search results matching tag: california

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (1000)     Sift Talk (38)     Blogs (67)     Comments (1000)   

California gas goes past $6 dollar

newtboy says...

ONE gas station is over $6…in Beverly Grove, the shopping district of Beverly Hills. The real average is $4.77 statewide.
Another totally dishonest @bobknight33 post. I expect nothing less.

I’m in Humboldt county, the most expensive gas in California regularly by far (except for special hyper expensive stations like Big Sur, Icehouse gas on the Rubicon trail, and the Uber rich one in the post).
…we are barely over $5, just like we were in 2019.

Texas Cop Vapes Confiscated Weed on Cruiser Camera

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

newtboy says...

Did they offer that in the program, or was it only random individuals….or are you extrapolating, assuming the program became universal? I thought this plan was just for the indigent.

$500 each for 4 works out to more than my wife brought home for 40 hours a week after 15 years at her last job…..barely livable for 4 anywhere in California, a nice income in some states. Not a huge amount to provide for 6 months. How much does temporary housing, services, extra law enforcement, etc cost over that time for 4 people? I assume they’re close.

Yes, universal income is costly, but most on the right won’t consider giving the destitute money if they don’t get a handout too, that likely multiplies the amount by over 10 times. With a means test, it would be billions, maybe under $100 billion. We spent nearly $6 trillion on bad Covid response in 2020, including trillions to corporate welfare handouts with no strings attached and they still fired millions of workers. I think if that’s ok we can afford to invest in making people productive again instead of drains on society (of course, not everyone will benefit, but 75% success must be a win overall). If not, socialize any corporation that took a bailout, we bought em, we should own them.

…Or taking on more debt like every government project, but the increase in gdp from turning costs into profits likely pays for the program without a dime in new taxes, just a reduction in costs of handling the homeless and new taxes from their incomes….especially if you have a means test and not universal income.

Yes, they convoluted by calling it universal income but focusing on homeless. It should be UMI. Universal Minimum Income….under employed get less than unemployed up to a certain minimum livable combined income, fully employed (with living wages) get nothing….IMO. Sadly, a large portion of people can’t see what’s in that plan for them (no homeless, less crime dumbshits) so won’t consider it unless they also get $500 even though that’s not even a noticeable amount to them….one more ivory backscratcher.

bcglorf said:

I'm gonna have to be that guy. $500 a month for a family of four is $2k, which is a very good chunk of money to drop in your lap.

That works out the same as it they were on a single income, working 40 hour weeks at $10/hr, so almost equivalent to a full time job. No doubt that's gonna be a big deal and noticeable financial improvement to the recipient(s).

As always with UBI schemes, the devil is in how you pay for it. If it's truly universal, paying $500/month to ~330 million Americans would cost $1.98 Trillion dollars, meanwhile the current entire US gov budget for 2022 is estimated at $1.2 Trillion.

So, to implement $500/month universally in America would require not only increasing overall tax revenues by almost 50% it would also require the cancellation of 100% of every single other expenditure. That not includes military spending going to zero, but even cancelling the jobs of everyone that collects taxes and would presumably have been responsible for distributing the $500 checks.

If the 'fix' is to just tax the pants off anyone earning more than the $500/month, or limiting who we give it to, then it ceases to be a UBI scheme, and is instead just a mundane modification of the existing social security scheme by shuffling more money back and forth between different folks.

Vote While It Counts

newtboy says...

Comment downvote for blatant lies

1) it specifically does not outlaw them, it explicitly allows them….it regulates and enforces them, so yes, in states with ID laws, it has mandatory ID to vote (but expands what ID is allowed beyond a drivers license.). Fail

2) It does not allow unattended drop boxes. where? Quote it. It requires more drop boxes than one for 3.5 million people, it does not (that I can find anywhere) allow unattended drop boxes any more than current laws which require them to be under surveillance and attended. It does not allow “vote gathering” liar, prove me wrong with quotes from the bill (you can’t)….side note, in California, the Republican Party itself set up multiple unauthorized drop boxes, unattended and without surveillance cameras even after being charged for breaking state laws, gathered those votes (discarding any that they didn’t want to submit, like any from people named Enrique and DeShawn, and possibly filling out any left unsealed…..Republicans are also the ones caught with campaigns directly harvesting ballots from nursing homes and admitting they filled out any race not filled out, voting for the Republican candidates even on Democrat’s ballots, so you know, those are Republican MOs, not Democratic, you can’t point to one actual example of Democrats doing that, maybe you can find some false OAN reports claiming that, but absolutely no evidence. Double Fail

