In the UT, a very bad thing. Mike Aguirre pumping for a Sports Authority to give away money to professional sports teams...a hagiography of the Chargers experience and its alleged importance to San Diego. With the anticipated forebearance of the Reader's admin, I am reposting my reply in the comments here:
See the original here and feel free to add your comments:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/aug/14/sa…
No, Mike...you're wrong on this issue.
We've spoken, and I've supported you over the years when everyone else was calling you names. But I think you're on the wrong track when you eloquently, but misleadingly, equate a fleeting pleasant emotional state, vicariously achieved, with accomplishment and pride.
San Diego has paid (and paid, and paid, and paid) for professional football entertainment for 50 years.
Football is a sport that really belongs to the east coast, south, and midwest. California is known for surfing, skating, volleyball, and other sports more reflective of our lifestyle and climate.
So its no wonder that a sports-entertainment business requires constant government support to maintain itself when the residents of the area have so many other, better, cheaper, healthier options than being "fans" of imported and mostly irrelevant football.
Considering this, it's simply unreasonable that we should continue the folly of subsidizing this expensive entertainment when we are cutting VITAL services.
San Diego is not unique or consequential or substantially better because of the Chargers. The opposite may be true. If football is so important, and really makes a city great, then surely Detroit, Green Bay, or Pittsburgh must be ranked more highly for quality of life than San Diego?
Come on, Mike. San Diego is what it is because of the sand, surf, weather, educational institutions, proximity to Mexico, and long time Navy influence. The professional sports teams are a mere footnote.
So I disagree. We do NOT need yet another layer of government, a sports authority, to employ former professional politicians as they await a return to office. We do NOT need to continue the bad precedent of throwing away money subsidizing entertainment when we're simultaneously cutting spending on education, infrastructure, and public safety.
Football may be fun and interesting, and produce momentary euphoria. Well, so is reality television, or pot, sniffing glue, or watching strippers for that matter. That doesn't make it something we should subsidize at the expense of our long term interests.
You can love the Chargers, or you can love San Diego. In today's economic climate, Mike, you cannot love them both.
Respectfully,
Fred Williams — August 14, 2011 11:24 p.m.
New Calif. redevelopment law could stop Chargers stadium
Richard, as usual you provide facts and figures that others either lack or deliberately obscure. Once again, thanks. Fred— September 7, 2011 7:46 a.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
I'm not a hacker myself, but I know a few... I think the hacker ethic is very compatible with libertarianism politically, which is why such a large number of IT folks support someone like Ron Paul.— August 17, 2011 11:40 p.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
Back on the original topic...UT profitability. As a "geek", I notice things...about the signonsandiego website: They're running a massive amount of flash advertisements. If you're able, check out the plugin container on your browser and how it goes through the roof when you open the UT site. Kill the plugin, (see the flash animations grey out) and look...the plugin restarts and you have to kill it a second time. Very interesting... I'm assuming they're scooping up a lot of user data. I wouldn't be surprised if they're using the controversial "zombie cookies". See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_cookie On another revenue increasing front, instead of having articles as static elements to which other functions (like commenting) point, they tend to have replications of articles (seemingly as unique instances, which is important for billing). The result can be seen right now with the Aguirre stadium op-ed. There are two (that I know of) identical versions of the article, each with a unique comment thread. (Strangely, while the urls appear identical, it depends on how you navigate to the article to determine which version you are served.) One way you can detect this is claims by regular UT commenters that their comments have been removed...actually, they've just been served a different version of the same page...with it's own unique comment thread. So it looks, from the outside, like their site administration isn't well planned or deployed -- although from the inside it may make quite good sense since this strategy may boost ad rates and claims of unique page hits. (Cool, we charge the advertisers twice on the Aguirre piece, and they probably won't notice...hee, hee.) It's also possible, of course, that they charge different rates for these different versions of the same page, and all this is well understood by their advertisers...or it's even possible that they serve a different instance of the same article based on what they learn from the persistent zombie cookies. I don't really know, and am only guessing from observing as an outsider. Still, I find it interesting to watch the evolution of the UT site and what they're running in the user's browser. Best, Fred— August 15, 2011 10:03 p.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
