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

61–70 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#61

Post by cucumber3732842 »

testbjjl wrote: post #23
akoboldfrying wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you okay with not using products that have an oil refinery in their supply chain?

I think if we consolidate those operations the better, and then we can improve an regulate legislative or as a market more easily than if everyone is spread all over.

If we consolidate them you wind up with the same situation we have for everything already. The big megacorps who's paid for experts and lawyers (and ability to donate to politics) to tell you why the river glowing is safe get to do what they want and the upstart who may challenge that bigCo to do better never gets off the ground. But I guess if the goal is simply to declare everything "fixed" because the government has agreed it's compliant then consolidation is fine.

Re: Banned in California

#62

Post by bilbo0s »

crawshaw wrote: post #34
beachtaxidriver wrote: post #6

As a resident who likes to breathe clean air and drink clean water, none of that seems all that bad. I guess there should be an ability to do this farther from the population centers though.

But you also want smart phones, electric cars, and a navy. There needs to be a path towards doing things other than foisting them on people who are out of sight.

But you also want smart phones, electric cars, and a navy

This is kind of disingenuous.

I mean, not everything used in California, needs to be manufactured in California. Why not manufacture it in New Mexico? Or Arkansas for that matter?

What you're implying, is that Wisconsin, Nebraska, Maine, Florida, etc, etc, etc, should all build out the manufacturing base to manufacture things that are used in those states. That's not really how a healthy economy should work.

I guess what I'm pointing out is that, we don't need to manufacture smartphones in South Dakota. It's perfectly acceptable to manufacture them in, say, New Jersey, and then ship them to South Dakota. Similarly, we don't need to manufacture everything in California.

Re: Banned in California

#63

Post by burkaman »

The Grandfatherd-in section is incredibly misleading. Look at the Semiconductor Fabrication section, for example. The implication is that these are the only fabs in the state, they wouldn't be able to get new permits today, and the red dots indicate that it would be "effectively impossible" to open any other ones. In fact (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat...) there are at least 18 fabs in California, and these are just two random examples of particularly old ones. Obviously they couldn't reopen under the same permits they got in the 60s, why would anyone expect that to be the case?

Re: Banned in California

#64

Post by richwater »

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?

Re: Banned in California

#65

Post by paxys »

crawshaw wrote: post #34
beachtaxidriver wrote: post #6

As a resident who likes to breathe clean air and drink clean water, none of that seems all that bad. I guess there should be an ability to do this farther from the population centers though.

But you also want smart phones, electric cars, and a navy. There needs to be a path towards doing things other than foisting them on people who are out of sight.

Plenty of states and countries are okay with having this stuff in their backyard. Most of them encourage it. Let them build it.

Re: Banned in California

#66

Post by [deleted] »

runjake wrote: post #37
reliabilityguy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Like where?

Like the places where people welcome deregulation and jobs? Not trying to sound like a jerk but there’s plenty of places in the US where people welcome stuff like coal mines and polluting factories. If the factories have to be somewhere and they consent, then why not there?

[deleted]

Re: Banned in California

#67

Post by reliabilityguy »

anon-3988 wrote: post #36
reliabilityguy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Like where?

There's this country called China that you guys been offshoring manufacturing to...

Unless you are from China, your jurisdiction offshores to China as well.

Re: Banned in California

#68

Post by encoderer »

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

I’m happy this is coming from a real person with skin in the game and not just a veiled PAC with murky intentions.

Re: Banned in California

#69

Post by tokenless »

reliabilityguy wrote: post #27
parhamn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not from California but this to me seems like a great case to move to California. Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Its not like they pay more for the iPhone.

> Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Like where?

Well the attitude that puts a full stop (well a question mark) after "NIMBY" says implicity "where the poors live".

Re: Banned in California

#70

Post by Take8435 »

jameson wrote: post #51
parhamn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not from California but this to me seems like a great case to move to California. Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Its not like they pay more for the iPhone.

Consider housing price and state tax as well

Sure. A state where housing is dirt cheap and no taxes is great, but if something happens to you, good luck finding a hospital or municipal services. Job prospects are also something to consider.

Just because houses cost more and there's a state tax, doesn't mean it's _bad_.

Post reply on HN