Nestle USA is moving its headquarters from Glendale, Calif., a pocket suburb just miles from downtown Los Angeles, to Rosslyn, Va., near Washington, D.C., and taking 1,200 California jobs with it. Why? As many companies have found, California is an awful place to do business.
The $26-billion-a-year food conglomerate is discreet, of course, about its reasons, citing a desire to be closer to its core customers and other bland corporate pabulum. But the fact is, Nestle and its corporate brethren in California that actually make things are overtaxed and overregulated, and elected officials treat them not as honored members of the community but as rapacious pirates.
======
That article points out that California has lost $26 billion in revenue due to out migration.
The $26-billion-a-year food conglomerate is discreet, of course, about its reasons, citing a desire to be closer to its core customers and other bland corporate pabulum. But the fact is, Nestle and its corporate brethren in California that actually make things are overtaxed and overregulated, and elected officials treat them not as honored members of the community but as rapacious pirates.
======
That article points out that California has lost $26 billion in revenue due to out migration.
How odd that this was never a problem before. Nor will moving headquarters really help them in that regard. What, will customers start going to the Nestle building to buy products in person? If not, then there's no point in moving.
Let's see...Carl's Jr, Sony, Toyota, now Nestle...and roughly 10,000 other businesses are all saying fuck this place. I wonder why they are so grumpy. Don't they understand that suffocating tax rates are what drives growth?
California is too stupid to realize how good they have it. It may be the most beautiful place on earth. You've got beaches, snow, mountains, ideal weather...everything. If their tax rates were competitive or even slightly more expensive (a premium for living in such an incredible environment), companies would be lining up to set up shop there and keep their employees happy. Instead, they're shoving each other out of the way to leave...
[ Stupid libtards ]
[h=1]California School Becomes First All-Female College To Admit Transgenders. Then THIS Happens.[/h]
Photo by John S Lander/LightRocket via Getty Images
[FONT=beaufort_promedium]BY:
AMANDA PRESTIGIACOMO[/FONT]
[FONT=beaufort_promedium]MAY 19, 2017[/FONT]
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#
[/FONT]
Mills College in Oakland, California decided to earn some major progressive points by becoming the first all-female college in the nation to accept male-to-female transgender students. Now the school is facing a major "financial emergency."
Go figure.
The school made the announcement to allow entry to men who "identify" as women back in August of 2014. The following academic year, the school received less than 1,000 applications from interested undergrads.
"The board of trustees announced that Mills is currently running a $9 million yearly operating deficit. The $9 million shortfall is about 16 percent of the school’s 2017 budget of $57 million," reports The Daily Caller.
[h=5]SPONSORED CONTENT[/h][h=2]Vets could receive up to $42k with these VA benefits[/h]Sponsored By MorningFinance
Administrators and professor are expected to be cut from the university due to the budget crisis. College president Elizabeth L. Hillman is expecting to implement 35 layoffs, including even tenured professors.
The school's policy currently allows for all students "who self-identify as female" eligible to apply. "This includes students who were not assigned to the female sex at birth but live and identify as women at the time of application. It also includes students who are legally assigned to the female sex, but who identify as transgender or gender fluid," reads the school's site.
Unfortunately, biological women who've legally changed their gender to male are persona non grata: "Students assigned to the female sex at birth who have undergone a legal change of gender to male prior to the point of application are not eligible for admission."
Still, the college's trans policy remains in place, and Mills is set to implement an entirely revamped, progressive curriculum. The Daily Caller reports:
[h=1]California School Becomes First All-Female College To Admit Transgenders. Then THIS Happens.[/h]
Photo by John S Lander/LightRocket via Getty Images
[FONT=beaufort_promedium]BY:
AMANDA PRESTIGIACOMO[/FONT]
[FONT=beaufort_promedium]MAY 19, 2017[/FONT]
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#
[FONT=beaufort_promedium]10594
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#[FONT=beaufort_promedium]146[/FONT]
[FONT=beaufort_promedium][/FONT]
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#[FONT=beaufort_promedium]183580[/FONT]
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#http://www.dailywire.com/news/16671...02516-podcast&utm_campaign=beingconservative#[/FONT]
Mills College in Oakland, California decided to earn some major progressive points by becoming the first all-female college in the nation to accept male-to-female transgender students. Now the school is facing a major "financial emergency."
Go figure.
The school made the announcement to allow entry to men who "identify" as women back in August of 2014. The following academic year, the school received less than 1,000 applications from interested undergrads.
