Breakdown In Civil Order

[Elixir]

Based on these data, it does not appear that the Marxist shit-hole states have crime rates as high as the Trumpist utopias.

That’s not a bug, it’s a feature of the Trumpist utopia. If only the Criminal in Chief was still in charge!

 

[steve_bank]

In the 90s China had a serious corruption problem. For a while they were executing officials by firing squad.

 

[Copernicus]

How does this Californian law create more options? More freedom to choose?

Maybe the difficulty you and I are having is that we Hoosiers aren't so mind numbingly stupid that we'll pay extra to buy a child's toothbrush from a particular aisle at a store.

Californians seem to need the government to point out how to be a competent shopper.

Maybe it's something else. Feel free to explain. Why did Californians pass a law requiring retailers to direct shoppers in a way that Hoosier shoppers took for granted?
Tom

The issue with the separated goods is hiding the lower priced goods away from the customers they think will pay the higher price. Stores always like to do that and apparently California put a stop to one form of doing so.

So far, I get the point about children's toys not being separated by gender, but I'm not sure that the law applies to clothing. Men and women's clothes can be different in style, and women's prices are almost always higher than men's prices for comparable items. For example, my wife and I shop for sweat pants, but the men's sweat pants tend to have pockets and drawstrings. The same brand sells women's sweat pants without the pockets or drawstrings (just elastic waste bands), but at a higher price. Otherwise they look the same. She buys the men's products (in a separate section of the store) for herself, because they fit and she has a slim enough waste that she needs the drawstring even for the women's sizes. I'm not sure that the law would really help in this case, if it did apply, because differing styles for men and women usually make it inconvenient not to separate by gender. The same goes for shoes. Women's shoes may be an aisle over, but they are always segregated from men's shoes because of differing styles. It might be nice to have a third unisex aisle when the styles don't differ, but I understand why retailers want to take advantage of the differing price structure for men's and women's clothing. It's to their advantage to be able to charge one gender more than the other.

 

[Jarhyn]

How does this Californian law create more options? More freedom to choose?

Maybe the difficulty you and I are having is that we Hoosiers aren't so mind numbingly stupid that we'll pay extra to buy a child's toothbrush from a particular aisle at a store.

Californians seem to need the government to point out how to be a competent shopper.

Maybe it's something else. Feel free to explain. Why did Californians pass a law requiring retailers to direct shoppers in a way that Hoosier shoppers took for granted?
Tom

The issue with the separated goods is hiding the lower priced goods away from the customers they think will pay the higher price. Stores always like to do that and apparently California put a stop to one form of doing so.

So far, I get the point about children's toys not being separated by gender, but I'm not sure that the law applies to clothing. Men and women's clothes can be different in style, and women's prices are almost always higher than men's prices for comparable items. For example, my wife and I shop for sweat pants, but the men's sweat pants tend to have pockets and drawstrings. The same brand sells women's sweat pants without the pockets or drawstrings (just elastic waste bands), but at a higher price. Otherwise they look the same. She buys the men's products (in a separate section of the store) for herself, because they fit and she has a slim enough waste that she needs the drawstring even for the women's sizes. I'm not sure that the law would really help in this case, if it did apply, because differing styles for men and women usually make it inconvenient not to separate by gender. The same goes for shoes. Women's shoes may be an aisle over, but they are always segregated from men's shoes because of differing styles. It might be nice to have a third unisex aisle when the styles don't differ, but I understand why retailers want to take advantage of the differing price structure for men's and women's clothing. It's to their advantage to be able to charge one gender more than the other.

Maybe this will actually lead to the sales of pocketless pants declining to the point where they cut that shit out.

 

[Politesse]

How does this Californian law create more options? More freedom to choose?

Maybe the difficulty you and I are having is that we Hoosiers aren't so mind numbingly stupid that we'll pay extra to buy a child's toothbrush from a particular aisle at a store.

Californians seem to need the government to point out how to be a competent shopper.

Maybe it's something else. Feel free to explain. Why did Californians pass a law requiring retailers to direct shoppers in a way that Hoosier shoppers took for granted?
Tom

The issue with the separated goods is hiding the lower priced goods away from the customers they think will pay the higher price. Stores always like to do that and apparently California put a stop to one form of doing so.

