|
|
| Laws Laws Laws (714942) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
| (714942) | |
Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 22:08:29 2011 California gets 725 New Laws starting January 1st, including Landlords not being able to evict victims of abuse from their property, leaf blower permits required, and forcing farmers to have to accept food stamps at farmers markets....http://lamesa.patch.com/articles/there-outta-be-a-law-californians-getting-725-new-ones-in-2011 |
|
|
| (714945) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jan 3 22:14:00 2011, in response to Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 22:08:29 2011. Jerry Brown got swored at earlier today. This is gonna be good. :) |
|
|
| (714950) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 22:32:06 2011, in response to Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 22:08:29 2011. And people wonder why I hate governments like the one in California - you have to have a lawyer on permanent retainer in order to live these days :( |
|
|
| (714952) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 22:48:29 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 22:32:06 2011. One of the worst nanny laws was created in NY - the trans fat ban. |
|
|
| (714953) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Mon Jan 3 23:01:50 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 22:48:29 2011. lol |
|
|
| (714954) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:04:29 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 22:48:29 2011. Maybe not the worst, but yes, that's a bad one. Fries SUCK in NYC now, and it has spread.Recently Wendy's changed its fries too (voluntarily), and while they were never all that great, they lost all taste now. They have a new "healtier" recipe now, which includes a new cut of fries with the skin still on it (usually that tastes great), and seas salt, but I think they changed the oil too, as it has that crappy "in NYC" taste now....even out here on LI. |
|
|
| (714955) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:06:20 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:04:29 2011. They should go back to using beef fat, or even better, lard.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (714956) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:06:48 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:06:20 2011. IAWTP!! |
|
|
| (714957) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:07:20 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 22:48:29 2011. Touché |
|
|
| (714960) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:12:00 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:07:20 2011. You were right when we talked about this last time. McDonalds fries are now worthless. Also have you noticed that sometime in the last year that potato chips also lost their taste? Is it just me? |
|
|
| (714963) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:19:35 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:12:00 2011. It's not just you. The government is legislating choice away from us. They weren't happy with just "low fat" (tasteless) alternatives, they have to TAKE AWAY what they find the "bad for you" choices. It makes me sick. |
|
|
| (714965) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:21:24 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:12:00 2011. Potato chips have gotten better: your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (714969) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:22:37 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:12:00 2011. You are right - taste has suffered. Still people keep buying the crap. Whenever I buy a burger at McD's or BK I now say no to the "meal" or the fries... Except for the time that the clerk insisted that the "meal" was cheaper than the burger and soda separately. I told her to charge me for the meal but throw the fries in the garbage since that is what they taste like :) I don't hold back :) |
|
|
| (714975) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:24:40 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:21:24 2011. There are some better/more expensive choices but the plain Lays and Ruffles have gotten tasteless. Plus I don't really like the extruded chips and more of them are going that route. I think that's what Lays must have done. |
|
|
| (714978) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:26:42 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:22:37 2011. I'm getting to that point as well. Now when I buy breakfast at McDonalds I never get the meal because I never really liked the hash browns. There's really no need to get the meal with fries now either. |
|
|
| (714982) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:29:11 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:26:42 2011. Sad isn't it. But there is a NOTICEABLE difference. I used to love fries too, but it's almost like eating sticks of cardboard at places where the change was made. |
|
|
| (714985) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:31:50 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:24:40 2011. Yes, I agree completely with that. There are good flavored chips out there, but unfortunately, many of the normal plain ones are utter crap now.They need to add all of those flavors now in order to cover up the fact that the chip has no taste now otherwise. Sad, because while I do like flavored chips sometimes, I also do like the regular old fashioned plain ones sometimes too, but the government has taken our choice of good ones away. |
|
|
