California AB-5 Law

[OldCorpse]

Okay, If I lived in some third world country or in poverty and squalor, I most definitely would see the appeal and and draw to come to someplace where it seems dreams can come true.

Come again? That simply isn't true. Tons and tons of immigrants come from highly developed places, and tons more want to come but it's very hard (our immigration system is messed up - it's harder for people from Europe than almost anywhere else!). If you look at Silicon Valley, huge numbers are from Europe, some of the most developed parts, Scandinavia, here in LA you can't throw a stick without hitting a bunch of Brits. Also, since I always like to provide links to back up what I say, guess where most Canadian immigrants end up in - CA is #1 destination for Canadian immigrants! I don't think Canada is a third world country of poverty and squalor. I travel to Europe all the time, and always get questions about how to immigrate to the U.S., and it's almost always CA (btw. CA is #1 for folks with French ancestry), never do I get questions about Idaho - for that matter, even the illegal immigrants flock to CA and not to Idaho, I guess even those from third world countries in poverty and squalor don't hanker after Idaho. Now, I'm not picking on Idaho, but some in this thread keep talking about how they know all these people in CA who want to go to Idaho, and how Idaho is so much better than CA and so on. Btw., yes, there are people from CA who move to Idaho, often those are retired cops and gun rights advocates and a certain profile of folks, which is fine, it's a free country - when they move, both CA and Idaho gain. And speaking of migration within the U.S., the folks moving TO California have higher education and income than those who move OUT of CA - hardly a profile of people from poverty and squalor. Incidentally, even those from places like India and China who immigrate legally are top students or come from rich families (as in China) - these are often the elites and cream of the crop who send their children to study here - and look at the study I linked to about billion dollar startups, a ton were started by international students... we get the cream of the crop from everywhere!

But you make it sound like EVERYONE wants to come there and if they can't see that then they're fools. There are people in this very thread that live there and say that they want out. Are they fools? Or do they just want a life that they can't get there, but can somewhere else? I myself have zero desire to live in this land of milk and honey, as you make it sound. Why would I? So I can have more competition? Make less money for the same work? Have a higher cost of living? Have a higher cost of housing? Fight more traffic? Suffer through more bureaucracy? But I could say, hey I live in CA.

No, I don't think everyone wants to live in CA, and yes, there are plenty who live here and want out. I get it, and that's fine, there's not a place on earth everyone will like - tastes differ. What I don't get is what I see from certain folks, who complain loudly of wanting to leave and what a sh|thole CA is, but for some reason don't move - it's a free country, go already! But no, they'd rather talk about how they'll leave, and instead spend all their time in newspaper comment sections and online comments and boards complaining about CA and how they'll move to f.ex. Texas and Texas is so much better and on and on - just go! I completely get it - as you put it, there is no reason for you to want to live in CA where there is more competition, the cost of living is higher and so on. That's OK. Some thrive on competition, want to compete in the biggest pool, some prefer the pickings in out of the way places or anywhere in between. Honestly, there's nothing wrong with it, and there are places that have things CA doesn't, so it's a no brainer to move there.

You love CA, that's obvious. We get it. That's fine. That's great. I love my state, too. To each, their own. But not everyone has to live in CA and site paragraphs of statistics to justify why everyone else should want to, too. I'm pretty far from CA in lot's of ways, but I bet there are plenty of people there that would give their first born to have my life here. OC, it's not the information that you present that ruffles feathers, it's the way you present it. You come across as if you're on a soapbox standing above the unwashed masses and they're fools for not heading your words.

This country is more than just CA and NY and there are lots of successful business and successful, happy people in these other places, too.

