The California thread

Sherman

Ostrich
Roosh said:

I have seen these people in San Diego. They aren't just homeless. They are mentally ill or even schizophrenic. I have seen some bizarre things. Like people walking around like they have literally just come out of a hospital.
 

Sherman

Ostrich
Leftist policies destroying water supply.

"Instead of building water infrastructure to increase supplies of water, public employee unions want to see tax revenues pour into their pockets and into the pension funds. High-tech billionaires want contracts to build “smart” appliances and monitoring systems to enforce water rationing. Extreme environmentalists, and the trial lawyers who get incredibly wealthy representing their organizations, want more legal bases upon which to file lucrative lawsuits. Sadly, major corporate agribusinesses often acquiesce to this abuse of residents because they’ve decided that a bigger slice of a smaller pie is all they can hope for from this legislature."

https://californiapolicycenter.org/permanent-water-rationing-coming-california/
 

Monty_Brogan

Woodpecker
Gold Member
Sherman said:
Roosh said:

I have seen these people in San Diego. They aren't just homeless. They are mentally ill or even schizophrenic. I have seen some bizarre things. Like people walking around like they have literally just come out of a hospital.

Bullshit. That’s black on white crime full stop. But nobody cares. They either have white guilt or just care too much for local nfl team to be worried about such things.
 

Sword and Board

Woodpecker
Dr Mantis Toboggan said:
Sword and Board said:
TigOlBitties said:
I live in Seattle and it might as well be California. The scenery is amazing, but it's an overpriced dump and full of some of the most brainwashed leftists I've ever met. Same as Portland. A lot of these looney lefties are from California or the Northeast though. The tech industry's influence is making it even worse.

There are still normal people here, and the more rural parts of Washington and Oregon are amazing like you said. Completely different than Seattle. Idaho, Western Montana and Alaska look amazing as well.

The Northwest US and British Columbia is one of the most beautiful parts of the world, and it makes my blood boil to see these Marxist cocksuckers destroy it.

I remember reading about some white nationalist movement years ago wanting the northwest and to separate from America. I guess the (((globalists))) caught wind and made sure it got globohomo'd.

Kind of like all those Nigerian and sub-Saharan refugee's getting plonked in the most lilly white areas they could find.

Nigerian immigrants in the US actually tend to be very high achieving, better educated and higher income on average than white Americans IIRC, and have a reputation for being hard working and family oriented. A lot of them are in medicine or engineering. Of course there aren't a ton if them relatively speaking and it's not that easy or cheap to get from there to here so I think we tend to get the best and brightest making their way over here.

Funny thing, if you ever want to hear a rant that would make a KKK member go "cmon, aren't you being a little hard on them?" ask a west African immigrant in the US what they think of American blacks.

Seems I mistook Nigerians for Somalian refugees.


The powers that be seemingly want to spare no white communities from diversification.

Anyone with some critical foresight can see the disastrous future ramifications of this when the demographics shift further.
 
Easy_C said:
What they need is a 1,000 years of Christianity as Jones prescribes, but I don't think he understands why. It isn't just because it "teaches you how to work" but because a Christian Theocracy eliminates most severely dysgenic practices from society.

In my experience the high end of people from that African background are terrifyingly intelligent but you need a Christian moral framework on society for that to propagate.

I have had those discussions with black RVF guys here as well and I fully agree - if you rounded up the smartest 20 mio. native Africans and put them into a country - any country even the one with the lowest recourses, then you would get a Western/Asian/adjacent country that is relatively safe and prosperous.

There are ways to create an eugenic system. Christianity was like that due to multiple factors - ban of inbreeding (initially even going back 10 generations), marriage only for men who had their shit together (work, property etc.), rich successful men having mistresses, criminals getting brutally executed early on in life with no progeny.

The Chinese had a similar system which produced their higher IQs - rich successful men for a long time had multiple wives, unsuccesful had zero, then they had the stable marriage patterns for the majority.

Even the Muslim system would be eugenic in theory if it were not for habitual and scripture-promoted inbreeding. Also you cannot overdo polygamy or the country becomes unstable. Only the top 0,1% can do it without destabilizing the entire boat.

