滨州山东治疗风湿及风湿哪里好(青岛月子里吹空调受风了怎么办) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The first data from an experiment in a California city where needy people get 0 a month from the government shows they spend most of it on things such as food, clothing and utility bills.The 18-month, privately funded program started in February and involves 125 people in Stockton. It is one of the few experiments testing the concept of “universal basic income,” an old idea getting new attention from Democrats seeking the 2020 presidential nomination.Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs has committed to publicly releasing data throughout the experiment to win over skeptics and, he hopes, convince state lawmakers to implement the program statewide.“In this country we have an issue with associating people who are struggling economically and people of color with vices like drug use, alcohol use, gambling,” he said. “I thought it was important to illustrate folks aren’t using this money for things like that. They are using it for literal necessities.”But critics say the experiment likely won’t provide useful information from a social science perspective given its limited size and duration.Matt Zwolinski, director of the Center for Ethics, Economics and Public Policy at the University of San Diego, said people aren’t likely to change their behavior if they know the money they are getting will stop after a year and a half. That’s one reason why he says the experiment is “really more about story telling than it is about social science.”Plus, he said previous studies have shown people don’t spend the money on frivolous things.“What you get out of a program like this is some fairly compelling anecdotes from people,” he said. “That makes for good public relations if you are trying to drum up interest in a basic income program, but it doesn’t really tell you much about what a basic income program would do if implemented on a long-term and large-scale basis.”The researchers overseeing the program, Stacia Martin-West at the University of Tennessee and Amy Castro Baker at the University of Pennsylvania, said their goal is not to see if people change their behavior, but to measure how the money impacts their physical and mental health. That data will be released later.People in the program get 0 each month on a debit card, which helps researchers track their spending. But 40% of the money has been withdrawn as cash, making it harder for researchers to know how it was used. They fill in the gaps by asking people how they spent it.Since February, when the program began, people receiving the money have on average spent nearly 40% of it on food. About 24% went to sales and merchandise, which include places like Walmart and discount dollar stores that also sell groceries. Just over 11% went to utility bills, while more than 9% went to auto repairs and fuel.The rest of the money went to services, medical expenses, insurance, self-care and recreation, transportation, education and donations.Of the participants, 43% are working full or part time while 2% are unemployed and not looking for work. Another 8% are retired, while 20% are disabled and 10% stay home to care for children or an aging parent.“People are using the money in ways that give them dignity or that gives their kids dignity,” Castro-Baker said, noting participants have reported spending the money to send their children to prom, pay for dental work and buy birthday cakes.Zhona Everett, 48, and her husband are among the recipients. When the experiment started she was unemployed and her husband was making 0 a day as a truck driver. They were always late paying their bills, and the pressure caused problems with their marriage.Once she got the money, Everett set it up to automatically pay bills for her electricity, car insurance and TV. She’s also paid off her wedding ring, donates a month to her church and still has some left over for an occasional date night with her husband.She said she and her husband now both have jobs working at the Tesla plant in Fremont.“I think people should have more of an open mind about what the program is about and shouldn’t be so critical about it,” she said. 4140

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Assembly voted Thursday to cap the interest lenders may charge on loans that can carry rates spiraling into the triple digits.Backed by civil rights groups, religious organizations and some trade associations, the proposed law would cap annual rates at around 38% for loans between ,500 and ,000.The bill comes as legislators across the country seek to reign in a storefront lending industry critics accuse of preying on low-income consumers in need of cash and trapping them under mounds of debt for years.But even as the bill advanced, some California lawmakers expressed concern that it will limit choices for consumers with bad credit or little access to banks and other financial products. And the lending industry, which wields significant influence in legislatures as well as in Washington, has launched an advertising campaign in California attacking the bill as it heads to the state Senate, where observers expect a tougher fight.Proponents of capping interest rates point to an explosion in high-interest consumer loans around the state over the last decade.The state already caps interest rates on consumer loans under ,500 but not for amounts over that threshold. In 2009, 8,468 loans for amounts between ,500 and ,000 came with interest rates over 100%, according to data from state regulators. Lenders now issue more than 350,000 loans each year with interest rates in the triple digits. A legislative analysis said at least one out of three borrowers is unable to pay their loans.But proposals to cap interest rates in recent years have faltered at California's Legislature. Several lawmakers still expressed concern about the latest proposal, suggesting it could drive lenders out of the market, pushing consumers with low incomes toward unregulated lenders or cutting off their easy access to capital."Without these alternative financial service providers, those folks would have nowhere else to go," said Democratic Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove of Los Angeles.Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon dismissed arguments the bill would ultimately harm low-income residents."Those are merely talking points of an industry that has repeatedly lied to members of this chamber," he said.Casting the bill as a moral issue, the Democrat said the legislation can be considered as important as any other lawmakers will vote on this year in the country's most populous state.The bill ended up passing with bipartisan support as one Republican legislator cited religious prohibitions on usury."I'm a free-market capitalist and I'm unashamed of it but we need to stand up and protect people who are being preyed upon," said Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham of San Luis Obispo.The support of the financial industry this year, too, may also signal that the sector foresees a reckoning in the state or at least further political uncertainty if lawmakers do not approve limits for loans between ,500 and ,000.The California Supreme Court cast a legal question mark last year over the lending industry's practices, deciding in one class action lawsuit that some interest rates can be so high as to be deemed unconscionable under financial laws.Democratic Assemblywoman Monique Limon of Santa Barbara, the bill's author, also suggested that an interest rate cap could end up on the ballot if the Legislature does not act.If passed, California would join 38 states and the District of Columbia in capping interest rates for these types of loans, according to a legislative analysis. The level proposed in California would be on the higher end.Observers expect a bigger political fight when the bill heads to the state Senate, however.Opponents of the bill have launched an advertising campaign aimed at stopping it.The trade group Online Lenders Alliance has bought ads on Sacramento television stations, according to Federal Communication Commission filings.A group calling itself Don't Lock Me Out California has also bought online ads attacking the bill. 4018

