9- If we accept a lower rate of growth - and to me realism dictates that we must - we still have a formidable task on our hands. If we take an increase from our present 17.1 million persons to 21. 7 million by 1970 (the figure being used by the State Department of Finance), Dr. Arnold of SRI has estimated that we will require another 1.8 million jobs or 225, 000 new jobs each year, and this forecast assumes that a 6% unemployment rate will be acceptable. I submit to you that it will be no easy task to nearly double the rate of new jobs created, especially if we accept a softening in the defense sector. Even though I expect California to continue to grow at a rate above the national average, the goal of 225, 000 new jobs will be hard to attain unless the national economy can be stimulated. Remember that with all of the natural advantages that California possesses there are some very important economic resources that we do not have or in which we are at a competitive disadvantage. Our state has virtually no coal, little in the way of non-ferrous metals, and only limited amounts of iron ore. Our energy needs exceed our energy resources, and we must now import energy into this state from great distances. We have a water problem, the proposed solution of which will cost billions. Our land values, our wage rates, our cost of living, our taxes -- all are relatively high. These are factors that work against attracting to California certain industries that are concerned primarily with operating in areas of low labor costs or where the low cost of assembling certain combinations