You misrepresent what I said in this thread. I didn't start or say that everyone should go to CA or stay or anything of the sort. The only reason I spoke up, is because folks like you started attacking CA in wholesale condemning ways that had nothing to do with the topic at hand - just review this thread, and see how you and others did this, and I only stepped in to say, hey, attack what's justified (bad law AB-5), but stop all the other nonsense because it simply isn't true - when you throw nonsense accusations calumnies and slander at CA, you bet I'll counter it with facts and numbers. You and others condemn the politics of the state (which btw. is against the rules here) - hey buddy, the majority of Californians freely and democratically elected these politicians, so you are criticizing the voters in this state. I merely pointed out, especially to folks like you who don't live here but feel free to attack us here in CA and our democratic choices, that our politicians delivered spectacularly for us economically, better than anywhere else IN THE WORLD, and that during that decade of one party rule, actually leapt forward to become the fifth largest economy in the WORLD. Your state may have different policies, and I'm happy for you - you guys keep your system and we'll keep ours, I don't care what system you have as I don't live there, but if you attack ours, I'll point out that we are #1 along so many metrics it isn't even funny - we see which works better along certain statistics including quality of life, cultural richness and so on, not just pure economics. And neither CA nor NY lack for people wanting to come here - the demand is sky high which is why the cost of living is sky high. We are very clear in criticizing our own faults (hello, AB-5), because we want to be better, but if you're an outsider throwing nonsense at us, we'll push back. That's all that happened here. Live wherever you want to, I'm happy for you - I promise not to move there, and I'll be happy for anyone from CA who wants to leave, to please leave, thank you, everyone will be happier living where they want to live, and statistics tell us the results. It's a free country!

 

[puredrifting]

I have a lot of the same feelings as OC about my state. I was born here and lived every moment of my life in this state. That's precisely why I want to leave it, it's beyond saving and living here is too sad and too painful, especially because I've lived my entire life here when it was good. I noticed everything "melting down" about 15 years ago.
Before that, California was everything you espouse. Best economy, best lifestyle, weather, wealth, infrastructure. Today, almost everything that was great about California, save the incredible geography and topography, has been reduced and eliminated.

All you have to do now is drive the 101 freeway from the 5 below downtown, drive the 101 through the heart of downtown up through Silverlake and into Hollywood.You'd think you were in the Favelas I've shot in in the hills of Rio. Similar situation there, the rich live at the beach, all is great down on Copacabana but drive two miles inland
and you are in a living nightmare. LA is turning into the same, there are homeless encampments literally 10' from the freeway with huge third world garbage dumps literally rolling into the slow lane of the freeway. This stuff was not there two years ago. The squalor was confined to Skid Row and the area around the Rescue Mission, now it's taking over the entire outlying
metropolitan area. The LA City Council and Garcetti are akin to the Tammany Hall rule at it's worst in NYC, they are corrupt, weak and ineffective at solving any of LA's problems. San Diego, San Francisco and most of the other metropolitan centers of the state are just smaller, slightly different versions of the same.

At least half of the people I know leaving are educated, have degrees, are successful in their business, and earn a great living, they are just disgusted by the lack of leadership, lack of fairness in public policy and single party rule. Your assertion that only the poor, unsuccessful and those who "can't make it" are leaving in drives is misinformed, insulting and reeks of hubris.
You can site statistics all you want, no different that if you were citing drunk driving statistics versus your child being killed by a drunk driver, it's two different things. I am sure the California Chamber of Commerce would welcome you as a spokeperson, your talking points sound identical to theirs https://www.calchamber.com/

Of course my observations are anectdotal, not scientific, I don't purport to be a sociologist doing a study. I only observe what's happening in my little circle of a couple hundred friends, associates and acquaintances, as a lifelong resident of this state for half a century. What I'm saying is that here on the ground, in the trenches, I am hearing
a groundswell of sentiment that people across the entire socioeconomic strata are leaving this state in droves. That has never happened in my lifetime and there are obviously myriad reasons for it. The observation is that unless you are rich, the experience of living here is crap, and that the powers that be have made a concerted and successful
effort to eradicate the middle class of the population. The policy makers of California are definitely amongst the worst in the entire country and idiocy like AB5 just adds more proof of that assertion.

 

[OldCorpse]

What can I say, everyone has their own experience. And yes, the statistics do indicate, including the very recent ones, that ON AVERGAGE the ones leaving have lower education and income compared to the ones coming IN. On the other hand, there are now more leaving than coming, a testament to the unaffordability of this state, and yes, including some of the problems you mention, puredrifting.

