|
ComradeCosmobot posted:But I don't see how 65 undermines 67.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:19 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:56: Stop trying to police the poor by making things you don't want them to do more expensive via regressive taxation. Sack up and make smoking illegal, or don't. And then we wait for the Iron Law of Prohibition to kick in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Why those positions on 51, 52 and 65? I've been leaning the opposite on those three. (51 because of the handout to builders, 52 because of the net good though I agree putting it as a prop is a problem, and 65 because I don't know why we should be guaranteeing profit for stores) If prop 65 gets more yes votes than 67, then 67 is considered null and void. By directing the funds you can inadvertently defeat the prop trying to create the funds in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:If prop 65 gets more yes votes than 67, then 67 is considered null and void. By directing the funds you can inadvertently defeat the prop trying to create the funds in the first place. In other words, 65 is literally a trap set by the plastic bag companies, with the environmental fund as the bait. 67 is on the ballot because these same companies forced what would otherwise be a normal law to be subject to a prop vote instead, and then put 65 alongside it to try to siphon votes away. 65 doesn't actually ban plastic bags; it says if bags are banned, the money must go to an environmental fund, and oh by the way if this passes, any other bag-related prop on the same ballot as this one doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Drifter posted:I actually agree with subsidizing the local school systems through taxes, regardless of whether you have kids going there or not. I think doing something that harms others in addition to yourself should be taxed out to prevent use. Okay, so soda is so bad for you that grown adults can't decide for themselves whether or not to ingest it, and we need to help them make the right decision... but it's not actually bad enough to be illegal, like heroin. Just bad enough that it should be inconvenient to buy, as long as you're poor. Why don't you have some sort of rationing, like allergy meds, that way rich and poor alike would be equally impacted? Also, why aren't you in favor of cranking the booze tax up to $2 a beer bottle and $10 for wine & liquor? Because holy poo poo that does a lot of damage to both the consumers and others. Drifter posted:And then we wait for the Iron Law of Prohibition to kick in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:
Christ, I agree with DR.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:11
|
|
Seriously? He's archetype of a poster that continually has to walk things back after people with experience in the real world chime in, and his high flying theories and ideals are dashed on the rocks of how the world actually works.
|
CopperHound posted:prop 65 has a poison pill provision for 67. Oh, I see where the confusion lies, hidden in the Proposition 67 analysis: quote:We note that Proposition 65 includes a provision that could be interpreted by the courts as preventing SB 270 from going into effect at all should both measures pass and Proposition 65 gets more "yes" votes. However, this analysis assumes that the other provisions of SB 270 not related to the use of revenues—such as the requirement to ban single-use plastic carryout bags and charge for other bags—would still be implemented. So it's more that it's ambiguous and would force a court case to determine if the "liberal interpretation" of Proposition 65 would result in negation of only the revenue usage part, rather than outright poison pilling Proposition 67.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:How are we defining "harms", exactly? Or is this one of those "it's moral when I do it" deals? A lot of people would disagree with heroin's current legal state FYI.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
Substitute your least favorite Schedule I for heroin then. And if you're for drug liberalization but think sugar should be taxed for the good of the poor then 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Substitute your least favorite Schedule I for heroin then. I think marijuana should be legal but also discouraged, primarily by heavy taxes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
So legal but only realistically available to Persons of Means. Got it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I think marijuana should be legal but also discouraged, primarily by heavy taxes. God drat, may as well keep it illegal since this is a cheap way for my neck to not inflame and cause nerve issues. Or my lower back pain, or to just get high in my house because I want to get high. I disagree, sir.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:45
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:God drat, may as well keep it illegal since this is a cheap way for my neck to not inflame and cause nerve issues. Or my lower back pain, or to just get high in my house because I want to get high. I disagree, sir. Recreational, to be specific. Medical can be whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I think marijuana should be legal but also discouraged, primarily by heavy taxes. So what's stopping people from just growing it themselves? Wouldn't that be a big workaround?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:So what's stopping people from just growing it themselves? Wouldn't that be a big workaround? Most people won't go through the effort. Yes, even though it's nicknamed "weed".
