|
The fact that it's a faculty strike is pretty interesting. I didn't think their union was organized enough to pull something like that off. Good for them!
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 03:34 |
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:Do bigoted they hide their articles behind paywalls article posted:Some minority groups can’t catch a break. edit: vv good point, I've edited in the article instead of discussing how to get around paywalls. VikingofRock fucked around with this message at 08:30 on Mar 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
fits my needs posted:No. They need to make the trains automated and cut the chaff. Too bad the unions will stone wall and block any changes that might make the commuters' experience better and make things more efficient. You can barely understand what the hell some conductors are saying like names of stops or other announcements. Why is that not automated? How many times has a disabled person been screwed over because of that? Can't lose those jobs! I've seen the (often literal) poo poo that the janitors have to clean up at BART stations, and honestly they deserve to be paid well for that work. But you know that the strike was about more than them, right? The drivers and the track maintenance workers were the main force behind it, and they have technical, safety critical jobs which are vital to the day-to-day operation of the entire Bay Area. Why shouldn't they be able to push for better/safer working conditions? The strike was an effective tactic, and if management didn't want to inconvenience the people who rely on the BART workers to get to work safely every day, then management shouldn't have tried to play hardball with the contract.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
I figure traffic can only get so bad, and if the tech industry keeps growing then eventually we will see more serious money dumped into mass transit / someone will actually form a regional transit authority. So we probably won't be dead by the time BART gets significantly expanded, but it'll be a while yet.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Why do we have laws about breaking and entering? I can open most older doors with a credit card. For that matter, why do we even have locks? It's relatively easy to make a lockpicking set at home, plenty of people do it. Sure, lockpicks are illegal but when has something being illegal ever stopped a criminal? I agree with your broader point, but the lockpick part is kind of a bad argument because lockpicks are legal in most of the US (and most relevantly they are legal in CA).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Because that way we can punish people after the fact. Also laws supposedly act as deterrents. Trab already covered the background checks for ammo catching some people who slipped through the cracks on the background check when buying guns, but I wanted to address the other half of your post, about people murdering their spouse (or committing suicide). These things are often impulse decisions, and if we make it less convenient to go buy some extra ammo, it can give people the time they need to cool off and work through their problem in a less violent manner. Now, sure, some people will already have the ammo they need at home and won't need to go buy more before they kill their wives/their neighbors/themselves, but not everyone will. This legislation will save lives, and I don't really think it's so onerous to most gun owners as to not be worth that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
So what would effective gun control legislation look like? If there's already an effortpost or an article on this somewhere feel free to just quote that post or point me to the article or whatever. I've often heard the argument from gun people that there could be better legislation if politicians knew more about guns, but I've never actually heard what that better legislation would be.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
drat, that sucks. The USA has been boycotting sovereign nations since before its founding, and boycotts were a major force against the South African apartheid. Now Israel has its own apartheid, and California says boycotting that is a step too far.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Artificer posted:Anyone have thoughts on this site? http://ballot.fyi/ For what it's worth, KQED's California proposition site seems pretty decent. edit: There's no substitute for ballotpedia though. Also yeah the site you linked is pretty far from "nonpartisan". VikingofRock fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Oct 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
I'm voting Clinton because I think she's legitimately the best candidate on the ballot by a pretty wide margin. Also the Democrats this year have a very progressive platform (by Democratic standards), and Hillary's platform in particular has a lot of good stuff in it, and I think voting for them now that they have moved left encourages them to continue moving left.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Well if you're going to have fun voting third party, how's Peace And Freedom? They seem decent from a cursory glance, but with that kind of nanoparty you never know if they have some completely awful view that you've just happened to miss.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:Anyone have a good writeup on prop 57, I'm having a hard time with this one. Vote yes. https://lwvc.org/vote/elections/ballot-recommendations/prop-57-public-safety-and-rehabilitation-act http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-end-proposition-57-20161004-snap-story.html http://www.peterates.com/props-1116.shtml#prop57
