Peak absurdity of CA gov

Status
Not open for further replies.
I say again - this was passed 39 years ago. Get over it, get on with it.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I say again - this was passed 39 years ago. Get over it, get on with it.
Click to expand...
So you want to pick up the tab for non-California companies that don't even sell directly to California companies, but are required to put labels and stickers, and pay someone to make sure because their product MAY end up in California? I mean, if you want us to get over it, you willing to help out?
 
EdFred said:
So you want to pick up the tab for non-California companies that don't even sell directly to California companies, but are required to put labels and stickers, and pay someone to make sure because their product MAY end up in California? I mean, if you want us to get over it, you willing to help out?
Click to expand...
Can you quantify the incremental cost of those and exclude the cost of all the dozens of lawyer-based warnings on everything?
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Can you quantify the incremental cost of those and exclude the cost of all the dozens of lawyer-based warnings on everything?
Click to expand...
Sure. Couple hundred thousand a year for a small company by the time you figure in the all in costs. Not including defending the initial lawsuits. Should I let you know where to send the check? I mean, because you have just as much to do with California as a non-California company. Just send the check and get over it, and get on with it. Right?

Or is this like one of those, "oh, I didn't mean me, I meant everyone else," sort of things?
 
Pi1otguy said:
There a bigger question about warnings that become noise.
Click to expand...

how many people read the dozens and dozens (and dozens and dozens) of pages of warning in the manuals that come with our cars?
 
Yeah, who reads?

Pilots Of America Management

Thread 'Rules of Conduct (RoC) Update: Effective 9/21/2018'

Effective as of 9/21/2018 the Rules of Conduct have been updated to include:

  • Pilots of America is an inclusive community. We celebrate aviation in all of its forms and by any and all practitioners. All are welcome here. We may not agree on all topics, but we welcome anybody with an interest in aviation. Exclusionary comments will not be tolerated. This includes discrimination based on religion, race, sexual orientation, or gender. It is not our goal to be the thought police. It is our goal to make this a welcome place for anybody that shares our passion for the...
Click to expand...
  • Like

:rockon:
 
CDS is strong with this group. Meaningless labeling requirements is a problem across many states and countries. I believe there has been multiple attempts to get the different labeling requirements across the states aligned, I think its been called the Accurate Labels Act a few times? However that has never worked. If you don't like a state's or country's rules, just stop selling product there.
 
Last edited:
Llewtrah381 said:
Can you quantify the incremental cost of those and exclude the cost of all the dozens of lawyer-based warnings on everything?
Click to expand...
"This product will kill you. We don't know how. But in 100-110 years you will be dead, guaranteed."

There. No applause needed. No royalties expected.
 
AV8R_87 said:
Stupid question: isn't it easier to just label it "Not to be sold in California"?
Click to expand...
3M did that, stuff still ended up in California. They ended up killing off the line because of the California headache. Sucks too because it was a damn good product line.
 
NoBShere said:
CDS is strong with this group. Meaningless labeling requirements is a problem across many states and countries. I believe there has been multiple attempts to get the different labeling requirements across the states aligned, I think its been called the Accurate Labels Act a few times? However that has never worked. If you don't like a state's or country's rules, just stop selling product there.
Click to expand...

Oh, you sweet summer child. It ends up in CA through 3rd or 4th parties. But guess who is responsible.

As the immortal Biff once said, "Think McFly, think."

All of Californias **** gets thrown on everyone else, even if they have no direct pipeline to CA. That is the problem.
 
If Johnson & Johnson HAD put a blanket Prop 65 warning on their talc, I wonder if they wouldn’t have lost.
 
EdFred said:
Oh, you sweet summer child. It ends up in CA through 3rd or 4th parties. But guess who is responsible.

As the immortal Biff once said, "Think McFly, think."

All of Californias **** gets thrown on everyone else, even if they have no direct pipeline to CA. That is the problem.
Click to expand...
While I don't see a need for Prop 65 labeling, I think you're overstating the weight of the burden relative to all of the other labeling burdens in a global economy.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
If Johnson & Johnson HAD put a blanket Prop 65 warning on their talc, I wonder if they wouldn’t have lost.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately for everyone involved, nobody knew talc was harmful until long after the horse was out of the barn.
 
Salty said:
Yep. Keep beating people over the head with pointless rules until they submit.
Click to expand...
Again - 39 years ago. And how many administrations since then?

Plus - “pointless” to the triggered…
 
I remember hearing a saying about a path to a bad place being paved in good intensions growing up . Unintentionally caused consequences are a real pita, many times very well meaning people impose rules with a very narrowly focused view and don’t look at the butterfly effect it will cause. It’s a human fault as old as time.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I say again - this was passed 39 years ago. Get over it, get on with it.
Click to expand...
39 years means that we should now have enough data to go back and performa a valid analysis to determine the cost-benefit ratio.

Over that 39 years:

How much $$$ has been spent?
Has the cancer death rate increased or decreased, and by how much?
Has the inflation-adjusted spending on cancer care increased or decreased, and by how much?
Has the cancer death rate in California changed in relation to other states and/or the rest of the world?
 
Bob Noel said:
how many people read the dozens and dozens (and dozens and dozens) of pages of warning in the manuals that come with our cars?
Click to expand...
Heck, I don’t even look at the dashboard anymore. Once you’ve set a new car up to drive properly by disabling the driver intrusion systems, there are so many warning lights on the dash that it’s pointless to look at anything other than the GPS speed readout on my cellphone.
 