| (714986) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:32:03 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 23:24:40 2011. Yeah some of those chips are like Pringles without the Pring.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (714987) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:34:18 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:22:37 2011. See? Not only do you skip the transfat but now you skip the useless carbs too. LOL!!your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (714989) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:35:23 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 23:19:35 2011. They installed a new vending machine where I work. 90% of the "choices" are now so-called healthy ones. I think the company is going to regret getting the contract - the half a row of "unhealthy choices" sell out within a day of being refilled - the five and a half rows of "healthy choices" hardly move.Same thing with the soda machine - all "healthy choices" except for one selection. Guess which selection sells out while the others fester? I've stopped patronizing the machines and so have a lot of others - we just go across the street to the deli for snacks! |
|
|
| (714992) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jan 3 23:40:37 2011, in response to Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 22:08:29 2011. "Landlords not being able to evict victims of abuse from their property"meaning men have to pay their rent and ladies don't |
|
|
| (714995) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 3 23:46:41 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:35:23 2011. Unless and until "healthy" foods can be made good-tasting, attractive, and tempting, they will not be purchased and/or eaten. Any six-year-old can tell you that about spinach. I have yet to eat anything "lowfat" or "healthy choice" that didn't taste like rabbit food.Your brain lights up when you see a cheeseburger for a reason, and I think the Food Police have forgotten why. (Moderation, of course, is always recommended.) |
|
|
| (715001) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 3 23:54:13 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Easy on Mon Jan 3 22:48:29 2011. That's called the California Effect. You haven't heard of it? |
|
|
| (715006) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jan 4 00:00:04 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 3 23:46:41 2011. They should work on the exercise part of the health equation instead of the food end, for now. Obesity is a problem but people aren't going to stop eating for flavor.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (715017) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 4 00:36:19 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:06:20 2011. Which is trans-fat free. Fuck vegetarians. |
|
|
| (715019) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by PHXTUSbusfan on Tue Jan 4 00:41:32 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by BMTLines on Mon Jan 3 23:35:23 2011. Yet more and more municipalities and businesses are going out of their way to broadcast that they only serve "healthy choices" to their employees. Several businesses have banned smoking on the business premises (even outside) and this trend is spreading. Pretty soon, all of the food in this country will taste so bad that everyone will be skinny as they'd prefer not to eat and/or the good tasting fatty food will be taxed to high heaven. |
|
|
| (715022) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jan 4 00:44:42 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 4 00:36:19 2011. Could always useyour pal, Fred |
|
|
| (715023) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jan 4 00:45:41 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by PHXTUSbusfan on Tue Jan 4 00:41:32 2011. The wealthy will be the only fat ones. And - get this - they won't be able to run away! LOLyour pal, Fred |
|
|
| (715039) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 4 02:54:41 2011, in response to Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jan 3 22:08:29 2011. all signed into law by a Republican. |
|
|
| (715040) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jan 4 02:56:55 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 4 02:54:41 2011. Still hung up on party labels? |
|
|
| (715045) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by jimmymc25 on Tue Jan 4 03:09:09 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:32:03 2011. And next they'll take away the gles too!Jimmymc25 |
|
|
| (715049) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 03:13:12 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jan 4 02:56:55 2011. OK ... Germans then. Better? |
|
|
| (715068) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:33:59 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jan 3 23:40:37 2011. Yes. And when someone wants to have a guarantee of staying in their apartment, just claim domestic violence. This has got to be one of the stupidest laws out there. What the hell is it the landlord's fault if the woman has an order of protection against her crazy boyfriend or husband? |
|
|
| (715070) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:37:40 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 3 23:46:41 2011. The food police HAVE forgotten why. I have NO problem with them allowing for choice, but it's ridiculous that they have to ban what they find "unhealthy". They don't want choice, they want their choice rammed down everyone else's throat.It's not good enough to these SOB's if there are "lowfat" sour cream choices, or lowfat potato chips....they want to BAN the non-lowfat choice. It's the same song as all the fuss with cigarettes. People KNOW they aren't good for you. Same thing here, people know greasy burgers and french fries aren't good for you, but it's the person's CHOICE to eat it or not, it's none of the govt's DAMN business. |
|
|
| (715071) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:39:34 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Tue Jan 4 00:00:04 2011. Yes, no problem with more education, and the like. But the problem is that they are SLOWLY (slowly so you don't notice it) taking away the choice of the "unhealthy" choices. You don't have the CHOICE of having the tastier french fries in places like NYC (and spreading) anymore. |