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Xaris posted:The main problem with CRV in California (and other states) is that you basically have to drive to the podunk outskirts of town to a recycling center, and often wait in a long smelly line just to get your return. This means you usually have to stockpile a lot of cans to make it even worthwhile to make that trip, and many people do not have room to stockpile a bunch of cans and then dedicate the time to go out for that long trip. Effectively it is just sort of an extra tax on the average person and most people will just opt to throw it in their recycling dumpster instead since it's still not quite worth the while unless you're literally unemployed or have a big yard to keep a giant garbage can full of cans. I recently tried to cash in the beer bottles left at my house after a Halloween party, and I made four separate trips to the town's recycling center. I was told on the first trip that the hours listed for the recycling center online were wrong and it was closed, on the second trip that the recycling center decided to close early that day, on the third trip that they weren't accepting bottles that day, and on the fourth trip that the line was well over an hour long. After all that I just decided that it wasn't worth the $7.50 or whatever I was going to get from the recycling center so I just threw the ~150 bottles in the recycling bin. I couldn't believe how annoying the whole process was.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Yeah something tells me succeeding from the union won't go as smoothly as you guys think. It could, especially if Scotland successfully secedes first to show people how modern secession is done. No one wants a war with California, and the Republicans probably want California to secede anyways since it gives them a very solid electoral map even when demographic shifts would otherwise catch up to them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
I personally think it would be pretty awesome if California's healthcare system was so good that sick people from across the country moved here to use it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
CPColin posted:My girlfriend and I went to the rally in downtown San Luis Obispo. Our chief of police gave a quick speech at the start that we could barely hear, but was apparently stressing that they are not our enemy and just want everybody to be safe. Nice. One thing that I've been very happy with is authority figures in CA standing up and explicitly taking the anti-hate side. I got emails from Janet Napolitano, George Blumenthal (Chancellor of UCSC), and the local graduate student administration all saying that Trump does not reflect the values of their organizations nor the values of Californians. quote:Lots of "Not our president" chants that we didn't join in on, because he'll be it, like it or not. I think this chant is more about Trump not being "their president" as in he is not the president that they personally elected, nor is he a president who reflects their values. Obviously he soon will actually be the president of the USA.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
It just occurred to me that if we do #Calexit we might get the President Brown and California nationalism that Jello Biafra promised us.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:Snakes too, or so I've been led to believe. That flag kicks rear end.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The California Condor is the correct symbol of California. This post is perfect.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Sydin posted:No idea what the laws are around states launching their own sattelites, but California certainly has the money and manpower to do it if they really wanted to. As much as I would love a full-fledged CA space program, my guess is that the more likely option would be CA providing some funding to support current satellites and to subcontract future launches out to SpaceX.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
So one thing that is occasionally brought up when discussing California standing up to the federal government is the federal government cutting off highway funding to California. How feasible would it be for California to supply that funding itself? I feel as though a temporary tax increase in order to fund our state in spite of the feds could pass if it was sold to the voters well. And if California could supply its own highway funding, what else could the federal government do to dick over California and could we deal with those things as well?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 09:28
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Though, yes, we'll probably be doing everything in our power to give them reasons to hate us more over the next four+ years, too. Hallelujah 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2017 10:37
|
|
|
TheDon01 posted:Dunno if this is the correct thread for it, but it's the closest I could find on the first couple pages of DnD. I think this thread is a fine place to ask this, but you might also want to try a thread in the new race subforum of D&D. Specifically the new racial history thread might be interested in it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:Ahem its two point five buck chuck thank you very much "Upchuck"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
Universities have a duty to protect their students. Milo is a threat to the students, having bullied a trans student until she was forced to drop out, and because of this Universities should not allow him to visit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
Edit: on second thought, this post was kind of rambling and stupid.
