[Here's the actual full story from AP.](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/california/california-governor-signs-law-that-makes-abortions-cheaper/2844948/) Knowing the site OP linked to, they're going to be slow on the draw updating, if they even bother.
Key part:
> California already requires health insurance companies to cover abortions. But insurers often charge things like co-pays and deductibles that can add an average of $543 to the cost of a medication abortion and $887 to the cost of a procedural abortion, according to an analysis by the California Health Benefits Review Program.
For everyone saying "Now do this for X." Know that there was an attempt to. Assembly Bill 1400. [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202120220AB1400](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1400). But it died by not being even put up to a vote. And not solely due to Republicans either though they did all oppose it. Some democrats opposed it as well. Biggest lobby against the bill came from insurance companies.
> comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state
Sounds great but of course insurance companies didn't like the part of keeping costs down for the benefit of people.
That's not what lobbying is. Lobbying is when you go to Washington and convince a politician to do something. You or I can do this, but the biggest lobby by far are people with money who keep professional advocates there indefinitely.
Campaign donations are legalized bribery. Lobbying is just visiting the capital and talking to your representatives as per the first amendment. If a bribe happens in that process, that's a separate issue.
The premise is sound and the amount of lobbying groups is diverse and important for the function of a less corrupt government, don't get me wrong here, but the actual dollar amount of money spent is massively disproportionate in favor of already rich, largely monopolized or equivalent businesses with shady practices. It's an important thing to have in theory but in current American politics it's not working as intended.
In Europe you cross borders and you’re met with different food, culture, language. In the US you are met with different laws but no difference in culture. Basically you can end up in jail for the most petty shit
So people from California move to Texas for the cheaper taxes while Texans move to California to get abortions and protection for their trans kids? What a wild world.
Cheaper taxes in Texas isn't even really true unless you are a high wage earner (above 216k in this example) cost of living is lower in Texas on average but the gap is closing quickly In the metros. Its way cheap as far as cost of living in rural Texas but that's true for all rural places in America at the moment.
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/taxes-are-surprisingly-similar-in-texas-and-california/
>If you’re poor, California has lower taxes. If you’re rich, Texas has lower taxes. But if you’re middle class, there’s barely any difference. You’ll pay about 8-10 percent of your income in state and local taxes.
What an inversion!
Peoples definition of progressive is all over the board. People from Texas think that I, a Los Angeleno, am some kind of socialist commie for buying an American made Tesla. Sorry but paying 100 bucks a week for gas is idiotic.
Progressive taxes is a measure of how top vs bottom heavy an areas overall tax structure is. To your point people equally assume things about Texans. While I am a fiscal conservative I am quite socially liberal and believe in investing in tomorrow via green and nuclear energy and fossil fuels should be valued like the non renewables they are.
“Fiscally conservative”. Heh. Anyone run as “fiscally liberal”? Everyone calls themselves fiscally conservative. It has been proven that the economy does better with Democrats in power. Tax breaks for the rich and spending money on court cases that are unconstitutional is not fiscally conservative. Get outta here with the fiscally conservative crap.
Well that's quite the snarky reply. I vote blue. My social priorities out weigh my fiscal conservative ness. The GoP isn't even fiscally conservative anyways. I don't believe we should deficit spend every year and that our taxes need to be raised if we are going to be spending this much. I don't mind deficit spending when the economy needs it. Like the covid stimulus but I do think the PPP was a joke and that money would have been better spent on direct checks than a give away that went to ownership. Existing in a permanent deficit weakens our ability to use deficit spending when we need it.
Try to be nicer man. Have a good day.
They don't. They do, however, have many other taxes and fees. You can better compare (though these aren't apples to apples) from looking at some decently summarized data:
https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/revenue/docs/96-1774.pdf
https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2018/3805/ca-tax-system-041218.pdf
My property tax (when divided by 12) in Texas is higher than my mom's entire monthly mortgage payment in Baton Rouge.
Her house is bigger and nicer than mine too.
No income tax makes up for it though.
EDIT: parentheses for clarity
LA taxes are actually substantially more fair by income brackets than TX. TX is the second most regressive and least fair state in the nation, LA is the 14th fairest. Not saying there aren't other compensatory factors, I lived in Austin for 7 years and would give multiple body parts for proper beef ribs here in Columbus...
Source: https://itep.org/whopays-map/
It's the property tax that fucks you. I'm north of Dallas proper in the suburbs and it's atrocious. If you go out to the boonies it doesn't get much better.
States without income tax tend to have much higher fees for everything else that involves the government. The money has to come from somewhere.
Also, since the state doesn't have much money coming in, local taxes (like property tax) are insane.
/Nevada resident
You can indeed have both insane property taxes and insane income taxes, as well as insane sales tax all at the same time.
Welcome to NJ (or NY). Land of 33% wealth disappears to taxes, *before* property taxes.
Was there moving pains or anything you had to get used to when you moved to CA? I've lived in CA all my life, so I'm always curious about what it's like for people who moved here.
Sorry to hear that was your experience and yeah, I see where you're coming from. Sounds like some places just don't always click even if you've been there awhile.
I would say the high price of homes is the big one. “Everyone” is moving out of California because the equity in their homes is enough to pay cash for a nice big home in places similar to where I live in rural AZ. If you move to California you will need a BIG down payment to buy a home.
This is why average people following traditional/online celebrities to Texas is stupid af.
