HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: ca.environment
Subject: Re: Plastic Recycling and Products Thereof
Date: 25 Jan 1993 10:39:54 GMT
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
	<Jym.17Jan1993.1628@naughty-peahen>
	<llk52iINN30l@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 18 Jan 93 02:22:10 GMT

> So you're recommending I put up a redwood fence, made of
> products bought from Pacific Lumber, a division of Maxxam????

=o= I never said anything even remotely resembling that.

> Perhaps a pine fence would be better, since it would rot
> every five years, giving the lumber industry an opportunity
> to cut down some more old-growth forests?
 
=o= I never said anything even remotely resembling that, either.
Also, for your information, softwoods like pine grow quickly,
and usually come from new growth.

=o= (And how long do you really think a plastic picket fence
is going to serve?  From what I've seen, plastic outdoor junk
gets damaged routinely.  A picket fence represents a lot of
easily damaged unrepairable surface area.  You'd be unusually
lucky if five years passed before you're back at Home Depot
buying a new one.)

=o= Now, if you were to ask what my actual recommendations
were, I'd say they would vary depending on your particular
environment. If your heart is set on a picket fence, I'd tell
you the following:

=1= Get a copy of the _Wood_User's_Handbook, by Pamela Wellner
and Eugene Dickey (of the Rainforest Action Network).  They
give rather detailed information on obtaining various types of 
wood that was logged in a sustainable manner.  They even list
some businesses in the Bay Area that specialize in such wood.
(They're more tolerant of some synthetic products than I am,
so of I course I recommend against following their advice to
use those materials.)

=2= Find a picket fence or materials for same made from a good
water-resistant wood.

=3= Find environmentally-sound wood preservative products.
I've tried the products of Auro and Livos, two German firms
(I've also heard of a new American firm called BioShield,
but I haven't tried their products).  You'll find some that
will hold off the biodegrading process for a good number of
years.  Apply those products to the fence.
    <_Jym_>
Newsgroups: ca.environment
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: Plastic Recycling and little reality
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:58:44 GMT

In article <2936653419.1.p00004@psilink.com> p00004@psilink.com (Michael Smith) writes:
>>In article <C13Jx6.F6H@quake.sylmar.ca.us>
>> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>>>Why?  Because you don't believe that property rights are unalienable?  ...
 
>What are they teaching in high-school civics these days? It's precisely
>property, and one's rights in it, that *are* "alienable".
 
I should ask the same question.  The central idea behind the theory of 
individual rights is that there are certain areas where individuals need to have 
sovreignty over their own affairs without interference from government 
or anyone else.  Individual rights are MORAL ideas which are prior to 
evaluations of laws...they are the more fundamental idea on which proper
government is defined in the first place.
 
Governments can refuse to recognize rights, but they cannot eliminate them.
This is similar to saying that a government may kill someone, but that doesnt
make it morally acceptable.
 
> I don't know
>what scriptural text Brian is thinking of here, 
 
I do not think that rights arise from ANY legal document, they arise 
from the nature of human beings and the nature of their social
interactions.  My whole point here is that rights cannot be eliminated 
merely by changing some law or scripture any more than a physical
law can be changed by passing a law.
 
>but of course the most
>famous context in which a list of inalienable (not, I believe,
>"unalienable") rights is enumerated is the Declaration of Independence,
>which has for Americans some moral authority though, of course, no legal
>force; 
 
My point was not that the declaration of independence is the course of
individual rights (indeed, my complaint is that people treat rights as though
they are a product of legislation of some kind).  The declaration DOES
point out that these rights exist, but it is not their source any more than 
a physics book is the source of the law of gravity.
 
>in that list property is conspicuous by its absence, and if
>Jefferson's testimony is to be believed, designedly so.
 
