Author Topic: California  (Read 361332 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: California, Calif lost 9000 businesses in 7 years, Tax Policy,
« Reply #650 on: March 15, 2018, 10:10:57 AM »
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: California, Calif lost 9000 businesses in 7 years, Tax Policy,
« Reply #651 on: March 15, 2018, 10:46:37 AM »
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html


California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
The real California
« Reply #652 on: March 15, 2018, 10:47:21 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: California, Calif lost 9000 businesses in 7 years, Tax Policy,
« Reply #653 on: March 16, 2018, 07:58:31 AM »
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.

(Our Calif thread could just be all blue states.)  If I move Colo, Fla or to the moon, the tax on the inflationary 'gain' for disposing of my MN assets will still be taxed at the highest rates in MN.

You can run, but you can't hide from them.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: California, Calif lost 9000 businesses in 7 years, Tax Policy,
« Reply #654 on: March 16, 2018, 08:58:06 AM »
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.

(Our Calif thread could just be all blue states.)  If I move Colo, Fla or to the moon, the tax on the inflationary 'gain' for disposing of my MN assets will still be taxed at the highest rates in MN.

You can run, but you can't hide from them.

Don’t worry Doug, in time they’ll just South Africa your assets away.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #656 on: March 18, 2018, 01:46:37 PM »
political correct decision.

real life incorrect.

STDs are going up.
and yes knowingly exposing someone to HIV is criminal.

What groups might be doing that ?   :roll:

DDF

  • Guest
Re: California
« Reply #657 on: March 18, 2018, 02:13:13 PM »
I don't know.... You go laying down with someone else without being sure.... You kind of get what you get.

Both parties are guilty IMO.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Schwarzenegger will lead the Republicans to the promised land
« Reply #658 on: March 21, 2018, 12:38:38 PM »
Terminator has "road map" to make Republicans relevant again in Cal and elsewhere :

https://www.yahoo.com/news/age-trump-schwarzenegger-wants-centrist-gop-063655838.html

Simply put become libs with an R in front of your name.

I admire his efforts but I believe he has lost his way frankly.  I don't know why Kasich even calls himself a Republican frankly .

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
California: Repeal the Top Two
« Reply #659 on: March 23, 2018, 02:01:25 PM »
 





TAKE CALIFORNIA BACK AGAIN! REPEAL THE TOP TWO!
 
ACTION: Download the petition to repeal the Top Two at: www.stoptop2.com
Sign and mail back ASAP. Then, download 20 more and get them signed and mailed back before April 1st. While all petitions will be filed on April 23rd, we must gather signatures NOW so the signed petitions can be returned, signatures verified, and petitions bundled for filing in each county. Do NOT send signed petitions to the Secretary of State! Send signed petitions to the address indicated above and below. The address is indicated on each petition as well.
 
 

NOTE: Sign a petition only for your county. Make sure signers sign a petition for their county if you are circulating in multiple counties or at events.
 
GREAT NEWS! With the number of recipients this single email is reaching, downloading and circulating 20 petitions will put us over the top for the number of signatures needed to place the repeal of the Top Two on the 2018 general election ballot in November. Once on the ballot, we can get rid of the Top Two and bring representative government back to California.
 
Please do your part to: TAKE CALIFORNIA BACK AGAIN!


Sincerely,
 
Tom Palzer
President
Foundation to Stop Top 2 LLC
Chairman
Committee to Repeal the Top Two
www.stoptop2.com
info@stoptop2.com
909.913.9500

 






Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
California: Federal Limits May Apply? Illegal alien ID can buy firearms?
« Reply #660 on: March 25, 2018, 08:41:55 AM »
California Special Alert: Update Regarding Use of Non-REAL IDs for Firearm Purchases
 

NRA and CRPA attorneys recently received further clarification from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) regarding the use of non-REAL IDs when purchasing a firearm at a California licensed firearms dealer. According to ATF, California licensed firearm dealers:

[M]ay accept post-January 22, 2018 licenses/identification documents that meet the definition in 18 U.S.C. 1028(d) in fulfilling their requirements under 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1)(C) and 27 CFR 478.124(c)(3)(i).  However, licensees may consider asking for additional documentation (e.g., passport) so that the transfer is not further delayed.
As a result, California residents who are issued non-REAL IDs after January 22, 2018, by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) may use their IDs for the purposes of purchasing a firearm, even if the ID contains the language “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on the front of the license and states on the back of the license that

“This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes.”

