Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

SirPablo posted:

I live in a city near the proposed line and a large contingent were actively fighting against it. You loving idiots! You don't want a direct line to 25 million people for your lovely town!? Ugh, the valley .

E: I should say the idiots won and the track is going well outside the city.

All those towns that the interstates didn't connect are doing great.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

GD_American posted:

I'm curious what the cost estimates for connecting that Victorville spur to LA so they can have a Vegas-LA line would be. I guarantee they've run the numbers already.

I think that line will never happen because it's essentially a weekend party bus for people in LA, there's not a lot of business reasons other than tourism, and I don't know that tourism alone could sustain that line. Unless I'm missing something.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Ardennes posted:

I guess the Las Vegas metro area is about 2 million people at this point, enough to probably deserve some type of line along with the usual tourist traffic.

I agree, but that doesn't make sense if it's running from Victorville.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Van5 posted:

What would be the best way to design a statewide rail system that doesn't just end up benefiting rich people, from a conceptual standpoint?

Build it, subsidize the tickets.

The rail system in and of itself isn't elitist, it's going through the right places. It just needs to be affordable.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Glass of Milk posted:

Can they not have express trains that only do the LA-SF-SD stops along with the normal ones? That would seem to be the way to go.

That seems to be exactly what they are doing. The map I posted earlier shows both local stops and "express" stops which are much more limited.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp
The real travesty of the train is how slow it is and how long it will take. We had trains that were almost as fast back when we were on steam, and we could build the entire system in less than 10 years but, you know, ~America~.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

A Winner is Jew posted:

Wait, have they released how fast (slow) the express train will be yet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail#Travel_times

Assuming that's express.


I told a coworker visiting from Hong Kong about an average speed of 180 and he laughed.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Ardennes posted:

Uh the fastest (regular service) TGV goes about 200 miles per hour.

Heh, I'm getting my fastest speeds mixed up with running speeds, my bad. I was under the impression that those trains ran at 300mph, because they can do it.


I'll go back to whining about project timetables.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp
I bike along the creek and boy does it smell awesome.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Ron Jeremy posted:

I don't know if data is there, but anecdatally, many purchases in the bay area have been cash. I dunno if we can separate the institutional investors vs the mom and pop rentals from the google millionaires buying a primary residence in cash.

I'd suspect most of those are investors, as even the new rich often will finance to spread the cost out.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

SirPablo posted:

I learned that Reagan single handedly saved the american economy by lowering taxes and getting inflation under control. Bork was not confirmed due to partisanship. Ron new nothing about selling weapons to fund terrorists. Socialism is Bad. It CAN be done. He was a proud union man. Peace through strength.

Did you urinate on his grave?

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

enraged_camel posted:

Economically, the city has suffered very badly in the past five years. Most high quality businesses left downtown, and it has become a barren wasteland of abandoned buildings, empty parking lots and low-value shops. It doesn't help that there's also a WalMart (that I live across the street from) that attracts all kinds of people from the ghetto and drives wages down in the area. There is a lot of crime everything from petty theft to robberies. There's a public parking lot next to my apartment building, and us residents park our vehicles in gated areas of the lot. Despite this, my car has been broken into twice over the past year. Did I mention that I don't venture outside after dark, despite being a fairly strong guy?

Tell me more about the "people from the ghetto" that WalMart attracts. :allears:

Leperflesh posted:

Courthouses do not usually anchor nice business districts. They attract bail bondsmen, pawn shops, and payday loan sharks.

I suppose crime might go down due to the police presence though?

There's actually the police HQ directly across from the new courthouse, and they're spending quite a bit of money in DTLB to nicen up the neighborhood, including at least one new upscale apartment building.

Ardennes posted:

So what is greater LA's weakest food category? It isn't Mexican, Chinese, or Korean obviously. I guess pizza isn't spectacular, but doesn't seem that bad. Not a lot of representation of French food in Southern California? Maybe Thai?

It's probably French or Italian. There's just not a lot of great Italian around, outside the Mozzo-plex. Similar to how the pizza is not good.

Traditional French is also pretty rare.

Thai though, there's a ton of good Thai in LA and Long Beach.


vvv Good point...it's so off-the-radar here I didn't even think of it. There's like a couple of George's Greek Cafe's around.

Zeitgueist fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Aug 6, 2013

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

nm posted:

Depends. We have a somewhat higher than average income tax, but property taxes are probably the lowest in the nation unless some state doesn't have property tax. Prop 13 especially insures that anyone (or their family) who bought property in the 80s or earlier, pays almost no property tax. This applies to companies too. Property values can only be re-assessed up if the property is sold to a non family member. The best part is that if you sell a business that owns property, that property stays assessed at old values. Companies create corporations for the sole purpose of holding a single large property, then instead of selling the property they sell the holding company.
California tax is hosed up, and most of it can be linked to prop 13 and the huge holes it creates.

That said, we allegedly have a budget surplus this year. Many of the inland counties are still hosed though.

To add to this, Prop 13 was essentially created with the express purpose of loving California through Starve The Beast, and did so pretty well.

Despite being one of the top 10 economies in the world, the state is in a perenial budget shithole. Though with a Dem supermajority and Governor, it's got slightly better, but for the most part our Team Blue is Team Light Red like in most of the country.

