Ehhh. I have to say as someone who is from California, the people who are totally unrepresented have a reason to complain. Allocating funds and bonds and budget time to things like a rail system that they will never use, etc. I was born somewhat near OC/LA and in a county where we actually had this thing called water, they would take our water, pump it to LA for "processing" (we had a plant... didn't need that service) and then pump it back to us and charge a fee for the "water transfer".
Seeing how I then lived the rest of my teens/early adulthood way up north in Chico I saw how batshit fuckawful the budget process was, and more than once wished everything south of Sacramento would just fall into the ocean and stop fucking with me. I dont think many people appreciate how large California is, and how dense the population pockets are. I've since left the state, and have to say if they split it up in some fashion I would consider moving back.
This does not mean I want it split up into "rich fucks with golden castles live in these 5 coastal cities, everyone else get fucked." Something a little more representative of the smaller population groupings of 400,000-1,000,000 would be okay with me.
I see California as just a microcosm (okay, a really big microcosm) of the nation as a whole. Bay Area versus Central Valley Wasteland isn't much different than New York versus Wyoming.
To add to that. Even if by some fluke, someone managed to carve California into new smaller states. It still wouldn't solve the issue of bitching about Y part of A, fucking X part of A. So instead of Northern California bitching about being fucked over by LA on the state budget, it'll be Northern Jefferson State bitching about Southern or Western or Eastern or Central or whatever or some combination of Jefferson State fucking them over. Even better going back to Jeffe's example, people in Jefferson State will still bitch about LA fucking them over somehow.
Any time an argument for secession/spliting from an existing government entity, boils down to "Wah, not being raped and pillaged but so-and-so is a meanie and we want to be an independent entity because we believe that will fix things," is a point where the proponents need to be told to bugger off. You're going to get people that are either assholes and/or get butthurt when they don't get their way and I don't see that ending anytime soon. Hell, I don't see the butthurt disappearing even if we do end up with a super computer AI overlord that does unbiased decision making for us (big if since it might make the unbiased conclusion that we are an intelligent species that is too irrational to be allowed to survive).
Ehhh. I have to say as someone who is from California, the people who are totally unrepresented have a reason to complain. Allocating funds and bonds and budget time to things like a rail system that they will never use, etc. I was born somewhat near OC/LA and in a county where we actually had this thing called water, they would take our water, pump it to LA for "processing" (we had a plant... didn't need that service) and then pump it back to us and charge a fee for the "water transfer".
Seeing how I then lived the rest of my teens/early adulthood way up north in Chico I saw how batshit fuckawful the budget process was, and more than once wished everything south of Sacramento would just fall into the ocean and stop fucking with me. I dont think many people appreciate how large California is, and how dense the population pockets are. I've since left the state, and have to say if they split it up in some fashion I would consider moving back.
This does not mean I want it split up into "rich fucks with golden castles live in these 5 coastal cities, everyone else get fucked." Something a little more representative of the smaller population groupings of 400,000-1,000,000 would be okay with me.
I haven't used the fire department before. Man, why is all that money allocated to something I don't even use?
I also kind of doubt your claim about water being randomly transferred around then then the county just eating a bill for it.
With Love and Courage
+1
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
I don't think I buy the "trying to gain more electoral votes" argument for why Draper is doing this, because it would be a whole lot easier to just push for a proportional divying of the electoral votes, a la Nebraska and Maine.
I'm going to lean towards this just being a billionaire' s vanity project.
Well, don't forget you'd also get ten new senators out of the deal, and if he thinks at least six of them are likely to be Republican...
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
I suppose that's possible. The whole idea is so batshit Looney Tunes that it's hard to determine motivation.
It's like seeing a crazy homeless guy rubbing shit on himself to the tune of Beethoven and wondering why he opted for the ninth symphony.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Yeah, with those states, two would be blue, three would be red, and one would be purple leaning red. You'd go from two D sens to 7 R, 5 D, give or take.