Here's what's hard for some to wrap their heads around - a lot of the criticism, puredrifting, I agree with 100%. The infrastructure has taken a hit, there is widespread corruption in government, but I can't talk about it directly, because the rules forbid discussing politics. So, I can only mention things obliquely and roundabout. The infrastructure problem is not something that happened in just the last 15 years. It's the result of underinvestment and corruption for a long time - and here I will NOT mention politics - but not exactly by the party that is now blamed... we all know who doesn't like to invest in public goods and instead prefers tax cuts, I'll leave it at that. In fact, the economy as I linked to in studies, has never been as good as under the one party rule the last 10 years (I won't mention who). This is not an aberration, just look at states around the country - which ones are growth engines and which are the laggards? But every party has its blind spots, and the current crew too - I agree 100%, the pandering is disgusting, the whole PC thing (which I can't stand), the idiotic social policies and so on. But some of the problems are not directly due to that - you point out homelessness, and I pointed out that we in CA are getting stuck (sometimes maliciously!) with homeless from all over the country (and even abroad!). What should CA do about the fact that other states ship their homeless out here (one way bus tickets), or that the homeless from all over come here for the weather and the free services? Even if you remove the free services (for which you and I pay taxes), they'll still come, because they won't freeze like in Montana. How is it CA's fault that other states won't or can't take care of their own and instead ship them or they come on their own here? Things are complicated.

I'm not saying the politicians bear no responsibility - they do, in spades. There is corruption, 100% yes. But I got news for you - I have lived and traveled all over, and I keep up with the news and my contacts: let me tell you, with *very* rare exceptions (mostly Scandinavia), there is corruption everywhere, most places much worse than CA, including right here in the U.S., most states are even more corrupt than CA and I got receipts, if you want, I'll link to studies. CA is hardly at the top in corruption in the U.S. (even less the world).

Corruption seems worse in CA because it's so big, so naturally you'll have more crime of that kind. We have more politicians than anywhere, so there is more chance for corruption. But that's not a fair measurement. Fair measurement is corruption per capita - and here CA shines, we are one of the least corrupt anywhere! Here's a link from Forbes, a study by a right wing institute hardly friendly to CA:

The Most Corrupt States In America

As you can see, CA is not even on the list of those corrupt states! Most corrupt: DC (what a surprise, not!), Louisiana, Illinoise, Tennessee and so on down the list - CA nowhere to be found! By sheer numbers, yes, say, cities such as Los Angeles because it has such huge number of politicians will have more corruption, but not by per-capita.

So you see, your impressions are formed by where you live, but for objective truth you need to look at objective numbers and travel widely and compare. The grass is always greener on the other side. But often when you get there, you realize that the greenest of all was right there where you were.

Again, I agree with you - many things have deteriorated in the last 20 years. Some of it is the fault of the politicians, some of it is just CA being the victim of its own success, some of it the sad state of politics overall. By the way, from my posts defending CA you probably think you know my politics... don't be so sure. I see the faults, but where I differ from you, is I want to stay and FIGHT. I will not let them destroy this state, and I will not be run out of my own g-d d-amn home! F*** that! The ones who give up, can leave. I'll stay and I need others who are strong and willing to fight - lets band together and give 'em hell. Let's keep politicians accountable, regardless of party - that's the patriotic thing to do, fight for your country and state.

 

[Paul F]

... The ones who give up, can leave. I'll stay and I need others who are strong and willing to fight - lets band together and give 'em hell. ...

I was fed up with Los Angeles and left in 1982. I couldn't stand the crime, pollution, nor traffic 38 years ago. When we left, our apartment manager said similar things to me. He basically said I was a big chicken for leaving. I've had 38 years in paradise. It was an excellent decision.

People in my area leave only because of financial reasons. They don't want to leave. But they need to make a living and they need to secure their financial futures. It's a smart move that should not be dismissed as though they deserted from a war. They are making sound decisions that fit their needs.

 

[Paul F]

Here it is by the numbers - https://escholarship.org/uc/item/96j2704t

 

[Batutta]

I left Los Angeles in 2009 and moved to Canada. The main reason was the cost of living. I was making good money as an editor, but I could just barely afford to live decently there at the time. I wasn't thriving. I couldn't find an affordable home in a desirable area, and my daughter was about to go into school. We owned property in Canada, and since my freelance work was steady and only required internet and fedex, we moved. My standard of living shot up tremendously. Sold that property and bought a 2,000 square foot home in a great neighbourhood. My health care costs went down to nothing (I have a pre existing condition which made insurance expensive). My daughter goes to school in one of the best districts in the country. And I live with zero anxiety about crime and random nutters roaming the neighbourhood. What I miss greatly...the culture you get from living in a cosmopolitan city like Los Angeles -- food, museums, theater, cinemas, and mostly, the people. You could meet ten people in a day and each one is a completely different type of person. And I'm not talking about race. You could meet ten white, heterosexual dudes and they'd all be different -- different backgrounds, different interests, different jobs, different personalities. Here, it seems every guy I meet is pretty much the same dude. Throw in race and living here is like marinating in mayonnaise compared to living in LA. Once my daughter graduates high school, I'll probably live part time in LA if I can swing it. I recently came to the realization that everything GOOD that happened in my life and career, happened in LA -- meeting my wife, launching a film career, having a child, making my film. While I've lived well here, I've been coasting on a life that LA made possible. That says something.

