• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Californians How Do You Plan To Vote On the Propositions.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
ichy said:
It's retribution, not revenge.

Re: innocent people being killed, most of those claims are vastly overhyped. Even the argument for Cameron Todd Willingham's innocence isn't nearly as strong as his supporters make it out to be. If we expect our legal system to be 100% free of error then we need to give up on the idea of punishing criminals and just let everyone go.
Click to expand...

I've yet to meet a single DP supporter that does not believe that the death of one innocent invalidates the DP entirely. I guess there is a first for everything.

Also funny: the majority of supporters tend to be self-described Christians...hilarious. 😀
 
zinfamous said:
Here, we've been raised on Nabisco. Just wait until you see those labels on every box of cereal, cracker, snack food, frozen food...etc. I contend that the labels won't tell you anything legitimate as to what is in the food, but it is going to open a lot of eyes. I still think it is a big "negative" for the very good things that can be involved with GMOs, but I feel it is necessary for getting the conversation going in a hopefully intelligent way.
Click to expand...

Well people looking into what they eat should be a conversation that we have even if most GMOs or perhaps all don't have unexpected effects on people.

However, I've heard stories involving GMO foods or more specifically the plants they are harvested from having unintended consequences.

I won't repeat them because I've only heard it from one source and finding links to stories about this subject as they apply to countries outside the U.S. that are direct links from news sites isn't easy.

However, what does happen if a GMO plant cross pollination with other plants? I've heard of Monsanto being worse than Apple when a plant they cooked up ends up somewhere where it wasn't supposed to be because of this.
 
Drako said:
It's simple economics IMO.

Oh, and man has been "genetically modifying" food since he started farming. The lawyers are going to have fun with this one for years to come.
Click to expand...

I've gotten into this before, in several other threads unrelated to this prop, but on the subject:

selective breeding is not the same as site-specific genetic modification. I really don't want to get into it right now--have to go deal with my ribosomal libraries cooking on my bench right now--but suffice to say, I deal with transgenic organisms on a daily basis.

Mendelian genetics is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
 
zinfamous said:
corporate spending on campaigns over the previous decade outweighs Union spending by about 30%+++ according to the above link I posted.
Click to expand...

Here are the actual numbers:

http://donor-demo-cir.herokuapp.com/groups/

A bit more telling than the PBS link especially when you look at the top contributor, margin, and some of the "corporations" in the top 10. ( not a shot at PBS, they were attempting to summarize, but it does merit some further evaluation IMO)

Also, if you look at the spending on the prop, the "against" outstrips the "for".. Sure you can say "well of course, they are protecting their interests". Problem with that (if we are operating under the assumption that Corps have an "unfair spending advantage" already, and this would increase it) is why don't we see them really giving a shit WRT to prop 32?

It just doesn't pass the smell test to me.. Voting Yes.
 
zinfamous said:
I don't disagree with the Union problem. I have an issue with the wrting in such propositions that claim "equal treatment" when the reality could not be further from that. It fundamentally pisses me off.

I don't give a dick about the Unions--I dislike them in principle, but accept the general necessity of them, even today--but I have a much larger problem with shifting influence squarely over to corporate interests?

If you really don't want money in politics, you would toss this to the can. Prepare to see far more money, and all of it coming from 2 or 3 "people."

good luck.
Click to expand...

I just don't see it that way I guess.. Why do you think there would be MORE money if 32 passes ? Shouldn't there be less because these "2 or 3 people" are unopposed ?

Its a "money in politics" problem... You may look at 32 as a boon, I look at it like a building block, maybe this moves CTA off the list as the current #1, and now we have a corp or super pac up there next, and we can focus on removing that influence as well.
 
zinfamous said:
Also funny: the majority of supporters tend to be self-described Christians...hilarious. 😀
Click to expand...

I'm an atheist. I kind of agree with the satanist take on turning the other cheek though: "A Satanist practices the motto, "If a man smite thee on one cheek, smash him on the other!" Let no wrong go unredressed."
 
What's wrong with prop 31?

Transparency = good
Offsets for tax increases or revenue decreases sounds good too.
Publication of proposed laws at least three days before vote also sounds good.
Allows local governments to implement a law in their own way as long as it gets the same results: sounds good and bad. Good because it gives more powe to local government in how they use their resources, it could be bad because it creates various versions of the same law that could be different from county to county.
Requires review of state programs and setting performance goals: sounds good to me although I know it would cause an increase in administrative costs but if we have smarter programs wouldn't that be offset?
I also like the part where they set aside time to actually review all the programs. To me that would create a lot of debate and bring out better public knowledge.


I see some higher administrative costs but overall a lot more transparency and accountability.


What am I missing?
 
My guy instincts tell me prop 34 will benefit private prisons especially when money must be set aside for police and investigations.

Private prisons benefit from prison work and from a growing prison population.


