One always presumes a fair amount of communal thought in a state, even one this large. But apart from a shared disdain for the governor and the Legislature, there is hardly anything communal anymore in California politics.

"There are dozens of different Californias -- hundreds, demographically -- and every single one of those Californias thinks the rest of them are wrong about everything," said Dan Schnur, head of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC, whose College of Letters, Arts and Sciences co-sponsored the poll with The Times.

U.S. Labor Group Unveils Plan to Tackle Joblessness

The head of the largest U.S. labor federation urged President Barack Obama on Tuesday to use the $700 billion Wall Street bailout fund to help cash-starved small businesses as a way to stem rising joblessness.

In a preview of labor's contribution to Obama's December jobs summit, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program could be lent directly to small- and medium-sized businesses at commercial rates.

The AFL-CIO jobs plan also calls for extended unemployment benefits, food assistance and healthcare for the unemployed, more money for infrastructure projects and state and local governments, and job creation aimed at distressed communities.

Rising unemployment poses a political danger to Obama as his fellow Democrats in Congress approach the 2010 election with voters increasingly dissatisfied with incumbents.

"If small businesses can get credit, they will create jobs. And we need jobs now," Trumka said in a speech to the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning Washington think tank.

Californians should not mistake a widely shared dislike of our political situation with shared agreement on what constitutes the common good.

The study was based on InfoUSA business data and a survey of 1,480 Los Angeles County residents. It was funded by the National Institutes of Health, with no financial support from the fast-food industry, Sturm said.

Contrary to "conventional wisdom," the density of fast-food chain restaurants per capita is actually less in South Los Angeles than in other parts of the city, said Sturm, a Rand senior economist.

They found that the far wealthier West Los Angeles has 29 fast-food chain establishments, 14 small food stores and 10 large supermarkets per 100,000 residents. South Los Angeles, by comparison, has 19 fast-food chain restaurants, 58 small food stores and three large grocery stores.

The authors said those data were at odds with "media reports about an over-concentration of fast-food establishments" in South Los Angeles.

Among those reports, the study cited a chart that accompanied a July 30, 2008, story in The Times. The chart said fast-food establishments represented 45% of all restaurants in South Los Angeles. That was a higher percentage than in any other section of the city.

Councilman Bernard C. Parks, whose 8th District includes part of the area where the moratorium is in force, took exception to the Rand report.

However, the study found no difference in fruit and vegetable consumption between residents of South Los Angeles and people in other areas. Likewise, there was no difference in the proportion of people who participate in 300 minutes of exercise or more per week.

Residents of both West and South Los Angeles tend to eat out about 3.5 times a week, though South Los Angeles residents are more likely to obtain food from a food cart or truck rather than a sit-down restaurant, the study said. South Los Angeles residents also were likely to watch more television.

That’s an average of $134,122 per California business, $13,801 per household and $4,685 per resident each year.

The study parallels a 2005 federal report on business regulations commissioned by the Office of Advocacy within the U.S. Small Business Administration.That report concluded that federal regulations cost $7,647 per employee for businesses with fewer than 20 employees.

This state report is based on data used by Forbes magazine’s annual ranking of state for business friendliness. It does not single out specific regulations that drive up costs.

Among the California conclusions:

The total cost ($493 billion) is almost 5 times the state’s general fund budget and a third of the state’s gross product.

The 3.8 million jobs lost equals 1/10th of California’s population. California has about 14 million jobs, down 1 million from the peak in July 2007.

The total cost breakdown is $266.5 billion in direct costs of various regulations, $210.5 billion lost labor income and $16 billion in business taxes the state would get without the regulations

One producer of construction aggregates in the state, Vulcan Materials, testified in an Assembly Jobs Committee hearing in June that it 'is not uncommon for the permitting process to involve millions of dollars and in some cases to take as long as 10 years to secure the necessary permits, many of which address duplicative regulatory aspects.'

While Californians are still feeling the sting of income and sales tax hikes signed into law earlier this year, now comes news that state tax authorities plan to take a little more from their pockets.

For only the second time in 30 years, the tax board is lowering the point where each tax bracket begins, bumping many people into a higher category. At the same time, officials are cutting back some deductions. Everyone will pay more, even people whose bracket or income doesn't change.

The bipartisan reform group California Forward has proposed a modest, reasonable and doable set of significant changes in how state and local governments operate.