On the contrary, the terminology pursuit of happiness was originally 
intended to be interpreted as the right to property and its enjoyment.
If you look at the way the term was commonly used at the time, its pretty
clear that this is the case (often the primary rights were listed as Life,
liberty, and property).  Perhaps you ought to read the writings of the
time more carefully.  
 
Even if nobody at the time believed in the right to own property (an
incredible assertion, no doubt) when the constitution was written,
that would not change the fact that property rights exist and must
be respected regardless of what kind of immoral laws a government
may pass.
 
--Brian

Newsgroups: ca.environment
From: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
Newsgroups: ca.environment
Subject: Re: Plastic Recycling and Products Ther
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:09:36 GMT
Organization: lbl
Distribution: world
Reply-To: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.12.154

A few comments on this plastics recycling thread:

* The suggestion was made (tylerh@cco.caltech.edu (Tyler R. Holcomb)) that
  unit-pricing of solid waste ("pickup BY THE BARREL") would greatly help
  recycling of post-consumer plastics.  This is already the case in many
  areas, and some are considering charging for solid waste by weight.
  While these are good ideas, I think they help only marginally, if at all,
  to significantly increasing plastics recycling.

* ||> Plastics, even if they were being dumped in the landfill ||
  ||> are still a better option than paper products.           ||
  ||                                                           ||
  ||=o= Not inherently, and not in the long term.              ||

  Come on, folks -- making generalizations very sweeping doesn't make them
  any more true.  If you had a choice of several doctors, one of which said
  "I only use metallic products", one which said "I only use plastic products",
  and one which said "I only use biomass-produced products", which doctor
  would you choose?  Or might you think that the appropriate material
  depends on the use?  The same applies to materials and product use.

* The discussion seems to revolve around landfills and landfilling,
  as if that is the best way to organize thoughts on the idea.
  To actually influence manufacturers, retailers, consumers, etc.,
  I believe a much broader view is required that will have landfill
  issues present, but off in a corner.

Bruce Nordman
B_Nordman@lbl.gov
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: tsu@cup.hp.com (Stanley Tsu)
Subject: Re: traffic school level 2 question
Summary: when did they put this law into effect?
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:36:10 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]
Keywords: traffic school level 2

> From: brians@hpcuhe.cup.hp.com (Brian Sullivan)
> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:42:01 GMT
> Subject: Re: traffic school level 2 question
> Newsgroups: ca.driving
>
>   The straight poop about traffic school level 2 is that it is
> no longer a useful alternative to pursue, unless you must protect your
> driving privledge.  The reason for this is that the DMV which
> maintians your driving record, will list your ticket in your driving
> record.   The DMV recently changed their policy (recently being 1 to 2
> years ago) regarding traffic school.

When did this occur precisely?  You mean to say they didn't
grandfather in this law???  I wasn't informed of this at the time
I went to traffic school.

--Stan
From: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Reply-To: gmcquary@Ingres.COM (George F. McQuary)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Distribution: ca
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:40:19 GMT

In article <21883@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> ez012303@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Mr. Imagination) writes:
>I also had to pay the registration fees, so my total bill was:
>- $300 Import Tax
>- $106 Registration
>- $40  Smog Check

Yes, the Import Tax, left over from three years ago when the California state
congress' main concern was overpopulation. Unfortunately the only result of
this and the many other penalties of California residency is that people with
jobs and money are moving out, depeleting state funds.

I registered my car about a month before the tax took effect in '90 and it cost
me $56. A friend registered her car Monday and it cost more than $450,
NOT including smog check. Apparently they now have some funky plan where the
car's value decides the amount of the tax. Her car is maybe worth 2k at best,
so expect it to go higher if you have something fancy.

Last time the state got this greedy didn't a lot of yuppies start buying
timeshares in Nevada? I guess I could stand skiing for six weeks a year to
save a couple grand in taxes and fees...

