Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk moves to Texas

ktvu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#791

Post by busterarm »

jxramos wrote: post #759
busterarm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, framed differently, California is looking for deep pockets to bail out their failing budget rather than adjust their policy to match what they can afford. The same has been happening in New Jersey with its insane taxes that don't really go to pay for services anymore and have diverted from transportation & infrastructure projects for decades now to bail out their severely underfunded pension funds...where the pen…

There is something incredibly ironic about that, unfunded pension liabilities for pensioners who no longer reside in the locale that gave them their pension.

Well, pensions are taxable just like regular income. Minus some exclusions usually. People are just trying to extend their retirement as far as possible.

It might just be that income tax isn't the best/fairest tax.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#792

Post by ddoolin »

manigandham wrote: post #667
ddoolin wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Illegal immigration should not be seen a failing of the state but as the abject failure of the federal government's immigration policies. Texas has, proportional to total population, more illegal immigrants than California and indeed any other state (at least by estimates). And guess what? They are getting free healthcare there and everywhere else too! If California's sanctuary policies are what's preventing the feds…

Does your point only work if you do "proportional to total population"? Why does that matter? Texas has El Paso which has major criminal drug and border activity. What does Texas have to do with California anyway? Why is your only defense picking single skewed metrics and comparing it to separate places? Are you going to compare CA as a whole against TX or would that reveal your bias? You still haven't answered what…

In a thread about people fleeing from California to other states, particularly Texas, it's certainly an appropriate comparison. Even more so when you consider Texas is about the closest in size and population except with nearly opposite politics. Comparisons are useful when talking about something in relative terms. Absolute statistics don't mean much in the context of moving from one place to another. You can say California is terrible but within the realistic options, not really. I didn't present any skewed metrics.

You twice pointed out illegal immigrants with emphasis on their contrast to "tax-paying" citizens but failed to connect it to any deeper meaning. So what if they've given them driver's licenses or paid for children & young adult healthcare? At least they've made attempts to integrate them, ostensibly recognizing their hardships and to prevent them from engaging in crime or becoming homeless.

Wildfires are easily preventable if you draw the line at individuals not lighting shit on fire in arid areas or private companies better maintaining their infrastructure.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#793

Post by karaterobot »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #515
monoideism wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you describe "far-right"? Edit: the reason I ask the question is that I've noticed a trend among people from very left-leaning areas to define anyone slightly right of center as being "far-right". I've been called "far-right" because of beliefs that were typical of moderate Democrats in the 1990s. What label that leaves for people like actual Nazis, fascists, neo-Confederates, etc, I'm not sure. Far-far-far ri…

We have a new lines drawn on acceptance for behavior towards sexuality, religion, women's rights and race since the 90's. The line has moved. The 90's was 30 years ago. I don't know your exact situation at all and criticism of you may indeed have been unfair. But for fucks sake don't try to make a case that you're not far-right by looking to the behavior of people in the past. That indicates strongly you may indeed h…

I think the commentor was as much concerned with the namespace pollution: to some people on the left, there doesn't seem to be a "right" (or even a "center"), anymore, only a "far right". This isn't because because they all share the same views, but rather because there's a lack of nuance to the language used by many people in discussing politics.

(I say people because the same thing occurs in reverse when talking about "extremist leftists")

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#794

Post by pchristensen »

bumby wrote: post #740
pchristensen wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved from the Bay Area (lived there 2 years) to Seattle (well, Bellevue) a few years ago. I had two elementary schoolers and a toddler. The main reason was that although I was paid fairly well, we would never be able to buy a house. So every year was a race between my raise and rent increases. We lived in a pretty decent school district, but it was difficult to move with in the same district, let alone the same sc…

I know it's natural to want to optimize for your child's school, but doesn't most evidence show that your child's school is only marginally predictive of attainment? The fact that you care so much to optimize for them might be self-selecting because your concerned/aware/have the resources to help in other ways.

It also determines who your children's peers will be. Selecting into a highly rated school district means all the other kids' parents did the same.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#795

Post by beerandt »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #105
ISL wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More-dangerously, it is taxing theoretical money that you haven't yet made. There is no guarantee that the current market-clearing price for a given object is equivalent to that at which a larger inventory can be sold. Taxing capital gains at the time of sale makes sense -- there is actual revenue available for taxation. Taxing unrealized gains can be a path to really-negative outcomes. This is particularly so if the…

There are some loopholes that should be closed however. You can go to a bank and borrow against your shares, using them as an asset without realizing capital gains. In my mind, if you use the shares (gains) as collateral for your benefit, you should have to recognize the capital gains as mark-to-market immediately payable.

A loan is not (usually) taxable income. Taxable income is used to pay back the loan.

This keeps people's capital invested longer term, which is part of the purpose of capital gains tax incentives.