We should split the state in six and then use some epic gerrymander-fu to make them all lean Dem.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
BTW, I don't know what the fuck Draper is trying to pull.
This is obviously not going to pass, so why is he spending money on it?
Because Silicon Valley feels that they need to be free of the shackles of regulations in order to innovate - this is something the Googlistas have argued as well.
This is the most logical explanation. He doesn't give a shit about six Californias. He just wants there to be a Silicon Valley state with its own government.
Still, I can't help but shake the feeling that there's some other game he's playing here.
Why? There doesn't need to be. The rich are no more immune from wasting their time on pet projects then anyone else.
+2
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
Any chance this is a way for him to use various legal loopholes to obtain money or to dodge taxes or other regulations, ala Super PACs? Or maybe he's just doing it to get laid by Randians?
You know what would help California with their water woes?
Telling Vegas to stop wanting green lawns and water parks in the Middle of a desert.
I don't know if LA has ever gotten significant water supplies from the Colorado River. It's definitely an issue for people downstream of Vegas in Arizona and far Southern California, though.
Ehhh. I have to say as someone who is from California, the people who are totally unrepresented have a reason to complain. Allocating funds and bonds and budget time to things like a rail system that they will never use, etc. I was born somewhat near OC/LA and in a county where we actually had this thing called water, they would take our water, pump it to LA for "processing" (we had a plant... didn't need that service) and then pump it back to us and charge a fee for the "water transfer".
Seeing how I then lived the rest of my teens/early adulthood way up north in Chico I saw how batshit fuckawful the budget process was, and more than once wished everything south of Sacramento would just fall into the ocean and stop fucking with me. I dont think many people appreciate how large California is, and how dense the population pockets are. I've since left the state, and have to say if they split it up in some fashion I would consider moving back.
This does not mean I want it split up into "rich fucks with golden castles live in these 5 coastal cities, everyone else get fucked." Something a little more representative of the smaller population groupings of 400,000-1,000,000 would be okay with me.
I haven't used the fire department before. Man, why is all that money allocated to something I don't even use?
I also kind of doubt your claim about water being randomly transferred around then then the county just eating a bill for it.
Why's that? It's quite possible that LA could have the rights to the water that supercede the upstream folks - there's a similar issue up in my neck of the woods regarding the Missouri and Mississippi, where the downstream folks have control of the water flow, even though we would like to retain some of the water ourselves.
I think people are naturally concerned about change, and I think not all change is good. And the pace of change is increasing. We haven't adapted systems to deal with that. Some of our institutions, like the law, aren't keeping up. Some of the laws are very old. The law when we went public was 50 years old. Law can't be right if it's 50 years old.
...
We haven't built mechanisms to allow experiementation. There are many exciting things you could do that are illegal or not allowed by regulation. And that's good, we don't want to chagne the world. But maybe we can set aside a part of the world. I like going to Burning Man. As a technologist maybe we need some safe places where we can try things and not have to deploy to the entire world. I like thinking about things like that.
In a fit of craziness, I actually went through county-by-county and calculated the populations of each of the proposed states and how they would have voted in 2012.
Since I spent like 45 minutes doing this, you get to read about it.
Jefferson
Made of up the sparsely populated northern counties of California.
Population (2010 census): 949,240. This would make it one of the least populous states, between Delaware and South Dakota.
Area: 40,713 square miles, or just a bit larger than Kentucky.
2012 election results: Romney wins, 181,611 to 164,615.
North California
The counties immediately south of Jefferson, including the "North Bay" of the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, and most of the counties in the Lake Tahoe region.
Population: 3,724,229, about a medium size state, between Connecticut and Oklahoma, and a little smaller than Oregon
Area: 12,608 square miles, or just a tad larger than Maryland
2012 election: Obama wins easily 841,782 to 563,821
Silicon Valley
It's the place I live! Also I think this is a dumb name for a state. How about Portola instead?
Population: 6,597,332, or more than Indiana and less than Arizona. This would put it in the top quarter of state population sizes.