 

[OldCorpse]

Thank you Paul F for that fantastic link, and thank you Batutta for your beautiful post! A lot to chew on, though obviously, I won't speak freely because I want to avoid getting into politics, so no party mention or such.

That study is so amazing! Here are a few takeaways:

1) High cost of housing is the biggest reason for moving for libs, but NOT for conservatives for whom taxes and political climate are key

2) Taxes and political climate don't matter to those libs who want to move, it's cost of living housing

3) It's mostly conservatives who want to move

4) By region, those who want to leave are NOT those from Los Angeles or big cities as you might imagine reading all about the filth and homeless in the cities - instead it is those who live OUTSIDE of Los Angeles, and the #1 region is Central Valley (farm country!).

5) By race, again, big surprise - not whites... instead, it's African-Americans! And those cited not politics, but cost of housing. Asians are the least likely to want to leave.

But here are the greatest surprises: on average, Californians LOVE to live in California. In the past ten years (one party rule) the proportion of those who LOVE living here *rose* steadily to now 50% with another 25% saying it's "nice", only 11% say it's "average", which leaves 14% who hate it. But the satisfaction is at highest level since going back to the period of 60's-80's. So funny, but the so called bad governing time - we love it more! Libs satisfaction rose from loving it 53% in 2013, to 67% loving it today! For conservatives, of course it went the opposite way.

So what can we conclude? Most CA residents love living here more and more, especially the libs. Those libs who want to move, feel forced out by high cost of housing. Meanwhile, those who hate it want to leave because of taxes and politics. I say that's generally fabulous news - the last 10 years delivered fantastic economic growth, and those who loved the last ten years want to stay and keep this system, those who hate it, want to leave - that will strengthen the system here in CA because those opposed will leave. Now, it's not all roses, because cost of living, especially housing is a definite negative, and unless CA meets that challenge it will eventually hurt us very badly.

It's funny, but Battuta seems to illustrate perfectly what's happening - he felt forced out of CA by cost, but he loved the culture here. He's not one of those bitter leavers who hated it here for political reasons. Here's the reality - CA is a diverse and culturally rich state (which aspect Battuta appreciates), and this is its immense strength, so great that it powers states around it as in the link I provided.

So if CA can fix some of its problems with costs and so on, it will continue to boom and those who hate the system are making it stronger by leaving. If we don't fix the costs, we'll lose more folks like Battuta, which would be a shame and a big negative. But bottom line, things are looking good. Now, there is a danger to one party rule - that if it goes too far, the loons take over, and this is why we have to stay and fight to keep the loony politicians out (of either party). Right now, because the party currently in power is so diverse *politically* we are doing well - there is enough wings in the party to keep the loons out of power (mostly) - but if ever the loons take over, that's the end... why can't the other party function as counterweight? Because sadly it was taken over by their loons - there is now no diversity in that party (the Overton Window moved too far). That's the dilemma for the CA system - it now must count on the only sane party left, and if that party gets taken over by *their* loons, there will be no sane party left in the state and that's the beginning of the end. Prognosis - cautiously optimistic, with some danger ahead.

 

[DLD]

LA is headed to the way of Detroit ... and not real Detroit but Detroit, as depicted in Robocop. And it goes way beyond the AB-5. The problems are political - as least, Michigan was a two-party state - ecological/enviromental, racial and economic.

The major trends are these :

the middle class is leaving;
the underclass is moving in;
crime levels are way up, even as the crimes themselves are downgraded (Prop 47) from felonies to misdemeanors;
LA now has 60,000 homeless, who won't be moved from their territories because it's now considered a right;
there are 45,000 criminal gang members and the declining police presence.

What this means is that block by block, the city is becoming a 3rd world country. Businesses are leaving in droves and the new ones are not being created. What's keeping the entire state up is the iPhones and search engines but those are also declining industries due to the diminishing effects of the technology and an increasing competition from the Chinese. And when the iPhones stop selling and the Apple stock crashes, the Götterdämmerung will be felt in full force.