How you do it is up for debate, but applied stable family-and-fatherhood-strengthening eugenic structure would benefit Africa far more than any financial help sent over by the globohomos. But that would mean that you would have to accept the truth and then desire to change it. The elite will not do it, because then their equality-Bolshevik attack against the West gets torpedoed and they can potentially get a dangerous smart black opposition down the line. I do believe that a high-IQ black nation would be inherently more rebellious and freedom-loving than an Asian one. So there is another reason for the globomos to keep them that way and tell them that Whitey is responsible for any perceived or real gap.

The result is what you can see on the TV report that Roosh posted.
 

Dr. Howard

Peacock
Gold Member
Diocletian said:
Roosh said:
kosko said:
debeguiled said:
I don't get why power lines suddenly became dangerous. There have been storms and dry seasons forever and never these kind of mega fires in Sonoma County. Is it because the equipment is deteriorating? Or the weather is getting more intense? P,G&E always had power lines snaking through trees all over the place and you never heard of them causing fires. It was always kids playing with matches, fireworks, or careless hikers and campers doing stuff. What is going on?

From my understanding it is due to California's over zealous environment protection laws and tree regulations which makes controlled burning and removal of trees difficult.

Yes ask any forest firefighter and he'll say the same.

Part of the problem with California is that large parts of the state are covered with a thick blanket of a type of vegetation called chaparral. This stuff gets to about 6 or 8 feet high max, but its very fast growing and gets bone-dry when the weather gets hot. Its a completely natural tinderbox and the only way to cheaply clear it out is via brush fires. Here's a small roundup of articles about the Laguna Beach wildfires of 1993: https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily...na-beach-firestorm-20131022-storygallery.html Wildfires are a totally natural feature of many parts of California and are one of the risks of living there, like tornadoes in Kansas.

People complain about the high cost of living there now, but if the local governments did their jobs and had that stuff mechanically cleared out it would be even higher. The hills and numerous canyons make it real expensive to do that.

Smokey the Bear will go down as one of the most idiotic policies ever put forth by the US government, right up there with the low fat diet. I grew up in SoCal and lived there for almost 30 years. I spent a lot time hiking there, from the local hills to the Sierra Nevadas. I live in Wyoming now, but the Rockies here and in Colorado have a similar problem as the Sierras: the bark beetle. Healthy forests in the Western US have fairly regular but low intensity fires which destroy weak or infested trees (plus the bugs infesting them) and leave the strong ones. Decades of fire suppression have interrupted this cycle and allowed the bark beetle to flourish which has left many millions of dead trees all throughout the Sierras and Rockies. Right now there is a massive inferno just waiting to explode here that will make all previous fires look miniscule by comparison.

I would have to disagree.

California is burning because a bunch of hippies wanted to save an owl and hug trees.

Environmentalist legal challenges on federal lands by environmentalists in the late 90s, early 2000s essentially stopped all logging, and fuel reduction in the Sierras.

Interior California and Washington state had heavy duty logging operations going on well up through the 80s...which was still 30 years into the Smokey Bear campaigns. Logging did a 'good enough' job of offsetting fire requirements.

However, come the "spotted owl" enviromentalists to logging protests on the west coast and virtually all logging was shut down on federal lands. This led to forest fuels buildup and fires that exist today. The same policies led to fuel buildup in Northern Minnesota and Wisconsin, the forests that havent' burned, are beetle and disease killed like you mentioned and just look awful.

Here is an article about environmentalists using the spotted owl to shut down logging in the southwest in the 90s https://www.hcn.org/issues/127/4040
 

Papaya

Crow
Gold Member

Dr. Howard

Peacock
Gold Member
Spectrumwalker said:
Dr. Howard said:
California is burning because a bunch of hippies wanted to save an owl and hug trees.


Dr. Howard said:
Logging did a 'good enough' job of offsetting fire requirements.

I love the sound of chainsaws in the morning.

^ staged but hilarious. The tree huggers figured out a better way to stop logging than to squat in the trees though.

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

Putting spikes into trees that will shatter chainsaws and sawmill blades, killing or injuring loggers and millworkers when cut. Like anything well intentioned by hippies it later turns against them.

In Ontario, there was a large forest fire in an old growth area that had been tree spiked decades earlier. Forest fire fighters cutting fire breaks hit one and pulled out of the area because of the danger. The forest burned.