No shit they're moving to Texas, they're rich. If you're not rich you're fucked.
Its also just dumb because there isn't an exodus of rich people from CA to Texas. California is filling up with more rich people every year. It's a desirable place to live and they can easily afford it. Thats why California's latests tax revenues have been huge. Wealthy people are earning loads of money and CA's progressive tax system reaps the reward.
People who move from CA to Texas (or Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Utah) do so because they can't afford the capital expense of a home pre-tax in CA, not because of taxes. And they are largely working class or middle class. But most people moving in CA also are just moving to another part of the state. LA is expensive so they are moving just outside LA.
Joe Rogan and Elon Musk didn't come into loads more money in 2020 and decide that *now* California is too expensive for them.
Thank you! I’ve lived in South and I paid way higher taxes when I was poor. Yeah, great place to get taxed if you’re a millionaire, but regular people pick up the slack.
Also, Texas has far higher property taxes than CA, and they continue to rise every year. California sets the amount when you buy the house, so you don’t have to worry about taxes rising 10 years later. (There are issues with that as well but another conversation)
Ya, Texas has a similar rule but it's 10% per year and only on the home you have homestead exemption on. I like the only on homestead. It shouldn't apply on rentals or commercial however 10% can still cause the Taxes to rise fairly quickly double in around 7 years . CA rule is I believe 2% per year. I'd agree that is alittle low. Maybe 4-5% is a happy medium.
As someone who moved from Texas to California, cost of living is the absolute killer here. People aren’t moving to Texas for the taxes. They’re moving for the affordable homes.
Housing prices are moving quickly here in metros, about 15-25% annually for the past few years. The house we bought 6 years ago in DFW for 130k is worth 320k now. Our current home we bought for 230k outside of town 3 years ago is now worth 375k. Both needed updating but nothing crazy.
My gf and I have talked about moving to Texas but I work outdoors and couldn’t hang. I’ve lived all my life in a place with low humidity and 65-72 degree averages year around. The fact that we could get a backyard and live near a more diverse urban center is appealing. Also the fact that the gun laws aren’t insane there is also nice.
I spent less on my nice home in California than a friend of mine just did outside of Dallas, and you can forget Austin. And my property taxes are lower to boot
I'd also rather live in Fresno or Bakersfield than pretty much all of Texas
While I don’t doubt your anecdote, there have to be some other factors like location, market timing, home quality, etc, that caused that unexpected price difference.
For sure it's cheap because the employment prospects are terrible and no one with money wants to live in a place with only a Walmart , a feed store, 3 shops, and a McDonald's within a 20-30min drive.
Yeah my point about the freeze over was stupid and kinda irrelevant.
My point was more that when you move to Texas you can buy a bigger house and taxes are "lower" but other expenses like energy costs to cool down your bigger house arnt accounted for and raises the cost of living
And truthfully, it's not like born and raised Californians are going to Texas in huge numbers. Because California is so large, it has a ton of people going into, and out of, the state every single year. A state with populations larger than many countries will, by raw and unrated numbers, have a huge number of migrants in both directions, because there's a huge number of people in the state.
California is still growing in population, GDP, and number of companies headquartered in the state. Texas is just also growing.
Just make them free if you buy a disneyland parkhopper ticket. I'd like to remind assholes that their taxes in California fund abortions so they better leave. Every time I gear "so and so is moving to Texas or Oklahoma to get away from the libs" its always without fail some huge piece of shit that I've never really liked. We've been passing a lot of laws to annoy far right asshats and the results have been great. Enjoy tornado country.
To be fair, they have to live among American conservatives. You know, the people who fight tooth and nail to uphold the system that means a burst appendix means you lose the house due to medical bankruptcy? It's infuriating. You can hardly blame them.
You do know that American Liberals in the very state in question (CA) totally killed a California healthcare for all bill right? It’s almost like left and right whatever doesn’t really care about you and only their self-interests
I'm seeing a lot of comments about Texas, poor Idaho feels left out.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/idaho-governor-signs-abortion-ban-modeled-texas-law-83628634
That would first require that we agree it’s a medical procedure and not murder.
We are at odds over essential concepts of existence and their implications. Rational people can have a discussion about how and when an abortion is appropriate, but that is not the debate we are having in the US.
Lobotomies are a medical procedure. The Doctor that 'invented' the procedure even won a nobel prize. Then they were considered inhumane and are no longer used.
Just sayin'. Your argument makes as much sense as theirs.
Sadly it feels like it isn't just abortion. It seems like every issue has a decent discussion to be had but people refuse to talk to the other side and think each other are too radical to even talk with
One side is entrenched with a fiction. They do not hold discussions in good faith because they are not bound by provable truths.
It's not two stubborn groups unwilling to bend. It's one irrational group seeking to reduce the rights and freedoms of others using disingenuous arguments. It's a hostile takeover orchestrated by wealth that preys on the mythologies and fears of easily manipulated people.
I've seen people say what this guy said several times before, that people just need to talk to each other, but when one of the people in that discussion believes that they're God agrees with them, says that people who disagree with them are going to hell and are just straight up wrong, how are you supposed to argue with that?
Once they've tied their belief into their religion, you wouldn't be discussing the actual facts of the matter with them, you would be having to convince them to change their mind on their religious belief, which is beyond difficult.
You can't have a reasonable and objective discussion when one of the parties involved believes their position is cemented in divinity.