 

[Batutta]

The thing you need to consider about Los Angeles is that it's not one concentrated urban centre. It's an incredibly sprawling, spread out city so you can have high crime in one area, and live in another area where you barely feel the effects from that. You can avoid trouble to an extent. In a place like New York, Chicago, Detroit...trouble finds you.

 

[OldCorpse]

LA is headed to the way of Detroit ... and not real Detroit but Detroit, as depicted in Robocop. And it goes way beyond the AB-5. The problems are political - as least, Michigan was a two-party state - ecological/enviromental, racial and economic.

The major trends are these :

the middle class is leaving;
the underclass is moving in;
crime levels are way up, even as the crimes themselves are downgraded (Prop 47) from felonies to misdemeanors;
LA now has 60,000 homeless, who won't be moved from their territories because it's now considered a right;
there are 45,000 criminal gang members and the declining police presence.

What this means is that block by block, the city is becoming a 3rd world country. Businesses are leaving in droves and the new ones are not being created. What's keeping the entire state up is the iPhones and search engines but those are also declining industries due to the diminishing effects of the technology and an increasing competition from the Chinese. And when the iPhones stop selling and the Apple stock crashes, the Götterdämmerung will be felt in full force.

Oh, if I had a nickel for every time I read one of these predictions of "DOOM!!!" for LA and CA, I'd buy even more property... in LA! We've been reading gleeful predictions from all the predictable quarters of utter ruin for LA and CA for literally decades now. Anyone remember the Zoot Suit Riots back in the 40's? Racial fears and conflict driven by racism and lack of economic opportunties always depicted as doom due to the "other", or as put above "the underclass moving in", white flight to suburbia "middle class is leaving" - but somehow CA and LA keep powering on. Watts Riots. Crack Epidemic. LA Riots. Doom foretold every time, but somehow LA and CA only gets richer and better. It has never been as bad as New York that actually went bankrupt in the 70's - and of course everyone who was afraid of "DOOM!!!" and fled NY, could only wish they bought property in the "doomed" city, they'd be insanely rich today, as NY is another blue powerhouse economy.

It's funny how folks who don't live in LA are so sure about how "doom" is just around the corner. Take the crime rate - the recent spike in crime is due mostly to downtown crime escalating. And why is crime escalating in downtown LA? Because it's gentrifying like crazy after decades of being a cesspool. More rich people and middle class are moving downtown and property values are exploding - and guess what, they are displacing the "underclass" and are reporting crimes. It's a sign of DEVELOPMENT and gentrification. It's rich moving in and the underclass being displaced, not the other way around. Crime was always rampant downtown, but when poor people and the underclass were the only ones there, crime was frequently severely underreported. Now that rich and middle class moved in, the reporting skyrocketed. Meanwhile the homeless downtown are being displaced and thrown out and spread to the rest of LA, so the homeless that have always existed now are suddenly visible and seem a huge issue (even though it's always been there, but also there are more homeless than ever due to factors I indicated). So, unless you've lived here for decades, you have no clue what anything means, and you report nonsense that's simply not true ("middle class moving out, underclass moving in", when the opposite is true and I provided links), or reporting crime numbers not understanding what they mean or show.

Meanwhile those of us who live in LA know the score - yes, there are homeless encampents everywhere and it's a serious problem - but real estate prices are exploding EVERYWHERE in LA, even, incredibly including East LA and South Central, the barrios and "ghettos", where you are seeing $+million properties more and more. The unaffordability crisis means more underclass is being DISPLACED including out of state (opposite of "moving in"), gentrification means RICH and middle class moving IN (opposite of "moving out"). At this point there really are no "cheap" places left in LA and the gentrification has moved onto the whole county. The city and in fact the whole region is gentrifying and cleaning up. A tip for the wise - the homeless crisis will be solved ("how" is too big a topic for this post), and when that happens the real estate values will explode even higher! I only hope that the homeless crisis gets worse first so that it can - PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE - depress some real estate values and run off the complainers so that we can buy up more property and then, poof! Prices rocket up! Every time they've predicted real estate doom for LA (or San Francisco, or CA in general), the opposite has happened - the S&L crisis, the 90's bust, the 2009 real estate crash and financial crisis - the wise bought low and then TO THE MOON! Like NY in the 70's, after the 9/11 and after every pause, it's only HIGHER! So by all means, please talk down CA, LA and everything here is terrible, terrible, terrible - stay away or leave, sell, sell, sell! And we'll help you out, we'll buy, buy, buy

What this means is that block by block, the city is becoming a 3rd world country. Businesses are leaving in droves and the new ones are not being created.