There are likely areas in CA that wildland fire fighters won't touch because of the same thing.
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
Dr. Howard said:
Spectrumwalker said:
Dr. Howard said:
California is burning because a bunch of hippies wanted to save an owl and hug trees.


Dr. Howard said:
Logging did a 'good enough' job of offsetting fire requirements.

I love the sound of chainsaws in the morning.

^ staged but hilarious. The tree huggers figured out a better way to stop logging than to squat in the trees though.

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

Putting spikes into trees that will shatter chainsaws and sawmill blades, killing or injuring loggers and millworkers when cut. Like anything well intentioned by hippies it later turns against them.

In Ontario, there was a large forest fire in an old growth area that had been tree spiked decades earlier. Forest fire fighters cutting fire breaks hit one and pulled out of the area because of the danger. The forest burned.

There are likely areas in CA that wildland fire fighters won't touch because of the same thing.

Sources?

This sounds like it comes straight from a timber company PR packet.

Tree spiking was not standard practice for environmentalists, and was roundly condemned by all but a tiny fringe, and that was the early nineties. Haven't heard much about it since then, although it was extremely useful to the rapacious timber companies.
 

Dr. Howard

Peacock
Gold Member
debeguiled said:
Dr. Howard said:
Spectrumwalker said:
Dr. Howard said:
California is burning because a bunch of hippies wanted to save an owl and hug trees.


Dr. Howard said:
Logging did a 'good enough' job of offsetting fire requirements.

I love the sound of chainsaws in the morning.

^ staged but hilarious. The tree huggers figured out a better way to stop logging than to squat in the trees though.

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

Putting spikes into trees that will shatter chainsaws and sawmill blades, killing or injuring loggers and millworkers when cut. Like anything well intentioned by hippies it later turns against them.

In Ontario, there was a large forest fire in an old growth area that had been tree spiked decades earlier. Forest fire fighters cutting fire breaks hit one and pulled out of the area because of the danger. The forest burned.

There are likely areas in CA that wildland fire fighters won't touch because of the same thing.

Sources?

This sounds like it comes straight from a timber company PR packet.

Tree spiking was not standard practice for environmentalists, and was roundly condemned by all but a tiny fringe, and that was the early nineties. Haven't heard much about it since then, although it was extremely useful to the rapacious timber companies.

Your designation of Rapacious Timber Companies displays your bias. Fortunately as a forester for many years, I have the opposite bias.

Regarding examples of tree spiking, and its ongoing practice.

This is the 'famous' US incident https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...-tactic/a400944c-a3a0-4c03-ab99-afada6f44e7a/

This is one of the Ontario Canada incidents
http://temagami.nativeweb.org/temagami-chronology.htm

This is one from British Columbia
https://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/a-little-place-called-clayoquot-sound

This is one from Minnesota
https://www.walkermn.com/news/one-a...cle_3e45b736-7f04-5f6d-92df-3db9482f4df1.html

Another one from British Columbia
http://www.climbkamloops.ca/?p=95

One from Indiana
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tree-spiking-arrest/

Oregon
https://www.rt.com/usa/346434-tree-spikes-protest-oregon/

Tree spiking is still going on.

The fire example comes from a colleague of mine in Canada when I worked in natural resources. He was a career wildfire fighter, not a forest industry lobbyist. I had also heard that the government and forestry companies mapped out areas where tree spikes were found as safety concern areas.
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
Dr. Howard said:
Your designation of Rapacious Timber Companies displays your bias. Fortunately as a forester for many years, I have the opposite bias.

No bias. Your view is the accepted one by all and sundry. Restating it without sources sounds like forest industry PR. Not bias. Fact.

I'm not a forester, though I have friends who used to be lumberjacks but were driven out not by environmentalists, but by the mechanization of the timber industry, that is why they lost their jobs, and the selling of old growth trees directly overseas, so killing the cottage industries that relied on logging.

This I remember from the 90's as well, so the sources are long gone, I'm afraid.

Most of your sources, as I indicated, are from the 90's too though. Let's not forget that. The last one, while technically true, actually says that the environmental group issued a warning where the spikes were so loggers wouldn't be injured, so not on the terrorist level you are claiming, though not justifiable by any means.

