California News

California Rainfall Almost Normal In 2014 (Hillary Clinton Update)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Via Not A Lot of People Know That… Hillary’s “drought” is-all bark-and-no-bit:

Hillary Clinton called out climate change “deniers” at a clean energy conference in Las Vegas Thursday evening, but revealed little new about what her own energy policy platform might look like if she decides to run for president.

Clinton began her remarks at the National Clean Energy Summit by laying out the problems climate change is already causing today, including extreme weather and droughts. “[These are] the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face,” she said. “No matter what deniers say.”…

(MSNBC 9/2014)

This comes by way of Climate Depot, but is mentioned in detail at Not A Lot of People Know That’s site.

...Almost Normal

Precipitation in 2014 was actually close to normal, ranking 44th driest since 1895.

[….]

A look at the 60-Month averages shows much more severe droughts in the 20thC. As with all droughts, it will take time for water reserves to build back up again. But it has done so before from much lower levels and there is no reason to suppose it won’t do again.

But, in the height of fear mongering a bill was passed that will assist in the destruction of dams in California… making water preservation for droughts much harder. Giving California tax-payer funds to eco-nuts. Dumb.

$Ringing$ In the New Year With Higher Gas Prices

Published by Papa Giorgio

In total, Exxon makes about 8 cents on the dollar for everything it does, soup to nuts: Its profit margin for the past 20 quarters averages 8.26 percent. That is, it is worth noting, a good deal lower profit margin than Wired parent company Conde Nast generally achieves, according to the company’s CEO, Charles Townsend. Apple’s profit margin runs about three times Exxon’s. Chip-maker Linear Technology’s profit margins routinely run four times those of Exxon. Energy is a high-volume business, not a high-profit-margin business. (National Review)

This comes by way of Breitbart:

Effective January 1st, drivers in California will be in for a shock as gas prices jump.  This overnight price increase has nothing to do with the fluctuations of the market, nor will drivers be getting a better grade of gasoline.  It’s simply the price of supporting a government that wants to control your every move.

Under complete Democrat domination, Gov. Jerry Brown’s appointee to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), Mary Nichols, has decreed that every driver must pay for another level of government control.  As California singlehandedly attempts to combat the ever-elusive “global warming”—now conveniently renamed “climate change”—CARB is putting gasoline and diesel fuel under the Cap-and-Trade scheme authorized by AB32 (known as the Global Warming Solutions Act).

It doesn’t matter that theres no evidence that raising the cost of fuel will do anything to alleviate a problem that is rooted in llaklitics instead of science.  By requiring refiners to buy a permit, this unelected board is doing nothing more than confiscating capital from ordinary Californians. Even though the cost is passed on at the pump, it will be paid by more than just drivers: the cost of every product that must be transported on California roads will cost more.

And for what?  The only clear beneficiary of this hidden tax on fuel are the bureaucrats whose ranks will increase, and the Democrat politicians whose socialist programs will be funded, further solidifying their control over every Californian.  This is how government continues to grow faster than the economy at large—and the never-ending growth of government is the greatest threat to our future, and our freedom.  Tomorrow, 900 new laws take effect, many of which limit our freedom or raise the cost of living in the most oppressed state in the union….

…read more…

So let us recap some of the taxes imposed on California drivers per gallon of gasoline (a sorta update to an older post):

  • State Underground Storage Tank Fee: The state underground storage tank fee is currently 1.4 cents per gallon.
  • State and Local Sales Tax: An average state sales tax rate of 2.25% percent is used in the calculation of the distribution margin although the actual sales tax rate does vary throughout California.
  • State Excise Tax: The California state excise tax is currently 35.3 cents per gallon.
  • Federal Excise Tax: The federal excise tax is currently 18.4 cents per gallon

That adds up to roughly 55-cents per gallon, not including state and local sales tax. This new tax will add a minimum of about 10-cents to this… meanwhile “Evil Big Oil” makes out like a bandit! with their 8-cents a gallon profit margin. Here’s an old 2007 Neil Cavuto discussion about essentially the above… lackluster profit margins for evil oil companies (my 2nd ever uploaded video onto my YouTube channel):

And as Fox already pointed out, these taxes like others will go to pet projects. Now, Jerry Brown’s pet projects versus covering the 500-billion dollars in un-subsidized retirement promises to California workers.