Love it, love it, love it! I live right on the border of West Hollywood and LA, near Melrose Ave. I was just hosting a visitor from Europe, an old friend in the business I've known for 20 years, who used to live in LA (went to film school here!). He remarked upon something extremely obvious - how Melrose went from empty storefronts as a result of the 2009 crash to now booming area full of life, expensive restaurants, stores and high end businesses moving in. The revitalisation is incredible. This, by the way is not unique to this area, go anywhere - I am in Santa Monica frequently - and the real estate is booming because so many high-tech and software companies are coming here or being created here. As a matter of fact, we rather mourn the gentrification - it's becoming too clean and bougie everywhere, and losing its old ramshackle Film Noir aesthetic and feel. Silverlake used to be a hipster expensive area full of young professionals and creatives - it still is, only now it's spread to Eagle Rock and areas that used to be gang areas, are now becoming super expensive as more and more economic activity invades the whole region. Anybody who lives in LA knows I'm telling the truth - what a contrast to someone who sits in FL and imagines that LA is becoming a 3rd world country with block by block disaster unfolding. Man, I wish it were true about "block by block" deterioration, I'd love to invest in some cheap real estate, the same way downtown LA used to be a cesspool, but if you invested you'd be sitting pretty now!

I'm happy to take any bets opposite of "Götterdämmerung will be felt in full force" - a "doom" bet that the usual CA and LA pessimists and doomsayers have been losing for decades. In fact, those who are so confident that we're doomed, should short anything associated with CA - I'll take the other side ... CA boosters and optimists have been winning and getting richer for decades, the doomsayers always miss the boat, such is the reality.

What's keeping the entire state up is the iPhones and search engines but those are also declining industries due to the diminishing effects of the technology and an increasing competition from the Chinese. And when the iPhones stop selling and the Apple stock crashes, the Götterdämmerung will be felt in full force.



Comedy gold! How many "crises" has CA weathered only to go onto even more insane economic growth? When the defense industry left SoCal, everyone was sure doom was around the corner. Same when domestic car industry left - doom... only to be replaced by the new dynamic Japanese car industry... which is now OLD and so leaving CA for Texas... only to be replaced by Tesla and so on. We move out of old industries and create new ones - because CA is building THE FUTURE. Sorry, but anyone who thinks Apple and Google is what is propping CA is out of their mind - Apple is old industry and Google is going that way too... which is GREAT, because we are moving forward building the FUTURE! In that link I provided that showed how 33 new billion dollar startups by immigrants were in CA and the next largest was NY with 8... well, Florida was there too - with 1! Oh, the humanity, LOL! How does 33:1 look? Where is the future being built? The place that is STARTING UP new businesses at 33 TIMES the rate of FL a place that managed to build 1? As in another link I provided, CA is has the densest startup activity in the world with Israel a close second (by population). You predict that when Old News Apple dies, we'll be doomed? LOL!

Oh, and we're not worried by the Chinese. I remember when the Japanese were supposed to swamp us... what happened? We ate their lunch - CA in particular, and btw. guess which is the #1 destination for Japanese immigrants who want to build something - CA! We'll eat China's lunch too - at least CA will! We have tons of Chinese who are bringing their best ideas here - and their money too, because it's so much safer than in legally uncertain China... and guess where the biggest destination for Chinese immigrants is - CA #1! Man, CA is #1 in so many things, we are TIRED OF WINNING! LOL!

And about how supposedly technology and business is leaving LA, here is a nice little article:

https://la.curbed.com/2019/7/22/20701279/tech-industry-los-angeles-size-salary

Weird, the opposite is happening - growth is skyrocketing and tech money is pushing that supposed "block by block" deterioration to ever more gentrification and higher prices! LOL! Keep betting against it!

Here's a nice selection of LA native tech companies you can bet against - growing so fast they form what is called Silicon Beach. Boy, is LA suffering from no tech growth, and the declining 3rd world real estate "block by block", LOL!

You keep betting against CA and LA - see ya in another 10 years! Btw. in another ten years, you better hope CA scientists solve global warming or all that Florida beachside property will be swimming under water

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Well I’ve been here a whole 3 days for a shoot and I’m ready to leave, lol.

So there is that.

 

[DLD]

The thing you need to consider about Los Angeles is that it's not one concentrated urban centre. It's an incredibly sprawling, spread out city so you can have high crime in one area, and live in another area where you barely feel the effects from that. You can avoid trouble to an extent. In a place like New York, Chicago, Detroit...trouble finds you.