--
George F. McQuary 
"He is mad, bad and dangerous to know." -Lady Caroline Lamb
From: charlie@lindy.Stanford.EDU (Charlie Channel)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Venice, CA House For Sale
Date: 25 Jan 1993 14:24:00 -0800
Organization: Stanford U
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: lindy.stanford.edu
Keywords: Sale House

OK.  So, it don't have nothin' to do with driving.  Well, I couldn't
find a ca.market.housing newsgroup.  Also, it might help someone who
is on a commute.  Also, I'm "driving" to sell.  So here's the deal:

2 bedroom house in Venice, CA for sale.  It's about 20 minutes from
LAX.  15 minute walk to Venice Beach.  It's in average condition.  I'm
asking $164,590 or best offer.  It was apprised at $173,000 in
December, 1992.

If you're interested, or know someone who is interested, send e-mail
or call collect to 415/328-3794.  Ask for Charlie.

I'm motivated to sell quickly.  I inherited the house (I grew up in
it) and have no desire to keep the property or to return to the Los
Angeles area.  It's a great time to buy.  Just do it!

C
From: aclark@netcom.com (Al Clark)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Date: 25 Jan 93 16:59:57 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

In article <77462@apple.apple.COM> erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
>Excuse me if this is a FAQ (if it is, direct me to the FAQ), but how much
>would it cost me to bring a 1986 S10 Blazer (2WD) into CA?  Would it be
>better in the long run to sell it outside of CA and buy something in CA?
>
>Thanks in advance!
>-- 
>Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177

       Assuming it meets Federal emission standards, you can register
       it in CA, but you need to pay:
       1 - Use tax (in lieu of sales tax) for it's value, unless you
	   did not buy it for use in CA.  If you owned the car for 91
	   days before you brought it into CA, you are okay.
       2 - Smog penalty. One time fee of $300.  If the car meets
	   CA emission standards for the year of manufacture, this
	   is not applicable.  It says what emission standards it
	   was manufactured to under the hood.
       3 - Normal CA registration costs.  Part of this is based on
	   car's value.  This like a personal property tax, and
	   is a deduction on your Federal Income Tax.

       If you want more specific info, the Calif DMV is local phone
       call for me; email specific questions.
-- 
Al - aclark@netcom.com - My opinions are my own.
From: chucko@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Chuck Fry)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:35:26 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Recom Technologies, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

In article <bkNJl_~F@twinsun.com> coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman) writes:
>- In addition to the $300 smog penalty, you will have to get your car smogged
>every two years (starting on entry).  Assuming it's not a CA emissions car, it
>could very well be impossible to bring up to spec, which would mean that you
>would have to pay the maximum fix fee every two years.  

Speaking as someone who brought an '89 Mustang in from Massachusetts
several years ago, this is not a problem.  First, there isn't that
much difference between "49-state" emission standards and
California's.  Second, the smog checkers recognize that it's a
49-state car and test it to the appropriate standard.  Third, any
well-maintained car should have no problem passing even the stiffer
California standards.  A modern fuel-injected car should be putting
out air that's almost as clean as it's taking in.

 -- Chuck Fry  Chucko@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov
Xref: sparky ca.driving:2869 ca.environment:1216 rec.autos:32652 ba.transportation:3215
From: jciccare@adobe.com (John Ciccarelli)
Newsgroups: ca.driving,ca.environment,rec.autos,ba.transportation
Subject: Electric auto conversion seminar
Summary: January 30 in Sunnyvale
Keywords: electric auto conversion
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:11:36 GMT
Followup-To: none
Distribution: ba
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

Ad seen in the San Jose Mercury News:

           CONVERT IT YOURSELF
  ...your car from gasoline to electric

Mike Brown & Shari Prange of Electro/Automotive will present an
all-day how-to seminar based on their acclaimed manual, Convert It.

Join us Saturday, January 30th, 10-5:30 pm at First United Methodist
Church in Sunnyvale.  $65/person, max class size 40.  Sponsored by
Electric Auto Association (EAA), Silicon Valley Chapter.