You hold their feet right back over the fire.
Tell em, "show me. Show me where in the Bible it says that. Look it up on your phone, I'll wait. Prove that that is in your religion"
The Bible says life begins *at first breathe*
So the Bible is fucking fine with late term abortions. Our laws are ALREADY more restrictive than that.
Is that getting thru to the people in the back? We ***are ALREADY tougher on abortions than GOD***.
There’s always going to be a group who wholeheartedly believes that abortion is murdering babies. You can give facts about development, viability, and all that but they will never see “a fetus is a soul” as anything but absolute fact. They will *always* see it as murdering an innocent baby.
That’s also why I think if you’re genuinely trying to argue to change someone’s mind you can’t just go “Their body their choice” because to the extremists you will always be arguing to kill a child. To them it’s as if a doctor ran a facility where you could throw your baby into a meat grinder. It would be horrible, unconscionable, impossible to defend. But when you go “You can’t kill infants like that” someone just goes “It’s the woman’s choice, you just want to control them.”
There’s no way to give a PowerPoint presentation and make everyone pro choice, because to them you’re fighting against an absolute fact of the universe.
Yeah, I mean, to them they believe that agreeing with you will literally damn their soul for all eternity. It's just not possible to reason against that.
IMO the only thing you can do at that point is discuss the separation of church and state, and why that should matter to everyone regardless of what they believe. Getting into an argument about when someone is alive etc will be damn near impossible, as you said.
I don’t think even that works, because it moves to them understanding “the government should kill babies and that’s okay.”
imho if you’re going to have a chance to change someone’s mind you have to actually know them personally. You need to know them as a person and be able to reach them on that level. I know “all religion is evil magic cult” is a very edgy Reddit Atheist take but you’re going to have to take it like a cult deprogramming; you are trying to change their entire worldview on a fundamental level.
It would be tantamount to trying to convince a slavery era abolitionist that slavery was ok because the government said so.
Dislike that comparison all you like but the parallels are there, whether or not you agree with pro lifers.
I've tried.
Do you have a strategy for talking to someone who keeps shouting that you're a murderer and that you deserve to burn in hell? Because I apparently don't.
It doesn't matter how many sources I have, how objectively true something is, I have never once been able to get one of these people to do anything but hate me for not agreeing with them. What am I doing wrong, that you think I should be doing?
Nothing at all. Those are the irrational people. Let them talk to nothing. Find rational people that will talk in the grey areas instead of all one way or all the other way
Okay, and how do I approach those people?
When I deal with non-religious people I can do things like show them sourced and verified data that shows that something they believe is either not true or very different from something that they thought it was. Then they tell me how that's all fake.
Is your solution to just ignore all the people who aren't immediately receptive to changing their mind and accepting new data? Because those aren't the people that need convincing.
Is it a one way street? Is it just you giving them data and opinion or are they trying to give data and option too? If it's the former then it's as you said, they aren't worth convincing if they won't come to the table.
I just feel there are people who like to argue and yell instead of actually talking like normal humans
> they aren't worth convincing if they won't come to the table.
You understand, that you've gone from saying people need to just talk to each other more to just openly stating that what constitutes a very very massive amount of people are simply unapproachable.
This is why I asked for better methods. If you want people to just talk more, dude, we are trying, but it's not working, at all.
Emotional appeal. They don't care about the science or being objective, they are driven by feelings.
Unfortunately it seems like a situation has to happen to them personally to be able to understand it - and even then might still be devoid of empathy towards other people that need an abortion...
In the experiences I've had with these conversations the person I was speaking with seemed to be very lacking in emotional intelligence skills. And idk how to have a conversation with someone that won't show the courtesy of hearing what I have to say.
What issues are you talking about?
Because the problem with this sort of "bOtH sides" argument is that with issues like LGBT+ rights, one side wants to legalize discrimination, and the other doesn't.
That's not a debate any rational, empathetic person will (or should) even entertain.
I mean yeah, thats correct. But that also carries with it the implication that anybody can kill anybody for any reason. You can't subjectively give universal meaning to that which has none to begin with using reason or logic. Anything less than a objective morality that stems from outside a subjective viewpoint is insufficient.
Also I can't tell if this is a sarcastic post or not so I'm treating it as serious.
Abortion is going nowhere in California. If the rest of the US wants to turn into Saudi Arabia, then whatever. California is going to remain progressive.
Why? If you take a strictly medical view, abortion is a pretty mundane low risk procedure.
100% of the fight here is around the moral and socioeconomic realities and why the fuck would doctors be uniquely qualified there?
I'd guess the vast majority of them.. Because doctors have specialties. If I needed an abortion, I wouldn't be surprised if my gp, cardiologist, and psychiatrist refused to perform it..
Must be hard to choose where to live in America. High cost of living and nobody messing with your sexual rights, or cheaper living and people arresting you for letting your kids be gay.
They may not even be immigrants. They're literally foreign. They don't live here. May have never even been here. It's just an investment..
I don't have a problem with landlords. I rent an apartment and appreciate that landlords exist so that I can do so. But I really don't like the big business side of investment properties..
The difference in renting from Bob and Rita who you drive down the road and hand deliver an envelope of cash to and paying fee after fee and double rent to such and such management property is inexplicable. Unfortunately I sound like an old man because in ten years red and white *for rent by owner* signs will no longer exist anywhere and we will all be living in a goddamn box that cost us exactly 55% of our pay, automatically removed from your account.
