I'd say there's a big difference between a "ban" and a phase out, which apparently is what California is doing. To prevent future construction is not to forcefully remove current ones. Seems like conservatives reaching for straws in the culture war, and if they're so for state's rights then why do they give a shit what NY and CA are doin…
I'd say there's a big difference between a "ban" and a phase out, which apparently is what California is doing. To prevent future construction is not to forcefully remove current ones. Seems like conservatives reaching for straws in the culture war, and if they're so for state's rights then why do they give a shit what NY and CA are doing? You're either for a state's right to do that shit if they want to or you don't like state's rights. Which is it conservatives?
An actual ban would (of course) mean you couldn’t buy one for any of the millions of homes with gas hookups, which of course you can. Let’s not pretend you don’t know the difference between a state banning the sale of a particular item and trying to discourage it’s future use by building new kitchens without gas. If NY and CA go through with strictly not allowing any new homes to be built with kitchen gas hookups (I’m skeptical), then there will still be millions of existing ones, which many people might prefer over the gas-less ones, potentially forcing a reversal of the policy. And the idea anyone would come and take your gas stove is even more ridiculous than the idea you couldn’t buy one. But if those who wish to fight culture wars couldn’t misconstrue or take things out of context they wouldn’t have much to complain about.
You are a rational person, who believes in the Constitution. The GQPers have never read the document and have no idea about the state rights enumerated within.
Red rights trump blue rights. As in white trumps black. As in evangelicalism trumps Judaism. As in Putin trumps [name any "Lib"]. As in...well...it's all seditionist/treasonous TFBS.
They're all for state's rights so long as its the "right" state's rights. Otherwise? Use the cudgel of the federal government to dominate, and I do mean in every sense of that word, the rest
American conservatism will fight *for* states rights on the following issues:
- slavery
- assault rifles
- preventing minorities from voting
- qualified immunity for cops when they kill unarmed suspects
American conservatism will fight *against* states rights on the following issues:
- abortion
- legal cannabis
- gun control
- teaching about institutional racism in public schools
- gas stove phase outs
The true lists are more expansive, but you get the idea on an issue-by-issue basis how thin their idealism about state's rights is. Conservatives love state's rights when talking about shit they like in the culture wars, but will stomp on state's rights when it's shit they don't like.
They are also against states take steps to decrease the destruction of the planet. They are already fighting for more oil leases, and more protection of fossil fuels. I wonder whose paying for that?
I also wonder (not much) whose paying for Manchin and Sinema to high five each other over preventing voting rights protection from the stage at Davos! I would love to think taxpayers are not funding that performative assholery.
And the fancy induction stoves that people will cite when telling you that “electric stoves” are just as good as electric are significantly more expensive.
Yeah, I suppose induction stoves may be considered currently "fancy", but we got one a few years ago and ours is frickin' awesome!
Water boils SO much faster (water for spaghetti boiling in a couple minutes), can put a pot on a very low temp without worrying about the fire sputtering out and gas filling the kitchen, since the glass doesn't get especially hot, the top is much easier to clean, not to mention no burned handles, hands etc from flame around the pot. (I don't work for or have investments in manufacturers of induction stoves as a disclaimer for what is sounding like an ad)
Prices will drop and this technology will become the standard, suspect. I like flame for a lot of things, but save it for my barbecue and grill.
Cars with internal combustion engines were considered "fancy" at one time...
I have a gas stove, dryer hot water heater and boiler (main/2nd floor are heated with hot water radiators). Basement has three small electric heaters. I live in Pittsburgh.
Last month, I paid $149 for gas; summer it’s ~$40-50. Electric is $198; when not using the electric heaters it’s ~$50; summer with AC is ~$150.
With all electric my electric bill would easily be >$500 (never mind adding a EV).
When you build more housing, you bring the cost of housing down and make it more affordable because then you don't have supply-side housing price inflation being driven by NIMBYism. CA and NY won't build more housing because of NIMBY lawsuits that prevent development, which constrains housing supplies and lifts their value, which makes housing more unaffordable for new entries into homeownership--in many cases making homeownership unobtainable. You also have rich people buying up ridiculous amounts of housing as investment properties, further crunching the housing supply. 1-in-every-7 homes in 2021 was purchased by a wealth management fund (source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022/housing-market-investors/). There are individuals--not real estate LLCs, but just wealthy individuals--who own 25+ properties. This is asset-class capitalism run amok, and it is making homeownership unaffordable for a whole generation of citizens. It is also creating a homelessness crisis.
WA housing was already out of sight, but during the pandemic years, investors bought up all the houses they could to sell at even greater inflated prices. My guess is that the same thing happened everywhere. The greedier get richer, always.
NYCers would rather vote for a billionaire than tax one. See Bloomberg. The same could be said about NYC's half-hearted attempt at taking on the NIMBYs. The liberals in NYC have the power and clout to fix the housing affordability problems there, they're just scared to death of taxing their own decadent class. I call them "chicken-dove liberals." It's like chicken hawk conservatives who are trigger happy on starting wars but will never fight one themselves. Chicken Dove Liberals will talk a real good game about fixing wealth inequality until they realize that fixing it means eating into their own decadent levels of materialism, and they can't have that now can they? They choose personal decadence over societal good every single time. Post-college liberal millennials living in liberal mega cities are the new Boomers dude #boomerisamindset
I'd say there's a big difference between a "ban" and a phase out, which apparently is what California is doing. To prevent future construction is not to forcefully remove current ones. Seems like conservatives reaching for straws in the culture war, and if they're so for state's rights then why do they give a shit what NY and CA are doing? You're either for a state's right to do that shit if they want to or you don't like state's rights. Which is it conservatives?