I am not saying all logging companies are rapacious, or that loggers themselves are the problem. As I remember it, it had more to do with how the companies got structured and manipulated by Wall Street. The corporate raiders got turned loose on the forests.

When I lived in Oregon in the 90's there were a lot of environmental group around, and not fringe hippie sorts, but the kind whose editorials were published in the NYT and Christian Science Monitor.

The tree spikers were outlaws, and most of the committed tree huggers engaged in political action that put their own lives at risk, not the lives of others, and it was mostly rhetoric and peaceful protest.

No one was against logging in general or saving every single leaf.

It wasn't the idiotic issue of saving all trees, but of protecting the last 3% or so of old growth forest, as well as ending the clear cutting that destroyed creeks, which also destroyed the salmon runs, etc..

I appreciate you adding sources, as I was unaware of what was going on in Canada.

That said, the logging industry did engage in a full court rhetorical press trying to make any environmental concerns seem like idiotic naive conspiracy theories, and this is where astro-turfing, that is, fake grass roots groups really started to take off.

They had the money, they had the media, and so reckless tales of tree spiking was used to delegitimize any environmental concerns the general population had. Just like how the CIA invented the term "conspiracy theory" to make people shut up about Kennedy's assassination.

They won the culture war on that one, and so the legend of every day Joes trying to earn a living and being maimed and killed by crazy eco-nuts became how it was all defined in the popular imagination.

It's a shame, because there could have been healthy forests and responsible logging and work for everyone until the big corporate guys got ahold of the situation.

I will close from a quote from your own source:

While anti-logging activists are often branded by the mainstream media and the US justice system as “eco-terrorists,” research suggests the term was developed in the 1970s by PR firms in order to demonize those trying to stop the logging industry from cutting down America’s ancient forests.

Some environmental activists renounced the use of tree spikes after one mill worker in California may have been seriously injured in an accident nearly 30 years ago, but no other incidents have ever been reported.
 

Dr. Howard

Peacock
Gold Member
debeguiled said:
Dr. Howard said:
Your designation of Rapacious Timber Companies displays your bias. Fortunately as a forester for many years, I have the opposite bias.

No bias. Your view is the accepted one by all and sundry. Restating it without sources sounds like forest industry PR. Not bias. Fact.

I'm not a forester, though I have friends who used to be lumberjacks but were driven out not by environmentalists, but by the mechanization of the timber industry, that is why they lost their jobs, and the selling of old growth trees directly overseas, so killing the cottage industries that relied on logging.

This I remember from the 90's as well, so the sources are long gone, I'm afraid.

Most of your sources, as I indicated, are from the 90's too though. Let's not forget that. The last one, while technically true, actually says that the environmental group issued a warning where the spikes were so loggers wouldn't be injured, so not on the terrorist level you are claiming, though not justifiable by any means.

I am not saying all logging companies are rapacious, or that loggers themselves are the problem. As I remember it, it had more to do with how the companies got structured and manipulated by Wall Street. The corporate raiders got turned loose on the forests.

When I lived in Oregon in the 90's there were a lot of environmental group around, and not fringe hippie sorts, but the kind whose editorials were published in the NYT and Christian Science Monitor.

The tree spikers were outlaws, and most of the committed tree huggers engaged in political action that put their own lives at risk, not the lives of others, and it was mostly rhetoric and peaceful protest.

No one was against logging in general or saving every single leaf.

It wasn't the idiotic issue of saving all trees, but of protecting the last 3% or so of old growth forest, as well as ending the clear cutting that destroyed creeks, which also destroyed the salmon runs, etc..

I appreciate you adding sources, as I was unaware of what was going on in Canada.

That said, the logging industry did engage in a full court rhetorical press trying to make any environmental concerns seem like idiotic naive conspiracy theories, and this is where astro-turfing, that is, fake grass roots groups really started to take off.

They had the money, they had the media, and so reckless tales of tree spiking was used to delegitimize any environmental concerns the general population had. Just like how the CIA invented the term "conspiracy theory" to make people shut up about Kennedy's assassination.

They won the culture war on that one, and so the legend of every day Joes trying to earn a living and being maimed and killed by crazy eco-nuts became how it was all defined in the popular imagination.

