California Doing California Things

[Jason Harvestdancer]

“Homeless” numbers increased in Los Angeles.

With The Felon in office what do you expect?

The Republican mantra is blame everything on Democrats. Do not solve problems, do not permit problems to be solved.

Since Los Angeles California is run and managed by a monopoly of Democrats......who else should the Republicans be blaming for this problem??? WTF does Trump have to do with California?

I could see your point if democracy was really practiced in L.A. But it is 1 party monopoly rule from the governor all the way down to the dog catcher.

And the solution to this problem is obvious. Just allow the already rich to build more homes! No need for local government to spend money or graft more money to their friends. All they need to do is leave people alone long enough to build more homes. That way all the real estate becomes cheaper until the homeless can afford shelter. But true democrats can't leave people alone and let people build more homes.

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

Seems to me the Libertarian position should be that people should be allowed to live in camp sites on public property.

On what property exactly? Look carefully at what you wrote.

 

[TomC]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

I'm referring to Governor Reagan, because he did other things before he became President.

 

[ZiprHead]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

I'm referring to Governor Reagan, because he did other things before he became President.

What did he do that you are referring to?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

I'm referring to Governor Reagan, because he did other things before he became President.

What did he do that you are referring to?

 Governorship_of_Ronald_Reagan#Mental_health_care

 

[ZiprHead]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

I'm referring to Governor Reagan, because he did other things before he became President.

What did he do that you are referring to?

 Governorship_of_Ronald_Reagan#Mental_health_care

That's not defending your case that "The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan" doesn't absolve Reagan the blame for closing inpatient mental health facilities. In fact it reinforces the point.

 

[TSwizzle]

Newsom really has lost the plot.

 

[Politesse]

He's 100% correct. You're all fucking traitors. You sold out our Constitution and our American way of life, and for what? To grab a brief moment of power that will immediately slip out of your grasp the second Trump is gone, because it was never legitimate or legal, and illegitimate power is fleeting by nature. You'll start fighting each other, while the rest of us fight to take back our country. I look forward to decades of alligator tears from everyone who hitched their wagon to this old nag.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

“Homeless” numbers increased in Los Angeles.

With The Felon in office what do you expect?

The Republican mantra is blame everything on Democrats. Do not solve problems, do not permit problems to be solved.

Since Los Angeles California is run and managed by a monopoly of Democrats......who else should the Republicans be blaming for this problem??? WTF does Trump have to do with California?

I could see your point if democracy was really practiced in L.A. But it is 1 party monopoly rule from the governor all the way down to the dog catcher.

You're assuming the count is honest.

And the solution to this problem is obvious. Just allow the already rich to build more homes! No need for local government to spend money or graft more money to their friends. All they need to do is leave people alone long enough to build more homes. That way all the real estate becomes cheaper until the homeless can afford shelter. But true democrats can't leave people alone and let people build more homes.

No, because land is a big limiting factor.

Build smaller? There are high fixed costs from building. The reality is that in a market with a high fixed cost and lower costs for improvements the market will strongly favor the options with more improvements. I grew up in a perfectly good for it's time middle class house. Looking at the market around here there's nothing that small being built. Nobody would buy it.

Build taller? The reality is the price per square foot for a building goes up as you make it taller. The costs of going vertical exceed the space gained. (Note that single family two story dwellings do not follow this pattern as the fire codes get much more strict in multi-family buildings.)

 

[Emily Lake]

Almost 25 years after the 9/11 jihad attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, California is about declare a couple of holidays for the death cult.

California could soon formally recognize two of Islam’s most important holy days under legislation that would give state workers greater flexibility to take them off and allow public schools to close in observance of the holidays. The measure, which overwhelmingly passed the state Assembly and is awaiting Senate action, would recognize Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha in state law and could soon head to Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.

Incredible.

Freedom of religion used to be considered an American virtue.

So did separation of church and state

 

[Emily Lake]

We recognize quite a few Christian holidays.

