Live data from Hacker News

Banned in California

bannedincalifornia.org

531–540 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#531

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…

[deleted]

Re: Banned in California

#532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can. It just takes backbone, which is rarely found in the political class. If I, as a voter, voted for a politician who promised to ban dumping mercury in the local river, I don't expect them to say "Oh, but any company already dumping mercury in the river can keep doing so, because we don't want to hurt people's livelihood." That's not what I voted for.

Ok, but if you are investing capital in some sort of production line or industrialization you are not going to want to do that in an area where you might just lose your entire investment instantly; instead, you're just going to invest it in Texas or China. Of course with more extreme examples like yours you do have to put some cost on the existing companies to get it fixed, but it would be something with a smaller co…

For sure there would be a disincentive to "invest" in the area where you might lose the investment. That would be intentional. As a voter, I specifically don't want companies to be making those kinds of "investments" in my region. Go "invest" your dirty industry in China. If California's reputation for harshly regulating these things prevents these kinds of businesses from opening here in the first place, I consider that Working As Intended. We could make that reputation even stronger by not grandfathering things.

Re: Banned in California

#533

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…

Wasn't there some magical thinking about how by outsourcing industries to those poor countries will bring them money and raise their standard of living to a point where they care just as much about their environment as us and it will all eventually equalize. Didn't quite pan out like that, did it.

It's not magical thinking; it just doesn't happen overnight. The real question is as we get relatively less wealthy in the West, will we start moving the other direction?

Re: Banned in California

#534
While I do tend to feel it is important that superpower-level countries be capable of producing within their political borders most/all of what they consume, for reasonable prices; I do not tend to feel that everything we produce needs to be produced everywhere within those political borders. California is the most beautiful and hospitable land on the entire planet. There's nothing wrong with putting the toxic chemical factories in a desert or tundra somewhere.

Re: Banned in California

#535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We do manufacture things. Just not in California. Texas beats California in total value of manufacturing shipments only because because of its petroleum and coal products manufacturing. And California beats Texas in manufacturing employment.

None of which answers the question of why we can't manufacture things in other states? Things that California clearly doesn't want to manufacture. Again, what is the reason New Mexico, or Utah, or Nebraska, or Tennessee cannot manufacture these things? And why is it a problem if they do so instead of California?

Big companies already handle manufacturing in other states. Often in states that have the worst education systems and quality of living. It is frequently done to reduce the cost of labor.

Manufacturing jobs are also some of the most unstable because big companies will shop around for tax breaks. Once they find a political sucker ... they build a new plant and close the old one which wrecks havoc on the local economy. PR teams are designed to mitigate negative feedback when this happens.

Smart politicians know this and will not concede to tax breaks for big companies, like Amazon.

Re: Banned in California

#536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be right, but the site is explicit about the Fremont plant being exempted, and opens with the claim that there are facilities grandfathered in.

The concept of "grandfathering" rule breakers has always seemed like naked corruption to me. OK, we think this thing is so bad , that we're passing a law to ban it, BUT everyone who was already doing this bad thing can keep doing it forever because... because... because putting an existing company out of business is apparently the worst thing in the world. If our elected officials think something is bad enough to ban…

Putting an existing company out of business means putting thousands of people out of work. That's the kind of thing that gets your party thrown out of office.

Re: Banned in California

#537
post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't. Anyone can go to the ER, and if you're poor it'll be billed through Medicaid. When I was young and poor, I had a multi-day hospital stay and multiple surgeries that totaled to $3.50 out of pocket. Urgent cares are everywhere and affordable.

I had a cholecystectomy a few years ago and had a complication that caused a gallstone to get lodged in my common bile duct after removal. Three days after surgery I was in the ER, I let them know I was in debilitating pain and that I just had surgery. They made me sit in the waiting room for 8 hours and only took me back when a doctor walked passed and noticed I was jaundiced. After his shift ended, the nurse who wa…

That's a ER triage complaint, not a financing complaint.

Re: Banned in California

#538
post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defend against who? You? I am in Canada, and the USA recently threatened to invade us, basically. So we need to buy weapons from the USA in order to defend ourselves from the USA? Sounds like mafia protection schemes.

Sure, we are now a threat, but let’s not ignore Russia or China. Neither of them are breaking news and Russia is the immediate threat for most of the West, and until recently for you guys as well

I never heard Russia or China openly say they want to annex-invade Canada.

However, I did hear the USA president say that openly, recently and multiple times.

So pardon me for entirely rejecting your 'Russia+China = BAD, USA = GOOD' narrative.

I would even go as far as saying that today, the most immediate danger to World stability is Donald Trump and his USA, which are not friends to anyone anymore. Let us hope we can survive the next 3 years.

Re: Banned in California

#539

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…

> I believe in procedural symmetry: if you ACTUALLY care about people and the environment, then you wouldn't let other poorer do these thing America barely cares about the domestic poor[1] - do you think its captains of industry will care about the poor abroad? Charity begins at home. 1. See locations of Superfund sites. Or for a modern example, where they are choosing to build AI datacenters powered by on-site diese…

A note about Superfund sites: It used to be funded by a small tax on chemical production companies. 70% of cleanup was paid for by the companies who caused it.

Then in 1995, congress "chose not to renew" that provision.

Now you and I literally and directly pay for the cleanup of hazardous waste. Companies don't really. Yet somehow they "Can't make factories" here

Re: Banned in California

#540
post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. It's especially relevant for the author's focus on shipbuilding. The old shipyard at Hunter's Point in San Francisco is horribly polluted, and they've been working to decontaminate it for more than three decades in order to reclaim the land for other uses (in particular, housing). Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Island also have a lot of pollution from the former naval base there. There is a cost to overregulat…

Hunter’s Point was where they cleaned the boats that were used for open air nuclear weapons testing. It’s not a great example. I’d be more convinced if you picked a decommissioned shipyard with more conventional problems, like marinship.

I picked Hunter's Point because I used to live near it. The problems from decommissioning radioactive ships are bad, but they're far from the only pollution that was there. Lots of VOCs, solvents, oils, radiation from other stuff (eg, glow-in-the-dark equipment made with radium), heavy metals, pesticides, PCBs, and what have you.

But sure, there are other shipyards they cleaned up in less than three decades.

Post reply on HN