Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday September 5, 2015
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2010, 04:42 PM   #26
CKxx
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 33458
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: PA
Vehicle:
Your BOV sounds lame
93 RX7+09 Forester

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ysidro View Post
Before worrying about the environment crap, California needs to worry about getting itself out of debt first, and create jobs for its people.
Seriously. I guess I appreciate their candor, but they could have just said, "We want to take your money to fund our ridiculous social programs" and it would have flow right under the radar.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
CKxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 02-01-2010, 05:03 PM   #27
kleinkid
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 27091
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Oak Harbor, Wa.
Vehicle:
2010 STi SE
DGM

Default Great idea for California

This is wonderful news. Will work very well in sunny warm California. More people getting exercise and being healthy, fewer fat people in California. Also, you can't haul as many groceries on a bicycle, so they will eat less. Health insurance premiums will go down. I'm surprised Arnold dodn't think of this earlier.
kleinkid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 05:13 PM   #28
shikataganai
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 92634
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Vehicle:
'07 Land Cruiser
'12 RAV4 EV

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
Voluntary, you are aware that most californians HAVE to drive to work because they cannot afford to live close to it. And when I lived in Cali, I never saw much public transportation. You cannot ask a person who lives in Huntington Beach to ride a bike to LA. By car its an hour commute depending on traffic. There are no busses that run that route.

I really think that we need to consider 'blackwater-ing the entire cali legislature' how can people be so stupid.
I shed no tears for people who live in Huntington Beach and "have to" commute to LA. Cry me a ****ing river.

California is expensive and crowded because many people still think it's a great place to live. Until people start to leave en masse prices are right where they should be, and if one's skills don't let one make what one considers a decent living with a reasonable commute in California then tough luck: there are 49 other states + the rest of the world in which to live.
shikataganai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2010, 07:34 PM   #29
White out
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 46277
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: On the beach
Vehicle:
** LP640
996TT

Default

So I don't have to worry about finding a parking spot big enough to fit my smug killing machine that doesn't reflect light. Sweet.

Parking in Pacific Beach is a pita with a wide vehicle.

Nick
White out is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 12:53 AM   #30
cyrenus
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 169523
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dickinson, ND
Vehicle:
2011 WRX Hatch
DGM

Default

More excessive governance by the liberal Cali legislative elites who, of course, know so much better than the masses what is good for them. I'd rather live up here on the frozen plains than put up with this sort of governmental social engineering, which, when all is said and done, will have predictable but unintended economic consequences causing the dopes to look for more ways to tax the populace to make up for the original wrong-headed decision.

Until Californians en-masse decide to reject this nonsense, they will be spoon-fed more of the same. How about trying to apply some basic, common-sense fiscal responsibility in lieu of such social engineering, tax-driven schemes?

Those of you who are defending taxing something that isn't currently taxed should be ashamed of yourselves. You are enabling the fools who are suppressing you and your fellow citizens' economic and human liberty and freedom.
cyrenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:09 AM   #31
Kostamojen
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 2272
Join Date: Sep 2000
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Mars
Vehicle:
2013 Subaru BRZ
Galaxy Blue

Default

Good thing I'm never actually parking on public property.
Kostamojen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:54 AM   #32
sauuce
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 109253
Join Date: Mar 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Davis
Vehicle:
2006 STi
SGM

Default

F*** this state's legislature. Seriously they all need to get shot in the neck.
sauuce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:57 AM   #33
HB_Dad
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 45190
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Huntington Beach/Ramona, CA
Vehicle:
2014 Impreza Sport L
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
Voluntary, you are aware that most californians HAVE to drive to work because they cannot afford to live close to it. And when I lived in Cali, I never saw much public transportation. You cannot ask a person who lives in Huntington Beach to ride a bike to LA. By car its an hour commute depending on traffic. There are no busses that run that route.
My dilemma exactly. I live in Huntington Beach and have worked in both Santa Monica and Torrance and there are no commuter trains between either Point A NOR Point B.

