What is wrong with California?

[Uncle Ted]

That's good news. Harris is a terrible candidate and could actually lose to the orange-faced idiot.

Too bad Pelosi is running for another term in the house... She has good approval still and would be a great running mate for Joe. And she is only 82 so maybe that would draw some attention away from Biden for being so damn old and senile.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Interesting thread about the practical implications of the recent California law outlawing new sales of non-electric vehicles by 2035.

Embedded Tweet

[Pelado]

Interesting thread about the practical implications of the recent California law outlawing new sales of non-electric vehicles by 2035.

Embedded Tweet

Practical implications? Why bother?

[Uncle Ted]

Interesting thread about the practical implications of the recent California law outlawing new sales of non-electric vehicles by 2035.

Embedded Tweet

The solution is simple...

So in order for California to have sufficient electricity to power 30M EVs, it will need to build 20 new, full size nuclear plants the size of the nuclear plants the state has been shutting down, or their equivalent. Tough to do with solar since people want to re-charge at night.

They just need to to build 20 full size nuclear power plants and then stash the waste they produce in some awful place like Nevada or just out in the ocean.

[BigFatMeanie]

This topic could go in multiple threads. An OpEd in the New York Times by Ezra Klein about the problems with Los Angeles' homeless problem.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/23/o...e-housing.html

While the piece highlights many things that are wrong with California, there is an elephant in the room that Klein seems to studiously ignore as he focuses exclusively on the lack of affordable housing as the proximal cause of homelessness.

Number of times the article mentions drug addiction in relation to the homeless problem: 0
Number of times the article mentions mental illness in relation to the homeless problem: 0

[BigFatMeanie]

California updated their list of states that are prohibited for California state-funded travel purposes. Utah made the list.

https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887

The following states are currently subject to California’s ban on state-funded and state-sponsored travel:

1. Alabama
2. Arizona
3. Arkansas
4. Florida
5. Georgia
6. Idaho
7. Indiana
8. Iowa
9. Kansas
10. Kentucky
11. Louisiana
12. Mississippi
13. Montana
14. North Carolina
15. North Dakota
16. Ohio
17. Oklahoma
18. South Carolina
19. South Dakota
20. Tennessee
21. Texas
22. Utah
23. West Virginia

I find the exceptions that allow travel to those states to be interesting:

Specifically, AB 1887 does not apply to state travel that is required for any of the following purposes:

1. Enforcement of California law, including auditing and revenue collection.
2. Litigation.
3. To meet contractual obligations incurred before January 1, 2017.
4. To comply with requests by the federal government to appear before committees.
5. To participate in meetings or training required by a grant or required to maintain grant funding.
6. To complete job-required training necessary to maintain licensure or similar standards required for holding a position, in the event that comparable training cannot be obtained in California or a different state not subject to the travel prohibition.
7. For the protection of public health, welfare, or safety, as determined by the affected agency, department, board, authority, or commission, or by the affected legislative office.

[Pelado]

California updated their list of states that are prohibited for California state-funded travel purposes. Utah made the list.

https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887



I find the exceptions that allow travel to those states to be interesting:

Please remind me of the criteria to be included on the prohibited list?

[USUC]

California updated their list of states that are prohibited for California state-funded travel purposes. Utah made the list.

https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887



I find the exceptions that allow travel to those states to be interesting:

Are sporting events considered state funded travel? UCLA or Cal can play in Utah?

[Pelado]

Are sporting events considered state funded travel? UCLA or Cal can play in Utah?

I think the out they use is that they're using donated funds or funds from athletic revenues rather than using state funds from taxpayers.

[Uncle Ted]

Are sporting events considered state funded travel? UCLA or Cal can play in Utah?

They have their own athletic budget so I don't think it applies... for now. Cal may need state funds to supplement their athletic budget after the new Pac 12-2 media contract gives them something less than $20m/yr and their new stadium loans come due. Then they may be subject to this law on state-funded travel. But who cares about Cal athletics?

[Jeff Lebowski]

California is so stupid.

[BigPiney]

California is so stupid.

It really is such a dumb virtue signaling law. We are working on getting an exemption to come to hiring fairs at colleges in those states.

[PaloAltoCougar]

California is so stupid.

No, UTAH is stupid!

[Pelado]

No, UTAH is stupid!

Even in a thread about California, disparaging the Utes is entirely acceptable.

[Uncle Ted]

California is so stupid.

No, UTAH is stupid!

I believe that you both are right.