[h=5]SPONSORED CONTENT[/h][h=2]Vets could receive up to $42k with these VA benefits[/h]Sponsored By MorningFinance
Administrators and professor are expected to be cut from the university due to the budget crisis. College president Elizabeth L. Hillman is expecting to implement 35 layoffs, including even tenured professors.
The school's policy currently allows for all students "who self-identify as female" eligible to apply. "This includes students who were not assigned to the female sex at birth but live and identify as women at the time of application. It also includes students who are legally assigned to the female sex, but who identify as transgender or gender fluid," reads the school's site.
Unfortunately, biological women who've legally changed their gender to male are persona non grata: "Students assigned to the female sex at birth who have undergone a legal change of gender to male prior to the point of application are not eligible for admission."
Still, the college's trans policy remains in place, and Mills is set to implement an entirely revamped, progressive curriculum. The Daily Caller reports:
The new curriculum — “a bold new education experience” called MillsNext — “will provide students with the tools and confidence to solve complex problems, communicate across differences and take action aimed at transforming their communities and the world,” according to documents obtained by Inside Higher Ed.
Mills will focus its new curriculum on issues including “gender and racial justice.”
It's remains unclear if the school's financial crisis is directly tied to their progressive trans policy, but one might suspect as much.Mills will focus its new curriculum on issues including “gender and racial justice.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/...ple-not-liking-massive-tax-hikes-freeloaders/
[h=1]California Gov: You people not liking massive tax hikes are “freeloaders”[/h]
- - -
What a cock sucker. He literally believes businesses serve as funding mechanisms for his social engineering.
I hope companies flee that state and leave their revenue stream bone dry.
[h=1]California Gov: You people not liking massive tax hikes are “freeloaders”[/h]
- - -
What a cock sucker. He literally believes businesses serve as funding mechanisms for his social engineering.
I hope companies flee that state and leave their revenue stream bone dry.
California Wants to Make Health Care a ‘Right’
Single-payer scheme set back by massive cost predictions — but give it time…
May 25, 2017, 12:04 am
Sacramento
A Bay Area Assemblyman got an earful last week as he pushed a largely symbolic bill that would have made it legal for California public employees to be members of the Communist Party. Rob Bonta of Oakland contritely withdrew the measure, which had passed out of committee, after leaders from the state’s large Vietnamese community gave him an earful.
I know of no public employee who had been fired for such membership, or for virtually any reason for that matter. Nevertheless, conservatives took the bait and one mentioned the threat from North Korean and Chinese communists. But it’s not like they are flooding the Department of General Services with job applications. It was typical Sacramento, as Democrats introduce meaningless legislation designed to burnish their progressive credentials.
As I argued in my Orange County Register column, California has many problems — none of which are the doing of avowed communists in state government. Instead of worrying about this nonsense, Republicans should be gearing up to fight a frightening Bonta-coauthored bill that makes no direct reference to communism, but apparently was inspired by the same kind of thinking despite its benign name, “The Healthy California Act.”
The legislation would toss out our existing, quasi-private health care marketplace and replace it with a mandatory, universal single-payer system. Everyone would get “free” health care — even people residing in the state illegally. It would create a new state bureaucracy run by a nine-member panel appointed by legislators and which includes union members. Legislators proudly declared that the bill would make health care in California a “right.”
This is crazy stuff, but it easily passed out of the Senate health committee. And support for Senate Bill 562 or something like it is becoming a line in the sand for Democrats. At the Democratic Party convention last weekend, the big news was the hundreds of activists who lobbied the party to embrace a single-payer plan. Even the foul-mouthed outgoing chairman of the party John Burton told the demonstrators to shut the f*** up or go outside. Burton is a San Francisco lefty, showing just how far to the Left the state party keeps going.
OK, it’s not going to become law anytime soon. Elements of the hastily drafted bill would need to go before voters, and it’s unlikely that even
Californians would toss aside their health care and dive into the deep unknown. Coloradans rejected a similar single-payer ballot measure at the polls last November by 79 percent to 21 percent. Gov. Jerry Brown has expressed skepticism about the idea. But this is indeed the next “big” thing here.
The most telling part of the debate came early in the week when the Senate Appropriations Committee released a staff report analyzing the costs of the bill in anticipation of a committee vote. Even in this land of free money, the report’s conclusions were stunning — and enough to send the bill to the “suspense” file for further financial review.
According to the appropriations committee report, this legislation would have annual costs of about $400 billion. For perspective, the total state general-fund budget — already an exercise in waste and excess — is $124 billion. One piece of legislation would more than triple the budget. It’s astounding. The bill’s advocates argue they would grab existing state, local, and federal medical expenditures, but even that — if the feds approve of the diversion from Medicare, and that’s doubtful — would only shave $200 billion off the price tag.