So far, I get the point about children's toys not being separated by gender, but I'm not sure that the law applies to clothing. Men and women's clothes can be different in style, and women's prices are almost always higher than men's prices for comparable items. For example, my wife and I shop for sweat pants, but the men's sweat pants tend to have pockets and drawstrings. The same brand sells women's sweat pants without the pockets or drawstrings (just elastic waste bands), but at a higher price. Otherwise they look the same. She buys the men's products (in a separate section of the store) for herself, because they fit and she has a slim enough waste that she needs the drawstring even for the women's sizes. I'm not sure that the law would really help in this case, if it did apply, because differing styles for men and women usually make it inconvenient not to separate by gender. The same goes for shoes. Women's shoes may be an aisle over, but they are always segregated from men's shoes because of differing styles. It might be nice to have a third unisex aisle when the styles don't differ, but I understand why retailers want to take advantage of the differing price structure for men's and women's clothing. It's to their advantage to be able to charge one gender more than the other.

Indeed that is the very reason, or at least justification, that clothing wasn't included in this third and final version of the bill. Personally, it seems implausible to me that the same factors would apply to both child and adult clothes, though. My mom made identical rompers for all of us kids, when we were little; why couldn't the Baby GAP? And the bill never addressed adult buys in any of its versions, I don't think.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In the 90s China had a serious corruption problem. For a while they were executing officials by firing squad.

They still have quite a corruption problem, although probably not as bad as it was then.

 

[Hermit]

Starbucks closing stores in LA

Yes, and everywhere else as well. To ignore that is misleading.

Starbucks has closed well over a thousand shops between autumn 2020 and now. 90% of the closures did not take place in California. Hundreds more closures are in the pipeline. Hardly any of them are shut due to safety concerns and obviously only a fraction of those that have been or will be shut down for that reason are located in that state. So, why all those closures? The pandemic definitely made a number of the stores unviable, but the principal reason is that Starbucks is repositioning itself.

The company is expanding into new markets as we speak. Starbucks has opted to mix things up a bit. Instead of closing stores and reducing its audience, the company plans to build new ones.

It is mostly in the form of drive-thrus or grab-and-go restaurants. The corporation claims that superior operating models at other sites will compensate for the shop closures.

It is important to know that this decision isn’t based on how well this store is selling or its effectiveness. It is based on how customers want it to be. They want to order online and pick it up at the store or have it delivered. So that’s what Starbucks is doing.

(Full article here.)

 

[Politesse]

Frankly, if the Starbucks down the street a few blocks from my apartment here in Fremont (lovingly nestled between a strip mall, a homeless navigation center, and a low rent neighborhood stretched along a railroad track and thus perenially beset with roving gang scuffles) is safe enough to keep open, but the Starbucks location in the plaza of the Doubletree Hotel on 1st Street in LA is so dangerously beset by criminal underlife that it must be immediately closed for the sake of its employees.... Well, I would certainly be curious to see what objective rubric was used to assess criminality and risk. I'm sure the fact that the latter Starbucks is a block away from city hall and a frequent haunt of city employees and visitors has... nothing to do with why it needed to be immediately shuttered (betcha another one will open somewhere within a three block radius within a year). Indeed, there's already another one less than a block away from the one which is closing, spacious, with a fetching outdoor patio. You'd think people would be too scared to sit out there, what with the rampant crime and all.



Pictured: one of the 6th most dangerous coffeeshops on the mean streets of Los Angeles. I am shivering with fear just looking at it, man.

 

[Politesse]

Some chilling reviews from the yelp page of the 6th most dangerous Starbucks in central LA:

"At 4:11 pm, april 7th two men working the bar at this location were very rude at 1st and Los Angeles st I don’t remember receiving an apology for my wait or a sorry for the inconvenience or any kind of customer service skills When asked to show proof of my drink order I was asked in a rude tone"

Those bastards! Probably the mafia.

