济南包皮内侧有白垢并溃烂(济南引起男性性功能障碍的原因) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The chair of the California Democratic Party took a leave of absence Monday amid an investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against him.Eric Bauman's leave will last until an outside investigation ends, party spokesman Mike Roth said."Chair Bauman believes this decision is the best way to ensure the independence and integrity of the process," Roth said in a statement. "The Party is confident that the procedures in place will allow for all parties to come forward freely and provide for a thorough and complete review."A party vice chair accused Bauman last week of sexually harassing and assaulting several unnamed people at party functions and called for Bauman's resignation. Others including California U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna and the Orange County Young Democrats called for Bauman to step aside.Daraka Larimore-Hall, the vice chair, spoke to two accusers and a witness, the Sacramento Bee newspaper reported.Bauman announced an outside investigation on Saturday."I take seriously any allegation brought forward by anyone who believes they have been caused pain," Bauman said in a statement. "I look forward to putting these allegations behind us and moving forward as unified Democrats."The party's executive board could vote to remove Bauman from office. But Larimore-Hall's call for Bauman's removal is still several steps from such a vote.In a letter to the party last week, Larimore-Hall said stories from Bauman's accusers illustrate a "clear and escalating pattern" of inappropriate behavior.Larimore-Hall did not respond to a request for comment Monday from The Associated Press.Bauman's leave comes just weeks after California Democrats made major gains in the midterm elections, winning key congressional seats in territory long held by Republicans.A series of sexual misconduct allegations against lawmakers, lobbyists and others in politics rocked California's political world late last year, at the height of the #MeToo movement. Three Democratic men resigned as state lawmakers after investigators hired by the Legislature found they likely engaged in inappropriate behavior.Bauman narrowly won the party chairmanship last year against Kimberly Ellis after a contentious battle between establishment Democrats and progressive activists.During that fight, Bauman said he was falsely targeted by rumors he engaged in inappropriate behavior with teenage boys. Bauman is the party's first openly gay chairman.Bauman called the rumors "despicable lies," and Ellis denounced them.First Vice Chair Alex Rooker will take over Bauman's duties while the investigation proceeds. 2628

RIP Hugh Keays-Byrne ?? It’s amazing you were able to play an evil warlord so well cause you were such a kind, beautiful soul. You will be deeply missed my friend. pic.twitter.com/kXDhNs5jEU— Charlize Theron (@CharlizeAfrica) December 2, 2020 250

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers on Tuesday moved to cap annual rent increases statewide for most tenants as a limited housing supply in the country's most populous state continues to drive up the cost of living while pushing more people to the streets.The California Senate voted 25-10 to cap rent increases at 5% each year plus inflation for the next decade while banning landlords from evicting tenants without just cause. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom says he will sign the bill into law, but first it must survive a final vote in the state Assembly where the California Association of Realtors is pushing to defeat it. Lawmakers must act by Friday.California's largest cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco, have some form of rent control, but a state law passed in 1995 has restricted new rent control laws since that year. In most places, landlords can raise rents at any time and for any reason, as long as they give advance notice.In Pomona, about 30 miles (48 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, Yesenia Miranda Meza says her rent has jumped 20% in the past two years. Monday, she marched with other tenants through the halls of the state Capitol chanting: "Once I've paid my rent, all my money's spent.""I'm a rent increase away from eviction, and that's with me having two jobs," she said "So if this (bill) doesn't go through and I get another rent increase, I really don't know what I'm going to do. I'm either going to be homeless or I'll have to cram into a room with a whole bunch of other people."Opponents have likened the proposal to rent control — a more restrictive set of limitations on landlords. California voters overwhelmingly rejected in a statewide ballot initiative to overturn the 1995 law last year.California Association of Realtors President Jared Martin said the group's 200,000 members strongly oppose the bill because it will "reduce the supply and quality of rental housing." It's an argument echoed by Republican Sen. Jeff Stone, who said developers would have no reason to build new housing if they can't make money off their investment."We'll see even a greater housing crisis because of the low supply of housing," Stone