|
Larry Parrish posted:I didn't even think it was legal to operate an encrypted radio on channels like that. Who's going to arrest the police?
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
Iunno, Coast Guard?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
FogHelmut posted:Who's going to arrest the police? I was thinking the FCC would keep billing them but even that's a stretch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
This isn't really new, lot of law enforcement across the country have been slowly switching to encrypted radios since over the last 20 years. SFPD switched last month for example.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2022 04:39
|
|
|
Yeah there is a transparency issue to it. On one hand, I could give benefit of the doubt to say that they're doing it because it's easier that way to comply with the personal information directive, but on the other hand I can imagine government agencies (particularly law enforcement) looking at the opportunity of mixing personal information and public information in one channel and saying it all must be encrypted. It'd be interesting if there will be a bill requiring them to separate the channels for transparency like SDPD did as mentioned in the article, or some other transparency measure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2022 05:34
|
|
|
The cops have been eliding dispatch public records and access requirements via cellphones for decades now, this isn't really new
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
Are all the Bums in LA a feature or a Bug? Like, is the homeless population by design? because LA keep re-electing the same people from the same parties so it seem like this is the intentional outcome of the work being done, and if so, is that what LA wants? I don't live in CA, so I'm just asking for clarification. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 08:01
|
|
|
We're the west's model for how to sustain austerity while suppressing the underclass, so yes. There's a hooverville where I live that has slowly upgraded to scrapwood boardwalks and some industrious fellow has rigged up a bunch of streetlights. You know, those work lights on a string hung from poles and branches and poo poo. So pretty soon it's gonna upgrade to a favela. And frankly that's an improvement over tent and curb living which is the only other option since it's about $1100-$1200 for a piece of poo poo apartment these days, or $600+ utilities for a room most places. This is just what's going to happen when most of the state is not paid enough even cover rent, let alone the rest of your expenses. And we literally have an aristocratic class by most definitions- you can effectively have tax free property so long as you do the correct paperwork jutsu when buying it, as many people who were already wealthy in the 80s did. And ever since 2011 the banks have directly owned something insane like 40% of homes in California. Not lienholding- directly owned and rented out by property management companies. Not to mention a complete ban on rent control for anything built after 1991.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 08:23
|
|
|
Absolute numbers for California as a whole are bigger for economic reasons. Homeless people in California are more visible than elsewhere for climate and sprawl reasons. There's more homeless people in New York City (#1 in us) than LA (#2), they're just less visible because of more shelters and winter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
Trollologist posted:Are all the Bums in LA a feature or a Bug? It’s a result of simply ignoring the problem. People absolutely hate the idea of spending money to help the “lazy and ungrateful” unhoused population. However, doing nothing to alleviate homelessness has a by-product of making it more visible, which is also intolerable to these fine, upstanding, employed citizens. This means that due to Martin vs Boise, some cities are reaching a tipping point now where in order to prevent the homeless from “overrunning and destroying” their parks and public spaces, they have to grit their teeth and actually provide housing and services. LA still doesn’t have anywhere near enough capacity to shelter its unhoused population, so police are now much more limited in their ability to conduct sweeps (a good thing), and that means the encampments are more permanent and visible than ever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 09:25
|
|
|
^^^ Cali and LA have actually approved quite a bit of money to address the problem but it takes time and also nobody seems to care enough to follow what's going onTrollologist posted:Are all the Bums in LA a feature or a Bug? Don't call unhoused people bums Also party is mostly irrelevant as "not doing jack poo poo about the homeless" is extremely bipartisan among pretty much everyone except leftist activists Nobody here wants an unhoused population but they also don't want to house the unhoused anywhere near where they live, so until they can get them into alternate dimensions there's a lot of hand wringing and then nimby Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 09:41 on Jan 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 09:39
|
|
|
LA needs 500k affordable housing units LA built 60k total in the last decade, including affordable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 09:42
|
|
|
Unironically the only viable solution at this point is either mass expropriation or freezing the state budget to build massive apartment towers, lol. But both solutions would be bad for the people who run the state, so. We'll continue this policy of hoping they freeze to death out of sight and praying the UN doesn't declare a humanitarian emergency.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 09:53
|
|
|
At this point, the money isn't even the biggest issue, places like LA and SF have passed ballot initiatives to fund the housing, the issue is that any planned construction gets locked up in lawsuits for years on end which inevitably settle the suit by building a smaller building that is half a decade behind schedule and cost 3x what it would have otherwise