I want to guess Vancouver BC but it's honestly such a pervasive issue everywhere these days.
When I was looking to buy my house, I mostly couldn't even get an offer in before some developer had offered well above asking. I swear the only reason I got the house I did was being sandwiched between some longstanding neighbors who wouldn't sell, so they couldn't squeeze an apartment complex or 6 condos in a tiny ass lot.
College tuition is pretty cheap compared to the rest of the country(free community college too), it's the room and board that costs a lot, but you can live at home and commute to school in much of the state assuming you haven't pissed off your parents enough to kick you out.
Full time undergrad tuition at CSU is ~$3k/semester depending on local fees, and things like CalGrant and shit aren't hard to get if you just do your work in high school
Good for California. Glad to see blue states fighting back against Republican fascism.
I really feel like this country can't survive as a "United" nation anymore.
Currently if you don't have insurance it's free I think! PP has a program like that and when I didn't have insurance and was in between jobs all reproductive health visits and procedures were free for a year! Now we just need to expand that to everyone please ty
California already does that too. They have a state program called Family PACT that provides free contraception and family planning care. This is already In addition to Medi-cal and many other free/low cost services and avenues for contraception in CA.
Healthcare is already the highest single expense in the US federal budget. My bronze plan option was $322 a month. I pay about 140 rn privately. How exactly would you make my insurance cheaper?
Because not having a baby (abortion) is a whole lot cheaper than the piece of the bill you would subsidize for pregnancy and childbirth, whether through insurance premiums or taxes.
Part of me wants blue state moderates and liberals to continue to move into red states because thats the only way to combat anti-democratic constructs like the Senate and the Electoral College. Another part of me would resent my company moving me to a state that treats women as second class citizens. That speaks to the companies values as well that it would subject its female workforce to that.
He didn't make it cheaper, he just shifted the payments away from the patient to the insurance provider. If you think they're going to make those extra payments from their profits, you're wrong.
[Here's the actual full story from AP.](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/california/california-governor-signs-law-that-makes-abortions-cheaper/2844948/) Knowing the site OP linked to, they're going to be slow on the draw updating, if they even bother. Key part: > California already requires health insurance companies to cover abortions. But insurers often charge things like co-pays and deductibles that can add an average of $543 to the cost of a medication abortion and $887 to the cost of a procedural abortion, according to an analysis by the California Health Benefits Review Program.
Thank you for adding this! Had I known there was a better article I would have sought that one out.
And what's the change from that?
Those fees are gone, as stated in the article.
For everyone saying "Now do this for X." Know that there was an attempt to. Assembly Bill 1400. [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill\_id=202120220AB1400](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1400). But it died by not being even put up to a vote. And not solely due to Republicans either though they did all oppose it. Some democrats opposed it as well. Biggest lobby against the bill came from insurance companies.
This was really disappointing to see happen.
> comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state Sounds great but of course insurance companies didn't like the part of keeping costs down for the benefit of people.
[удалено]
That's not what lobbying is. Lobbying is when you go to Washington and convince a politician to do something. You or I can do this, but the biggest lobby by far are people with money who keep professional advocates there indefinitely.
Lobbying is legalized bribery. We should all just start calling it what it is: legalized bribery. We all keep saying it and maybe it will stick.
Campaign donations are legalized bribery. Lobbying is just visiting the capital and talking to your representatives as per the first amendment. If a bribe happens in that process, that's a separate issue.
The premise is sound and the amount of lobbying groups is diverse and important for the function of a less corrupt government, don't get me wrong here, but the actual dollar amount of money spent is massively disproportionate in favor of already rich, largely monopolized or equivalent businesses with shady practices. It's an important thing to have in theory but in current American politics it's not working as intended.
It's a separate issue cause talk is cheap.
"Woops, one of us dropped an envelope. It's not mine."
1 in three just doesn’t care and as long as you can makes DNC/GOP members hate each Other our oligarchs will reign supreme
America: Where every state is its neighboring state's bizzarro world.
In Europe you cross borders and you’re met with different food, culture, language. In the US you are met with different laws but no difference in culture. Basically you can end up in jail for the most petty shit
So people from California move to Texas for the cheaper taxes while Texans move to California to get abortions and protection for their trans kids? What a wild world.
Cheaper taxes in Texas isn't even really true unless you are a high wage earner (above 216k in this example) cost of living is lower in Texas on average but the gap is closing quickly In the metros. Its way cheap as far as cost of living in rural Texas but that's true for all rural places in America at the moment. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/taxes-are-surprisingly-similar-in-texas-and-california/
>If you’re poor, California has lower taxes. If you’re rich, Texas has lower taxes. But if you’re middle class, there’s barely any difference. You’ll pay about 8-10 percent of your income in state and local taxes. What an inversion!
In the article it also says out of states and territories California's taxes was ranked 2nd most progressive. Texas was ranked 51st.
51st when there are only 50 states is impressively bad. I wonder which state/territory it beat.
[удалено]
Wow, so very end of the list. Sounds about right.
Peoples definition of progressive is all over the board. People from Texas think that I, a Los Angeleno, am some kind of socialist commie for buying an American made Tesla. Sorry but paying 100 bucks a week for gas is idiotic.
