this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
32 points (100.0% liked)

California

1925 readers
48 users here now

Welcome to /c/California, an online haven that brings to life the unrivaled diversity and vibrancy of California! This engaging community offers a virtual exploration of the Golden State, taking you from the stunning Pacific coastline to the rugged Sierra Nevada, and every town, city, and landmark in between. Discover California's world-class wineries, stunning national parks, innovative tech scene, robust agricultural heartland, and culturally diverse metropolises.

Discussions span a wide range of topics—from travel tips and restaurant recommendations to local politics and environmental issues. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or planning your dream visit, /c/California is your one-stop place to share experiences, ask questions, and celebrate all the things that make California truly unique.

Related Communities:

Nearby Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fletcher_bosom@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Okay but there's no federal DMV or highway patrol. If the DOJ can decide not to pursue corruption charges against the executive branch and the Republican congress, why should the CA DMV work against the states own environmental interests? Keep issuing the stickers.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately that's not how it works.

Interstate highways, i.e. the ones with the blue, red, white shield-shaped markers, are federally funded, and what they can be used for is defined at the federal legislation level.

Violate those rules, funding gets withdrawn for noncompliance, etc.

[–] fletcher_bosom@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Where does most of that that finding come from?

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] fletcher_bosom@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Excuse my typo -- I meant to write "funding." My point is that Democrats and neolibs always bring a toy knife to the Republican's gunfight. Progressives need to own their power and stop funding a federal government (and welfare red states) that is sacrificing everything we value to make billionaires richer.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 3 points 1 month ago

Extending this required action by US Congress, and with Republican control of both houses and the orange dictator...

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] zabadoh@ani.social 3 points 1 month ago

Thanks for letting me know: Here's an archived version

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ev should not be in carpool lanes unless they are a carhool. The whole point is roads are expensive and carpools use half as much space so we should encourage them.

[–] pishadoot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

The government, both state and federal, use incentives to encourage certain behaviors. Tax breaks for retirement spending, education, child bearing, solar installations, EV purchases etc are all examples of this.

During the EV adoption phase the govt will incentivize use of EVs through various means such as tax breaks, preferred parking, preferred lanes (carpool lanes).

Once adoption rates are high enough, the incentives slow down. It's a good thing to initially give reasons to adopt tech or behaviors that benefit the common good.

It can be argued that it might be time to remove carpool access for EVs for several reasons, and it can be argued that we should keep them for now. I don't have a specific opinion on the matter of fact, I think both perspectives are reasonable (as you stated carpool lanes are meant to encourage car pooling, which has environmental and traffic benefits).

EVs only have an environmental benefit in this case so once we reach a tipping point where the environmental benefit is outweighed by the detriment to traffic flow, it's time to revert the incentive. I don't know if it's time yet, I'm not a traffic/environmental analyst.

But I think this change has more to do with the administration's battle against EVs and green tech in general than a calculated cost benefit analysis.