Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kagus]

It gives the Mexicans something to do.

(California is also a large consumer of avocados, with strict produce import laws, so there's bound to be internal attempts to provide for the demand. And avocados actually grow fairly well there from what I know)

And California is a lot more than just desert, for what it's worth.

Also ninja.

[Naturegirl1999]

Thank you both for correcting me

[Dostoevsky]

Not a desert, but its agriculture is heavily overdrawing available water resources - and that's even before the latest waves of droughts over the past several years. Land is literally sinking in areas because the water table is so depleted.

(Citation needed, I know - don't have time to throw together some links, so my apologies.)

[scriver]

I played the California Fallouts

Deserts for desserts

[Iduno]

Mainly for the fact that nobody in their right mind would build a city in the desert.

[Clears throat in Las Vegas]

...wait, I'm not sure what I'm trying to prove here.

Hah. Good point ... however i said nobody in their "right mind" would build a city in the desert not that nobody would. Have you seen Las Vegas?

Aye. Lived there for ten years.

...hence why I'm not sure what point I'm trying to make.

I've been there. Can you imagine if they built it somewhere that wasn't shit? It would be too expensive, because literally anyone would want to be there.

[Lord Shonus]

Mainly for the fact that nobody in their right mind would build a city in the desert.

[Clears throat in Las Vegas]

...wait, I'm not sure what I'm trying to prove here.

Hah. Good point ... however i said nobody in their "right mind" would build a city in the desert not that nobody would. Have you seen Las Vegas?

Aye. Lived there for ten years.

...hence why I'm not sure what point I'm trying to make.

I've been there. Can you imagine if they built it somewhere that wasn't shit? It would be too expensive, because literally anyone would want to be there.

More importantly, the fact that Nevada was almost entirely undeveloped at the time meant that the legal code was very malleable - not a ton of people to convince. When the mob, flush with completely legit cash after WWII (longstanding ties between organized crime and the labor movement meant that a lot of mob bosses got government jobs dealing with dock security and labor relations - not to mention the economic boom put a huge amount of workingman's dollars in their coffers legitimately), was looking for a place to set up money-laundering operations on a gigantic scale to wash the huge amounts of illegitimate cash they gained from wartime gambling and prostitution they were able to get exactly what they wanted. If you want to launder money, there is no more perfect way to do it than set up a casino - at the most basic level you can just have a goon take in a sack of cash and lose it all. Then the casinos proved so profitable most of the mobs involved simply went legit.

[Doomblade187]

So, the DCCC (Democratic party institution for election consulting) has been caught working with a primary challenger of an incumbent house Democrat, something they were supposed to be preventing.

The person they were trying to primary is Ilhan Omar, a progressive. Not a great look right now.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I think that's old news? DCCC has been pretty open about blacklisting progressives while funding primaries by centrists.

Omar's Republican opponent is also on record calling for her to be hanged and is currently on the run after stealing a thousand dollars from Target.

[nenjin]

California isn't "a desert". It has desert regions. It's also the largest agricultural producing state in the entire USA.

https://beef2live.com/story-states-produce-food-value-0-107252

They grow stuff there ... because it's a good place for growing stuff.

Yeah it's great....except for the fact they don't have nearly enough water to support that kind of agriculture and have to pipe it in from other places.

Other than that it's _great._

[MrRoboto75]

California isn't "a desert". It has desert regions. It's also the largest agricultural producing state in the entire USA.

https://beef2live.com/story-states-produce-food-value-0-107252

They grow stuff there ... because it's a good place for growing stuff.

Yeah it's great....except for the fact they don't have nearly enough water to support that kind of agriculture and have to pipe it in from other places.

Other than that it's _great._

No, the place that's either literally shaking, in a drought, or on fire is the perfect place for agriculture.

[hector13]

Was Omar the one that said of Trump to “get that motherfucker”?

[Naturegirl1999]

California isn't "a desert". It has desert regions. It's also the largest agricultural producing state in the entire USA.

https://beef2live.com/story-states-produce-food-value-0-107252

They grow stuff there ... because it's a good place for growing stuff.

Yeah it's great....except for the fact they don't have nearly enough water to support that kind of agriculture and have to pipe it in from other places.

Other than that it's _great._

No, the place that's either literally shaking, in a drought, or on fire is the perfect place for agriculture.

i remember watching a documentary about the drought, and avocado farmers buying up the aquifers, meaning the citizens had even less water to work with, as most of it is used for avacsdo production, hence why I thought it was a desert

[PTTG??]