Area: 8,402 square miles, or the 4th smallest state ahead of only Rhode Island, Delaware, and Connecticut.
2012 election: take a guess (Obama wins in a landslide, 1,625,311 to 836,010).
Central California
Middle America isn't too dissimilar from Middle California.
Population: 4,124,776, again, a medium sized state, between Oregon and Kentucky.
Area: 45,692 square miles, or between Ohio and Pennsylvania.
2012 election: Romney wins, but probably not by as much as you'd think, 576,059 to 542,101.
West California
It's really more the Central Coast + LA, but eh.
Population: 11,533,918, slightly bigger than Ohio.
Area: 11,948 square miles, between Hawaii and Maryland.
2012 election: Obama wins, 2,543,219 to 1,157,864
South California
Suburban LA, deserts, and San Diego
Population: 10,504,924, or slightly smaller than Ohio.
Area: 36,439 square miles, between Indiana and Kentucky
2012 election: this would instantly become a swing state. Obama would have won in 2012, 1,797,731 to 1,713,549.
Obviously, I think the idea is still ludicrous. If you were going to do it, I'd just settle for North and South California.
In a fit of craziness, I actually went through county-by-county and calculated the populations of each of the proposed states and how they would have voted in 2012.
Since I spent like 45 minutes doing this, you get to read about it.
Jefferson
Made of up the sparsely populated northern counties of California.
Population (2010 census): 949,240. This would make it one of the least populous states, between Delaware and South Dakota.
Area: 40,713 square miles, or just a bit larger than Kentucky.
2012 election results: Romney wins, 181,611 to 164,615.
North California
The counties immediately south of Jefferson, including the "North Bay" of the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, and most of the counties in the Lake Tahoe region.
Population: 3,724,229, about a medium size state, between Connecticut and Oklahoma, and a little smaller than Oregon
Area: 12,608 square miles, or just a tad larger than Maryland
2012 election: Obama wins easily 841,782 to 563,821
Silicon Valley
It's the place I live! Also I think this is a dumb name for a state. How about Portola instead?
Population: 6,597,332, or more than Indiana and less than Arizona. This would put it in the top quarter of state population sizes.
Area: 8,402 square miles, or the 4th smallest state ahead of only Rhode Island, Delaware, and Connecticut.
2012 election: take a guess (Obama wins in a landslide, 1,625,311 to 836,010).
Central California
Middle America isn't too dissimilar from Middle California.
Population: 4,124,776, again, a medium sized state, between Oregon and Kentucky.
Area: 45,692 square miles, or between Ohio and Pennsylvania.
2012 election: Romney wins, but probably not by as much as you'd think, 576,059 to 542,101.
West California
It's really more the Central Coast + LA, but eh.
Population: 11,533,918, slightly bigger than Ohio.
Area: 11,948 square miles, between Hawaii and Maryland.
2012 election: Obama wins, 2,543,219 to 1,157,864
South California
Suburban LA, deserts, and San Diego
Population: 10,504,924, or slightly smaller than Ohio.
Area: 36,439 square miles, between Indiana and Kentucky
2012 election: this would instantly become a swing state. Obama would have won in 2012, 1,797,731 to 1,713,549.
Obviously, I think the idea is still ludicrous. If you were going to do it, I'd just settle for North and South California.
East and West! Easy and West!
This guy is either an idiot or an asshole (or both); his comment about the law shows he either lacks a fundamental understanding of the law or is willfully ignorant of it.
Edit: IIRC California was buying a lot of the Colorado River water before it was leaving Colorado resulting in a lot upset people in Arizona and Nevada. I'm pretty sure that deal has ended though (which sucks for Central California as they grow an assload of food and currently don't have a whole lot of water to do it with).
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
All in all I am in favor of them splitting California, maybe not 6 pieces but 3 or 4. As long as the Dakotas, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Montana and Nebraska get merged into a single state.
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Huge swaths of Cali don't and have been resistant to their implementation.
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Huge swaths of Cali don't and have been resistant to their implementation.
