Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
sd_matt
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
And it no longer is. Not like it used to be, anyway. It has destroyed its competitive advantage, and due to not only regulation, but also due to excessive litigation and prohibitively expensive insurance that arose due to that litigation.
[/quote]The Kauffman Foundation ranks California as the 8th best state for New Economy businesses:
http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedfiles/2008_state_new_economy_index_120908.pdf
I suspect you are lamenting the loss of old-line businesses that polluted the hell out of the environment. While those businesses are moving out, innovative new startups are cropping up all the time.
Proposition 23 is currently polling at 45% against with only 34% for it:
It looks like it’s going to go down in flames and you can look forward to more of those businesses who make money by making the public pay for their externalities leaving the state. I say good riddance. For every pollution-based business that leaves, there will be 100 technology-based startups to take their place.[/quote]
…100 tech based startups…we shall see.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]Just as I suspected, you can’t cite any environmental regulations that have caused economic harm, so you fall back on the same, old, tired ‘regulation is bad’ meme. Weak. The business I work for is thriving. I’ve also started a side business that appears to be taking off. If the businesses you are associated with are failing, I suspect it is because you are a failure and has nothing to do with environmental regulations.[/quote]
By your own standard. You still refuse to articulate just how AB32 will encourage the development of cheap green energy.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]Just as I suspected, you can’t cite any environmental regulations that have caused economic harm, so you fall back on the same, old, tired ‘regulation is bad’ meme. Weak. The business I work for is thriving. I’ve also started a side business that appears to be taking off. If the businesses you are associated with are failing, I suspect it is because you are a failure and has nothing to do with environmental regulations.[/quote]
By your own standard. You still refuse to articulate just how AB32 will encourage the development of cheap green energy.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]Just as I suspected, you can’t cite any environmental regulations that have caused economic harm, so you fall back on the same, old, tired ‘regulation is bad’ meme. Weak. The business I work for is thriving. I’ve also started a side business that appears to be taking off. If the businesses you are associated with are failing, I suspect it is because you are a failure and has nothing to do with environmental regulations.[/quote]
By your own standard. You still refuse to articulate just how AB32 will encourage the development of cheap green energy.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]Just as I suspected, you can’t cite any environmental regulations that have caused economic harm, so you fall back on the same, old, tired ‘regulation is bad’ meme. Weak. The business I work for is thriving. I’ve also started a side business that appears to be taking off. If the businesses you are associated with are failing, I suspect it is because you are a failure and has nothing to do with environmental regulations.[/quote]
By your own standard. You still refuse to articulate just how AB32 will encourage the development of cheap green energy.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]Just as I suspected, you can’t cite any environmental regulations that have caused economic harm, so you fall back on the same, old, tired ‘regulation is bad’ meme. Weak. The business I work for is thriving. I’ve also started a side business that appears to be taking off. If the businesses you are associated with are failing, I suspect it is because you are a failure and has nothing to do with environmental regulations.[/quote]
By your own standard. You still refuse to articulate just how AB32 will encourage the development of cheap green energy.
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=sd_matt]If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).
[/quote]There are a few problems with this:
(1) This thread has nothing to do with gays in the military
(2) I don’t give a rat’s about gays in the military.My goodness, your attempt at goat-getting failed miserably. If you want to discuss gays in the military, please start a new thread. Don’t hold your breath waiting for me to participate in such thread.
[quote=sd_matt]
I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.
LOL[/quote]What does that presentation have to do with Proposition 23? You’ve made some wild, illogical leaps in your post. Please dial down the tard level in any subsequent posts. Intelligent readers will appreciate it.[/quote]
The point is your sources leave a lot to be desired. Can I make that any more clear.
The video is VERY relevant as it discusses some of the problems with alternative energies…politically speaking. Is it directly related to Prop 23? Maybe maybe not. It also shows just how ineffective our R&D is.Is that not relevant to you?
Very well with the goat getting…I’ll refrain.
Now, what in your opinion, is contained in AB 32 that will encourage the development of cheap/ green energy that everyone will line up to buy?
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=sd_matt]If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).
[/quote]There are a few problems with this:
(1) This thread has nothing to do with gays in the military
(2) I don’t give a rat’s about gays in the military.My goodness, your attempt at goat-getting failed miserably. If you want to discuss gays in the military, please start a new thread. Don’t hold your breath waiting for me to participate in such thread.
[quote=sd_matt]
I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.
LOL[/quote]What does that presentation have to do with Proposition 23? You’ve made some wild, illogical leaps in your post. Please dial down the tard level in any subsequent posts. Intelligent readers will appreciate it.[/quote]
The point is your sources leave a lot to be desired. Can I make that any more clear.
The video is VERY relevant as it discusses some of the problems with alternative energies…politically speaking. Is it directly related to Prop 23? Maybe maybe not. It also shows just how ineffective our R&D is.Is that not relevant to you?
