|
I splurge on eggs and get em at a cage free farm stand place. Local honey too. Even with the higher price, eggs are still a great source of cheap protein and I eat them almost every day.
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:41 |
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:I splurge on eggs and get em at a cage free farm stand place. Local honey too. Even with the higher price, eggs are still a great source of cheap protein and I eat them almost every day. How much are they? I buy flats of 5 dozen from ours for like 20$. As long as you just get regular pastured cage free eggs and not XXL EXTREME JUMBO EGGS they're drat reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
My co-worker went month to month with is rental, and they just raised it by $1,500/mo. Apparently living over a surf shop means you're not zoned for residential! Then at my office building that the company I work for owns, the nice top floor corner office (THE office in the building) had some tenants that have been there for 5 years that we wanted to kick out so we could take over the place. My bosses decided to raise their rent by 3x. Turns out the tenants are super happy to pay for the privileged of this corner office, and agreed to a 3 year lease with no questions. Getting to see both sides of the lovely coin there, from the screwed tenants to the land lords going "Wow we should have raised the rent long ago think of all of the hypothetical money we lost since people are happy to get rear end hosed by rent if they can afford it!" jeeves fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
California is giving back voting rights to 45,000 released felons under supervision.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
The first shot in The Second Battle of Diablo Canyon is due to be fired today with the first meetings regarding its license renewal (applied for in 2009) due to be held this evening.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Good
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
I can't think of a compelling reason why voting rights are taken away from felons in the first place. I've read that it would create situations where jails situated in rural areas would suddenly add like 2500 prisoners to a community with like 5000 non-jail residents and other silly things like that, but that's a technicality. You could easily legislate that imprisoned voters vote in the districts they were residents in before they were convicted, for example. We vote, directly or indirectly, for the laws that put those people in jail. It should not be possible for the majority to protect its majority by jailing people who disagree on a given policy question. Just as a hypothetical example: jail all the gays on sodomy laws, and now you've reduced the possibility that a politician supporting gay rights can get elected. That sort of thing. I think if you polled convicts you would not find that a majority are in favor of legalizing rape or murder or poo poo like that, either. They might have different opinions on things like mandatory sentencing laws, how plea bargaining works, and how much (excessive) force the police are allowed to use, though, and as the people who have been most directly affected by those sorts of policies, I think their voices ought to matter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:
When have we jailed a bloc of people based on their ideology? Has this happened in recent memory? If you use marijuana as an example I will preemptively counter with being in favor of legalization does not get you in jail, smoking it does.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I can't think of a compelling reason why voting rights are taken away from felons in the first place. I've read that it would create situations where jails situated in rural areas would suddenly add like 2500 prisoners to a community with like 5000 non-jail residents and other silly things like that, but that's a technicality. You could easily legislate that imprisoned voters vote in the districts they were residents in before they were convicted, for example. One good reason is that it's a potentially abusive situation if proper inspections aren't followed. It's quite likely that you already see a similar thing happen in nursing homes. Patients are mostly out of it so it's dead easy to get them to vote how you want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
computer parts posted:One good reason is that it's a potentially abusive situation if proper inspections aren't followed. And yet, somehow, there has not been a spate of scandals involving nursing home votes being sold to the highest bidder.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
tirinal posted:And yet, somehow, there has not been a spate of scandals involving nursing home votes being sold to the highest bidder. That we know of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Bastard Tetris posted:How much are they? I buy flats of 5 dozen from ours for like 20$. As long as you just get regular pastured cage free eggs and not XXL EXTREME JUMBO EGGS they're drat reasonable. In that same ball park. I buy 2 1/2 dozen at a time. It used to be 8 bucks and now it's 12. Everybody's up in arms, but I think it's money well spent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:When have we jailed a bloc of people based on their ideology? Has this happened in recent memory? If you use marijuana as an example I will preemptively counter with being in favor of legalization does not get you in jail, smoking it does. Not ideology, but we did inter a large number of Japanese Americans during World War 2. They were U.S. citizens at the time, and they were effectively denied their right to vote in that they were not provided with absentee ballots and were not allowed to return home to vote. I would also not be surprised if there were some issues during the red scare under McCarthy as well with certain people being effectively denied the right to vote based on their politics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure stripping the right to vote from 13% of black men leads to a pretty significant redshift in American politics--whether or not that is intentional is up to you to decide.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:I'm pretty sure stripping the right to vote from 13% of black men leads to a pretty significant redshift in American politics--whether or not that is intentional is up to you to decide. Probably not unless they lived in significant swing states, or if they would vote in state elections.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Probably not unless they lived in significant swing states, or if they would vote in state elections. Like, say, Florida?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