said. "Either this will force our constituents to join a 60,000 homeless population that we see in the LA area, or they will simply just move to another state."But supporters say the bill includes lots safeguards to prevent that from happening. The rent caps don't apply to new construction built within the last 15 years — a provision that prompted the California Building Industry Association to drop its opposition.Plus, the caps don't apply to single family homes, except those owned by corporations or real estate investment trusts. And duplexes where the owner lives in one of the units are also exempt."We all desperately want to build more housing. It was a very important aspect of this bill," Democratic Assemblyman David Chiu said.But even some Democrats who voted for the bill on Tuesday signaled they didn't like it, a sign the bill is not guaranteed to pass. Sen. Steve Glazer, a Democrat representing a district in the San Francisco Bay area, cited a 2018 study by Sanford University showing landlords under rent control are more likely to nudge tenants out by spending less on maintenance."Any time you reduce rate of return on an investment, you make that investment less attractive, and this is true even if new investment is exempted for 15 years as this bill does," he said.But Carolyn Wilson, a 71-year-old Sacramento resident, said she needs help now. She said her rent has increased about 0 each year and her landlord just gave her a 60-day notice to move out for on reason."All I do is get up on the computer looking for some place to go," she said. "With my income, I can't afford anything." 3819

Rising prices and plummeting listings — not to mention a global pandemic, record unemployment and recession — didn’t keep first-time home buyers from the market in the second quarter of 2020.Ordinarily, in April, as the second quarter of the year begins, homebuying season is well underway, and inventory and prices are both rising toward a summer peak. But the second quarter of 2020 was unusual, to say the least.Across the nation and among the most populous metropolitan areas, prices increased modestly in the second quarter and inventory became even more constrained in an already sparse market. Homeowners who’d been planning to sell reconsidered — though listings ticked up slightly in April, they fell sharply in May and June — and people who’d been thinking of buying, at a minimum, took a beat. But real estate professionals scrambled to implement virtual tours and finalize home purchases in parking lots, and market participants, particularly economically secure buyers, cautiously came out of hiding.Lured in part by record low mortgage rates, first-time home buyers made up 35% of existing home sales in June, according to the National Association of Realtors, a higher share than in the past several years. For first-timers who have stability in the COVID-19 economy, and the wherewithal to stomach a highly competitive market, buying can still make sense.In this quarterly report, we analyze median incomes in the first-time home buyer age range (25-44) compared with listing prices among the 50 most populous metro areas to come up with an affordability ratio. Budgeting for a home that costs roughly three times your annual income (an affordability ratio of 3.0) has been a rule of thumb for years, but first-time buyers often have to stretch beyond this to account for higher prices in metro areas and their lower incomes compared with repeat buyers. By weighing the affordability ratio versus home availability in the largest metro areas, we can get an idea of the conditions first-time buyers are facing when they set out to become homeowners.By looking at both quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year changes, we can get a better picture of the effects of the COVID-19 economy on this year’s homebuying market. The former can provide insight into chronological market responses to the pandemic — our first-quarter affordability report captured data only through March, just the beginning of 2020’s atypical spring season. The latter can show how this year’s second quarter contrasts with similar periods in relatively normal times.Affordability down overallHouses got slightly more out of reach for first-time home buyers in April through June, rising nationally from 4.5 times first-time home buyer income in the first quarter to 4.7 times in the second, and among the 50 largest metros from 5.1 to 5.2 times first-time buyer income. This trend is expected at this time of year. Home prices rise as the housing market heats up in the late spring and summer, but incomes don’t rise in a similar seasonal fashion. If anything, we might’ve expected a more dramatic change, but economic uncertainty on the part of sellers could have kept steeper list price increases at bay.Nine of the 50 metros analyzed bucked this trend and saw affordability improve, but barely, sometimes only by a fraction of a percent.The five most affordable metros for first-time home buyers in the second quarter include Pittsburgh (homes listed at 3.1 times first-time buyer income), St. Louis (3.4), Cleveland (3.5), Hartford, Connecticut (3.5), and Buffalo, New York (3.6). The