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
Qualcomm engineers get axed, then train foreign replacements
Donald Trump is egotistical, frequently offensive, doesn't have a deep understanding of foreign policy, may be bigoted, unstable, and frankly might even be considered emotionally / mentally ill. All of the above are certainly valid reasons to not vote for him and I can't disprove any of them. HOWEVER - despite all of the above I will tell you why I might vote for Trump and why a large number of Americans are voting for him despite the above flaws. The RNC elites say that illegal immigration, free trade agreements, and H1B visas are good for America. I think illegal immigration, free trade agreements, and H1B visas are all good for very big corporations but very bad for middle class Americans. Trump is the only major candidate who holds all those views. That is why Mitt Romney and the RNC are going ballistic about Trump, not any of the above issues with Trump. I also have a lot of respect for Bernie Sanders as he is the other POTUS candidate who clearly cares about the American middle class. However I'm not sure I want to turn America into Scandanvia as Sanders advocates. I realize Scandanavian countries have been successful in many ways but I think there are a lot of differences between the US and Scandanvia which might not make their model work here. There are differences between US culture and Scandanvian culture.— April 1, 2016 5:27 a.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
BTW the draft of the initiative can be found on the Chargers' web site http://www.chargers.com/sites/chargers.com/files/…— March 31, 2016 3:10 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
Being completely right about everything he said is no excuse for saying bad things about the Chargers. Bruce Henderson is still the devil. That's the way stadium subsidy advocates will see it anyway.— March 31, 2016 2:38 p.m.
Qualcomm engineers get axed, then train foreign replacements
Yes - I think if you work hard, are productive, consistently produce quality work, keep your skill set up to date, and don't make any enemies you will always find a job somewhere.— March 30, 2016 9:01 p.m.
Qualcomm engineers get axed, then train foreign replacements
Bob Elmasian The law of supply and demand shows that as supply of a good (such as engineering labor) increases, the price of that good (such as a salary) decreases. So ANY H1B hiring decreases US engineering salaries. Of course, the blatant abuses by IT departments in famous recent cases such as Disney and Edison lower salaries and disrupt American workers lives even more than most H1B hiring. There is no great shortage of engineers. If there were (again by the law of supply and demand) engineering salaries would be skyrocketing. But they're not. Also, if there were a great shortage of engineers companies would be willing to hire less than stellar engineering graduates. But they're not - increasingly a graduate degree from a "name brand" college is required for many engineering positions. Certainly the H1B program helps American high-tech companies by lowering labor costs. It has been argued that the H1B program has helped establish American cities (esp. silicon valley) as the high tech capitals of the world - and that keeping the high tech work in the US helps provide jobs to support staff (other workers and industries that support the high tech industry). So I suppose it's possible that there are some advantages to the H1B program to certain segments of the population. But the main results of the H1B program are lower salaries and less job security for American engineers.— March 30, 2016 8:42 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
David Elgier, I think you should put the following verbatim into the traffic / parking impact analysis in the EIR for the stadium. " I encourage you to whip out your smart phone and download an application called Uber. That should end any concerns you have about parking." I'm sure that would go over well with the EIR review committee.— March 30, 2016 7:59 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
Heather Paetow The pros and cons are pretty simple. The pro of the initiative is if it passes the Chargers stay in San Diego. In theory for 30 years at least (but there are likely loopholes which could allow them to leave earlier). There may be some small economic benefits to others outside of the Charger organization but these benefits are insignificant (see papers by Roger Noll or other articles on fieldofschemes.com). The only significant benefit to passing the initiative is that the Chargers stay in San Diego. The con is that it costs San Diego taxpayers $1.15B. And it would perpetuate the notion that subsidizing wealthy business owners at the expense of the general public is acceptable public policy. Who knows where that precedent will eventually lead to? So basically if you think keeping the Chargers is so important that it's worth $1.15B of public money then you should vote yes on the intiative. The pros and cons are pretty simple. Is keeping the Chargers worth $1.15B of public money?— March 30, 2016 3:57 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
One thing I heard today (AM 1360) is that the annual maintenence (15M) will come from TOT taxes not the Chargers. So if that's true then the Chargers' out of pocket contribution to this stadium will be 650M - 100M (NFL grant) - 200M (NFL loan) - PSL revenue - naming revenue which totals to the Chargers paying pretty close to ZERO.— March 30, 2016 3:40 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
Hosting big sports events is a big boon to the economy. Look at how great Brazil's economy is doing after hosting a World Cup and going into the 2016 Olympics!!! Or maybe not so great..— March 30, 2016 1:38 p.m.
Chargers release so-called financing plan
A recent advocacy piece by Kevin Acee (UT) is a good example of the tricks used to attempt to mislead voters about the true costs to citizens and true benefits to the Chargers. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/mar… These tricks have been mentioned before in many excellent columns by Don, and by many posts. But I'll repeat I see 2 major tricks which use horrendously flawed and misleading logic. 1. TOT taxes are just money from tourists. They don't affect San Diegans in any way. 2. Most of the $1.15B in tax revenue is being spent on a convention center expansion. Only $350M will be spent on the Chargers' stadium. 3. The Chargers are offering a good deal because most NFL stadiums get more taxpayer revenue than the Chargers stadium (assuming you don't count any of the land acquisition or convention center costs). Of course, in reality both these arguments are deeply flawed. 1. Higher TOT taxes will mean less revenue for hotels - either they lower rates and/or have lower occupancy (results: possible bankruptcies, layoffs, lower salaries). Also, there are other things that increased TOT revenue could be used for which would be far more appropriate uses of tax money. 2. It's clearly not worth $800M for a non-contiguous convention center expansion. In 2013 a $520M contiguous expansion was proposed. It's debatable whether the $520M for a contiguous expansion would be a good deal for the city but it's certainly a heck of a lot better deal than $800M for a non-contiguous expansion. So more money is allocated for a less valuable convention center expansion. This would be like going to a car dealer and telling them you will pay 50K for a BMW 530 then having the dealer offer you a Toyota Camry for 80K. (Not to bash Toyota - I'm quite happy with my Camry). 3. A "good deal" is only in perspective to the really, really bad deals other cities have received. This would be like a mob boss telling store owners that paying him 1% revenue as "protection money" is a good deal because other mob bosses charge 2%.— March 30, 2016 10:35 a.m.