How...how does that even work? Do you just pay a flat rate as part of property taxes or something?
Hell, I live in Michigan where there is absolutely no shortage of fresh water, and I've still got a meter that tells my township how much to bill me.
Or are you talking about a meter that can regulate usage - like how people have special meters hooked to their AC so the electric company can cut their usage on hot days?
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Huge swaths of Cali don't and have been resistant to their implementation.
Wait, what?
They just pay a flat fee for water? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Even here in WA, where we have so much water it literally falls from the sky, we're still paying for usage.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I have no idea how they pay. I just know my apartment complex in Monterey had none and I occasionally see articles about Californians complaining about government interference where they're getting installed.
Okay, aside from all the other stupid on display there, how the hell does splitting the state into chunks "solve" the water issue? The "issue" is that we have a fucking drought, and I'm pretty sure drawing imaginary lines on a piece of paper is not going to make it rain.
I mean, I guess it would solve the water issue in the same way that blindfolding your kids and dumping them into a forest somewhere would solve your financial issues.
Also, as a Sacramentan, no way in hell do I want my new state to be dominated by the California boondocks.
This confused me the most.
Just start using water meters dammit. Texans use water meters.
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Huge swaths of Cali don't and have been resistant to their implementation.
How...how does that even work? Do you just pay a flat rate as part of property taxes or something?
Hell, I live in Michigan where there is absolutely no shortage of fresh water, and I've still got a meter that tells my township how much to bill me.
Or are you talking about a meter that can regulate usage - like how people have special meters hooked to their AC so the electric company can cut their usage on hot days?
Flat rate as part of property taxes is how the city I grew up in did it (not in CA)
I have no idea how they pay. I just know my apartment complex in Monterey had none and I occasionally see articles about Californians complaining about government interference where they're getting installed.
The second apartment I lived in didn't have a meter for each unit, but it did have one in the whole complex.
I hated it because water wasn't included in our rent, so the complex charged each tenant a portion of what the whole complex used with a formula based on the occupation and size of each unit. Since I lived by myself and don't cook, though, I don't use a lot of water at all and so I wound up paying way too much.
The first apartment I had had each unit with its own meter, and third place included it in the rent so I didn't care. I suspect the latter is the case for a lot of folks, so to them water is basically "free".
Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Why
Because you otherwise wind up with the tyranny of the majority. How invested are rural areas going to be if you don't give them a meaningful voice?
How invested are urban areas going to be when their interests are drowned out by low population areas with disproportionate control over the government?
Mine literally didn't have one at all. It was nonsense. Mind, they've been installing them all over for some time now but compliance isn't required til 2025. The bill was passed in 2004.
I feel like someone should send this guy a copy of Lord of the Flies.
"Guys, we can do it ourselves," doesn't often work out like one would hope. :?
"That Jack guy was a real type-A go-getter, and once he dealt with the whining liberals he'd have really got the economy of that island moving if BIG GOVERNMENT hadn't turned up and taken the rewards of his hard work away from him. Let's see if we can't re-run this, maybe kick in some decent investment and some quality consultants and get things really moving this time."
Ehhh. I have to say as someone who is from California, the people who are totally unrepresented have a reason to complain. Allocating funds and bonds and budget time to things like a rail system that they will never use, etc. I was born somewhat near OC/LA and in a county where we actually had this thing called water, they would take our water, pump it to LA for "processing" (we had a plant... didn't need that service) and then pump it back to us and charge a fee for the "water transfer".
Seeing how I then lived the rest of my teens/early adulthood way up north in Chico I saw how batshit fuckawful the budget process was, and more than once wished everything south of Sacramento would just fall into the ocean and stop fucking with me. I dont think many people appreciate how large California is, and how dense the population pockets are. I've since left the state, and have to say if they split it up in some fashion I would consider moving back.
This does not mean I want it split up into "rich fucks with golden castles live in these 5 coastal cities, everyone else get fucked." Something a little more representative of the smaller population groupings of 400,000-1,000,000 would be okay with me.