Politicians who oppose sports subsidies are toast. Yes. Very true. In 1994 I was a minor darling of San Diego Republicans, a promising young politician who had done well in an underfunded city wide race, built up name recognition and contacts, was probably going to run again and maybe win... Then I joined people like Richard Rider in opposing the midnight demolition (anyone remember that?) and rebuild of The Murph, the quickie naming rights sale (at a bargain price) to Irwin Jacobs, and the inevitable "golly, now the Padres need a place to play" that followed. I debated Roger Hedgecock on air, predicting that we would end up paying out the nose for the ballpark (he claimed it would never take a dime from the general fund). Yes, I also simultaneously moved fulltime into IT, where the money is much better and the work is far more honest. Yet I can say with some certainty that as soon as I became anti-sports-subsidies, any plans for eventually representing San Diegans in poltical office were "toast". (And it's probably made my life a lot better, to tell the truth...) Best, Fred P.s. To validate what I claim here, have a look at UT archives for 1994, SDCCD Board of Trustees, District E, and check the final election results through the Registrar's website. Don't know if recordings of Hedgecock are available from so long ago...I doubt it. P.p.s. I'm sure if I were to run for office today, even having been largely vindicated in my previous positions, as an open atheist, foreign language speaker, former trailer park resident, who opposes sports subsidies...I would be the first candidate in history to actually receive a negative number of votes.— August 15, 2011 9:33 p.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
Now that is interesting...please do ask him for permission to tell us wtf he was really thinking. Also ask, please, why he trusts the UT after all the times it has sabotaged him...is it Charlie Brown kicking at Lucy's football? Good grief!— August 15, 2011 9:22 p.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
In the UT, a very bad thing. Mike Aguirre pumping for a Sports Authority to give away money to professional sports teams...a hagiography of the Chargers experience and its alleged importance to San Diego. With the anticipated forebearance of the Reader's admin, I am reposting my reply in the comments here: See the original here and feel free to add your comments: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/aug/14/sa… No, Mike...you're wrong on this issue. We've spoken, and I've supported you over the years when everyone else was calling you names. But I think you're on the wrong track when you eloquently, but misleadingly, equate a fleeting pleasant emotional state, vicariously achieved, with accomplishment and pride. San Diego has paid (and paid, and paid, and paid) for professional football entertainment for 50 years. Football is a sport that really belongs to the east coast, south, and midwest. California is known for surfing, skating, volleyball, and other sports more reflective of our lifestyle and climate. So its no wonder that a sports-entertainment business requires constant government support to maintain itself when the residents of the area have so many other, better, cheaper, healthier options than being "fans" of imported and mostly irrelevant football. Considering this, it's simply unreasonable that we should continue the folly of subsidizing this expensive entertainment when we are cutting VITAL services. San Diego is not unique or consequential or substantially better because of the Chargers. The opposite may be true. If football is so important, and really makes a city great, then surely Detroit, Green Bay, or Pittsburgh must be ranked more highly for quality of life than San Diego? Come on, Mike. San Diego is what it is because of the sand, surf, weather, educational institutions, proximity to Mexico, and long time Navy influence. The professional sports teams are a mere footnote. So I disagree. We do NOT need yet another layer of government, a sports authority, to employ former professional politicians as they await a return to office. We do NOT need to continue the bad precedent of throwing away money subsidizing entertainment when we're simultaneously cutting spending on education, infrastructure, and public safety. Football may be fun and interesting, and produce momentary euphoria. Well, so is reality television, or pot, sniffing glue, or watching strippers for that matter. That doesn't make it something we should subsidize at the expense of our long term interests. You can love the Chargers, or you can love San Diego. In today's economic climate, Mike, you cannot love them both. Respectfully, Fred Williams— August 14, 2011 11:24 p.m.