Very well with the goat getting…I’ll refrain.
Now, what in your opinion, is contained in AB 32 that will encourage the development of cheap/ green energy that everyone will line up to buy?
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=sd_matt]If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).
[/quote]There are a few problems with this:
(1) This thread has nothing to do with gays in the military
(2) I don’t give a rat’s about gays in the military.My goodness, your attempt at goat-getting failed miserably. If you want to discuss gays in the military, please start a new thread. Don’t hold your breath waiting for me to participate in such thread.
[quote=sd_matt]
I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.
LOL[/quote]What does that presentation have to do with Proposition 23? You’ve made some wild, illogical leaps in your post. Please dial down the tard level in any subsequent posts. Intelligent readers will appreciate it.[/quote]
The point is your sources leave a lot to be desired. Can I make that any more clear.
The video is VERY relevant as it discusses some of the problems with alternative energies…politically speaking. Is it directly related to Prop 23? Maybe maybe not. It also shows just how ineffective our R&D is.Is that not relevant to you?
Very well with the goat getting…I’ll refrain.
Now, what in your opinion, is contained in AB 32 that will encourage the development of cheap/ green energy that everyone will line up to buy?
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=sd_matt]If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).
[/quote]There are a few problems with this:
(1) This thread has nothing to do with gays in the military
(2) I don’t give a rat’s about gays in the military.My goodness, your attempt at goat-getting failed miserably. If you want to discuss gays in the military, please start a new thread. Don’t hold your breath waiting for me to participate in such thread.
[quote=sd_matt]
I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.
LOL[/quote]What does that presentation have to do with Proposition 23? You’ve made some wild, illogical leaps in your post. Please dial down the tard level in any subsequent posts. Intelligent readers will appreciate it.[/quote]
The point is your sources leave a lot to be desired. Can I make that any more clear.
The video is VERY relevant as it discusses some of the problems with alternative energies…politically speaking. Is it directly related to Prop 23? Maybe maybe not. It also shows just how ineffective our R&D is.Is that not relevant to you?
Very well with the goat getting…I’ll refrain.
Now, what in your opinion, is contained in AB 32 that will encourage the development of cheap/ green energy that everyone will line up to buy?
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=sd_matt]If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).
[/quote]There are a few problems with this:
(1) This thread has nothing to do with gays in the military
(2) I don’t give a rat’s about gays in the military.My goodness, your attempt at goat-getting failed miserably. If you want to discuss gays in the military, please start a new thread. Don’t hold your breath waiting for me to participate in such thread.
[quote=sd_matt]
I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.
LOL[/quote]What does that presentation have to do with Proposition 23? You’ve made some wild, illogical leaps in your post. Please dial down the tard level in any subsequent posts. Intelligent readers will appreciate it.[/quote]
The point is your sources leave a lot to be desired. Can I make that any more clear.
The video is VERY relevant as it discusses some of the problems with alternative energies…politically speaking. Is it directly related to Prop 23? Maybe maybe not. It also shows just how ineffective our R&D is.Is that not relevant to you?
Very well with the goat getting…I’ll refrain.
Now, what in your opinion, is contained in AB 32 that will encourage the development of cheap/ green energy that everyone will line up to buy?
Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]California is the home to Apple, the biggest, most successful company in the world. That fact blows a pretty massive hole in your theory that California regulations are stifling business.
If you are having trouble succeeding in California, why not move to a state or country where you can be successful? For instance, perhaps you would be more successful in the Gulf Coast region. Not everyone can make it here. There’s no shame in admitting that you can’t succeed in a regulatory environment that produced the largest, most successful company in the world.[/quote]
You are citing one example and applying it to the aggregate. I listen to NPR, Fox, Rush ect do this all day. What has been the aggregate effect on on CA?Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]California is the home to Apple, the biggest, most successful company in the world. That fact blows a pretty massive hole in your theory that California regulations are stifling business.
If you are having trouble succeeding in California, why not move to a state or country where you can be successful? For instance, perhaps you would be more successful in the Gulf Coast region. Not everyone can make it here. There’s no shame in admitting that you can’t succeed in a regulatory environment that produced the largest, most successful company in the world.[/quote]
You are citing one example and applying it to the aggregate. I listen to NPR, Fox, Rush ect do this all day. What has been the aggregate effect on on CA?Participant[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]California is the home to Apple, the biggest, most successful company in the world. That fact blows a pretty massive hole in your theory that California regulations are stifling business.
If you are having trouble succeeding in California, why not move to a state or country where you can be successful? For instance, perhaps you would be more successful in the Gulf Coast region. Not everyone can make it here. There’s no shame in admitting that you can’t succeed in a regulatory environment that produced the largest, most successful company in the world.[/quote]
You are citing one example and applying it to the aggregate. I listen to NPR, Fox, Rush ect do this all day. What has been the aggregate effect on on CA? -
AuthorPosts