The problem is that we DO have a commuter train which works nicely... IF you are lucky enough for it to be anywhere near either the start or end of your commute. Unfortunately, the ass-jockeys who designed the system seem to have deliberately avoided all of the coastal cities making a train ride from, say, Huntington Beach to Santa Monica (a 35-40 mile commute) impossible. What Southern California needs is a train that goes up and down PCH (Highway 1) from Dana Point to Ventura or even Santa Barbara with one station every perhaps 2 cities (give or take depending on populace). A second train line should also go from San Clemente through the San Fernando Valley and all the way to Valencia. This proposed train could travel right up the middle of (or next to) the 5 and 405 freeways. As much as I love my car, I would much rather zone out with my iPod on a train commute.

So going back to the original topic of reducing free parking, I am all for it so long as they make the viable commuter train routes I mentioned a reality. Otherwise, it is pretty much extortion as they are demanding more money with no way out.
HB_Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 04:28 AM   #34
powderdayz
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 229399
Join Date: Nov 2009
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
MBP

Default

ummmmm, i was just in california... i wasn't aware there was ANY free parking to even take away... this state is retarded you can't go anywhere without having to pay to park.
powderdayz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 08:59 AM   #35
whoosh
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 40989
Join Date: Jul 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Vehicle:
OT vag inspector

Default

so what happens everytime there is a earthquake?



do they stop the trains to inspect the track?





if they do......way to go cali
whoosh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 10:29 AM   #36
samagon
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 26859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: undisputed COMBAT! champion
Vehicle:
of TXIC
I also like (oYo)!!!!

Default

This will probably work as well as the proposal to eliminate black cars.

samagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 11:03 AM   #37
Masterauto
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 198376
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Delaware
Vehicle:
STI Subaru BRZ
Nissan GT-R

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexington View Post


Free parking is the best kind of parking. I'm waiting for the day Cali outlaws the car.
Why outlaw it when they can make a fortune taxing it?
Masterauto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 11:33 AM   #38
onelove221
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 118781
Join Date: Jun 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Washington, DC
Vehicle:
2005 Cadillac CTS-V
Laser Red

Default

Free parking is not a right.

California made the tragic decision to not sufficiently fund alternatives to private automobile transportation and how it gets to reap the whirlwind of its folly.

From an urban planning standpoint, the Greater Los Angeles MSA probably should not be as populous as it is, given the fact the every single working adult has to use an automobile to commute. Unless we come up with a different way to fuel cars, it will simply be unsustainable in the 21st century.

Carpooling, ride sharing, telecommuting and the state's limited ability (due to the high costs) to build out public transportation is going mean fewer half measures like taxing parking and more radical changes are in the pipeline.
onelove221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 11:58 AM   #39
tedstryker
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 180009
Join Date: May 2008
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Vehicle:
06 TR
WHITE

Default

tedstryker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 12:41 PM   #40
b4wantab
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 21293
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Oak Park, IL
Vehicle:
05 OB Black Bean
1969 W-30

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoosh View Post
so what happens everytime there is a earthquake?



do they stop the trains to inspect the track?





if they do......way to go cali
Only if there is time between the forest fires and mud slides.

When you have people that do not live like you do making decisions / laws for you this is what happens.

Peace,

Greg
b4wantab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 01:42 PM   #41
movieman
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 169683
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
Vehicle:
2015 Forester 2.5
Red

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onelove221 View Post
California made the tragic decision to not sufficiently fund alternatives to private automobile transportation and how it gets to reap the whirlwind of its folly.
Building cities around the most efficient form of modern transport (i.e. cars) is hardly folly; their folly, if there is one, is not improving the roads over the last few years to deal with increased traffic levels.

Quote:
Unless we come up with a different way to fuel cars, it will simply be unsustainable in the 21st century.
Back in the real world, cars or something similar will still be around it the 22nd century because they're vastly more efficient for the average user than 'public transport' will ever be. If you can't 'come up with a different way to fuel cars', then you can't run 'public transport' either.
movieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:01 PM   #42
ainnamor
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 199043
Join Date: Jan 2009
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2009 WRX
OBP

Default

i think your definition of efficient, relative to this topic, is not correct. Mass transit is always more efficient. The energy spent to move an individual is drastically reduced. It may take an individual more time to commute but the cost savings make it efficient.
ainnamor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:07 PM   #43
JC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 692
Join Date: Dec 1999
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2011 Grand Cherokee
Triumph Street Triple R

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
Maybe you should read the proposal. I already said if businesses pay for their employees to park more will drive. What is your point? They pay for a lot, or they pay for the parking in public spots. Either way this proposal is irrelevant.

