California To Drop State Rock Over Asbestos Concerns 256
Diamonddavej writes "The LA Times reports that Californian legislators are close to dropping the translucent green rock Serpentine as the state rock of California because of its tenuous association with chrysotile asbestos. Sen. Gloria Romero declares in her bill (SB 624) that Serpentine should be dropped as California's state rock because it 'contains the deadly mineral chrysotile asbestos, a known carcinogen, exposure to which increases the risk of the cancer mesothelioma.' The bill has backing from mesothelioma support groups. Critics point out that Serpentine is a group of 20 different minerals, and Californian Serpentine rarely contains much chrysotile, never mind its dangerous fibrous asbestos form. Its is suspected that lawyers involved in asbestos compensation claims and cleanup companies will profit from the bill. Vast tracts of California where bedrock is made of Serpentine could be declared hazardous to health... even if it contains no crysotile at all! It looks like SB 624 will be passed; it won unanimous bi-partisan support from an Assembly committee last week."
Well then... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Zarf?
You're not related to Pinky are you?
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't appear to be a state rock band, at least not according to wikipedia.
Lots of other state stuff though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_United_States_state_insignia [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
All the nuts head west.......when they reach the Pacific they can't go any further.
They can always go over into the water and drown, like the lemmings in those 'nature' films so carefully staged by Disney where film crew were off-camera pushing the lemmings toward the edge...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The new state rock - crack. (Score:5, Funny)
In other news... (Score:3, Funny)
California has a State rock.
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:In other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is precisely the sort of thing that politicians do when the economic and financial situation pretty much destroys any capacity at meaningful change. It's a classic stunt, where they ban things or make pointless proclamations, because these sort of actions are cheap, allow them to look populist and all governmental, even as, as you point out, Rome burns around them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Also coming up: White Star Line [wikipedia.org] deckchair arrangements may have been less than optimal, claims report.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In other news, goofy Californians fiddle with state rocks while their budget burns, note water still wet film at 11.
Of course, you cannot use that water to put out the fire because it might threaten another species of smelt or a snail somewhere...
That's California for you. (Score:2, Funny)
Even their state rock is known by the state of California to cause cancer.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Fits right in with the air, at least.
Funny thing is this is the non-cancerious asbestos (Score:5, Informative)
If California ever decided to do some research like the New England Journal of Medicine they would find articles all the back to the late 1980's showing that this type of asbestos is not cancerious. The other funny thing is the "doctor" in the 1960's who said that cancer was bad wasn't even a doctor but researching someone's background is a lot harder than just gining into some idiot. If they are banning this rock maybe we should ban dihydrogen monoxide I hear that kills thousnads of people every year.
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever you do, don't let them know that Cyanide is made of carbon and nitrogen. It could spell the end of California!
Actually, on second thought...what the hell, let's tell 'em and see what happens!
Re: (Score:2)
Don't believe him. He obviously works for them. [steampowered.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So do real doctors say that cancer isn't bad?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Pet rock (Score:5, Funny)
I had a pet rock. It wasn't as maintenance-free as you'd expect.
Also, is this part of the Daily Mail's efforts to categorise all known substances/things/ideas into those that cause and those that cure cancer?
Re:Pet rock (Score:4, Funny)
How would they categorize radiation! The opposite of a shovel... is a shovel!
All joking aside the California state rock should be foam spray painted to look like rock until it bounces off of Captain Kirk's head. MOVIE MAGIC!
Either that or whatever rock is most commonly found in Bronson Canyon.
Re:Pet rock (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed! The parking structure where I work has Prop 65 signs everywhere. This made no sense to me at first - it's just a giant pile of concrete, rebar, fluorescent lights and asphalt, surely none of that causes cancer right? Then I realized what's likely to be the case: people put cars in parking structures, and car exhaust is known by the state of California to cause cancer. And there's no way around that unless you're willing to not park cars in a parking structure.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
I find it amusing that a state rock even exists, let alone the fact that it's causing such a ruckus! You Americans!
*ruffles hair*
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia has a nice list of state things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_United_States_state_insignia [wikipedia.org]
Unanimous bi-partisan support... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is it that every time I read the words "Unanimous bi-partisan support", the result is always and without exception... Trouble?
Re:Unanimous bi-partisan support... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Unanimous bi-partisan support... (Score:5, Informative)
This is akin to the "all puppies are lovely act" - anyone who doesn't vote yes on it is a communist.
