|
Minarchist posted:Sycamores are native and grow well here in the same areas as Eucalyptus. My neighbor has a huge sycamore and it looks great (even though it drops those dingleberries into my yard all year long.) My dead front lawn plan for next year is to add some big rocks, 2 fruitless olive trees, some lavender and various bunches of grass and that's it. Maybe a few dwarf (12 foot max) cypress trees to go around the patio after I have the 3+ 60 foot aggressive shitbox cypress trees removed. Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Jul 22, 2015 |
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:06 |
|
|
Sycamores naturally occur in riparian areas and can end up looking pretty ratty if they don't get adequate moisture; comparing them to Eucalypts isn't really all that accurate. They are happier in the central parts of the state than they are in the south. There are lots of good drought resistant choices for trees in the south, though; many are desert species and are well suited to the climate. While the coastal sage scrub natives are often fuel because of the oils that protect them from drought, there are lots of natives that don't have those properties. Tree of Life Nursery is a great resource for people interested in native plants, although their focus is much more oriented to SoCal. Lavender can be great but it's very particular about drainage and many varieties are not cold tolerant, which can be a problem for some areas in central California. I'm a landscape architect who designs large scale commercial, civic and institutional projects and am happy to entertain plantchat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Noggin Monkey posted:Sycamores naturally occur in riparian areas and can end up looking pretty ratty if they don't get adequate moisture; comparing them to Eucalypts isn't really all that accurate. They are happier in the central parts of the state than they are in the south. There are lots of good drought resistant choices for trees in the south, though; many are desert species and are well suited to the climate. Actually I have a bunch of questions. What would your solution be to The Bay Area Eucalyptus issue? What would you replant/replace it with, or would you leave the Eucalyptus? What's your ideal 'green space'? I know the whole range of California is gonna be different, but if you could do some ideal planting/landscaping, what is the way to go in your opinion?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Anywhere the redwoods can still grow, help them grow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Anywhere the redwoods can still grow, help them grow. Just don't plant them near your home or the people living there in 20+ years will hate you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Minarchist posted:For some reason a lot of Eucalyptus and Jacarandas in my area got planted right where people are gonna park their cars. Yeah, lets have two horribly messy species right where people are going to leave their expensive vehicles It sucks parking under eucalyptus trees, makes your car look like it's made out of paper mache due to all the falling bark.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Just don't plant them near your home or the people living there in 20+ years will hate you. Says the guy NOT living inside a giant tree  realpost edit: redwoods need that cool coastal fog or they dry out really bad, the ones at Cal Poly Pomona are hurting bad despite getting plenty of water, it's just too dry for them 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Space-Bird posted:Actually I have a bunch of questions. Urban forests are most healthy when they have diversity; I tend to feel that cutting down mature trees CAN be a viable strategy, but it's a nuanced issue. Will the loss of shade negatively impact human habitation or use? Would cutting everything down increase erosion downslope? Do the trees present a danger to development or natural systems? How does cost factor in? There are tons of factors and appropriate solutions vary from site to site. I've done some work in the Napa Valley but don't know as much about the Bay Area ecosystems and landscapes as I do for the southern end of the state. 'Ideal' use of a green space varies depending where in the urban/rural interface a site exist, ie the right use for an urban site is going to be different from a suburban or rural one. My own work focuses on urban parks, college campuses, class A offices and other principally urban developments. Planting and living systems for those projects vary depending on the owner's desired program, but we typically eschew "traditional" plants used on California (ie inappropriate nonnative species) and prefer to use a mix of natives and adapted species. Like the tree issue, there can be a lot of nuance. Water availability is a big deal, as is the clients appetite for maintenance and cost. Personal taste also plays a big factor. My own garden in San Diego is transitioning to desert plants and native sage scrub plants because I don't have irrigation and prefer to infrequently water in the dry season. That's about as much as I can manage phone posting but I'm happy to get more specific if you like!