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California had a near-record number of daily coronavirus deaths as pandemic cases strained hospitals and reduced normal intensive care space to a record low. Yet Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday that there are hints residents may be heeding medical officials’ increasingly desperate calls for caution during the holidays. The transmission rate has been slowing for nearly two weeks. The rate of positive cases reached a new high of 12.3% over a two-week period but was starting to trend down. Yet the state's worst surge is taking a horrendous toll that threatens to only worsen if people gather during the holidays. 650

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Jerry Brown is leaving office Jan. 7 after signing more than 1,000 laws in his last year, further positioning the state as a bastion of liberal activism and goad to President Donald Trump.The laws, most of which take effect Tuesday, ease criminal sentences, tighten gun restrictions and address climate change, gender discrimination and sexual harassment.The Democratic governor approved 1,016 laws, the most in any of his last eight years in office. His 201 vetoes also were the most during his final two terms, as lawmakers passed a record number of measures.Counting his two terms from 1975 to 1983, the state's longest-serving governor vetoed 1,829 bills and saw 17,851 become law.Here are some of the laws taking effect with the new year:CRIMINAL JUSTICESweeping new laws bar juveniles younger than 16 from being tried as adults, even for murder, and keep children under 12 out of the criminal justice system unless they are charged with murder or rape.Other laws allow many defendants to ask judges to dismiss their charges if they show mental illness played a major role in their crime and limit the state's felony murder rule, which holds accomplices to the same standard as the person who carried out the killing.A new law responding to police shootings of young black men broadens public access to officers' personnel records. A police union is challenging whether the law is retroactive.Repeat drunken drivers and first-time offenders involved in injury crashes must install an ignition interlock device, which blocks their vehicle from starting if the driver isn't sober.GUNSSpurred by mass shootings, lawmakers further tightened California's already tough gun laws.Anyone convicted of certain domestic violence misdemeanors will be barred for life from possessing a firearm, while those under age 21 will be banned from purchasing a rifle or shotgun unless they are members of law enforcement or the military or have a hunting license.Several other laws already took effect, including measures explicitly banning rapid-fire bump stocks that attach to guns; requiring eight hours of training for concealed carry applicants; and allowing police to seize ammunition and magazines under domestic violence restraining orders.A lifetime firearm ban goes into effect in 2020 for anyone who has been hospitalized for a mental health issue more than once in a year.WILDFIRESUtilities may bill customers for future legal damages and for settlements from the deadly 2017 wildfires that caused more than billion in insured losses, even if the companies' mismanagement caused the blazes.The measure is among more than two dozen wildfire-related laws.Others make it easier to log trees, build firebreaks and conduct controlled burns of vegetation that would fuel wildfires; require investor-owned utilities to upgrade equipment so it's less likely to cause fires; safeguard residents' insurance coverage following disasters; and improve emergency notifications.GENDER DISCRIMINATION AND SEXUAL HARASSMENTCalifornia becomes the first state to require publicly held corporations to have at least one woman on their boards of directors by the end of 2019 and two or more by 2021.Spurred by the #MeToo movement, another new law bans private and public employers, including the state Legislature, from reaching secret settlements over sexual assault, harassment or discrimination. A law preventing businesses from requiring employees to sign liability releases to keep their jobs or receive bonuses is among several expanded protections.Californians also can list their gender as "nonbinary" on their driver's licenses, designated as the letter "X."CLIMATE CHANGECalifornia's utilities must generate 60 percent of their energy from wind, solar and other renewable sources by 2030, which is 10 percent higher than a previous mandate. Lawmakers set a goal of phasing out electricity from fossil fuels by 2045."This is historic because there is no economy larger in the world that has committed to pure clean energy," former Democratic state Sen. Kevin de Leon of Los Angeles wrote when Brown signed the bill into law.It was California's latest ambitious reaction to Trump's decisions to withdraw from the Paris climate accord and revive the coal industry.Other new laws study ways to ease the impact of climate change, encourage the use of biomethane and protect Obama administration targets for removing "super pollutants" called hydrofluorocarbons from refrigerants.Another law bars the Trump administration from expanding oil drilling off the California coast by blocking new pipelines and other supporting construction in state waters.OTHER LAWS— Dine-in restaurants may only provide drinking straws at customers' request.— Restaurants that advertise children's meals must include water or unflavored milk as the default beverage, though customers can still order other options.— Elections officials must provide prepaid return envelopes for vote-by-mail ballots. They also must give voters a chance to correct a ballot signature that doesn't match the one on file and let them track mail-in ballots.— The minimum wage rises to for companies with 26 or more employees and for smaller businesses as California phases in a base hourly wage.— A bill protecting net neutrality rules was set to take effect Jan. 1 but was blocked until a federal lawsuit is resolved. 5423

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Governor Jerry Brown has agreed to deploy 400 National Guard troops at President Donald Trump’s request, according to the Associated Press.Brown specified that not all the troops will head to the U.S.-Mexico border and none will enforce federal immigration enforcement.The troops will focus on fighting drug crime, firearms smuggling and human tracking, a letter sent to the Trump by Brown Wednesday said.Brown said the troops will not help build a wall or “detain people escaping violence and seeking a better life.”Trump has said he wants up to 4,000 troops to be sent to the border to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking.Brown said the deployment will happen pending review and approval of the federal government. 758

来源：资阳报