• 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.

Toyota bailing on California going to Texas

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
spidey07 said:
The constitution doesn't apply to states. So in that regard it isn't valid.
Click to expand...

Maybe you want to put the crack pipe down and indulge us by shedding light on your ridiculous reasoning as to why the Constitution does not inhibit state governments?

If that's the case, why can't states choose to pass restrictive gun laws?
 
You're the type of person that when someone posts a chart drawing out for you in easy to understand terms that money has actually been flowing the opposite direction (as anyone with their eyes open could easily see) you just go "nuh uh!!!!" So what's to see?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rajsabh...ifornias-fiscal-crisis-dooming-silicon-valley

The idiots of this state are even working on destroying Silicon Valley. But by all means keep denying it and insisting the opposite.
 
1prophet said:
Isn't the INTERNET with it's unlimited free eh, pirated porn destroying the old school porn industry?
Click to expand...

I don't think so. A lot of the porn money is transitioning to the live model sites now. I have a few friends who work in the industry (one is a composer who went to Berkeley and the other is a developer). That is really the only part of the industry that seems to be growing these days.
 
Darwin333 said:
As big of a 2nd Amendment person that you are...... Are you serious???
Click to expand...

Yes. It is exactly why states were able to have draconian restrictions on firearms, the 2nd amendment didn't apply to them. Now that the 2nd was recently incorporated, it does for that specific amendment. Why do you think individual states have their own Constitutions?
 
spidey07 said:
Yes. It is exactly why states were able to have draconian restrictions on firearms, the 2nd amendment didn't apply to them. Now that the 2nd was recently incorporated, it does for that specific amendment. Why do you think individual states have their own Constitutions?
Click to expand...

What you're saying is that the constitution and all it's amendments don't apply to states? I am going to go out on a limb and guess you don't understand how the constitution works with regards to amendments.
 
smackababy said:
What you're saying is that the constitution and all it's amendments don't apply to states? I am going to go out on a limb and guess you don't understand how the constitution works with regards to amendments.
Click to expand...

The amendments didn't apply to the states but similar rights were included in states constitutions. After the 14th the supreme court could rule on if an amendment was incorporated or not if it actually applied to the states.

To this day there are still amendments that don't apply to states. The constitution is about FEDERAL government, not state.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have zero clue about how amendments work and if they apply to states or not.
 
spidey07 said:
The amendments didn't apply to the states but similar rights were included in states constitutions. After the 14th the supreme court could rule on if an amendment was incorporated or not if it actually applied to the states.

To this day there are still amendments that don't apply to states. The constitution is about FEDERAL government, not state.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have zero clue about how amendments work and if they apply to states or not.
Click to expand...

Actually, no. It DID apply to the states, and that was the intent of the framers. It was not until Barron v. Baltimore that Marshall made the error of saying the bill of rights did NOT apply to the states. This was rectified with the due process clause in the 14th amendment. The only reason some amendments are not incorporated is that either they were deemed non-applicable, have since been overturned by a new amendment, or haven't been to court yet.
 
Zaap said:
They used to manufacture in Long Beach until around 2008.
Click to expand...

what did they manufacture in LB? I believe their main plant was in KY?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Motor_Manufacturing_Kentucky

//edit

wow

United States[edit]
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Mississippi, Tupelo, Mississippi – Toyota Corolla The facility will be named "Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Mississippi, Inc."[9]
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky, Inc., (TMMK) is located in Georgetown. Engine manufacture - 2GR-FE and 2AR-FE. Vehicle manufacture and assembly - Camry, Hybrid Camry, Avalon and Venza.
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas, Inc (TMMTX) is located in San Antonio. Vehicle manufacture and assembly - Tundra & Tacoma.
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Indiana, Inc. (TMMI) is located halfway between Princeton and Fort Branch. Vehicle manufacture and assembly - Sequoia, Sienna & Highlander.
Toyota Motor Manufacturing Alabama, Inc. (TMMAL), is located in Huntsville. Engine manufacture 1GR-FE, 1UR-FE and 3UR-FE. Engines mostly for TMMTX and some TMMI.
Toyota Motor Manufacturing West Virginia, Inc. (TMMWV), is located in Buffalo. Engine manufacture 2GR-FE, 2ZR-FE and 1AR-FE.
Click to expand...
 