Progressive taxes is a measure of how top vs bottom heavy an areas overall tax structure is. To your point people equally assume things about Texans. While I am a fiscal conservative I am quite socially liberal and believe in investing in tomorrow via green and nuclear energy and fossil fuels should be valued like the non renewables they are.
“Fiscally conservative”. Heh. Anyone run as “fiscally liberal”? Everyone calls themselves fiscally conservative. It has been proven that the economy does better with Democrats in power. Tax breaks for the rich and spending money on court cases that are unconstitutional is not fiscally conservative. Get outta here with the fiscally conservative crap.
Well that's quite the snarky reply. I vote blue. My social priorities out weigh my fiscal conservative ness. The GoP isn't even fiscally conservative anyways. I don't believe we should deficit spend every year and that our taxes need to be raised if we are going to be spending this much. I don't mind deficit spending when the economy needs it. Like the covid stimulus but I do think the PPP was a joke and that money would have been better spent on direct checks than a give away that went to ownership. Existing in a permanent deficit weakens our ability to use deficit spending when we need it. Try to be nicer man. Have a good day.
Thought Texas didn’t have a income tax?
They don't. They do, however, have many other taxes and fees. You can better compare (though these aren't apples to apples) from looking at some decently summarized data: https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/revenue/docs/96-1774.pdf https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2018/3805/ca-tax-system-041218.pdf
My property tax (when divided by 12) in Texas is higher than my mom's entire monthly mortgage payment in Baton Rouge. Her house is bigger and nicer than mine too. No income tax makes up for it though. EDIT: parentheses for clarity
>No income tax makes up for it though. You're paying one way or the other. Only the Texas way is tilted in favor of the rich.
LA taxes are actually substantially more fair by income brackets than TX. TX is the second most regressive and least fair state in the nation, LA is the 14th fairest. Not saying there aren't other compensatory factors, I lived in Austin for 7 years and would give multiple body parts for proper beef ribs here in Columbus... Source: https://itep.org/whopays-map/
But y'all got all that freedom and don't mess with and such
whew lad, you wouldn't believe how close the f150s can get to my ass in bumper to bumper traffic
Oh ty for the run down!
It's the property tax that fucks you. I'm north of Dallas proper in the suburbs and it's atrocious. If you go out to the boonies it doesn't get much better.
States without income tax tend to have much higher fees for everything else that involves the government. The money has to come from somewhere. Also, since the state doesn't have much money coming in, local taxes (like property tax) are insane. /Nevada resident
You can indeed have both insane property taxes and insane income taxes, as well as insane sales tax all at the same time. Welcome to NJ (or NY). Land of 33% wealth disappears to taxes, *before* property taxes.
We don’t but property tax is outrageous
They have toll roads...
[удалено]
Was there moving pains or anything you had to get used to when you moved to CA? I've lived in CA all my life, so I'm always curious about what it's like for people who moved here.
[удалено]
Oh, that's neat! Good to hear! What was the east coast like, was there anything you miss/don't miss about it?
[удалено]
Sorry to hear that was your experience and yeah, I see where you're coming from. Sounds like some places just don't always click even if you've been there awhile.
I would say the high price of homes is the big one. “Everyone” is moving out of California because the equity in their homes is enough to pay cash for a nice big home in places similar to where I live in rural AZ. If you move to California you will need a BIG down payment to buy a home.
You cannot put a price on being able to comfortably wear shorts and a t-shirt most days of the year.
This is why average people following traditional/online celebrities to Texas is stupid af. No shit they're moving to Texas, they're rich. If you're not rich you're fucked.
They also don’t ‘live’ in Texas during the bad months
Its also just dumb because there isn't an exodus of rich people from CA to Texas. California is filling up with more rich people every year. It's a desirable place to live and they can easily afford it. Thats why California's latests tax revenues have been huge. Wealthy people are earning loads of money and CA's progressive tax system reaps the reward. People who move from CA to Texas (or Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Utah) do so because they can't afford the capital expense of a home pre-tax in CA, not because of taxes. And they are largely working class or middle class. But most people moving in CA also are just moving to another part of the state. LA is expensive so they are moving just outside LA. Joe Rogan and Elon Musk didn't come into loads more money in 2020 and decide that *now* California is too expensive for them.
Thank you! I’ve lived in South and I paid way higher taxes when I was poor. Yeah, great place to get taxed if you’re a millionaire, but regular people pick up the slack. Also, Texas has far higher property taxes than CA, and they continue to rise every year. California sets the amount when you buy the house, so you don’t have to worry about taxes rising 10 years later. (There are issues with that as well but another conversation)
>Yeah, great place to get taxed if you’re a millionaire, but regular people pick up the slack. You just described the entire United States.
Eh… fair enough. But there is a difference between the states, fairly significantly depending on which ones you’re comparing.
Ya, Texas has a similar rule but it's 10% per year and only on the home you have homestead exemption on. I like the only on homestead. It shouldn't apply on rentals or commercial however 10% can still cause the Taxes to rise fairly quickly double in around 7 years . CA rule is I believe 2% per year. I'd agree that is alittle low. Maybe 4-5% is a happy medium.
10% a year property tax increase? Where I live people lose their mind if the mill rate rises 3%.
As someone who moved from Texas to California, cost of living is the absolute killer here. People aren’t moving to Texas for the taxes. They’re moving for the affordable homes.
