Is it frugality... or extreme cheapskate?

[kalvado]

Which changes would increase the graduation rate that the union opposes?
Thank goodness for a strong union for keeping governors from making disastrous decisions that would make the situation even worse.

As far as I understand, seniority based employment - as opposed to merit based - is one of the big things. Younger teachers were kicked out and would not return.
https://tntp.org/news-and-press/view/new-yorks-outdated-tenure-laws

Any objective evaluation - although that is a tough issue by itself - is another one:
https://www.nysut.org/members/member-guide/appr

That is not the key financial issue; just some examples of why union protecting membes first doesn't necessarily acts in the interest of students and general public.

There are many, many reasons why FDR and George Meany *strongly* opposed that creation of public/government employee unions.



Mike

Pfft.  I can agree on the tenure program.  My kids had a couple of dud teachers...then again, what student doesn't?

But, like NYSUT says, they are for evaluations in that link you provided.

However, it's not clear how those factor into graduation rates.

Finally, if you're jealous of union benefits, get your own.  No need to tear down everyone else to your level.

Well, one thing you may or may not realize, school education is VERY EXPENSIVE. It makes total sense to look at costs and deliverables. NY fails on both.
How expensive you may ask? right now, NYS public schools spend $24k per student per year - so by the end of high school (with diploma or not) it is $300k total per kid. Think about it as a loan, similar to college loan, we both are paying off from our taxes. In case you think college loans are expensive....
So if you plan to work for 36 years (3x12), it is currently $8k/year for you or me.  Compared to about $1200/working adult spending of NYSDOT
I would say this is pretty serious amount of money, and at a first glance that spending is inefficient. At a second glance, it is very inefficient....

So, now we're back to you cutting funding to our schools...

Why pay for schools when you could be on par with the likes of WV or MS...?

That's exactly what I mean when I talk about quality of education in NY. We're talking about distant top 1 spender, but somehow that means aiming to the bottom of the pack...

[Rothman]

Which changes would increase the graduation rate that the union opposes?
Thank goodness for a strong union for keeping governors from making disastrous decisions that would make the situation even worse.

As far as I understand, seniority based employment - as opposed to merit based - is one of the big things. Younger teachers were kicked out and would not return.
https://tntp.org/news-and-press/view/new-yorks-outdated-tenure-laws

Any objective evaluation - although that is a tough issue by itself - is another one:
https://www.nysut.org/members/member-guide/appr

That is not the key financial issue; just some examples of why union protecting membes first doesn't necessarily acts in the interest of students and general public.

There are many, many reasons why FDR and George Meany *strongly* opposed that creation of public/government employee unions.



Mike

Pfft.  I can agree on the tenure program.  My kids had a couple of dud teachers...then again, what student doesn't?

But, like NYSUT says, they are for evaluations in that link you provided.

However, it's not clear how those factor into graduation rates.

Finally, if you're jealous of union benefits, get your own.  No need to tear down everyone else to your level.

Well, one thing you may or may not realize, school education is VERY EXPENSIVE. It makes total sense to look at costs and deliverables. NY fails on both.
How expensive you may ask? right now, NYS public schools spend $24k per student per year - so by the end of high school (with diploma or not) it is $300k total per kid. Think about it as a loan, similar to college loan, we both are paying off from our taxes. In case you think college loans are expensive....
So if you plan to work for 36 years (3x12), it is currently $8k/year for you or me.  Compared to about $1200/working adult spending of NYSDOT
I would say this is pretty serious amount of money, and at a first glance that spending is inefficient. At a second glance, it is very inefficient....

So, now we're back to you cutting funding to our schools...

Why pay for schools when you could be on par with the likes of WV or MS...?

That's exactly what I mean when I talk about quality of education in NY. We're talking about distant top 1 spender, but somehow that means aiming to the bottom of the pack...

Pfft.  You've only mentioned graduation rates, which aren't normalized statistics across states.

[kalvado]

Which changes would increase the graduation rate that the union opposes?
Thank goodness for a strong union for keeping governors from making disastrous decisions that would make the situation even worse.