To register, call (408) 371-5969.

###

-- 
John Ciccarelli           Adobe Systems,  1585 Charleston |    _~C      __C
jciccare@mv.us.adobe.com  Mountain View CA USA 94039-7900 |  ='\<,    ='\<,
uunet!adobe!jciccare      415/962-6677,  fax:415/903-0584 | (&)/(\)  (&)/(\)
=== "If you live within 7 miles of your job, why drive?" === BIKE TO WORK ==
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: dhepner@cup.hp.com (Dan Hepner)
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:44:04 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8.2]


From: ez012303@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Mr. Imagination)

>It did meet smog standards for 1985, but it was not originally equipped
>with CA emissions, and it did pass CA requirements when I registered it here.  
>I had to pay the $300 import tax, my understanding is that any car not 
>originally sold in CA, but later brought into CA, is charged the import tax.

Many cars are "50 state cars", and have an emissions sticker which
claims that they meet the Ca emissions standards, even if bought
in Maine.  These cars are not subject to the $300 fee.

Dan Hepner
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Date: 25 Jan 93 03:21:16 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

Excuse me if this is a FAQ (if it is, direct me to the FAQ), but how much
would it cost me to bring a 1986 S10 Blazer (2WD) into CA?  Would it be
better in the long run to sell it outside of CA and buy something in CA?

Thanks in advance!
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177
"This is the final task I will ever give you, and it  goes  on  forever.   Act
happy, feel happy, be happy, without a reason in the world. Then you can love,
and do what you will."           -- Dan Millman, "Way Of The Peaceful Warrior"
From: bungee@Apple.COM (Chris Petersen)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Road conditions
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:36:10 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <77434@apple.apple.COM> erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
>In Utah (winter quarters for Ed 'n the Gang of Four) they really stick it to
>idiots who have run off the road - tow truck drivers usually charge 'em
>$75+ for a pull out of the snow.  Serves 'em right.
 ^^^^

Ahhhh, that's nuthin'.  In Yosemite, a couple o' weekends ago, this guy was in
a chain control area, was NOT carrying chains (nevermind using them), and ran
off the road.  He was ticketed $60 for not carrying chains (which is the law
in a control area); and it took TWO tow trucks to get him out...totalling $310+
just for the tow.  Joy.  Nice $400 weekend.

-chris
 bungee@apple.com

p.s. And what is it with these people who buy Blazers, Troopers, PathFinders,
     4Runners, etc. and DON'T get 4WD?!?  What's the point?
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: devesh@bombay.oracle.com (Speed Queen)
Subject: Traffic school questions (was Re: weaving ticket)
Reply-To: devesh@bombay.oracle.com
Organization: Oracle Corp., Redwood Shores CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:38:52 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <ostubble.727988830@uclagsm> ostubble@agsm.ucla.edu (Otha  
Stubblefield III) writes:
> 
> This is probably in the FAQL, at the Traffic School I went to (in 
> Westwood Village), we had in attendance a young man that had been
> to Traffic Schools all over the state.  Based on our combined 
> experiences, it was determined that the intervals between traffic
> school visits is determined by the city and or county that has 
> jurisdiction over the location where you were cited.  The intervals
> discussed ranged from never (you can't go at all!) to 12 months.
> 
> Of course, your experiences may vary.
> 
>

Ah.. so how about compiling a list of cities/counties and the minimum
duration between traffic school visits? I will be interested in those
around bay area locations specifically..

Another question I had was whether in CA you could take 'advanced' traffic 
school (12 hours as opposed to 8) within the minimum duration period. For
example you could do this in TX. Or does this also depend on cities/counties?