Liberals Want Voting Age 16-and-Under To Ensure Liberalism

Published by Papa Giorgio

Scotland liberals lowered the age of voting to 16-years old, which increased their chance of seceding from the UK. Dennis Prager makes the point that liberals here (esp. California) want to do the same thing. Here is the article on California Democrats wanting to do the same thing, but younger:

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters ~ 2004) – Four Democratic California lawmakers on Monday proposed giving teenagers as young as 14 the right to vote in a move that would make the often trailblazing state the first in the nation to do so.

Under the proposal, youths under the current legal voting age of 18 would be able to cast ballots in state and local elections only, although their vote would not have full weight that an adult vote would.

For example, a vote cast by a 14 or 15-year-old would be counted as a quarter of a vote, and a vote by a 16 or 17-year-old would be counted as half a vote.

Lawmakers say giving teenagers partial votes would get them interested in the election process and would not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as it only applied to state ballots.

“We believe it’s time to open up the franchise to young Californians at the age of 14, let them register and vote and be seriously included in the process,” said Democratic State Senator John Vasconcellos.

Sue North, chief of staff for Vasconcellos, said that if the proposal passes, it would be the first time any state would have amended its constitution to allow high school students to vote.

For more clear thinking like this from Dennis Prager… I invite you to visit: http://www.dennisprager.com/

Hollywood Hypocrites At Their Most Embarrassing Lowes

Published by Papa Giorgio

Moonbattery has this update on Hollywood’s hypocrites — Matt Damon is at the top of that list!

Damon Pool

Zillionaire leftist Matt Damon is in a position to do many things others can only dream of doing. High among them: dump a bucket of toilet water on Matt Damon’s head.

Matt Damon was conflicted when friends Jimmy Kimmel and Ben Affleck called on him to complete the ALS ice bucket challenge. The award-winning actor wanted to help a good cause, but didn’t want to waste clean water in the process.

So, he did what any good humanitarian would do: He used toilet water instead.

I feel for the actresses who have to get near Damon. If a bucket of water to fight amyotrophic lateral sclerosis would be a waste, taking a shower must constitute a felony against Gaia. He probably hasn’t bathed in weeks, given his apparent belief that once water has been used it disappears forever, leaving the earth depleted.

…read more…

What Responsible Governments Do/What California Isn’t Doing

Published by Papa Giorgio

(See also this video)

Forbes has this excellent article about what responsible governments do… and what California does:

…As we all know, the President and others are selling the canard that the current drought is the result of global warming or climate change.  The fact that we had decades- long droughts years before industrialization doesn’t matter to them as they bloviate over a drought of several years.

Simply stated, California government has other priorities – priorities which to them are far more important that ensuring that 38 million people have water. They include:

  • A High Speed Rail project, mired in lawsuits and of uncertain costs – at least $68 billion but perhaps double that amount, and
  • A 2004 $3 billion stem cell bond program ($6 billion with interest) that has produced no approved therapies but has, according to the AP, resulted in “the opening of sleek buildings and gleaming labs at a dozen private and public universities built with matching funds” without any cures in the pipeline.  Of course, now they want more money.

California legislators spend millions more on nonessential items like $2.7 million for a new swimming pool in Calexico near the Mexican border – during a drought.  California is also spending an additional $46.6 million to build up to 54 hydrogen fuel stations to serve a state of 158,648 square miles.  That is one station for every 2,938 square miles.  Hope you don’t get stranded.

Rather than waste money on such projects, which can’t possibly be more important than water, California should look to places like Singapore to learn what a responsible government should be doing. 

Singapore has but 247 square miles.  It is a population of nearly 4.5 million people.  Obviously, it has very little land for such things as reservoirs.   Instead, Singapore relies on 15 reservoirs, desalinated water, water reclamation, and imported water to meet their water needs.   

