A statue of former governor and President Ronald Reagan was approved with Gov. Jerry Brown's signature on Friday, as Brown noted he would like to raise taxes like Reagan did.
"Even in those days he demonstrated courage and unique leadership ability - even to the point of raising California taxes when he saw they were needed," said Brown, according to a story in the Sacramento Bee.
The statue will be paid for with private funds. Even so, do you think a statue of The Gipper is appropriate? Let us know in the comments!
Other bills signed this week included:
- A new, state-run retirement savings plan for the private sector, according to the Washington Post.
- No more open carrying of rifles and shotguns in California cities, according to the LA Times.
- Legislators might have a tougher time raising fees at University of California schools. A bill signed this week said university officials must consult students and justify their need for fee hikes before putting them into place, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
- Foster parents and caregivers now are required to take training in "cultural competency and sensitivity" regarding gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual kids, according to the Chronicle.
- High speed rail officials must disclose any financial stakes they have in the plan, according to the Los Angeles Times.
- Students will have free access to online textbooks, according to the Sacramento Bee's Capitol Alert.
- Employers and universities can no longer ask workers, potential employees or students for their e-mail or social media logins or passwords, according to the San Jose Mercury News.
- Brown signed 19 bills easing the way for more solar power and other renewable energy in California, according to the LA Times PolitiCal.
- California has a new marine reptile: the leatherback sea turtle. Read more in LA Times PolitiCal.
- No more using dogs to hunt bobcats and bears: read more in the Sacramento Bee.
- Graduation rates and the number of students headed to college now will be figured into school rankings. Read more in the SacBee Capitol Alert.
- Are you a victim of corporate fraud? Restitution now should come faster than before, according to the SacBee Capitol Alert.
- State parks won't close for another two years, if at all, after the scandal this year involving a discovery of tens of millions of unknown dollars in the state parks fund. Read more in LA Times PolitiCal.
- Driverless cars are now OK, at least if you have one like the Google guys. Read more on Santa Cruz Patch and in the Contra Costa Times.
- Partying with a friend who goes into a coma? You won't be punished after calling 911 if emergency responders find a small amount of drugs. Read more in HealthyCal.org.
- Party bus operators are now responsible for underage drinking on board: in the San Jose Mercury News.
- Domestic violence victims will receive more protections under a new law covered in the LA Times PolitiCal.
- The state's campaign disclosure website is about to get a facelift, thanks to lobbyist and political candidates. Read more in LA Times PolitiCal.
- Nurse practicioners and others can perform non-surgical abortions. Read more in SacBee Capitol Alert.
- Eighteen bills will help veterans and those in the military receive more benefits, including help with education and finance. Read more in LA Times PolitiCal.
- Workers comp is getting an overhaul. Read more in the Associated Press story.
What kind of state do you advocate? Please name it.
If I want my water heater replaced, and Someone is willing to do it for $200, and the exchange is agreed and completed voluntarily to the satisfaction of each party.... What part of this event (repeated daily under many differing particulars but the same results) is not a Free Trade? If such transactions actually occur freely, then Free Trade does exist and can be extended across all borders.
If it is a "rip off" why are people using them willingly and voluntarily? Drivers are not forced to use the pay lanes. How could any lanes be free? who would build and maintain them for free? If they were free then there would be no need for Taxation to obtain them.
I do not believe that the means of producing the necessities of human existence, what is produced and how it is distributed, should be determined by a group of individuals whose goal for setting this process in motion is not the needs of society but personal/private gain, or profit if you like. Capitalists wealth comes from one source and one source only, the use of human labor power. Therefore, capital is a collective product so it's use and allocation should be collectively determined by those whose life activity creates it. What do you do for a living Albert?
I am an Engineer.
>The trade between consumer and producer are set at market price. Actually the market price is determined by prices ACTUALLY paid and not by prices set. A house may sell above or below the price set. Clearly, prices paid are always fluctuating as conditions change and no one can set that price without coercion. >Market price to be determined by cost of production, demand, competition and availability of supply as well as the consumers ability to afford the product. Market price is determined by what people are willing to actually pay (and this changes constantly), independent of the costs of the product. The costs of production against the market price will determine quantity and quality produced (a little, a lot, or none) >The addition or subtraction of competition will be naturally determined by all the above. Certainly competition is an important factor in affecting economic conditions. But Market prices also affect the level of competition. It is a feedback system. >consumers and producers will determine price, competition, some level of safety standards and some level of responsible environmental protections. Yes >In other words, at some point, trade will reach equilibrium in order to maintain sales. Sort of. equilibrium suggest a stable level of trade and price, however methods, tastes and conditions do not stand still. The market can never be stable in this sense, it ever dynamic and changing with the ideas of men.
Clearly I described a trade, and for it to be free it must be entered into voluntarily. This is a real life event and it satisfies the requirements of a free trade. An Free Trade economy is composed of such voluntary transactions. So Free Trade does exist as I claim in varying degrees and is virtually impossible to extinguish. A world without free trade is a world of absolute slavery for everyone. the economy is all barter, money is merely a medium of exchange that facilitates the barter much more efficiently.
"Communism (from Latin communis - common, universal) is a revolutionary socialist movement to create a classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, as well as a social, political and economic ideology that aims at the establishment of this social order." Wiki
I apologize, I should have been more specific. I meant how the cartels behave in Mexico. Not here in the U.S. I realize here with all the effort to stop trafficking the premise is invalid. In Mexico due to various reasons, the cartels and their behavior appear to be exempt from government intervention. As such, the way they deal with competition, supply and demand I thought would be a beginning reference to Free Trade. Perhaps you are correct, this would be a difficult parallel.
I think what I said about drugs in the US applies to Mexico. Drugs are criminalized in Mexico as in the US. Recently there has been talk in Mexico about legalizing drugs but the US puts pressure against this. Biden, in Mexico, Says U.S. Won't Legalize Drugs http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203458604577264103153246424.html If I am missing your question could you pose it again?
Capitalism is not pro-business. Here is another explanation as to why one must not conflate a Capitalist with Business People. It has always been a Marxist practice to confuse the two. Is Capitalism "Pro-Business?" http://youtu.be/hjh7mXPfMKs "In this video, Professor Steve Horwitz advocates for free market economic policy. He refutes the often recited claim that "What is good for General Motors is good for America" by explaining that pro-business legislation encourages behavior that is not beneficial to society or the business itself. He suggests that, in a free market, factors such as profit and competition encourage behavior that ultimately benefits society. Professor Horwitz illustrates that pro-business legislation restricts progress and therefore caters to the interests of industry rather than to consumers, whereas "supporters of free markets are ultimately pro-human and pro-people because it is through markets that we get the most innovation and we get the most goods and the cheapest prices."