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

California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 275 posts

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#251

Post by refurb »

claudeganon wrote: post #35
Justin_K wrote: post #18

The sad part is that CA remains a one party state and this will just get swept under the rug. The power is too unchecked.

I don’t think Republican opposition is the answer, as they’re demonstrably just as corrupt and self-serving. But California could certainly benefit from some primary challenges from the left. LA is seeing this happen with the election of Nithya Raman and George Gascón (who were vehemently opposed by mainstream Democrats). Interested to see how they might shift the terrain.

From the left? It doesn’t get more left than SF and the corruption is rampant here.

I’m not sure why you equate corruption with where you sit in the political spectrum.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#252

Post by refurb »

vkou wrote: post #80
Justin_K wrote: post #18

The sad part is that CA remains a one party state and this will just get swept under the rug. The power is too unchecked.

CA will remain a one-party state as long as the Republican party continues to push absolutely insane policies and candidates. Which will keep happening, because the sane ones get primaried out.

Are you arguing the democrats are putting out sane policies and candidates? Have you seen SF?

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#253

Post by claudeganon »

refurb wrote: post #251
claudeganon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think Republican opposition is the answer, as they’re demonstrably just as corrupt and self-serving. But California could certainly benefit from some primary challenges from the left. LA is seeing this happen with the election of Nithya Raman and George Gascón (who were vehemently opposed by mainstream Democrats). Interested to see how they might shift the terrain.

From the left? It doesn’t get more left than SF and the corruption is rampant here. I’m not sure why you equate corruption with where you sit in the political spectrum.

>It doesn’t get more left than SF and the corruption is rampant here.

Most of SF’s politicians would be center right in Europe and are more or less only accountable to their wealthy donors. This is the primary source of their corruption.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#254

Post by dragonwriter »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #164
dragonwriter wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> >Every senate election I can recall in California has been Democrat v Democrat by the general election > Which is the point of the system. Yes, but not the way you paint it. > Republicans only have a shot if they don't compete with each other, and no third party candidate ever has a chance. No, the point (at least, insofar as created by same-party general elections was the point) of the system was that Republican-l…

That may have been the justification used to pass the system, but the result is still everything I've said and it's hard to believe that wasn't intended.

> but the result is still everything I've said

No, the result is not “Republicans only have a shot if they don't compete with each other” (except to the extent it it is equally “Democrats only have a shot if they don't compete with each other”; it does disadvantage a party having support spread among many candidates vs concentrated on a smaller number, but there's nothing that makes that more true for one party that the other.) And no third party candidate ever had a chance before the blanket primary. (The blanket primary probably slightly improves this for the Green Party in certain Democratic-dominant districts, but only if Democratic support is highly concentated on a single candidate such as an in-party popular incumbent, but its still not much of a chance.) But, again, that's not new with the blanket primary; classic partisan primaries and FPTP voting were more than sufficient to make that generally the case just as it pretty much is everywhere in the country that uses those systems.

So the two things that make up “everything you said” are not the result of the system.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#255

Post by zo1 »

29athrowaway wrote: post #225
zo1 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a thought experiment: How would you solve those problems with your hands tied behind your back (i.e. you don't have a government to rely on)? Just try one - assume you're in a fictional universe and writing a novel or something. Anywho, the problem with this trail of discussion is that you can come up with an infinite amount of "problems" and libertarians can likewise come up with a "solution" to each one. However…

Let's entertain this idea... Without a monopoly of violence, you have 3 alternatives: a) Multiple entities keeping each other in check, in perpetual competition... b) One faction becomes more powerful than the rest and eventually assimilates the rest or turn them into vassals. c) Factions decide to ally up and either assimilate the rest and make vassals out of them. Basically, smaller fish gets eaten by larger fish.…

We have had and currently have A, B and C, we just don't "see it" because it has an aura of "Democracy" and "will of the people". If we truly had freedom, it would be part of society, every government, the UN and considered a fundamental Human Right for individual groups of people to voluntarily group together and decide to "leave" their state/nation/entity/vassal/government/faction, and form their own "monopoly of violence" within their geographic area.

But we don't have that. We belong and are forced under subjugation to our individual governments without any say in the matter other than "voting" and "community participation". We can dress it up any which way we want, but we're forced into a relationship by virtue of birth and we have no option to leave.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#256

Post by mannykoum »

Kapura wrote: post #152
AlwaysRock wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I very much feel the same way. Unfortunately it is not easy to move to another country long term and work there. Also obviously every other country also has its own issues, many that one likely wouldnt discover until after making a move.