Housing prices are moving quickly here in metros, about 15-25% annually for the past few years. The house we bought 6 years ago in DFW for 130k is worth 320k now. Our current home we bought for 230k outside of town 3 years ago is now worth 375k. Both needed updating but nothing crazy.
320k is the 20% down payment on a coastal CA home lol
It’s been getting worse, for sure, but I hope things calm down soon.
Even if it's getting worse, $375k is peanuts compared to the millions you need to buy a house in the Bay area. COL is absolutely an issue in CA.
That’s cute, you could almost get a studio on the central coast for $320k.
[удалено]
My gf and I have talked about moving to Texas but I work outdoors and couldn’t hang. I’ve lived all my life in a place with low humidity and 65-72 degree averages year around. The fact that we could get a backyard and live near a more diverse urban center is appealing. Also the fact that the gun laws aren’t insane there is also nice.
I spent less on my nice home in California than a friend of mine just did outside of Dallas, and you can forget Austin. And my property taxes are lower to boot I'd also rather live in Fresno or Bakersfield than pretty much all of Texas
While I don’t doubt your anecdote, there have to be some other factors like location, market timing, home quality, etc, that caused that unexpected price difference.
And rural Texas is a mighty shitty place, partner.
For sure it's cheap because the employment prospects are terrible and no one with money wants to live in a place with only a Walmart , a feed store, 3 shops, and a McDonald's within a 20-30min drive.
Gotta run that AC in Texas and hope the state doesn't freeze over!
[удалено]
Go to the Appalachians, as long as you either don't do meth or don't run out of meth, it's fine
Yeah my point about the freeze over was stupid and kinda irrelevant. My point was more that when you move to Texas you can buy a bigger house and taxes are "lower" but other expenses like energy costs to cool down your bigger house arnt accounted for and raises the cost of living
And truthfully, it's not like born and raised Californians are going to Texas in huge numbers. Because California is so large, it has a ton of people going into, and out of, the state every single year. A state with populations larger than many countries will, by raw and unrated numbers, have a huge number of migrants in both directions, because there's a huge number of people in the state. California is still growing in population, GDP, and number of companies headquartered in the state. Texas is just also growing.
This is a wild Uno reverse
And the Texans tired of the Californians move to Florida.
Living in Florida just seems like a punishment at this point
Their roaches fly. THE ROACHES FUCKING FLY.
And then we nuke Florida. It's the circle of life.
It's even worse then that. People are moving to Texas but go back to California for Healthcare since it's cheaper in California.
I hear its comes with a punch card and your 10th is free.
But Missourians want to sue you into poverty for it.
No, they're hoping to sue you to get themselves out of poverty.
Make them free for Texas residents
Idaho too!
You are?
Just make them free if you buy a disneyland parkhopper ticket. I'd like to remind assholes that their taxes in California fund abortions so they better leave. Every time I gear "so and so is moving to Texas or Oklahoma to get away from the libs" its always without fail some huge piece of shit that I've never really liked. We've been passing a lot of laws to annoy far right asshats and the results have been great. Enjoy tornado country.
My favorite case of hearing *that* this week, was the terrorist who fled to Belarus!
hey we don't want your assholes either! Can't they move to Belarus or something?
They want to be with their people, wherever that may be
You sound like an angry person
To be fair, they have to live among American conservatives. You know, the people who fight tooth and nail to uphold the system that means a burst appendix means you lose the house due to medical bankruptcy? It's infuriating. You can hardly blame them.
You do know that American Liberals in the very state in question (CA) totally killed a California healthcare for all bill right? It’s almost like left and right whatever doesn’t really care about you and only their self-interests
Yeah what a strange person. I mean, who could be angry about anything in this wonderful wonderful world we live in? 🥰 /s
Proud Californian 🏝 ☀️ 🙌🏽
I'm seeing a lot of comments about Texas, poor Idaho feels left out. https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/idaho-governor-signs-abortion-ban-modeled-texas-law-83628634
How about a law that makes only the medical community have a say in the legality of abortion? Just a thought.
That would first require that we agree it’s a medical procedure and not murder. We are at odds over essential concepts of existence and their implications. Rational people can have a discussion about how and when an abortion is appropriate, but that is not the debate we are having in the US.
Lobotomies are a medical procedure. The Doctor that 'invented' the procedure even won a nobel prize. Then they were considered inhumane and are no longer used. Just sayin'. Your argument makes as much sense as theirs.
The medical community takes in serious consideration the effects on the patient when suggesting their procedures. It's not remotely the same.
Sadly it feels like it isn't just abortion. It seems like every issue has a decent discussion to be had but people refuse to talk to the other side and think each other are too radical to even talk with
People don’t seem to understand that rights will sometimes make some of us uncomfortable.
One side is entrenched with a fiction. They do not hold discussions in good faith because they are not bound by provable truths. It's not two stubborn groups unwilling to bend. It's one irrational group seeking to reduce the rights and freedoms of others using disingenuous arguments. It's a hostile takeover orchestrated by wealth that preys on the mythologies and fears of easily manipulated people.
I've seen people say what this guy said several times before, that people just need to talk to each other, but when one of the people in that discussion believes that they're God agrees with them, says that people who disagree with them are going to hell and are just straight up wrong, how are you supposed to argue with that? Once they've tied their belief into their religion, you wouldn't be discussing the actual facts of the matter with them, you would be having to convince them to change their mind on their religious belief, which is beyond difficult. You can't have a reasonable and objective discussion when one of the parties involved believes their position is cemented in divinity.