"A nice ambiance, but this is apparently supposed to be an iced coffee? Literally 90% milk. I’m not one to write reviews (not sure I ever have) but this is a total ripoff."

I bet they poisoned it, too! Not just for the lactose intolerant, either.

"This coffee shop was suggested by a friend from college whose son goes to school in the city. We're so happy she did it. A specialty coffee and either biscotti or a cookie were enjoyed by each of us. We are impressed at how well their order pickup process works and not much waiting space, but the crowdedness is a sign of their successful business. We're probably going back here!"

This one sounds good on the face of it, but listen to the part about crowdedness! Clearly they are being mobbed by the masses, it's lucky no one suffocated.

"Best service ever from the baristas specifically Matt"

Matt is probably dead by now.

"Great and friendly staff! Been here several times during our stay at the Doubletree by Hilton. There was a homeless guy one time inside and asking customers to buy him food. They definitely need to do something about that as some customers looked uncomfortable with him around. Otherwise, the place was great!"

They gave it five stars anyway, but you can almost smell their cold fear at having encountered a homeless person once.

"Clean and friendly, the service was fast, efficient and polite. It was relatively busy, being early in the morning, but the staff worked as a team, we're smiling and generally positive. Awesome "

Sounds like leftist brainwashing to me. No one is that happy to be a barista.

"This Starbucks joint has a pleasantly secluded vibe, and even though it's relatively small in size, it's always easy to find a seat here and the environment makes you want to sit and hang out for several hours at a time. Regular customers of this particular coffee shop will find that every member of the staff is incredibly friendly and are good at what they do. The absence of a restroom is perhaps the only negative aspect of this Starbucks, but its Google Wi-Fi service is easily the fastest out of all Starbucks outlets I've ever been to in Los Angeles, or anywhere for that matter. This is by far my favorite Starbucks."

That guy must be actually working for the mob, that's why he claims to like the place so much. He's trying to lure us in to his den of crime and iniquity.

Overall, the place has four and a half stars. Normally, you'd think that was pretty good for a Starbucks of all places, but you have to wonder, why a half star short of perfect? Is it the murders? The graffiti? The human feces in the plaza? There is no way to answer these questions except paranoid, highly emotional speculation.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

 

[Swammerdami]

The Atlantic has an interesting article blaming rising crime rates and other recent justice-system flaws on the response to pandemic.

 

[thebeave]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

Alright, good job Jimmy. I'll send a mass email to all 700 CEOs to let them know we have great leadership in this state, and they are simply misguided "conservatives", and to seek counsel from Jimmy H. in Ohio if they want to know the true story. Is there a daytime phone number you can provide in case there are questions?

Seriously, California established itself with a high GDP and supporting infrastructure under more favorable past conditions. The state is well suited geographically and climate wise for high GDP output. Major sea ports and international airports in both Northern and Southern California, moderate climate and prime agriciultural land in the Central Valley. Home of top notch universities like UCLA and Berkeley (the whole UC and Cal State system for that matter), Stanford, USC, etc. to provide research and an educated workforce. In theory, as a business, you'd have to go out of your way to go wrong in this state. Yet businesses are fleeing the state mostly due to state government imposed taxes and regulations. I wonder at what point we start spiraling down from #5 GDP output towards the bottom:

Businesses Are Fleeing California Along With Its Residents, And President Biden Should Pay Attention

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

Alright, good job Jimmy. I'll send a mass email to all 700 CEOs to let them know we have great leadership in this state, and they are simply misguided "conservatives", and to seek counsel from Jimmy H. in Ohio if they want to know the true story. Is there a daytime phone number you can provide in case there are questions?

I know, I know, I should know better than to question a survey posted on a website called ChiefExecutive.Net. They have a survey and every CEO in the US (apparently 700) say boo.

