California Lunacy Thread

Illinois would show a similar exodus to Arizona. There are tons of people here from Illinois. We also have tons of snowbirds from Minnesota, Wisconsin and Nebraska.
I understand snowbirds.

It’s people fleeing the effects of decades of Progressive policy…. and then voting for Progressive policy in their new locale.

That’s just batsh!t crazy.
 
I understand snowbirds.

It’s people fleeing the effects of decades of Progressive policy…. and then voting for Progressive policy in their new locale.

That’s just batsh!t crazy.
Snowbirds are part-year residents fleeing winter weather. We also have a lot of full-year permanent transplants from those states too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LittleVol
Newsom Proposes Raising Californians’ Electricity Consumption Tax to Investigate ‘Big Oil’

"State Sen. Brian Dahle (R-Bieber) on May 17 questioned a representative from the state’s finance department on the proposed tax increase, which would fund more than a dozen new positions at California Energy Commission responsible for figuring out if oil refineries are charging too much.

“Why are we paying electricity rates to go after oil producers, or to fund the positions, when it should come out of the general fund?” Dahle asked during a Senate hearing. “At the end of the day, why are [electricity] ratepayers on the hook?

“Low-income, disadvantaged folks are paying those bills,” Dahle added.

The representative didn’t answer the question."
 
The article completely ignores piss poor forestry management and continuing to build in high risk areas in favor of blaming climate change. But I can't blame SF for the decision.

I think it's the cost of rebuilding as well. What I don't understand is why SF wouldn't try something like their competitors are doing (our clients for example) in hiring private fire companies for structure protection.

We had over 200 saves last year against a dozen complete losses. Even at the low end of half a million a property (we do have California, Montana and Arizona in our response area, so that's probably way low) we saved our clients a minimum of nine figures in claims.

SF can afford to hire independents at a fraction of the cost of claims. I'm surprised they would give up business without looking for other options.
 
SF can afford to hire independents at a fraction of the cost of claims. I'm surprised they would give up business without looking for other options.
You're talking about SF though. They've done a good job of breeding intelligence out of the population.
 
I think it's the cost of rebuilding as well. What I don't understand is why SF wouldn't try something like their competitors are doing (our clients for example) in hiring private fire companies for structure protection.

We had over 200 saves last year against a dozen complete losses. Even at the low end of half a million a property (we do have California, Montana and Arizona in our response area, so that's probably way low) we saved our clients a minimum of nine figures in claims.

SF can afford to hire independents at a fraction of the cost of claims. I'm surprised they would give up business without looking for other options.

I hadn't even considered that option, never knew insurance companies did that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and AM64
The article completely ignores piss poor forestry management and continuing to build in high risk areas in favor of blaming climate change. But I can't blame SF for the decision.
What else is new? Liberals never accept any blame for the ramifications of their poor decisions. They're also ignoring the fact that lack of maintenance of the electrical lines and equipment by the power companies in the state of California has contributed to many of the fires.
 

VN Store



Back
Top