American Apparel Begins Laying Off 2,400 Workers In Southern California -- January 16, 2017

The California Page

From The Los Angeles Times:

• final chapter as America's largest garment maker
• the company has about 3,500 factor works in southern California
• Canadian clothing maker Gildan Activewear, at auction, won the right to buy the American Apparel brand and some manufacturing equipment; it will not assume AA's leases on its factories
• AA's 110 stores and website will remain open until at least April
• Gildan Activewear has yet to decide where it will make AA goods; most of its hubs are in Central America and the Caribbean

Let's see if Trump tweets.

This goes all the way back to Ross Perot, doesn't it? 1992. Pretty prescient.

And all this time we have been focused on global warming.

*******************************

California's Deficit Is Back

From The Los Angeles Times:

Less than four years after declaring California’s budget balanced for the foreseeable future, Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday said the state is projected to run a $1.6-billion deficit by next summer — a noticeable shift in the state’s fiscal stability that could worsen under federal spending cuts championed by President-elect Donald Trump.

“The trajectory of revenue growth is declining,” Brown said in unveiling his $179.5-billion plan for the fiscal year that begins in July.

The bullet train will still be funded; not sure about K-12 education.

California Dreamin', Mamas and Papas

*********************************

Not To Worry

California governor proposes 42% gasoline tax hike to bail out CALPERS.  No major mainstream media outlet reported this; it was reported over a 3-day weekeknd.

Gov. Brown’s willingness to try raising gasoline taxes by 17 cents a gallon, and on vehicle registration fees by $65, is a sign of the insolvency risk from the exploding cost of California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) public  pensions.

Brown’s draft 2017-2018 budget already includes a $524 million increase for the public pension contribution. That amounts to an 11 percent increase over this year’s $5.3 billion cost.

The CalPERS contribution increase would have actually been another $516 million more next year, but the world’s biggest pubic pension is allowing the State of California to “smooth” the higher pension funding cost by reducing its projected investment return expectation from 7.5 percent to 7 percent. But that smoothing will lock California into about a $524 million CalPERS contribution increase for each of the next four years.

And all this time we've been focused on the "never-ending" drought (it's over) and global warming.

By the way, much more at the link. Much more than David Muir over at ABC News would ever tell you.

**************************

31 States Bought Into This Including California

Medicaid provides health insurance for lower income folks. Cost is shared between US government and the states.

States historically have been given great latitude in determining who is eligible for Medicaid. However, under ObamaCare, the federal government determined eligibility. States, through a court decision, are not required to accept Medicaid expansion under ObamaCare.

Thirty-one states did accept this expansion and have greatly expanded Medicaid enrollment under ObamaCare.

If ObamaCare is repealed, the states are left holding the bag with the greatly increased enrollment. At least that's how I understand it. But it's probably more complicated than that. From NBC:

States such as California, New Jersey, Kentucky and Arkansas, which have expanded their Medicaid programs, have seen sharp decreases in their uninsured rates. States that didn't expand Medicaid, such as Texas, Florida and Virginia, did not experience as much of a drop in the number of people without health insurance. So far, 31 states and the District of Columbia have expanded their Medicaid programs under the ACA to cover adults who earn up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — or $16,394 per year. 

By the way, remember that vote in the Senate that was the first step in repealing ObamaCare? I never understood it, but this is what it was all about. From Michale Hiltzik in The Los Angeles Times before the  vote:

More than political risk stands in the way. Numerous provisions of the Affordable Care Act are subject to filibuster in the Senate, which the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes to avoid. According to healthcare expert Timothy Jost, an emeritus law professor at Washington and Lee University, those may be safe from repeal. As it happens, they include many consumer-protection reforms that are very popular, including the ban on exclusions or higher premiums for preexisting conditions, and caps on annual and lifetime benefits.

The Senate voted to end filibusters on any part of ObamaCare -- at least, again, that's how I  understand it. Could be wrong.

Later: see first comment. A reader explains it in less than a paragraph. Much appreciated.