Prior ATF Open Letter to Dealers Rescinded

ATF also informed NRA and CRPA attorneys that the letter issued in June of 2016 concerning “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses, will be rescinded. A recent review of the ATF website for the letter states “Page Not Found.”

Pursuant to AB 60, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) may issue licenses and identification cards to individuals who cannot prove legal status in the United States. The licenses and identification cards issued pursuant to AB 60 stated “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on the front of the card making them distinguishable from licenses issued to U.S. citizens.

Federal law prohibits those who are illegally in the United States from receiving and possessing firearms. In June 30, 2016, ATF sent a letter to firearm dealers informing them they could not transfer firearms to individuals using AB 60 licenses (licenses with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on their front) due to the likelihood the individual was in the country illegally and thus prohibited from receiving and possessing firearms.

Recently California started to implement the federal REAL ID Act, which requires state-issued licenses and identification cards to meet federal requirements for verification. AB 60 licenses do not meet these requirements. On January 22,108, DMV started issuing licenses to people who did not apply for or go through the process to acquire a REAL ID. Unfortunately, after January 22, 2018, the licenses issued pursuant to AB 60 and those issued to Californians who didn’t apply for a REAL ID state on their face “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY,” and thus, according to the June 30, 2016 ATF letter, are unacceptable for firearm purchases.

Presumably this problem was corrected by DMV. ATF initially stated that licenses issued pursuant to the AB 60 undocumented individuals differed from those issued to U.S. citizens because on the back of the AB 60 licenses the license stated, “This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes.” Thus, there would be a way to differentiate between licenses issued pursuant to AB 60 and to U.S. citizens who did not apply for a REAL ID license. Unfortunately, this information was incorrect as both AB 60 licenses and the licenses issued to U.S. citizens stated, “This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes” on the reverse side.

NRA and CRPA attorneys pointed this concern out to ATF soon after it was discovered. ATF now realizes that they cannot avoid this problem as these licenses with the same language on the front and back are sent out to U.S. citizens and undocumented individuals alike. Thus, ATF’s position changed, and they are withdrawing the June 30, 2016 letter concerning “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY.”

Lingering Concerns

 Not all “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses can be used to acquire firearms. Licenses issued prior to January 22, 2018 with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on them were likely issued to individuals who cannot show lawful citizenship status. Firearm dealers are strongly advised to insist on an additional form of identification before accepting a license issued before January 22, 2018 with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” marker.

Licenses issued after January 22, 2018 that state “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” may or may not have been issued to a person who is within the United States illegally. If a firearm dealer has cause to believe the individual using one of these licenses may be prohibited from possessing firearms, as ATF suggests, the dealer may want to consider asking for additional documentation.

Californians who want to make sure they have zero problems purchasing a firearm in the future may want to consider applying for and acquiring a REAL ID through the DMV. Remember these licenses can be used to board airplanes, gain access to military bases, and other federal facilities in 2020. Californians will not be able to use their non-REAL IDs for these purposes after 2020 and will be required to provide some other form of identification.

California licensed firearm dealers should be aware, however, that the California Department of Justice (“DOJ”) may nonetheless continue to hold the position that any “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses cannot be used for the purposes of purchasing a firearm. That position is an unlawful overreach because the question of lawful presence in the United States as it relates to firearm purchases falls directly under ATF’s control. Under California law, one only needs to provide “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age” when attempting to acquire a firearm from a California licensed dealer. “Clear evidence” is defined as a valid California Driver’s License or Identification Card. Because both AB 60 licenses and non-REAL IDs are considered valid California identification, regardless if they satisfy federal requirements or not, both satisfy California’s requirement of “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age.”  In addition, ATF has informed NRA and CRPA attorneys that they will be rescinding their previous policy prohibiting the use of such licenses.

Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight web page for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: California - Census
« Reply #662 on: March 27, 2018, 10:11:58 AM »
California sues, could lose a House seat if an honest census is taken.

What was the bad news again?
-------------------------
California Sues Trump Administration Over Census Citizenship Question.   States with large [ILLEGAL] immigrant populations stand to lose seats in Congress, federal funding and electoral college votes.
   - Huffington Post today.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #663 on: March 27, 2018, 01:53:31 PM »
If only taxpayers had a party that would fight for them the way the Crats fight for illegals.    :x

Wasn't that the way it was supposed to be?

 :-P

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
59% of Californians want to increase deportations of illegals
« Reply #666 on: April 20, 2018, 08:19:29 AM »
nearly half those surveyed support a so-called “Muslim ban”. Punishing immigrants is still popular: 59% said increasing deportations is important.

https://haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/california-survey-othering-and-belonging

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #667 on: April 20, 2018, 08:29:09 AM »
The other 41 % are the immigrants and few tech titans and Democrat pols who need their votes and cheap labor.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
California Kills Effort to Make Housing Affordable
« Reply #668 on: April 25, 2018, 09:08:53 AM »
California NIMBYs Kill Effort to Make Housing Affordable
https://spectator.org/california-nimbys-kill-effort-to-make-housing-affordable/

The state with the widest income inequality disparity wants separate but not equal.

From the article:
"SB 827, introduced by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), aimed to limit local governments’ abilities to restrict housing. Under SB 827, developers across the state would have been able to ignore local zoning rules on height, density, and parking near transit hubs. Doing so would have allowed the supply of housing to increase while simultaneously encouraging methods of transportation that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and traffic congestion."

Liberals answer:  Not in my backyard.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
POTH: California now fifth largest economy in the world
« Reply #670 on: May 08, 2018, 05:11:09 AM »
second post:

If someone's main source of info about California was this forum, would they know this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/california-economy-growth.html?emc=edit_th_180508&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=496411930508

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: POTH: California now fifth largest economy in the world
« Reply #671 on: May 08, 2018, 08:25:32 AM »
If someone's main source of info about California was this forum, would they know this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/california-economy-growth.html?emc=edit_th_180508&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=496411930508

Actually yes, their success was discussed recently.  http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1897.msg108400#msg108400

A response mentions that the rounding error surplus is dwarfed by the trillion dollar pension time bomb.  http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1897.msg108411#msg108411

Not much new is in this article; they became no. 5 in the world by formerly being no. 5 in the world and having downturns on a different cycle with Britain. Their growth rate last year was 3%, as was the nation, roughly.  In the UK, growth has dropped below 2%.

No one should deny that amazing things in the business and technology world are still coming out of (parts of) California.  Their capitalist engine of the successful part of California is still so strong that it can push through the heavy load of state and federal tax burdens, as can Wall Street in Manhattan.  

But there is irony in their braggery.  We should judge a Leftist state by Leftist criteria.  It is not good that the rich are getting richer in their world and not good by anyone's judgment that the poor are getting poorer.  Calif takes and spends $200 billion a year while letting homelessness and poverty rates get worse.  The state is not a success if you take away the top 1%, top 10%, top quintile, considered to be evil in leftist economic thought.  10% have homes worth a million or more and 40% live in poverty of near poverty: http://www.ppic.org/publication/poverty-in-california/.  As stated in the article, our million dollar homes (MN) are better than their million dollar homes.  )  You pay extra to be near other rich people.

"The fire chief in San Ramon...total pay of $516,344 in 2016...and nearly 200 police officers across the state make more than $300,000 a year.  So, you make more and pay more for everything.  Sounds like their dollar is worth less than ours - unless they leave with it.

The question in political economics is not how does Calif compare to Kansas, it is how does Calif under leftist governance compare with Calif if it had a more limited government and more economic freedom. Why isn't their growth rate better than the nation?  Why can't they duplicate the success of silicon valley in east LA or the central valley?  The success isn't because of high taxes and big government; the success is in spite of it.