There's no denying the problems: gridlock, perpetually late budgets, chronic deficits, IOUs, Sacramento raids on local coffers...

But these are some steps recommended unanimously by the California Forward's Leadership Council after 18 months of mulling:

Lower the Herculean hurdle for legislative passage of a state budget from a two-thirds majority to a simple majority. But retain the two-thirds requirement for tax increases.

For fiscal conservatives and anyone with common sense, require that unexpected spikes in tax revenue be spent only for one-time purposes, not to enhance programs in perpetuity.

Require the sponsor of any new spending proposal, whether in the Legislature or at the ballot box, to identify the funding source.

Budget for two years, rather than one, and regularly monitor the spending plan to watch for red ink.

Set clear goals for each program. If they're not met, change or chuck the program.

Prohibit the Legislature from raising taxes on a majority vote and calling them "fees."

Provide local governments with more control over their own fates by barring the state from raiding property taxes and other revenue.

Permit cities, counties and school districts to unite in some common endeavor, such as gang suppression, and pay for it with a tax increase passed by a simple majority of voters. Now it would require a two-thirds vote.

Relax term limits while reducing the overall time a person could spend in the Legislature.

Relatively few businesses, once they're formed, pick up and move across state lines. Over the last several years, the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California has done exhaustive research trying to measure precisely how many jobs California has lost because of such moves, while also measuring the offsetting number we have gained from businesses moving into the state. The conclusion? The impact is tiny. The researchers found that the average annual job loss was only .06% of California's total employment. Just to be clear, that's not 6%; it's six one-hundredths of 1%.

California has battled such negative perceptions for years. But its huge consumer base, great weather and dynamic entrepreneurial culture have kept many businesses anchored here. Still, in a tough economy when companies are looking to slash costs, some industry leaders fear poachers will be more successful this time around.

...

The Nevada campaign touts the fact that the Silver State has no corporate or personal income tax, no inventory tax, and lower workers' compensation costs. A light-industrial facility that costs $405,478 a year to operate in Las Vegas would cost $625,774 to operate in Los Angeles County, according to the Nevada Development Authority.

Two months ago, more than 300 people were employed at the site making engine parts for trucks and heavy machinery for Gregg Industries, which is owned by Neenah Enterprises Inc. in Wisconsin.

But a settlement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District required Gregg to spend $5 million on factory improvements, so the company decided instead to leave the state. Company spokesman Adan Ortega Jr. said Gregg didn't want to make the payment in the difficult economic climate.

Gregg is part of the parade of companies marching out of California. The state lost 79,000 manufacturing jobs between 2003 and 2007, while seven other states with a meaningful percentage of U.S. manufacturing gained 62,000, according to a report scheduled to be released today by the Milken Institute.

The report blames the state's onerous regulations and high taxes in particular for pushing businesses elsewhere.

The state is shedding manufacturing jobs at a faster pace than the nation as a whole, the report said. Though many jobs left the country in the 2002 recession, states such as Arizona, Nevada and Oregon saw an increase in manufacturing employment in 2003.

Part of the problem, Wong said, is that regulations change so often in California that it's difficult for companies to plan. The state enacted an average of 15 changes in labor law each year from 1992 to 2002, four times more than state legislatures averaged nationwide.

California also often requires projects to be approved in many different jurisdictions, so that a plan vetted by the state could be sidetracked by the county, Wong said.

California GDP grew last year despite the global financial crisis, said Brian McGowan, the state's deputy secretary for economic development and commerce. And green-energy jobs in the state have grown at a rate 10 times faster than total job growth since 2005.

To evaluate a state's business climate, he said, companies should focus on workforce skill, availability of capital and overall quality of life, rather than just on taxes and regulatory costs.

To prevent more departures, the study recommends creating incentives for innovation, assisting companies in obtaining capital, investing in workforce development and establishing an office to streamline the regulatory process.

The Obama plan would give new powers to the Federal Reserve to oversee the entire financial system and would also create a new consumer protection agency to guard against credit and other abuses that played a big role in the current crisis.

Lawrence Summers, head of the president's National Economic Council, said that those who believed this power should not reside with the Fed had the responsibility to make the case for some other agency.

The creation of the new consumer agency is aimed at guarding against the kinds of lending abuses which resulted in many Americans being saddled with far more mortgage debt than they could handle.