Discussion:
[OT] What's in a name
(too old to reply)
Quadibloc
2020-03-29 17:50:30 UTC
Permalink
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264

However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.

Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.

Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-03-29 18:20:38 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 10:50:30 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
As I understand it, "poor" in India means a level of poverty
unimaginable to an American--can the poor in India _afford_ grocery
stores?
Peter Trei
2020-03-30 02:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
John Savard
John:

You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a little fact checking before you hit send.

Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html

"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal services and restaurants that deliver food."

A real problem there are millions of off-books workers who are now jobless, and trying to walk home to their villages, sometimes hundreds of miles away.

Pt
Titus G
2020-03-30 02:58:46 UTC
Permalink
On 30/03/20 3:02 pm, Peter Trei wrote:
snip
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
A real problem there are millions of off-books workers who are now
jobless, and trying to walk home to their villages, sometimes
hundreds of miles away.
Pt
You just reminded me of _The White Tiger_ by Aravind Adiga, a
fascinating fictional 2008 tale depicting Indian life. Its protagonist
began his working life a long way from his village. Great plot. Well
worth reading.
Quadibloc
2020-03-30 03:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a little fact checking before you hit send.
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal services and restaurants that deliver food."
Well, I saw the item here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/

and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and credible
news source.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-03-30 03:44:19 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a little fact checking before you hit send.
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal services and restaurants that deliver food."
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and credible
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
more information:
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
o***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 22:39:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a little fact checking before you hit send.
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal services and restaurants that deliver food."
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and credible
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
.....hmmmm.....

Federalism (with a 10th amendment, for those that need a cattle prod)....

....what a concept......
Dorothy J Heydt
2020-03-31 23:02:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the
novel coronavirus
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important
to give the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up
violence against people
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese,
and they're not
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic
of China. So the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too
much into the fact
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is
a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve
for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to
do a worse job than Donald Trump.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a
little fact checking before you hit send.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
Post by Quadibloc
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and
credible
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
Post by J. Clarke
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
In other news, Trump is ready to slacken air-quality standards
for automotive manufacturers.

However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Lynn McGuire
2020-03-31 23:58:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the
novel coronavirus
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important
to give the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up
violence against people
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese,
and they're not
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic
of China. So the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too
much into the fact
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is
a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve
for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to
do a worse job than Donald Trump.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a
little fact checking before you hit send.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
Post by Quadibloc
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and
credible
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
Post by J. Clarke
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
In other news, Trump is ready to slacken air-quality standards
for automotive manufacturers.
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/490318-trump-administration-rolls-back-obama-era-fuel-efficiency-standards

I guess that California does not need pickup trucks anymore. The new
federal standards were to raise the gas mileage requirements for vehicle
fleets to 54 mpg in 2026 (from the present 25 mpg). Trump changed it to
an increase of 1 mpg per year from the present requirement.

The only way that a pickup will get 54 mpg is to electrify it which will
double the cost and reduce the towing range. I paid $40K for my 2019
Ford pickup last October (it had a sticker price of $55K). I cannot
imagine paying $80K for a pickup of the same capability.

Lynn
Alan Baker
2020-04-01 00:04:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the
novel coronavirus
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important
to give the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up
violence against people
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese,
and they're not
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic
of China. So the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too
much into the fact
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is
a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve
for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to
do a worse job than Donald Trump.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a
little fact checking before you hit send.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
Post by Quadibloc
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and
credible
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa.  The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
Post by J. Clarke
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
In other news, Trump is ready to slacken air-quality standards
for automotive manufacturers.
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market.  It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/490318-trump-administration-rolls-back-obama-era-fuel-efficiency-standards
I guess that California does not need pickup trucks anymore.  The new
federal standards were to raise the gas mileage requirements for vehicle
fleets to 54 mpg in 2026 (from the present 25 mpg).  Trump changed it to
an increase of 1 mpg per year from the present requirement.
The only way that a pickup will get 54 mpg is to electrify it which will
double the cost and reduce the towing range.  I paid $40K for my 2019
Ford pickup last October (it had a sticker price of $55K).  I cannot
imagine paying $80K for a pickup of the same capability.
It's a FLEET requirement, Lynn.