As far as I understand, seniority based employment - as opposed to merit based - is one of the big things. Younger teachers were kicked out and would not return.
https://tntp.org/news-and-press/view/new-yorks-outdated-tenure-laws

Any objective evaluation - although that is a tough issue by itself - is another one:
https://www.nysut.org/members/member-guide/appr

That is not the key financial issue; just some examples of why union protecting membes first doesn't necessarily acts in the interest of students and general public.

There are many, many reasons why FDR and George Meany *strongly* opposed that creation of public/government employee unions.



Mike

Pfft.  I can agree on the tenure program.  My kids had a couple of dud teachers...then again, what student doesn't?

But, like NYSUT says, they are for evaluations in that link you provided.

However, it's not clear how those factor into graduation rates.

Finally, if you're jealous of union benefits, get your own.  No need to tear down everyone else to your level.

Well, one thing you may or may not realize, school education is VERY EXPENSIVE. It makes total sense to look at costs and deliverables. NY fails on both.
How expensive you may ask? right now, NYS public schools spend $24k per student per year - so by the end of high school (with diploma or not) it is $300k total per kid. Think about it as a loan, similar to college loan, we both are paying off from our taxes. In case you think college loans are expensive....
So if you plan to work for 36 years (3x12), it is currently $8k/year for you or me.  Compared to about $1200/working adult spending of NYSDOT
I would say this is pretty serious amount of money, and at a first glance that spending is inefficient. At a second glance, it is very inefficient....

So, now we're back to you cutting funding to our schools...

Why pay for schools when you could be on par with the likes of WV or MS...?

That's exactly what I mean when I talk about quality of education in NY. We're talking about distant top 1 spender, but somehow that means aiming to the bottom of the pack...

Pfft.  You've only mentioned graduation rates, which aren't normalized statistics across states.

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

[Rothman]

Which changes would increase the graduation rate that the union opposes?
Thank goodness for a strong union for keeping governors from making disastrous decisions that would make the situation even worse.

As far as I understand, seniority based employment - as opposed to merit based - is one of the big things. Younger teachers were kicked out and would not return.
https://tntp.org/news-and-press/view/new-yorks-outdated-tenure-laws

Any objective evaluation - although that is a tough issue by itself - is another one:
https://www.nysut.org/members/member-guide/appr

That is not the key financial issue; just some examples of why union protecting membes first doesn't necessarily acts in the interest of students and general public.

There are many, many reasons why FDR and George Meany *strongly* opposed that creation of public/government employee unions.



Mike

Pfft.  I can agree on the tenure program.  My kids had a couple of dud teachers...then again, what student doesn't?

But, like NYSUT says, they are for evaluations in that link you provided.

However, it's not clear how those factor into graduation rates.

Finally, if you're jealous of union benefits, get your own.  No need to tear down everyone else to your level.

Well, one thing you may or may not realize, school education is VERY EXPENSIVE. It makes total sense to look at costs and deliverables. NY fails on both.
How expensive you may ask? right now, NYS public schools spend $24k per student per year - so by the end of high school (with diploma or not) it is $300k total per kid. Think about it as a loan, similar to college loan, we both are paying off from our taxes. In case you think college loans are expensive....
So if you plan to work for 36 years (3x12), it is currently $8k/year for you or me.  Compared to about $1200/working adult spending of NYSDOT
I would say this is pretty serious amount of money, and at a first glance that spending is inefficient. At a second glance, it is very inefficient....

So, now we're back to you cutting funding to our schools...

Why pay for schools when you could be on par with the likes of WV or MS...?

That's exactly what I mean when I talk about quality of education in NY. We're talking about distant top 1 spender, but somehow that means aiming to the bottom of the pack...

Pfft.  You've only mentioned graduation rates, which aren't normalized statistics across states.

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

[kalvado]

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

So, let's try again.
What are the factors you want to look at - other than saying "it is all very complicated"?
I would compare NY with surrounding states - NJ (as a proxy for NYC), VT (as a proxy for upstate), CT, PA, NH and MA.
All those states have somewhat lower spending than NY, higher graduation rates, higher average SAT scores with similar participation rates (top-10 SAT scorer states have few kids taking exam)... Can you point a finger at the parameter that explains being top-1 spender without demonstrable change in outcome?  I have only two suggestions: either it is union, or NYS kids are much dumber than US average... 
And again - this is not some academic discussion. School spending reflects on overall tax burden and affects viability of business in the state. Would it be better for kids' future to have more chance of economic success without having to move far away?