What is relevant is exactly what I said. And which was emphasized again by movieman. There are consequences to such a policy.
Where is it that you are reading it? I live in Long Beach so this is relevant to my life.
JC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 03:07 PM   #44
Yotsuya
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 935
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: ಠ_ಠ
Vehicle:
Dani Sordo Fan Club

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by movieman View Post
Building cities around the most efficient form of modern transport (i.e. cars) is hardly folly; their folly, if there is one, is not improving the roads over the last few years to deal with increased traffic levels
Cars aren't the most efficient form of modern transport.
Yotsuya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 04:23 PM   #45
onelove221
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 118781
Join Date: Jun 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Washington, DC
Vehicle:
2005 Cadillac CTS-V
Laser Red

Default

Quote:
Building cities around the most efficient form of modern transport (i.e. cars) is hardly folly; their folly, if there is one, is not improving the roads over the last few years to deal with increased traffic levels
Example #1 of the aformentioned folly.

Cars are NOT "the most efficient form of modern transport". They are the most CONVENIENT form of modern transport. Big difference.

The problem with California and places like it, is that they opted for 50+ years of low density, auto dependent development vs higher density development in which a variety of transportation modes, from cars to rail, could be viable. Now that it is too cost prohibitive to build out an effective, functional public rail transportation system, they are screwed.
onelove221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 04:47 PM   #46
sxotty
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95600
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
2003 WRX wagon
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC View Post
Where is it that you are reading it? I live in Long Beach so this is relevant to my life.
http://dist27.casen.govoffice.com/ve...30AD3F2%7D.DOC

There you go. The main focus is public street parking, but it reduces the obligation of businesses to provide private parking. They will still have the option of course, but will not be forced. There are some parts that sound a little worse, but in reality it isn't that draconian at all. Some of the "bad" parts don't really matter. Those include charging an employee to park separately. That sounds bad, and may be if the company in question tries to screw over employees, but in general is just a transfer payment. It allows an employee that doesn't drive to get a bigger paycheck than one that does park.

Incentives like that are good IMO b/c prior to that those employees that do not drive have a lower salary to help subsidize parking for those that do. (That actually is a very correct economic argument, but if it doesn't make sense then it is my fault for being incoherent in explaining it).
sxotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 07:25 PM   #47
JC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 692
Join Date: Dec 1999
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Vehicle:
2011 Grand Cherokee
Triumph Street Triple R

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
http://dist27.casen.govoffice.com/ve...30AD3F2%7D.DOC

There you go. The main focus is public street parking, but it reduces the obligation of businesses to provide private parking. They will still have the option of course, but will not be forced. There are some parts that sound a little worse, but in reality it isn't that draconian at all. Some of the "bad" parts don't really matter. Those include charging an employee to park separately. That sounds bad, and may be if the company in question tries to screw over employees, but in general is just a transfer payment. It allows an employee that doesn't drive to get a bigger paycheck than one that does park.

Incentives like that are good IMO b/c prior to that those employees that do not drive have a lower salary to help subsidize parking for those that do. (That actually is a very correct economic argument, but if it doesn't make sense then it is my fault for being incoherent in explaining it).
This sounds pretty bad to me...

Quote:
Requiring that all new employment contracts charge the full cost of employer-provided parking.
I work at a ~1000 site with a massive parking lot left over from when we were a 10,000 person site (yeah outsourcing!) this could really screw me.

Some of it like un-bundling parking from rent sounds good but how practical is it? If own a duplex and the parking is a driveway or garage do I charge them separately? What if they don't want it? I just lose the rent from property I already own? You can't rent it to someone else.