So pickup trucks can get less than 54 mpg and still be sold.
J. Clarke
2020-04-01 00:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the
novel coronavirus
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important
to give the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up
violence against people
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese,
and they're not
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic
of China. So the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too
much into the fact
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is
a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve
for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to
do a worse job than Donald Trump.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a
little fact checking before you hit send.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
Post by Quadibloc
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and
credible
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
Post by J. Clarke
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
In other news, Trump is ready to slacken air-quality standards
for automotive manufacturers.
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
I'm getting tired of hearing that one. No currently effective
requirement will change, what is being changed is future requirements.
In any case, California can demand a miracle if they want to, that
doesn't mean that it is going to happen.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-01 00:37:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:11:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the
novel coronavirus
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important
to give the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up
violence against people
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese,
and they're not
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic
of China. So the
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too
much into the fact
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is
a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve
for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to
do a worse job than Donald Trump.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a
little fact checking before you hit send.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery
stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal
services and restaurants that deliver food."
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
Post by Quadibloc
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and
credible
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
news source.
The Atlantic article specifically mentions Goa. The Deccan Herald has
<https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/covid-19-lockdown-after-failing-to-home-deliver-goa-cm-orders-grocery-stores-open-from-friday-818039.html>.
Post by J. Clarke
This seems similar to the US in which the governors have made
decisions that far exceed what the Federal government has required.
In other news, Trump is ready to slacken air-quality standards
for automotive manufacturers.
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-11-15/california-trump-administration-lawsuit-auto-emissions-climate-change
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Quadibloc
2020-04-01 16:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.

At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be worth doing
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.

Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to the cost of
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move. As well, the geography of the Los
Angeles Basin hasn't changed since the 1960s, although of course its population
has increased, yet California's emission standards keep getting stricter, so
perhaps they have gone beyond what is necessary to protect people in Los Angeles
from deadly smog.

Of course, those states with cities in which photochemical smog is an issue
might adopt California emissions or something similar if they still can.

The trouble is that California emissions exist because of an EPA waiver;
Congress would need to take action so that states are free to set their own
pollution standards, with people being required to abide by both Federal and
state standards. (Obviously, allowing states to set lower standards than Federal
standards and prevent enforcement of Federal standards would not be helpful.)

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-04-01 21:27:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.
At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be worth doing
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.
Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to the cost of
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move. As well, the geography of the Los
Angeles Basin hasn't changed since the 1960s, although of course its population
has increased, yet California's emission standards keep getting stricter, so
perhaps they have gone beyond what is necessary to protect people in Los Angeles
from deadly smog.
Of course, those states with cities in which photochemical smog is an issue
might adopt California emissions or something similar if they still can.
The trouble is that California emissions exist because of an EPA waiver;
Congress would need to take action so that states are free to set their own
pollution standards, with people being required to abide by both Federal and
state standards. (Obviously, allowing states to set lower standards than Federal
standards and prevent enforcement of Federal standards would not be helpful.)
This would mean the Congress giving up its Constitutional power to
have exclusive control over interstate commerce.
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
Dorothy J Heydt
2020-04-01 23:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.
At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be
worth doing
Post by Quadibloc
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.
Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to
the cost of
Post by Quadibloc
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move. As well, the geography of the Los
Angeles Basin hasn't changed since the 1960s, although of course its
population
Post by Quadibloc
has increased, yet California's emission standards keep getting stricter, so
perhaps they have gone beyond what is necessary to protect people in
Los Angeles
Post by Quadibloc
from deadly smog.
Of course, those states with cities in which photochemical smog is an issue
might adopt California emissions or something similar if they still can.
The trouble is that California emissions exist because of an EPA waiver;
Congress would need to take action so that states are free to set their own
pollution standards, with people being required to abide by both Federal and
state standards. (Obviously, allowing states to set lower standards
than Federal
Post by Quadibloc
standards and prevent enforcement of Federal standards would not be helpful.)
This would mean the Congress giving up its Constitutional power to
have exclusive control over interstate commerce.
No it wouldn't. It would mean N percent of automakers would
decide (before or after a cost-benefit analysis) whether it was
worth their while to manufacture cars that fit the California
standards. They've made that decision in the past.

