Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
There are members of virtually EVERY profession that have suspended misdemeanor convictions, including defense contractors with Top Secret clearances (I know a few). ====================== The legal term for this is in California is expungement. Under certain circumstances those with misdemeanor convictions in California can expunge misdemeanors from their records merely by filing a court petition.— November 5, 2009 6:52 p.m.
Here's A New One: U-T Owners Understate Claimed Readership
If you search Google and hit on a U-T article, you will find the link has been disabled. You can no longer access U-T articles on the internet.— November 2, 2009 9:43 p.m.
Dollar "Carry Trade" Creates Global Asset Bubble That Will Burst
The treasury can only print more money if China is willing to buy more-if China stops buying we have to stop the deficit spending. ======== The Treasury is not dependent on China to fund deficit spending. The Federal Reserve is funding the government deficit primarliy by printing money, and using this money to buy Treasury bonds which the Federal Reserve owns. The fact is, this type of deficit spending can continue almost indefinitely.— November 2, 2009 8:28 p.m.
Memory -- er, uh -- Lapses at the Union-Tribune
What's reprehensible is a company firing someone just before they qualify for a pension. That happened while I was with McGraw-Hill, but I don't remember it happening while I was at the U-T. ======== Congress outlawed this practice after 60 Minutes did a piece in 1974 about about Standard Oil employee Clyde Shearer. He was fired for no reason shortly before he was eligible to collect a pension from Standard Oil, and was left virtually destitute. Standard Oil routinely fired most rank and file employees shortly before they became eligible to collect pensions leaving them with no legal recourse. The public outcry was enormous. Congress enacted pension vesting laws to protect employees from this type of abuse.— November 1, 2009 10:55 p.m.
Memory -- er, uh -- Lapses at the Union-Tribune
They are both mutually exclusive and have nothing to do with one another Why do you think is would be reasonable for the UT to interfere with a private transaction that has no relationship to the UT, explain how that will interfere with UT job. ================= I disagree. The U-T would not want Breen working for a competitor or producing work product that could appear in competing publications. The U-T would want exclusive rights to Breen's work, it would not want Breen spreading his name around in various publications. Would the U-T want Breen's name on a comic strip that was published in the LA Times? Of course not. Employers have the right under California law to restrict and regulate their employees' outside business activities. The U-T could have legally fired Breen had he gone into business with Kelley. Kelley is suing the wrong party. He had a contact with Breen. Kelley should sue Breen for breach of contract and force him to either comply with the contract or pay damages. In my opinion, Kelley's lawyer is chasing a red herring in his efforts to prove management lied. This issue is irrelevant. The legal issue is whether the U-T had the legal right to fire Breen in the event he went into business with Kelley. If the U-T had that right, then Kelley has no case.— October 29, 2009 8:15 p.m.
Memory -- er, uh -- Lapses at the Union-Tribune
I don't think Kelley has much of a case. The Court will likely rule that it was reasonable for the U-T to stop an employee like Breen from entering into a business venture that might interfere with his duties at the paper. Winner should argue that she directed Breen not to work with Kelley because she feared such an association would interfere with his duties at the U-T. Employers have this right. For example, the Reader has the right to prevent Bauder from ghost writing columns for Paul Krugman while he's on the Reader payroll. The issue of whether Breen told Osborne or Winner about the contract is irrelevant. It seems to me that Kelley sued the wrong party.— October 28, 2009 10:16 p.m.
Memory -- er, uh -- Lapses at the Union-Tribune
Who will pay the judgement if Kelley wins? Will the U-T's former owner, Copley Press, have to pay the judgement, or will the new owner be on the hook?— October 28, 2009 8:22 p.m.
Burnham's "Elitist" Remark Hands Victory to Rider
However, I would say that $2 a share would have stuck with me. I think it was more than that. The actual amount may have been covered up in some way. Best, Don Bauder ================ The answer is at the SEC website. Burnham Pacific was delisted from the stock exchange in 2002 and all its assets were transferred to a liquidating trust, BPP Liquidating Trust, to sell assets and pay off the investors. Each stockholder received one unit in the trust in exchange for each share held in Burnham Pacific. The trust terminated on 12/29/2005. From 2002 through 12/29/2005 the investors received total liquidating distributions from the trust of only $1.42 per unit. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/805730/000…— October 25, 2009 4:26 p.m.
Is San Diego a haven for Homeless?
Then, keep a bag and a bottle of water in your glove compartment at all times. When you see one of these folks standing on the corner, you can hand off the bag like passing a football, without even stopping. ========== The homeless receive up to $2,200 per month in Social Security disability payments and matching state disability payments. It They certainly do not need your Dollar Store handouts to survive. They choose to spend our tax dollars on drugs and alcohol, and then beg for handouts because they blew the money on crap. What the homeless need is military discipline and regimentation in their lives. They need to be told when to get up in the morning, when to go to sleep, when to brush their teeth, and when to eat. They need to be forced to perform at least 8 to 10 hours of physical work per day, 6 days per week, in order to leach the drugs and alcohol out of their systems. The constant monitoring and supervision the homeless require can only be provided with the confines of a government run facility. It is inhumane to allow the homeless to remain on the streets living in degradation.— October 25, 2009 9:35 a.m.
Is San Diego a haven for Homeless?
After all, you had the same idea for people who go to bars or drink alcohol in public places. Wait--were drinkers to enroll in work camps, or just the death march and then summary execution? By SDaniels =========== I never made any such comment. I stated that I was in favor of the alcohol ban at the beach, and wanted the police to vigorously enforce the ban. I never advocated summary execution of the homeless. I advocated rounding them up and placing them in camps where they can live with dignity in a controlled environment, free from drugs and alcohol. This would occur after a hearing in a court of law with due process. You would have them continue to live on the streets in filth and squalor because you have no conscience. I also advocate rounding them up because it is cheaper than the current arrangement. Many of the "homeless" earn more in government benefits from their claimed disabilities than many of you earn by working. You also fail to address the issue of whether CreO is illegally using welfare benefits to fund a college education that many others work 40 hours a week to pay for. I am sure many SDSU students could earn 4.0 GPAs if they quit their 40 hour a week job and went on welfare to study full time.— October 24, 2009 9:53 p.m.