Live data from Hacker News

Banned in California

bannedincalifornia.org

371–380 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are the incorrect choices. You CAN actually do these processes, and still keep the environment clean. I believe in procedural symmetry: if you ACTUALLY care about people and the environment, then you wouldn't let other poorer do these thing. The USA being richer, can afford to do it right and safer, not through regulation, but through process. There is a difference. So what would you do if you ACTUALLY cared ab…

USA is already effectively priced out of manufacturing due to high labor costs. Doing things with the "correct choices" simply makes the impossible even more so.

It's actually not labor costs at all.

The difference between the USA and, for example, China, in manufacturing is the difficulty of getting a new factory built.

If you have a product designed and ready for production, it will take you years to build a factory in the USA. All the while you'll be losing money managing the build, paying your employees and, most importantly, letting your competitors get a head start.

Likewise, if you build that factory in China, it'll be up and running in less than a year and you can start making your R&D money back, get to market before your competitors and not bleed money keeping your companies doors open.

The labor costs are easily offset by removing the logistics of moving the product.

Tesla Gigafactories are a pretty good example of this. The first two took ~3 years to build in Nevada and New York. The third, in Shanghai, took 10 months.

Re: Banned in California

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big reasons we have no universal healthcare is because we socialized defense for other countries like your country. You guys are years if not decades away from being able to defense yourselves.

That’s not really true, as an American. We spend a ton on healthcare anyway, just inefficiently and in a way that causes stress and struggles for patients.

Yeah, the administrative overhead related to just the billing system is staggering. Many hospital systems have more billing professionals than they have beds.

Re: Banned in California

#373
Great! Considering you can’t swing a dead cat around Silicon Valley without hitting a superfund site, this seems ok.

People and businesses that are ok with being exploited and exploiting others, while externalizing the true cost of their products on to the environment and future generations by treating the air and land like an open sewer can do it elsewhere.

Re: Banned in California

#374
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw complaints that amounted to “it’s more expensive to build out large industrial facilities in bay area than in Reno” okay what’s different in Reno hmmm I could be like the website and try to imply it’s only environmental regulations… or I could acknowledge that land price and availability is drastically different and also labor costs…. But then that wouldn’t help my contrived argument that it’s all the pesky reg…

It's providing a single geographic data point to you, for free. You're welcome to do your own research if you want a complete picture.

Nice, you’ve just described how confirmation bias works.

Out of context, incomplete single data points that feels like one’s already held view is how confirmation bias works.

Re: Banned in California

#375

These explanations have no citations, and even the explanations frequently conflict with the category labels. It seems much more like an elaborate propaganda infographic than a useful source of information.

"Hey AI, tell me what manufactured phone components require permitting in California." ... Copy paste copy paste copy paste

I can think of multiple manufacturers that do all engineering and have recently built manufacturing facilities in California and would manufacture there at scale too except other states gave them massive tax incentives. Tesla and Rivian both do initial manufacturing in California. Startups like Freeform, doing metal 3D printing at scale, are in California. This article is wrong.

Re: Banned in California

#376
post #88

Oh I didn’t realize pineapple farms were banned in California and Alaska. I thought they hadn’t been built for other reasons over the last decade. But according to this, not being built means banned. TIL! Started reading this site but the massive gaps in logic and reasoning are like nails on a chalkboard. No new fabs being built in CA means fabs are banned?! Okay well fabs are banned in pretty much the whole country…

California is mismanaged and you don’t need to vote Red to fix it. We can do better as Blue State. Wake up. We’re losing to ourselves like an obese patient anemic to a diet.

I think it could be better run for sure. We need to look at things other states seem to do well (Utah - homelessness, Texas - K12) and push to improve.

The problem for me is that when you go out in the rest of the country the dislike bordering on hate for California is really common. It is insane to me that you can send Marines to Los Angeles and almost no one cares. California is a such a huge chunk of the US economy, not just tech but agriculture, trade and yes even manufacturing.

The partisanship is poison for everyone and it holds back reform in California. We're all the same country.

Re: Banned in California

#378

Should California be treated differently than the rest of the world? In addition to banning these manufacturing processes in California, we should ban the products manufactured with these processes from California. This would require products to "green up" in order to access California's vast market. By allowing dirty products manufactured elsewhere, we've simply moved the problem and its harms out of our line of sig…

this does happen to some extent for example with auto emissions and other things. CA is such a large market when it alone makes a change, it often drags along other states or the nation.

Re: Banned in California

#379
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this website’s author is correct I’m supposed to believe that no paint gets applied to cars in Canada. Existing shops get grandfathered.

Is there any reason to assume that there's a dire need for more shops to apply paint in cars in California? If not, regulating to prioritize the air quality over increasing competition isn't unreasonable.

Is there any reason to assume that air quality standards can be maintained only by 50-year-old paint shops, and not by newer ones built to higher standards?

See also the counterproductive legacy of the anti-nuclear movement.

Re: Banned in California

#380

I live in Santa Clara where the first chip fans in the world existed. In places like Santa Clara (home to Intel, AMD, Nvidia), and neighboring Sunnyvale and Mountain View there are maps of chemical leakage of industrial solvents which had contaminated the groundwater. The very first Google offices sat directly over one of these sites around 2004. It took decades to dissipate. People complained about noxious fumes and…

IIRC Google mountain view had to get evacuated once for fumes seeping through the ground
Post reply on HN