Calif was the world's 5th largest economy previously, but lost that when Pelosi and the Democrats took over economic policy in Washington.  They got their standing back (ironically) under Trump.  Deregulation at least elsewhere helped Apple to sell more i-stuff and google to sell more g-stuff.

From the article: "One of the state’s technology giants, Apple, brought in more revenue in its latest fiscal year — $229 billion — than the entire economic output of Wyoming, five times over."

Yes, but Wyoming has what leftists dream of, far more equal incomes and wealth spread across the state, with the exception of Teton County where rich Californians moved to enjoy the natural beauty without the high taxes.  They drove up the housing prices and still vote left!
---------------
Unmentioned in the article is how states like California, especially the prosperous areas, will do under the new tax laws, where people will have to pay real federal income taxes on nearly all of their inflated California incomes.  The high Calif tax rates used to be instead of paying the additional in federal taxes.  Now they get both, a much truer blue state model.

Irony and hypocrisy, in order to repeal the state and local exclusion, the new 'blue wave' Democrats from the highest income inequality states will have to give tax cuts to the rich!  Or watch blue states fall (economically) into the sea.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 08:41:53 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #672 on: May 08, 2018, 03:03:30 PM »

"The question in political economics is not how does Calif compare to Kansas, it is how does Calif under leftist governance compare with Calif if it had a more limited government and more economic freedom"

Agreed 100%.

That said, I am pissed at myself that I totally missed the change in budgetary realities from going bankrupt to surplus.  Definitely a glitch in my Search for Truth that I missed this.



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #674 on: May 09, 2018, 08:21:26 AM »
Crafty:  "I am pissed at myself that I totally missed the change in budgetary realities from going bankrupt to surplus."

Fair enough but I'm not so sure that is the case.  (Still bankrupt?)

$6 B is a 'projected' surplus.
The 13.3% tax bracket is highest in the nation.  Tax what you want less of.  If they haven't found the line of what people will pay without changing their behavior, they must be getting close to it.
The blue state loss of state and local tax deductions is real.
37% federal plus 13.3% state makes the combined rate over 50% and then you pay property taxes (10th worst in the nation), and sales taxes 7.25%) with after tax dollars!
https://www.ocregister.com/2017/03/13/californias-property-tax-burden-10th-worst-in-nation/

California is suing over the loss of the state and local tax deduction but has no grounds to win.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gop-tax-plan-lawsuit-20180126-story.html
If tax rates don't matter, why sue?

The poor don't pay more with the loss of the state and local tax deduction.  Don't californians want the rich to pay more?  Do it for the children.  http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-election-day-2016-proposition-55-income-tax-1478277671-htmlstory.html

Assuming $6.1 B is accurate, that is a 0.0046 proportion of the 1.3 T pension debt.  Celebrate carefully.
https://californiapolicycenter.org/can-californias-economy-withstand-1-3-trillion-of-government-debt/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Re: California
« Reply #675 on: May 18, 2018, 05:52:14 AM »


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Motor voter in California
« Reply #677 on: May 25, 2018, 02:42:12 PM »
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-voters-beware-theres-a-serious-problem-with-dmvs-motor-voter-system/

That's pretty funny in a Democratic cognitive dissonance end of the republic sort of way, California's low rate of voter turnout may be caused by the fact that many/most are registered multiple times and vote only once!

We have motor voters too, and now a requirement that landlords provide voter registration to tenants - regardless of their eligibility to vote.

Voting isn't supposed to be overly easy.  It doesn't make sense to exert nearly coercive measures to vote on populations known to include citizens and non-citizens, felons and non-felons.  It doesn't make sense, that is, unless your goal is to increase vote fraud.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile





DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Dividing California into 3?
« Reply #686 on: June 27, 2018, 08:38:46 AM »
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/cal-3-new-california-yes-california-feud-over-how-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=weekend&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=weekend


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/13/cal-3-plan-divide-california-three-states-would-cr/

So, Dems now have 2 senators, with this it would be 4-2?  Net effect the Dems remain 2 up?

