|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:I wouldn't say useless. Our complex wanted to raise my rent 12% this year (we pay 2600 for 1b/1b 650 sqft) and we only got a better offer (4%) by making a big stink. This removes a lot of the dread we had about the next predatory lease renewal. Yeah, it would have helped here in the last year too. Mountain View's rent control doesn't cover single family homes or condos (or anything built after 1995, but we do get eviction protection), so we ate a 15% increase last year.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:I wouldn't say useless. Our complex wanted to raise my rent 12% this year (we pay 2600 for 1b/1b 650 sqft) and we only got a better offer (4%) by making a big stink. This removes a lot of the dread we had about the next predatory lease renewal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
I don’t know enough to say one way another, some form of rent control is probably needed. But from what I understand is California’s real problem wrt housing are rich NIMBY’s who refuse to let anything be built. I’m part of a YIMBY and transit group in MD (we push for high density housing with mass transit options) and dealing with rich NIMBYS has been a pain in my rear end. They have time, money, and fight everything even the most modest housing solutions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:I don’t know enough to say one way another, some form of rent control is probably needed. In San Francisco they had the audacity to do a "Go Fund Me" and raise $$$ so their lawyer could stop homeless shelters from being built. In other words, they didn't even use their own $$$.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:2600 holy gently caress are you in SF? San Jose, baby
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:2600 holy gently caress are you in SF? I think that’s closer to the price of a studio in SF.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:San Jose, baby drat dude brutal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
2600 is pretty standard for a 1br in LA in nicer parts of town.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 02:42
|
|
|
I called DiFi, Harris, and my rep about Trump's plan to pull the homeless off the street forcibly and house them in government institutions. They'd all heard and issued statements against it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:I called DiFi, Harris, and my rep about Trump's plan to pull the homeless off the street forcibly and house them in government institutions. They'd all heard and issued statements against it. These are called workhouses. Big in the early industrial years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:I don’t know enough to say one way another, some form of rent control is probably needed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 05:48
|
|
|
X-posting
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
Sacramento
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:48
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Sacramento has no hills to get in the way of biking. Too bad about the heat and about the lifted pickup trucks trying to mow down bikers tho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
Stay out of Sacramento.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
The heat isn't too bad once you're used to it. But a truck will kill me on the way home from work some day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
Sacramento is doomed by its crumbling levee system and climate change is going to make it increasingly intolerable during the summer, or so I gather.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:The heat isn't too bad once you're used to it. If you get used to it then you're already lost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Sacramento has a pretty good train museum. Sacramento has more trees than any other state capital. Sacramento is a good place to live if you want to visit any of those other cities, but can't afford to move. Sacramento feels pretty good if you just drove up the 5 or the 99 and still have memories of Bakersfield, Fresno, or Stockton.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Sacramento feels pretty good if you just drove up the 5 or the 99 and still have memories of Bakersfield, Fresno, or Stockton. This is the truth. It’s got an excellent and convenient airport as well. Unfortunately, as has been noted, it will be washed away when our deteriorating levees inevitably fail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
We should fill the central valley with water so we can have a californian sea
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Sacramento has a pretty good train museum. I'm sorry, don't you mean the Farm to Fork capital? I'm pretty sure that's even on a water tower there
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:We should fill the central valley with water so we can have a californian sea
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
Briefly, yeah. The Great Flood of 1862 flooded most of the central valley to the point you could take a boat down it from SF to LA. It's not a big part of the USA's larger cultural memory despite the scale because it happened smack in the middle of the Civil War on the farthest flung of frontiers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Briefly, yeah. The Great Flood of 1862 flooded most of the central valley to the point you could take a boat down it from SF to LA. It's not a big part of the USA's larger cultural memory despite the scale because it happened smack in the middle of the Civil War on the farthest flung of frontiers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862 "The ARkStorm dumped an equivalent of 10 feet of rainfall in California, in the form of rain and snow, over a period of 43 days" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:We should fill the central valley with water so we can have a californian sea I'd hope it would be a huge lake so we can draw fresh water from it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
To be clear, parts of the Central and San Joaquin Valleys periodically flooded throughout prehistory and into the modern era, and in some cases only don't flood a few times every century now because California built a comprehensive system designed to prevent it, and also not incidentally siphon off as much water as possible and when that's not enough (which is always) we'll go ahead and suck up what's in the ground too. But, also, it appears that California's climate has swung between rainer and dryer periods on cycles of anywhere from a couple of decades to several centuries in length, and so irrespective of climate change we may be entering into either a dryer or wetter period than any experience in CA's relatively short recorded history. And then factor in climate change and how that affects el nino/la nina/etc. and the reality is that we simply cannot predict what is in store for CA's climate over the coming century, really. There's a nonzero chance that by preventing the periodic flooding, we're permanently eliminating the ability of parts of the aquifer under the valley from recharging, which is also uhhh, maybe really bad? There are numerous projects aimed at improving/managing recharge, my understanding is that they mostly rely on diverting water to recharge on the rare occasions when there's excess water beyond that required by environmental regulations to stay in rivers plus what water rights holders extract, and that's uhhh, not a reassuring situation either, lol. Here's a collection of stuff on prehistoric flooding: https://cepsym.org/proceedings-1996.php And a little infographic thingy on aquifer recharge projects: http://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/groundwater/charts/recharge-interactive/index.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
