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

Banned in California

bannedincalifornia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#241

Post by rswail »

SecretDreams wrote: post #232
ineedaj0b wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t have to destroy the state to produce these things. With aligned talent you can make the process neutral. I’m assuming lots of ‘eco conscious’ engineers would love to implement better practices and get paid for it.

> With aligned talent you can make the process neutral. I’m assuming lots of ‘eco conscious’ engineers would love to implement better practices and get paid for it. I think to be eco neutral, you would be cost prohibitive. Which would be an issue in car manufacturing and phone manufacturing. Also, the website lumps adjacent tech together and says they're all banned, but they are not. Lumping sheet metal stamping in w…

> I think to be eco neutral, you would be cost prohibitive. Which would be an issue in car manufacturing and phone manufacturing.

Which just shows that other places are allowing those costs to be externalized to society in general which is classic "privatize profits, socialize costs" that businesses have relied on.

Re: Banned in California

#242

Post by Noaidi »

ineedaj0b wrote: post #207
kgwxd wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It proves it's pointlessness. CA doesn't want manufacturing like that in their state. Period. They're saying you are not welcome to destroy our environment, go to Texas, they love that shit. States Rights, right?

You don’t have to destroy the state to produce these things. With aligned talent you can make the process neutral. I’m assuming lots of ‘eco conscious’ engineers would love to implement better practices and get paid for it.

There is no such thing as zero externalities in manufacturing. Unless these ‘eco conscious’ engineers ship all the waste to China these chemicals as by products will continue to harm the environment. And guess what, you are part of the environment. You all just want excuses to keep playing with these toys.

I cannot to move to California once all the billionaires move to Texas and Florida.

Re: Banned in California

#243

Post by Fischgericht »

There is a reason these kind of things are no longer possible in much of the western world and especially Europe-like US states like California:

After the deindustrialization people started to enjoy healthy air and clear water.

As always when it comes to "the good old times" or "make great again", your brain will remember very selectively.

I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forbidden to swim in it, and if you did, you had weird oily chemicals on your skin that felt unhealthy (burn, itching etc).

Back then we had huge production industries upstream, employing thousands of people.

Today you can swim in the river without any problem at all. But the industry and the jobs have shrunken a lot, because not polluting the air and water simply is expensive.

You can sum this up with: Producing stuff without polluting the environment in most cases is impossible. Reducing the pollution costs a lot of money, and can make your product non-competitive.

This is why you outsource to other countries and let them do it, because you simply do not care about them living in a polluted environment. Poison Outsourcing.

So, if the US wants production industry again, and want it to be competitive, than have a look on how the environment in the countries you will be competing with looks like, and then to an informed decision if you really want that.

I'd pick the clean air and water, and have people poisoned far away that I don't know and can ignore.

What would be your choice?

Re: Banned in California

#244

Post by seb1204 »

SecretDreams wrote: post #232
ineedaj0b wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t have to destroy the state to produce these things. With aligned talent you can make the process neutral. I’m assuming lots of ‘eco conscious’ engineers would love to implement better practices and get paid for it.

> With aligned talent you can make the process neutral. I’m assuming lots of ‘eco conscious’ engineers would love to implement better practices and get paid for it. I think to be eco neutral, you would be cost prohibitive. Which would be an issue in car manufacturing and phone manufacturing. Also, the website lumps adjacent tech together and says they're all banned, but they are not. Lumping sheet metal stamping in w…

We live in a throwaway garbage generating society. Many things we use or consume should be costly and prohibitive. E.g. single use coffee cups.

Pointing out that such costs have been externalised for decades should be the starting point to internalise them.

Re: Banned in California

#245

Post by brockers »

mparkms wrote: post #48

The creator of the website is the CEO of a battery-powered induction cooktop company. ( https://x.com/sdamico ) He clearly has an agenda against what he perceives as onerous environmental regulations: https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026536815902208479 https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026552845294792994

ad hominem? Please explain what makes the regulatory burdens onerous instead of impossible.

Re: Banned in California

#246

Post by seb1204 »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #217
scoofy wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes no sense to say "oh, we need to manufacturer this stuff... just not here." That's basically NIMBYism for electronics. You either make it doable or you don't.

> It makes no sense to say "oh, we need to manufacturer this stuff... just not here." That's basically NIMBYism for electronics. This statement doesn't acknowledge why NIMBYism is odious. The reason is that we all need housing, but new housing may devalue current housing. While some may wish to protect their housing values/community feel/etc, others wish and may rightly deserve, access to housing at the same levels o…

Do the factories need to be polluting? Or can it be done less polluting or even neutral?

Re: Banned in California

#247

Post by clarionbell »

Fischgericht wrote: post #243

There is a reason these kind of things are no longer possible in much of the western world and especially Europe-like US states like California: After the deindustrialization people started to enjoy healthy air and clear water. As always when it comes to "the good old times" or "make great again", your brain will remember very selectively. I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forb…

When people can't afford homes, food and medicine, environment ceases to be a priority.

It's mostly a question of when, not if.

Re: Banned in California

#248

Post by rswail »

This is whining from someone that doesn't want to be responsible for the externality of pollution that these manufacturing facilities generate.

The regulations are to stop the pollution, if you can manufacture without polluting, then you'll comply and be able to manufacture.

The problem is that there are other regulatory environments where the people aren't protected from pollution.

What would fix that is enforcing the regulations nation wide, then applying tariffs on imported products that don't enforce the same regulations.

Net result, more expensive phones, better health and improved environment for the public. In the same way as car pollution was cleaned up.

Re: Banned in California

#249

Post by jwagenet »

richwater wrote: post #64
mparkms wrote: post #48

The creator of the website is the CEO of a battery-powered induction cooktop company. ( https://x.com/sdamico ) He clearly has an agenda against what he perceives as onerous environmental regulations: https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026536815902208479 https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026552845294792994

> has an agenda Everyone has an agenda. Is anything on this site false? Is it incorrect information?

> Aluminum Anodizing & CNC Machining

There are a ton of CNC machining (AL and otherwise) and anodizing shops in the Bay Area.

Re: Banned in California

#250

Post by paulryanrogers »

Fischgericht wrote: post #243

There is a reason these kind of things are no longer possible in much of the western world and especially Europe-like US states like California: After the deindustrialization people started to enjoy healthy air and clear water. As always when it comes to "the good old times" or "make great again", your brain will remember very selectively. I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forb…

> What would be your choice?

Less stuff and less pollution everywhere.

Post reply on HN