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Recreational, to be specific. Medical can be whatever. Why? Because you disapprove?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Most people won't go through the effort. Yes, even though it's nicknamed "weed". Effort? Doesn't the sun do all the work?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:Why? Because you disapprove? I don't see any moral obligation to promote it. Panfilo posted:Effort? Doesn't the sun do all the work? You can make your own alcohol by leaving stuff in a barrel for a few weeks, but most people won't do that either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
Anyone know anything about the LA city measure JJJ? Both sides claim voting their way will result in housing price increases, and support seems to be mixed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I don't see any moral obligation to promote it. Something tells me leaving weed plants in the sun too long won't eventually result in the same kind of nerve damage leaving stuff in a barrel for too long will.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Something tells me leaving weed plants in the sun too long won't eventually result in the same kind of nerve damage leaving stuff in a barrel for too long will. For a simpler analogy then: It's really easy to make your own lunch. Yet people still spend lots of money to get it premade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:05
|
|
|
Which is why you should only be able to buy In-n-Out or McDonalds if you can afford the $10 trans fat tax on each food item.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Which is why you should only be able to buy In-n-Out if you can afford the $10 trans fat tax. Nah, it should be $20.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:For a simpler analogy then: It's really easy to make your own lunch. Yet people still spend lots of money to get it premade. Yeah well the state of California can't tax the sun, checkmate 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:
Rude! Also maybe you are thinking of someone else? Because I argued vehemently against 63, on the basis that it won't work and is easily gotten around: and also because "sending a message" with a worthless gun law is wasting political capital that gun control advocates should instead spend on actually-effective gun control. I'm also against regressive taxes just to police poor people. I don't have a sugar tax on my ballot, though, so I haven't read as much about it, so I didn't weigh in on the soda tax thing. BCRock posted:I know there have been a few of you guys who have posted your takes on all of the statewide ballot initiatives earlier in the thread, but I'm lazy and don't feel like flipping back through 100 pages of recycling and gun chat, so could someone re-post their list? Thank you, stranger. Here are my high-flying theories that are dashed on the rocks of reality. I changed the summary titles where that one guy's summary titles were misleading or incomplete, but these are still not the actual titles of these bills. 51 School Construction Bonds MAYBE I'm generally in favor of paying for school stuff. Ultimately we should repeal prop 13 if we want to unfuck school spending, and also the legislature should spend from the general fund, but using bonds to pay for construction costs is cool and good. The thing about 51, though, is that it's sponsored by construction companies, and has this thing in it to limit how much developers and homebuilders can be required to pay for a local school project, even if that project directly benefits their development. I find that very suspicious. Brown is against this measure, but hey, it's been a long time since we had a general bond sale for school projects and the legislature snoozed so now this is what we've got. Probably if it doesn't pass, a bunch of schools won't get to build poo poo. 52 Extend Medi-Cal Hospital Fee YES This fee was actually put together by those private hospitals, it's used to get matching federal funds, and we need those funds. If we're going to stop doing this fee scheme (for whatever reason, maybe it's some kind of BS scheme?) then we need to very specifically figure out how to keep getting those federal matching funds. In the meantime, a vote of NO on 52 means substantially defunding Medi-Cal. 53 Voter Approval of Revenue Bonds NO The entire state doesn't need to vote every time the legislature decides to pass a self-funding bond measure to build a local project somewhere. Mind you, "self-funding" usually means like a toll bridge or whatever, and I'm against regressive funding for infrastructure projects generally: infrastructure benefits everyone, even if you don't drive across a bridge constantly you benefit from the economic payoff of that infrastructure, especially if you're rich. We should pay for roads and bridges with progressive income taxes and possibly property taxes. But that's beside the point, which is that this isn't a broken thing that needs fixing. 54 72-Hour Legislation Review Period YES It has exceptions for emergencies. It's BS how legislatures often amend a bill a bunch of times and then it gets pushed through before anyone other than the authors of the amendments could possibly have had time to do analysis. This might backfire during our state's annual budget fight, but gently caress it, sunshine laws are almost always a good idea. 55 Continue Tax on Incomes Over $263,000 YES Why the gently caress do rich people need a tax cut? These taxes are only temporary because the lawmakers that passed it were too spineless to pass a permanent tax increase. Rich people in America still pay way less taxes than most other civilized countries, so you can safely ignore their whining. 