VikingofRock fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Feb 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 11:19
|
|
|
I don't really buy the argument that California seceding would lead to civil war. There is not nearly as much ill-will between CA and the rest of the US as there was between the South and the North. There's nothing as divisive or horrible as slavery, there's no bleeding Kansas, there's no John Brown, etc. And secession without civil war is not exactly unheard of nowadays--Scotland almost did it a few years ago, and no one was thinking that the UK would invade them if they left. If California voted to secede the Republicans would have a choice between letting them go, and thus ensuring Republican dominance for at least another generation, or fighting a possibly-extremely-bloody civil war for no real benefit. I have a hard time thinking they would choose the latter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
Litany Unheard posted:Losing one-eighth of your tax base seems like something most nations would fight pretty hard to prevent. I mean, Scotland is 1/12th of the UK's GDP. It's not like that is orders of magnitude different. And a civil war would definitely be much, much worse for the US economy than letting California leave in peace.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
Necroskowitz posted:Watch out folks, Nigel is coming for us. Why would any Democratic Californian vote for that split? If I'm reading this right, it basically creates a new red state, while not significantly decreasing California's population (which is the source of California's electoral underrepresentation). Plus it's not like the red inland parts of the state are dragging down the rest of CA, since we have a Dem supermajority in both houses.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:Fresno itself is terrorism but i dont see anyone tripping over themselves to do anything about it. Did some new info come out or something? I thought the police had been pretty adamant in saying it wasn't terrorism, just a guy off his meds.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:you misunderstand - Fresno the city is an act of civic terrorism Oh gotcha. Somehow my eyes just skipped right over the word "itself" in your post.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Looks like we are one step closer to single payer. There are still a lot of unanswered questions though.The LA Times posted:A sweeping measure that would establish government-run universal healthcare in California cleared its first legislative hurdle Wednesday as scores of supporters crammed into the Capitol to advocate for a single-payer system.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:My rep Ken Calvert is a real piece of poo poo with a quickly growing Hispanic constituency but he still won 2016 by 17 points :/ Good. If Kansas 4 or Georgia 6 are any indication, that puts him right within striking distance of replacement.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Just called my rep (Bill Monning) about SB 562, which was actually my first time calling a political office. I feel pretty good about it! It only took a second, too. http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:To be fair, that's like, every public facing city employee (and occasionally members of the Board of Supervisors.) Agreed. Those people should all be paid extremely well, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 08:24
|
|
|
CPColin posted:For reference, Governor Jerry just signed this guy and moved the presidential primary up to March: Hell yeah! This is great news. Agreed w/r/t ranked choice, or my personal favorite: approval voting. Also, I don't think any federal-level election (including primaries) should be winner-take-all, and instead delegates should be awarded proportionally for each state. But this is an excellent (if small) step towards making things better.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Thoughts on the new 12 cents/gallon gas tax going into effect tomorrow? On the one hand $5+ billion in additional revenue for transport infrastructure is much needed and it's nice that some of that money is earmarked for local towns to use for their own infrastructure. On the other hand though it feels regressive as gently caress; the only group that's going to feel the squeeze are poor earners who have to commute for work. Yeah it's super regressive, especially in California where the poor commute 1.5 hours each way and the rich walk to work (or work from home). The extra money is definitely a good thing, but it's an awful way to pay for it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
Xaris posted:I somewhat disagree. I'm against sales-tax and obviously best thing to do is repeal Prop 13. But Bay Bridge toll is going up $6 to $9, should it even have a toll because that's regressive? Infact should all bridges be free just because it's regressive? Should alcohol tax be abolished (perhaps it should) because it's super regressive? Should weed not be taxed when it's finalized sold legally? I'd personally answer yes to all of these (and additionally think we shouldn't tax cigarettes), but in the case of alcohol, weed, and cigarettes I can at least understand wanting to try to control people's behavior via taxes. In the case of gas taxes though, it is often very difficult for the poor (or shrinking middle class) to reduce their driving significantly since public transit is such a mess in CA and they need to get to work and they can't afford to move closer to work. So I don't think this is likely to reduce driving much, and will instead just disproportionately tax the poor and middle classes. If it comes out that this actually does decrease driving significantly, I'll still grumble that it's regressive but won't find it nearly as distasteful as a whole.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Cascadia thread is that way You got me all excited; I thought there really was a Cascadia thread.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 03:34 |
|
|
Cross-posting from the state and local politics thread: Sacramento's mayor is extremely  https://twitter.com/Mayor_Steinberg/status/948988941364965376
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2018 22:47
|
|