To make up for our massive property tax hole, we have regressively high tax rates and fees on most everything else. It's not wrong to say that our budget problems could be pretty much entirely solved by fixing the property tax issue, since the gaps are never more than a tiny, tiny fraction of our state GDP. The weighting of the budget on income and sales taxes also means that we're very sensitive to booms and recessions, moreso than many other states.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Ho Chi Mint posted:

The line I hear from guys at work is "California is broke because it has too many social services and Union leeches."

Not even remotely true. California is(was) broke because rich people don't want to pay taxes, just like most every other state.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

GrumpyDoctor posted:

There is a supermajority. The prop 25 change allowed a simple majority to pass a budget, but new taxes still need 2/3rds.

This is correct. The 2/3 new tax thing is part of Prop 13.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Jerry Manderbilt posted:

Man, I remember an OC Register article :qq:-ing about how Orange County's mostly-Republican state legislators were now completely hamstrung by the new supermajority.

More GOP tears in the aftermath of the 2012 election: still fun to read, even months after the schadenfreude thread was closed.


It was also drat satisfying to see my former peer advisor, from Cypress, post on his Facebook that he was going to a Romney victory party, saying "I'll be there, how about you guys?" and then cry about how Obama lost the majority of counties but still got reelected :unsmigghh:

I'm fine with Orange County politician tears because the OC has some really reprehensible politics.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Thanatosian posted:

Yeah, the fact that it applies to commercial properties, and properties owned by corporations and trusts is loving bullshit.

If it's going to exist at all, it should only apply to primary residences, and there should be a value cap. Like, there's no way ten million dollar mansions should be protected by it.

Well that's kind of the classic, thing, isn't it? Sell it to the middle class as something for them, when it's actually nothing of the sort. Similar to how the estate tax abolitionists talked about family farms.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

CrazyLittle posted:

I don't disagree, but "no parking" is also inappropriate.

I'd be fine with "no parking" as long as it applied to rich and poor alike. :colbert:

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Dusseldorf posted:

20 percent over 20 years isn't "major population growth".

It is if that's entirely millionaires.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

A Winner is Jew posted:

LA's not bad when it comes to museums though since the MOCA and LACMA are like 7 miles apart, and you can spend a day between the two of them and go to the Griffin Observatory in the evening. Plus there's the Pantages, Ahmanson, Disney Concert hall, or seeing a show being taped at WB studios and all of them being really fun but cheep / mid range (ok concert hall is expensive) things to do if you have a free day there.

The Getty is a pretty awesome museum(s) as well.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp
Aren't a bunch of cities in Orange County named for Klansmen?

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Glass of Milk posted:

Edit: Obviously, the best landscaping would be natural drought-resistant plants and rocks, but there's lots of people for whom it would be sacrosanct.

I do a little fist pump every time I see a fake-grass or rock lawn in LA. If I could to own a home in southern California(nope), I would definitely get rid of any grass immediately.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Ron Jeremy posted:

Fake grass is meh. If you're going to use water, might as well water something edible. Pull up your backyard and plant a garden.

The idea is not to use water, which I don't believe fake grass needs.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Papercut posted:

Or not using grass. Clover lawns are great, but they attract bees so of course that makes them completely unacceptable for a family, from the typical suburban parents' perspective.

Well the bee problem appears to be well on it's way to taken care of.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Leperflesh posted:

LA has freeways with like six lanes each direction that are parking lots all the drat time, it's completely insane.

You get phenomenons like the 10 freeway which is inexplicably heavy traffic at basically all hours. I've come to a stop at 4am on a Saturday.

withak posted:

If traffic was better in LA then people would have nothing to make conversation about when they finally arrive at their destination.

True that.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

WampaLord posted:

Traffic is the great equalizer. Or it was, until the Express Lanes became the real-life version of Pay to Win DLC for video games.

In a complete shock to nobody at all, Express Lanes are a dumb idea except for making money.

My favorite part of this is they did the analysis after they made the change, instead of, you know, looking at any other place that did this.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

appropriatemetaphor posted:

So wait with those toll lane things on the 110, can I just drive in it if I'm carpooling? Or do I have to buy some gizmo?

You have to buy a gizmo that requires a deposit of like $40.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Dusseldorf posted:

Yeah, one of my good friends died on a cycle last year and a bunch of other people I know have wiped out or gotten taken out in traffic.

At least from a driver's perspective it's extremely hard to see a cyclist who's cutting lanes coming if you're lane changing as they are going 20 MPH faster than the rest of traffic and you're already paying attention to about 4 or 5 things going on.

As a bicycle commuter, I'd actually wager that a lot more motorcycle accidents are car error than bikes cutting lanes.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

Willa Rogers posted:

Brown's proposal is also a great example of how labor, at times, allows itself to be corrupted out of self-interest. And yah, the prison-guards union has never cared a whit for social justice or saving the state money.

Yeah the corrections union's awfulness has nothing to do with organized labor and everything to do with how awful capitalism is.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003

by Ralp

I like that Portland comes in better than LA, when it's only slightly larger than Long Beach.

  • Locked thread