They should be injecting into the aquifers during the rainy season imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
If you read Cadillac Desert you'll walk out absolutely pissed scared about California's future. I did a year ago and it rattled me so bad that I'm in process of moving out of the state. Take that for what you will.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Take that for what you will. But yeah, depending on who talks we're either in a historic dry or a historic wet spell and will flip soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah IANAL but that seems like it opens another avenue of legal protest, which is that the law is more or less tailored to specifically attack a particular industry/handful of companies. How are the state's lawyers going to tell judges with a straight face that Oh, the people in all those other industries? They're "legitimately" independent contractors, even though their employers don't pass the tests we just made up, but Uber and Lyft and Grubhub, they're different. Laws specifically target specific industries/companies all the time. There are explicit exceptions in any type of regulatory law. Not to say that some bs contract based reasoning can invalidate this law, but it being unfair....I don't see it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:There's a nonzero chance that by preventing the periodic flooding, we're permanently eliminating the ability of parts of the aquifer under the valley from recharging, which is also uhhh, maybe really bad? Aquifer recharge is mostly a load of poo poo. Even in 70s, the ground has dropped more than 25-ft, even worse in some places. Aquifers work because water is filling the voids that then get extracted. One those voids are emptied, they soil particles collapse under their own weight no longer suspended up via "incompressible" water molecules. Once it's gone, it's gone because now you have a dense material where the voids no longer exist. There is very little in the way of recharging them even via fracking techniques won't make enough of it stick. We'd be lucky if we could put even 5% back if we wanted to. What we've done with the Central Valley and Ogalla aquifers is loving tragedy almost on par with the Amazon. We had 1000+ years of water that we could have used carefully in times of drought to sustain a billion people to provide drinking water, and carefully planned agricultural crops for nourishment and re-using run-off. Instead we blew threw it in 100 years to give shareholder and landed-gentry more profits. Both will permanently be gone by 2100.  
Xaris fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Wasn't that flood the reason they basically picked up Sacramento and raised the town an extra ten feet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Xaris posted:Aquifer recharge is mostly a load of poo poo. It's a lot more complicated than you're making it out. https://mavensnotebook.com/2018/08/29/managed-aquifer-recharge-in-california/ Basically, some parts of the aquifer are clay fines, and those undergo compaction, and then while they can still recharge somewhat and store water, they don't re-inflate. But there are also large parts of the aquifers in CA that are sand and gravel type layers that can definitely absorb tens or hundreds of millions of acre-feet of water, if we bother to build recharge projects: and we are bothering, to the tune of billions of dollars and literally hundreds of projects statewide, right now. Estimates in the linked report indicate there's something on the order of 140 million acre-feet of underground storage capacity available in the central valley, which is roughly similar to the full capacity of the entire state's above-ground reservoirs. Recharge is accomplished through several different methods, and which method is best depends on the exact geohydrology in the given area. There are already successful and operating recharge projects using standing surface pools, flooding of fallow cropland during winter, and direct injection into wells. There's problems, lots of them. Contamination of subsurface water, the problem of salinification particularly in the san joaquin valley, the fact that pumping up and then drawing out of water in these aquifers means flushing chemicals such as arsenic that are stored in the subsurface rocks out into the water we then intend to use, and of course, lots of complications arising from our stupid state water rights system. So I'm not trying to be overly optimistic here, a lot of places that have suffered from severe subsistence are not going to be recovered, period. That compaction has happened and is likely irreversable. But aquifer recharge is not "mostly a load of poo poo" at least as it pertains to broadly adding water back to depleted aquifers statewide.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
Xaris posted:Aquifer recharge is mostly a load of poo poo. Even in 70s, the ground has dropped more than 25-ft, even worse in some places. Aquifers work because water is filling the voids that then get extracted. One those voids are emptied, they soil particles collapse under their own weight no longer suspended up via "incompressible" water molecules. Once it's gone, it's gone because now you have a dense material where the voids no longer exist. There is very little in the way of recharging them even via fracking techniques won't make enough of it stick. We'd be lucky if we could put even 5% back if we wanted to. What we've done with the Central Valley and Ogalla aquifers is loving tragedy almost on par with the Amazon. We had 1000+ years of water that we could have used carefully in times of drought to sustain a billion people to provide drinking water, and carefully planned agricultural crops for nourishment and re-using run-off. Instead we blew threw it in 100 years to give shareholder and landed-gentry more profits. Nah please read https://californiawaterblog.com/2015/12/27/the-earth-is-falling-land-subsidence-and-water-management-in-california/ They even use the two figures you posted haha
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
 Some anti-vaxxers just threw some kind of sticky red liquid from the 2nd floor viewing gallery in the state senate onto the legislators while shouting "this is baby blood" edit: https://twitter.com/ZavalaA/status/1172691491333869569 fermun fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Sep 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Thank god AntiVaxxers are showing restraint and presenting rational arguments for their side.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:27
|
|
|
The anti-vaccine people that SB 276 dragged out of the woodwork are kinda freaking me out a little tbh. As a political scientist I always knew that they existed, but it’s a little more visceral seeing them out in force, in my state. Feels not great man. Hope they all follow through on their threats to leave.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
It's confirmed to be menstrual blood by CHP https://twitter.com/ahartreports/status/1172673325396480000
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:If you read Cadillac Desert you'll walk out absolutely pissed scared about California's future. I did a year ago and it rattled me so bad that I'm in process of moving out of the state. Take that for what you will. Pretty much everywhere west of the Rockies is screwed in terms of future droughts. Which is why the wife and I are looking at somewhere back east. We’ll need to live in a concrete bunker to withstand the Sandersonesque hurricanes and annual F5 tornado storms, but we won’t be lacking for water.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 18:25
|
|