[hotdogPi]

Higher graduation rate is not always better. If the graduation rate is too high, that means the goal is set too low, and some kids are graduating that shouldn't be.

[kalvado]

Higher graduation rate is not always better. If the graduation rate is too high, that means the goal is set too low, and some kids are graduating that shouldn't be.

Totally true, especially with states setting their own standards. Interestingly enough, US graduation rate was slowly growing over past 15 years after 25 years of stagnation.
SAT could be a good metric, but it is not uniformly applied. Many states with high scores have few kids taking exam.

[kphoger]

Higher graduation rate is not always better. If the graduation rate is too high, that means the goal is set too low, and some kids are graduating that shouldn't be.

Some Children Left Behind

[Rothman]

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

So, let's try again.
What are the factors you want to look at - other than saying "it is all very complicated"?
I would compare NY with surrounding states - NJ (as a proxy for NYC), VT (as a proxy for upstate), CT, PA, NH and MA.
All those states have somewhat lower spending than NY, higher graduation rates, higher average SAT scores with similar participation rates (top-10 SAT scorer states have few kids taking exam)... Can you point a finger at the parameter that explains being top-1 spender without demonstrable change in outcome?  I have only two suggestions: either it is union, or NYS kids are much dumber than US average... 
And again - this is not some academic discussion. School spending reflects on overall tax burden and affects viability of business in the state. Would it be better for kids' future to have more chance of economic success without having to move far away?

If those are your only two suggestions, then you really do need to read the chapter I provided.

A bunch of those other states also have teachers unions...

[kalvado]

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

So, let's try again.
What are the factors you want to look at - other than saying "it is all very complicated"?
I would compare NY with surrounding states - NJ (as a proxy for NYC), VT (as a proxy for upstate), CT, PA, NH and MA.
All those states have somewhat lower spending than NY, higher graduation rates, higher average SAT scores with similar participation rates (top-10 SAT scorer states have few kids taking exam)... Can you point a finger at the parameter that explains being top-1 spender without demonstrable change in outcome?  I have only two suggestions: either it is union, or NYS kids are much dumber than US average... 
And again - this is not some academic discussion. School spending reflects on overall tax burden and affects viability of business in the state. Would it be better for kids' future to have more chance of economic success without having to move far away?

If those are your only two suggestions, then you really do need to read the chapter I provided.

A bunch of those other states also have teachers unions...

OK, go ahead and provide some suggestions. I specifically don't compare NY with MS or ND, my comparison is for the northeast. And again, question is not "why graduation rate is lower", q
uestion is "what those extra dollars actually buy us?"

And I am not saying union is an unconditionally bad thing. It really depends, it is stupid to deny positive things unions did.
Problem of some unions (and not only unions) is that they are pushing things too far. Like Albany police union standing for their members (good thing,right?) - e.g. fighting against firing of a cop after he did a drunk hit-and-run with bodily injury to the other side. 

[mgk920]

So then we should ALL just throw more money at it.  But when is it 'enough'?

Mike

[kphoger]

Sometimes there literally isn't enough money. My backyard fence is falling apart, but any amount of yelling "I need to spend a little money on preventative maintenance!" at the bank doesn't cause them to deposit anything in my account.

Well put.

I feel like the OP's solution to the problem is basically "People should spend more money".  Then, when it's pointed out that they don't have any more money to spend, he'd say "People should have more money".

[Rothman]

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

So, let's try again.
What are the factors you want to look at - other than saying "it is all very complicated"?
I would compare NY with surrounding states - NJ (as a proxy for NYC), VT (as a proxy for upstate), CT, PA, NH and MA.
All those states have somewhat lower spending than NY, higher graduation rates, higher average SAT scores with similar participation rates (top-10 SAT scorer states have few kids taking exam)... Can you point a finger at the parameter that explains being top-1 spender without demonstrable change in outcome?  I have only two suggestions: either it is union, or NYS kids are much dumber than US average... 
And again - this is not some academic discussion. School spending reflects on overall tax burden and affects viability of business in the state. Would it be better for kids' future to have more chance of economic success without having to move far away?