The Glumslinger fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jan 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:Absolute numbers for California as a whole are bigger for economic reasons. Homeless people in California are more visible than elsewhere for climate and sprawl reasons. NYC passed a law in 1981 which requires the city to provide enough beds to meet the needs of every homeless person looking for shelter. California doesn't give a gently caress. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Unironically the only viable solution at this point is either mass expropriation or freezing the state budget to build massive apartment towers, lol. But both solutions would be bad for the people who run the state, so. We'll continue this policy of hoping they freeze to death out of sight and praying the UN doesn't declare a humanitarian emergency. Ballot initiative to join China’s belt and road initiative for actual infrastructure development and poverty alleviation!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 19:08
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Ballot initiative to join China’s belt and road initiative for actual infrastructure development and poverty alleviation! President Xi, my people yearn for
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
Look we’re sorry about the Chinese exclusion act and we’re sorry we haven’t take care of the last one, but can you please build us another railroad???
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:At this point, the money isn't even the biggest issue, places like LA and SF have passed ballot initiatives to fund the housing, the issue is that any planned construction gets locked up in lawsuits for years on end which inevitably settle the suit by building a smaller building that is half a decade behind schedule and cost 3x what it would have otherwise Speaking of the elusive dream of high speed rail in CA in our lifetimes, I feel like it's the same issue. Ballot initiative gets passed, funds get allocated, and then it's decades of lawsuits, land deal graft etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 22:33
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:At this point, the money isn't even the biggest issue, places like LA and SF have passed ballot initiatives to fund the housing, the issue is that any planned construction gets locked up in lawsuits for years on end which inevitably settle the suit by building a smaller building that is half a decade behind schedule and cost 3x what it would have otherwise Thankfully some of the SF Prop C money is being used to buy up failing hotels and use them to house people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2022 22:33
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:Ballot initiative to join China’s belt and road initiative for actual infrastructure development and poverty alleviation! I'd vote for it lol. It would be a better investment then the stupid poo poo the state/calpers invests in normally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 00:17
|
|
|
CalCare made it through appropriations and is going to the full assembly for a vote.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:CalCare made it through appropriations and is going to the full assembly for a vote. I assume the insurance companies are opening up the wallets and this will die in a narrow vote with a couple of assembly members doing very well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
i'm sure they're trying but it getting out of committee is already further than it has ever gotten before. if they had the sway to stop it outright i would have expected it to die in the health committee hearing a week ago the real weak point in this process is probably going to be the funding, since that's going down the initiative track. Get ready to receive a million mailers from groups with names like Freedom in Health Carepaid for by Kaiser Permanente telling you that universal healthcare is going to murder you and your doctor
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 01:30
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:i'm sure they're trying but it getting out of committee is already further than it has ever gotten before. if they had the sway to stop it outright i would have expected it to die in the health committee hearing a week ago Is there a good detailed breakdown of the bill and the pros/cons somewhere?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:19
|
|
|
confused posted:Is there a good detailed breakdown of the bill and the pros/cons somewhere? Here's some info from the Cal Nurses Association, who are the biggest boosters I've seen for the bill: Fact Sheet Coverage Summary How It's Paid For As written it appears to be truly comprehensive universal coverage, regardless of immigration status, for all California residents. Even includes vision, hearing, and dental. Not aware of any actual opposed sites or groups as of yet, it's just some dispersed grumbling about costs from conservatives so far. But the arguments that are coming up in that grumbling seem to be the same as usual: it's too expensive, taxes are the devil, government shouldn't be between you and your doctor (that is your insurance agent's rightful place, as ordained by Our Lord and Saviour, The Free Market). One other wrinkle appears to be that a waiver is required from the feds for California to be able to direct federal health funds towards a UHC plan, so expect any future Republican administration (and possibly some Dem ones) to try and starve it of that funding if it passes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:Here's some info from the Cal Nurses Association, who are the biggest boosters I've seen for the bill: Yeah... I'm seeing the same things you are. All the criticism is just the usual FUD. Given the magnitude of the change, I'd love to read some good faith criticism of the bill. The only criticism I've seen directly related to the bill is the fact that the board created to manage it requires one member of the board to be a nurse and one member of the board to be a representative of a labor union. The criticism being "why do those two interest groups get special treatment under the bill?" Which I think is a fair question.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:47