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
At least in the case of Burlingame's eucalyptuses, I'll take an improved, electrified Caltrain over some dumb invasive species of tree in a boring yuppie suburb that I never visit anyway. But that's just my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 06:39
|
|
|
Noggin Monkey posted:While the coastal sage scrub natives are often fuel because of the oils that protect them from drought, there are lots of natives that don't have those properties. Tree of Life Nursery is a great resource for people interested in native plants, although their focus is much more oriented to SoCal. Up in the Bay Area, Yerba Buena Nursery is a great resource for native plants.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
California oak trees seem like a good option?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:My neighbor has a huge sycamore and it looks great (even though it drops those dingleberries into my yard all year long.) My father has a massive loving sycamore in his backyard and they also drop ridiculous amounts of leaves. Enough to carpet his yard and the 5 yards adjacent to his in dry leaves. Talk about a loving fire hazard and a total bitch to clean up every fall.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:California oak trees seem like a good option? The Coast Live Oak is a bit shrubby for my taste although we have planted a lot; Black or Blue Oaks are super hard to find in the trade, which is really unfortunate because they are pretty nice. We use Live Oaks and Holly Oaks a lot; I planted a bunch of Red Oaks in Napa and they have done pretty well. Good choices for the south also include Chilean Mesquite, Palo Verde, various Acacias, Madrone and a few more I can't think of at the moment. The Chinese Elm is a pretty good choice for most of the state as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Tuxedo Gin posted:My father has a massive loving sycamore in his backyard and they also drop ridiculous amounts of leaves. Enough to carpet his yard and the 5 yards adjacent to his in dry leaves. Talk about a loving fire hazard and a total bitch to clean up every fall. hell yeah, I've only been in this house since October and have cleaned the gutters and back yard of leaves from that tree at least 4 times and there are always more appearing out of nowhere. It has sprouted several babbys throughout my backyard too that I'll probably have to murder. I also have at least 3 different kind of oak tree babbys from surrounding old oaks as well, too bad they won't be big enough to enjoy for another 50 years. Looks like valley oak, interior live oak and maybe a holly oak on the far right? The one on the top left is a different blue/grey color even though the lovely iphone pic makes them all look the same - so it might be an Engelmann Oak....hell if I know. There are huge oak trees all over the area. 
Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:There's a contest to win a house in Jackson by paying 100$ and submitting a dessert to be taste tested. I always thought jackson was pretty, but then I'm usually just driving through at dawn omw to kirkwood
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Jackson's not so bad. Hotter than poo poo in summer, to be sure, but there's also tons of cute historic Gold Rush towns all about and some half-decent wineries. The only downside is that Stockton has gotten large enough that it somewhat ruins the nighttime views from our family's friends' summer cottage that we visit sometimes. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
UC is raising the minimum wage to $15/hr: http://universityofcalifornia.edu/press-room/uc-president-announces-15hour-minimum-wage Of course, TAs only make like $18/hr (http://grad.ucsd.edu/_files/financial/acad-pay/STURATES1415-Rev3.pdf). Does anyone else find this $15/hr stuff kind of insidious? Measures to make every aspect of middle class life (education, health care, housing, retirement, etc.) more affordable are ignored, but hey, poverty can be comfortable now!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Does anyone else find this $15/hr stuff kind of insidious? Measures to make every aspect of middle class life (education, health care, housing, retirement, etc.) more affordable are ignored, but hey, poverty can be comfortable now! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
That attitude is pretty much generalizable to "any incremental change is bad."