Interesting take - that it benefits Republicans?  Do you really trust that Republicans would win in one of these?  I doubt that it will pass and I don't see the other states accepting it if it does.

Northeastern Colorado tried to split off:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado

The lines in Cal 3 are arbitrary and no one really gains except maybe Republican voters in the Republican state if there is one.  I would rather see a Calif or American overlay plan where in this divided society you can choose which side governs you.  )

I don't mind if liberal California secedes as long as we get to keep some ports and they guarantee that good, nation-loving Americans are not kicked out with them.  I have conservative relatives living in Berkeley, Hillsborough and Palo Alto.

Merge with Mexico and do that IN Mexico.  We'll keep the natural resources, the good weather and the vacated mansions.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Captain Capitalism explains California's Cal-3 Initiative
« Reply #688 on: July 13, 2018, 08:48:28 AM »
https://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-californias-cal-3-initiative-will.html?m=1


Thursday, July 12, 2018
How California's "Cal-3" Initiative Will Expose the Left's True Nature

The nation should pay attention and pay attention closely to California's "Cal-3 Initiative," because it will be one of the rare moments an entire political party will expose its true nature to the world.  This is a rare sight, even rarer than last year's total solar eclipse, because most political parties have to hide their true nature, lest moderate voters find out what their true agenda is and vote them out of power.  In this particular case, "Cal-3" - the initiative to split California into three separate states - will force the American left and democrat party to show Americans their true colors.

How will this happen?

Well the left faces a paradox when it comes to California.  It claims California, specifically the cities, are leftist political, economic, and sociological successes.  They have banned bags, have emissions standards, pay for illegal aliens' education, and a whole host of other socialist merit badges that renders these municipalities "socialist utopias" in their minds.  But these socialist successes are the coastal cities of California, not the ignorant, heathen interior of the state that wishes to secede.  And the Californian left LOATHES the "ignorant, CIS gendered, white hick scum" that populate said interior.

So here's a question any moderate...or any American for that matter...should ask themselves:

If the left is so confident in its policies AND it detests the conservative scum in the interior of California, wouldn't they WANT to divorce themselves from the rest of the state?  According to them those rural and suburbanite ignoramuses are only holding the intellectually superior left back from achieving their true utopia.  Besides, I know I WOULD LIKE to get rid of leftists out of my state/city/county/country, so why wouldn't the left want the same?

And here is where their hypocrisy (and a complete debunking) of their socialist ideology lies.

Deep down inside the left knows it needs those "no good dirty, hickish, ignorant, suburbanite scum" because the left is completely financially dependent on them.  They don't want to admit it.  They don't even want to admit it to themselves, but the professional left knows an entire "theoretical leftist utopian state" of social workers, guidance counselors, politicians, teachers, environmentalists, non-profits directors, welfare recipients, students, and other varied sorts of parasites cannot survive without an economic host to tax and live upon.  The California coastal cities, and their socialist utopian dream, NEED the people they hate the most.  The reverse is not true as conservatives do not need socialists because hosts do not need parasites.

This is going to create an interesting situation for California's leftists.  They're going to be forced to tacitly admit to the world they need the rest of the state more than the state needs them.  This is doubly terrifying for them because it will also prove their "socialist ideology" (which is all these people have) is unsustainable, unfeasible, and simply wrong.  But ultimately if the left votes against Cal 3, it shows what they truly want - the continuing of the partial enslavement of other people.  And if the voting public can make that connection people will vote in droves for Cal-3 and kick California's coastal cities out into their own little socialist beds they made for themselves.  So what's a leftist to do?

Well one thing they can do is come up with red herrings that have nothing to do with what Cal 3 is fundamentally about (sovereignty, freedom, and the right of people to choose).  One such measure is already underway where these morally-better-than-you leftists are citing environmental concerns as to why they need to keep sucking off your taxblood you shouldn't break up California.  You can expect more cowardly moves like this to obscure their real reason in keeping Californians enslaved to the socialist coastal towns as the vote approaches.