Seriously, California established itself with a high GDP and supporting infrastructure under more favorable past conditions. The state is well suited geographically and climate wise for high GDP output. Major sea ports and international airports in both Northern and Southern California, moderate climate and prime agriciultural land in the Central Valley. Home of top notch universities like UCLA and Berkeley (the whole UC and Cal State system for that matter), Stanford, USC, etc. to provide research and an educated workforce. In theory, as a business, you'd have to go out of your way to go wrong in this state. Yet businesses are fleeing the state mostly due to state government imposed taxes and regulations. I wonder at what point we start spiraling down from #5 GDP output towards the bottom:

What a bunch of idiots... charging taxes to pay for the infrastructure you mentioned earlier in the same post. At some point CA will definitely spiral down the drain, but the growth of the last 40 years seems to imply that is still off in the future. Democrat failure!

 

[thebeave]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

Alright, good job Jimmy. I'll send a mass email to all 700 CEOs to let them know we have great leadership in this state, and they are simply misguided "conservatives", and to seek counsel from Jimmy H. in Ohio if they want to know the true story. Is there a daytime phone number you can provide in case there are questions?

I know, I know, I should know better than to question a survey posted on a website called ChiefExecutive.Net. They have a survey and every CEO in the US (apparently 700) say boo.

Seriously, California established itself with a high GDP and supporting infrastructure under more favorable past conditions. The state is well suited geographically and climate wise for high GDP output. Major sea ports and international airports in both Northern and Southern California, moderate climate and prime agriciultural land in the Central Valley. Home of top notch universities like UCLA and Berkeley (the whole UC and Cal State system for that matter), Stanford, USC, etc. to provide research and an educated workforce. In theory, as a business, you'd have to go out of your way to go wrong in this state. Yet businesses are fleeing the state mostly due to state government imposed taxes and regulations. I wonder at what point we start spiraling down from #5 GDP output towards the bottom:

What a bunch of idiots... charging taxes to pay for the infrastructure you mentioned earlier in the same post. At some point CA will definitely spiral down the drain, but the growth of the last 40 years seems to imply that is still off in the future. Democrat failure!

There are various other surveys other than the CEO one, with metrics and objective criteria. You'd likely find they don't rank CA #50, but it would be rare to find CA outside the bottom third of the states. Still, that's pretty sad, don't you think?

 

[Hermit]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

Alright, good job Jimmy. I'll send a mass email to all 700 CEOs to let them know we have great leadership in this state, and they are simply misguided "conservatives", and to seek counsel from Jimmy H. in Ohio if they want to know the true story. Is there a daytime phone number you can provide in case there are questions?

Seriously, California established itself with a high GDP and supporting infrastructure under more favorable past conditions. The state is well suited geographically and climate wise for high GDP output. Major sea ports and international airports in both Northern and Southern California, moderate climate and prime agriciultural land in the Central Valley. Home of top notch universities like UCLA and Berkeley (the whole UC and Cal State system for that matter), Stanford, USC, etc. to provide research and an educated workforce. In theory, as a business, you'd have to go out of your way to go wrong in this state. Yet businesses are fleeing the state mostly due to state government imposed taxes and regulations. I wonder at what point we start spiraling down from #5 GDP output towards the bottom:

Businesses Are Fleeing California Along With Its Residents, And President Biden Should Pay Attention

And yet California keeps outperforming the US as a nation in terms of GDP growth. It does better than Texas and Florida too.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes. This is the democrat leadership I am talking about. Imagine how much further along California would be if we weren't #50 (dead last) in the best states to do business in the US:

The 2020 Best & Worst States For Business

The pandemic cratered economic development for now, but it hasn’t changed CEOs’ opinions about three important things: Texas remains the best place in America to do business, in their eyes; having a capable workforce is still their top concern, despite now-record unemployment; and states’ “blue” political leanings concern them—except when they don’t.

Welcome to Chief Executive’s annual “Best & Worst States for Business” survey, Covid edition. Once again, for the 16th year out of the 16 years we have conducted our poll, Texas ranks No. 1. Despite the shutdown of much of its oil industry by the coronavirus recession, the state retains extremely business-friendly characteristics and policies. The rest of the top 10 states also remained essentially unchanged from the 2019 rankings. Similarly, the bottom 10 in the rankings were relatively frozen, with California once again in last place. (See the full list.)

5th largest GDP in world... a failure of leadership.