On a more personal level it seems like this law would be a big "fuck you" to people that had loved ones killed by someone who will now get to live out their life (in some cases it's a better life than before they were in prison).
 
35 seems unnecessary, very few people have gone to jail for this in the first place and yet it will require training for police which will cost more money.
 
I would have likely voted yes on 32 if it was only for Public Unions, as public workers already have strong protections according to the 14th Amendment.
 
All corn is genetically modified it became it's current form through human manipulation.

32 needs to pass I'm sick of being beholden to the Teachers Union. Fuck them and their public schools. Education already takes over 40% of California's general budget. It'S obviously not enough to keep running the inefficient shitty education system we have now, but I fail to see how that is my responsibility to continue funding failure. Lack of school choice and competition over education dollars is stagnating the education industry(yes it's a fucking industry even public schools are selling a product, you're just forced to pay for it). I feel education costs can be cut by over half and quality up if we start opening up the industry to more private choice.
 
For those late to the party and think Jerry's being honest about prop 30......

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/P...ng-3917833.php

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/...in-dishonesty/

http://www.scpr.org/blogs/politics/2...opponents-say/

The law itself deceives you. Prop 30 money simply displaces a like amount out of the general fund for Sacramento to do other stuff with. They have been lambasted by almost every major news media and then even Molly Monger and her prop 38 tax crowd (especially when she revealed the lies) since a couple weeks ago when the new ads came out. Because most people, even smart people who READ the law (like yourself) won't know that it just frees money up on the back end. Another version of "kicking the can".

Just like Brown's train.

Just like Villaraigoosegg's subway to the sea.

They know that if they can earmark "more/extra" money in one place, that's enough to give them more money to play with elsewhere as they substitute these allocations.

[size=+4]NO ON PROP 30!!!![/size]
 
zinfamous said:
I've yet to meet a single DP supporter that does not believe that the death of one innocent invalidates the DP entirely. I guess there is a first for everything.

Also funny: the majority of supporters tend to be self-described Christians...hilarious. 😀
Click to expand...

So life in prison of one innocent doesn't invalidate life in prison? Punishment of an innocent invalidates punishment overall? Arresting an innocent means we shouldn't ever arrest anyone? How far to you stretch it. Maybe we should do a better job with our legal system rather than worrying about punishments.

The reason the DP is so costly and so time consuming is because we give it so much red tape and there's so many hurdles to cross to put someone to death. The act of the DP itself is very simple, and I believe it should stand. Just because our judicial system is broken and we don't clear people off Death Row quickly enough doesn't mean we end the death penalty. The correct solution is to look at why the hell does it take so long? If you wanted to you could get all the facts out on the table and done with very quickly.
 
Correct! And at the same time, find out why it costs 3 times the amount per prisoner in California that it does in other states! 😉

This state is so bass ackward it makes hell look like the Bahamas.
 
There is a significant difference still between selective breeding or hybridization and genetically modified foods. Man has been selectivly breeding and hybridizing fruits and vegetables for thousands of years, this isn't the same as GMO foods that are less than 50 years old.
 
DLeRium said:
So life in prison of one innocent doesn't invalidate life in prison? Punishment of an innocent invalidates punishment overall? Arresting an innocent means we shouldn't ever arrest anyone? How far to you stretch it. Maybe we should do a better job with our legal system rather than worrying about punishments.

The reason the DP is so costly and so time consuming is because we give it so much red tape and there's so many hurdles to cross to put someone to death. The act of the DP itself is very simple, and I believe it should stand. Just because our judicial system is broken and we don't clear people off Death Row quickly enough doesn't mean we end the death penalty. The correct solution is to look at why the hell does it take so long? If you wanted to you could get all the facts out on the table and done with very quickly.
Click to expand...

very simple. It takes so long because the state putting someone to death is a very serious issue. With the long, long history of fraudulent criminal trials, the absolute assurance of guilt is a must.

again, I don't know anyone that disagrees with this. It really doesn't matter why it is so expensive--the easiest solution is the only solution.

End it, because it is, quite simply, morally reprehensible.

the cost issue is only used to appeal to immoral justice hawks. When that doesn't work, it isn't really worth trying to convince someone otherwise, imo. :\

DO I believe that some people commit such horrible acts that they forfeit their life value? Yeah...but I don't believe it is the state's right to kill them.
 
30 - Yes
31 - No
32 - No
33 - Yes
34 - No
35 - Yes
36 - Yes
37 - Undecided
38 - No
39 - Yes
40 - Yes

Btw anyone who's in Los Angeles, vote no for on Measure B 😉
Bring it on election day!
 
35 is a terrible law, that could have the adult children of prostitutes be charged and convicted of human trafficking.
 
DCal430 said:
35 is a terrible law, that could have the adult children of prostitutes be charged and convicted of human trafficking.
Click to expand...

That's a stretch.

However its a bad law because consensual acts of prostitution could cause those who have nothing to do with human trafficking to be prosecuted by overzealous DA's under this law despite its original intentions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top