The Water Man check-in center in East Village
This project makes a lot of sense, and David Ross continues to be one of the most heroic men in San Diego. David Ross gets beat up, by cops, by thugs, by the very people he tries so hard to help, yet he keeps working on his mission to make a real difference in the world for those who suffer on the streets. This simple idea, of giving the unfortunate a secure place to store some of their belongings, is long overdue. While it may seem expensive, compared to just about everything else the city is doing it's a bargain...plus, it actually works. When we see CCDC wasting hundreds of thousands on "reports" which contain falsified information to support pre-ordained conclusions, written by former CCDC insiders now working as consultants, we know that most of the money this organization spends is squandered. Remember also that former councilman Maienschein is being paid a handsome salary by the United Way to implement the "Plan to End Chronic Homelessness". Oh really? What's he doing? And former CCDC board member, and wife of Toni Atkins, Jennifer LeSar was just given a huge sum of public money to also "solve homelessness". How's that working out, Jen? So while the costs of this simple and straightforward project, a hundred grand a year, seem high, it's a lot more value for tax payer's money than the quiet corruption of paying off insiders to claim credit for "helping the homeless" while preparing their next career step. Meanwhile, David Ross gets punched in the face, lawyers get their cut, the homeless have to wait and wait for their compensation, or any assistance from a contemptuous public. San Diego, America's Finest City.— August 11, 2011 10:33 p.m.
"I'd Love It"
Hey now, Barbie...you haven't responded to my polite request for cash and food. How ungrateful. Here we are, best and closest of friends. Don't you remember that I actually met you one time at that one party where you were doing that thing? Jeez, you're so stuck up! So I'll give you one last chance...only because I'm so kind and thoughtful. I'm looking forward to receiving your money, and eating your food. Please be sure to let me know when you've deposited it all in my account, n-kay? Oh, and don't go expecting me to offer you something in return. This obsession of yours of getting a benefit is disgraceful. You should give me your money, time, and food because of our friendship and your love for humanity. How dare you suggest that I should reciprocate? That's so unfair! :-) (Reverting to seriousness...hey, Barb. Hope things are going well. Thought this would cheer you up, maybe give you something to copy/paste/send to the next emailing mf who, in the words of the wise and venerable Dr. Dre, tires you by, "comin up to me, with his hands out, wantin somethin for free". Take care, keep writing, keep your head up, and stare down the idiots...best, Fred.)— August 6, 2011 12:28 a.m.
Will Southern Cal Newspapers Combine?
Don, you explained that one of the main reasons the dollar remains as healthy as it has so far is that the EURO has similar problems. Now, traditionally, when one currency is inflated (to pay debts with valueless paper) it is compensated by a run to another more trustworthy currency. Yet, as you describe, the primary alternative, the EURO, is in similar condition. In fact, it seems that the quantitative easing practised by the guardians of both currencies is keeping them in a sort of miserable equilibrium. Gold prices, and other popular commodities bets, I think are not based on industrial futures, but a direct result of folks like Glenn Beck hard selling it as a secure investment for believers in the coming apocalypse. I'm dystopian when it comes to the next decade or so of financial ugliness we'll endure, but since I don't think Jesus will be appearing in a shaft of light to smite the unbelievers, I want a long term plan to ensure there's something for my family. Property is still inflated (when compared to rental income), commodities are a sucker's bet, stocks and bonds...please don't expect me to believe the SEC or Treasury is interested in protecting our investments. Hiding cash under the mattress might be safer than relying on corporate owned databases, where our alleged wealth is actually a collection of ones and zeroes. After working in IT for two decades, I don't trust software -- especially complex financial software that is connected with other massive and complex software. I know what can, and probably will go wrong, although nobody can know exactly when. So what is left?— August 6, 2011 12:18 a.m.
"I'd Love It"
Barbie, I would love it if you could please just go ahead and send all your money to me, n-kay? Yeah, that would be great. Oh, and can you make sure to tell me when you've sent it all. I don't want to have to log in to check if you've not sent it yet. Plus, if you don't mind too much, maybe you could also send along any credit cards that have any room left on them for charges? Just be sure to wash them really good first, careful not to scratch them -- so use a non-abrasive cleaner, and put them in plastic bags so I don't get any of your germs. Oh yes, one more thing. You know how I can't stand the thought of pee and poop, right? Well, if you wouldn't mind coming over and scrubbing out my toilet, that would be so appreciated. I don't have one of those plastic scrubber stick thingies, so I'm just going to have to let you use one of my sponges. I don't mind if you bring gloves, but that's totally up to you, Barb. Can I call you Barbie? N-kay, great! Thanks a lot. You know you can count on me anytime you're feeling lonely and have extra food you need eating. Just give me money for a taxi, and I'll come right over. Love and kisses, Fred— August 3, 2011 9:48 p.m.