On that note, Gore would have certainly won Florida if it weren't for Florida's strict felon disenfranchisement laws. Almost one in four African-American Floridians cannot vote. (Not to mention the many thousands of people who were incorrectly purged from the voter rolls as felons due to shoddy databases that included people with misdemeanors or names that happened to be similar to those of actual felons.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
computer parts posted:That we know of. If nobody knows about it, it's not a scandal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:On that note, Gore would have certainly won Florida if it weren't for Florida's strict felon disenfranchisement laws. Almost one in four African-American Floridians cannot vote. (Not to mention the many thousands of people who were incorrectly purged from the voter rolls as felons due to shoddy databases that included people with misdemeanors or names that happened to be similar to those of actual felons.) This sort of disfranchisement has been been part of the right wings strategy in Florida since reconstruction ended.  No, I am not exaggerating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:(Not to mention the many thousands of people who were incorrectly purged from the voter rolls as felons due to shoddy databases that included people with misdemeanors or names that happened to be similar to those of actual felons.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
So how long before Haggen's totally folds? They've laid off 700 employees as of July and every store I've seen is a ghost town. I know that Vons/Albertsons had to divest market share due to anti-trust laws but drat, you'd think they could have done some homework on the market they were getting into! This reminds me of when Mervyn's got bought out from Target, corporate fiddled around with everything imaginable and closed within a year. If someone high up isn't shorting the crap out of Haggen's stock I'd be amazed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
What the hell is Haggens?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
nm posted:What the hell is Haggens? Grocery chain based out of Washington. They bought up 100+ stores that Vons and Albertsons were forced to ditch in Southern California to comply with federal anti-trust after they merged. They had a "glitch" with their pricing early on and everything was a LOT more expensive...and it really hasn't changed in the last 4 months. I work near one and everyone there has been cut to bare bones part-time or has quit outright and the parking lot is deserted. Employment's bad enough but a lot of these people are going to lose their livelihoods because of this 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
My local Haggen had a six-pack of Firestone Union Jack for something ridiculous like $14. The 7-Eleven down the street tops out at $10. A freaking 7-Eleven! Every time I have to go to Haggen (it's in walking distance, so I go there for things like milk or bread), I fill out the customer satisfaction thing and take a poo poo on their prices. The weekly groceries trip now involves driving across town to Vons. Maybe they did it on purpose! Also, they have the new credit card readers with the chips, but nobody knows how they work and nothing happens when I insert my card. But the slot is still lit up, suggesting that you can.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
It's looks like they're trying to court the Whole Foods market but they are having a sit time communicating that. People are going into their old Albertsons expecting Albertsons pricing and getting discouraged when everything is now expensive, no matter what the quality. http://m.ocregister.com/articles/haggen-659029-stores-store.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Minarchist posted:Grocery chain based out of Washington. They bought up 100+ stores that Vons and Albertsons were forced to ditch in Southern California to comply with federal anti-trust CPColin posted:weekly groceries trip now involves driving across town to Vons. The Invisible Hand. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Every Haggens around here (Santa Barbara) is bleeding profusely. They seem to think they were courting the Whole Foods demographic, but (1) a town can only support so many high-end grocery stores and around here we've already maxed out with one a Whole Foods, a Gelsons, and Lazy Acres (who the gently caress thought adding 5 more expensive stores here would work when the area barely supported 3?), and (2) they're not even high end anyway - it's the exact same grocery store poo poo every other basic chain carries, plus a tiny bit more organic produce, at higher prices. No bulk foods, nice butcher shop & seafood & charcuterie like Whole Foods or Lazy Acres has. There's literally no reason to pay their markup rather than going to the other supermarket down the street. The fact that they fired every single disabled worker (14 of them) in this town that Vons and Albertsons had previously employed didn't do them any PR favors either. They've already been sued and while I think they'll win (since they're bleeding money they cut all nonessential positions, including the bagger/service position that all the disabled workers just happened to be in, so it wasn't targeted) it was a loving boneheaded maneuver.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:The Invisible Hand. It could have been more disastrous to allow the merger with no selloff. All ~15 supermarkets in my area (with the aforementioned high-end exceptions) would have been owned by the same company. There'd be nothing stopping them from implementing Haggens-level pricing and consumers would have zero alternative. IMO where the regulators failed was in approving the sale of 146 stores to a tiny chain that was already failing at managing barely more than 1/10 that many. In related news, Santa Barbara's two healthcare providers, Cottage Health Systems and Sansum Clinic, are attempting to do the same thing: merge and spin off a few little private surgical centers to appease the FTC. Everyone in town, including everyone I know who works for either of the two companies, seems to know it's going to be a disaster when it happens. It'll almost certainly happen anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:
This is happening everywhere because you get higher reimbursement for procedures done in a facility owned ASC than the hospital's OR, even if there's no actual hospital stay involved. This won't change until we get away from fee-for-service which no procedural physician wants.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