RampantAndroid said:
Actually, no. It DID apply to the states, and that was the intent of the framers. It was not until Barron v. Baltimore that Marshall made the error of saying the bill of rights did NOT apply to the states. This was rectified with the due process clause in the 14th amendment. The only reason some amendments are not incorporated is that either they were deemed non-applicable, have since been overturned by a new amendment, or haven't been to court yet.
Click to expand...

shhh! (whatever you do, don't tell Spidey that if the constitution didn't apply to the states, he couldn't get all gay-happy about SCOTUS overturning 2nd amendment violations in various states and counties)

shhhhh!


edit: oh shit, he had already gone full stupid on that. This is what I get for reading threads backwards.
 
smackababy said:
That is true, except you are equating "organic" with of higher quality, which isn't true. Because your organic food is "more important" doesn't mean it is any better; in fact, there is no conclusive research over the nutritional content that I can find. Plenty of sources say they are the essentially the same, just that one costs a lot more.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking organic, per se, so much as Slow food. It is, by nature and practice, organic, but that isn't the point. The real issue being that it's easier to find heritage stocks of breeds--not this USDA standard pork shit that doesn't resemble any kind of real pig--lean pig? wtf is that? D:


anyway, back to my initial point: based on some empirical theorizing, our farts very likely do smell better. :colbert:
 
MooseNSquirrel said:
This reminds me of the right wing meme from a few years ago claiming all the rich people were leaving CA.

Because clearly if you are wealthy you would want to leave a state that has the perfect balance of great weather and amazing geography and move to a crappier place.
Click to expand...

Because obviously everywhere else is crappier compared to Cali...
 
senseamp said:
I believe in the free markets. And the free markets are valuing living in CA higher than living in TX. People are willing to pay much more to live in CA than TX.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really equate out linearly like you are implying. People make more in Cali to make up for the higher cost of living. If a person can work X job in Cali and live Y lifestyle with the proceeds and move to Texas, making 1/2 as much, yet still live Y lifestyle, they haven't given up anything at all to move to Texas.
 
Darwin333 said:
That doesn't really equate out linearly like you are implying. People make more in Cali to make up for the higher cost of living. If a person can work X job in Cali and live Y lifestyle with the proceeds and move to Texas, making 1/2 as much, yet still live Y lifestyle, they haven't given up anything at all to move to Texas.
Click to expand...

Nevermind that much of the costs imposed on people living here in CA has very little due to demand and everything to do with taxes, regulation, subsidies, etc all of which are passed down onto the consumer. Gasoline prices in CA are a perfect example of how government has imposed a higher cost of living on people in this state then in other states.
 
Darwin333 said:
That doesn't really equate out linearly like you are implying. People make more in Cali to make up for the higher cost of living. If a person can work X job in Cali and live Y lifestyle with the proceeds and move to Texas, making 1/2 as much, yet still live Y lifestyle, they haven't given up anything at all to move to Texas.
Click to expand...

And yet, people and companies choose to stay in places like Silicon Valley and pay more to do so. That means that Texas cannot replicate the lifestyle when you include non-material things like the size of the house in accessing lifestyle.
 
smart money goes where it's welcome. Alarmist eco-KOOKS have destroyed california public policy. The populous will eventually come out of their green self induced stupor and turn things around.
 
IGBT said:
smart money goes where it's welcome.
Click to expand...
vc-disbursements-by-state-and-province.png


Indeed.
 
senseamp said:
vc-disbursements-by-state-and-province.png


Indeed.
Click to expand...
That's venture capital. How many people do you know employed by a startup company?

California is pretty much the birthplace of modern venture capital firms so of course it leads the pack. The firms prefer keeping a close eye on who they give venture capital money to, so you have an advantage being close to them.

But what good is citing venture capital money in CA's favor if once the start up is established and moves up to manufacturing a product (you know, the point where actual jobs are created) and they locate their factories in Texas or Tennessee or even out of the country?
 
Darwin333 said:
That doesn't really equate out linearly like you are implying. People make more in Cali to make up for the higher cost of living. If a person can work X job in Cali and live Y lifestyle with the proceeds and move to Texas, making 1/2 as much, yet still live Y lifestyle, they haven't given up anything at all to move to Texas.
Click to expand...

If a house that is worth $600k in CA is only worth $100k in TX, when the homeowner decides to sell the house in CA, s/he can buy six houses in TX. Over the long term, the CA house will net the owner more actual dollars in property appreciation because the starting principal is a lot higher. Also, keep in mind that when the properties are paid off, the CA homeowner will have more actual spending dollars available than the TX homeowner which they can use to buy up cheap property in TX.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top