It's a shame, because there could have been healthy forests and responsible logging and work for everyone until the big corporate guys got ahold of the situation.

I will close from a quote from your own source:

While anti-logging activists are often branded by the mainstream media and the US justice system as “eco-terrorists,” research suggests the term was developed in the 1970s by PR firms in order to demonize those trying to stop the logging industry from cutting down America’s ancient forests.

Some environmental activists renounced the use of tree spikes after one mill worker in California may have been seriously injured in an accident nearly 30 years ago, but no other incidents have ever been reported.

I think we are sidebar-ing the thread so I'll keep it short. I appreciate the perspective and think that we've got a separation of time and geography as well.

My main experience with environmental protestors was during my time in Canada, and my time in the US with forestry was bureaucratic.

I think that logging protests slowly migrated north. Once victories were achieved or contests died down they went north. Protests of logging in Clayqout sound and northern ontario were mid to late 90s, and then moved onto the entire Canadian boreal forest in the 2000s.

What CA and OR were getting in the late 80s was probably what we were getting in the early 2000s.

We'll disagree on the cause of logging employment on the west coast. I still think its the federal government caving to pressure. My contrast example is the US southeast, which still has a large and active forest industry, one of the differences being that the timberlands are privately held. Raw log exports on the west coast sure didn't help, but they are also legal in the southeast.
 

Roosh

Cardinal
The feces is getting worse in California:

“It’s horrifying for people to step outside and see poop smeared all over the sidewalk, we know it’s getting worse.”

The City of San Francisco now has three public toilets available after 8 p.m. — located in Castro, Soma and the Tenderloin, but Supervisor Matt Haney said the city needs even more.

“We’ve seen a reduction in the number of reports of feces in the areas immediately around the pit stop bathrooms including the ones that are 24 hours,” Haney said. “We obviously need more. We need to expand the number of these bathrooms and the hours.”

The city also has a poop patrol, staff members who clean up human waste mostly in the Tenderloin, the district with the highest number of 311 calls for sidewalk cleanliness complaints.

Throughout the city, 311 has received more than 25,000 poop complaints this year alone.

“It’s a serious public health concern.”

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area...issue-continues-to-grow-in-san-francisco/amp/
 

Douglas Quaid

Kingfisher
The public transportation in these West Coast cities is absolutely disgusting too. I can only imagine how bad San Francisco is. I've seen trash, piss, needles, junkies nodding out, tweekers and drunks acting insane, and a guy shit his pants on the bus. There are bums begging for money and even trying to start fights with people. I saw a lady digging at her ass then start touching a bunch of hand rails. That's how these diseases start spreading. I've heard stories about bums jerking off on the bus too. But the worst part is the smell of human decay, almost like people are rotting alive.

I bought an electric bike because I got tired of it. The commute is so much faster and more pleasant now. That's $27.50/week, or almost $1500/year the city/county doesn't get from me, and I wish more people had this attitude. This shit is unacceptable. San Francisco, LA, San Diego, Seattle and Portland are turning into the third world.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
I recall that some time ago /pol managed to get some women to piss/shit their pants and post pictures of it on social media ostensibly in support of rape victims.

Maybe they can get a movement started that convinces liberals to post pictures of themselves shitting in the street as an act of solidarity with the homeless.
 
I have a home in California that's worth ~$650k. All paid off, beautiful coastal area. That being said, I'm going to borrow against it heavily and start buying properties in Idaho, Wyoming, etc. where real estate is still cheap and there's still some Heritage-Americans who share my values. This allows me to get invested in these other states where I can still have a shot at raising a family, while riding any increased real estate bubbles that may come my way for the California home.

If the real estate market crashes in California, I won't really care because I'm moving out anyways. I'd rather be leveraged against a California home and risk losing it after taking the proceeds elsewhere. Let the usurious bankers try to sort the mess out after I've jetted town. They are going to take a haircut on the house and that's their problem.

If anyone else has a California home with a lot of equity, you should contact your bank to see if they will do a home equity line of credit or home equity loan. You should arbitrage your proceeds back into cheaper real estate markets in Heritage-American states ASAP before you get outpriced from those areas. Let the bank bet on California real estate, you take your proceeds and invest elsewhere.
 
Top