But the biggest thing leftists can do is simply "nothing" because I have some good news for my fine Californian democrat friends.  And it's what has been saving the democrat party since the JFK years!

Americans, especially Californians are ignorant, low IQ morons.  And nobody is going to be paying attention.

In addition to convincing millions of people to commute and enslave themselves into traffic-congested leftist municipal hell holes, I have to tip my hat to the left in another regard.  You have done a SPECTACULAR job in brainwashing a full three generations to become non-thinking conformists who simply...don't think.  At best they spew simplistic, feelings-based leftist talking points they've been conditioned to in K-College, but most are more concerned about what's happening on Game of Nice Chairs, their addiction to social media, or what the latest idiocy is in sportsball.  And to think the average American idiot, let alone his inferior Californian cousin, is going to be smart enough to make the connection between the left voting against Cal 3 and their continued economic enslavement of working Californians is laughable.

So don't worry California leftists.  Your socialist fiefdoms and slave plantations are safe.  The slaves aren't even smart enough to realize how California welfare spending has resulted in California traffic, so you have a green light to vote against Cal 3.  Nobody is smart enough to see what's really going on.
______________
If you liked this article consider passing it along to a friend or sharing on social media!
Also visit Aaron's other cool sites below!
Podcast
Consulting
YouTube
Books
Patreon

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
Ninth Circuit Upholds Preliminary Injunction Against
Newsom’s Standard Capacity Magazine Ban
 
In another blow to Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom’s anti-gun agenda, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling in the case of Duncan v. Becerra on Tuesday, upholding a lower court’s decision to suspend enforcement of Proposition 63’s restriction on the possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.
 
Following the enactment of Proposition 63, CRPA attorneys sought an injunction against the magazine possession ban, arguing that the law violated the Second Amendment, as well as the due process and takings clauses of the United States Constitution. Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez agreed, issuing a preliminary injunction just days before the law was set to take effect. California quickly appealed the decision.
 
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that Judge Benitez did not abuse his discretion, holding that he applied the correct legal standards and made reasonable inferences based on the record. But one judge on the panel disagreed. Responding to the dissent, the majority noted that it was not within the panel’s authority to re-weigh the evidence of the case, nor could it substitute its discretion for that of the district court. What’s more, referencing the Ninth Circuit’s 2014 ruling in Fyock v. Sunnyvale, which affirmed the denial of an injunction against a local magazine ban, the majority held that simply because a judge disagrees with another district court does not necessarily mean the district court abused its discretion on the matter.
 
Meanwhile, in the trial court, a motion for summary judgment is pending and a ruling on the merits of the case is expected soon. Regardless of the outcome, the case will most certainly be appealed again to the Ninth Circuit. But by that time, the Supreme Court will likely have a new Justice who respects the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment.
 
To stay informed on the Duncan case, as well as other important Second Amendment issues affecting California gun owners, be sure to subscribe to NRA and CRPA email alerts. And be sure to visit the NRA-ILA California dedicated webpage at www.StandAndFightCalifornia.com and the new CRPA webpage at www.CRPA.org.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Obviously, California needs to raise taxes!
« Reply #690 on: September 14, 2018, 11:11:49 AM »



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Why does liberal California have the worst poverty rate? LAT
« Reply #693 on: September 22, 2018, 05:57:30 AM »
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html

Not enough taxes and government!

Highest welfare benefits and lowest work requirement makes the poor ...  not work and stay poor.

Is it even legal, constitutional to trap poor people?

What if it afflicts other races more than whites, and it does, like abortion does, would it be racist?  Liberal policies are racist??!!

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Why does liberal California have the worst poverty rate? LAT
« Reply #694 on: September 22, 2018, 01:10:03 PM »
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html

Not enough taxes and government!

Highest welfare benefits and lowest work requirement makes the poor ...  not work and stay poor.

Is it even legal, constitutional to trap poor people?

What if it afflicts other races more than whites, and it does, like abortion does, would it be racist?  Liberal policies are racist??!!