The appropriations committee then assumes that California’s new health bureaucracy would eliminate $100 billion to $150 billion in current, private health care spending. That optimistic scenario would still leave a $50 billion to $100 billion short fall. The analysis admits that its estimates “are subject to enormous uncertainty.” Every government program ends up costing multiple times what its designers initially predicted. All this would be paid for by a 15 percent payroll tax — provided there are any businesses foolish enough to remain here after its passage. Not that the bill’s backers seem dissuaded by financial realities.
A previous health committee analysis made these obvious points: “There is likely to be increased utilization of health services over fee-for-service Medi-Cal” and “this bill strongly limits the state’s ability to control costs.” Well, yeah. The cost estimates can’t possibly factor in the degree of demand that would overwhelm the system. Or the magnet that California would increasingly become for everyone from everywhere. If you’re in our state, you’d have — as a human right, mind you — access to every health care procedure you demand (but queue up in line for that operation, which you’ll be sure to receive sometime in the next century).
Some of the bill’s advocates actually argue that putting a bureaucracy in charge of the health market will increase efficiency because it gets rid of the administrative duplication of multiple health plans and agencies. As the Mercury News explained, the bill’s primary author, Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, “insisted S.B. 562 would ‘clamp down’ on health care costs in several ways, including eliminating the need for insurance companies and their administrative costs and profits.”
If that’s so, then the Soviet economy should have been the model for the world because it eliminated those darn profits! Obviously, our current government-dominated health care system is no model of free-market economics, but the answer is to make it less bureaucratic and more competitive. These same fans of single-payer will no doubt yell and scream about the evils of monopolies (which only exist when government grants them but I digress), yet think a health care monopoly is wonderful.
Why waste our breath? A simple Facebook meme says it all: It shows a photo of a bountiful grocery market created by “evil capitalists exploiting people’s hunger” juxtaposed with a photo of food riots in Venezuela courtesy of “noble socialists making food a human right.” I suppose as we die waiting for medical care in this utopian California single-payer health system, we can at least feel happy knowing that we aren’t the victims of medical profiteers. Or at least those of us who haven’t moved elsewhere.
That this bill has gotten as far as it has is a reminder that the biggest threat to our lives comes not from members of a party devoted to overthrowing our government, but from members of a party who already control our government.
The Seventh Tuberculosis Hospital, Moscow (NVO/Creative Commons)
Single-payer scheme set back by massive cost predictions — but give it time…
May 25, 2017, 12:04 am
Sacramento
A Bay Area Assemblyman got an earful last week as he pushed a largely symbolic bill that would have made it legal for California public employees to be members of the Communist Party. Rob Bonta of Oakland contritely withdrew the measure, which had passed out of committee, after leaders from the state’s large Vietnamese community gave him an earful.
I know of no public employee who had been fired for such membership, or for virtually any reason for that matter. Nevertheless, conservatives took the bait and one mentioned the threat from North Korean and Chinese communists. But it’s not like they are flooding the Department of General Services with job applications. It was typical Sacramento, as Democrats introduce meaningless legislation designed to burnish their progressive credentials.
As I argued in my Orange County Register column, California has many problems — none of which are the doing of avowed communists in state government. Instead of worrying about this nonsense, Republicans should be gearing up to fight a frightening Bonta-coauthored bill that makes no direct reference to communism, but apparently was inspired by the same kind of thinking despite its benign name, “The Healthy California Act.”
The legislation would toss out our existing, quasi-private health care marketplace and replace it with a mandatory, universal single-payer system. Everyone would get “free” health care — even people residing in the state illegally. It would create a new state bureaucracy run by a nine-member panel appointed by legislators and which includes union members. Legislators proudly declared that the bill would make health care in California a “right.”
This is crazy stuff, but it easily passed out of the Senate health committee. And support for Senate Bill 562 or something like it is becoming a line in the sand for Democrats. At the Democratic Party convention last weekend, the big news was the hundreds of activists who lobbied the party to embrace a single-payer plan. Even the foul-mouthed outgoing chairman of the party John Burton told the demonstrators to shut the f*** up or go outside. Burton is a San Francisco lefty, showing just how far to the Left the state party keeps going.
OK, it’s not going to become law anytime soon. Elements of the hastily drafted bill would need to go before voters, and it’s unlikely that even
Californians would toss aside their health care and dive into the deep unknown. Coloradans rejected a similar single-payer ballot measure at the polls last November by 79 percent to 21 percent. Gov. Jerry Brown has expressed skepticism about the idea. But this is indeed the next “big” thing here.