Singapore obviously made water production a priority for its tiny landmass that is 0.155% of California’s landmass, yet has 8.4% of California’s population.  That is what responsible governments do, and one reason why Singapore has the third highest per-capita GDPs in the world, despite its size and lack of natural resources….

Gay Repub Running for Cali’s 52nd Congressional District – Harassed

Published by Papa Giorgio

The Inquisitr brings us up to speed on the main issue at hand, and it is this — totalitarian thinking of the LEFT, which includes the Gay Laeft:

Gay Republican congressional candidate Carl DeMaio feels he is being attack by liberal groups and LGBT-friendly organizations simply because he is a Republican. Ads mocking DeMaio have included putting his likeness on the body of a drag queen.

Dana Perino of Fox News first brought the Carl DeMaio race to national attention after flying to the state to meet the man who might become the first openly gay Republican to be elected to the state Congress. Perino was moved by Demaio’s life story and achievement working across the aisle to foster economic growth when serving in other elected positions. The man referred to by many as “the gay Republican” was orphaned at 13 when his dad left the family a few weeks for his mother died. He and his brothers and sisters were separated into different foster homes by social services.

As a young adult, Carl DeMaio worked to put himself through a top-tier college and ultimately went on to build and then sell two multi-million dollar companies. The Californian’s story sounds like the embodiment of the American dream, but the attack ads he has endured since throwing his hat into the ring for a congressional seat have been deemed as demonizing, demoralizing, and full of “gay-baiting” hate speech. Media Matters is among those who appear to not support DeMaio and have mocked Fox News for supporting the candidate. The gay Republican was also booed during a gay pride parade in California…

…read more…

The story was brought to my attention (and the video starting out the post) are with thanks to Gateway Pundit. GP puts it thus:

Carl DeMaio was orphaned when he was 14. He was taken in by Jesuits and earned his way to Georgetown University. After college, Carl founded two successful businesses before the age of thirty. He sold the businesses and was elected to San Diego City Council. Now Carl DeMaio is running for Congress.

That’s why the liberal gay groups hate him. Ads mocking DeMaio, by far left groups, have included putting his likeness on the body of a drag queen.

On Wednesday Carl DeMaio’s San Diego office was vandalized. Computers were destroyed and electrical cords were cut only six days before the primary election.

Another recent story that encapsulates the totalitarianism (total thought) of the LEFT is this story via Gay Patriot about a law professor at the University of Virginia, WHO ACTUALLY SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE, has a campaign by the gay-left against him because his thinking also includes “religious freedom.” This apparently is not “total” enough for the left:

Douglas Laycock is a law professor at the University of Virginia, a supporter of gay marriage, but also a supporter of religious liberty. Therefore, he is now the target of an intimidation and harassment campaign from the intolerant gay left.

An outfit called GetEQUAL (led by its co-director Heather Cronk) has launched a national e-mail campaign attacking Laycock for his role in shoring up the legal arguments of those who support what it calls “religious bigotry.”

GetEQUAL has also recruited a University of Virginia law student (Greg Lewis) and an alum (Stephanie Montenegro) to send an open letter to Laycock asking him to consider the “real-world consequences that [his] work is having.” And they have submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking e-mails between Laycock and various right-wing and religious liberty groups.

Laycock has apparently committed the unforgivable Thoughtcrime of valuing religious liberty and freedom over the oh-so-delicate feelings of … I’m just going to say it… pansies. (Not used as a pejorative against their sexuality, but against their mewling, whiny, complete lack of emotional strength.)…

…read more…

California Democrats Kill Bill to Outlaw Sex-Selection Abortions

Published by Papa Giorgio

Breitbart reports on this horrendous example that comes from the Party of Death:

On Tuesday, thirteen Democrats on the California State Assembly Health Committee voted down a bill that would have outlawed the practice of sex selection through abortion.