Meanwhile, with everybody (for some values of 'everybody')
social-isolating, the atmosphere is a lot cleaner.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
J. Clarke
2020-04-02 00:02:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.
At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be
worth doing
Post by Quadibloc
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.
Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to
the cost of
Post by Quadibloc
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move. As well, the geography of the Los
Angeles Basin hasn't changed since the 1960s, although of course its
population
Post by Quadibloc
has increased, yet California's emission standards keep getting stricter, so
perhaps they have gone beyond what is necessary to protect people in
Los Angeles
Post by Quadibloc
from deadly smog.
Of course, those states with cities in which photochemical smog is an issue
might adopt California emissions or something similar if they still can.
The trouble is that California emissions exist because of an EPA waiver;
Congress would need to take action so that states are free to set their own
pollution standards, with people being required to abide by both Federal and
state standards. (Obviously, allowing states to set lower standards
than Federal
Post by Quadibloc
standards and prevent enforcement of Federal standards would not be helpful.)
This would mean the Congress giving up its Constitutional power to
have exclusive control over interstate commerce.
No it wouldn't. It would mean N percent of automakers would
decide (before or after a cost-benefit analysis) whether it was
worth their while to manufacture cars that fit the California
standards. They've made that decision in the past.
Meanwhile, with everybody (for some values of 'everybody')
social-isolating, the atmosphere is a lot cleaner.
Congress set up the rules that allowed California to have a waiver,
and then delegated the power to decide whether they actually get one
to the executive. And the excutive has had enough of California's
special pleading.

The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution. California should never
have been allowed to interfere with it to begin with. The FBI should
have collected the fruit police too.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 01:00:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.
At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be
worth doing
Post by Quadibloc
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.
Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to
the cost of
Post by Quadibloc
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move. As well, the geography of the Los
Angeles Basin hasn't changed since the 1960s, although of course its
population
Post by Quadibloc
has increased, yet California's emission standards keep getting stricter, so
perhaps they have gone beyond what is necessary to protect people in
Los Angeles
Post by Quadibloc
from deadly smog.
Of course, those states with cities in which photochemical smog is an issue
might adopt California emissions or something similar if they still can.
The trouble is that California emissions exist because of an EPA waiver;
Congress would need to take action so that states are free to set their own
pollution standards, with people being required to abide by both Federal and
state standards. (Obviously, allowing states to set lower standards
than Federal
Post by Quadibloc
standards and prevent enforcement of Federal standards would not be helpful.)
This would mean the Congress giving up its Constitutional power to
have exclusive control over interstate commerce.
No it wouldn't. It would mean N percent of automakers would
decide (before or after a cost-benefit analysis) whether it was
worth their while to manufacture cars that fit the California
standards. They've made that decision in the past.
Meanwhile, with everybody (for some values of 'everybody')
social-isolating, the atmosphere is a lot cleaner.
Congress set up the rules that allowed California to have a waiver,
and then delegated the power to decide whether they actually get one
to the executive. And the excutive has had enough of California's
special pleading.
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution. California should never
have been allowed to interfere with it to begin with. The FBI should
have collected the fruit police too.
What is interstate commerce about setting standards for products sold
within a particular state?
Kevrob
2020-04-02 02:16:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
What is interstate commerce about setting standards for products sold
within a particular state?
The Feds passed the Clean Air Acts on the premise that pollution
doesn't respect state boundaries, and even if a car manufacturer
only sold a model within one state, it can't control the secondary
market, so the original owner might drive it across state lines and
sell it there. 50 separate sets of standards could turn into
"anti-pollution" rules that were really barriers to entry from out-
of-state firms. Strict safety and pollution standards as a de
facto import quota or ban was a trick the Japanese manufacturers
used to block competitors from overseas.