The most telling part of the debate came early in the week when the Senate Appropriations Committee released a staff report analyzing the costs of the bill in anticipation of a committee vote. Even in this land of free money, the report’s conclusions were stunning — and enough to send the bill to the “suspense” file for further financial review.
According to the appropriations committee report, this legislation would have annual costs of about $400 billion. For perspective, the total state general-fund budget — already an exercise in waste and excess — is $124 billion. One piece of legislation would more than triple the budget. It’s astounding. The bill’s advocates argue they would grab existing state, local, and federal medical expenditures, but even that — if the feds approve of the diversion from Medicare, and that’s doubtful — would only shave $200 billion off the price tag.
The appropriations committee then assumes that California’s new health bureaucracy would eliminate $100 billion to $150 billion in current, private health care spending. That optimistic scenario would still leave a $50 billion to $100 billion short fall. The analysis admits that its estimates “are subject to enormous uncertainty.” Every government program ends up costing multiple times what its designers initially predicted. All this would be paid for by a 15 percent payroll tax — provided there are any businesses foolish enough to remain here after its passage. Not that the bill’s backers seem dissuaded by financial realities.
A previous health committee analysis made these obvious points: “There is likely to be increased utilization of health services over fee-for-service Medi-Cal” and “this bill strongly limits the state’s ability to control costs.” Well, yeah. The cost estimates can’t possibly factor in the degree of demand that would overwhelm the system. Or the magnet that California would increasingly become for everyone from everywhere. If you’re in our state, you’d have — as a human right, mind you — access to every health care procedure you demand (but queue up in line for that operation, which you’ll be sure to receive sometime in the next century).
Some of the bill’s advocates actually argue that putting a bureaucracy in charge of the health market will increase efficiency because it gets rid of the administrative duplication of multiple health plans and agencies. As the Mercury News explained, the bill’s primary author, Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, “insisted S.B. 562 would ‘clamp down’ on health care costs in several ways, including eliminating the need for insurance companies and their administrative costs and profits.”
If that’s so, then the Soviet economy should have been the model for the world because it eliminated those darn profits! Obviously, our current government-dominated health care system is no model of free-market economics, but the answer is to make it less bureaucratic and more competitive. These same fans of single-payer will no doubt yell and scream about the evils of monopolies (which only exist when government grants them but I digress), yet think a health care monopoly is wonderful.
Why waste our breath? A simple Facebook meme says it all: It shows a photo of a bountiful grocery market created by “evil capitalists exploiting people’s hunger” juxtaposed with a photo of food riots in Venezuela courtesy of “noble socialists making food a human right.” I suppose as we die waiting for medical care in this utopian California single-payer health system, we can at least feel happy knowing that we aren’t the victims of medical profiteers. Or at least those of us who haven’t moved elsewhere.
That this bill has gotten as far as it has is a reminder that the biggest threat to our lives comes not from members of a party devoted to overthrowing our government, but from members of a party who already control our government.
The Seventh Tuberculosis Hospital, Moscow (NVO/Creative Commons)
[h=1]California Senate Passes $400 Bil Socialized Medicine It Can't Pay For[/h] June 2, 2017
Daniel Greenfield
35
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to More
99Share to Print
ogressive policies are based on science. Liberals are the reality-based community. They invest in our future using the best expert policies to pass $400 billion bills they can't possibly pay for because it's the politically correct thing to do.
Welcome to the Ground Zero of left-wing policymaking.
The money tree? Money fairies? A trillion dollar coin? Declaring a Communist state and seizing everyone's money?
Daniel Greenfield
35
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to More
99Share to Print
ogressive policies are based on science. Liberals are the reality-based community. They invest in our future using the best expert policies to pass $400 billion bills they can't possibly pay for because it's the politically correct thing to do.
Welcome to the Ground Zero of left-wing policymaking.
A proposal to adopt a single-payer healthcare system for California took an initial step forward Thursday when the state Senate approved a bare-bones bill that lacks a method for paying the $400-billion cost of the plan.
“Despite the incredible progress California has made, millions still do not have access to health insurance and millions more cannot afford the high deductibles and co-pays, and they often forgo care,” Lara said during a floor debate on the bill.
Much like California can't afford Lara's bill.“Despite the incredible progress California has made, millions still do not have access to health insurance and millions more cannot afford the high deductibles and co-pays, and they often forgo care,” Lara said during a floor debate on the bill.
The bill, which now goes to the state Assembly for consideration, will have to be further developed, Lara conceded, adding he hopes to reach a consensus on a way to pay for it.