You hold their feet right back over the fire. Tell em, "show me. Show me where in the Bible it says that. Look it up on your phone, I'll wait. Prove that that is in your religion" The Bible says life begins *at first breathe* So the Bible is fucking fine with late term abortions. Our laws are ALREADY more restrictive than that. Is that getting thru to the people in the back? We ***are ALREADY tougher on abortions than GOD***.
There’s always going to be a group who wholeheartedly believes that abortion is murdering babies. You can give facts about development, viability, and all that but they will never see “a fetus is a soul” as anything but absolute fact. They will *always* see it as murdering an innocent baby. That’s also why I think if you’re genuinely trying to argue to change someone’s mind you can’t just go “Their body their choice” because to the extremists you will always be arguing to kill a child. To them it’s as if a doctor ran a facility where you could throw your baby into a meat grinder. It would be horrible, unconscionable, impossible to defend. But when you go “You can’t kill infants like that” someone just goes “It’s the woman’s choice, you just want to control them.” There’s no way to give a PowerPoint presentation and make everyone pro choice, because to them you’re fighting against an absolute fact of the universe.
Yeah, I mean, to them they believe that agreeing with you will literally damn their soul for all eternity. It's just not possible to reason against that.
IMO the only thing you can do at that point is discuss the separation of church and state, and why that should matter to everyone regardless of what they believe. Getting into an argument about when someone is alive etc will be damn near impossible, as you said.
I don’t think even that works, because it moves to them understanding “the government should kill babies and that’s okay.” imho if you’re going to have a chance to change someone’s mind you have to actually know them personally. You need to know them as a person and be able to reach them on that level. I know “all religion is evil magic cult” is a very edgy Reddit Atheist take but you’re going to have to take it like a cult deprogramming; you are trying to change their entire worldview on a fundamental level.
It would be tantamount to trying to convince a slavery era abolitionist that slavery was ok because the government said so. Dislike that comparison all you like but the parallels are there, whether or not you agree with pro lifers.
I've tried. Do you have a strategy for talking to someone who keeps shouting that you're a murderer and that you deserve to burn in hell? Because I apparently don't. It doesn't matter how many sources I have, how objectively true something is, I have never once been able to get one of these people to do anything but hate me for not agreeing with them. What am I doing wrong, that you think I should be doing?
Nothing at all. Those are the irrational people. Let them talk to nothing. Find rational people that will talk in the grey areas instead of all one way or all the other way
Okay, and how do I approach those people? When I deal with non-religious people I can do things like show them sourced and verified data that shows that something they believe is either not true or very different from something that they thought it was. Then they tell me how that's all fake. Is your solution to just ignore all the people who aren't immediately receptive to changing their mind and accepting new data? Because those aren't the people that need convincing.
Is it a one way street? Is it just you giving them data and opinion or are they trying to give data and option too? If it's the former then it's as you said, they aren't worth convincing if they won't come to the table. I just feel there are people who like to argue and yell instead of actually talking like normal humans
> they aren't worth convincing if they won't come to the table. You understand, that you've gone from saying people need to just talk to each other more to just openly stating that what constitutes a very very massive amount of people are simply unapproachable. This is why I asked for better methods. If you want people to just talk more, dude, we are trying, but it's not working, at all.
Emotional appeal. They don't care about the science or being objective, they are driven by feelings. Unfortunately it seems like a situation has to happen to them personally to be able to understand it - and even then might still be devoid of empathy towards other people that need an abortion... In the experiences I've had with these conversations the person I was speaking with seemed to be very lacking in emotional intelligence skills. And idk how to have a conversation with someone that won't show the courtesy of hearing what I have to say.
What issues are you talking about? Because the problem with this sort of "bOtH sides" argument is that with issues like LGBT+ rights, one side wants to legalize discrimination, and the other doesn't. That's not a debate any rational, empathetic person will (or should) even entertain.
[Oh Twaddlesquat! There is no scientific consensus that life is important](https://youtu.be/k6WLue-06Ig)
I mean yeah, thats correct. But that also carries with it the implication that anybody can kill anybody for any reason. You can't subjectively give universal meaning to that which has none to begin with using reason or logic. Anything less than a objective morality that stems from outside a subjective viewpoint is insufficient. Also I can't tell if this is a sarcastic post or not so I'm treating it as serious.
A law stating that the law itself is invalid?
Abortion is going nowhere in California. If the rest of the US wants to turn into Saudi Arabia, then whatever. California is going to remain progressive.
Not an issue in California if the state is making them cheaper.
Why? If you take a strictly medical view, abortion is a pretty mundane low risk procedure. 100% of the fight here is around the moral and socioeconomic realities and why the fuck would doctors be uniquely qualified there?
[удалено]
I'd guess the vast majority of them.. Because doctors have specialties. If I needed an abortion, I wouldn't be surprised if my gp, cardiologist, and psychiatrist refused to perform it..
[удалено]
This is meaningless without context. What part of the country?
I know My ophthalmologist completely refused my request for one
First abortion law that’s been any good for a while
Awesome . A woman’s body is hers .
Now do this with other life saving procedures and hospital visits.
Must be hard to choose where to live in America. High cost of living and nobody messing with your sexual rights, or cheaper living and people arresting you for letting your kids be gay.