When the CAA was first passed people from underpopulated and remote
states like Wyoming or Montana argued that they didn't have enough
vehicular traffic to make smog a problem, and shouldn't have to
follow the same rules. "What, you are never going to drive to
Denver?" was a good response to that.

Harmonizing safety and pollution regs was one of the benefits of
EC/European Union. I worked in a plant manufacturing equipment
for commercial restaurants one winter 40+ years ago. We had to
make separate "export versions" that would pass certification in
the target markets we were selling them to. Doing the same one
for all the EEC companies was really good for business. If the
US and EEC specs had been the same, that would have been even better.

CA setting its own car standard is a very large, very strong tail
trying to wag the dog. Sacramento could just ban IC engines, and
demand that everybody who packs up the old 4-banger and moves to San
Jose junk it once they establish residence, or sell it out-of-state.
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act

Kevin R
Peter Trei
2020-04-02 03:11:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
What is interstate commerce about setting standards for products sold
within a particular state?
The Feds passed the Clean Air Acts on the premise that pollution
doesn't respect state boundaries, and even if a car manufacturer
only sold a model within one state, it can't control the secondary
market, so the original owner might drive it across state lines and
sell it there. 50 separate sets of standards could turn into
"anti-pollution" rules that were really barriers to entry from out-
of-state firms. Strict safety and pollution standards as a de
facto import quota or ban was a trick the Japanese manufacturers
used to block competitors from overseas.
When the CAA was first passed people from underpopulated and remote
states like Wyoming or Montana argued that they didn't have enough
vehicular traffic to make smog a problem, and shouldn't have to
follow the same rules. "What, you are never going to drive to
Denver?" was a good response to that.
Harmonizing safety and pollution regs was one of the benefits of
EC/European Union. I worked in a plant manufacturing equipment
for commercial restaurants one winter 40+ years ago. We had to
make separate "export versions" that would pass certification in
the target markets we were selling them to. Doing the same one
for all the EEC companies was really good for business. If the
US and EEC specs had been the same, that would have been even better.
CA setting its own car standard is a very large, very strong tail
trying to wag the dog. Sacramento could just ban IC engines, and
demand that everybody who packs up the old 4-banger and moves to San
Jose junk it once they establish residence, or sell it out-of-state.
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act
At the moment, a CA resident can't register a non-Ca compliment car bought out of state, and a
used car must pass the Ca smog check.

https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/noncaveh/noncaveh.pdf

Pt
Peter Trei
2020-04-02 03:12:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
What is interstate commerce about setting standards for products sold
within a particular state?
The Feds passed the Clean Air Acts on the premise that pollution
doesn't respect state boundaries, and even if a car manufacturer
only sold a model within one state, it can't control the secondary
market, so the original owner might drive it across state lines and
sell it there. 50 separate sets of standards could turn into
"anti-pollution" rules that were really barriers to entry from out-
of-state firms. Strict safety and pollution standards as a de
facto import quota or ban was a trick the Japanese manufacturers
used to block competitors from overseas.
When the CAA was first passed people from underpopulated and remote
states like Wyoming or Montana argued that they didn't have enough
vehicular traffic to make smog a problem, and shouldn't have to
follow the same rules. "What, you are never going to drive to
Denver?" was a good response to that.
Harmonizing safety and pollution regs was one of the benefits of
EC/European Union. I worked in a plant manufacturing equipment
for commercial restaurants one winter 40+ years ago. We had to
make separate "export versions" that would pass certification in
the target markets we were selling them to. Doing the same one
for all the EEC companies was really good for business. If the
US and EEC specs had been the same, that would have been even better.
CA setting its own car standard is a very large, very strong tail
trying to wag the dog. Sacramento could just ban IC engines, and
demand that everybody who packs up the old 4-banger and moves to San
Jose junk it once they establish residence, or sell it out-of-state.
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act
At the moment, a CA resident can't register a non-Ca compliment car bought out of state, and a
used car must pass the Ca smog check.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/noncaveh/noncaveh.pdf
Pt
Compliment -> compliant. Screw autocorrect.
Kevrob
2020-04-02 03:14:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Kevrob
CA setting its own car standard is a very large, very strong tail
trying to wag the dog. Sacramento could just ban IC engines, and
demand that everybody who packs up the old 4-banger and moves to San
Jose junk it once they establish residence, or sell it out-of-state.
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act
At the moment, a CA resident can't register a non-Ca compliment car bought out of state, and a
used car must pass the Ca smog check.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/noncaveh/noncaveh.pdf
If CA loses the CAA waiver, that might have to change.
There would be more lawsuits, I'm sure.