The money tree? Money fairies? A trillion dollar coin? Declaring a Communist state and seizing everyone's money?
“We don’t have the money to pay for it,” Sen. Tom Berryhill (R-Modesto) said. “If we cut every single program and expense from the state budget and redirected that money to this bill, SB 562, we wouldn’t even cover half of the $400-billion price tag.”
That's okay. Math was invented by old dead white men. Intersectional math says we can pay for everything if we just scream loudly enough.
Lara said action is required because of what is happening in Washington.
“With President Trump’s promise to abandon the Affordable Care Act as we know it — for one that leaves millions without access to care — California is once again tasked to lead," he told his colleagues.
Courageously lead... over the cliff.“With President Trump’s promise to abandon the Affordable Care Act as we know it — for one that leaves millions without access to care — California is once again tasked to lead," he told his colleagues.
We just offered to buy a mansion on the water we both really like, now I just have to come up with 10 million dollars
If I start a Go Fund Me page, will y'all chip in? maybe ask everybody you know too and then ask them to ask everybody they know?
Thanks
Life gets a lot easier when you start thinking like a liberal
If I start a Go Fund Me page, will y'all chip in? maybe ask everybody you know too and then ask them to ask everybody they know?
Thanks
Life gets a lot easier when you start thinking like a liberal
Remember That California Single Payer Plan? Yeah… Never Mind.
JAZZ SHAW Posted at 4:01 pm on June 24, 2017
Earlier this month we reported that California was in a bit of a quandary. They were bound and determined to have a single payer health plan for their citizens no matter what the Republicans wanted to do on the national level. And by golly, they got a plan put together in the state legislature and moved it out of committee, despite the fact that it was going to cost more than the total GDP of the state.
Then it made it out onto the floor of the Assembly. As Leslie ******* of Legal Insurrection tells us, the cold light of day seems to have given some of the legislators second thoughts and the plan has gone back on the shelf.
You mean you couldn’t figure out those details once it came out of committee?
While you consider that news, keep in mind that this is what the liberals in not only California but around the rest of the nation want to push on the entire country. And that attitude remains even after the dismal day when none other than the Washington Post threw in the towel and said that it might just sink the fiscal ship.
Much of this is a problem of scale. The smaller the population of a given country or state and the more they are already used to socialist style control of all their assets, the easier it is to pull off something approaching single payer. (But even in Canada, with their tiny population and devoted socialist climate they’ve run into serious delivery problems, wait times and a hard time finding doctors.) When you crank it up to even the size of a state like California the balloon bursts quickly.
But fear not, California, because I HAVE A PLAN. Your problems will soon be a thing of the past. You know how west coast liberals are always preaching the evils of giving “tax cuts to the rich” and how the wealthiest among us should pay their fair share? Surely that applies at the state level also. With that in mind, I invite any California legislators to steal this idea from me at no cost and introduce the “Movie Star Single Payer Subsidization Act of 2017.”
Under this bold plan, every Hollywood Star, Writer, Director, Producer or Studio executive who earns more than two million dollars in a single year will generously forfeit all income in excess of that amount to fund a single payer health care system for the state. On top of that, the movie studios will be even more helpful. The profits from all films which exceed 25% of the production costs will go into the same fund. Just working off the back of a napkin here it seems to me that they could recover a nice chunk of that $400B this year alone with room to spare.
That may sound drastic, but I know what big fans of Barack Obama you all were for the last eight years, so let’s keep in mind what he said. At some point, you’ve made enough money, right?
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/06/24/remember-california-single-payer-plan-yeah-never-mind/
JAZZ SHAW Posted at 4:01 pm on June 24, 2017
Earlier this month we reported that California was in a bit of a quandary. They were bound and determined to have a single payer health plan for their citizens no matter what the Republicans wanted to do on the national level. And by golly, they got a plan put together in the state legislature and moved it out of committee, despite the fact that it was going to cost more than the total GDP of the state.
Then it made it out onto the floor of the Assembly. As Leslie ******* of Legal Insurrection tells us, the cold light of day seems to have given some of the legislators second thoughts and the plan has gone back on the shelf.
I recently reported that California Senate Bill 562, which would establish a single payer healthcare system within the state, had recently cleared a major hurdle by passing through a state legislative committee.
However, the measure died upon entering the California Assembly.
Really? The bill was “woefully incomplete?” Which part, exactly? I’m just taking a shot in the dark here, but it might be the bit about “financing, delivery of care, cost controls.” However, the measure died upon entering the California Assembly.
A high-profile effort to establish a single-payer healthcare system in California sputtered Friday when Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Paramount) decided to shelve the proposal.