If those are your only two suggestions, then you really do need to read the chapter I provided.

A bunch of those other states also have teachers unions...

OK, go ahead and provide some suggestions. I specifically don't compare NY with MS or ND, my comparison is for the northeast. And again, question is not "why graduation rate is lower", q
uestion is "what those extra dollars actually buy us?"

And I am not saying union is an unconditionally bad thing. It really depends, it is stupid to deny positive things unions did.
Problem of some unions (and not only unions) is that they are pushing things too far. Like Albany police union standing for their members (good thing,right?) - e.g. fighting against firing of a cop after he did a drunk hit-and-run with bodily injury to the other side.

1) Air conditioning, evidently, compared to Ohio

2) Glad that you see the situation as more nuanced than "teachers union is murdering us."

[NWI_Irish96]

The folks who do anything to avoid the delivery fee even though their vehicle is ill-equipped to handle the item purchased which has lead to some very amusing pictures posted on the Internet.

This is the only one that bothers me, because it involves creating a hazard on the road for others. If you can't get it home safely or afford the delivery fee, then buy a less expensive model.

The people who insist on paying CA$H for everything. I understand the undertones behind this habit... if you are handing over cash to pay for items, it makes you more cost-conscious of what you spend your money on. Having said that, I prefer to use my credit card to pay for my purchases including the recurring bills, and, most importantly, pay it off every month so that I don't pay interest. Since I have a rewards card, I'm saving up the year-end cash-back to pay for some appliance replacement, and more importantly, build up my credit rating so that I was able to purchase a home. Which brings me to my next point...

Some people just aren't good at controlling their use of credit, so for them it makes sense. For anyone else, there are tons of benefits to building up and using credit, and people should be aware of that, but in the end their choice doesn't impact me.

The people who crow about paying CA$H for their home. All well and good, until you look at the details. The house is a big small, and doesn't meet their needs. They are out in the middle of the country, meaning they have to travel a significant distance to the store, further to the warehouse store, and even further to get to work. That's a problem that was underscored the past several months when gas prices hit record levels making every mile hurt in the wallet. And, the Internet connectivity, being that it is "wireless Internet", isn't all that great and expensive which poses a challenge working from home. But, hey, they paid CA$H for their home. Meanwhile, I have a decent home where I can work to work, shopping is very close by, and I have gigabit Internet in both upload and download speeds.

The "mommy fixes" where the repair usually consists of transparent or duct tape, all just to save five-ten bucks from purchasing a new replacement. Note that I'm not lumping the "self-repair" people in this category, as they are actually watching the YouTube HowTo videos, ordering the parts, and doing thew repair themselves.

The folks who do anything to avoid the delivery fee even though their vehicle is ill-equipped to handle the item purchased which has lead to some very amusing pictures posted on the Internet.

The folks who purchase the absolute cheapest products who, by nature, may lack features and functionality, and because of the lower quality, promptly falls apart a short time after the warranty expires.

Likewise, the folks who life's mantra is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Slight problem... the item they are utilizing is so technologically obsolete to the point where they are hunting FleaBay to find the replacement parts that are no longer made by the manufacturer. I should emphasize that the actual replacement is both cheaper to operate and increases productivity, resulting in long term savings to offset the replacement cost.

Not spending the little bit of money for preventative maintenance, including regular computer backups and oil changes. Nope, nope, don't have the time or money for that, but SURPRISE when there is a major repair or restoration bill that costs more and puts you out of action for days!

All of these things boil down to cost benefit analysis of different options. Yes, in a lot of cases spending more up front saves you later, even if you have to borrow with interest to do so, but again, it doesn't affect me so it doesn't bother me.

[bing101]

Frugality sounds more like the group involved benefit from certain economic, fiscal and monetary conditions of the era.