Kevin R
Quadibloc
2020-04-02 05:33:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.
Your post is informative, and I see now where there are valid issues. In Canada,
railroad lines are basically immune to provincial law, and so are television
stations - but telephone companies are under a different circumstance. Instead
of the Bell System from coast to coast, as it was in the United States, several
of our provinces, such as Manitoba and Alberta, had their own telephone
companies. The city of Edmonton, within Alberta, even had its own telephone
company as distinct from the one run by the provincial government! (And this
despite the fact that unlike provinces versus the Federal government, cities
were mere creatures of the province, with no protected powers of their own.)

John Savard
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 21:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
What is interstate commerce about setting standards for products sold
within a particular state?
The Feds passed the Clean Air Acts on the premise that pollution
doesn't respect state boundaries, and even if a car manufacturer
only sold a model within one state, it can't control the secondary
market, so the original owner might drive it across state lines and
sell it there. 50 separate sets of standards could turn into
"anti-pollution" rules that were really barriers to entry from out-
of-state firms. Strict safety and pollution standards as a de
facto import quota or ban was a trick the Japanese manufacturers
used to block competitors from overseas.
When the CAA was first passed people from underpopulated and remote
states like Wyoming or Montana argued that they didn't have enough
vehicular traffic to make smog a problem, and shouldn't have to
follow the same rules. "What, you are never going to drive to
Denver?" was a good response to that.
Harmonizing safety and pollution regs was one of the benefits of
EC/European Union. I worked in a plant manufacturing equipment
for commercial restaurants one winter 40+ years ago. We had to
make separate "export versions" that would pass certification in
the target markets we were selling them to. Doing the same one
for all the EEC companies was really good for business. If the
US and EEC specs had been the same, that would have been even better.
CA setting its own car standard is a very large, very strong tail
trying to wag the dog. Sacramento could just ban IC engines, and
demand that everybody who packs up the old 4-banger and moves to San
Jose junk it once they establish residence, or sell it out-of-state.
There is that nasty "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution,
which might prevent the Golden State from banning IC vehicles registered
in other states from driving on interstates and US Highways within CA,
that allow one to travel between states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act
Kevin R
Go back to the 60's, wherein vehicles met federal standards, and CA owners/drivers were required, in order to pass inspections, add on this and that to meet their local standards.

IOW, let Californians pay the price for living there, without punishing the innocent.
Quadibloc
2020-04-02 05:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states. Thus, if each state can outlaw putting
arsenic in someone'e tea, putting poison in the air they breathe is still within
that same authority.

John Savard
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 21:35:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended....
Yeah....we hear that a lot.

What we DON'T hear is how they know.

....or what SCOTUS might have opined.
J. Clarke
2020-04-02 21:52:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.