Rendon announced late Friday afternoon that the bill, Senate Bill 562 by state Sens. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) and Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), would not advance to a policy hearing in his house, making it all but certain the measure will not be acted upon this year.
“SB 562 was sent to the Assembly woefully incomplete,” Rendon said in a statement. “Even senators who voted for SB 562 noted there are potentially fatal flaws in the bill, including the fact it does not address many serious issues, such as financing, delivery of care, cost controls, or the realities of needed action by the Trump administration and voters to make SB 562 a genuine piece of legislation.”
Rendon announced late Friday afternoon that the bill, Senate Bill 562 by state Sens. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) and Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), would not advance to a policy hearing in his house, making it all but certain the measure will not be acted upon this year.
“SB 562 was sent to the Assembly woefully incomplete,” Rendon said in a statement. “Even senators who voted for SB 562 noted there are potentially fatal flaws in the bill, including the fact it does not address many serious issues, such as financing, delivery of care, cost controls, or the realities of needed action by the Trump administration and voters to make SB 562 a genuine piece of legislation.”
You mean you couldn’t figure out those details once it came out of committee?
While you consider that news, keep in mind that this is what the liberals in not only California but around the rest of the nation want to push on the entire country. And that attitude remains even after the dismal day when none other than the Washington Post threw in the towel and said that it might just sink the fiscal ship.
The government’s price tag would be astonishing. When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) proposed a “Medicare for all” health plan in his presidential campaign, the nonpartisan Urban Institute figured that it would raise government spending by $32 trillion over 10 years, requiring a tax increase so huge that even the democratic socialist Mr. Sanders did not propose anything close to it.
Single-payer advocates counter that government-run health systems in other developed countries spend much less than the United States does on its complex public-private arrangement. They say that if the United States adopted a European model, it could expand coverage to everyone by realizing a mountain of savings with no measureable decline in health outcomes, in part because excessive administrative costs and profit would be wrung from the system.
In fact, the savings would be less dramatic; the Urban Institute’s projections are closer to reality. The public piece of the American health-care system has not proven itself to be particularly cost-efficient.
Single-payer advocates counter that government-run health systems in other developed countries spend much less than the United States does on its complex public-private arrangement. They say that if the United States adopted a European model, it could expand coverage to everyone by realizing a mountain of savings with no measureable decline in health outcomes, in part because excessive administrative costs and profit would be wrung from the system.
In fact, the savings would be less dramatic; the Urban Institute’s projections are closer to reality. The public piece of the American health-care system has not proven itself to be particularly cost-efficient.
Much of this is a problem of scale. The smaller the population of a given country or state and the more they are already used to socialist style control of all their assets, the easier it is to pull off something approaching single payer. (But even in Canada, with their tiny population and devoted socialist climate they’ve run into serious delivery problems, wait times and a hard time finding doctors.) When you crank it up to even the size of a state like California the balloon bursts quickly.
But fear not, California, because I HAVE A PLAN. Your problems will soon be a thing of the past. You know how west coast liberals are always preaching the evils of giving “tax cuts to the rich” and how the wealthiest among us should pay their fair share? Surely that applies at the state level also. With that in mind, I invite any California legislators to steal this idea from me at no cost and introduce the “Movie Star Single Payer Subsidization Act of 2017.”
Under this bold plan, every Hollywood Star, Writer, Director, Producer or Studio executive who earns more than two million dollars in a single year will generously forfeit all income in excess of that amount to fund a single payer health care system for the state. On top of that, the movie studios will be even more helpful. The profits from all films which exceed 25% of the production costs will go into the same fund. Just working off the back of a napkin here it seems to me that they could recover a nice chunk of that $400B this year alone with room to spare.
That may sound drastic, but I know what big fans of Barack Obama you all were for the last eight years, so let’s keep in mind what he said. At some point, you’ve made enough money, right?
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/06/24/remember-california-single-payer-plan-yeah-never-mind/
Twitter thread that exposes some of the insanity going on there today. Hopefully the copy and paste works...they are numbered, just read them in order starting at 2.
- Thomas Wictor @ThomasWictor 20h20 hours agoMore
(2) California Transportation Plan 2035 and California Transportation Plan 2040 are jaw-dropping nightmares of totalitarianism.
- (3) These plans were drawn up by the unelected Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
(4) SCAG has 82 members. It's meetings are never televised, and the public is never invited.Here's what's coming:
- (5) SCAG--by its own admission--is trying to make driving in Southern California impossible. The first step was raising the gas tax.
