I was reading Prop 28 opposition and saw that the LA Times editorial opposed it.

I’m sure they make a series of interesting points in their argument. But this one quoted line is a particularly bad take:

> What happens if the student population plummets in future years while the number of disabled elderly people grows?

Uh, then we change laws to reflect the changed reality. It’s as if people wanted to create brand-new laws in the 1910’s regarding car accidents and what happens if a car driver hits a person, etc, and people objecting to those laws from being made, saying “well we are all gonna be flying in spaceships in the future anyway. No need to regulate cars.”