|
|
| (715072) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:41:22 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by PHXTUSbusfan on Tue Jan 4 00:41:32 2011. Yes, and it sounds absurd, but you are dead on in this, they do this slowly so it's not noticeable, but little by little they erode all the choice away.And the smoking is a good example. Just 5 years ago (forget about 10 years ago), people would have thought it absurd that one day smoking would be banned outside buildings, or in public sidewalks, or even in private homes now. It's utterly out of control, and there is no end in sight. |
|
|
| (715073) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:42:15 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Tue Jan 4 00:45:41 2011. It has nothing to do with "wealthy". "The Wealthy" can't buy the tastier food choices either. |
|
|
| (715074) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:43:13 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jan 4 02:54:41 2011. WHO CARES? Where did anyone mention politician parties? And for the record, Schwarzenegger was a RINO. |
|
|
| (715142) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by Hank Eisenstein on Tue Jan 4 13:24:26 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by Fred G on Mon Jan 3 23:06:20 2011. Which went out of favor over a decade ago, long before the current trans-fat bans. |
|
|
| (715175) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:13:02 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:33:59 2011. It's been said many times that you've gotta be out of your f'in mind to want to be a landlord ... perhaps this will cause many to finally get the help they need. :) |
|
|
| (715180) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:17:28 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 07:43:13 2011. If all democrats are judged by Pelosi, then all republicans can be judged by Scharzenegger ... this "RINO" stuff is nonsense, he was never thrown out of the party. Same for Doomberg. Face it ... they ARE republicans. |
|
|
| (715185) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 15:24:22 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:13:02 2011. I guess the government only wants there to be government housing, as opposed private individuals buying property, maintaining it, and providing a place for people to live. But all the laws are completely against landlords, especially in liberal cities and states.There are most definitely slum lords, but there are also plenty of landlords that have pride in their buildings. |
|
|
| (715187) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 15:26:11 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:17:28 2011. Bloomberg is NOT a Republican. He's a lifelong Democrat that switched to "Republican" to get elected on the coatails of Guiliani.And what example is "Pelosi"? You are claiming she is a DINO? |
|
|
| (715189) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Tue Jan 4 15:34:54 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:17:28 2011. and 'Scharzenegger' leaves a lot to be desired here in california |
|
|
| (715191) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:48:35 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 15:24:22 2011. Heh. There you go again. Have you ever BEEN a landlord? Ever managed property at least? You seriously have to be out of your mind. And aside from those who rent out their basement to a meth lab, most landlords these days are LLC's mistakenly invested in "sure thing." It's not like the old days at all anymore.Sure the lib'rul government of California and NYC don't give a rat's ass about landlords. They never did. But your vision of the stoic landlord is comical as well ... the type of landlord you refer to who has fewer than five "residential units" is almost never subject to any regulation at all. |
|
|
| (715193) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:52:21 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 15:26:11 2011. If you join the party and RUN as one, you ARE a republican. Why can't you just face the fact that the GOP is a bunch of whores ALSO? |
|
|
| (715194) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:54:51 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Tue Jan 4 15:34:54 2011. Past tense. :)Given what Jerry Brown has done for Oakland, I have a feeling he might be the right guy at the right time for y'all ... |
|
|
| (715195) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 16:04:28 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:48:35 2011. Heh. There you go again. Have you ever BEEN a landlord? Ever managed property at least? You seriously have to be out of your mind.Yes, and it's not easy in NYC. But your vision of the stoic landlord is comical as well ... the type of landlord you refer to who has fewer than five "residential units" is almost never subject to any regulation at all. Much of Brooklyn and Queens is 6 Family Homes, so if that answers your question, I am quite familiar with the "under 5", but it doesn't apply by 1..... |
|
|
| (715196) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 16:05:45 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 15:52:21 2011. Never said they were. But to compare Liberal San Fran Nancy Pelosi as the equivalent to a liberal RINO doesn't make sense. |
|
|
| (715198) | |
Re: Laws Laws Laws |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jan 4 16:24:13 2011, in response to Re: Laws Laws Laws, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jan 4 16:04:28 2011. Sounds like somebody overbuilt. The "4" limit by the way has been law since the 1950's. Dumbasses. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|