(6) The second step was the "road diets": The most-traveled roads in SoCal are having lanes removed.
- (7) The former lanes become bike lanes or parking. The goal is to add at least an hour to everyone's commute. Each way.
- (8) Taxes on the table for consideration include a mileage tax, based on a car's GPS system. The government will access that easily.
(9) Then there's a "congestion tax." You will pay more if you drive during high-traffic periods.
(10) No new light rail or bus lines are being built. Therefore people will be forced to live in giant apartment buildings close to work.
(11) The only transportation that will be economically feasible is the bicycle.
(12) So in the blazing heat of summer and during the monsoon season, executives will be expected to bicycle to work.
- (13) Little by little, the suburbs will be destroyed and abandoned. Southern California will become a gigantic apartment block.
(14) Of course this is pure madness. This will drive ALL business out of California.
(15) But these two plans ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED. The reflectors on freeways--"Botts' dots"--are being removed.
(16) The government says that instead of Botts' dots, we'll have painted lines that driverless cars will be able to read better.
(17) Try and drive at night on a freeway with no reflectors. You can't.THAT'S why they're removing the Botts' dots.
(18) There's no point in removing the Botts' dots right now, because there are virtually no driverless cars.
- (19) But the reflectors are being removed. Say goodbye to driving the freeways at night.
(20) By 2040, California will be home to a handful of white billionaire oligarchs, Chinese real-estate magnates, and Mexican slaves.
(21) I heard on the radio today that "people are finally beginning to wake up."Remember SCAG, the group that created these plans?
(22) The plans were ALL APPROVED BY REPUBLICANS.California now has a bipartisan--UNIPARTISAN--ruling class.
- (23) This place will be the worst state in the union by 2040.It will actually become Blade Runner.
(24) See the giant apartment buildings?
(25) Meet Vision Zero.
Thomas Wictor @ThomasWictor 19h19 hours agoMore
(26) Zero traffic deaths by 2025.The only way to do that is to eliminate traffic.
2 replies18 retweets61 likes
Reply
2
Retweet
18
Like
61
Direct message
-
Thomas Wictor @ThomasWictor 19h19 hours agoMore
(27) Vision Zero.Guess what Pol Pot called his plan for Cambodia?Year Zero.
3 replies26 retweets76 likes
Reply
3
Retweet
26
Like
76
Direct message
-
Thomas Wictor @ThomasWictor 19h19 hours agoMore
(28) This is not about the environment or climate change. This is total and absolute control of citizens' lives. Cradle to grave.
7 replies50 retweets124 likes
Reply
7
Retweet
50
Like
124
Direct message
-
Thomas Wictor @ThomasWictor 19h19 hours agoMore
(29) And it's happening in the United States.Really.
no problems, the money can be found in the clouds, it's all just numbers, we're just borrowing from ourselves to pay ourselves, it never has to be repaid, you guys don't understand balance sheets..........
did I miss anything?
did I miss anything?
no problems, the money can be found in the clouds, it's all just numbers, we're just borrowing from ourselves to pay ourselves, it never has to be repaid, you guys don't understand balance sheets..........
did I miss anything?
Hey, isn't this why bankrupt Illinois (go figure: another fucked up blue state) slammed its citizens with a 32% tax hike desperately trying to manage its massive debt? Because it's all Monopoly money, dontchaknow.
Hehe, good ol' Pudget Sound economics.
Twitter thread that exposes some of the insanity going on there today. Hopefully the copy and paste works...they are numbered, just read them in order starting at 2.
(2) California Transportation Plan 2035 and California Transportation Plan 2040 are jaw-dropping nightmares of totalitarianism.
(4) SCAG has 82 members. It's meetings are never televised, and the public is never invited.Here's what's coming:
(6) The second step was the "road diets": The most-traveled roads in SoCal are having lanes removed.
(9) Then there's a "congestion tax." You will pay more if you drive during high-traffic periods.
(10) No new light rail or bus lines are being built. Therefore people will be forced to live in giant apartment buildings close to work.
(11) The only transportation that will be economically feasible is the bicycle.
(12) So in the blazing heat of summer and during the monsoon season, executives will be expected to bicycle to work.
(14) Of course this is pure madness. This will drive ALL business out of California.
(15) But these two plans ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED. The reflectors on freeways--"Botts' dots"--are being removed.
(16) The government says that instead of Botts' dots, we'll have painted lines that driverless cars will be able to read better.
(17) Try and drive at night on a freeway with no reflectors. You can't.THAT'S why they're removing the Botts' dots.
(18) There's no point in removing the Botts' dots right now, because there are virtually no driverless cars.