3) dumb ass, it requires investigation by the state “ Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including by requiring states to conduct post-election audits for federal elections”. It also requires states to purchase voting machines with a paper receipt and record, so no more attempts like cyber ninjas to reprogram the machines to give the results they want with no physical record to prove their fraud. Super fail

4) where does it limit a states ability to challenge and audit itself? Quotes from the bill or admit you’re lying. It limits the states ability to gerrymander, to deny polling places for targeted populations, and to create biased and blatantly racist policies designed to obstruct certain populations from voting. It limits states ability to limit early voting. It actually REQUIRES states to audit every federal election you delusional fucking moron. Double dipsolitious fail

5) the scariest part for you (that you didn’t mention intentionally) is making Election Day a national holiday, because if poor working people get a paid day off to vote, guaranteed more will vote, and that’s disastrous for the right that freely admits it can only win elections if they get to choose the voters, the method of voting, and the outcome (I’m looking at Trump), and will never win any election ever again if all legal voters vote.

Such a sad, deluded little liar you’ve become, bob. You must really dislike yourself to do that to yourself. You’re worth an honest argument and position, bob. You let Trump twist you into this dishonest, “say anything”, hyper partisan angry little man…..you deserve better, and we all deserve better from you.

Always against the side of freedom, inclusion, equal opportunity, truth, honesty, fairness, civil rights, and civility.

bobknight33 said:

It does not have mandatory ID to vote.

It allows un attended voting boxes.

It allow vote gathering.

None of this is secure.


Limits states ability to challenge.

The simple tool that can open most US stores

eric3579 says...

My understanding is that it is legal for anyone to purchase and possess lock picking tools. Seller does have to obtain info regarding purchaser, but just basic stuff.

Here are the California codes regarding such tools.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?chapter=3.&part=1.&lawCode=PEN&title=13.

BSR said:

I don't know for a fact but I suspect that you may have to show proof that you are legally allowed to purchase such items. After all "lawyer" is in his title.

The simple tool that can open most US stores

eric3579 says...

He's not selling "burglary tools" anymore than Home Depot is, but i know what you're saying. It sure doesn't feel right for him to sell what he does.

By California law it's no more a burglary tool then a screwdriver is. Intent to break in must be proven for the tool to be deemed illegal to be in possession of. At least that's how i read it. California Penal Code 466

newtboy said:

It should be noted, just getting caught with burglary tools can be a 6 month sentence in California.

The simple tool that can open most US stores

newtboy says...

They should subpoena his customer list. He’s selling burglary tools, and not just to first responders (should be limited to actual police/fire departments and locksmiths IMO)….and putting out videos describing how to break into businesses.
If there’s a sudden rash of business break ins with no door damage he should be charged as an accomplice. I can’t believe he sells multiple burglary tools on his site, I thought he just proved how bad most padlocks are, I never saw him do a breaking and entering how to before. Yikes!
It should be noted, just getting caught with burglary tools can be a 6 month sentence in California.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

Tonga Eruption Causes Tsunamis all around the Pacific

eric3579 says...

Timestamps:
0:01 - 3:08 Peru
3:09 - 7:56 California
7:57 - 12:11 Japan
12:12 - 15:46 Chile
15:47 - 17:13 Ecuador
17:14 - 18:34 Hawaii
18:35 - 19:34 Oregon
19:35 - 20:19 Mexico

Has anyone heard/read if and how the eruption may impact global temperatures over the next few years? Curious what the climate scientist are predicting, but maybe to soon to know anything.

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

newtboy says...

That’s called politicizing the court, packing it with obviously hyper partisan activist (drunkard rapist) judges, then bringing otherwise completely invalid lawsuits so they can improperly rule in your favor based on political affiliation, not the law. Their cases had no chance in a fair or balanced court because they have no merit. That is a bastardization of how the law works, and a recipe for the end of the union.
(And your idea that the right doesn’t bring obviously losing cases to court is hilariously ignorant, for just one glaring example, look at the 62 election cases laughed out of court, tried as political theater, never having a snowball’s chance in hell of winning without complicit, partisan judges ruling solely based on who appointed them.)

