5 ms·

To paraphrase James Carville, "It's the people, stupid". It seems like there's a lot of Californians who talk about sustainability, but then turn right around a

by jdhn 7y ago

To paraphrase James Carville, "It's the people, stupid". It seems like there's a lot of Californians who talk about sustainability, but then turn right around and vote in people who continue to promote suburban sprawl, single family houses, zoning that doesn't promote density, and lack of investment in public transportation.

baggy_trough 7y ago
California's government isn't so hot either.
- jdhn 7y ago
  Is this a symptom of one party governance? It's certainly not because of a lack of money or progressiveness. If anything, I would expect that the California state government would be leading in all of these issues.
  - baggy_trough 7y ago
    It's almost as though progressivism and throwing money at problems doesn't really work that well.
    - throwawaytoday5 7y ago
      I forgot the shinning examples of conservative rule that is Alabama and Mississippi. For all the faults that California has political, it's still an economic powerhouse. What does Kentucky have?
    - pas 7y ago
      Nah, it works, it just takes a loooot more money than people imagine. Especially because if you want to tackle local problems that require local service providers (education, healthcare, craftsmen) you'll have to pay local (very high) prices.
lacker 7y ago
I think part of this is national politics pushing out state politics. Every statewide California race recently has felt like a foregone conclusion. Either the Democrat beats the Republican by a huge margin, or one Democrat beats another Democrat while the two agree on all policies. California just doesn’t have the one-party-against-another politics that make democracy work.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  Even if it’s always a Democrat they must still be competing with each other just as fiercely to get selected to be the Democratic candidate?
  - defterGoose 7y ago
    There's still cooperation in the party, and while the Democratic Party is a husk of its former principled self, the GOP has exploded into flames.
- chrisweekly 7y ago
  "the one-party-against-another politics that make democracy work" Where have you seen this happening in practice? A political science professor first showed me 25 years ago something I still see in US national politics: a "winner-take-all" voting system that creates a polarizing dynamic, typically resulting in a roughly 51:49 split -- with the potential for radically different outcomes hinging on tiny pockets of voters. Also, both parties are institutionally corrupted by the dominance of money (cf Lessig on "Fix Congress First", highlighting campaign finance as a fundamental threat to democracy). But only one of the parties is exhibiting blatant, explicit, direct opposition to the principles of democracy (eg voter suppression, rule of law, etc) from the highest level on down. The degree to which state politics are tied to the characteristics of the national party makes it difficult for powerful governors or even mayors to deviate from party lines. Don't get me wrong; the idea of a free marketplace of ideas and the positive value of principled opposition are things I'm sure we'd agree on. But that's not what we have. Wish I knew how to fix it.
- specialist 7y ago
Fakira 7y ago
None of those things have anything to do with sustainability and mismanagement of California's resources.
gduffy 7y ago
No offense, but your thinking here is actually a bigger part of the problem. There is nothing fundamentally unsustainable about suburbs, single family homes, low density, or cars. 50% of the USA is totally uninhabited, and it is possible today to build a totally off-grid and sustainable single family home / suburb in the majority of it. You can even capture carbon in concrete. Don't prescribe solutions just because you prefer them, set incentives and goals to favor the right outcomes and let people decide and optimize how to do it. Your urban utopia is my hellscape, and my suburban utopia is yours. The good news is, this is America, and we can both live here. Good fences make good neighbors. P.S. most of the $2 trillion real estate market in the Bay Area where I have lived for 12 years exists precisely because our politicians DON'T promote further development, sustainable or otherwise. Most of what's here is decaying, old, unsustainable, whether it is high or low density, and nobody can afford to improve it because all the tradespeople got priced out and left years ago.
- Karrot_Kream 7y ago
  > P.S. most of the $2 trillion real estate market in the Bay Area where I have lived for 12 years exists precisely because our politicians DON'T promote further development, sustainable or otherwise. Most of what's here is decaying, old, unsustainable, whether it is high or low density, and nobody can afford to improve it because all the tradespeople got priced out and left years ago. While I think the rest of your response is orthogonal (albeit valid), I think this is the heart of the matter relevant to the article. Californian infrastructure is aging and politicians have only made it more difficult over time to build new anything, whether that's power, water, internet, transport, or housing infrastructure. I just wish I knew what the solution was.
  - gduffy 7y ago
    The first part of the response is to the parent comment, not the article. That said, intelligent legislation to encourage all types of housing and development (with externalities like carbon priced in as taxes, not government prescribed solutions to mitigate them) would go a long way to bringing back affordability. The solution in the interim is to vote with your dollars and feet, if you can. And really think about it if your answer is "I can't". Most of the time, that's not really true. I'm leaving next month. Bye California and your awful policies that literally burn us to death at worst, and make us poorer and stingier zero-sum competitors at best. And for those of you who say "don't let the door hit your ass on the way out" ... check in with me in 10 years and let's compare stories! <3

by jdhn 7y ago

baggy_trough 7y ago

California's government isn't so hot either.