As for the _criminal law_, kidnap somebody and see who comes after
you. It won't be Barney Fife. The Federal government generally
doesn't _want_ to be involved in local law enforcement, however there
are some crimes that it has chosen to address and there are
circumstances where it can take jurisdiction from the locals.
Post by Quadibloc
Thus, if each state can outlaw putting arsenic in someone'e tea, putting poison in the air they breathe is still within that same authority.
If the Federal government sets standards for the arsenic content of
tea then the states are powerless to set higher standards for such
content for tea imported into the state unless the Federal government
chooses to cede them that power. If the tea is manufactured in the
state they can regulate it all they want to.
Peter Trei
2020-04-03 00:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
As for the _criminal law_, kidnap somebody and see who comes after
you. It won't be Barney Fife. The Federal government generally
doesn't _want_ to be involved in local law enforcement, however there
are some crimes that it has chosen to address and there are
circumstances where it can take jurisdiction from the locals.
Post by Quadibloc
Thus, if each state can outlaw putting arsenic in someone'e tea, putting poison in the air they breathe is still within that same authority.
If the Federal government sets standards for the arsenic content of
tea then the states are powerless to set higher standards for such
content for tea imported into the state unless the Federal government
chooses to cede them that power. If the tea is manufactured in the
state they can regulate it all they want to.
Slightly off topic, but here's some cool maps showing how lockdowns have cleaned up the air.

https://dhruvmehrotra3.users.earthengine.app/view/earther-time-series

Pt
William Hyde
2020-04-03 19:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
As for the _criminal law_, kidnap somebody and see who comes after
you. It won't be Barney Fife. The Federal government generally
doesn't _want_ to be involved in local law enforcement, however there
are some crimes that it has chosen to address and there are
circumstances where it can take jurisdiction from the locals.
Post by Quadibloc
Thus, if each state can outlaw putting arsenic in someone'e tea, putting poison in the air they breathe is still within that same authority.
If the Federal government sets standards for the arsenic content of
tea then the states are powerless to set higher standards for such
content for tea imported into the state unless the Federal government
chooses to cede them that power. If the tea is manufactured in the
state they can regulate it all they want to.
Slightly off topic, but here's some cool maps showing how lockdowns have cleaned up the air.
https://dhruvmehrotra3.users.earthengine.app/view/earther-time-series
Between city lights, air quality, and my aging eyes, I can't see nearly as many stars here as I once could. First magnitude and the brighter second magnitude, yes, dimmer second magnitude only on good days, and the brighter third magnitude only on good days, and even then only those whose location I know well (gamma Aquila, for example).

But on a clear night recently, it was as if the clock had been turned back. Constellations I hadn't seen in decades were now clear. Fourth magnitude stars were still out, but then there was a bright moon.

I may have to see if I can resurrect an old telescope, or more likely a pair of binoculars.

William Hyde
Quadibloc
2020-04-03 06:15:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
Well, California isn't really interested in prohibiting their _importation_ into
California. It only needs to prohibit their _operation_.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-04-03 10:44:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
Well, California isn't really interested in prohibiting their _importation_ into
California. It only needs to prohibit their _operation_.
Prohibition on operation would be an attempt to regulate interstate
commerce through the back door.

Understand, the power to regulate interstate commerce is quite broad.
Pet cats at the Hemingway museum have to be caged at night because
those pet cats, even though they never leave the state, generate
enough interstate commerce in the form of tourism that they can be
regulated by the Federal government.
Kevrob
2020-04-03 13:12:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
Well, California isn't really interested in prohibiting their _importation_ into
California. It only needs to prohibit their _operation_.
Prohibition on operation would be an attempt to regulate interstate
commerce through the back door.
Understand, the power to regulate interstate commerce is quite broad.
Pet cats at the Hemingway museum have to be caged at night because
those pet cats, even though they never leave the state, generate
enough interstate commerce in the form of tourism that they can be
regulated by the Federal government.
In 1942, the Supreme Court ruled that the Feds
could regulate the wheat crop of a farmer who was
not going to sell it into the interstate market.
His removing himself as a customer for animal feed
was deemed "affecting interstate commerce."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

"Find the result you want, then torture the text of the
law into supporting it" has long been a criticism that
some political thinkers have of what is called "judicial
activism." It's often a "whose ox is being gored" critique.