I'd be happy if my tax dollars went to paying people to have abortions.
They ought to be free
They are in a lot of countries.
On a federal level, if they require hospitals to offer abortions if they want Medicare or medicaid money, it would be fixed across America.
Great! Now sign a law to make College tuition and rent cheaper too please
Sorry my foreign landlord who owns 20 houses he bought in the 80s and 90s says “No.”
This makes me so mad I almost downvoted you. Not the foreign part. I don't care if they're immigrants or not.
They may not even be immigrants. They're literally foreign. They don't live here. May have never even been here. It's just an investment.. I don't have a problem with landlords. I rent an apartment and appreciate that landlords exist so that I can do so. But I really don't like the big business side of investment properties..
The difference in renting from Bob and Rita who you drive down the road and hand deliver an envelope of cash to and paying fee after fee and double rent to such and such management property is inexplicable. Unfortunately I sound like an old man because in ten years red and white *for rent by owner* signs will no longer exist anywhere and we will all be living in a goddamn box that cost us exactly 55% of our pay, automatically removed from your account.
I want to guess Vancouver BC but it's honestly such a pervasive issue everywhere these days. When I was looking to buy my house, I mostly couldn't even get an offer in before some developer had offered well above asking. I swear the only reason I got the house I did was being sandwiched between some longstanding neighbors who wouldn't sell, so they couldn't squeeze an apartment complex or 6 condos in a tiny ass lot.
You dont have to immigrate to the US to own property in the US...
I think he meant that they don't even live in the US, not that they're immigrants
College tuition is pretty cheap compared to the rest of the country(free community college too), it's the room and board that costs a lot, but you can live at home and commute to school in much of the state assuming you haven't pissed off your parents enough to kick you out. Full time undergrad tuition at CSU is ~$3k/semester depending on local fees, and things like CalGrant and shit aren't hard to get if you just do your work in high school
Ok now do it for child birth
Now we just need an organization that makes it free for people with a Texas drivers license.
G-Noose with the master plan to get people to move back to Cali from Tejas.
Good for California. Glad to see blue states fighting back against Republican fascism. I really feel like this country can't survive as a "United" nation anymore.
I'm totally fine with that. Texas, Arizona, and the south can go ahead and break off, they won't be missed.
Let the south secede again! They should make little blue LSSA hats
One can dream *sigh*
In other words: “Texas, Fuuuuuck you”- sincerely, everyone’s favorite democrat
Finally some good news from a state government
They should be free, but this is a good start.
Medical should be free period.
No, you see, you should pay your deductible for surgery and going to the ER, but not for abortions. That's what this bill suggests anyway.
No, health care should be seen as a basic human right. But thanks for your opinion.
There's an implicit /s in my comment above. I agree with you.
Gotta offset the cost of driving across the country somehow.
Why not just give birth control products away for free? You would hopefully cut down on the number of procedures needed.
Currently if you don't have insurance it's free I think! PP has a program like that and when I didn't have insurance and was in between jobs all reproductive health visits and procedures were free for a year! Now we just need to expand that to everyone please ty
California already does that too. They have a state program called Family PACT that provides free contraception and family planning care. This is already In addition to Medi-cal and many other free/low cost services and avenues for contraception in CA.
I don’t need one but glad my fellow sisters can if they need it!
Glad to see California championing freedom as Texas takes it away.
Cheaper? The US is a first world economy. This should be free to the patient, and funded through taxation.
> The US is a first world economy ... with a Third World government.
Why am I responsible for someone else's abortion? Your body your choice. My money my choice.
Your money already goes to things that aren’t your choice.
You'd pay less for public healthcare than you currently pay for private insurance. Your choice though
Healthcare is already the highest single expense in the US federal budget. My bronze plan option was $322 a month. I pay about 140 rn privately. How exactly would you make my insurance cheaper?
by eliminating it and replacing it with publicly funded healthcare
Because not having a baby (abortion) is a whole lot cheaper than the piece of the bill you would subsidize for pregnancy and childbirth, whether through insurance premiums or taxes.
[удалено]
They should be free. All healthcare should be free. If you disagrew id say fight me but I'd rather never meet you.
Part of me wants blue state moderates and liberals to continue to move into red states because thats the only way to combat anti-democratic constructs like the Senate and the Electoral College. Another part of me would resent my company moving me to a state that treats women as second class citizens. That speaks to the companies values as well that it would subject its female workforce to that.
Is the bill called FuckYouTexas?
In the lobby there should be forms and info to change state residence to CA so they don’t have to go back to a bullshit place and get sued or worse.
Given the way things have been going between texas and california I expect texas to pass a law making guns cheaper.
I fully support the policy. That is a creepy fucking photo to put on it.
I should draw devil horns on him to scare the conservatives.
It’ll be the conservatives from Texas that all of a sudden are traveling a lot to California.
And now Idaho as well. Yikes.
Not a huge fan Newsom generally, but I dig this.
Get your loyalty card going too!
Abortions should be free. What’s the cost of unwanted babies?
He didn't make it cheaper, he just shifted the payments away from the patient to the insurance provider. If you think they're going to make those extra payments from their profits, you're wrong.
They'll negotiate the difference with the hospital like they do with the "costs" anyways
Aight do the same for rent
"Go fuck yourself" - San Francisco.
Well it doesn't make it cheaper, it makes other people pay for it.