I think this is the usual California proposal that sounds good inside a meeting and is an expensive cluster**** once it gets implemented.
JC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2010, 12:47 AM   #48
cyrenus
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 169523
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dickinson, ND
Vehicle:
2011 WRX Hatch
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ainnamor View Post
i think your definition of efficient, relative to this topic, is not correct. Mass transit is always more efficient. The energy spent to move an individual is drastically reduced. It may take an individual more time to commute but the cost savings make it efficient.
Alright, Mr. Efficient. Get rid of your WRX and start riding a metal tube into the city every day. I'm right behind you. And then what? The wise legislators decide that mass transit would be the most efficient way to deliver tourists to Yellowstone? Glacier Park? Well then there's no need for personal -- inefficient -- transport whatsoever. Of course, we'd all have to get on waiting lists to be transported to our dream vacations and road trips would become a thing of the past.

Point is, too many people have become too willing to let the government decide personal choices for them, which just empowers the employees (the government), when it's the employers (us) who should be making our own decisions.

And, to the person who mentioned that the oil-based economy's days are numbered, do a little research -- you might be surprised to find that discoveries of new oil and gas fields are made almost monthly worldwide. Not to mention all the fields that are deemed 'off-limits' by the government and enviros. who are cut from the same cloth as these misgided Cali twits who want to encourage mass transit by taxing people in that direction.

You will have to have had some degree of university brainwashing to think this is OK.
cyrenus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2010, 07:15 AM   #49
sxotty
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95600
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
2003 WRX wagon
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC View Post
I work at a ~1000 site with a massive parking lot left over from when we were a 10,000 person site (yeah outsourcing!) this could really screw me.
That depends how it is implemented. I imagine they (company) would charge an employee some fee per one space. So if you have a massive lot it would actually be cheaper since the per space cost goes down as area increases. It doesn't make too much sense to me that they would just divide the cost by the number of employees since it isn't like you could use 10 parking spots yourself. (If they are legislating it like you fear they are definitely being idiots, but I think it unlikely)


Quote:
Some of it like un-bundling parking from rent sounds good but how practical is it? If own a duplex and the parking is a driveway or garage do I charge them separately? What if they don't want it? I just lose the rent from property I already own? You can't rent it to someone else.

I think this is the usual California proposal that sounds good inside a meeting and is an expensive cluster**** once it gets implemented.
Well that is the problem with the free market, some things that sound good just don't work out as well. That is why we have municipal fire departments instead of private companies competing

I imagined that private parking at a residence is exempt, but that a parking garage at a apartment complex or something like that would not be. If I am incorrect once again I would say they did a poor job.

I am not a free market fundamentalist if there is such a thing. So I don't care that much about this (except as I mentioned above I hate pay parking), but it is ironic that the approach overall is actually dictated by the market. Ironic b/c of the people proposing and opposing it. I like whatever policies make life more convenient even if they are not the most efficient use of resources and am willing to pay slightly more not to be inconvenienced.
sxotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2010, 10:36 AM   #50
ainnamor
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 199043
Join Date: Jan 2009
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2009 WRX
OBP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrenus View Post
Alright, Mr. Efficient. Get rid of your WRX and start riding a metal tube into the city every day. I'm right behind you. And then what? The wise legislators decide that mass transit would be the most efficient way to deliver tourists to Yellowstone? Glacier Park? Well then there's no need for personal -- inefficient -- transport whatsoever. Of course, we'd all have to get on waiting lists to be transported to our dream vacations and road trips would become a thing of the past.
I was just setting the record straight. Cars are not efficient.

I don't think that driving for fun is bad and whatever pollution coming from my tailpipe does not concern me on a daily basis. I am also not worried about the world running out of oil any time in the near future. I am sure California hates me but I'm over it.
ainnamor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Petition to Eliminate Front Plates in Ohio SonicWRX Mid West Subaru Owners Club Forum -- MWSOC 5 11-12-2009 12:00 AM
In attempt to break the record.... Dena North West Impreza Club Forum -- NWIC 23 09-07-2008 01:02 AM
Dr. Kills self in attempt to stop WAPCE psychoskip Off-Topic 23 07-17-2006 04:29 AM
best path to eliminate turbo lag in a stock 2 liter WRX? alacrity024 Off-Topic 116 05-01-2006 10:26 AM
Petiton to eliminate front plate in TX! bbaker Texas Impreza Club Forum -- TXIC 1 04-14-2004 03:00 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2015 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2015, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.