least affordable, all in California, include Los Angeles, topping the list for the second quarter in a row, with homes listed at 12 times first-time buyer income; San Diego (9.0); San Jose (8.2); San Francisco (7.6); and Sacramento (6.6).First-time buyer guidance: Homes get less affordable in late spring to early summer, and in this regard, the second quarter of 2020 is no different. First-time buyers who are economically secure may be able to make up for the rise in home prices by qualifying for record low mortgage rates. For example, the monthly payment on a 0,000 mortgage at 4.1% interest — roughly the average rate a year ago — is ,160 per month, with 7,483 in interest over the 30-year life of the loan. However, at today’s rate of 3.1%, you’d pay ,025 per month and 8,942 in interest over the life of the loan — nearly ,000 in savings, total, and a 5 monthly break on your payment. Use a mortgage calculator to see what the difference in rates means for your budget.Unseasonal scarcity in the second quarterEven in years when supply is limited, an influx of homes hits the market during the spring homebuying season. Nationally, inventory grew 10% from the first to the second quarter of 2018, and 6% during that period last year. But in 2020, nationwide inventory dipped, albeit slightly, by about 2% quarter-over-quarter.Half of the largest metros in the country saw a decrease in average active listings from Q1 to Q2, with the largest quarter-over-quarter declines in Cleveland (-17%), Louisville, Kentucky (-14%), and Memphis, Tennessee (-14%). However, other large metros saw remarkable increases: San Jose (+62%), Denver (+47%) and San Francisco (+39%), for example. These dramatic climbs helped push the average quarter-over-quarter change among the largest 50 metros to +4%.Stepping back to look at year-over-year changes and how the supply of homes changed from Q2 2019, we found inventory dropped 23% among the 50 largest metros, on average, with 21 metros witnessing a decrease in available homes of 25% or more. Active listings in Las Vegas decreased 8%, the smallest quarterly drop of any metros analyzed and the only one of less than 10%.We’ve been in a strong seller’s market for some time now, as the supply of homes hasn’t kept pace with demand. Having fewer homes hitting the market during the first months of the pandemic only stood to worsen the situation. A highly competitive market has grown even more so, and buyers without room to negotiate could be priced out entirely.First-time buyer guidance: If you’re at all uncertain about your economic security this year and buying would mean an increase in overall housing costs or leave you with no source of emergency funds, you may want to postpone your first home purchase. The low supply of homes means you’re less likely to find a home that checks all the boxes on your wish list. A loss of income, a bout of poor health or caring for a sick loved one could be overwhelming on top of a down payment, closing costs and the expenses associated with moving.Home prices rise, as expectedWe expect prices to rise as the housing market heats up, and if 2020 is sticking to the script in any way, this is it. From the first quarter to the second, national median list prices grew 7% in 2018 and 8% in 2019. This year, they grew 7% nationally, and slightly less, 5%, on average, among the largest metros, quarter-over-quarter.Year-over-year growth was similar, rising about 3%, on average, among the 50 largest metros, after adjusting for inflation.This overall relatively unremarkable growth in prices is one silver lining for first-time buyers. Having a dramatic shortage of homes for sale could drive prices up, but it doesn’t appear that sellers are listing their homes disproportionately higher than last quarter or than at this time last year. That said, list prices are only part of the story, and there’s little doubt that the lack of supply is driving hard bargaining in the negotiation process.First-time buyer guidance: The price you see on a listing doesn’t tell the whole story. If you’re shopping in a seller’s market, be ready to act fast with an offer and compete with other buyers. You may end up paying more than list price, so shopping for homes listed under your max budget will give you a little more wiggle room if you find yourself in a bidding war.Metro spotlight: Cincinnati, Cleveland and ColumbusOhio has three metro areas in our analysis. It was also among the first states to begin canceling large events, declare a state of emergency and issue statewide restrictions to slow the spread of COVID-19. These factors may have played a role in changes in the local housing markets.Cincinnati, Cleveland and Columbus were some of the more affordable populous metros in the second quarter, with home prices averaging 4.7, 3.5 and 4.5 times the median first-time home buyer income, respectively. Even so, all three showed rising prices compared with the same period last year. Median home prices in Cincinnati rose 12%, the third-highest increase of all metros analyzed.But the big story in these Ohio metros is a lack of availability. Though inventory among all metros analyzed fell 23%, on average, compared with