Oh I didn’t realize pineapple farms were banned in California and Alaska.

I thought they hadn’t been built for other reasons over the last decade. But according to this, not being built means banned. TIL!

Started reading this site but the massive gaps in logic and reasoning are like nails on a chalkboard.

No new fabs being built in CA means fabs are banned?!

Okay well fabs are banned in pretty much the whole country then, so why call out California?

Just because something isn’t done doesn’t mean it’s banned. Neither is it necessarily bad. There’s a lot of reasons why not to build certain things certain areas - labor cost, earthquake risk, land is more desired leading to higher cost, blah blah blah

That doesn’t mean something is banned. Maybe we should look at making some things easier but this website is just a hit piece and has a clear motivation rather than being a trustworthy evaluation.

It’s like those cringy billboards on highway 5 about Gavin newsom and water.

Edit —— Complaining that large factories can’t easily be built in dense population centers like the Bay Area means things are banned is weird - who in the right mind thinks a sprawling factory with emissions should go smack dab in the middle of population centers? Why can’t we build a new nuclear plant in Manhattan or maybe an oil refinery on wall street!? Waah waah so outrageous! None were built in the last decade so it’s the outrageous regulations fault! I want my lead battery smelter in downtown Portland but Oregon banned it! Waah waah!

Aside that, this site is mostly blaming California regulations for the nationwide manufacturing issues driven heavily by free trade