The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (AB 2336) ran into opposition by all of the Democrats on the committee, who saw the bill as a prelude to broader abortion restrictions, according to a report from LifeNews.com. Instead, Democrats introduced a resolution to condemn sex-selection abortion–but not to outlaw it.

The bill was introduced on May 6th by Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who said in her opening testimony that “the U.N. estimates that upwards of 200 million girls around the world have been aborted merely because they were ‘the wrong gender.'” She explained that countries like India and China are dominated by a male-child mentality, with mothers preferring future working men and family providers over the “burden” of baby girls.

“This is the real war on women,” Grove told the committee. “Girls are being killed simply for being girls and it’s happening right here in California and not just Third World Nations.”….

Lifenews fills in some blanks:

Sex-selection abortion in California—which has evolved into a cottage tourism industry for women wishing to hand-pick their baby’s gender—will remain a protected practice after the Assembly Health Committee snubbed a proposal on May 6 to end the barbaric trend. As expected, the committee voted along party lines, 13-6, squelching Assembly Bill (AB) 2336 (Grove R-Bakersfield).

In introducing her Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act at the hearing, Assemblywoman Shannon Grove offered statistics showing that entire population segments are shifting toward male majorities as experts estimate that 160 million girls have been killed either from through sex-selection abortion or infanticide at birth by parents seeking a boy.

Grove cited evidence that women from China, India, and other nations where the practice has been outlawed are now coming to California to take advantage of the state’s dangerously deregulated abortion laws.

“This is the real war on women: the killing of baby girls simply because they are girls,” Grove told committee members. “We hear often in this Capitol building about women’s rights, equal rights for women, equal protection under the law, equal pay. Well colleagues, girls are being killed simply for being girls and its happening right here in California and not just Third World nations.”

Grove also reminded committee members that multiple Planned Parenthood workers across the country have been captured on undercover videos assisting patients seeking abortions based on gender.

“Are American girls somehow less valuable or do they deserve less dignity, less worth?” Grove said at one point in her testimony….

…read more…

Elitist Liberals, Sound Analogies, and Tolerance Over a Cup-O-Joe

Published by Papa Giorgio

Do as I say, not as I do… dammit.

Zo Peacefuly attends his California Assemblyman’s Meet & Greet, only to get harassed by a woman “attorney” attendee, who actually sics the cops on him!

Meanwhile, Democrat Al Muratsuchi shows his true hypocritical self. Just another example of how liberals like Al are not tolerant of things, but want to make it a law for others to be tolerant of the things they wouldn’t tolerate. Hear more in this ZoNation.

Experience the creative energy and conservative insight that Zo delivers in every show. Click here to buy the ZoNation Complete Series Collection: http://bit.ly/ZoNationCompleteSeries

Larry Elder Lays Bare L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Class Warfare

Published by Papa Giorgio

Garcetti focuses on pay-rate myths in the genders. Again and again the Right has to deal with these mantras of the Left. Video of Mika Brezezski spreading this lie is included in the audio.

For more clear thinking like this from Larry Elder… I invite you to visit: http://www.larryelder.com/

Alternative Energy Boondoggle, [California] Tax-Payers Being Ripped Off!

Published by Papa Giorgio
Medieval Scam Alert

According to the EIA, new on-shore wind power is about 37 percent more expensive than new advanced-coal technologies. And solar power makes wind power look like a bargain — new solar photovoltaic power is close to 300 percent more expensive than new advanced-coal technologies. Americans already massively subsidize these costly forms of energy. Wind receives federal subsidies equal to $23.37 per megawatt hour, and solar receives $24.34 per megawatt hour. (Coal receives 44 cents per megawatt hour.) ~ National Review

I have people close to me that will never vote for a bond measure because they do not want their property taxes to increase, but they will increase everyone’s taxes to fund failing business plans and technology. The disconnect is astounding. Here is a positive look at this ponzi scheme that has transferred millions of tax-payer monies to fund the company, to fund people buying the product, and to fund the buying back of the energy — all at the cost of the tax-payer because profit in this industry is impossible:

…Additionally, renewable energy qualifies for accelerated depreciation, which has the effect of reducing OFM’s taxable income and will lower the company’s tax obligation by about $170,000 over two years, Zalcberg said.