Not really. We get christmas... but it's really not a business and state holiday because of religious observance, but because it's a cultural tradition.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Who are you kidding? The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan for closing mental hospitals in the 1960s. It is almost as if it is easier to blame someone than to do something.

The 60s? Was Reagan in office in the 60s?
I believe that you are referring to the 80s.

President Reagan closed nearly all mental hospitals. He claimed he was going to save a bunch of taxpayer money by "liberating" the patients. Other people pointed out that it would result in big increases in drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness, and crime.

Guess who was correct?
It wasn't Reagan.
Tom

I'm referring to Governor Reagan, because he did other things before he became President.

What did he do that you are referring to?

 Governorship_of_Ronald_Reagan#Mental_health_care

That's not defending your case that "The Democrats, who have had monopoly rule for over a decade, and majority rule for decades more, still blame Reagan" doesn't absolve Reagan the blame for closing inpatient mental health facilities. In fact it reinforces the point.

I am not here defending Reagan, so you think I am "not defending [my] case". I am here pointing out that what Reagan did could have been reversed easily over the last few decades and didn't.

 

[Emily Lake]

As for whether "all" or "none" are a better option, I personally would be fine with either, but if it is "none" then it needs to be a true none. If it is supposedly because of religious freedom and the Constitutional protections thereof that various religious holidays of Pagan faiths must not be recognized, then Christmas and Thanksgiving have also got to go. Since the odds of that happening are somewhere between 0 and -100 (US conservatives already think there is a "war on Christmas" and waste millions of dollars trying to fight said war in commerce, charity, society, and law) I do not support banning other religions from having their holidays likewise recognized. If they think they can attract the votes necessary to do so, there's no reason they shouldn't try. The current situation, in which Christianity is the only faith routinely endorsed and invoked by the state, is not coherent with our supposed values of freedom of religion and governmental non-partisanship.

Thanksgiving isn't a religious holiday.

Christmas in the US is damned near a secular tradition as it stands. And almost universally, public entities don't specifically refer to it as christmas anyway, but rather say "happy holidays" or refer to it as "winter holiday".

 

[Emily Lake]

So you oppose social health

What exactly is "social health"?

 

[Emily Lake]

Seems to me the Libertarian position should be that people should be allowed to live in camp sites on public property.

You think the libertarian position is that the commons can be taken over and used privately without the accountability of ownership?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Seems to me the Libertarian position should be that people should be allowed to live in camp sites on public property.

You think the libertarian position is that the commons can be taken over and used privately without the accountability of ownership?

I tried asking him a similar question about that statement. He didn't answer, proving I don't answer questions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Hunter-gatherer is not viable in most modern ecosystems.

Foraged goods are a part of many anthropogenic landscapes even in the modern world. I think what you're trying to say is that it is not possible for the population of, say, a modern metropolis to survive solely off of gathered food. This is true. But rarely are we talking about thousands let alone of people trying to live only in such a fashion. Occasional hunting, fishing, logging, and wild gathering are an important part of life for many people, be they homeless, impoverished, or just inclined to take food and material collection into their own hands, and rarely do they make such an impact on the environment that the government has to intervene. In general, both we and our landscapes would benefit if there were more use of natural resources over industrially produced ones. Periodic hunting of deer, in season, does not cause ecosystemic malfunction, but actually prevents it. Fishing can be a problem, but again, it's rarely if ever individuals throwing a line off the local pier of a weekend who are the greatest threat to our fisheries - that's be environmental degradation, stream pollutants, and overfishing by commercial fleets.

Keyword: "periodic". Most ecosystems can tolerate some harvesting. Most ecosystems can not tolerate year round harvesting.

Depends on what you include in harvesting. Predator species, for example, do an excellent job of helping to maintain ecological balance and a healthy environment. Wolves and mountain cats prey on species year round, for example.