56 Increase Cigarette Tax NO Raises the tax from 87 cents a pack to $2.87 a pack, which is a big fuckin' increase. Puts the same tax onto e-cigs. Sin taxes are stupid and regressive generally, but especially so when they're on mega-addictive substances like nicotine. How about we tax the gently caress out of cigarette company profits, instead? Or perhaps it should be illegal to make profits by selling products that kill people? I dunno, I'm just spitballing here. 57 Parole and Juvenile Justice Reform YES "Get tough on crime" is the way district attorneys have gotten elected for decades, and the way they fulfill this campaign promise is by doing their utmost to be harsh on anyone who gets arrested. DAs have a direct conflict of interest here; "prosecutorial discretion" is a fundamentally broken idea when prosecutors have a strong incentive to rack up convictions by any means. Prop 57 puts the decision of whether to try a juvenile as an adult into the hands of a juvenile court judge, which... well, still isn't ideal, since judges are also often elected, but it's an improvement. This law also makes it possible for "nonviolent" offenders to qualify for parole sooner by taking classes and for good behavior. Since the role of prison ought to be reform, rather than just revenge, I'm in favor of anything that incentivizes convicts to engage in self improvement while we stockpile them in conditions we recently decided were too harsh to keep chickens in. 58 Allow Bilingual Education YES Racists who think nobody in America should be allowed to be too foreign decided to try and hurt immigrants a while back by taking away in-classroom assitance to help immigrants' kids pass our horrible, hosed up standardized testing. This measure rolls that decision back, allowing ESL kids to get assistance, and leaving it up to local school districts and parents to decide where and how to do that. 59 Register Disapproval of "Citizens United" MAYBE I'm in favor of a constitutional amendment to reform campaign financing, and in the short term, that does mean fighting against Citizens United. However, this measure is a nonbinding resolution advising state officials as to our opinion... and that's something much, much more efficiently and effectively done by a poll. Each measure on the ballot makes it less likely that people will bother to vote at all, because of the frustratingly massive brick of a voter guide and confusing array of measures they have to face. Each measure also costs a nonzero amount of money to handle. We don't need to be packing the ballot with opinion polls on various subjects. So my advice is to vote YES if you really really want to, but otherwise, leave this one blank. A NO vote will be interpreted as you being in love with superPAC spending on campaigns, so don't vote NO. 60 Condoms in Porn Videos NO The puritans are pretending to be concerned about women's health, but that's a facade. Really this is about getting porn out of California. Porn stars already generally undergo massive amounts of testing and most pornographers are not going to try to compete with the rest of the global industry while also slapping condoms on all their stars' cocks. They'll just move out of state. Sex workers unwilling or unable to relocate will lose their jobs. Essentially nobody will be saved from AIDS. 61 Limit Prescription Drug Prices Paid by State NO This probably won't work, and might cause VA hospital patients to pay more for medicine, or even be unable to get certain medicines entirely. The exception carved out for a big chunk of medi-cal points to exactly who wrote this ballot measure and wants it to pass for selfish financial reasons, too. I'm in favor of single-payer and perhaps also capping or entirely removing the profit margins enjoyed by pharma companies, but you should not try to "send a message" that you support a broad change by passing unnecessarily complex experimental laws with poor enforcement mechanisms and plausibly serious blowback consequences that nobody can really predict. 62 Repeal Death Penalty YES The death penalty is ridiculously expensive, and doesn't work; it doesn't work as a deterrent, and it doesn't compensate victims. There's no such thing as "closure" and even if there were, it's wrong for the state to kill people just to satisfy victims' emotional need for it. The death penalty is stupid and wrong and bad and Americans are way behind the rest of the world when it comes to figuring that out. 63 Background checks for bullets, mandatory gun theft reporting, large capacity magazine ban NO A couple of the minor provisions of this law are OK-ish, but the bullet background check thing is one of those stupid ideas that only hurts the law-abiding gun owners (who buy lots of ammo because they shoot it at gun ranges) and not really people with criminal intent (who buy a small amount of ammo to shoot at people). Anyone who has a gun either got it legally (passed a background check) or illegally (can get bullets the same way). Wastes whatever gun-control political capital might exist in the state on pointless ineffective laws. If you are in favor of gun control, advocate and fight for laws that actually control guns. For example, let's make it impossible for people with mental health problems to get or keep guns? 64 Legalize Recreational Marijuana YES It's less impairing or addictive than alcohol and less harmful to your body than ibuprofin. It never should have been illegal in the first place. 65 Bag fee becomes bag tax MAYBE Stores used to give away single-use bags for free, so it's not clear why they need to be given the money from mandatory bag fees: but maybe if they're selling more durable re-usable bags, they should get to keep the money for them? If you're against bags because of the marine problem (in the water they look like jellyfish so a lot of things eat them and die), then vote NO on this and vote YES on 67. If you don't want to ban bags, vote NO on 67, and then maybe yes or no on this one depending on whether you have an opinion here. A good option would also be to not vote on 65, because it's not clear why this matters at all or is being put in front of voters in the first place. 