Last edited:
NoBShere said:
CDS is strong with this group. Meaningless labeling requirements is a problem across many states and countries. I believe there has been multiple attempts to get the different labeling requirements across the states aligned, I think its been called the Accurate Labels Act a few times? However that has never worked. If you don't like a state's or country's rules, just stop selling product there.
Click to expand...
Well, I’ve heard serious discussions in my industry about having separate price sheets for California, to take into account the higher cost of doing business there.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Heck, I don’t even look at the dashboard anymore. Once you’ve set a new car up to drive properly by disabling the driver intrusio systems, there are so many warning lights on the dash that it’s pointless to look at anything other than the GPS speed readout on my cellphone.
Click to expand...
You can see that while you’re texting and/or surfing the internet?
 
NoBShere said:
While I don't see a need for Prop 65 labeling, I think you're overstating the weight of the burden relative to all of the other labeling burdens in a global economy.
Click to expand...
I also ship internationally. None of the California labeling is required, nor will we get a lawsuit brought against us. Not even for Europe. Try again.
 
EdFred said:
I also ship internationally. None of the California labeling is required, nor will we get a lawsuit brought against us. Not even for Europe. Try again.
Click to expand...
I'm glad we can agree on something, California requirements are not required outside of California. With the WEE, RoHS, translations, etc in EU for labeling, slapping a Prop 65 label on just doesn't seem any more burdensome.
 
NoBShere said:
I'm glad we can agree on something, California requirements are not required outside of California. With the WEE, RoHS, translations, etc in EU for labeling, slapping a Prop 65 label on just doesn't seem any more burdensome.
Click to expand...
I meant the labeling required for CA is not required elsewhere. Still have to deal with CA BS because the product *may* end up in CA
 
EdFred said:
I meant the labeling required for CA is not required elsewhere. Still have to deal with CA BS because the product *may* end up in CA
Click to expand...

This is actually fascinating to me. If Manufacturer sells to (anywhere but CA) , then Reseller sells to CA -- how is the lack of a label the Manufacturer's responsibility? wouldn't the reseller be at fault here?
 
So, politics and stupidity aside...

I think a common misconception about California is that is entirely comprised of surfers and hippies. And tech magnates. It has its share of those, but there are large sectors of the state that are every bit redneck as Texas, without exaggeration. You go slightly north of where I live, and the rice farmers are pretty much what you would find in Kansas except it is rice and not corn. And a lot of corn is produced in California. You go to the Central Valley and you have cowboys and ranchers that produce more beef than the next two states combined. California is the leading agricultural producer for several crops.
 
schmookeeg said:
This is actually fascinating to me. If Manufacturer sells to (anywhere but CA) , then Reseller sells to CA -- how is the lack of a label the Manufacturer's responsibility? wouldn't the reseller be at fault here?
Click to expand...
Aww.. you’ve never had the “pleasure” of learning the phrase subrogation. The USA has a bad reputation of being sue happy. It is my personal hypothesis that it may be more a result of insurance companies having teams of lawyers to sue every tom, dick, and harry that they can to recoup their money every time they have to pay a claim. I would be interested in seeing the percentages of claims brought by individuals in relation to claims brought by insurance providers in liability cases. I have a hunch which way would show a higher percentage. This is only my opinion/theory and meant in no way to slander insurance companies.
 
Flatiowa said:
Aww.. you’ve never had the “pleasure” of learning the phrase subrogation. The USA has a bad reputation of being sue happy. It is my personal hypothesis that it may be more a result of insurance companies having teams of lawyers to sue every tom, dick, and harry that they can to recoup their money every time they have to pay a claim. I would be interested in seeing the percentages of claims brought by individuals in relation to claims brought by insurance providers in liability cases. I have a hunch which way would show a higher percentage. This is only my opinion/theory and meant in no way to slander insurance companies.
Click to expand...

Only in the aviation insurance context.

So in this scenario, am I understanding right: Reseller loses a suit, Reseller's product completions insurance subrogates against manufacturer for not putting the sticker on the product? Ugh. Tort reform needed indeed.

I'd think if I was anti prop (65? whatever it is) as a manufacturer, I would opt to put a "not for sale in California" sticker out of spite instead. :D
 
schmookeeg said:
I’d think if I was anti prop (65? whatever it is) as a manufacturer, I would opt to put a "not for sale in California" sticker out of spite instead. :D
Click to expand...
Yes, avoid the fourth largest economy in the world. Now that’s solid business advice.

Sac Arrow said:
So, politics and stupidity aside...

I think a common misconception about California is that is entirely comprised of surfers and hippies. And tech magnates. It has its share of those, but there are large sectors of the state that are every bit redneck as Texas, without exaggeration. You go slightly north of where I live, and the rice farmers are pretty much what you would find in Kansas except it is rice and not corn. And a lot of corn is produced in California. You go to the Central Valley and you have cowboys and ranchers that produce more beef than the next two states combined. California is the leading agricultural producer for several crops.
Click to expand...

And I would add the mountainous regions, not Tahoe, are expansive and very different from the rest of the state. Being able to sit on the deck with my wife, dog and a nice bourbon just looking across the valley at the next ridge with no one around except the bears, raccoons, foxes, deer, bats, bobcats and mountain lions (and squatchs depending how much bourbon I’ve had) keeps me sane.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top