(20) By 2040, California will be home to a handful of white billionaire oligarchs, Chinese real-estate magnates, and Mexican slaves.
(21) I heard on the radio today that "people are finally beginning to wake up."Remember SCAG, the group that created these plans?
(22) The plans were ALL APPROVED BY REPUBLICANS.California now has a bipartisan--UNIPARTISAN--ruling class.
(24) See the giant apartment buildings?
(25) Meet Vision Zero.
(26) Zero traffic deaths by 2025.The only way to do that is to eliminate traffic.
2 replies18 retweets61 likes
Reply
2
Retweet
18
Like
61
Direct message
(27) Vision Zero.Guess what Pol Pot called his plan for Cambodia?Year Zero.
3 replies26 retweets76 likes
Reply
3
Retweet
26
Like
76
Direct message
(28) This is not about the environment or climate change. This is total and absolute control of citizens' lives. Cradle to grave.
7 replies50 retweets124 likes
Reply
7
Retweet
50
Like
124
Direct message
(29) And it's happening in the United States.Really.
California...
Arguably, one of the most beautiful states in the nation. Yet, batshit insane liberals are determined to utterly destroy it, one asinine rule, tax and regulation at a time.
Guess were all the liberal locusts will flee to once their state becomes unhabitable?
Undocumented immigrant driver’s licenses near milestone in California
Of course none of them vote...right? RIGHT??? Shush()*
Parasites!
BY ALEXEI KOSEFF
akoseff@sacbee.com
JULY 26, 2017 6:00 AM
Nearly a million undocumented drivers could be licensed in California by the end of the year.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article163623103.html
akoseff@sacbee.com
Nearly a million undocumented drivers could be licensed in California by the end of the year.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article163623103.html
Of course none of them vote...right? RIGHT??? Shush()*
Parasites!
[h=1]CalExit II Approved to Gather Signatures for Right to Secede[/h]
Chelsea Guglielmino / Getty Images
by ASSEMBLYMAN TIM DONNELLY26 Jul 2017Sacramento, CA4278
[h=2]For the second time in less than a year, the CalExit effort in California will gather signatures for the right to secede from the United States.[/h]According to the Sacramento Bee, California’s Attorney General Xavier Becerra granted the remaining CalExit group the right to gather signatures to put a referendum on the ballot:
The original initiative was clouded by rumors of Russian involvement and irreconcilable differences among leadership.
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that CalExit II, as it’s come to be known, has been modified substantially from the original CalExit effort:
Tim Donnelly is a former California State Assemblyman and Author, currently on a book tour for his new book: Patriot Not Politician: Win or Go Homeless. He also ran for governor in 2014.
1216
17
by ASSEMBLYMAN TIM DONNELLY26 Jul 2017Sacramento, CA4278
[h=2]For the second time in less than a year, the CalExit effort in California will gather signatures for the right to secede from the United States.[/h]According to the Sacramento Bee, California’s Attorney General Xavier Becerra granted the remaining CalExit group the right to gather signatures to put a referendum on the ballot:
The state attorney general issued an official ballot measure title and summary Tuesday. The campaign can now start gathering the more than 585,000 signatures it will need to qualify for the 2018 ballot.
The initiative would form a commission to recommend avenues for California to pursue its independence and delete part of the state constitution that says it is an inseparable part of the U.S. The measure would also instruct the governor and California congressional delegation to negotiate more autonomy for the state.
This will be the second attempt to put a secession measure on the 2018 ballot. The first attempt failed, and was subsequently withdrawn from consideration in April.The initiative would form a commission to recommend avenues for California to pursue its independence and delete part of the state constitution that says it is an inseparable part of the U.S. The measure would also instruct the governor and California congressional delegation to negotiate more autonomy for the state.
The original initiative was clouded by rumors of Russian involvement and irreconcilable differences among leadership.
advertisement
This latest initiative, which will be titled “California Autonomy From Federal Government,” according to Becerra’s press release, must gather 585,000 valid signatures to qualify for the 2018 ballot.
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that CalExit II, as it’s come to be known, has been modified substantially from the original CalExit effort:
The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California’s governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.
The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.
The fiscal impact study conducted by the state of California, according to the Times, says it would cost more than $1.25 million per year for an advisory commission to assist the governor on California’s independence, plus “unknown, potentially major, fiscal effects if California voters approved changes to the state’s relationship with the United States at a future election after the approval of this measure.”The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.
Tim Donnelly is a former California State Assemblyman and Author, currently on a book tour for his new book: Patriot Not Politician: Win or Go Homeless. He also ran for governor in 2014.