Then there’s the business of selling power to the power company. OFM is selling electricity from its solar farm to Progress for 18 cents a kilowatt hour, a premium price approved by state regulators to promote solar energy. At the same time, OFM is paying only one-third of that price for the power it buys from Progress.

The effect is that instead of paying a utility bill, OFM will receive $60,000 yearly from Progress over its 20-year contract with the utility….

Now, here is the John Locke Foundation looking at the same topic:

Getting taxpayers and electricity ratepayers to pay your electric bill

This September 2010 N&O report about the Holly Springs furniture company OFM shows why solar is so popular with private businesses and why it is such a bad deal for taxpayers and ratepayers.

According to the numbers in the story, we can make a rough calculation of who pays and who benefits. First, OFM gets the taxpayers to pay for half of the cost of the solar equipment (i.e., half of $1.4 million, or $700,000). Then OFM receives taxpayer-paid tax breaks worth $170,000. Then Progress Energy ratepayers pay OFM 18 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity produced by the solar panels, while OFM buys power from Progress Energy for 6 cents per kilowatt-hour to run its facility — a net profit of 12 cents per kilowatt-hour. Over 20 years, that would amount to a $1.2 million “profit” from Progress Energy inflicted on ratepayers by the legislature when it passed SB 3.

We must remember that OFM must pay for one-half of the cost of the solar panels, but subtracting the $700,000 cost from the total subsidies above ($2.070 million), OFM gets a cool “profit” after that expense of $1,370,000 to its bottom line courtesy of North Carolina taxpayers and Progress Energy ratepayers.

And that is not all. OFM and other businesses that participate in this fleecing of taxpayers and ratepayers get glowing media reports like this one.

OFM Celebrates One-Year Anniversary of Solar Farm With Plans to Expand

Holly Springs, N.C. — This month office and school furniture manufacturer, distributor and wholesaler OFM is celebrating the one-year anniversary of the 250-kilowatt solar farm it installed on the rooftop of its headquarters in Holly Springs, N.C. last August. The company has since been producing more energy than it uses…

Why not expand when you can force taxpayers and ratepayers to pay your electricity bills? Businesses that feed at the public trough are nothing new. This example illustrates that the environmental movement is the new home of crony capitalism, with taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies for solar, wind, electric car batteries, new LED lighting, the list goes on and on. Businesses get billions, politicians get good press, and taxpayers and ratepayers get fleeced. For more details, see John Stossel’s report on crony capitalism….

…read more…

Hurting the poor the most

The Institute for Energy Research found

that electricity prices are almost 40%

higher in states with mandates for their use.

(source)

How bout’ California? We can see the same boondoggle going on here as well… and its getting worse under government MoonBeam! (Waaay worse.) Here is some info from Hockey Stick, via the WSJ:

…California, for example, has allocated $3.3 billion in rebates for solar installations through 2016 and compensates residents between $0.20 and $0.35 cents per watt of expected performance (about 5% to 10% of the total cost of installation). San Francisco, which has a 100% renewable goal, provides additional rebates ranging from $2,000 to $10,000 per residential installation.

Meantime, school districts in California have received a total of $400 million this year for energy-efficiency projects, including window-glazing and solar-panel installations. SolarCity has contracted with school districts in Barstow, Simi Valley, Los Angeles and other cities.

SolarCity also benefits from “net metering” policies that 43 states, including California, have adopted. Utilities pay solar-panel customers the retail power rate for the solar power they generate but don’t use and then export to the grid. Retail rates can be two to three times as high as the wholesale price of electricity because transmission and delivery costs, along with taxes and other surcharges that fund state renewable programs, are baked in.

