|
California Politics: Worse than negative rain is rain
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:Don't forget the mudslides! My wife has a comic strip from years ago that showed a newsreporter in California, saying "The good news is the earthquake triggered a mudslide that put out the wildfires."
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1086252366041559040 Gavbot good?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
Triangulation makes you do good things occasionally
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Whichever one of you is programming Gavin to act this way, just know I appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Whichever one of you is programming Gavin to act this way, just know I appreciate it. There was a pretty big password breach recently and I bet someone just combed through and found the login. Should have used a password manager.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
Please. Gavin is a Nexus 5. He can't be so easily hacked, he is simply so advanced that he knows exactly how to blend in with us. You should be more afraid than ever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bobbyp89/status/1086338221498351616
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Please. Gavin is a Nexus 5. He can't be so easily hacked, he is simply so advanced that he knows exactly how to blend in with us. You should be more afraid than ever. If the best survival strategy for replicants is to be more humane people than natural-born humans, then they have more of a right to the world than we do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Warning: Tears in rain are known to the state of California to cause cancer. Blade Runner sucks, btw.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
It's ok guys, he's a politician being responsive to the will of his constituents. I know this is unfamiliar territory for some of you, but no need to be so cynical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
Politicians don't care about their constituents or what they want. They care about money and power. Silly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
Well, no, it's just the process is designed to weed those politicians who actually care about their constituents out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 00:16
|
|
|
Sometimes the Republicans are so lovely that the centrist position is genuinely compassionate and seems possibly even radical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 00:23
|
|
|
Goddammit goons, just feel good about this already!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
cheese posted:Sometimes the Republicans are so lovely that the centrist position is genuinely compassionate and seems possibly even radical. people working 40+ hours a week will get their still-sub-poverty level means-tested benefits and if the Redumblicans don't like it they can taste my blade
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
I still don't really get what means tested means, like what happens if you give a poor person (me plz) too much money? They buy too much stuff? Is that bad for the economy somehow?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 01:03
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:I still don't really get what means tested means, like what happens if you give a poor person (me plz) too much money? They buy too much stuff? Is that bad for the economy somehow? It's about keeping (mostly minority) people from getting more than they  deserveinstitutional bigotry raised to the power of just world raised to the power of prosperity gospel pure Calvinist bullshit
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:I still don't really get what means tested means, like what happens if you give a poor person (me plz) too much money? They buy too much stuff? Is that bad for the economy somehow? "You didn't EARN that money, you leech!" *votes for guy who inherited every dollar in his bank account* And I guess if you dump a ton of money into the economy it can spike inflation up, but inflation happens anyways so  But generally safe to assume that anyone opposing giving poor people money has a whole lot of classist and racist reasons they aren't saying out loud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
It’s technically the most efficient way to allocate poverty alleviation benefits, by matching need to the benefits given, so you’ll occasionally see well meaning technocratic liberals calling for it. But in practice, yes, the above posters are correct, it very often gets used as a cudgel to keep people from accessing public benefits. And republicans love to add on lots and lots of addditional requirements that require additional administration, rendering moot whatever savings means testing would have delivered anyway. TLDR: in a perfect world they would make sense, but due to racism\republicans they are for the most part a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 09:22
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:I still don't really get what means tested means, like what happens if you give a poor person (me plz) too much money? They buy too much stuff? Is that bad for the economy somehow? like themrguy said, it's supposed to allocate based on need and ability. in its ideal case it'd be set up such that if someone is able to find a job and work that job without undue strain on their financial situation or general well-being (eg, having to move or a stressful and long commute), they would not be eligible to receive support. that's not how it is instituted in practice. it's used as a gate keeping method to refuse services to people that do need them, usually by way of having you show you're applying to like 40 jobs a month and taking training/school/etc. a negative income tax is a better way to handle this sort of thing imo, along with there being a federal/state clearinghouse for work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
the dems love means testing because they think it'll convince the Moderate Republicans that theyre Tough On Welfare unlike those other democrats and the republicans love means testing because it lets them turn the form to apply for disability into a jim crow literacy test
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
It's so when you convert that old warehouse into "artist live-work lofts" and the planning commission insists that you offer at least 15% at below-market rates, those 2 units will be rented by the zero-income children of rich people instead of directly by the rich people
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
Could it be?!?!quote:California to Vote on Partial Repeal of Sweeping Tax Law http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/california-to-vote-on-partial-repeal-of-sweeping-tax-law.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
Also: gently caress yeah UTLA with the big win in their strike.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Could it be?!?! Is there reason to be concerned this might hurt small businesses that own their property outright? Just wondering how this might get spun by opponents due to Grandma’s house not being at stake.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
Probably loss of jobs, driving business out of California, harming the economy overall, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
theyre going to lie and say that grandmas house is at stake
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:theyre going to lie and say that grandmas house is at stake The sad thing is that given how the 2018 general election went it'll probably work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:theyre going to lie and say that grandmas house is at stake maybe you moneybags have a whole house for your grandma, but regular folks like me have to house grandmas by the square foot in our commercial warehouse space.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Could it be?!?! be still my beating heart
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
They'll use a slippery-slope argument that prop 13 that protects grandma is "under attack" and also use the "but small businesses/jobs" angle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
what's next? we increase taxes on the grandma factories, reducing garndma per family below its already abysmal rate? no. you all can pretend to care about the comman family, the jones and veruc de font's, but by support the Industrialized Grandma Relief Act you are condemning us to a world with carbon free grandmas, when we ourselves are made of carbon. it's a death sentence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
end the congress-created grandmabowl
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:They'll use a slippery-slope argument that prop 13 that protects grandma is "under attack" and also use the "but small businesses/jobs" angle. Small bussness facebook and google. Just hard working (tax dodgers) like the rest of us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
Disney for certain will plow an obscene amount of money into a smear campaign because IIRC they pay something like 30 cents per square foot in property taxes on Disneyland currently thanks to Prop 13.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:They'll use a slippery-slope argument that prop 13 that protects grandma is "under attack" and also use the "but small businesses/jobs" angle. the slippery slope justification may be in the fine print of the voter guide but i expect the headine message will be "WILL PUT GRANDMA OUT ON THE STREET AND MAKE YOUR INHERITANCE WORTHLESS" when have the big business interests felt the need to justify their baldface lies about what props say? the ads against the dialysis prop and the costa hawkins repeal and for the unpaid overtime for emt props just said they would raise dialysis prices, raise rents, and prevent emts from responding while on break
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
Would that apply to apartment complexes too?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 03:55
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Could it be?!?! FMguru posted:Also: gently caress yeah UTLA with the big win in their strike. Second read: Moderate UTLA win. The language on charter schools is pretty toothless and I think the super probably considers it a win that there was no language about charter caps or freezes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
Just did a quick read of the proposed prop and it exempts commercial agriculture, the first $500,000 of property used for business purposes and completely exempts any business with less than 50 employees from any property taxes. It also lets businesses with less than $2 million in property holdings statewide continue to be taxed based on price at purchase regardless of any other factors. So the "but the small businesses" argument won't get far (I mean they'll lie anyways but there's a counterargument built into the prop). A little disappointed it's not more aggressive but I suppose it's an improvement over the status quo. FCKGW posted:Would that apply to apartment complexes too? No, that's residential property.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 04:21
|
|