I haven't used the fire department before. Man, why is all that money allocated to something I don't even use?
I also kind of doubt your claim about water being randomly transferred around then then the county just eating a bill for it.
... well okay. I'm going to have to call the fire department gag a bit of a straw man. I'm not talking about just a normal ole train that toots up and down the state. They're specifically building an entirely new rail system that's going to go from LA to San Francisco (initially). Which will be quite literally of no use whatsoever for nearly everyone in the state who is not in those two areas. We already have a rail system, it's called Amtrak and I guess it's just for those poor people who whether they want to or not, are helping fund a ridiculous overpriced overbudget project that can't be stopped.
There are lots of by any other states standards, incredibly large cities and population centers that simply don't count. Fresno has 500,000 people living in it, and no one gives a shit. It's not like other states where they call it a metropolitan area (I'm looking at you Nashville with your "600,000") and incorporate the entire county into the census for the major city population stats. If you're not in the top 3-4 for population dense areas in the state, then fuck off because your opinion means quite nearly nothing to Sacramento. If you take San Francisco, you're looking at 800,000 people, if you take the metro area of San Francisco, you're looking at 4.5 million and it's the not even in the top 3 for Californias most populous cities.
Posts
To add to that. Even if by some fluke, someone managed to carve California into new smaller states. It still wouldn't solve the issue of bitching about Y part of A, fucking X part of A. So instead of Northern California bitching about being fucked over by LA on the state budget, it'll be Northern Jefferson State bitching about Southern or Western or Eastern or Central or whatever or some combination of Jefferson State fucking them over. Even better going back to Jeffe's example, people in Jefferson State will still bitch about LA fucking them over somehow.
Any time an argument for secession/spliting from an existing government entity, boils down to "Wah, not being raped and pillaged but so-and-so is a meanie and we want to be an independent entity because we believe that will fix things," is a point where the proponents need to be told to bugger off. You're going to get people that are either assholes and/or get butthurt when they don't get their way and I don't see that ending anytime soon. Hell, I don't see the butthurt disappearing even if we do end up with a super computer AI overlord that does unbiased decision making for us (big if since it might make the unbiased conclusion that we are an intelligent species that is too irrational to be allowed to survive).
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
I haven't used the fire department before. Man, why is all that money allocated to something I don't even use?
I also kind of doubt your claim about water being randomly transferred around then then the county just eating a bill for it.
Well, don't forget you'd also get ten new senators out of the deal, and if he thinks at least six of them are likely to be Republican...
It's like seeing a crazy homeless guy rubbing shit on himself to the tune of Beethoven and wondering why he opted for the ninth symphony.
Why? There doesn't need to be. The rich are no more immune from wasting their time on pet projects then anyone else.
...because he just found two extra Peggle balls?
"I... CAN ... MAKE ...THE... LINES... STRRRAAAAAAAIIIIIIGGGGHHHHHT!!!"
I don't know if LA proper gets this water, but Riverside is in the area at least:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Aqueduct
Of course, that's not really the craziest aqueduct to get water into the LA basin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_aqueduct
Why's that? It's quite possible that LA could have the rights to the water that supercede the upstream folks - there's a similar issue up in my neck of the woods regarding the Missouri and Mississippi, where the downstream folks have control of the water flow, even though we would like to retain some of the water ourselves.
Actually, it makes sense, if you understand the SV mindset. I'd look up the Google I/O 2013 keynote, as this was something that came up in Page's presentation:
Since I spent like 45 minutes doing this, you get to read about it.
Jefferson
North California
Silicon Valley
Central California
West California
South California
Obviously, I think the idea is still ludicrous. If you were going to do it, I'd just settle for North and South California.
East and West! Easy and West!
This guy is either an idiot or an asshole (or both); his comment about the law shows he either lacks a fundamental understanding of the law or is willfully ignorant of it.
