Column
2019-4 (1/28/19)
I
try to ignore California. Apparently this irritates California. It
keeps upping its game until it does something so outrageous I can’t
ignore it. This time California hit me with a trifecta. The three
contestants are competing for both the most outrageous and the
silliest. You can pick the winners.
The
first two entries spring from the shortage of housing in the Golden
state. Several cities have an idea. They turned it in to an
ordinance. I don’t understand how the ordinance eases the housing
shortage. Maybe you will.
These
ordinances require the owners of rented housing to pay the tenant a
moving expense charge to get the tenant to move. Payment of the
charge is required even when the rental period has ended. The charge
may be as much as $8,000.
A
couple serving in the military rented out their house while stationed
outside California. When they returned they had to pay thousands of
dollars of ransom to liberate their house. The ordinance didn’t
even exist when they rented their house to the tenant. Surprise!
The legality of the moving charge is now the subject of a lawsuit.
The
national government has a program that aids the building of
“affordable” housing. A developer used this program to get the
government to provide most of the financing to build some apartments.
The apartments cost over $700,000 each.
I
guess affordable doesn’t mean much until you know “affordable by
who.” Or, perhaps no one can afford to live in California.
Having
just saved humanity from destruction by plastic straws, California
seeks new dragons to slay. Without villains there would be no
heroes. Berkeley found a monster lurking in the same jungle as
plastic straws. The newly discovered menace is the straws companion,
disposable cups.
How
might a hero slay the disposable cups? Berkeley’s dragon slayer is
the quarter. Be very careful when you reach for your change. It may
include one of those killer quarters.
So,
how will Berkley deploy its newly discovered weapon? It will require
beverage sellers to charge a nonrefundable fee of $0.25 for each
disposable cup. The merchant gets to keep the quarters. This may
be the dragon slayer's Achilles heel. As one reporter pointed out,
there appears to be nothing to prevent a merchant from lowering his
price $0.25 to offset the cost of the cup.
One
of the counsel members voting for the ordinance suggested it was to
save the planet. Ah, yes, for the want of a quarter the planet was
lost. The ordinance did include some other planet saving features,
such as a ban on disposable table wear that wasn’t compostable.
Maybe
going back to wooden spoons will save at least half of the planet.
Do ice cream cups still come with wooden spoons? Or, is that
something that only those of us from the age of dinosaurs remember?
In
case three examples weren’t enough, I am including a bonus warning
without any extra charge. California is considering baning paper
receipts for purchases. Would this force everyone to switch to
plastic?
Some
may believe I want to stop the foolishness in California. I wouldn’t
think of it. No idea is so bad some politician doesn’t want to
road test it. Let California be the proving ground for bad ideas.
California can serve as the bad example for the rest of us to learn
from.
*
* * * *
*
* * *
*
* *
*
*
*
Copyright
2019
Albert
D. McCallum
No comments:
Post a Comment