4 ms·

This is the most california thing Ive ever heard.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
California, the land where everything that isn't banned or taxed causes cancer.
gammateam 8y ago
But is it? This is probably going to be on that "Included Government Taxes and Regulatory Fees" section of your cell phone bill that has no explanation whatsoever. I've had those everywhere I've lived in the country.
weberc2 8y ago
Texting is know by the state of California to cause cancer...
- freehunter 8y ago
  They'd never be that specific. If the warnings were that specific they'd actually be useful. Instead there are warnings saying an entire building contains some unknown chemicals that will have an unknown chance of giving you an unknown type of cancer.
- deepuj 8y ago
  Well, texting while driving is a leading cause of road accidents..
  - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
    > accidents I prefer to call them collisions because "accident" implies nobody is at fault.
- SilasX 8y ago
  The propensity to raise taxes on anything other than land is known in the state of California to be a cancer.
cabaalis 8y ago
A new law and a new tax is right up their alley, but this is the thing that got me: > But they add that under the regulators’ proposal the charge could be applied retroactively for five years — which they call “an alarming precedent” — and could amount to a bill of more than $220 million for California consumers. Edit: I just wanted to point out: As someone else mentioned in another thread on this article, there's an idea of "ex post facto" laws in the US constitution[1]. So considering this "an alarming precedent" when the authors of the constitution already knew of such a thing and prohibited it is a statement about our generation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_10:_Limits_on_the_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_Stat...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- schoen 8y ago
  The ex post facto provision is normally interpreted to apply only to criminal laws, not to civil penalties or taxes.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > The ex post facto provision is normally interpreted to apply only to criminal laws, not to civil penalties or taxes. FWIW, the precedent distinguishing prohibited ex post facto laws from permitted retrospective laws was established by the Supreme Court when ink on the Constitution was practically still wet, in Calder v. Bull (1798).
    - PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
      It has also been rolled back. I do not remember the specific case, but it dealt with the SOR requirements being extended on people long after they has been convicted and sentenced due to a change in SOR laws. The courts ruled that it did not violate ex post facto. If that doesn't violate it, then taxes definitely wouldn't either. I think there is an applicable quote about defending scoundrels that would apply here.
omegaworks 8y ago
California neoliberals and their regressive tax proposals ensure the cost of social programs fall on the shoulders of everyone, ensuring the uber-wealthy are burdened to the same degree as the day laborer. The state has a property tax freeze on its hands that charges private country clubs pennies to the dollar on what should be their fair share.[1] 1. https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-gladwell-bf204294a1e8 https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-g...
briantakita 8y ago
It's a transfer of wealth from the middle class to those who control the funds (bureaucrats & oligarchs).

California, the land where everything that isn't banned or taxed causes cancer.

But is it? This is probably going to be on that "Included Government Taxes and Regulatory Fees" section of your cell phone bill that has no explanation whatsoever. I've had those everywhere I've lived in the country.

weberc2 8y ago

Texting is know by the state of California to cause cancer...

freehunter 8y ago
They'd never be that specific. If the warnings were that specific they'd actually be useful. Instead there are warnings saying an entire building contains some unknown chemicals that will have an unknown chance of giving you an unknown type of cancer.
deepuj 8y ago
Well, texting while driving is a leading cause of road accidents..
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  > accidents I prefer to call them collisions because "accident" implies nobody is at fault.
SilasX 8y ago
The propensity to raise taxes on anything other than land is known in the state of California to be a cancer.

cabaalis 8y ago

A new law and a new tax is right up their alley, but this is the thing that got me: > But they add that under the regulators’ proposal the charge could be applied retroactively for five years — which they call “an alarming precedent” — and could amount to a bill of more than $220 million for California consumers. Edit: I just wanted to point out: As someone else mentioned in another thread on this article, there's an idea of "ex post facto" laws in the US constitution[1]. So considering this "an alarming precedent" when the authors of the constitution already knew of such a thing and prohibited it is a statement about our generation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_10:_Limits_on_the_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_Stat...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
schoen 8y ago
The ex post facto provision is normally interpreted to apply only to criminal laws, not to civil penalties or taxes.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > The ex post facto provision is normally interpreted to apply only to criminal laws, not to civil penalties or taxes. FWIW, the precedent distinguishing prohibited ex post facto laws from permitted retrospective laws was established by the Supreme Court when ink on the Constitution was practically still wet, in Calder v. Bull (1798).
  - PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
    It has also been rolled back. I do not remember the specific case, but it dealt with the SOR requirements being extended on people long after they has been convicted and sentenced due to a change in SOR laws. The courts ruled that it did not violate ex post facto. If that doesn't violate it, then taxes definitely wouldn't either. I think there is an applicable quote about defending scoundrels that would apply here.

omegaworks 8y ago

California neoliberals and their regressive tax proposals ensure the cost of social programs fall on the shoulders of everyone, ensuring the uber-wealthy are burdened to the same degree as the day laborer. The state has a property tax freeze on its hands that charges private country clubs pennies to the dollar on what should be their fair share.[1] 1. https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-gladwell-bf204294a1e8 https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-g...

briantakita 8y ago

It's a transfer of wealth from the middle class to those who control the funds (bureaucrats & oligarchs).