In other words, it's not a loophole. It's working as intended.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#796

Post by notsureaboutpg »

techsupporter wrote: post #220
S_A_P wrote: post #158

Pretty interesting to see this move makes people so salty. There does seem to be a trend of people fleeing California, I dont know enough about the situation out there to comment on whether or not its valid. I suspect something must be going on for several high profile folks moving out. And before you bash Texas, its not perfect. But its pretty diverse, and it seems that folks with opposing viewpoints can still coexi…

My birth certificate says "Texas" across the top and people have been "fleeing California" to Texas for as long as I've been alive. There's nothing special about Musk; he just happens to be high-profile about it and managed to extract more from California before decamping to a "cheap" state than several of those who came before him. I disagree with your assessment that Texas has wide acceptance for opposing viewpoint…

>Only when I went to college in a college town did people largely seem to want to live and let live.

It's odd because I grew up in a major metro, and going to college I found people in college to be very strict and severe about enforcing their morals on people. You had to use specific language, be nice and more forgiving and understanding to the right groups of people, and you were not supposed to disagree on specific subjects of discussion or you'd be a pariah.

The idea that this is "live and let live" is silly. It seems that way to you because your morals align very closely with the morals of people in a college setting. If they didn't, you'd notice the similarities to an orthodox religious community immediately.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#797

Post by llampx »

the_economist wrote: post #760
blntechie wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s simply amazing how allowing to build 50 high rise condos would bring the entire bubble down but the CA (or most American) cities or the state won’t. It will obviously fail on the ballot due to NIMBYism but I’m not sure why would that even need to be on ballot.

This is not completely true, as the cost to build high rise condos is extremely high and the land is very expensive. Every place in the USA that has kept housing affordable has done so with sprawl, which California's government doesn't allow. You can see a detailed study of it here: https://www.buildzoom.com/blog/cities-expansion-slowing

The land is very expensive, shouldn't that be good enough of a reason to build high rises? It works in NYC and most of Europe, the only reason there are few high rises in SF is because of the government that prefers artificial scarcity.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#798

Post by chillwaves »

J0_k3r wrote: post #732
chillwaves wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Democratic party is a center-right party. If you are further to the right of them, you are far-right.

No they're not. You don't define the overton window, society does. I'm right of the democrats but I'm not far right, that's the society we live in.

This isn't up for debate. In economic terms, socialism is what the left looks like.

Do you see anything that looks like "socialism" coming from the democratic party in the united states?

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#799

Post by knowaveragejoe »

manigandham wrote: post #642
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CA provides sanctuary status for illegal immigrants, along with driver licenses, free healthcare and other benefits paid for by tax-paying citizens. I see these easily debunked anti-immigration talking points regularly elsewhere on the web in right-wing circles, but I'm surprised to see it on HN. I encourage anyone interested in the reality of immigration(including the common myths like the above) to either read Op…

You didn't debunk anything but only posted some open-border ideology. Feel free to actually respond to the specific policies that are affecting the state of California instead. Here's just 1 example to get you started: Illegal immigrants have free healthcare until the age of 26 in California, however tax-paying law-abiding citizens are fined if they don't have health insurance.

I posted some "open-borders ideology" from... noted anarcho-capitalist Bryan Caplan.

Indeed, I didn't attempt to debunk anything you said, other than point out they are easily debunked. You understand that these are two separate things, right?

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#800

Post by notsureaboutpg »

Dudelander wrote: post #505
monoideism wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you describe "far-right"? Edit: the reason I ask the question is that I've noticed a trend among people from very left-leaning areas to define anyone slightly right of center as being "far-right". I've been called "far-right" because of beliefs that were typical of moderate Democrats in the 1990s. What label that leaves for people like actual Nazis, fascists, neo-Confederates, etc, I'm not sure. Far-far-far ri…

Some views Moderate Democrats held in the 90s could be very far right, depending on the subject. Bill Clinton supported "Don't ask, don't tell" and the defense of marriage act. They were considered moderate in the 90s, but I would classify them as far right today. A moderate in the 1930s could literally have supported Fascism, and the "progressive" Woodrow Wilson supported the Klu Klux Klan. I'm not saying this appli…

>Bill Clinton supported "Don't ask, don't tell" and the defense of marriage act. They were considered moderate in the 90s, but I would classify them as far right today.

Perfect example of why the question had to be asked.

Most people in America would not consider those positions to be far-right today. Most immigrants to the US today would also have those positions if asked. Everyone in my parents' generation still has those views, and my generation is split on the issue.

Don't ask don't tell and the Defense of Marriage act can coexist with a tolerant society. It's not "far-right" to believe that marriage is only between men and women and to still believe that LGBT people have the same rights as everyone else.

EDIT: Further data. Pew says that in 2019(!) 49% of black Americans did not support extending marriage to LGBT people. Are 49% of black Americans far-right? Obviously not, but intellectual circles in the US have moved so far to the left that this is a serious statement they would make. (https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-ga...)

Post reply on HN