Thanks,
Devesh

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Devesh S. Khatu                        	Oracle Corporation
  Office: 3OP3 #307 				E-mail: devesh@oracle.com
  Phone : (415) 506-4488	 		Fax   : (415) 506-7293	
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman)
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.4.19
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:54:22 GMT

I partially researched this but ended up not doing it for logistical reasons.
Basically, it's what the previous poster said.  Two additional considerations:

- Is the CA use tax in addition to the other state's sales tax?  States do not
always fail to do stupid things like this.  Could be expensive.

- In addition to the $300 smog penalty, you will have to get your car smogged
every two years (starting on entry).  Assuming it's not a CA emissions car, it
could very well be impossible to bring up to spec, which would mean that you
would have to pay the maximum fix fee every two years.  The actual limit
depends on the vehicle year (new car == higher limit).  I don't have the
actual numbers, but I seem to remember that they ran in the $90-300 range.
Ouch.

Mike

-- 
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Paperwork on car purchase
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:46:31 PST

In <lm8h43INNjlh@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>:

>I'm about to buy a car from a private individual who still has a
>loan on it.   This is the first time I'll have done this in California.
>I'll be getting a loan too.

>What is the recommended protocol to ensure that everyone gets the
>right money and paperwork, and that when I take the car over, the only
>lien on it is the one for my loan, and the DMV believe I am the new owner?

Well, here's what has to happen, in order:

1)  The existing car loan must be paid off, and the current lienholder needs
to sign the pink slip over to the current owner.

2)  The current owner then signs the pink slip over to you, once you have
paid for the car.  Or, since you'll be getting a loan also, it would be to
your lender.

One question, though:  Does the current owner need your money to pay off the
existing loan?  You said that you'll be getting a loan, so you need to check
with the lender you plan to use.

In any case, I'd suggest (and I suspect that your lender would require) some
type of written contract in advance which guarantees that when all is said
and done, you will have the car (which is needed to secure the loan).  Your
lender would have to pay the current lienholder directly, most likely.  This
is probably something to be handled directly by the two lenders.  They'll
almost certainly know how to handle this to ensure that none of the four
parties involved gets burned.


Tim Irvin
******************************************************************************
This .sig meets Greenpeace standards by using over 25% recycled pixels.
From: ez012303@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Mr. Imagination)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: How much to bring out-of-state vehicle into CA?
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:19:17 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

I brought an '85 Supra into CA in Sept. 1992 and it was registered to me in TN.
I had already paid the sales tax on it in TN, so I didn't have to pay the tax
here.  It did meet smog standards for 1985, but it was not originally equipped
with CA emissions, and it did pass CA requirements when I registered it here.  
I had to pay the $300 import tax, my understanding is that any car not 
originally sold in CA, but later brought into CA, is charged the import tax.
I also had to pay the registration fees, so my total bill was:
- $300 Import Tax
- $106 Registration
- $40  Smog Check

-Grant

J. Grant Montgomery | 1985 Celica Supra 5-speed | IMGNSHN
		    |      Mr. Imagination      |
From: jefftb@sr.hp.com (Jeff Brown)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: CHP Restriction Levels in snow?
Date: 28 Jan 93 00:13:23 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: HP Sonoma County (SRSD/MWTD/MID)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.9 PL6]



  As far as the "M&S" mark on your sidewalls making them snow tires is bunk
  in my opinion. I have some Michelen MXL's (Ithink) on my wifes mazda 626.
  They had to be ordered to get the M&S on the sidewall but look idnetical
  to non M&S'd mxl's. There is very little void area in the tread pattern.
  They get me through R1 (?) conditions w/o chains but they slide all over
  the place. These tires only had about 1000 mi on them. 
  The M&S designation is BS. If you are going to drive in the snow get real
  snow tires w/ lots of void area in the tread.    
  btw I'm not slamming these tires they work fine in rain and dry. I just 
  feel I was sold a tire that should perform Ok in the snow and didn't. 

  Jeff ( slip n sliden') Brown
Xref: sparky ca.driving:2893 misc.consumers:22625 misc.legal:23408 alt.privacy:3094