Is right now really the time to be repeating the same sectarian nonsense that's been floating around for decades? The states are largely identical, and where they are different is largely the effect of subgroups within the state -- no state has some magical effect that ends right at its borders. If Four Corners shifted to the left twenty miles, nobody would be able to just tell. California's forest fires are a by-product of rural land-use policies and easy commutes; the water it moves comes largely from within the state itself; the earthquakes, well the earthquakes are a gimmie.

My point is, we're all facing the return of a banished horseman of the apocalypse. I'd argue that the only thing worth really consider among the differences between states, or indeed nations, is whether or not their governments are 1: wise enough to recommend the correct action; 2: trustworthy enough to be listened to; and 3: honest enough to reveal even the data that is not flattering.

While so far California's state actions have been reasonably decent, I can't say the same for the federal political structure in both parties. Rand Paul has taken a radically pro-pestilence stance, and Nancy Pelosi is now several steps to the right of Donald Trump, arguing against strong support for those affected for Coronavirus while taking decisive action to insulate herself from the economic shock by selling her stock based on inside information. I want her recalled, or maybe impeached.

[Frumple]

Ha ha ha.

Remember that 1 trillion dollar liquidity thing a little bit back?

They're going to do it again!

Every day for the next 30 days straight.

Like. It might not even be a bad idea, from what I'm seeing? Shit's basically monopoly money being used like that, it's a shitton of loans w/ interest that theoretically actually spends nothing, and might even net the Fed a profit.

But.

The optics.

The optics of doing this when the fuckers in the WH and Senate can't seem to pass or enact even basic fucking assistance for anything that isn't wall street. The sheer look of 'giving' thirty fucking trillion to fucking investors instead of the american public. Holy shit.

I'm just saying, but more than ever the solution to this shit looks like a nice outlay of fava beans and chianti, to deal with this unfortunate rich person malignancy America seems to have developed.

Nancy Pelosi is now several steps to the right of Donald Trump, arguing against strong support for those affected for Coronavirus while taking decisive action to insulate herself from the economic shock by selling her stock based on inside information. I want her recalled, or maybe impeached.

Also that, neither of those are actually happening. The latter in particular, unless folks have dug up something else, was fucking fabricated in relation to stocks that A) were expiring or some shit the day they were traded B) were traded prior to major briefings other congressfucks were caught dumping stock after and C) don't show any sign of being unusual in basically any goddamn way. We have congress folks showing signs of holy shit corruption (like that GOP fuck that voted against the stock act or whatever it was, dumped stocks immediately after a major briefing, and then proceeded to try to downplay the dangers of the crow plague in public), but pelosi doesn't actually seem to be one of them.

The former's basically the same goddamn thing. We have people comparing statements by pelosi days or weeks prior to shit trump said or major shifts in what's going on, to fucking nonsense word babble the shitgibbon isn't actually going through, while the house the pelosi's heading is consistently passing shit several orders more leftward than fucking anything the GOP or trump is actually doing, nevermind the mouth noises they're utterly not backing.

[McTraveller]

The current financial situation is basically this:

We're learning just how much of our economy is based on "nonessentials".  Basically if it isn't food, utilities (including communications infrastructure), logistics, health care, emergency services, and housing it's not 'essential.'

So if your income is tied to a "nonessential", you have no income.  You want to keep the essentials, so somehow you need to pay the people providing the essentials.  There are two ways to do this:  pay the essential providers directly and have them "give out" the essentials, or pay everyone (including people who provide essentials and are getting paid already) so they can still pay for the essentials.

If you pay "everyone" then the people who just happened by circumstance to provide essentials, you get paid twice: you get normally by people buying your goods/services (with the "emergency funds" or whatever) and you get emergency funds yourself.

There are alternatives too, like "nobody is allowed to call in any debts, but please still provide the necessities."  This is slightly better: technically it would mean those providing necessities do not need (as much) money themselves, so they don't need "everyone" to get emergency funds.  This would avoid pumping massive amounts of cash into the system.

Reality though is that you probably can't pick just one of those options (suspend bills, pay everyone, pay providers of necessities only) so you end up with some combination.  Whatever is picked, though, there will be long-term effects.

Hopefully one of the lessons society learns from this is we need to be a society that values savings and reserve capacity as a fundamental part of the economy to help deal with this kind of stuff.  It's only because we have no reserves that we have to resort to money printing. 

Remember, money printing is really just saying "please keep working to make these necessities, we'll try and make it up to you later."