|
|
|
confused posted:The only criticism I've seen directly related to the bill is the fact that the board created to manage it requires one member of the board to be a nurse and one member of the board to be a representative of a labor union. The criticism being "why do those two interest groups get special treatment under the bill?" Which I think is a fair question.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
eSporks posted:So mandate one of the board members has to be a healthcare financial administrator (a mandate which effectively means nothing). Fair treatment, done. Unless I misunderstand your concern? I don't know enough about the dynamics to have a strong opinion one way or the other. I just thought it was a fair, good faith question and the only specific criticism I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:36
|
|
|
Not really seeing an issue with designating a nurse; as a group they have specific concerns re: the administration of health care that are distinct from those of other actors within the health care industry. You can't just appoint a generic health care expert and presume they'll either understand or seek to represent the concerns nurses might have. And obviously nurses are generally more involved in actual health care provision than any doctor typically is. As for labor, I think every board should have labor represented but I also think workers should own the means of production so I might be a bit biased. Who are people suggesting as needing a place on the board that don't have one? Obviously you can't put a bunch of pharma and insurance industry reps on the board, they'd be there with the explicit goal of making the whole thing collapse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:51
|
|
|
How's it dealing with out-of-state free rider problem? Like if I was uninsured in Texas and diagnosed with something expensive and chronic, I would absolutely move to California if that's my only way to get healthcare. Or having elderly people retire to CA before Medicare kicks in. But then the system ends up with an especially sick/expensive pool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 04:34
|
|
|
We'll solve that by having no affordable housing
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 04:39
|
|
|
The appointed board is supposed to define the residency requirements, it's not established in the language of the bill. As for the free rider issue, I'd be interested to know if there have been any studies on how social programs/spending affect migration within the US. I'm sure some number of people would be drawn to the state for the public health care, but that those people would be universally indigent and unable to work or provide for themselves otherwise seems unlikely. Nor is it exactly easy for poor people to just pick up and move themselves across the country. Most people want to have a home and enough to eat wherever they end up, for instance. And if this works like it should all the costs will come down for everyone, so a few more people getting the care they need won't implode the system. Of course if this were just a federal program we wouldn't have to think about it at all but the federal government will never pass a universal public health program.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
CA can form a intra-state compact with other states. We'll pool the moneys and distribute out care in you belong to a member state. Oh. Sorry Granpa Joe MAGA, if you weren't a born CA citizen or SunCAre state member there's a 6mo residency requirement before it kicks in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
And you have to sing "I Love You, California" in front of all your friends
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:22
|
|
|
CPColin posted:And you have to sing "I Love You, California" in front of all your friends https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wBTdfAkqGU
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:26
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:CA can form a intra-state compact with other states. We'll pool the moneys and distribute out care in you belong to a member state. Citizenship requires service in a state run cannabis farm
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:30
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:CA can form a intra-state compact with other states. We'll pool the moneys and distribute out care in you belong to a member state. we'll just have an armed border and strict access controls for outsiders like in The Water Knife
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:38
|
|
|
CPColin posted:We'll solve that by having no affordable housing Don't be silly, we will build plenty* of affordable housing, all of which will require tenants to be vetted by a bunch of fancy libs/chuds, and half of which will require tenants to be elderly or veterans, or some other restrictive qualifier. And the other half will be for rich people instead of extremely rich people. We need to think of ordinary everyday working folks with six figure incomes. Also, homeless concentration camps are a form of affordable housing too, stop being so dishonest sir. *not plenty Rah! fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:48 |
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:we'll just have an armed border and strict access controls for outsiders like in The Water Knife or, you know, like we did during the Dust Bowl.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:27
|
|