jdhn 7y ago
Is this a symptom of one party governance? It's certainly not because of a lack of money or progressiveness. If anything, I would expect that the California state government would be leading in all of these issues.
- baggy_trough 7y ago
  It's almost as though progressivism and throwing money at problems doesn't really work that well.
  - throwawaytoday5 7y ago
    I forgot the shinning examples of conservative rule that is Alabama and Mississippi. For all the faults that California has political, it's still an economic powerhouse. What does Kentucky have?
  - pas 7y ago
    Nah, it works, it just takes a loooot more money than people imagine. Especially because if you want to tackle local problems that require local service providers (education, healthcare, craftsmen) you'll have to pay local (very high) prices.

lacker 7y ago

I think part of this is national politics pushing out state politics. Every statewide California race recently has felt like a foregone conclusion. Either the Democrat beats the Republican by a huge margin, or one Democrat beats another Democrat while the two agree on all policies. California just doesn’t have the one-party-against-another politics that make democracy work.

chrisseaton 7y ago
Even if it’s always a Democrat they must still be competing with each other just as fiercely to get selected to be the Democratic candidate?
- defterGoose 7y ago
  There's still cooperation in the party, and while the Democratic Party is a husk of its former principled self, the GOP has exploded into flames.
chrisweekly 7y ago
"the one-party-against-another politics that make democracy work" Where have you seen this happening in practice? A political science professor first showed me 25 years ago something I still see in US national politics: a "winner-take-all" voting system that creates a polarizing dynamic, typically resulting in a roughly 51:49 split -- with the potential for radically different outcomes hinging on tiny pockets of voters. Also, both parties are institutionally corrupted by the dominance of money (cf Lessig on "Fix Congress First", highlighting campaign finance as a fundamental threat to democracy). But only one of the parties is exhibiting blatant, explicit, direct opposition to the principles of democracy (eg voter suppression, rule of law, etc) from the highest level on down. The degree to which state politics are tied to the characteristics of the national party makes it difficult for powerful governors or even mayors to deviate from party lines. Don't get me wrong; the idea of a free marketplace of ideas and the positive value of principled opposition are things I'm sure we'd agree on. But that's not what we have. Wish I knew how to fix it.
specialist 7y ago

Fakira 7y ago

None of those things have anything to do with sustainability and mismanagement of California's resources.

gduffy 7y ago

No offense, but your thinking here is actually a bigger part of the problem. There is nothing fundamentally unsustainable about suburbs, single family homes, low density, or cars. 50% of the USA is totally uninhabited, and it is possible today to build a totally off-grid and sustainable single family home / suburb in the majority of it. You can even capture carbon in concrete. Don't prescribe solutions just because you prefer them, set incentives and goals to favor the right outcomes and let people decide and optimize how to do it. Your urban utopia is my hellscape, and my suburban utopia is yours. The good news is, this is America, and we can both live here. Good fences make good neighbors. P.S. most of the $2 trillion real estate market in the Bay Area where I have lived for 12 years exists precisely because our politicians DON'T promote further development, sustainable or otherwise. Most of what's here is decaying, old, unsustainable, whether it is high or low density, and nobody can afford to improve it because all the tradespeople got priced out and left years ago.

Karrot_Kream 7y ago
> P.S. most of the $2 trillion real estate market in the Bay Area where I have lived for 12 years exists precisely because our politicians DON'T promote further development, sustainable or otherwise. Most of what's here is decaying, old, unsustainable, whether it is high or low density, and nobody can afford to improve it because all the tradespeople got priced out and left years ago. While I think the rest of your response is orthogonal (albeit valid), I think this is the heart of the matter relevant to the article. Californian infrastructure is aging and politicians have only made it more difficult over time to build new anything, whether that's power, water, internet, transport, or housing infrastructure. I just wish I knew what the solution was.
- gduffy 7y ago
  The first part of the response is to the parent comment, not the article. That said, intelligent legislation to encourage all types of housing and development (with externalities like carbon priced in as taxes, not government prescribed solutions to mitigate them) would go a long way to bringing back affordability. The solution in the interim is to vote with your dollars and feet, if you can. And really think about it if your answer is "I can't". Most of the time, that's not really true. I'm leaving next month. Bye California and your awful policies that literally burn us to death at worst, and make us poorer and stingier zero-sum competitors at best. And for those of you who say "don't let the door hit your ass on the way out" ... check in with me in 10 years and let's compare stories! <3