• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California Ranked as #1 State with Worst Air Quality

truthatallcost

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
26,719
Reaction score
6,278
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?
Is it possible the air quality issues stemmed in part from BEING ON FIRE for about 25% of the past year?

Edit: Yep:
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report
Experts say part of the reason for the bad air in California is the increase in population and the recent wildfires.
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?

Their ground pollution is getting pretty bad too...at least, in San Francisco.

D4yNJVEWwAAB1bp.jpg

Lachlan Markay on Twitter: "So @open_the_books mapped out every report of human feces on the streets of San Francisco since 2011 and uhhhhhh https://t.co/7t3Cocc6Qf… https://t.co/t3kmWOZCii"
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?

California has the worst air quality in the nation and yet it also has the special privilege of setting its own standards for air quality without EPA oversight. Trump has proposed deep cuts in EPA spending and California officials are not happy. Why should they care if Trumps tries to cut over spending for the good of the economy? California does not need the EPA. Let them resolve their own air quality problems on their own dime without having to be led around by the nose by some federal government employee working with some federal government agency whose workers are no smarter than California's own experts.
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?

Oh My!

Consternation for all the ecomentalists!
 

Saw this yesterday...what disgusting pigs in San Fran. It's like the 14th century there with people being allowed to **** in the streets. Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.
 
Saw this yesterday...what disgusting pigs in San Fran. It's like the 14th century there with people being allowed to **** in the streets. Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.

So easily swayed by a graphic that could be produced for anywhere. It was nearly a decade of poop records. And it throws you into a maniacal rage against "liberals". Are we to pretend that rage is not merely looking for an excuse?
 
That's a moot point considering 6 out of the 10 cities with the dirtiest air quality have been from California for the past dozen years. I posted the OP because we're now up to 7.
It's not moot, but it may be only a side point.

The article doesn't say whether this study was able to determine the source(s) of the air quality issues, although certainly the population growth is a significant contributor.
 
All that toxic gas from talking Liberals.
 
So easily swayed by a graphic that could be produced for anywhere. It was nearly a decade of poop records. And it throws you into a maniacal rage against "liberals". Are we to pretend that rage is not merely looking for an excuse?

1. I live in the Bay Area.

2. I step over, or walk around human poop everyday on my way to work in a downtown location. Today it was on the side of a bus stop shelter that homeless people have taken over.

3. I don't know what its like in Florida, but the stories of human waste in parts of the Bay Area are not exaggerated to anyone who lives here.
 
1. I live in the Bay Area.

2. I step over, or walk around human poop everyday on my way to work in a downtown location. Today it was on the side of a bus stop shelter that homeless people have taken over.

3. I don't know what its like in Florida, but the stories of human waste in parts of the Bay Area are not exaggerated to anyone who lives here.

I really feel sorry for you, having to put up with that. You, nor anyone else should have to. It shouldn't happen in the USA.

I wonder what could possibly have gone wrong in San Francisco? (Maybe the incestuous big state / big money politics?)
 
1. I live in the Bay Area.

2. I step over, or walk around human poop everyday on my way to work in a downtown location. Today it was on the side of a bus stop shelter that homeless people have taken over.

3. I don't know what its like in Florida, but the stories of human waste in parts of the Bay Area are not exaggerated to anyone who lives here.
The homeless person issue in California always makes me question the claim that it's a liberal state.

To me, solving that kind of issue is simple.
You provide free housing and help to get people off the streets and back to the "normal" state of working/contributing. although I understand that in some areas of California even being employed isn't enough to afford a place to live.

The problem with that, as I understand it, in the case of some cities in California, is that housing prices in those areas are flat ****ing ridiculous.
So providing free housing would be really expensive for the city/state.

I mean, for myself, in PA, I pay ~$425/month for half of a small house, including access to some basement storage, all utilities (less internet), a full bathroom, and washer/dryer.

I suspect that if I lived in LA that would get me a closet where I could lean against the wall for sleep and maybe a cushion to rest my head on while doing so.

Slight exaggeration.
 
Saw this yesterday...what disgusting pigs in San Fran. It's like the 14th century there with people being allowed to **** in the streets. Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.

Are you saying all the homeless vets in the streets of SF have a mental disorder?
 
My own suspicion is that California is not vigorously enforcing its vehicle smog rules because most of the violators are poor people or undocumented immigrants (although they now are allowed a driver’s license as a document).

The progressives running California would rather inhale bad air than put a burden on “oppressed” people.
 
The homeless person issue in California always makes me question the claim that it's a liberal state.

To me, solving that kind of issue is simple.
You provide free housing and help to get people off the streets and back to the "normal" state of working/contributing. although I understand that in some areas of California even being employed isn't enough to afford a place to live.

The problem with that, as I understand it, in the case of some cities in California, is that housing prices in those areas are flat ****ing ridiculous.
So providing free housing would be really expensive for the city/state.

I mean, for myself, in PA, I pay ~$425/month for half of a small house, including access to some basement storage, all utilities (less internet), a full bathroom, and washer/dryer.