They are. They will never admit it though.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
WSJ: California Dems test the limits of Anti-Trumpism
« Reply #695 on: October 19, 2018, 10:12:14 PM »

Link copied…

    Opinion Commentary Cross Country

California Democrats Test the Limits of Anti-Trumpism
They want to campaign on national issues, but voters are focused on progressive failures closer to home.
By Allysia Finley
Oct. 19, 2018 6:46 p.m. ET

Democrats are targeting eight of the 14 California congressional districts currently held by Republicans. Voters in seven of the 14 districts favored Hillary Clinton in 2016. Opposition to Donald Trump has raised Democrats’ hopes that they can topple GOP incumbents in the Golden State, even in the conservative fortress of Orange County, easing their path to a House majority.

But revulsion toward liberal governance in California is growing as its failures compound. This may counteract animus toward Mr. Trump. California Democrats might have an easier time defeating Republicans if all politics were national. Instead, they have to contend with the litany of local problems that their progressive policies have wrought.

For starters, government pension costs are soaring across the state, forcing tax increases and cuts to public services. Seven cities in Orange County are asking voters to approve sales tax hikes in November. Santa Ana, a low-income, predominantly Hispanic city, is seeking to raise its sales tax 1.5 percentage points to 9.25%.

The League of California Cities warned earlier this year that local pension costs were projected to increase 50% by 2024 and could drive some municipalities into bankruptcy. The Los Angeles Unified School District is making emergency budget cuts and layoffs to avoid bankruptcy, yet the teachers union is threatening to strike if its members don’t receive a 6% raise.

Underfunded public pensions are diverting precious taxpayer dollars from transportation and other public-works projects. Last year the Democratic Legislature jammed through a 12-cent gasoline-tax hike meant to fund repairs to rickety roads and congested highways. Other than Hawaii, California’s gas prices are the highest in the country—95 cents a gallon higher than the nationwide average. In June voters recalled Democratic state Sen. Josh Newman—whose Southern California district favored Mrs. Clinton by 13 points—because of his vote for the gas-tax increase. The tax hike is so politically toxic that even progressive Democrat Katie Porter, who is challenging Orange County Republican Rep. Mimi Walters, has been running TV ads declaring, “I oppose higher gas taxes.” GOP Rep. Jeff Denham’s Democratic opponent, Josh Harder, has likewise touted his opposition.

Mr. Newman’s recall deprived Democrats of the legislative supermajority they need to raise taxes without GOP support. But this November Democrats are looking to flip two state Senate and two congressional districts—held by Mr. Denham and David Valadao—in the agriculturally rich San Joaquin Valley. Democrats hold the registration advantage in these districts but are weighed down by their long-running support for unpopular environmental policies that restrict water to farmers in the region. Worries about water are helping keep Messrs. Denham and Valadao afloat despite voters’ disdain for President Trump.

Then there’s the Department of Motor Vehicles fiasco. The sclerotic agency is struggling to meet surging demand for Real ID licenses that will be needed to board domestic flights starting in 2020. Californians wait three to four months for a DMV appointment. Democrats recently charged the agency with automatically registering voters who renew or replace their driver’s licenses. Recently the agency reported that its ill-trained technicians made 23,000 registration errors. All of this is raising questions about government competence. Former Republican Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, who is running for his old job as an independent, has compared the single-payer legislation that his Democratic opponent, Ricardo Lara, sponsored in the state Senate to putting the DMV in charge of health care. Mr. Poizner is ahead in most polls.

The wariness of progressive ideology is most evident in the governor’s race featuring Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and GOP businessman John Cox. During the state’s open primary, the Democrat sidled up to progressives and public-employee unions, endorsing single-payer health care and a moratorium on charter schools. But Mr. Newsom has lately found himself on defense as Mr. Cox makes hay of the state’s vagrancy epidemic and soaring housing costs. At a recent campaign event in the Orange County exurb of Seal Beach, Mr. Newsom mused: “What happened to our state?” At another campaign stop, in Torrance, he dubbed homelessness “the ultimate manifestation of our failure” and acknowledged that “we own that.”