So in California, solar ratepayers on average are credited about 16 cents per kilowatt hour on their electric bills for the excess energy they generate—even though utilities could buy that power at less than half the cost from other types of power generators…

Not to mention green jobs and money going to waste or keeping money laundering back into the political parties (mainly Democratic):

Cal Watchdog asks a simple question, gives three short responses, and then you can read the rest:

Now that the $2.167 billion California Solar Initiative is winding down, electricity ratepayers might ask: What was it and what did it accomplish? Was it:

1.) A cutting edge solar energy project to bring about a “self-sustaining” solar power industry, as touted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and state legislators?

The answer is mostly no based on post-project evaluations done by academic experts.

2.) A program to replace very expensive conventional peak time power plants with equally expensive but clean rooftop solar electricity that is generated at the time of day when it is hottest?

The answer is no. Contending that rooftop solar power replaces conventional peak time power is bogus. This is because electricity rates are tiered depending on usage and climate zone and the fact that ultra peak power rates during heat waves and cold snaps only last maybe as much as four weeks out of 52 weeks in a year.

3.) An expensive, artificial green energy and jobs program that is now being wound down, as there is a recovery in the jobs market?

The answer is yes. Since California’s Solar Initiative did not produce a self-sustaining rooftop solar power market (Question No. 1) and cannot be justified as a replacement for expensive peak time electricity, this leaves us with one conclusion: It was mainly a jobs stimulus program that ended up adding about a $200 tax to 10.8 million utility customers’ electric bills.

[….]

Millions of utility customers subsidize solar installations

Of course, the CPUC omitted disclosing that the $6.16 per kilowatt cost of installing rooftop solar power came by adding $2.167 billion to the electricity bills of other California electricity ratepayers. To provide subsidies to the 118,303 recipients of residential, commercial and governmental rooftop solar power installations the electricity bills had to be raised for 10.8 million customers of Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) through its subsidiary the California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE).

In other words, the Solar Initiative mandated on average about 91 other electricity customers to subsidize the rooftop solar installations of each rooftop solar power installation. Spread over 10.8 million customers, that equates to about a $200 tax per California electricity customer. The California Solar Initiative is another socialized system like Social Security that is based on a larger base of utility ratepayers paying for a smaller number of recipients. It is a program based on privatizing profits and socializing losses.

Thus, the $6.16 per kilowatt cost installed and 43,000 solar-energy-related jobs created by the California Solar Initiative are artificial and not market-based. The program could never have become self-sustaining in the first place.

…read more…

When government picks winners and losers, we all lose:

The California Air Resources Board is reportedly considering a new plan to help transportation for low earners: buying them cars. The agency would like to give those of low income a voucher to buy energy-efficient vehicles like the Nissan Leaf, which has a sticker price of $21,000. The board currently gives drivers $1,000 to $1,500 to get rid of their older vehicles in an attempt to curb carbon emissions; there is a second program that gives up to $4,000 depending on the vehicles involved.

….The CARB has even implied that it could sponsor the full purchase of an $18,000 for families of three looking to pick up a hybrid. Stanley Young, spokesman for the Air Resources Board, said that California should “make sure low-income people can also get into these clean vehicles.”

The federal cash for clunkers program was an immense failure, frontloading car purchases but doing nothing to truly spur demand for new vehicles. This program would have the ostensible goal of moving America’s auto industry toward more fuel efficiency; instead, it would redistribute income by subsidizing big business.

~ Breitbart

“A fundamental principle of information theory is that you can’t guarantee outcomes… in order for an experiment to yield knowledge, it has to be able to fail. If you have guaranteed experiments, you have zero knowledge” ~ George Gilder

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Competition is a “discovery procedure,” Nobel-prize-winning economist F. A. Hayek taught. Through the competitive market process, we producers and consumers constantly learn things that force us to adjust our behavior if we are to succeed. Central planners fail for two reasons:

First, knowledge about supply, demand, individual preferences and resource availability is scattered — much of it never articulated — throughout society. It is not concentrated in a database where a group of planners can access it.

Second, this “data” is dynamic: It changes without notice. No matter how honorable the central planners’ intentions, they will fail because they cannot know the needs and wishes of 300 million different people. And if they somehow did know their needs, they wouldn’t know them tomorrow.

~ John Stossel