Hey some non-profits did a cool thing and bought some housing in the Mission that people were going to get evicted from http://blog.sfgate.com/inthemission/2015/08/06/sf-buys-six-buildings-keeping-artists-and-others-in-place/ quote:Two longtime residents and artists as well as tenants in 18 other units will be able to stay in rent-controlled apartments thanks to two non-profits buying six buildings from a landlord who decided to back away from evicting tenants and instead sell the buildings to the city. Lets read the comments quote:Win win? Taxpayers just got foot the bill here, how much did we pay for these trashy buildings? Watch out for those slip and fall lawsuit next, oh the agony reading at the bar....  quote:Rent control like the dinosaur must die, the City is expensive, my wife and I who rented for ten years finally had to pull the plug and move out, it's just not worth the struggle. quote:NON PROFITS are the worst organizations out there. They take tax payer monies and spend it at will. I never give anything to any organizations. The middle class is screwed again paying for these rent controlled apartments. quote:If renters want to have a say about their home they can buy their own, just like the rest of us. You do have to save and watch your pennies instead of just acting entitled. Give it a try. quote:Instead of becoming a world class city, SF continues down the road the road to perpetual ghettoization. quote:I think everybody understands the pain and issues around evictions… but, hey welcome to life! Renters are renting, not owning. It’s not the same. There is no right to live in SF, plenty of affordable housing is available in other parts of the Bay Area. It’s neither fair nor rational to subsidize a few lucky ones while others have to move away. :jerryseinfeldgettingupandwalkingout.gif:
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
"loving renters are relying on laws to keep their cost of living artificially low!  "- Someone whose property taxes are calculated based on what their house was worth in 1975.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
withak posted:"loving renters are relying on laws to keep their cost of living artificially low! Aye Not only those those, but recent residents who are not so subtley getting mad about all the people who've lived here for decades being able to stay because "They don't right to live here!! It's ruining my world class fun-playground for me!! Why don't they just move away??" Also gently caress SFGate holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Xaris posted:Not only those those, but recent residents who are not so subtley getting mad about all the people who've lived here for decades They're doing us a favor. There's nothing worse than a person who has lived in SF for more than 15 years. I miss my "you can't spell insufferable without SF" t-shirt from a time when it was perfectly acceptable to hate on native San Franciscoans. Now they're some kind of weird protected species.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Jamais Vu Again posted:This won't change until we get away from fee-for-service which no procedural physician wants. "I became a doctor to
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:They're doing us a favor. There's nothing worse than a person who has lived in SF for more than 15 years. Those (usually) aren't the actual insufferable people 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
It never ceases to amaze me how up their asses San Franciscans get about how progressive they are, then turn around and act FYGM as gently caress when it comes to affordable housing or homeless issues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:It never ceases to amaze me how up their asses San Franciscans get about how progressive they are, then turn around and act FYGM as gently caress when it comes to affordable housing or homeless issues. They really are following the Nordic model.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:It never ceases to amaze me how up their asses San Franciscans get about how progressive they are, then turn around and act FYGM as gently caress when it comes to affordable housing or homeless issues. "Im glad I have nice things, and I also want other people to have nice things" ... is different than the idea: "I will give up my nice things so that everyone can have mediocre things". The lucky homeowners that want to keep the neighborhoods they moved into looking the way they did when they moved in are less to blame than giant companies flooding a geographically constrained area with their servants. Seattle is having the same problem. If Google, Amazon, etc moved to Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, or South Dakota, there would not be an unneeded housing crisis around their fiefdoms. This should never have happened to begin with: "Average S.F. rent hits shocking new high: $3,458".
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
ProperGanderPusher posted:It never ceases to amaze me how up their asses San Franciscans get about how progressive they are, then turn around and act FYGM as gently caress when it comes to affordable housing or homeless issues. The vast majority of comments on SFGate are not from San Franciscans or even likely Californians. Just by being SF, the articles are used as clickbait on all of the worst of conservative internet forums/sites. It's like 99% trolls.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:41 |
|
|
FRINGE posted:The lucky homeowners that want to keep the neighborhoods they moved into looking the way they did when they moved in are less to blame than giant companies flooding a geographically constrained area with their servants. Seattle is having the same problem. If Google, Amazon, etc moved to Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, or South Dakota, there would not be an unneeded housing crisis around their fiefdoms.  Yeah, because Google could totally move their headquarters to Nebraska and get everyone to move there. Google, Amazon, et al. aren't in the expensive, desirable cities because they love having to pay expensive office rents and huge salaries to match housing costs in the area. They're in those cities because that's where most good developers are or want to live. This is so incredibly true that tons of Googlers who work in Mountain View endure a horrifyingly bad commute from SF and somehow even higher rents than MTV because that's how much they want to live in a real city. If they can't even stomach living in the South Bay or Peninsula, how do you think Google could get them to move to Kansas? NIMBYs are absolutely to blame for the housing crisis. They got in and then decided to shut the door behind themselves. Sure, it's rational on some level for them to oppose more density, just like it's rational on some level for the affluent to vote for social welfare cuts and more tax cuts for themselves. That doesn't mean it's an ok thing to do. NIMBYs are using rising housing costs to fund their retirement off the backs of the young.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 19:56
|
|