Kevin R
Peter Trei
2020-04-03 16:13:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
Well, California isn't really interested in prohibiting their _importation_ into
California. It only needs to prohibit their _operation_.
Prohibition on operation would be an attempt to regulate interstate
commerce through the back door.
Understand, the power to regulate interstate commerce is quite broad.
Pet cats at the Hemingway museum have to be caged at night because
those pet cats, even though they never leave the state, generate
enough interstate commerce in the form of tourism that they can be
regulated by the Federal government.
In 1942, the Supreme Court ruled that the Feds
could regulate the wheat crop of a farmer who was
not going to sell it into the interstate market.
His removing himself as a customer for animal feed
was deemed "affecting interstate commerce."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
"Find the result you want, then torture the text of the
law into supporting it" has long been a criticism that
some political thinkers have of what is called "judicial
activism." It's often a "whose ox is being gored" critique.
Kevin R
I think the 'Sick Chicken' case of 1935 has some relevancy here, with
SCOTUS limiting use of Commerce Clause.

https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.L.A._Schechter_Poultry_Corp._v._United_States
Alan Baker
2020-04-04 16:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted exclusively to
the Federal government by the Constitution.
But that was in no way intended to limit the power of the individual states to
regulate what happened within each state. The _criminal law_ is, after all, the
responsibility of the individual states.
Yes, if California wants to regulate cars that are _made_ in
California they are welcome to do so. But they do not have the power
to regulate cars made in Michigan, including lacking the power to
prohibit their importation into California, unless the Federal
government chooses to cede that power to them.
As for the _criminal law_, kidnap somebody and see who comes after
you. It won't be Barney Fife. The Federal government generally
doesn't _want_ to be involved in local law enforcement, however there
are some crimes that it has chosen to address and there are
circumstances where it can take jurisdiction from the locals.
Post by Quadibloc
Thus, if each state can outlaw putting arsenic in someone'e tea, putting poison in the air they breathe is still within that same authority.
If the Federal government sets standards for the arsenic content of
tea then the states are powerless to set higher standards for such
content for tea imported into the state unless the Federal government
chooses to cede them that power. If the tea is manufactured in the
state they can regulate it all they want to.
So is it your contention that no state can regulate any product sold
within its borders in any way?
Titus G
2020-04-02 00:03:55 UTC
Permalink
On 2/04/20 12:12 pm, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
snip
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Meanwhile, with everybody (for some values of 'everybody')
social-isolating, the atmosphere is a lot cleaner.
Yes, worldwide.
Here, I notice the lack of background noise and am enjoying the peace
and quiet. Others out exercising or avoiding cabin fever are friendly
whilst observing our two metre distance requirement.
Wearing a mask and disposable gloves, I have been supermarket shopping
once and the only shortage was customers. With a list and knowing where
the items were it was a quick trip. Being in the middle of a late summer
with a relief from unseasonal rain, probably makes our isolating easier
though our media is full of examples of non-compliance. One week gone.
David Johnston
2020-04-04 20:02:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
However, California is not about to do that, and it is a very
large market. It will be interesting to see which automakers
will relax their standards and shrink their market to the other
49.
And Trump's response has been to argue that California _can not_ create
standards different (i.e., stricter) than the Federal standards.
Yes, I saw that news some time ago on a tech site.
At the moment, yes, car makers have been making all their cars with California
emissions. Instead of making cars with California emissions for the California
market, and cars that are cheaper and have better gas mileage for the rest of
the country. That wouldn't require Federal legislation; it would be worth doing
if California's standards were sufficiently out of step with those of other
states.
Although, the fact that car makers don't do this now, and much of California's
emission standards are irrelevant in much of the country, but add to the cost of
a car, and impact gas mileage - which doesn't just cost money, it uses up the
world's strictly limited fossil fuel resources... is perhaps why the Trump
Administration is considering this move.
<snort> Trump is just in favour of pollution.
o***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 22:37:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
Meanwhile, in other news: India's response to the coronavirus is a total lockdown: including the grocery stores. So the poor can starve for the next two weeks. Narendra Modi has shown that it is possible to do a worse job than Donald Trump.
John Savard
You'd be much less of a laughing stock in this group if you did a little fact checking before you hit send.
Grocery stores in India remain open, as do many other essential service.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/23/asia/coronavirus-covid-19-update-india-intl-hnk/index.html
"Exempt from the order are essential services such as grocery stores, hospitals, pharmacies, petrol stations, telecoms and postal services and restaurants that deliver food."
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/india-coronavirus-covid19-narendra-modi/608896/
and I thought the Atlantic Monthly was a reputable, responsible, and credible
news source.
John Savard
....sad when strongly held beliefs are shattered.....
David Johnston
2020-03-30 04:09:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
News reports have condemned Donald Trump for noting that the novel coronavirus
came from mainland China. Other reports note that it is important to give the
disease and the virus a neutral name, to avoid stirring up violence against people
of Asian background.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3900264
However, some Chinese people don't seem to agree.
Of course, in Taiwan, pretty much everybody already _is_ Chinese, and they're not
worried about stirring up hostility towards the People's Republic of China. So the
circumstances are different, and perhaps we shouldn't read too much into the fact
that they're unabashedly calling it the Wuhan coronavirus.
"Wuhan" is not the same word as "Chinese".
Quadibloc
2020-04-01 16:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
"Wuhan" is not the same word as "Chinese".
No, but "Wuhan coronavirus" is one of the possible names for COVID-19 that is
considered to be an unacceptable name as it could contribute to discrimination and
hate crimes and so on.