[NWI_Irish96]

Having electricity prices too low will just encourage wasting electricity, something California is trying to avoid but Texas doesn't care about. You are aware of global warming, right?

There is some sense in higher prices pushing for more savings; but that is also a handicap for certain businesses where energy costs are significant. Think heavy industry, big data, AI... Water desalination, which may become make-it or break-it for CA...

Oh, and by the way. It is no longer "global warming". It is "climate change".

In the big picture, it is global warming. The planet is getting warmer. "Climate change" is a term used to dumb it down for people who can't understand why the planet getting warmer overall sometimes causes extreme weather events that don't necessarily include the temperature rising, like blizzards, hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and droughts.

[kalvado]

Any other parameter to look at? or "you just need to feel it!"?
A high school diploma is a significant thing for an adult, easily meaning being able to get a job or not. And high school diplomas are recognized across the nation, as far as I understand...

Sure, diplomas have that significance.  But strictly looking at graduation rates and blaming lower rates on teacher unions when there are a whole host of other variables out there affecting graduation rates out there is inappropriate.

Just looking at graduation rates in a vacuum is like looking solely at GDP when comparing countries' economic output.  That's why you see GDP per capita or GDP per whatever to make the statistic comparable.  In other words, you're not controlling for things like crappy schools in other states, environmental factors, socioeconomics, percent English learners, etc., etc., which may have a much stronger effect on graduation rates than teachers unions.

Coincidentally enough, my statistics book from grad school used an example of research done on actual education achievement as determined by test scores to show how complicated the variables affecting real education achievement are.  So, sure, check out Introduction to Econometrics by Stock and Watson, chapter 5 in particular.

So, let's try again.
What are the factors you want to look at - other than saying "it is all very complicated"?
I would compare NY with surrounding states - NJ (as a proxy for NYC), VT (as a proxy for upstate), CT, PA, NH and MA.
All those states have somewhat lower spending than NY, higher graduation rates, higher average SAT scores with similar participation rates (top-10 SAT scorer states have few kids taking exam)... Can you point a finger at the parameter that explains being top-1 spender without demonstrable change in outcome?  I have only two suggestions: either it is union, or NYS kids are much dumber than US average... 
And again - this is not some academic discussion. School spending reflects on overall tax burden and affects viability of business in the state. Would it be better for kids' future to have more chance of economic success without having to move far away?

If those are your only two suggestions, then you really do need to read the chapter I provided.

A bunch of those other states also have teachers unions...

OK, go ahead and provide some suggestions. I specifically don't compare NY with MS or ND, my comparison is for the northeast. And again, question is not "why graduation rate is lower", q
uestion is "what those extra dollars actually buy us?"

And I am not saying union is an unconditionally bad thing. It really depends, it is stupid to deny positive things unions did.
Problem of some unions (and not only unions) is that they are pushing things too far. Like Albany police union standing for their members (good thing,right?) - e.g. fighting against firing of a cop after he did a drunk hit-and-run with bodily injury to the other side.

1) Air conditioning, evidently, compared to Ohio

2) Glad that you see the situation as more nuanced than "teachers union is murdering us."

1) I don't believe AC would cost anywhere close to $1K per student annually.
2) I definitely see it that way. NYSUT is one of those unions which desperately need a reality check.

[kphoger]

The folks who do anything to avoid the delivery fee even though their vehicle is ill-equipped to handle the item purchased which has lead to some very amusing pictures posted on the Internet.

This is the only one that bothers me, because it involves creating a hazard on the road for others. If you can't get it home safely or afford the delivery fee, then buy a less expensive model.

If you found the item for free on Craigslist, then "buy a less expensive model" isn't really an option.

We used to own a plastic backyard slide, maybe five or six feet tall.  Ahead of my wife getting her home daycare licensed, we realized that it was too tall to pass state daycare regulations, so we offered it for super-cheap on Craigslist.  The woman who contacted us for it was a single mom barely making ends meet.  We decided to not even charge her for it at all.  But, to get it to her house, I took the sections apart and strapped them to the top of my car.

In the big picture, it is global warming. The planet is getting warmer. "Climate change" is a term used to dumb it down for people who can't understand why the planet getting warmer overall sometimes causes extreme weather events that don't necessarily include the temperature rising, like blizzards, hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and droughts.