I suspect that if I lived in LA that would get me a closet where I could lean against the wall for sleep and maybe a cushion to rest my head on while doing so.

Slight exaggeration.

One eigth the population of the nation and roughly one third of the welfare spent in the nation. (Not a conservative or Republican thing)

The requirements to evict homeless are onerous. (Again...)

The weather is favorable. (It just is)
 
Is it possible the air quality issues stemmed in part from BEING ON FIRE for about 25% of the past year?

Edit: Yep:
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

Of course it does, but here's the other issue. So much of the more populous areas in California consist of basins, so anything and everything settles in there and stays. But you could stop every last car and truck IN California for a MONTH and we'd still be trapping photochemical and particulate smog all the way from China and India.
Yes, as hard as that might be to believe, it's real.

Sorry to say, no matter what we do here in California, even if 90% of our passenger car and light truck fleet were to go 100 percent electric, we will STILL have a fairly high smog level because most the California cities are built on land that is basin or bowl shaped and those basins collect the smog and trap it in, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about that.

So, what we HAVE been doing however, has been working. California STILL has a lot fewer full scale smog alerts per annum than we used to, and we have a lot more pristine clear air days than we used to.

But wildfires and imported smog will continue to be a problem here.
California is going to have to go all hands on deck to achieve a technological solution, even if it's just a partial one, to the problem. California being what it is, I have no doubt we will, and the entire world will look to California and try to adopt, copy or steal our methodologies should our efforts meet with any measurable level of success.

We love challenges.

PS: Most of you who are gloating might want to check this map. The truth isn't pretty about your state or town either, as it turns out. We're just the worst because we're the biggest, that's all.

united_states.gif
 

You know what's really STUPID about so called POOP MAPS?
It's POOP, so when you map poop, it portrays poop as if it somehow has a half life of 300 thousand years.
That's not to minimize the health hazards of street defecation, as it's clear that countries like India suffer from dangerous disease vectors for the same reasons.
But you will notice that each individual report has something called a CLOSE DATE, which seems to indicate that at some point, the poop either washed away, disintegrated or was cleaned up.

India has been attempting to handle their similar problem, many cities in many other countries have as well. Paris was suffering from public URINATION issues until they finally decided to provide public urinals scattered around the city. That's because Paris suffered from a lack of public restroom facilities for decades. Even businesses serving the public would not offer their facilities TO the public, even for a fee.

San Francisco is going to have to offer public restrooms, and they will have to attempt to keep them clean and operational as much as possible. But even right now, the poop is not "radioactive".

Every poop ever shatted since 2011, eh?
"OMG OMG don't step there, Doris!! A hoomin bean pooped on that sidewalk eight years ago!!!!"
 
My own suspicion is that California is not vigorously enforcing its vehicle smog rules because most of the violators are poor people or undocumented immigrants (although they now are allowed a driver’s license as a document).

The progressives running California would rather inhale bad air than put a burden on “oppressed” people.

And you'd be wrong.
 
Can California be sued if their nasty air pollution is drifting eastward, to the other eastern states, causing an increase in their costs? These costs can include the extra hardships to maintain federal air quality compliance, and all the additional health problems caused by California pollution. Also, how much sooner is California causing the earth to be destroyed, due to climate change? Has AOC yelled at California, yet!
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?

Uh....I grew up here. Anyone who lived here in the 60s and 70s remembers smog. Our laws created the standards for clean air, catalytic converters, low mileage, no burning without permits, two stroke engine bans, elimination almost entirely of bbcues lit with lighter fluid, etc. Our air is way better then it ever was with way more cars as well. We do have fires though, they tend to create a lot of smoke.
 
My native state of California is No. 1 in many other things, too -- most of them negative.
 
Originally Posted by RobertU:
My own suspicion is that California is not vigorously enforcing its vehicle smog rules because most of the violators are poor people or undocumented immigrants (although they now are allowed a driver’s license as a document).

The progressives running California would rather inhale bad air than put a burden on “oppressed” people.


And you'd be wrong.

Unpaid traffic fines and mushrooming fees have left 4.2 million Californians with suspended driver’s licenses — more than one-sixth of the licenses issued statewide — with poor people the hardest-hit

4.2 million have lost driver’s licenses because of unpaid fees - SFGate

If many if not most of those 4.2 million poor people are defying the law and still driving, I doubt they are going to pay for smog checks on their mostly older cars and will allow their non-compliant vehicles to pollute the air.
 
California ranked as No.1 state with worst air quality: report

7 of the top 10 American cities with bad air quality are in California. It doesn't really matter who believes in climate change and who doesn't, when the state that leans the furthest left both treats climate change as a religion, and pollutes the environment with irresponsible policies. If the poster child for blue state America can't even get it right when it comes to important issues like clean air, then who can? I'm both conservative, and concerned about preserving the environment.

Question: Of the Democrats on this site who hope to win future elections by way of population demographics change, and overpopulation, who amongst you will actually want to live in the utopian society you're scheming for when it wreaks havoc on the environment? Is it possible to care about climate change and also support ideas that will destroy the environment?

Pretty sure that's due to the wild fires man.
 
Back
Top Bottom