John Savard
David Johnston
2020-04-01 16:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by David Johnston
"Wuhan" is not the same word as "Chinese".
No, but "Wuhan coronavirus" is one of the possible names for COVID-19 that is
considered to be an unacceptable name as it could contribute to discrimination and
hate crimes and so on.
John Savard
Yes WHO is discouraging geographic place names for diseases. I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola because of the resulting hardship long
after the disease outbreak was over there. But Wuhan coronavirus was in
fact an honest description of where it was at that time. Chinese virus
is being put out there with malicious intent.
BCFD36
2020-04-02 02:16:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by David Johnston
"Wuhan" is not the same word as "Chinese".
No, but "Wuhan coronavirus" is one of the possible names for COVID-19 that is
considered to be an unacceptable name as it could contribute to discrimination and
hate crimes and so on.
John Savard
Yes WHO is discouraging geographic place names for diseases.  I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola because of the resulting hardship long
after the disease outbreak was over there.  But Wuhan coronavirus was in
fact an honest description of where it was at that time.  Chinese virus
is being put out there with malicious intent.
It was shown that the Drumpenfurher changed the notation on his speech
TO "Chinese Virus". So obviously he was trying to stir the shit.
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)
Thomas Koenig
2020-04-05 18:03:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
Robert Carnegie
2020-04-05 18:47:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
In Africa.

<http://www.montypython.net/scripts/4york.php>
of course:

"We were evicted from *our* hole in the ground;
we had to go and live in a lake!"

(The Four Hobbits Sketch... or Fourth Age
of Middle-Earth maybe)
Quadibloc
2020-04-06 00:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
Yes. At the time of the outbreak of Ebola, while the tendency to name novel
diseases after the place of the outbreak was too entrenched to fully dislodge,
at least rather than cursing forever the particular village where it originated,
the doctor involved decided to use the name of a river running through the
general area.

John Savard
Quadibloc
2020-04-06 00:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
And here's my source:

https://www.livescience.com/48234-how-ebola-got-its-name.html

John Savard
David Goldfarb
2020-04-06 06:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
Possibly David J. was thinking of the village of Lassa, which I've
read is now a ghost town due to the lingering fear of Lassa fever.
--
David Goldfarb | "M as in Mary, P as in Paul, U as in...
***@gmail.com | um...something beginning with U."
***@ocf.berkeley.edu |
Thomas Koenig
2020-04-06 07:14:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Goldfarb
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by David Johnston
I feel bad
for people who live in Ebola
So do I. Ebola is a river.
Possibly David J. was thinking of the village of Lassa, which I've
read is now a ghost town due to the lingering fear of Lassa fever.
The town of Marburg is not really stigmatized by the Marburg virus.
Loading...