Alright, good job Jimmy. I'll send a mass email to all 700 CEOs to let them know we have great leadership in this state, and they are simply misguided "conservatives", and to seek counsel from Jimmy H. in Ohio if they want to know the true story. Is there a daytime phone number you can provide in case there are questions?

I know, I know, I should know better than to question a survey posted on a website called ChiefExecutive.Net. They have a survey and every CEO in the US (apparently 700) say boo.

Seriously, California established itself with a high GDP and supporting infrastructure under more favorable past conditions. The state is well suited geographically and climate wise for high GDP output. Major sea ports and international airports in both Northern and Southern California, moderate climate and prime agriciultural land in the Central Valley. Home of top notch universities like UCLA and Berkeley (the whole UC and Cal State system for that matter), Stanford, USC, etc. to provide research and an educated workforce. In theory, as a business, you'd have to go out of your way to go wrong in this state. Yet businesses are fleeing the state mostly due to state government imposed taxes and regulations. I wonder at what point we start spiraling down from #5 GDP output towards the bottom:

What a bunch of idiots... charging taxes to pay for the infrastructure you mentioned earlier in the same post. At some point CA will definitely spiral down the drain, but the growth of the last 40 years seems to imply that is still off in the future. Democrat failure!

There are various other surveys other than the CEO one, with metrics and objective criteria. You'd likely find they don't rank CA #50, but it would be rare to find CA outside the bottom third of the states. Still, that's pretty sad, don't you think?

I'm just glad you are able to communicate with us outsiders, based on the hell it is in California. I can only imagine you are capable of communicating via Satellite internet.

That survey is quite something. New York, California, and Illinois, the three worst states for "CEOs" to do business in. They also seem to be the three states where the some of the most business is done.

According to this, New York, California, and Illinois, 3rd, 1st, 5th respectively in overall GDP. Per capita, they rank 1st, 4th, and 10th.

Per Capita, Florida is ranked 37th in the US. No wonder it is great to do business there. They are desperate for it! Texas isn't so bad, at 20th.

So what were you saying?

 

[Hermit]

There are various other surveys other than the CEO one, with metrics and objective criteria. You'd likely find they don't rank CA #50, but it would be rare to find CA outside the bottom third of the states. Still, that's pretty sad, don't you think?

We're talking about the economy, right? In terms of GDP growth (2020:Q4 - 2021:Q4) California ranks third with 8.0%. Hawaii is #1 with 8.8%, followed by Nevada with 8.2. The three tailenders are West Virginia (1.7%), Nebraska (1.1%) and Alaska (0.0%). (Forbes)

 

[Politesse]

There are various other surveys other than the CEO one, with metrics and objective criteria. You'd likely find they don't rank CA #50, but it would be rare to find CA outside the bottom third of the states. Still, that's pretty sad, don't you think?

And yet, everyone wants to do business here, despite the bitching.

Even companies that "move" are happy to still operate here, take our money, recruit from our schools, ship from our ports, and otherwise very obviously continue to be here wherever their tax guys might claim they are headquartered at the moment. Guys like Elon Musk like to make headlines crying about how impossible it is to do business in California, but he's (1) still making bank off of us, and (2) still running south Fremont as an ersatz company town, along with maintaining many other facilities around the San Jose metro and beyond.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is a bit silly. CEOs hate doing business in the states they do business in... therefore... it doesn't count. And Texas rules!

I mean I look at Ohio, where the GOP has been cutting taxes and services, and the jobs ain't coming. Even the right-wing JobsOhio thing that seemed more rife for potential abuse hasn't done particularly well, spending around $7k per job allegedly it helped get to the state. Ohio has a permanent rust belt, and now that the fracking boom is gone, that short spell of deruster is gone in Youngstown.

How much did Ohio have to pay to keep the sports teams, Sherwin Williams, Goodyear/Firesteone, and the like? Amazon owned warehouses, but that is much more about geography and Ohio's centered distance to lots of population.

 

[atrib]

The outreach teams are useless.

What alternative strategy would you propose?

Round up all the homeless people and place them in "re-education camps", where they will be tuaght new skills like breaking rocks, and we, the regular people, never have to be confronted by them again.