last year, it fell 34% in Cincinnati, 33% in Cleveland and 25% in Columbus.When comparing this quarter’s listed homes with last quarter’s, we find a similarly dramatic decrease. Cleveland saw the largest quarter-over-quarter dip in active listings among all metros analyzed: inventory fell 17% from the first quarter. Active listings fell 10% in Cincinnati and 7% in Columbus at the time of year when most markets would typically be flooded with home listings.The one thing saving buyers from being completely locked out of homeownership: affordability. So while finding a home will prove tricky due to a lack of inventory, homes on the market are more likely to be within budget for first-time buyers.Analysis methodology available in the original article, published at NerdWallet.More From NerdWalletMortgage Outlook: A Light Lift to September RatesSmart Money Podcast: Lower Mortgage Rates, and Moving During a PandemicMortgage Outlook: Recession Presses Down on August RatesElizabeth Renter is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: elizabeth@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @elizabethrenter. 9901

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California will limit rent increases for some people over the next decade after Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law Tuesday aimed at combating a housing crisis in the nation's most populous state.Newsom signed the bill at an event in Oakland, an area where a recent report documented a 43% increase in homelessness over two years. Sudden rent increases are a contributing cause of the state's homeless problem, which has drawn national attention and the ire of Republican President Donald Trump."He wasn't wrong to highlight a vulnerability," Newsom said of Trump's criticisms to an audience of housing advocates in Oakland. "He's exploiting it. You're trying to solve it. That's the difference between you and the president of the United States."The law limits rent increases to 5% each year plus inflation until Jan. 1, 2030. It bans landlords from evicting people for no reason, meaning they could not kick people out so they can raise the rent for a new tenant. And while the law doesn't take effect until Jan. 1, it would apply to rent increases on or after March 15, 2019, to prevent landlords from raising rents just before the caps go into place.RELATED: San Diego's top neighborhoods to get more rental space for the moneyCalifornia and Oregon are now the only places that cap rent increases statewide. Oregon capped rents at 7% plus inflation earlier this year.California's rent cap is noteworthy because of its scale. The state has 17 million renters, and more than half of them spend at least 30% of their income on rent, according to a legislative analysis of the proposal.But California's new law has so many exceptions that it is estimated it will apply to 8 million of those 17 million renters, according to the office of Democratic Assemblyman David Chiu, who authored the bill Newsom signed.It would not apply to housing built within the last 15 years, a provision advocates hope will encourage developers to build more in a state that desperately needs it. It does not apply to single family homes, except those owned by corporations or real estate investment trusts. It does not cover duplexes where the owner lives in one of the units.RELATED: Making It In San Diego: How housing got so expensiveAnd it does not cover the 2 million people in California who already have rent control, which is a more restrictive set of limitations for landlords. Most of the state's largest cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Francisco, have some form of rent control. But a state law passed in 1995 bans any new rent control policies since that year.Last year, voters rejected a statewide ballot initiative that would have expanded rent control statewide. For most places in California, landlords can raise rent at any time and or any reason if they give notice in advance.That's what happened to Sasha Graham in 2014. She said her rent went up 150%. She found the money to pay it on time and in full, but her landlord evicted her anyway without giving a reason. She was homeless for the next three years, staying with friends, then friends of friends and then strangers."Sometimes I lived with no lights, sometimes I lived with no water, depending on who I was living with (because) they were also struggling," she said. "Sometimes I just had to use my money to go to a hotel room so I could finish my homework."Graham, who is now board president for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, now lives in family housing at the University of California, Berkeley, where she is scheduled to graduate in May. She said the law, had it been in place, would have helped her.But Russell Lowery, executive director of the California Rental Housing Association, says the law adds an expensive eviction process that did not previously exist. He said that will encourage landlords to increase rents when they otherwise wouldn't."It adds unnecessary expenses to all rental home providers and makes it more difficult to sever a relationship with a problem tenant," he said. 4034

来源：资阳报