66 Undermine the rights of victims of our horrifying criminal justice system NO Might be unconstitutional anyway. Seeks to put limits on death row appeals. Note: this country has put a lot of innocent people to death. I'm talking people who have been post-mortem proven innocent via DNA testing or otherwise. Even if you're in favor of the death penalty, it's obviously blatantly immortal to remove the process by which the unjustly convicted can prove their innocence. 67 Ban Single-Use Plastic Grocery Bags MAYBE If you're against single-use plastic grocery bags, vote YES on 67 to actually get the law that banned bags that the legislature passed and Gov. Brown signed in 2014 to take effect. I already use reusable bags whenever possible but occasionally I don't, for various reasons, and I think educating people is probably a better approach... but plastic grocery bags are an environmental hazard, so banning them outright is a reasonable position to take. Note though that what actually happens is people who would otherwise have gotten a free plastic bag or ten, instead pay money for nearly-free "reusable" bags that use more plastic, and then usually throw them away instead. I don't think that's a net gain, just a regressive tax. The state law does not force people to actually re-use re-usable bags, because of course it can't, so I'm not sure if this is or would be effective. Maybe? Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Mince Pieface posted:Anyone know anything about the LA city measure JJJ? Both sides claim voting their way will result in housing price increases, and support seems to be mixed. The actual affordable housing part can be bypassed (developer can build the equivalent units elsewhere, or just pay out if pocket into the city's affordable housing fund). So the stupid high rise on Sunset can maintain its stupid rents if the dev builds some poo poo condos in, like, Whittier or Watts. That said, I'm voting Yes for it, because it it loving mandates that developments include cheap housing I'm all for it. And if they can't build they can at least pay out the rear end to the city. FilthyImp fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Mostly it's the clauses about worker pay and sourcing (30% transitional, local worker) that sour people on it. Part of me thinks it's because you can't pay a poo poo wage, but I can see it contributing to slowdowns if crews can't be found in sufficient numbers. Thanks for the analysis!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
I swear https://www.sos.ca.gov at least has a URL for the election results by now. What gives, Alex Padilla?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/ballot-measures/ Well with <4% Precincts, it's not that helpful, but holy gently caress it's going to be really god drat stupid if Prop 53 wins which it is so far but I hope that doesn't hold. Legal weed, no condoms, cig tax, plastic bag ban and few others are doing well but looks like death penalty is here to stay. E: Prop 53 is going down, which is good and will probably fail once more larger counties like SF/Alameda/etc come in. Xaris fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Bummer. My big hope was that we would repeal the death penalty. This election blows.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Goddamnit people, don't ban plastic bags! What the hell am I supposed to use as a cheap trash bag for my small garbage cans now? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
I never expected us to repeal Death Penalty so it's not a surprise, even at 43/57. It's still largely popular amongst the soccer mom Marinite-like blue dog crowd, and I'd imagine even more minority family voters are also in favor of keeping it, who think it's still useful to deter crime and save our kids etc etc and such.Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Goddamnit people, don't ban plastic bags! What the hell am I supposed to use as a cheap trash bag for my small garbage cans now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
53 is really close and I really hope it doesn't go yes... FOR FUCKS SAKES DO THESE PEOPLE EVEN KNOW WHAT A REVENUE BOND IS? Also holy poo poo at people wanting to speed up death penalty proceedings. Only 14% reporting right now so things could definitely change. I should probably just wait for tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Legalized marijuana is the emptiest loving victory on the same night Trump wins the presidency (because it's going to be prosecuted by the feds as if it wasn't)
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Legalized marijuana is the emptiest loving victory on the same night Trump wins the presidency. Only because republican controlled house+senate+presidency+court is going to crack down and completely destroy legal weed in WA/CO/CA
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
We'll be lucky if he doesn't send in the National Guard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ithrow88/status/796208159022952448
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Legalized marijuana is the emptiest loving victory on the same night Trump wins the presidency (because it's going to be prosecuted by the feds as if it wasn't) gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress gently caress
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
Also, lol at Prop 59, which now literally doesn't matter because there will never be a favorable political environment to take up the amendment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:19 |
|
|
Hi, everybody. http://yescalifornia.org Bye, everybody.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 07:55
|
|