Isn't it also because "warm" sounds like a good thing to most people?  That's also why "greenhouse effect" didn't last very long as a term:  greenhouses are full of vibrant life.

[kalvado]

Having electricity prices too low will just encourage wasting electricity, something California is trying to avoid but Texas doesn't care about. You are aware of global warming, right?

There is some sense in higher prices pushing for more savings; but that is also a handicap for certain businesses where energy costs are significant. Think heavy industry, big data, AI... Water desalination, which may become make-it or break-it for CA...

Oh, and by the way. It is no longer "global warming". It is "climate change".

In the big picture, it is global warming. The planet is getting warmer. "Climate change" is a term used to dumb it down for people who can't understand why the planet getting warmer overall sometimes causes extreme weather events that don't necessarily include the temperature rising, like blizzards, hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and droughts.

"global warming" doesn't seem to materialize.  Climate change is a replacement much more nuanced concept.
Sir Karl would argue that such approach means climatology is no longer a science, but that in a whole different flame.

[abefroman329]

That's also why "greenhouse effect" didn't last very long as a term:  greenhouses are full of vibrant life.

I mean, I definitely associate "greenhouse" with "place that is uncomfortably warm" (see, e.g. Garfield Park Conservatory), but "hothouse effect" would have been a better idea.

[J N Winkler]

We used to own a plastic backyard slide, maybe five or six feet tall.  Ahead of my wife getting her home daycare licensed, we realized that it was too tall to pass state daycare regulations, so we offered it for super-cheap on Craigslist.  The woman who contacted us for it was a single mom barely making ends meet.  We decided to not even charge her for it at all.  But, to get it to her house, I took the sections apart and strapped them to the top of my car.

That was a mitzvah.

Isn't it also because "warm" sounds like a good thing to most people?  That's also why "greenhouse effect" didn't last very long as a term:  greenhouses are full of vibrant life.

I think part of the reason we struggle with terminology is that humans are very bad at thinking about long-term trends, and many of the negative effects we worry about involve great shortening of recurrence intervals for things like hurricanes, tornadoes, rainfall of intolerably high intensity, wet-bulb heat waves, and so on.

[CtrlAltDel]

Apparently, it's about how Texas used to be better than California in every single way.

I never claimed that Texas is better in every single way, only that I'm happier here than in California.

So, what then is better in California, do you think?

That would explain why he didn't bring up Texas's more recent electricity fiasco, which killed anywhere from 200 to 700 people.

Are you talking about the February, 2021 extreme weather event where it snowed in Houston as well as the DFW area (where the expected snowfall is a "dusting" in the northern part once a year.... maybe),

Yes. The one that came after something broadly similar happened ten years prior and that led to recommendations that a bunch of things be addressed but that weren't, thus leading to a crystal clear example of the penny-wise pound-foolish actions you deride in your OP. That one, yes.

[kphoger]

So, what then is better in California, do you think?

Cabernet Sauvignon, Pinot Noir.

[abefroman329]

So, what then is better in California, do you think?

Cabernet Sauvignon, Pinot Noir.

And, if you're into that sort of thing, Humboldt Gold.

[SectorZ]

Having electricity prices too low will just encourage wasting electricity, something California is trying to avoid but Texas doesn't care about. You are aware of global warming, right?

There is some sense in higher prices pushing for more savings; but that is also a handicap for certain businesses where energy costs are significant. Think heavy industry, big data, AI... Water desalination, which may become make-it or break-it for CA...

Oh, and by the way. It is no longer "global warming". It is "climate change".

In the big picture, it is global warming. The planet is getting warmer. "Climate change" is a term used to dumb it down for people who can't understand why the planet getting warmer overall sometimes causes extreme weather events that don't necessarily include the temperature rising, like blizzards, hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and droughts.

Per the IPCC and NOAA, "climate change" is to discuss any change in climate regardless of source, including things like volcanic activity that can force temperatures downward. "Global warming" is to discuss warming caused solely by human activity. The media tends to conflate the two, which causes others to do so.