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:At least in the case of Burlingame's eucalyptuses, I'll take an improved, electrified Caltrain over some dumb invasive species of tree in a boring yuppie suburb that I never visit anyway. But that's just my opinion. I lolled over a angry letter to the editor about those trees. Burlingame may be boring on the outside but it has more cougars than the Santa Cruz mountains
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
Is it an adequate solution to the problem of systemic wealth disparity in a country with little in the way of a social safety net? No. Should we be glad that there's the political will to do even that instead of our usual policy of loving over the poor as hard as we can? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Baby Babbeh posted:Is it an adequate solution to the problem of systemic wealth disparity in a country with little in the way of a social safety net? No. I mean, I guess? These increases in pay will just fall on the backs of students and faculty. The UC should be reducing nonacademic personnel, if anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I mean, I guess? These increases in pay will just fall on the backs of students and faculty. The UC should be reducing nonacademic personnel, if anything. Those greedy non-academic personnel who benefit from a minimum wage are truly the issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Those greedy non-academic personnel who benefit from a minimum wage are truly the issue. Management too, obviously. But yes, all non-academics at the university are leeching off of students and faculty. Edit: Isn't this the Marxist viewpoint? Slobjob Zizek fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Management too, obviously. But yes, all non-academics at the university are leeching off of students and faculty. Nope, not at all. Unless you want the students and faculty doing all of the non-academic work too? I'm thinking janitors and office staff, are you talking faculty? That is a different discussion. But the faculty isn't making minimum wage. Ah that Marxist viewpoint tossed in while I was writing; beautiful man, beautiful. 
Pohl fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Those greedy non-academic personnel who benefit from a minimum wage are truly the issue. I'm glad over the whole minimum wage fight, serves as a really quick litmus test to find horrible people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Nope, not at all. Students and faculty should get tuition discounts/lower grant overhead before initiatives like this happen. The UC system is in sorry shape and the faculty and students are really what drive it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Students and faculty should get tuition discounts/lower grant overhead before initiatives like this happen. The UC system is in sorry shape and the faculty and students are really what drive it. What initiative are you talking about? The minimum wage increase?  Those drat janitors. This needs posted twice. Get those students out there emptying the garbage, cleaning toilets and mowing the lawn. Sweep the floors, vacuum rooms and then spend hours answering questions about student aid and how the loving catalog works. We aren't going to pay those students, however, we will just lower their tuition. Now then, when do they work so they can afford to loving eat? You have a very limited viewpoint. The reason the cost of CA colleges going up is not cost, it is that people refuse to pay taxes to fund it like they did in the past. gently caress you, got mine, times 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. It is a simple concept. Edit: And people working at those places deserve to make a living wage. They deserve to feed to themselves and their children. They deserve to have an opportunity. The deserve to not just be maligned in life, but to actually have hope. Sorry man, people build systems, and everyone in that system is important, don't dismiss them. Pohl fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Edit: And people working at those places deserve to make a living wage. They deserve to feed to themselves and their children. They deserve to have an opportunity. The deserve to not just be maligned in life, but to actually have hope. Sorry man, people build systems, and everyone in that system is important, don't dismiss them. I think this is just an absurd viewpoint, but this isn't a thread for that debate. Cheers!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think this is just an absurd viewpoint, but this isn't a thread for that debate. Cheers! "Service workers deserve to make a living wage" is absurd? Uh, ok.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:The UC system is in sorry shape and the faculty and students are really what drive it. Yeah its those loving poors! http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/...ned-by-a-regent quote:A year ago, Richard C. Blum, then the chairman of the regents of the University of California, spoke at the Milken Institute’s Global Conference 2009, held at the Beverly Hilton in Los Angeles. The corporate confab was hosted by Michael Milken, the “junk bond king” who went to prison in the aftermath of the savings and loan fiasco in the 1980s. Milken, who is barred from securities trading for life by federal regulators, has since recreated himself as a proponent of investing in for-profit educational corporations, an industry which regularly comes under government and media scrutiny in response to allegations of fraud made by dis-satisfied students. http://cironline.org/reports/uc-endowment-has-worst-investment-returns-among-largest-us-college-funds-5929 quote:UC endowment has worst investment returns among largest US college funds gently caress the poors! More money for the rich! Investment gamblers deserve all out money. God has said so!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:UC is raising the minimum wage to $15/hr: http://universityofcalifornia.edu/press-room/uc-president-announces-15hour-minimum-wage I TAed for several years at a UC (I am on fellowship now). The facilities staff work very very hard for little pay and they deserve a big raise. The administrative workers in my department (advisors, people who handle grants and financing) are "part time" employees treated and paid like trash. Here's a thought - maybe we can raise wages for both custodial staff and TAs at the same time?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
