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
Working the Alaska pipeline and Prudhoe Bay
Gotta agree with DannyD. The smirking prose is annoying, self-indulgent, and gets in the way of the story. I just couldn't finish this article, even though I should have found the topic interesting. I stopped reading around about the union song... I like Mr. Daugherty's shorter articles...maybe his style of writing just doesn't translate into a longer piece? I'm open to others who may disagree and can explain why I should give this article another chance, but for now I'm at a loss as to why I should read further...does it become interesting enough to forebear the annoying tone and style? Fred— November 15, 2011 6:08 a.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
"....and two useless but true theorems are proved." So apt a description of the type of work professional academics in social "sciences" most frequently publish.— November 15, 2011 5:09 a.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
I found this interesting: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/… "Until recently, we were mesmerised by the bosses' self-attribution. Their acolytes, in academia, the media, thinktanks and government, created an extensive infrastructure of junk economics and flattery to justify their seizure of other people's wealth. So immersed in this nonsense did we become that we seldom challenged its veracity."— November 7, 2011 6:22 p.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
Here are some numbers and graphs from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in…— November 6, 2011 9:08 p.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
I put my irony on the fire, careful to keep the powder dry, and with one bird in hand walked past the two Bushes. Knowing that two wrongs cannot make a Wright, but not wanting to be the only one left, I grabbed the bull by the Supervisor Horns, and headed directly toward Tangiers where the Tangents arose. Now confused, deluded, and gobsmacked, I give myself up to the slings and arrows twisting my direction, outrageous though they be. "Drink the sky!" commanded the pink stratocaster as it climbed the sofa leg. Yet I had, in my milky innocence, asked for cash up front. :-)— November 4, 2011 7:51 p.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
Don and Twister, it's an interesting conversation you're having (between the lines) about dealing with quotes when conversing online. * Sometimes terrible people say wonderfully insightful things. * Often, wonderful people say horribly banal things. There's no way to separate the author from the quote without losing insight as to its validity, motivations, applicability to the individual who said it, and so on... Yet if we rigidly apply that standard, then some wonderful quotes would become "forbidden". Do we so wantonly throw away potential wisdom simply because the author was flawed in some way? I think Twister is saying Mead's quote stands on its own, regardless of how scholars have reassessed her work in the many decades since it was first published. And since the quote had no direct relevance to any controversy about her work or methods, a negative comment about Mead had no place in the discussion, which was about acquiring time v. money as a virtuous goal in living. That's reasonable. But what about this: "The writer is the engineer of the human soul." I could insert such a quote into a discussion to illustrate a point. If I mention that it was Uncle Joe Stalin who said it though...would I really be surprised if my point was ignored in favor of declaring me a slavish sycophant to a tyrant? If any people were speaking face to face, or on the phone, and such a quote were dropped casually into the conversation, no attribution would have been expected. No dispute or misunderstanding or tangent would have resulted...but here, in this medium, such things matter disproportionately. As an amateur quasi/pseudo-sociologist interested in how we use technology to communicate, and particularly how technology changes the nature of the communications, I find this fascinating. So please excuse my commenting on what is, rightfully, a dead issue. (Feel free to not comment in reply to this...just ruminating here, not seeking a long conversation on this tangental topic.) Best, Fred— November 3, 2011 11:05 p.m.
Vizcaíno Meets Storms, Natives, and, Finally, San Diego
Mr. Smith, as a certified member of the rabble and coincidentally a long time bozo in good standing, I concur with my colleague Twister. I'm ravenous for pearls you provide. I squeal and grunt in satisfaction, wallowing in my enjoyment as I gobble every delicious word. We're unworthy, and all the more grateful. Though unwashed, and more than a bit rank, the masses of history geeks, bozos, rising rabblers, and curmudgeonly commenters all unite to sing a cacophonous chorus to you. "We want more, More, MORE!" Best, Fred Williams— November 3, 2011 10:43 p.m.
San Diego unions push transaction tax
Golly, you're right. That dummy Kahneman...what was the Nobel Prize committee thinking when they gave him a prize, huh? From now on, whenever we need to know anything about any subject, we'll turn to Jeff the omniscient and ignore all those stupid cognitive scientists who actually do that wasteful experimentation and research. Thanks for setting us all straight. With your ninety hour days, and forty day weeks, working so hard at your trade, we're lucky to get these fragrant little wisdom droppings from you and should be far more grateful. And don't worry...it's enough just for you to say you disagree. As usual, we won't expect any actual evidence or reasons for your opinion. Since you're a fancy day-trader, picking up the little slivers here and there when you can fool other fancy day-traders, we all know that your knowledge is as near-perfect as can be imagined and won't dare to question you.— October 30, 2011 7:47 a.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
We geeks give money back because it wasn't what we were really looking for when we got it. Some of the work I'm proudest of cost me all my money...and sometimes the most lucrative work was trivial bull that I cannot even remember. There's little correlation between the financial rewards and the other, far more important rewards. I think giving it away, or spending it on projects that have little chance of making money but "matter" for other reasons is fairly common among us "geeks". And the quiet good we do in the world is sometimes far greater than the visible and lauded "philanthropy" of the financial titans. Nobody can make it in the IT world if they're greedy. The culture is oriented toward sharing, mostly information, and giving credit based on real accomplishment rather than transitory social status. Hoarding is antithetical to us. It's the opposite from the financial manipulator who will hide the facts, dissemble and distort, trick and trap others into making a mistake so they can collect money. Our prestige is found in exposing error and correcting others, preventing mistakes...the money be damned. At least those are the kinds of people I work with, and I'm proud to know them, privileged to spend my days with them, and enriched enough that I can be generous too. It's kinda sad to contemplate the weak, paranoid, and delusional mindset of those who hoard, grabbing and gobbling, never content to enjoy their own meal but demanding what's on other's plates as well. Scientists have identified the traits of psychopaths who have these anti-social urges. Perhaps it's time to begin testing for this, and putting them into counselling and rehabilitation instead of the corporate boardrooms and trading floors. (Just kidding...relax Jeff, I won't put you in a re-education camp.) Best, Fred— October 29, 2011 8:50 p.m.
Income chasm widens in San Diego
So in that case, what do you actually think, Jeff? Originally you say that you mostly agree with the erudite commenter you linked to, and now you back away, cherry-picking the bits you like, without even identifying them. Did they teach that to you when you studied business? Sure, it makes your position impervious to argument...but it also makes your argument impervious to comprehension. So rather than asserting (repeatedly) your financial, intellectual, and moral superiority (all of which are debatable), take a clear position that you won't back away from. As to your hilarious screed above...that one's going into the archives. Best, Fred * P.s. Maybe this link sums up your position? http://thejobmouse.com/2011/10/28/we-are-wall-str… Care to comment?— October 29, 2011 8:23 p.m.