WRT “the abortion issue” (and the nation destroying ploy to end run the courts rulings),remember, states claiming they can overrule federal law (specifically contradicted in the constitution btw) is EXACTLY what caused the civil war. It’s astonishing trying to overrule federal law with a state law isn’t a felony, it’s definitely unconstitutional.

Previous rulings have been overturned, but never before just ignored with the OK from the highest court. They just ruled themselves out of power, because if their ruling can be circumvented so easily or just ignored by states outright, they might as well close shop and go home….ending the USA.

Newsom is proving that by enacting the same measures against guns in California. If you think that will stop at ghost guns and assault rifles, or that other states won’t follow suit, you’re dumber than I give you credit for.

bobknight33 said:

The fact that cases are now before the court is because some conservatives feel there is a chance to have their cases win.

Why bring these case before the supreme court if you know you would have a high likely to loose. All the cost time and effort.


WRT to the abortion issue .If overturned it just means that the decision goes back to the states.


Overturning a previous opinions has occurred and will occur in the future .

Jordan Klepper vs. Anti-Vaxxers in SoCal | The Daily Show

newtboy says...

Funny they want to imply these are far left liberal anti vaxers because they’re Californians, but they all spouted far right wing talking points verbatim. I wish, when they bring up body autonomy, he would ask “so you’re pro choice, right?” I think their answers would clear up who many of these people really are.

FYI, Jordan, there are tons of bat shit crazy right wingers in California , especially in the LA area.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

What did I tell you!?! States rights! Suckers! Bwaaaahahahahaha!

“I am outraged by yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place,” Newsom said. “But if states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way.” Newsom said he will work with his staff, the Legislature and California Attorney General Rob Bonta to craft a bill that would let citizens sue anyone who “manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts” in California. They could seek damages of at least $10,000 per violation plus costs and attorney’s fees, Newsom said.

Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256524466.html#storylink=cpy

I told you this would happen.

BTW, the Presidential coup Plan PowerPoint handed over by Meadows pretty much obliterated the lies that 1) it wasn’t an attempted coup 2) it wasn’t expected 3) it wasn’t planned 4) it wasn’t Trump supporters being violent and 5) the white house wasn’t directly involved.
Contemporaneous records of the planning, including texts to organizers and militias claiming that the national guard is poised to protect Trump rioters from arrest or attack….as if any non cultist needed more evidence beyond the live broadcast of the coup attempt, but now there’s publicly available physical documentation/evidence directly from the highest levels in Trump’s cabinet of their own direct involvement in the planning to overturn the certified election by fraud and force.….which I’m certain you will dismiss as fake news with no hint of evidence because your little brain can’t handle facts.

the PowerPoint laid out a plan to effectively use the military to steal the election outright, undeniably. That’s treason.

The plan was to use the military, specifically the national guard, declare a state of emergency, throw out most of the ballots from the 2020 election, and then have the national guard run by people that Trump handpicked himself count only the paper ballots that they deemed to be legitimate. essentially giving them a free ride to throw out any ballots that were for Biden. Only count the ones for Trump and boom, Donald Trump gets all the electoral votes. That's how the coup was supposed to happen. So again, these lawmakers were briefed on this two days before the capital riot. So they knew exactly what Donald Trump was trying to do, what his administration, what his friends, what his allies had suggested to him. There is no indication at all that one of these lawmakers alerted the department of justice, the FBI, local authorities, anyone, they had this information and they did nothing with it.

Any official who knew and didn’t report to the FBI or DOJ should be removed immediately, get the firing squad, and their entire estate (and their spouses estate, and minor children’s estates) seized. That’s a lot of Republicans.

Also, Fox hosts, the same ones who now claim Jan 6 was a peaceful picnic, families calmly touring congress, and it was BLM and ANTIFA and the FBI that perpetrated the violence that didn’t happen, were all frantically trying to reach the president to stop the attack on January 6, outraged he wouldn’t tell his supporters to stop attacking America, explaining how not acting to stop the coup was destroying his legacy and theirs.

Lake Mead At Historic Low, Expect Water Shortages

newtboy says...

The California state water board just announced that farms will receive 0% of their allocation in 2022 from state run sources in both the earliest and lowest allocation announcement.

ZERO. Only the bare minimum for sanitary conditions in many otherwise completely dry communities, up to 55gal per day per person if they’re granted emergency access.