What is detrimental is the commercial harvest of natural resources. And what is also detrimental is humans not being willing to live with the fact that some destructive forces ( fires, floods, predation by predator species) are part of nature and part of the cycle that keeps an ecological system healthy and functioning.

Around here the cats don't stay put, they follow the seasons up and down.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Jewish population is over 3% (which is still small overall, though) and has more holy days that I can remember or keep track of, and they get...nothing.

That's due to anti-Semitism, and is not a good thing. Why would you think it is?

Why would I think what is? I'm not sure what you're asking.

It certainly has the appearance of anti-Semitism. It would be interesting to see if a bill to have the state recognize a Jewish holiday would make it through the state legislature. If not, that would be the nail in the coffin. I just find it annoying how progressives beat their chest constantly about how bigoted "the other" is and how they stand on the moral high ground, when their words and actions tell a different story.

Okay, I am actually confused. I thought you were arguing that neither Hannukah nor Eid should be recognized. Are you arguing that all of the above holidays should be? If so I agree, and I think nearly all so-called "Progressives" would as well.

My issue is the seeming preference of CA of one religion over the other. Either do both, or none. My preference (by a long shot) is do none. There are too many religions to try to make everyone happy, and our government should stay secular and keep out of the religion business. Maybe we were just talking past each other, but it sounds like we are in agreement here.

Or do it on a basis of you get X holy days per year. You decide where to use them, but it must be decided far in advance for scheduling purposes.

 

[RVonse]

“Homeless” numbers increased in Los Angeles.

With The Felon in office what do you expect?

The Republican mantra is blame everything on Democrats. Do not solve problems, do not permit problems to be solved.

Since Los Angeles California is run and managed by a monopoly of Democrats......who else should the Republicans be blaming for this problem??? WTF does Trump have to do with California?

I could see your point if democracy was really practiced in L.A. But it is 1 party monopoly rule from the governor all the way down to the dog catcher.

You're assuming the count is honest.

And the solution to this problem is obvious. Just allow the already rich to build more homes! No need for local government to spend money or graft more money to their friends. All they need to do is leave people alone long enough to build more homes. That way all the real estate becomes cheaper until the homeless can afford shelter. But true democrats can't leave people alone and let people build more homes.

No, because land is a big limiting factor.

Build smaller? There are high fixed costs from building. The reality is that in a market with a high fixed cost and lower costs for improvements the market will strongly favor the options with more improvements. I grew up in a perfectly good for it's time middle class house. Looking at the market around here there's nothing that small being built. Nobody would buy it.

Build taller? The reality is the price per square foot for a building goes up as you make it taller. The costs of going vertical exceed the space gained. (Note that single family two story dwellings do not follow this pattern as the fire codes get much more strict in multi-family buildings.)

Land is limiting in other places like NYC too but that did not prevent other excellent solutions, such as building skinny sky scraper apartments for billionaires. Ultra wealthy apartments were not for the homeless directly, but they served to increased the supply of housing for everyone. That is just one idea that you won't see from any California democrats.. Their main problem is political on a local level where existing home owners and landlords actually want high prices yet lower taxes for those people already in those homes! They refuse redevelopment of existing structures in the name of protecting historical buildings or some other environmental absurdity artificially causing scarcity. It is what they want and it causes homelessness protecting profits for the existing home owners.

Look to China and other sensible housing in the world. They have proven it is possible using contemporary and advanced construction to house everyone in affordable housing but they did not do it with liberal campaigns from the democrat party protecting historical neighborhoods and prop 13 tax. If you look at Shanghai today it looks like an advanced construction. LA and San Francisco looks pretty much like they did when I grew up in the 1960's with little change except for much more preventable homelessness in both places. Chicago and Detroit are other democrat run strongholds that have run themselves into the ditch (like California is doing today) still looking like they did when they were once successful in the 1800's.

 

[TSwizzle]

What a tool Newsom is



Yeah, the "zen diagram" is pure crossover.

He should still run for the nomination.