Seriously - doesn't California have bigger problems to tackle? It really is a testament to how broken government is when the only thing they can pass is a change to the state rock.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously - doesn't California have bigger problems to tackle?
Of course they do. Cow tails.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Unanimous bi-partisan support... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is akin to the "all puppies are lovely act" - anyone who doesn't vote yes on it is a communist.
Seriously - doesn't California have bigger problems to tackle? It really is a testament to how broken government is when the only thing they can pass is a change to the state rock.
More than a testament to broken government, it's a reflection of the state and its people too. This is yet another sign of how California, once the greatest most glamorous state in the union, has become the nation's laughingstock. California looks more and more like Rome at the end of its life. Unfortunately, what happens to California is often a precursor of where the rest of the country is going.
Re: (Score:2)
> This is yet another sign of how California, once the greatest most glamorous > state in the union, has become the nation's laughingstock.
Midwesterners have been laughing at California since before WWII.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Isn't ALL rock hazardous to your health if you breathe it?
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't ALL rock hazardous to your health if you breathe it?
Remember the safety drill: Stop, drop and roll :)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:5, Informative)
It's been modded funny, but it's correct. The most common mineral on the land surface is quartz -- the crystalline form of SiO2. Powder it, breath it in, and eventually you get silicosis [wikipedia.org]. So, obviously we must ban rocks.
In reality, rock *dust* is harmful, but that should be fricking obvious. Take the risk seriously and wear breathing protection, and avoid powdering rocks and breathing it in if you can.
The only rock dust that might not be particularly harmful if inhaled in small quantities could be from minerals that are reactive enough to be completely dissolved in the body. Silica and asbestos are such a problem precisely because they are silicate minerals that *aren't* easily broken down chemically, so the microscopic but sharp grains mechanically damage cells over and over again -- it's like the microscopic equivalent of crushed glass shards. Among the common rocks, limestone (CaCO3) and gypsum (CaSO4) are the only ones I can think of that are easily metabolized. We often eat these ones as food additives. Calcium supplements are often limestone. But too much of that is probably also harmful if breathed in (the lungs have a limited capacity to remove particles), and most natural limestones are not pure CaCO3 (there would be an insoluble residue left over, and that could build up).
I can't believe they're wasting time on this. As the article mentions, much serpentine doesn't even have asbestos.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me add salt (NaCL) to your list.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Halite dust actually has some theurapeutic effects: http://www.salt-therapypipe.com/background-of-treatment.asp [salt-therapypipe.com]
And it's not like you can easily breathe a lethal concentration of salt.
Re: (Score:2)
If rock is in the kind of state where you can breathe it, you'd better run fast, preferably away from the mountain.
Known to the state of California... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe they should just put warning labels on all the rocks. "Serpentine, the state rock of California, contains substances known to the state of California to cause cancer".
"Serpentine, the state rock of California, may contain substances known to the state of California to cause cancer".
It's strange (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought California was bankrupt or something. But I guess this is the biggest problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's not going to help tourism if we don't know what rocks we can and cannot breathe via "State rock" designation!
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Well it's not going to help tourism if we don't know what rocks we can and cannot breathe via "State rock" designation!
I've visited California twice.
It's hot and dry. The northern part wasn't bad though. Maybe if the state was split in half, North and South California, I'd even be willing to move to the northern part..... kinda similar to how I liked living in North Carolina but thought the southern half sucked.
signed,
tourist
Re: (Score:2)
Here's hoping for no replacement (Score:2)
Seriously, what the hell is the point of having a state anything? They got birds, fish, various rodents or whatever the fuck.
Can them all and save us the time of ever having to debate this shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone know why? Are the different names for the states not a sufficient differentiator that other items are required? Do US Sat Navs perhaps use them to help find their position? - Was that an Albatross? OK, left at the lights?
State rock assignments are dangerous! (Score:3, Interesting)
lots of fraud around asbestos (Score:5, Interesting)
Lawyers are one of the biggest areas of fraud and corruption the US right now. In a lot of states, the attorney general sets up a pay-to-play system where they get kickbacks to let certain law firms handle certain legal issues (or even pursue cases that normally would be ignored). In other cases, lawyer lobby organizations try to get laws written in vague ways that will require extra legal work, or as in this case, create potential lawsuits where there doesn't seem to even be danger.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah but as costly as lawyers are, they are still only 1/100th as costly as the US Congress or State Legislators that are writing the laws. It's the reason why Thomas Jefferson quit his law career and moved into politics - he realized real change can only come from the top, by writing the laws himself, and ignoring those who would try to corrupt the system
Distraction (Score:3, Insightful)
Referendums (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems like a large part of the problem has been the prevalence of referendums, rather than laws passed by the legislature. No one votes to raise taxes and everyone votes to create a new program to save the rattlesnakes or whatever. There is a reason we have a representative democracy, we can't all be expected to be informed on every issue or bill. We aren't even supposed to worry so much about whether we agree with the positions a politician takes, but rather whether we think they are keeping themselves
Wait... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope.
Here's the problem: There are two groups of people interested in what legislators do. Taxpayers, and Union bosses.
Union bosses pay the legislators (through a campaign slush fund system that basically amounts to the legislators being on Union payrolls--the funds pay for vacations, and trips to the tune of millions).
Taxpayers elect them.
There are two ways to fix a deficit: raise taxes (they already tried that once with the largest state level tax hike in US history in 2009, didn't work), or cut spendin
In most other states... (Score:2)
...Paper still covers Rock.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess ... (Score:2)
How about Pyrite... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fools Gold seems appropriate for California these days.
I lived in California for 25 years (Score:2, Insightful)
To anyone wondering why the state is in so much financial trouble perhaps this story will explain why. Most state legislatures have their heads up their own asses. In California they can see daylight and teeth.
Because (Score:2)
This last session here in Washington State
In case there was any doubt (Score:2)
California is crazy. People are fond of making fun of places like Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi, but at least they don't spend their time passing stupid crap like this into law.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh yeah? [dumblaws.com]
Highlights:
Bear wrestling matches are prohibited.
Incestuous marriages are legal.
Boogers may not be flicked into the wind.
Well, OK, I sort of agree with that last one.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me guess, you are one of those people who also thinks that dogfighting should be legal.
Re: (Score:2)
You think those don't have a ton of state stuff they spent time passing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arkansas_state_symbols [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alabama_state_symbols [wikipedia.org]
Amusingly, both have a version of the bible as their state book.
Which leaves one question: (Score:4, Interesting)
Who exactly was drunk enough to come up with the idea of a state rock in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
No, we can't really explain it any better.
I assume it's just some official marketing trick and/or environmental plea (won't someone PLEASE think of the state mammal?!).
I don't understand having a motto either. I don't even know what my state's motto is.
Ok, I looked up a few state mottos.
Utah: Industry
Maryland: Manly deeds womanly words (Fatti maschil, Parole femine)
Colorado: Nothing without the Deity (Nil sine Numine)
New Jersey: Liberty and Prosperity
Montana: Gold and Silver (Oro y Plata)
Here's the complet
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wikipedia forgot 'question.'
Yes, New Mexico has a State question.
Re: (Score:2)
Tartan I can sort of get. There's quite a number of Americans with Irish and Scottish ancestry.
Californian legislators lead by example... (Score:2)
In the mean time (Score:2)
The same legislature can't even pass a budget. Some how they can find time to debate the various pros and cons of the state rock, but they can't pass a budget. I swear that politicians are a layer of middle management that need to be downsized out of the system. We can call it an efficiency improvement.
Now wait a minute (Score:2, Funny)
Worse than that... (Score:2)
Actually, chrysotile is not a proven carcinogen. It is a suspected carcinogen, and its toxicity is at worst rather low. There are many forms of asbestos, only a handful have been linked to mesothelioma by solid evidence, but the plaintiff's attorneys try to exaggerate it to "a single fiber of any asbestos could theoretically cause cancer." I'm not kidding; I've heard that from an attorney.
What a disingenuous claim (Score:2)
The Environmental Working Group [ewg.org] cites 2,509 deaths from mesothelioma per year. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [dot.gov] cites, in 2008 alone, 34,107 fatal crashes, which sent 26,689 people to their own funeral.
According to the California Office of Traffic Safety [ca.gov] there were 3,995 fatalities from car crashes in 2008 alone. More people die in car accidents in one year in California than nationally from mesothelioma.
Do these pesky politicians actually think they're doing good with laws like these? How
Now they'll have to ban the state animal (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Grizzly bears don't kill people, people kill people, with grizzly bears!
Suggestion for an Alternative (Score:3, Funny)
I have a suggestion for an alternative all natural, eco-friendly solution: Coprolite [wikipedia.org]
It even fits well given the politics of California.
Black and White Thinking (Score:2)
If ever there was an example of shallow, inane, uncritical and utterly monochrome thinking, this is it. The thinking of this elected representative has gone somthing like this:
Asbestos is bad. Rock is associated in some way with Asbestos. Therefore rock is bad. Ban rock.
Students of basic logic/philosophy may weep, but this is not only the thinking of the representative, but also of a substantial portion of the California electorate and indeed the electorate throughout the western world. This pantomime logic
Cancer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Beaten by my iPhone 3G. Can you feel the burn? Oh yes.
And I even snuck in a PUN! FP with humor!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Goddam bigot!
Re: (Score:2)
The problem seems to be that you (as the taxpayer) get to support these folks one way or another.
Fine with plural marriage... not so fine with the seemingly usual result (broken homes, screwed up abused children). So the taxpayers get to support the excess wives and children.
If we could all just agree to have everyone supported by the government it would be much simpler. Then nobody would be complaining about having to support these people because we would all be supported by the government. No job, no p
Re: (Score:2)
>>>The problem seems to be that you (as the taxpayer) get to support these folks one way or another.
Two married women (or 1 man and 2 wives) can't support themselves? I'm fairly certain they can and your argument is specious. These people are no more likely to end-up on welfare then a divorced man and wife
.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, especially now that state workers are now having all of their pay above the minimum wage deferred indefinitely [yahoo.com]. How's it feel to be a minimum wage worker in a state with one of the highest costs of living? This is after they've been put on mandatory furlough for a few days each month, giving them a ~10% cut in pay.
Seriously, California is fucked unless they make the budget take priority over shit like this.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What you forget to point out is that all those pay cuts are because the state can't actually lay off any of the workers due to union protections.
Meanwhile, in the private sector, companies like mine are laying off 30% of their staff and cutting the pay of everyone else by 10% in order to keep fiscally solvent. Of course this means dramatic cuts to the state because of reduced income and sales taxes. But let's make sure that people in state government keep their jobs and mandatory pay raises. Let's not cut s
Re: (Score:2)
...the state can't actually lay off any of the workers due to union protections.
Don't know where you got that idea. Several state agencies have been laying off workers for the past couple of years. The problem the unions pose is that layoff notices are handed to the most recently hired workers, not the least competent workers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"The people who run California are doing a terrible job."
The public of California are doing a terrible job. The price of freedom is vigilance.
Inaction is consent to incompetence, tyranny, and incompetent tyranny.
Re: (Score:2)
... Dihydrogen Monoxide.
Is a very dangerous substance, usually in short supply in Kalifornia. Too much of it might be a good thing for Kalifornia as it might reduce the idiot percentages a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually CA like most coastal states brings more money to the Fed than it gets back. Without this it might be able to balance its books. Perhaps we should stop feeding the welfare queen that is middle America. I do not live in CA nor much like it when I visited it, I like winter. I live in an east coast state that also gives up money we could use to fund hicks in fly-over country.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually CA like most coastal states brings more money to the Fed than it gets back. Without this it might be able to balance its books. Perhaps we should stop feeding the welfare queen that is middle America.
California controls 53 of the 435 voting seats in the House of Representatives, which is the sole federal body that can appropriate money. If Californians have a problem with how much money the federal government takes, they control a good 1/8th of the House by themselves. That's a pretty good start on a push to reduce federal spending and regulations and they'd get a bipartisan following if they made a concerted effort.
HOWEVER, Californians love to push for federal spending and new federal programs, plu
Re: (Score:2)
You make good points but do nothing to address the issue I presented. Middle America is sucking the productive states dry, via farm subsidies and similar.
BTW I live in western NY and am very familiar with the issues you brought up.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Actually CA like most coastal states brings more money to the Fed than it gets back.
Isn't that how the progressive tax is supposed to work? Richer people pay more money into the central US treasury? Maybe you'd prefer to go to a flat tax.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I ask you all why you're so quick to rag on California when all of your dumb-asses are trying to move here
No we're not. Therefore the rest of your argument is negated.
>>>nazi conservatism
Nazis are anti-freedom (like communism). Conservatives are pro-freedom (except for a religious nutjobs). They are NOT the same thing - they are polar opposites and you make yourself look like a fool when you try to equate them.
Liberals on the other hand are the ones that passed a law which says I wil
Re: (Score:2)
Come on Keith, just sign for a damn nick name and be done with it. Then you can post about it on twitter.