I lived in Hollywood for 14 years and worked in Hollywood, Studio City, Sherman Oaks, Encino, Woodland Hills, Northridge, West LA, Pasadena, Torrance, Hawthorne, Westwood and Canoga Park (and that's with one company! - no, not really) I was there during the 1992 Rodney King riots and the 1994 6.8 Northridge earthquake. And too many fires and mudslides to mention. As a "local", I'd take all the friends and relatives on tours of LA, from the Chinese Theater to Rodeo Drive to Malibu, the Mulholland, the Temescal Cyn, the 3rd St. Promenade and on and on. I was also told that it was much better there in the 1960's than in the 70's, in the 70's than in the 80's, in the 80's than in the 90's.

I got there in the summer of 1987 and a friend of mine took me to the Westwood Village. I saw Nick Lowe walk by. On the next block I saw Tasia Valenza. Every block was filled with people. There were sidewalk restaurants. There were crowded movie theaters. And the proverbial music and laughter. But, a year later, there was a shooting with a UCLA student being killed in a crossfire between two rival gangs. And Westwood died. Store windows were boarded up. The eateries went out of business. At night, Shamshiri aside, the place became deserted. And that's the history of LA in a nutshell.

 

[Batutta]

I lived in Hollywood for 14 years and worked in Hollywood, Studio City, Sherman Oaks, Encino, Woodland Hills, Northridge, West LA, Pasadena, Torrance, Hawthorne, Westwood and Canoga Park (and that's with one company! - no, not really) I was there during the 1992 Rodney King riots and the 1994 6.8 Northridge earthquake. And too many fires and mudslides to mention.

I was there through all that too. Good times.

 

[DLD]

So, to get back to AB5 - Lorena Gonzalez is clearly being groomed for a higher profile gig. Her JD from UCLA Law makes her a very marketable candidate. So, I'd say it's very unlikely that AB5 will be rewritten unless forced by the new 9th Circuit.

 

[OldCorpse]

So, I'd say it's very unlikely that AB5 will be rewritten unless forced by the new 9th Circuit.

Yeah, no. In fact, reworking AB-5 is a very active endeavor, and Gonzalez herself is a big advocate of that, to the point where she even complains about the perception that AB-5 was meant to be written in stone, whereas from the beginning she wrote it with the idea of it being a work in progress:

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article240264901.html

"The California Legislature is considering nearly three dozen bills to clean up or repeal the landmark gig economy law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom just months ago."

So much for "very unlikely to be rewritten". As I said from my first post in this thread - AB-5 was clearly not going to stand in its present form, and as any law it must be reworked to become a net benefit to the community. But the misinformation about CA and anything concerning it never stops... that's OK, we'll come out the other end bigger and stronger than ever, and as usual where CA leads others follow, and those that don't follow end up in the bottom of the field as they have for the past 150 years - just look at the bottom states, have been losing ever since the Civil War and still have not figured it out.

 

[puredrifting]

...from the beginning she wrote it with the idea of it being a work in progress...

Sacramento and the state legislators over the past two decades are straight out of Idiocracy. This is legislating and policy
making at it's worse, "let's just throw a bunch of crap at the wall and see what sticks, then tweak it". What kind of policy making is that?
I posit that Ms. Gonzalez is an out of touch idiot. She has no clue about the hardship, financial loss and stress for a good portion Californians her
idiotic legislation is causing.

 

[OldCorpse]

Sacramento and the state legislators over the past two decades are straight out of Idiocracy. This is legislating and policy
making at it's worse, "let's just throw a bunch of crap at the wall and see what sticks, then tweak it". What kind of policy making is that?
I posit that Ms. Gonzalez is an out of touch idiot. She has no clue about the hardship, financial loss and stress for a good portion Californians her
idiotic legislation is causing.

This is fair - up to a point. Like I said from the begining - this law is an example of arrogance and ignorance combined. Arrogance, because she assumed that just because her intentions were "good", therefore she does not need to do due diligence to see what might be the unintended consequences. Ignorance, because so very much in this law was simply a complete lack of understanding of the realities of people working in such circumstances. That's a fair hit.