This is on top of the major cuts from sources like the Colorado river, already cut completely from Arizona and Nevada farmers, and with California aquifers rapidly running dry.
California is by far the largest food producing state, producing over 13% of all food in America (by value) and nearly 100% of many staple foods and beverages. Along with the near complete halt to farming in neighboring states, it’s impossible to imagine this won’t dramatically affect both food costs and quality in America for the foreseeable future.

This is inflation due to predicted climate change, @bobknight33 , in case you need someone to blame…and since inflation is suddenly an issue for you. Biden asked for funding to address it, and got not one Republican vote. Clearly inflation isn’t important to Republican representatives unless it’s inflation of yacht prices.

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

newtboy says...

Democrats are denied even a hearing for even their centrist picks (Garland) outrageously unconstitutionally, then Republicans pick FAR RIGHT politicos to replace moderate leftist judges. That was new, never before seen in our history.
Sotomayor and Karen are centrists, dumb shit. Kavenaugh and Barrett are extremist far right wingers….Barrett is barely even a judge, rushed in by a lame duck traitorous seditionist and his lackeys, directly contradicting their own excuse for not hearing Obama’s nomination. They actually admitted they rammed her through as fast as possible with the barest minimum of examination in order to pack the court in anticipation of them contesting the election results….admitted it before the election.
Kavenaugh and Barrett are both extremist Far right wingers, political activist judges, who lied in their confirmation, one is a multiple rapist, never investigated, the other a religious extremist with zero experience who said she would recuse herself on any issue of faith, but hasn’t recused herself from any.
Throw down the gauntlet?! Opposition to his nomination centered on his perceived willingness to roll back the civil rights rulings of the Warren and Burger courts, and his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal. On October 23, 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court by a roll call vote of 42—58. Bork's margin of rejection by the Senate remains, by percentage, the third-largest on record and broke a 142-year record for largest defeat of a Supreme Court nomination. A historic immediate bipartisan rejection because he was totally unsuited, and had undeniably tried to help Nixon cover up Watergate as acting AG by firing the special prosecutor at Nixon’s direction (the AG and deputy AG had quit when Nixon insisted)….*.
Absolutely nothing similar to Obama being denied a hearing for his picks for a year until his term ended….*. Holy shit! What stupidity.

There are far fewer “conservatives” today, the Republican Party is 26% of the population, not a majority.

Yes, they are throwing cases to the packed court as fast as possible before their stolen majority evaporates. I support a 15 justice Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment halting any further additions without a 2/3 majority….add 6 hyper liberals…no judicial experience necessary or even preferred…AOC would be great.

Why bring a case you might lose? Because cases are supposed to be heard on their merits, not based on political affiliation you ignorant cow. You think the Supreme Court should be a political wing of the right, choosing and deciding cases based on political affiliation, not the law, science, common sense, ethics, or precedent….but only when it serves you.

So, gun rights should be up to states? That’s the next step if you win that fight…the constitution dies and states decide everything….as civil war erupts. Great plan, so patriotic. Remember, California is big enough that when they require fingerprint scanners on all guns sold in the state, manufacturers will add them to all guns….when semi auto guns are banned, manufacturers will move to single shot guns….just like auto manufacturers changed their cars to meet our requirements. Is that your plan? Had you even considered what individual states being in control means? It means California becomes the leader of America, controlling the other states by means of our size, wealth, and international clout. Enjoy.

Not like this, it hasn’t. Never in American history has the court been politicized and weaponized against the will of the majority to ignore precedent (contrary to their oaths and confirmation statements) in order to overturn established law and constitutional rights as a political act. Never.

bobknight33 said:

To say that Republicans are politicizing the supreme court is nonsense. Democrats pick left leaning and Republicans pick right leaning. This is not new. Where were your complaints of politicizing when Sotomayor or Kagen were appointed?

But if you want to go there it started with Senator Ted Kennedy within minutes of Bork being picked by POTUS Reagen to be appointed took to the floor of the senate and thrown down the gauntlet.


They may be lean more conservative today however Its been leaning left last 50 years.

The fact that cases are now before the court is because some conservatives feel there is a chance to have their cases win.

Why bring these case before the supreme court if you know you would have a high likely to loose. All the cost time and effort.


WRT to the abortion issue .If overturned it just means that the decision goes back to the states.


Overturning a previous opinions has occurred and will occur in the future .

Putting pants on while in space is a breeze



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists