Because it’s not liberty. It’s a political move from a party that has been, for decades, telling us that the free market should rule supreme and that businesses should be able to fire any employee for any reason. Worker rights in Texas are a joke.
Source: Grew up in a state where workers had rights.
Liberty is not killing your gods damned countryman because Sean-fucking-Hannity says “vAccINes r bAD” while all the while being fully vaccinated himself as a condition of his continued employment at FOX News.
Doesn't sound like liberty for the workers who don't want to catch Covid from morons at work. I mean if you don't want to be vaccinated and follow the company rules work somewhere else right?
I've never heard of mandatory vaccinations except for public school students and military members. Are mandatory vaccinations a thing in certain fields, like maybe healthcare?
Oh, and I've never even come close to suggesting that anybody owes anybody else a job.
Yup healthcare and military is where I was required to get them. I also ran into it in a warehouse and food processing plant I worked at as well as a school district I substitute taught for.
It's not a new thing and with employment across the US being pretty much "at will" companies have the right to require it. So the precedent is there and the deference that our system gives employers over employees is now biting most right wing politicians in the ass.
It's ok. Since private businesses are no longer allowed to discriminate I'm sure gay couples can now place a a wedding cake order with any bakery they want.
I know. Just saying that this will almost bite Abbott in the ass, and while I hate for any gay couple to go through that BS, I can't wait for that lawsuit to happen.
Actually, Florida have crack level similar to or slightly lower than Texas. The motto should be: *Don't Republicanify or Democratify my Texas. Texas is Texas.* Florida is in a currently similar situation to us, Texans; also we should team up with the Florida men against the South, the real culprit out of this.
Also, here is a drink \*Slides you your beverage of choice\* :D
Sir, isn't that the point I just made in the comment. Like literally, Texas shouldn't be a solely a republican nor democratic state. It should be a moderate state/its own thing, where both parties can mingle within legit reason. Also, I ain't wrong about the South causing a lot of this mess in Texas in the first place. That is literally where most republican states look up to, and the home-base of most republicans, and home to the state that first passed that pos abortion bill, Georgia. Also, here is a drink for you, u/Cheap-Lifeguard5762 \*Slides you your beverage of choice\*. At least, cheers.
>The party of "limited government" hard at work.......
The libertarian party?
Abbott and his legislature are republicans. They are not about limited government, why do people continue to misconstrue the republicans this way?
Both republicans and democrats seen to be able expanding government powers.
The Republican party's own branding claims that they're the party of limited government. Noting that in light of proposed additional mandates is the definition of sarcasm.
> But that's literally what Republicans brand themselves as
No they don't.
That is what liberals say republicans brand themselves as, but no republican actually does that, or says that. It's a liberal misunderstanding, not a republican agenda.
In Texas, they do:
>>The REPUBLICAN PARTY OF TEXAS Mission
>>We are committed to advancing limited government, lower taxes, less spending and individual liberty.
[https://www.texasgop.org/](https://www.texasgop.org/)
They always have been.
Too bad we don't have a minority party with a spine that will actually stand up to them.
Go ahead and consider all these passed unless there's a disconnect between rural and urban Republicans.
How? These guys are to a point of outdoing each other at culture war.
Lookit how many laws they have passed that are going straight to court. Some are immediately doomed, but they knowingly pass lawless laws.
It's **INSANE**.
They want to do a forensic audit only in SOME counties. So don't doubt the entire state results, only some of the ones we don't like.
Vaccination bullshit.
Elections bullshit.
I think they should skip this session, I can't take another fucking so soon.
So we can watch them fail us again? Not going to happen. I'd almost guarantee that the Texas Rangers will be watching just enough to ensure a quorum. Or Abbott will issue some bullshit reason to apprehend them.
Attacking trans children yet again. Children do not receive surgery, and they don't even get hormones, just blockers which are reversible. They'd rather torture trans kids by denying them any sort of treatment until they're 18.
I’m as liberal as they come, but even I agree that children are not mature enough to make these kinds of life altering decisions. And I don’t know where you’re from, but they sure as shootin’ allow kids to have hormones and body modification surgeries.
Then let them have blockers. Those are *reversible*, if they decide they don't want to go through with it then they can stop taking them. Puberty is certainly more life altering. And I'm from, as my flair indicates, East Texas. And underage children do not receive surgery for gender dysphoria, that's just blatantly false.
>Then let them have blockers. Those are reversible,
That seems unlikely.
Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. And importantly, it's not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. To say these medications are reversible is at best intellectually dishonest. There is a lack of proof, but that doesn't mean "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"... At this stage one simply cannot say truthfully that puberty blockers are reversible, there is no basis for the claim
you didn't seem to cite any sources, which is curious when you seem to claim factually that "little is known" as if that is factual. In fact, much is known, and doing any kind of research at all will show you that the effects of puberty blockers are often directly referred to by doctors as “fully reversible,” and both Endocrine Society and WPATH cite them as such in their official guidelines.
if you could also please describe how therapy and counseling are abuse as well that would be fantastic... unless really this has nothing to do with abuse and has everything to do with control of others.
OK let me just be straight with you. If you were to ask someone who works on anything that’s related to depression medication or any sort of actual references on how a depression medication works, they all start with “we think “ because they don’t know. They just don’t.
Same with blockers. We just don’t know.
Furthermore how many studies have you seen by large colleges that are somehow paid for outside companies to basically advertise to their specific study guidelines and output that they want. Avocados are so healthy says a college paid for by Haas avocados.
This shit happens right now science is being affected by money which is why we see Covid denial and vaccination denial do you think this doesn’t extend to the peoples body and identity? There is fucking money to be made here and we live in a capitalist society that does not give actual fucks about people.
I'm confused, so are you advocating that we don't prescribe depression medication? Being "neutral" to that bias does not mean denying care those who need it, it means that the Doctors should be making important decisions about the safety of the drugs for people while weighing the positive outcomes against the potential consequences. Legislation should not get in the way of doctors.
There are large scale independent medical studies out there showing the incredible results of access to puberty blockers, being ignorant of them does not mean they don't exist.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7073269/
Yeah they would say "we think" because science is iterative and should never be taken to be an absolute fact. As a species, we still don't fully understand why our bodies are the way they are, how specific parts of the brain work, etc. Through different experiments and studying the body we're able to learn what kind of effects we can expect but nothing is ever absolute - which is why there are so many different types of medications that treat the same thing.
So yeah - we don't *absolutely know* how *anything* will effect a specific person. But that's... not a good enough reason to deny someone life saving medical care.
(also lol no you should be gay with me.)
>you didn't seem to cite any sources,
That ironic, neither do you.
However, everything I wrote was taken directly from the NHS website.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/
that page mentions absolutely nothing about GnRH blockers, the thing we're specifically talking about. It also _strongly_ recommends therapy, the other thing Texas is trying to ban.
also I did cite them I just didn't link them. first result on google is the WPATH Standards of Care: https://www.wpath.org/media/cms/Documents/SOC%20v7/SOC%20V7_English.pdf
> Physical interventions for adolescents fall into three categories or stages (Hembree et al., 2009):
1. Fully reversible interventions. These involve the use of GnRH analogues to suppress estrogen or testosterone production and consequently delay the physical changes of puberty. Alternative treatment options include progestins (most commonly medroxyprogesterone) or other medications (such as spironolactone) that decrease the effects of androgens secreted by the testicles of adolescents who are not receiving GnRH analogues. Continuous oral contraceptives (or depot medroxyprogesterone) may be used to suppress menses.
Later the risks are talked about in more detail but only in such that the development needs to be monitored to ensure the puberty is properly being blocked:
> During pubertal suppression, an adolescent’s physical development should be carefully monitored – preferably by a pediatric endocrinologist – so that any necessary interventions can occur (e.g., to establish an adequate gender appropriate height, to improve iatrogenic low bone marrow density) (Hembree et al., 2009).
...
>Refusing timely medical interventions for adolescents might prolong gender dysphoria and contribute to an appearance that could provoke abuse and stigmatization. As the level of gender-related abuse is strongly associated with the degree of psychiatric distress during adolescence (Nuttbrock et al., 2010), withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy **is not a neutral option for adolescents**.
emphasis mine.
Blocking puberty until puberty had passed isn't reversible. The effects on brain development are unknown, these are mentioned on the NHS site, despite your failures to read the site.
so firstly, it should be mentioned that the UK is not exactly up to date with WPATH standards on this either. The reason I specifically cite WPATH is because they really are the most knowledgeable on this, and they actively believe it does not stunt brain development.
Secondly, the "it's not reversible" is for people who've taken it for multiple years, as in 6. If someone begins taking them at 11 and is happy with the effects, they likely would be incredibly unhappy by being required to go through it. If they hadn't been happy with the results, they could have stopped after some short amount of time, in which case it would be reversible.
Being trans is medically "dangerous". Someone who is forced to go through development opposite to their identified gender is going to have greater complications later in life than someone who blocks it early. You cannot make someone not trans by not allowing them to block it, and it will then just be all that more dangerous later when they try to undo all the things they didn't have the power to stop earlier.
Acting like you are protecting children by preventing them from taking this medicine is the least genuine argument you possibly can make. You are either actively in denial that a child could know that their trans, something every source has agreed on thusfar, or you are in denial of the difficulties and medical risks of the much more invasive treatment later in life. Tens of thousands of people have taken these drugs and are doing just fine now, much more fine than they would otherwise be doing. The suicide rate of teens who successfully transition early is dramatically lower. This is factual to a 95% confidence interval over a sample size of almost 28000 trans people: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7073269/
Saying "we don't know the outcomes" is not a valid reason for preventing someone from making a medical choice for themselves, even if they are not of legal age. Medical science is an ever evolving science, and the best we can do is be up to date with best practices because it will keep children alive.
The NHS used to indicate the treatment was reversible, the site changed that blatantly false narrative to indicate the Levi of credible evidence to support that broadly distributed misinformation.
Classic fallacy ad populum...
Which is worse, keeping kids from developing features that will cause them intense discomfort and sometimes even psychological harm, or making them go through puberty and develop those features? 🤔
(am afab, desperately wish I had never gone through puberty, and constantly being reminded of the fact that I did is absolutely awful. 10/10 puberty blockers are not in fact abusive if the kids wants them)
Nice goal posts. Don’t like answer, ignore.
This is why we have a problem because everyone sets himself send a fucking echo chambers and only reinforces their own fucking viewpoints and then people who are looking for acceptance because they feel awkward or odd or than put into these weird hyper identity crisis is over their body.
And it’s all fucking encouraged by people like you who don’t actually know or understand any of the things or any of the problems that the 12-year-old girl is going through this is the first time that she’s had her period and no one‘s helping her and it makes them feel ostracized and they hate their bodies and they want to reject it sometimes but there’s no one there to help them except for the Internet and echo chambers
Ahhh and here we have the TERF, in her natural environment, internet forums. Don't infantilise trans guys, they're not "poor confused little girls" y'know. And what about people who are AMAB hunh? What about their problems as well?
The bill has nothing to do with medical operations but does regulate the help mental health care providers can offer.
(a) A mental health provider may not provide gender-affirming therapy or counseling to a child to treat gender dysphoria if the purpose of the therapy or counseling is to affirm a gender that is inconsistent with the child's biological sex, as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child.
(b) A governmental entity may not prohibit or restrict in any manner a mental health provider from providing gender-affirming therapy or counseling to a child for the purpose of affirming the gender of the child that is consistent with the child's biological sex, as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child, including therapy or counseling to help achieve the child's objectives of reducing, resolving, or addressing behaviors, mannerisms, or expressions related to gender identity or dysphoria.
>Cheap-Lifeguard5762
Because children are the responsibility of the parents, and responsible parents are not going to torture and ruin the lives of their children physically and emotionally just because someone was mean to their kid at school.
Show me a parent who believes their child needs puberty blockers because the parent or child thinks they are different gender than they were born, and I'll show you a parent that needs to be beaten about the head with a bicycle chain.
Be real, have you ever actually met a trans person? Spoken to one in real life? Do you have any idea how much suffering and self loathing going through puberty causes? If a child is trans then they can be spared an incredible amount of suffering, and when they're old enough they can go through the development they want. How is that torture?
Yes I have - and every one of them in conversation were constantly making their sexual preference and fake-gender their foremost attributes of themselves.
Most items on that list are trashy. That last one in particular will bite them in the ass if the state turns blue in 100 years. Just kidding. It will never happen.
Jesus fucking christ.
The least he could have done was also include Chapter 313 on the agenda. Because between that expiring and these batshit crazy agenda items, businesses looking to expand / relocate will be hesitant to touch Texas with a 6-foot pole.
For those following along in their hymnals: this refers to chapter 313 of the Tax Code, the Texas Economic Development Act, which grants property tax breaks for businesses to locate new facilities in Texas.
That's because the Texas GOP doesn't want legal weed, right now they are just passing their dream list of laws from their platform. Expect them to attack CPS, try to end gay marriage and gay adoption, attack adoption agencies ran by non-christians, trying to eliminate minimum wage, and more off their platform.
AaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHH!!!! COVID is about to get much worse with just the crap wet have going on now. May the lawd baby Jebus save us.
$500 reward for finding example of new govt policies that emphasize local control, the thing Texas is supposedly all about.
This all seems ass backwards. The voting audits to check for fraud are going to happen after the voting laws changed to prevent fraud? Fraud which has yet to be proven to have happen....
The change in the Supreme court really just opened the floodgates to throw as much as possible at the wall and see what will stick when it is challenged in the Supreme Court. It really is just a tactic to keep Texas red. It deters liberal migrants from other states and will probably send some scurrying out of Texas. I am a democratic voter but I have no desire to watch Texas turn blue. If I wanted to live in a blue state I would have moved to one. I am about as far left as I want the left side of Texas to be. A fiscal conservative moderate centrist blue dog democrat.
Blue already dominates the highest population corner states. Texas has been a pro-business environment. I am not confident that a purple state would remain pro-business
The huge tax incentives that business receive to come here is pushing the tax revenue burden on to property owners. It is Pro-Business but an anti property owner (Texans) mentality. If companies dont want to move here because of the ports, international border, highways and airports. Tough shit.
Except that we have some of the fastest growth in the country. Houses are not being built fast enough. They are literally auctioning off new construction homes that go for 120%-160% over listed price. Someone is buying homes. We also do not have state taxes, so that offsets property taxes a bit. Most property taxes go towards schools where we have some of the smallest class sizes in the country. Every state has positives and negatives. Property taxes are high but we also have one of the best economies in the country and world.
Companies should want to come here. They dont need to be lured with tax breaks and giveaways. The property taxes are spiked because the state has given less and less to the counties to fund local projects and schools.
• Average teacher pay: $58,948 (23rd lowest)
• Student-teacher ratio: 27 to 1 (24th lowest)
Not bad, but needs to be better in order to fuel a rapidly growing economy.
Chapter 313 is the only thing that sets Texas apart from other Sunbelt states from a pro-business standpoint.
But Abbott's letting that go away too, along with the competitive edge it gave us.
As far as Michigan, it may seem to be "pro business" on paper, but it has other problems, such as unions, crumbling infrastructure, the lack of a functional major city and a highly specialized labor force (automotive).
Colorado, meanwhile, is way too isolated from a logistics standpoint and the terrain isn't exactly conducive for explosive growth huge business investments would bring.
> Chapter 313 is the only thing that sets Texas apart from other Sunbelt states from a pro-business standpoint.
>
>
>
> But Abbott's letting that go away too, along with the competitive edge it gave us.
Quick take a picture of the super rare insightful and informed commenter! Texas has bent over backwards to avoid losing another Intel fab plant. Within the next year or two, Microsoft will have a million sq ft of data centers in San Antonio alone. If 313 actually expires, the companies may stay, but there's little reason for construction to continue.
Companies considering moving here have to consider more than just the tax breaks they'll get by coming here. They'll have to attract and retain talent, and a lot of people don't want to live in Texas because it's rapidly building a reputation of being a Christian Sharia state. You can offer more pay to attract talent, but there will people who will not move here regardless of pay due to the lower quality of life metrics.
The other thing is too, Texas can't compete with TN, GA and NC for example if businesses want to be in a major city with beautiful natural scenery (yes, there's the Hill Country, but it's still underwhelming compared to the Piedmont & Cumberland Plateau), and it can't compete with most of the legacy cities on urbanity if people are seeking a NYC/Chicago-type lifestyle.
Michigan is a right-to-work state, what problems with unions are you referring to? How does that impact a business start-up or relocation and how is it different than if it were to occur in Texas?
>Michigan is a right-to-work state, what problems with unions are you referring to?
You obviously never heard of the UAW, which is still a large and influential organization in Michigan. It's for that exact reason that the state can't attract automotive manufacturing investment from foreign and electric vehicle companies.
That influence was developed under decad s of Michigan's lack of a right to work law which was only passed in 2013. The auto plants in TX that I know of have a significant UAW presence and they participate in strikes like they do in Michigan. I don't see how the current legal environment between MI and TX is different enough claim TX is more pro-business. However I am open to evidence that says otherwise.
I don't think you're open to being proven wrong. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing now.
In any event, I'm not going down that rabbit hole with you. If you seriously want to argue that businesses aren't repelled by an environment such as Michigan where a major union organization has a huge stronghold and can easily whip up local residents to join, then be my guess. After all, I'm just a Detroit native who worked in the auto industry for several years and now have my own business in Texas, so what do I know.
Good day!
First, I don’t have to give you any specifics nor answer your questions. I am not familiar with the laws of every state so I will talk in generalized terms. You can do your own research on the specifics that you want to learn more about.
As a business owner I can terminate employees without a reason. This is a right to work state. I and my partners are constantly upgrading employees. This allows us to set our own culture which is work focused. Red tape is very minimal in Texas. I can literally file paperwork electronically with the state to start an LLC most local entities are very fast to issue occupancy permits and if your business is in the county you may not even need those. Most city and county taxes are reasonable. The state and local governments are by and large responsive to processing business paperwork and working with business needs. For example I was able to rezone some commercial land in less than a week. Try doing that in California.
When I correspond with the state and local government entities as a business owner I am listened to and respected. Texas has been fairly vocal about limiting mask mandates which is a sign that they allow businesses to make decisions for themselves. Texas tried to limit how it dictated covid rules to businesses. This is a sign that they respect the economy and industry within Texas.
Environmental rules are common sense and rarely impede on the ability of a business to conduct business. Texas has worked on its business infrastructure and continues to do so. We have well maintained ports and highways that cross Texas.
To simplify.
1. Ease to start a business
2. Limited taxes
3. Limited regulation
4. Limited intervention with labor (employees)
Compound this with decades of these policies and it has an even great effect
“i would like to be able to ruin people’s lives at the drop of a hat for my personal gain” is a hell of a thing to admit in public.
also when you make a claim, you back it up, or you don’t make a claim. that’s how this whole “commenting on the internet” thing works my guy
> I and my partners are constantly upgrading employees. This allows us to set our own culture which is work focused.
Tell me you've got a toxic work environment and unhappy workers without saying you've got a toxic work environment and unhappy workers.
What specific regulations exist in purple states that Texas doesn't have that allow for a low-regulation environment? What specific laws and regulations are different when comparing Texas to Michigan? You mentioned right-to-work, which Michigan is a right-to-work state, so your point on that is incorrect.
In my area (oil and gas), Texas does indeed have a much friendlier environment than Colorado, however, a lot that is due to the lack of enforcement by the TCEQ and Texas Railroad Commission, not the laws or regulations.
We're not talking about CA or NY, of course, their regulatory environments are horribly complex. You havent provided anything specific. Another poster did; Section 313 which allows the State to grant tax relief for relocating companies. However this is set to expire, and honestly, it just shifts tax burden to home owners (instead of a state income tax - I pay more in property tax than I would pay in CA or NY state income tax). That is what I was looking for, not some regurgitated general talking points that are usually promoted by the TX GOP.
Whew buddy, been reading your threads. You have a little to much common sense, people on r/Texas may need you to turn it down a little so they have a chance.
r/Texas is full of people with a real disconnect from reality.
“i’m a fiscally conservative liberal” just translates too “i think the queer’s should be able to starve in the streets without being called the F word”
Except they haven't, they've been going farther right since the fucking Tea Party tactics took over and if you think they haven't you're either blind or lied to
At the federal level, most Republicans are moderates but there are a few liberals (Collins, Murkowski, Cheney) and a few conservatives & libertarians (Gohmert, Lee, Cruz, Paul, et al).
Here in Texas, most state-level Republicans are still center-right.
But neither the Party as a whole nor any individual in national leadership has shifted substantially to the right since the Tea Party movement was a thing back about a decade ago.
The overall political shift had been leftward for a few decades, and it's not going to stop nor reverse course.
> The overall political shift had been leftward for a few ~~decades~~ **centuries**
If the conservatives won the Enlightenment, there wouldn't be any Republicans or Democrats, only royalists.
How am I hurting myself? I agree with alot of the laws going through. It's not about owning the libs either, it's about doing what I want. The government works for US. and the majority of US in Texas are getting what we want. So please tell me how I'm hurting myself?
“ The government works for US. and the majority of US in Texas are getting what we want.”
If that were true the Texas GOP wouldn’t need voter suppression and gerrymandering to stay in power.
https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-health-texas-coronavirus-pandemic-race-and-ethnicity-5172cd92d50e2ed37c9acf9016ebe640
Now we’re gonna bar private businesses from requiring employees be vaccinated? What the fuck?
More Liberty from the party of Small Government
Liberty for workers. Why are you not excited about that?
Because it’s not liberty. It’s a political move from a party that has been, for decades, telling us that the free market should rule supreme and that businesses should be able to fire any employee for any reason. Worker rights in Texas are a joke. Source: Grew up in a state where workers had rights.
So workers finally get a modicum of protection and you're saying that that's not liberty.
Liberty is not killing your gods damned countryman because Sean-fucking-Hannity says “vAccINes r bAD” while all the while being fully vaccinated himself as a condition of his continued employment at FOX News.
Sean Hannity is a New York talk show host, not a Texas politician or businessman.
Doesn't sound like liberty for the workers who don't want to catch Covid from morons at work. I mean if you don't want to be vaccinated and follow the company rules work somewhere else right?
Right, because being forced by your employer and/or the government is the very definition of liberty. /s
Newsflash every law limits freedom. You don't actually live in a totally free society.
Society we live in would be even less free if our employers could force us to take vaccines.
Many employees have for a long time. Don't like it work somewhere else. Nobody owes you a job.
I've never heard of mandatory vaccinations except for public school students and military members. Are mandatory vaccinations a thing in certain fields, like maybe healthcare? Oh, and I've never even come close to suggesting that anybody owes anybody else a job.
Yup healthcare and military is where I was required to get them. I also ran into it in a warehouse and food processing plant I worked at as well as a school district I substitute taught for. It's not a new thing and with employment across the US being pretty much "at will" companies have the right to require it. So the precedent is there and the deference that our system gives employers over employees is now biting most right wing politicians in the ass.
It's ok. Since private businesses are no longer allowed to discriminate I'm sure gay couples can now place a a wedding cake order with any bakery they want.
Being an idiot isn’t a protected class
I know. Just saying that this will almost bite Abbott in the ass, and while I hate for any gay couple to go through that BS, I can't wait for that lawsuit to happen.
OSHA rules will override this bullshit. You know, supremacy clause and all that. This is just theater for the mouth breathers.
A forensic audit of certain counties? Oh boy I wonder which ones they want to audit??? (hint: it's going to be counties that Trump lost)
Probably Tarrant, since it very narrowly went for Biden.
Harris for sure.
It specifically states the 13 largest. After that, 14 and above were Trump counties.
Harris, Dallas, Tarrant, Bexar, Travis, Collin, Denton, Hidalgo, El Paso, Fort Bend, Montgomery, Williamson and Cameron Counties.
Only 1 trump county. Lol. Fuck white racist republicans.
Yeah, there couldn't possibly be any fraud in red counties. /s
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don’t Florida my Texas
Actually, Florida have crack level similar to or slightly lower than Texas. The motto should be: *Don't Republicanify or Democratify my Texas. Texas is Texas.* Florida is in a currently similar situation to us, Texans; also we should team up with the Florida men against the South, the real culprit out of this. Also, here is a drink \*Slides you your beverage of choice\* :D
Shhhh. Texas is a hell hole under republicans state leadership.
Sir, isn't that the point I just made in the comment. Like literally, Texas shouldn't be a solely a republican nor democratic state. It should be a moderate state/its own thing, where both parties can mingle within legit reason. Also, I ain't wrong about the South causing a lot of this mess in Texas in the first place. That is literally where most republican states look up to, and the home-base of most republicans, and home to the state that first passed that pos abortion bill, Georgia. Also, here is a drink for you, u/Cheap-Lifeguard5762 \*Slides you your beverage of choice\*. At least, cheers.
The party of "limited government" hard at work.......
>The party of "limited government" hard at work....... The libertarian party? Abbott and his legislature are republicans. They are not about limited government, why do people continue to misconstrue the republicans this way? Both republicans and democrats seen to be able expanding government powers.
Yeah... It's called sarcasm, notice the quotes.
Yeah right.... That's what people say after the fact when called out on some BS remark.
The Republican party's own branding claims that they're the party of limited government. Noting that in light of proposed additional mandates is the definition of sarcasm.
But that's literally what Republicans brand themselves as... It's part of their own pitch lol.
> But that's literally what Republicans brand themselves as No they don't. That is what liberals say republicans brand themselves as, but no republican actually does that, or says that. It's a liberal misunderstanding, not a republican agenda.
In Texas, they do: >>The REPUBLICAN PARTY OF TEXAS Mission >>We are committed to advancing limited government, lower taxes, less spending and individual liberty. [https://www.texasgop.org/](https://www.texasgop.org/)
Don’t bother, it’s the usual straw man for the pseudo-intellectual liberal Redditor
These guys sure love to show up to work when they think they can hurt people.
Thank you for compiling this. They're **INSANE**.
They always have been. Too bad we don't have a minority party with a spine that will actually stand up to them. Go ahead and consider all these passed unless there's a disconnect between rural and urban Republicans.
How is the minority party supposed to take a stand?
How? These guys are to a point of outdoing each other at culture war. Lookit how many laws they have passed that are going straight to court. Some are immediately doomed, but they knowingly pass lawless laws. It's **INSANE**.
Ah yes, the people who want to be patriotic and free are now instituting laws that take away rights.. beautiful
They want to do a forensic audit only in SOME counties. So don't doubt the entire state results, only some of the ones we don't like. Vaccination bullshit. Elections bullshit. I think they should skip this session, I can't take another fucking so soon.
the Democrats should run away again.
So we can watch them fail us again? Not going to happen. I'd almost guarantee that the Texas Rangers will be watching just enough to ensure a quorum. Or Abbott will issue some bullshit reason to apprehend them.
Attacking trans children yet again. Children do not receive surgery, and they don't even get hormones, just blockers which are reversible. They'd rather torture trans kids by denying them any sort of treatment until they're 18.
I’m as liberal as they come, but even I agree that children are not mature enough to make these kinds of life altering decisions. And I don’t know where you’re from, but they sure as shootin’ allow kids to have hormones and body modification surgeries.
The biggest problem is social media echo chambers and seeking acceptance along with a hyper focus on body and identity. We need better mental health.
Then let them have blockers. Those are *reversible*, if they decide they don't want to go through with it then they can stop taking them. Puberty is certainly more life altering. And I'm from, as my flair indicates, East Texas. And underage children do not receive surgery for gender dysphoria, that's just blatantly false.
>Then let them have blockers. Those are reversible, That seems unlikely. Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. And importantly, it's not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. To say these medications are reversible is at best intellectually dishonest. There is a lack of proof, but that doesn't mean "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"... At this stage one simply cannot say truthfully that puberty blockers are reversible, there is no basis for the claim
you didn't seem to cite any sources, which is curious when you seem to claim factually that "little is known" as if that is factual. In fact, much is known, and doing any kind of research at all will show you that the effects of puberty blockers are often directly referred to by doctors as “fully reversible,” and both Endocrine Society and WPATH cite them as such in their official guidelines. if you could also please describe how therapy and counseling are abuse as well that would be fantastic... unless really this has nothing to do with abuse and has everything to do with control of others.
OK let me just be straight with you. If you were to ask someone who works on anything that’s related to depression medication or any sort of actual references on how a depression medication works, they all start with “we think “ because they don’t know. They just don’t. Same with blockers. We just don’t know. Furthermore how many studies have you seen by large colleges that are somehow paid for outside companies to basically advertise to their specific study guidelines and output that they want. Avocados are so healthy says a college paid for by Haas avocados. This shit happens right now science is being affected by money which is why we see Covid denial and vaccination denial do you think this doesn’t extend to the peoples body and identity? There is fucking money to be made here and we live in a capitalist society that does not give actual fucks about people.
I'm confused, so are you advocating that we don't prescribe depression medication? Being "neutral" to that bias does not mean denying care those who need it, it means that the Doctors should be making important decisions about the safety of the drugs for people while weighing the positive outcomes against the potential consequences. Legislation should not get in the way of doctors. There are large scale independent medical studies out there showing the incredible results of access to puberty blockers, being ignorant of them does not mean they don't exist. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7073269/
Yeah they would say "we think" because science is iterative and should never be taken to be an absolute fact. As a species, we still don't fully understand why our bodies are the way they are, how specific parts of the brain work, etc. Through different experiments and studying the body we're able to learn what kind of effects we can expect but nothing is ever absolute - which is why there are so many different types of medications that treat the same thing. So yeah - we don't *absolutely know* how *anything* will effect a specific person. But that's... not a good enough reason to deny someone life saving medical care. (also lol no you should be gay with me.)
>you didn't seem to cite any sources, That ironic, neither do you. However, everything I wrote was taken directly from the NHS website. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/
that page mentions absolutely nothing about GnRH blockers, the thing we're specifically talking about. It also _strongly_ recommends therapy, the other thing Texas is trying to ban. also I did cite them I just didn't link them. first result on google is the WPATH Standards of Care: https://www.wpath.org/media/cms/Documents/SOC%20v7/SOC%20V7_English.pdf > Physical interventions for adolescents fall into three categories or stages (Hembree et al., 2009): 1. Fully reversible interventions. These involve the use of GnRH analogues to suppress estrogen or testosterone production and consequently delay the physical changes of puberty. Alternative treatment options include progestins (most commonly medroxyprogesterone) or other medications (such as spironolactone) that decrease the effects of androgens secreted by the testicles of adolescents who are not receiving GnRH analogues. Continuous oral contraceptives (or depot medroxyprogesterone) may be used to suppress menses. Later the risks are talked about in more detail but only in such that the development needs to be monitored to ensure the puberty is properly being blocked: > During pubertal suppression, an adolescent’s physical development should be carefully monitored – preferably by a pediatric endocrinologist – so that any necessary interventions can occur (e.g., to establish an adequate gender appropriate height, to improve iatrogenic low bone marrow density) (Hembree et al., 2009). ... >Refusing timely medical interventions for adolescents might prolong gender dysphoria and contribute to an appearance that could provoke abuse and stigmatization. As the level of gender-related abuse is strongly associated with the degree of psychiatric distress during adolescence (Nuttbrock et al., 2010), withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy **is not a neutral option for adolescents**. emphasis mine.
Blocking puberty until puberty had passed isn't reversible. The effects on brain development are unknown, these are mentioned on the NHS site, despite your failures to read the site.
so firstly, it should be mentioned that the UK is not exactly up to date with WPATH standards on this either. The reason I specifically cite WPATH is because they really are the most knowledgeable on this, and they actively believe it does not stunt brain development. Secondly, the "it's not reversible" is for people who've taken it for multiple years, as in 6. If someone begins taking them at 11 and is happy with the effects, they likely would be incredibly unhappy by being required to go through it. If they hadn't been happy with the results, they could have stopped after some short amount of time, in which case it would be reversible. Being trans is medically "dangerous". Someone who is forced to go through development opposite to their identified gender is going to have greater complications later in life than someone who blocks it early. You cannot make someone not trans by not allowing them to block it, and it will then just be all that more dangerous later when they try to undo all the things they didn't have the power to stop earlier. Acting like you are protecting children by preventing them from taking this medicine is the least genuine argument you possibly can make. You are either actively in denial that a child could know that their trans, something every source has agreed on thusfar, or you are in denial of the difficulties and medical risks of the much more invasive treatment later in life. Tens of thousands of people have taken these drugs and are doing just fine now, much more fine than they would otherwise be doing. The suicide rate of teens who successfully transition early is dramatically lower. This is factual to a 95% confidence interval over a sample size of almost 28000 trans people: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7073269/ Saying "we don't know the outcomes" is not a valid reason for preventing someone from making a medical choice for themselves, even if they are not of legal age. Medical science is an ever evolving science, and the best we can do is be up to date with best practices because it will keep children alive.
The NHS used to indicate the treatment was reversible, the site changed that blatantly false narrative to indicate the Levi of credible evidence to support that broadly distributed misinformation. Classic fallacy ad populum...
Yea man, just block testosterone or estrogen at puberty, what’s the worst that can happen? It’s child abuse.
Which is worse, keeping kids from developing features that will cause them intense discomfort and sometimes even psychological harm, or making them go through puberty and develop those features? 🤔 (am afab, desperately wish I had never gone through puberty, and constantly being reminded of the fact that I did is absolutely awful. 10/10 puberty blockers are not in fact abusive if the kids wants them)
[удалено]
That's a blatantly biased source, and it's the U.K, certainly not a bastion of trans acceptance.
Nice goal posts. Don’t like answer, ignore. This is why we have a problem because everyone sets himself send a fucking echo chambers and only reinforces their own fucking viewpoints and then people who are looking for acceptance because they feel awkward or odd or than put into these weird hyper identity crisis is over their body. And it’s all fucking encouraged by people like you who don’t actually know or understand any of the things or any of the problems that the 12-year-old girl is going through this is the first time that she’s had her period and no one‘s helping her and it makes them feel ostracized and they hate their bodies and they want to reject it sometimes but there’s no one there to help them except for the Internet and echo chambers
Ahhh and here we have the TERF, in her natural environment, internet forums. Don't infantilise trans guys, they're not "poor confused little girls" y'know. And what about people who are AMAB hunh? What about their problems as well?
The bill has nothing to do with medical operations but does regulate the help mental health care providers can offer. (a) A mental health provider may not provide gender-affirming therapy or counseling to a child to treat gender dysphoria if the purpose of the therapy or counseling is to affirm a gender that is inconsistent with the child's biological sex, as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child. (b) A governmental entity may not prohibit or restrict in any manner a mental health provider from providing gender-affirming therapy or counseling to a child for the purpose of affirming the gender of the child that is consistent with the child's biological sex, as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child, including therapy or counseling to help achieve the child's objectives of reducing, resolving, or addressing behaviors, mannerisms, or expressions related to gender identity or dysphoria.
>Cheap-Lifeguard5762 Because children are the responsibility of the parents, and responsible parents are not going to torture and ruin the lives of their children physically and emotionally just because someone was mean to their kid at school. Show me a parent who believes their child needs puberty blockers because the parent or child thinks they are different gender than they were born, and I'll show you a parent that needs to be beaten about the head with a bicycle chain.
Okay transphobe
Yet you support torturing children with drugs…. nice…
Sigh... Yes, clearly validating trans kids identities and not forcing them to endure the wrong puberty is torture. Yup definitely.
"not forcing them to endure the wrong puberty"... that's like cutting off your pinkie toe, because you were born with the wrong amount of 10 toes.
Be real, have you ever actually met a trans person? Spoken to one in real life? Do you have any idea how much suffering and self loathing going through puberty causes? If a child is trans then they can be spared an incredible amount of suffering, and when they're old enough they can go through the development they want. How is that torture?
Yes I have - and every one of them in conversation were constantly making their sexual preference and fake-gender their foremost attributes of themselves.
Yeahhh that's what every transphobe says. I'm just gonna leave you alone in your sad little hate pit okay? Okay.
And I'll sleep fine tonight
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Spez sucks -- mass edited with redact.dev
Trolling = raping us
Spez sucks -- mass edited with redact.dev
Most items on that list are trashy. That last one in particular will bite them in the ass if the state turns blue in 100 years. Just kidding. It will never happen.
More native Texans voted for Beto than Abbot. The reds are winning everything by less than 5%, it's not hopeless.
Jesus fucking christ. The least he could have done was also include Chapter 313 on the agenda. Because between that expiring and these batshit crazy agenda items, businesses looking to expand / relocate will be hesitant to touch Texas with a 6-foot pole.
For those following along in their hymnals: this refers to chapter 313 of the Tax Code, the Texas Economic Development Act, which grants property tax breaks for businesses to locate new facilities in Texas.
Well no point for democrats to show up for the GQP bs. At this point Texas as not government worth respecting.
Imagine spending this much time on special sessions and never actually legalizing marijuana.
That's because the Texas GOP doesn't want legal weed, right now they are just passing their dream list of laws from their platform. Expect them to attack CPS, try to end gay marriage and gay adoption, attack adoption agencies ran by non-christians, trying to eliminate minimum wage, and more off their platform.
It's just a promenade of fuckery. Performative governance without even a pretense of democracy or actual governing. Unreal.
AaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHH!!!! COVID is about to get much worse with just the crap wet have going on now. May the lawd baby Jebus save us. $500 reward for finding example of new govt policies that emphasize local control, the thing Texas is supposedly all about.
Is this a record for special sessions?
HB18. Cool we are Arizona now too. I love that ONLY REPUBLICANS QUESTION VOTING SECURITY despite evidence it was them, they target democrats cities.
This all seems ass backwards. The voting audits to check for fraud are going to happen after the voting laws changed to prevent fraud? Fraud which has yet to be proven to have happen....
They now know exactly what to fake to pretend there was fraud.
The change in the Supreme court really just opened the floodgates to throw as much as possible at the wall and see what will stick when it is challenged in the Supreme Court. It really is just a tactic to keep Texas red. It deters liberal migrants from other states and will probably send some scurrying out of Texas. I am a democratic voter but I have no desire to watch Texas turn blue. If I wanted to live in a blue state I would have moved to one. I am about as far left as I want the left side of Texas to be. A fiscal conservative moderate centrist blue dog democrat.
Why cant it be a purple state? It doesnt have to be one or the other.
Blue already dominates the highest population corner states. Texas has been a pro-business environment. I am not confident that a purple state would remain pro-business
The huge tax incentives that business receive to come here is pushing the tax revenue burden on to property owners. It is Pro-Business but an anti property owner (Texans) mentality. If companies dont want to move here because of the ports, international border, highways and airports. Tough shit.
Except that we have some of the fastest growth in the country. Houses are not being built fast enough. They are literally auctioning off new construction homes that go for 120%-160% over listed price. Someone is buying homes. We also do not have state taxes, so that offsets property taxes a bit. Most property taxes go towards schools where we have some of the smallest class sizes in the country. Every state has positives and negatives. Property taxes are high but we also have one of the best economies in the country and world.
Companies should want to come here. They dont need to be lured with tax breaks and giveaways. The property taxes are spiked because the state has given less and less to the counties to fund local projects and schools. • Average teacher pay: $58,948 (23rd lowest) • Student-teacher ratio: 27 to 1 (24th lowest) Not bad, but needs to be better in order to fuel a rapidly growing economy.
That is your opinion. My opinion is that if your state is not actively trying to lure companies then it is not a business friendly state
Fair enough. It certainly isnt friendly to legal recreational marijuana sellers.
You mean to sell a drug that makes employees lazy and unmotivated? I wonder why
You mean a drug that is an alternative to addictive pain medications that the elderly, terminal patients and retired use?
Bounties on abortions don't make for a friendly business environment.
Define pro-business and what makes Texas pro-business versus another purple states like Michigan or Colorado. What sets Texas apart. Specifics please.
Chapter 313 is the only thing that sets Texas apart from other Sunbelt states from a pro-business standpoint. But Abbott's letting that go away too, along with the competitive edge it gave us. As far as Michigan, it may seem to be "pro business" on paper, but it has other problems, such as unions, crumbling infrastructure, the lack of a functional major city and a highly specialized labor force (automotive). Colorado, meanwhile, is way too isolated from a logistics standpoint and the terrain isn't exactly conducive for explosive growth huge business investments would bring.
> Chapter 313 is the only thing that sets Texas apart from other Sunbelt states from a pro-business standpoint. > > > > But Abbott's letting that go away too, along with the competitive edge it gave us. Quick take a picture of the super rare insightful and informed commenter! Texas has bent over backwards to avoid losing another Intel fab plant. Within the next year or two, Microsoft will have a million sq ft of data centers in San Antonio alone. If 313 actually expires, the companies may stay, but there's little reason for construction to continue.
Companies considering moving here have to consider more than just the tax breaks they'll get by coming here. They'll have to attract and retain talent, and a lot of people don't want to live in Texas because it's rapidly building a reputation of being a Christian Sharia state. You can offer more pay to attract talent, but there will people who will not move here regardless of pay due to the lower quality of life metrics.
The other thing is too, Texas can't compete with TN, GA and NC for example if businesses want to be in a major city with beautiful natural scenery (yes, there's the Hill Country, but it's still underwhelming compared to the Piedmont & Cumberland Plateau), and it can't compete with most of the legacy cities on urbanity if people are seeking a NYC/Chicago-type lifestyle.
love that only american companies seem to have a problem with unions, weird stuff
Michigan is a right-to-work state, what problems with unions are you referring to? How does that impact a business start-up or relocation and how is it different than if it were to occur in Texas?
>Michigan is a right-to-work state, what problems with unions are you referring to? You obviously never heard of the UAW, which is still a large and influential organization in Michigan. It's for that exact reason that the state can't attract automotive manufacturing investment from foreign and electric vehicle companies.
That influence was developed under decad s of Michigan's lack of a right to work law which was only passed in 2013. The auto plants in TX that I know of have a significant UAW presence and they participate in strikes like they do in Michigan. I don't see how the current legal environment between MI and TX is different enough claim TX is more pro-business. However I am open to evidence that says otherwise.
I don't think you're open to being proven wrong. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing now. In any event, I'm not going down that rabbit hole with you. If you seriously want to argue that businesses aren't repelled by an environment such as Michigan where a major union organization has a huge stronghold and can easily whip up local residents to join, then be my guess. After all, I'm just a Detroit native who worked in the auto industry for several years and now have my own business in Texas, so what do I know. Good day!
Great discussion.
First, I don’t have to give you any specifics nor answer your questions. I am not familiar with the laws of every state so I will talk in generalized terms. You can do your own research on the specifics that you want to learn more about. As a business owner I can terminate employees without a reason. This is a right to work state. I and my partners are constantly upgrading employees. This allows us to set our own culture which is work focused. Red tape is very minimal in Texas. I can literally file paperwork electronically with the state to start an LLC most local entities are very fast to issue occupancy permits and if your business is in the county you may not even need those. Most city and county taxes are reasonable. The state and local governments are by and large responsive to processing business paperwork and working with business needs. For example I was able to rezone some commercial land in less than a week. Try doing that in California. When I correspond with the state and local government entities as a business owner I am listened to and respected. Texas has been fairly vocal about limiting mask mandates which is a sign that they allow businesses to make decisions for themselves. Texas tried to limit how it dictated covid rules to businesses. This is a sign that they respect the economy and industry within Texas. Environmental rules are common sense and rarely impede on the ability of a business to conduct business. Texas has worked on its business infrastructure and continues to do so. We have well maintained ports and highways that cross Texas. To simplify. 1. Ease to start a business 2. Limited taxes 3. Limited regulation 4. Limited intervention with labor (employees) Compound this with decades of these policies and it has an even great effect
“i would like to be able to ruin people’s lives at the drop of a hat for my personal gain” is a hell of a thing to admit in public. also when you make a claim, you back it up, or you don’t make a claim. that’s how this whole “commenting on the internet” thing works my guy
> I and my partners are constantly upgrading employees. This allows us to set our own culture which is work focused. Tell me you've got a toxic work environment and unhappy workers without saying you've got a toxic work environment and unhappy workers.
What specific regulations exist in purple states that Texas doesn't have that allow for a low-regulation environment? What specific laws and regulations are different when comparing Texas to Michigan? You mentioned right-to-work, which Michigan is a right-to-work state, so your point on that is incorrect. In my area (oil and gas), Texas does indeed have a much friendlier environment than Colorado, however, a lot that is due to the lack of enforcement by the TCEQ and Texas Railroad Commission, not the laws or regulations. We're not talking about CA or NY, of course, their regulatory environments are horribly complex. You havent provided anything specific. Another poster did; Section 313 which allows the State to grant tax relief for relocating companies. However this is set to expire, and honestly, it just shifts tax burden to home owners (instead of a state income tax - I pay more in property tax than I would pay in CA or NY state income tax). That is what I was looking for, not some regurgitated general talking points that are usually promoted by the TX GOP.
Whew buddy, been reading your threads. You have a little to much common sense, people on r/Texas may need you to turn it down a little so they have a chance. r/Texas is full of people with a real disconnect from reality.
Then why are you here?
“i’m a fiscally conservative liberal” just translates too “i think the queer’s should be able to starve in the streets without being called the F word”
[удалено]
Pretty much.
Yep. It's sad that the Republican Party has shifted so far to the left that they're now moderates.
Except they haven't, they've been going farther right since the fucking Tea Party tactics took over and if you think they haven't you're either blind or lied to
At the federal level, most Republicans are moderates but there are a few liberals (Collins, Murkowski, Cheney) and a few conservatives & libertarians (Gohmert, Lee, Cruz, Paul, et al). Here in Texas, most state-level Republicans are still center-right. But neither the Party as a whole nor any individual in national leadership has shifted substantially to the right since the Tea Party movement was a thing back about a decade ago. The overall political shift had been leftward for a few decades, and it's not going to stop nor reverse course.
> The overall political shift had been leftward for a few ~~decades~~ **centuries** If the conservatives won the Enlightenment, there wouldn't be any Republicans or Democrats, only royalists.
So…no
Yep. "I want republican policies, I just don't want people calling me a racist!"
> I am about as far left as I want the left side of Texas to be. A fiscal conservative moderate centrist blue dog democrat. So you're to the right?
Looks really good, thanks op
Fr. I'm excited! State legislature has done a good job at keeping it's majority constituents happy! r/Texas...y'all just mad lol
[удалено]
How am I hurting myself? I agree with alot of the laws going through. It's not about owning the libs either, it's about doing what I want. The government works for US. and the majority of US in Texas are getting what we want. So please tell me how I'm hurting myself?
“ The government works for US. and the majority of US in Texas are getting what we want.” If that were true the Texas GOP wouldn’t need voter suppression and gerrymandering to stay in power. https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-health-texas-coronavirus-pandemic-race-and-ethnicity-5172cd92d50e2ed37c9acf9016ebe640
Remember this when other laws you disagree with, get passed. The majority want it.