During a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, Mr. Newsom even criticized city officials for condoning vagrancy and drug use. “You can be too permissive, and I happen to think we have crossed that threshold in this state—and not just in this city,” he said.

Mr. Newsom and his liberal allies have raised seven times as much money as his GOP opponent, but Mr. Cox is beating the spread. A KFI-NBC poll this week shows the Republican trailing by 7 points even though Democrats boast a 19-point voter-registration advantage. At this time in 2014, Gov. Jerry Brown led in the polls by more than 20 points.

So where does that put Republican House candidates? Most Republican incumbents in districts that favored Mrs. Clinton won handily in 2016. Mrs. Walters and her fellow Orange County Republican Dana Rohrabacher both carried their districts by 17 points. The electorates in most of these districts remain conservative, but projections of huge liberal turnout give Democrats a polling edge.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, whose safe Republican district includes Bakersfield, is nonetheless hoping that conservatives will be driven to turn out to support Mr. Cox and repeal the gas tax. The test this November is whether California voters’ distaste for President Trump exceeds their disdain for their own state’s progressive leadership.

Ms. Finley is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile
WSJ: Trump's California Water Relief
« Reply #696 on: October 19, 2018, 10:14:59 PM »
second post

Trump’s California Water Relief
A much-needed review to allow more storage and less waste.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 19, 2018 7:17 p.m. ET

Donald Trump ran as a champion of the forgotten man, and few have been forgotten more by the political class than California’s parched farmers. On Friday the President made good on a campaign promise to deliver more water to more people.

California has an arid climate in the best of times. Yet tens of billions of gallons of water each year are wasted because of restrictions on pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta that are intended to protect fish including smelt and chinook salmon.

One problem is that California lacks storage capacity in the north to capture the abundant precipitation that falls in the mountains during wet years, such as 2017. Runoff then rushes into rivers that dump into the delta rather than flowing south or into reservoirs for storage for the dry years.

The other major problem is federal regulations, known as biological opinions, that limit the rate at which water in the delta can be pumped to the south of the state. During storm surges, most water is flushed out to San Francisco Bay. In August 59,300 acre feet of water were wasted—enough to sustain 474,000 Californians for a year—and more than one million acre feet may flow out to sea during wet months.

These restrictions are intended to prevent smelt from getting ensnared in the pumps and to maintain a pH balance suitable for fish. Nonetheless fish populations have continued to decline, which some biologists attribute to predatory species like the striped bass and wastewater.

In 2010 federal Judge Oliver Wanger scored the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for “sloppy science and unidirectional prescriptions that ignore California’s water needs.” The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely concurred with Judge Wanger’s assessment but concluded that pumping restrictions were necessary to “counteract the uncertainties” of the government’s analysis.

Enter President Trump, who has ordered the Departments of Commerce and Interior by 2019 to review their sloppy science and revise the fish biological opinions. His Friday executive order also directs the agencies to streamline regulatory reviews for western water projects.

A major water storage and delivery project hasn’t been completed in California’s north for decades. A project to raise the height of the Shasta Dam to store more water was stuck in regulatory purgatory for three decades, but the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has finally unclogged the regulatory pipe and plans to award a construction contract next year.

The President’s reprieve couldn’t come at a better time since California regulators this summer proposed again to sharply restrict water deliveries to farms. The state also enacted legislation making water rationing limits permanent. These include limiting indoor use to 55 gallons per day per person and restrictive rules for farm water management.

Most Californians may not like President Trump, but his water decision is another case in which his willingness to challenge political shibboleths will help average people.

Appeared in the October 20, 2018, print edition.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
We may have reached Peak California
« Reply #697 on: October 31, 2018, 01:32:07 PM »
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6337809/California-city-council-candidate-faces-heat-dropping-wheelchair-bound-mom-86-panhandle.html

In their defense, it's one of the last ways of making money in California that hasn't been taxed into oblivion.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72281
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19763
    • View Profile
Is CD safe?
« Reply #699 on: November 12, 2018, 07:15:04 AM »
CD ,
are you in and danger from the fires?