Fortunately, I am blessed with friends who have already made the jump, in many different directions, so I have firsthand testimonies of the pros and cons of moving to a variety of different countries. Japan sounds nice.

If you speak Japanese.

I have heard that it is fairly hard for foreigners who don't speak the language. I am still considering moving there but more so due to neo-orientalist tendencies and less because I think it's a good idea...

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#257

Post by DanBC »

_zg4q wrote: post #246
AsyncAwait wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least there's universal healthcare in the middle of a global pandemic, unfortunately there's a push to remodel it after the U.S. private insurance model, but also a string opposition to that idea.

"Universal Healthcare" is generally pretty terrible. I'm not saying the US system is perfect, it has plenty of flaws but at least you can't be banned from getting services you want [0]. Plus government is already subsidizing the cost of the vaccine, and creating a program for elderly and low income people to get the vaccine for fairly cheap [1]. [0] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/17/nhs-provokes-fur... [1]…

Can you explain to me what you think is happening in your Telegraph link?

In particular, why you think this is "the NHS", and not some specific services in one part of the country, and also why these patients can't make use of private healthcare instead.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#258

Post by _zg4q »

DanBC wrote: post #257
_zg4q wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Universal Healthcare" is generally pretty terrible. I'm not saying the US system is perfect, it has plenty of flaws but at least you can't be banned from getting services you want [0]. Plus government is already subsidizing the cost of the vaccine, and creating a program for elderly and low income people to get the vaccine for fairly cheap [1]. [0] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/17/nhs-provokes-fur... [1]…

Can you explain to me what you think is happening in your Telegraph link? In particular, why you think this is "the NHS", and not some specific services in one part of the country, and also why these patients can't make use of private healthcare instead.

> Can you explain to me what you think is happening in your Telegraph link?

Smokers and obese people are being prevented from receiving surgeries that are not deemed "essential" unless they stop smoking for 8 weeks or loose weight, respectively.

> In particular, why you think this is "the NHS" and not some specific services in one part of the country

Maybe this question isn't to be taken literally, but multiple articles' titles with some variation of "NHS bans some obese and smokers from surgery 'indefinitely'"

> and also why these patients can't make use of private healthcare instead.

As of 2015, only 10.5% of population was using private insurance [0]. We could assume roughly 89.5% of population is covered by the NHS since it's given by default. If you cannot afford private insurance, you will only have NHS.

In my opinion, I believe having a public option will slowly eliminate private insurance or at least reduce the types of services available. Additionally I think it's dangerous for the government to set that sort of precedent.

[0] https://www.commonwealthfund.org/international-health-policy...

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#259

Post by zepto »

ashtonkem wrote: post #247
zepto wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The need to turn differences in reading and opinion into a no holds barred psychological fight is genuinely toxic.“ I agree. That’s why I think it’s a bad idea to tell someone that something they are responding to isn’t present. Avoiding bulverism is a good step to avoid bringing things into the psychological realm. Knock it off! I get that you have a different understanding which is reasonable, but that can be expr…

> You read the GP’s comment through the concept of a ‘core’ argument, which excludes some parts of what the GP said as simply examples. I think the parent reasonably doesn’t use that concept, and sees more than one argument being made. This discussion would have gone much smoother if you'd just gone with this argument rather than jumping straight to gaslighting.

I was responding to some plain old bulverism/gaslighting.

It’s toxic, and I’d prefer that we don’t ‘smoothly’ gloss over that.

If you hadn’t led with “I think you have missed the point, the GP’s argument wasn’t...”, it would have gone a lot smoother. The rest of what you said stood entirely without them.

Can you say what value those phrases added other than to just undermine the person you were responding to as a way of establishing your interpretation as ‘correct’?

I see I’ve been flagged for asking if you were gaslighting, but frankly the comment I was replying to fell foul of the site guidelines too.

Perhaps I should have just flagged it, but my sense is that it wasn’t enough to warrant that.

You can interpret the question about ‘gaslighting’ as some great insult, or you can take it as real observation about a toxic conversational gambit that it seems like you unintentionally engaged in.

Your choice.

Re: California Public Utilities Commission fired director who exposed missing $200M

#260

Post by mleonhard »

San Francisco's accounting is similarly incomprehensible. I tried to download the city's annual report and failed. There is none. Or rather, there are several, and all are incomplete.

I believe there are several large scandals brewing in SF government and many government officials are committing crimes against the citizens. I hope ProPublica or another journalism organization will take on the project to uncover them. I just donated to ProPublica. I hope you will, too.

Post reply on HN