So was it an assault weapons “phase out” or an assault weapons ban?
Give me a break with the word games. You’re not fooling anyone.
An actual ban would (of course) mean you couldn’t buy one for any of the millions of homes with gas hookups, which of course you can. Let’s not pretend you don’t know the difference between a state banning the sale of a particular item and trying to discourage it’s future use by building new kitchens without gas. If NY and CA go through with strictly not allowing any new homes to be built with kitchen gas hookups (I’m skeptical), then there will still be millions of existing ones, which many people might prefer over the gas-less ones, potentially forcing a reversal of the policy. And the idea anyone would come and take your gas stove is even more ridiculous than the idea you couldn’t buy one. But if those who wish to fight culture wars couldn’t misconstrue or take things out of context they wouldn’t have much to complain about.
No, that was a straight up ban. I hope that one comes back though.
You are a rational person, who believes in the Constitution. The GQPers have never read the document and have no idea about the state rights enumerated within.
Well said Travis. This is what I found so annoying about the rant yesterday.
Red rights trump blue rights. As in white trumps black. As in evangelicalism trumps Judaism. As in Putin trumps [name any "Lib"]. As in...well...it's all seditionist/treasonous TFBS.
They're all for state's rights so long as its the "right" state's rights. Otherwise? Use the cudgel of the federal government to dominate, and I do mean in every sense of that word, the rest
American conservatism will fight *for* states rights on the following issues:
- slavery
- assault rifles
- preventing minorities from voting
- qualified immunity for cops when they kill unarmed suspects
American conservatism will fight *against* states rights on the following issues:
- abortion
- legal cannabis
- gun control
- teaching about institutional racism in public schools
- gas stove phase outs
The true lists are more expansive, but you get the idea on an issue-by-issue basis how thin their idealism about state's rights is. Conservatives love state's rights when talking about shit they like in the culture wars, but will stomp on state's rights when it's shit they don't like.
They are also against states take steps to decrease the destruction of the planet. They are already fighting for more oil leases, and more protection of fossil fuels. I wonder whose paying for that?
I also wonder (not much) whose paying for Manchin and Sinema to high five each other over preventing voting rights protection from the stage at Davos! I would love to think taxpayers are not funding that performative assholery.
I think electric stoves are considerably cheaper than gas stoves.
No they are not.
And the fancy induction stoves that people will cite when telling you that “electric stoves” are just as good as electric are significantly more expensive.
Yeah, I suppose induction stoves may be considered currently "fancy", but we got one a few years ago and ours is frickin' awesome!
Water boils SO much faster (water for spaghetti boiling in a couple minutes), can put a pot on a very low temp without worrying about the fire sputtering out and gas filling the kitchen, since the glass doesn't get especially hot, the top is much easier to clean, not to mention no burned handles, hands etc from flame around the pot. (I don't work for or have investments in manufacturers of induction stoves as a disclaimer for what is sounding like an ad)
Prices will drop and this technology will become the standard, suspect. I like flame for a lot of things, but save it for my barbecue and grill.
Cars with internal combustion engines were considered "fancy" at one time...
I have a gas stove, dryer hot water heater and boiler (main/2nd floor are heated with hot water radiators). Basement has three small electric heaters. I live in Pittsburgh.
Last month, I paid $149 for gas; summer it’s ~$40-50. Electric is $198; when not using the electric heaters it’s ~$50; summer with AC is ~$150.
With all electric my electric bill would easily be >$500 (never mind adding a EV).
But yeah…electric is awesome! (Nope)
Does this make housing less affordable? Of all the reasons for the housing shortage this is likely not a significant factor.
When you build more housing, you bring the cost of housing down and make it more affordable because then you don't have supply-side housing price inflation being driven by NIMBYism. CA and NY won't build more housing because of NIMBY lawsuits that prevent development, which constrains housing supplies and lifts their value, which makes housing more unaffordable for new entries into homeownership--in many cases making homeownership unobtainable. You also have rich people buying up ridiculous amounts of housing as investment properties, further crunching the housing supply. 1-in-every-7 homes in 2021 was purchased by a wealth management fund (source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022/housing-market-investors/). There are individuals--not real estate LLCs, but just wealthy individuals--who own 25+ properties. This is asset-class capitalism run amok, and it is making homeownership unaffordable for a whole generation of citizens. It is also creating a homelessness crisis.
Further reading: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/01/homelessness-affordable-housing-crisis-democrats-causes/672224/
Further listening: today's Grey Zone podcast (a Vox production) that interviews the author of that Atlantic piece above
WA housing was already out of sight, but during the pandemic years, investors bought up all the houses they could to sell at even greater inflated prices. My guess is that the same thing happened everywhere. The greedier get richer, always.
Check in that WaPo link above and see for yourself. They have that data mapped out.
NYCers would rather vote for a billionaire than tax one. See Bloomberg. The same could be said about NYC's half-hearted attempt at taking on the NIMBYs. The liberals in NYC have the power and clout to fix the housing affordability problems there, they're just scared to death of taxing their own decadent class. I call them "chicken-dove liberals." It's like chicken hawk conservatives who are trigger happy on starting wars but will never fight one themselves. Chicken Dove Liberals will talk a real good game about fixing wealth inequality until they realize that fixing it means eating into their own decadent levels of materialism, and they can't have that now can they? They choose personal decadence over societal good every single time. Post-college liberal millennials living in liberal mega cities are the new Boomers dude #boomerisamindset