Edit: IIRC California was buying a lot of the Colorado River water before it was leaving Colorado resulting in a lot upset people in Arizona and Nevada. I'm pretty sure that deal has ended though (which sucks for Central California as they grow an assload of food and currently don't have a whole lot of water to do it with).
Wait Wait Wait!
You guys don't have water meters in California?
Like really? We have them in WI. And we have ridiculous amounts of water.
It's not an issue of water meters, but of a point I bring up every time someone talking about "one man, one vote" - out West, you have lightly populated watersheds and highly populated urban areas that don't have the local resources to support their population. But, they do have the votes to force the watershed regions to supply them, instead of instituting unpopular conservation policies. Which is why, as a counterbalance, you have to amplify the political voice of the less populous regions.
Nowheresia.
Just let me buy some stock in flag manufacturing companies first.
Maybe someone should explain what a water meter is because living in Socal we definitely had a meter on our house tracking our usage. How else would the water company know what to charge you?
Why
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Huge swaths of Cali don't and have been resistant to their implementation.
How...how does that even work? Do you just pay a flat rate as part of property taxes or something?
Hell, I live in Michigan where there is absolutely no shortage of fresh water, and I've still got a meter that tells my township how much to bill me.
Or are you talking about a meter that can regulate usage - like how people have special meters hooked to their AC so the electric company can cut their usage on hot days?
Wait, what?
They just pay a flat fee for water? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Even here in WA, where we have so much water it literally falls from the sky, we're still paying for usage.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Because you otherwise wind up with the tyranny of the majority. How invested are rural areas going to be if you don't give them a meaningful voice?
Flat rate as part of property taxes is how the city I grew up in did it (not in CA)
We should probably burn our state constitution and start over.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Well assuming it is stored somewhere in the state, you guys have been making a good effort at torching that POS.
The second apartment I lived in didn't have a meter for each unit, but it did have one in the whole complex.
I hated it because water wasn't included in our rent, so the complex charged each tenant a portion of what the whole complex used with a formula based on the occupation and size of each unit. Since I lived by myself and don't cook, though, I don't use a lot of water at all and so I wound up paying way too much.
The first apartment I had had each unit with its own meter, and third place included it in the rent so I didn't care. I suspect the latter is the case for a lot of folks, so to them water is basically "free".
How invested are urban areas going to be when their interests are drowned out by low population areas with disproportionate control over the government?
"That Jack guy was a real type-A go-getter, and once he dealt with the whining liberals he'd have really got the economy of that island moving if BIG GOVERNMENT hadn't turned up and taken the rewards of his hard work away from him. Let's see if we can't re-run this, maybe kick in some decent investment and some quality consultants and get things really moving this time."
So I guess not having a meter isn't as uncommon as I thought.
We also only use about 150 litres of water per person per day, which looks to be way less than Californians.
I would be terrified of what would be put in its place, though.
... And now I'm wondering what Brown would come up with working on his lonesome.
Well you don't brush your teeth. Just how much water do you need to boil the taste out of food?
... well okay. I'm going to have to call the fire department gag a bit of a straw man. I'm not talking about just a normal ole train that toots up and down the state. They're specifically building an entirely new rail system that's going to go from LA to San Francisco (initially). Which will be quite literally of no use whatsoever for nearly everyone in the state who is not in those two areas. We already have a rail system, it's called Amtrak and I guess it's just for those poor people who whether they want to or not, are helping fund a ridiculous overpriced overbudget project that can't be stopped.
There are lots of by any other states standards, incredibly large cities and population centers that simply don't count. Fresno has 500,000 people living in it, and no one gives a shit. It's not like other states where they call it a metropolitan area (I'm looking at you Nashville with your "600,000") and incorporate the entire county into the census for the major city population stats. If you're not in the top 3-4 for population dense areas in the state, then fuck off because your opinion means quite nearly nothing to Sacramento. If you take San Francisco, you're looking at 800,000 people, if you take the metro area of San Francisco, you're looking at 4.5 million and it's the not even in the top 3 for Californias most populous cities.