Where I disagree somewhat, is with the idea that crafting a law with the premise that it will be tweaked later on. The opposite is the case. A new law should be always crafted with the idea that it has enough flexibility to be tweaked later on. In defence - a bit - of Gonzalez, please show me any lawmaker, anywhere on planet earth (Heaven doesn't count) who is a specialist on absolutely everything they are confronted with when making laws. It's humanly impossible. Therefore you must always allow for the very real possibility that there are going to be unintended and unforeseeable consequences that will need to be addressed by tweaking the law. In the case of AB-5 however, this went way too far - a lot could have been anticipated, and clearly Gonzalez did not do enough (if any!) listening to people affected when she created this law. Thus, this law was unusually badly done, and it was a failure on day one, and a failure that could have been foretold by a five-year old. FAIL.

That said, it's just one law. It will be reformed. Most laws, thankfully, are done a little bit more carefully than this. AB-5 needs to be addressed ASAP - it's an embarrasement.

 

[puredrifting]

This is fair - up to a point. Like I said from the begining - this law is an example of arrogance and ignorance combined. Arrogance, because she assumed that just because her intentions were "good", therefore she does not need to do due diligence to see what might be the unintended consequences. Ignorance, because so very much in this law was simply a complete lack of understanding of the realities of people working in such circumstances. That's a fair hit.

Where I disagree somewhat, is with the idea that crafting a law with the premise that it will be tweaked later on. The opposite is the case. A new law should be always crafted with the idea that it has enough flexibility to be tweaked later on. In defence - a bit - of Gonzalez, please show me any lawmaker, anywhere on planet earth (Heaven doesn't count) who is a specialist on absolutely everything they are confronted with when making laws. It's humanly impossible. Therefore you must always allow for the very real possibility that there are going to be unintended and unforeseeable consequences that will need to be addressed by tweaking the law. In the case of AB-5 however, this went way too far - a lot could have been anticipated, and clearly Gonzalez did not do enough (if any!) listening to people affected when she created this law. Thus, this law was unusually badly done, and it was a failure on day one, and a failure that could have been foretold by a five-year old. FAIL.

That said, it's just one law. It will be reformed. Most laws, thankfully, are done a little bit more carefully than this. AB-5 needs to be addressed ASAP - it's an embarrasement.

On all your points, I agree heartily. As a Californian, I'm sure you've noticed the repeated hubris and arrogance of our idiot elected officials here, especially since it became single party rule.
The state has fiscally succeeded in spite of them, not because of them. If we had good legislators, imagine much more the state could have succeeded. We wouldn't have the CALSTRs and CALPRs
train wrecks for long term pension payout that most politicians seem to conveniently forget when they say our state has such a huge fininacial reserve.

De Maistre said, people get the government they deserve. If so, the electorate here must have some pretty horrific Karmic retribution from things they've done to have constantly elected the rogue's gallery of corrupt losers as the "leaders" of California.

 

[Efexone]

Chiming in here, been a while since I've posted. I'm sorry if this may of been discussed before in the thread, but would like to hear everyones thoughts on this:

I'm still fairly surprised how many "freelancers" are still working under their Socials, and not taking advantage of the simple benefits of incorporation. AB-5 does not care about B2B relationships. Since they are considering temporarily waiving the registration costs due to the backlash, it's a great time to further legitimize yourself as a true independant contractor, if thats what you want. It's important to have a workers comp policy, even if only for yourself, along with the liability protection an LLC or Corp offers. Pair this with a CPA and some quickbooks, and you're fairly setup to continue to succeed as an independant contractor.

 

[DLD]

... I posit that Ms. Gonzalez is an out of touch idiot. She has no clue about the hardship, financial loss and stress for a good portion Californians her idiotic legislation is causing...

I'd have to disagree here. There are no accidents in this law. It's been diligently prepared and assembled. The assemblywoman may have been a "bill sponsor" but the language is usually worked on by some very high tier lawyers at the HQ. As I said, Lorena G. is being groomed for bigger things and this is the way to get her noticed by the usual suspects. Or, more precisely, she has been noticed and this is her foray into limelight.

As to AB5 being rewritten, it's not likely to change anything. They'll clean up some language, making it tighter, may introduce some "means testing" - you can be an independent contractor, if you're making less than $12,000/year or something like that - but the substance of the bill will not be significantly altered. This law was long in development and no one should act as if this was unexpected. There are, obviously, precedents everywhere too.

PS. No one commented on my link from a few days ago. It's a similar labor law, designed to control the adult film industry, which likely be driven to Nevada and Florida. Or somewhere off-shore. And a lot of cameramen, makeup artists and video editors make a living off that too.