Hmmmm.... sounds dubious. How about instead of all that, we cut the number of TAs/custodial staff and have them do more work for the same amount of pay? Then we can afford to give the chancellors a raise, so that we can attract top talent to those positions! Seriously, though, this is a good move by UC and I'm liking the pressure we're seeing to move to higher wages for the working poor. It doesn't solve the inequality problems but it does a lot for the poorest workers and their families.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think this is just an absurd viewpoint, but this isn't a thread for that debate. Cheers! No please, talk away. I really want to know what you meant. Like California, this thread is big and diverse. It can take it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
So I went to an old Cafe called the Big Kitchen today for breakfast at about 7:30. I had ok food, unlimited black coffee, and some great conversation. I talked to a guy that worked for GE and has a Theology degree, and a guy that is law enforcement (not really, I think he is a security guard, he really got tired of my pointed questions. I was even being nice, I wasn't trying to out him, I was just asking questions). The old guy with the Theology degree was great, though. On the way home I stopped at a bar and had a smoke with some of the employees on the patio. It was a great morning. Happy California day everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
That article failed to mention who Dicky Blum's wife is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think this is just an absurd viewpoint, but this isn't a thread for that debate. Cheers!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think this is just an absurd viewpoint, but this isn't a thread for that debate. Cheers! Are you sure? Slobjob Zizek posted:It's absurd that people can't afford to raise a family until their late 20s (when fertility starts to become a concern) and decisions can't be made freely. I think people would have more kids if it was again feasible to live a full adult lifestyle at 22 (job paying a lot, being able to live alone, not needing more school, etc.).
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:That article failed to mention who Dicky Blum's wife is. God drat it. An old part of me knew the answer and told me not to look but I did and god drat it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:06 |
|
|
loving hell. I wish the Democratic Party could forcibly eject people like Dianne Feinstein. I remember back when she was the mayor of San Francisco (she became mayor pro-tem due to the Milk/Moscone assassination, and then was elected twice in the late 70s and early 80s), and students were protesting something or another that she was loving them over with. Probably her veto of domestic partner legislation. She ran against Pete Wilson for governor and lost. I blame the Wilson years in part on her ineffective campaign. Also if she'd won, she probably wouldn't have run for senator in 92, which probably would have meant Boxer would be our senior senator instead of Feinstein (or whoever). Wikipedia posted:Feinstein was criticized in 2009 when she introduced a bill directing $25 billion to the FDIC the day after the agency awarded her husband's company a contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.[23] Feinstein and her husband have been tied to questionable dealings between the world's largest commercial real estate firm and the U.S. Postal Service.[24] Feinstein has also been accused of abusing her position to award her husband’s companies billions of dollars in military contracts. I'm not against gun control but Feinstein's assault weapons ban thing has always been and continues to be a completely stupid and ineffective political posture in which some scary-looking guns get banned while other equally (or more) effective guns that aren't those specific scary-looking guns are perfectly legal. In 2012, 7.75 million Californians voted for her. Wikipedia posted:Foreign Policy wrote that she had a "reputation as a staunch defender of NSA practices and the White House's refusal to stand by collection activities targeting foreign leaders."[35] In October 2013 she criticized the NSA for monitoring telephone calls of foreign leaders friendly to the US.[36] In November 2013 she promoted the Fisa Improvements Act bill which included a "backdoor search provision" that allows intelligence agencies to continue certain warrantless searches as long as they are logged and "available for review" to various agencies.[37] Also she pretends to support medical marijuana while quote:she was the only Democrat who joined a minority of Republicans in voting against a measure designed to prevent federal interference with states' medical marijuana laws; that legislation passed with a 21-9 vote on June 18, 2015. She's the senior Democrat (and chair, when the Democrats have a majority) of the Senate Appropriations, Judiciary, Rules, and Intelligence Committees, which means she's very powerful and influential when it comes to legislation passing through or originating in any of those committees. She's old, she's conservative in a lot of ways, she's a blight on liberal principles, and I'm just now finding out that her husband is deeply and inextricably entwined with both for-profit private higher education of the trashiest kind, and running the state's higher education system. gently caress them both. I hope they die in a fire.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 03:56
|
|