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
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
Almost $82K salary buys a median-priced SD home
The other part in that equation is that the San Diego job market does not offer up nearly the same kind of salaries as New York or Boston. At least that's the way I remember it from my time there in the late 90's. I remember SD being a very expensive town overall. And that's coming from a native Brooklynite.— February 20, 2014 5:52 a.m.
Mary Jo White fretted about "aggressive" regulator
Matt Taibbi and Don Bauder have been my go-to's for keeping an eye on the scoundrels in high places and for my education on financial chicanery. I have urged many a person to read their work. I will check out some of the others mentioned here as well. I would like to recommend Barry Ritholtz too. He is the author of Bailout Nation and has a regular column in the Sunday Washington Post. His blog is regular reading for me and it is excellent-- The Big Picture (www.ritholtz.com).— February 3, 2013 6:04 a.m.
U.S. Kills Osama bin Laden: Reports
Don’t get me wrong. I’m shedding no tears for this man. But I find myself wondering what the hell this really means. Tojo, Hitler, and Goering had more American blood on their hands than this guy. A lot more. And Tojo and Goering got trial...s. And Hitler would’ve got one too had he not committed suicide. All I think this does is forever cement bin Laden’s status as the eternally convenient boogeyman. A distraction that lasts forever, deflecting attention away from the long line of blunders that led up to those horrible moments on September 11 and the bungling and outright crimes that were committed in its aftermath. By making sure there was no trial, it will also forever bury our own government’s hand in creating bin Laden and al Qaeda. I wonder what unsavory information would’ve been brought to light in a public trial. And maybe it’s just the conspiracy theorist in me, but I’m also left wondering what horrendous piece of legislation is going to get rammed through the House and Senate now that everyone is chanting “USA! USA!” And what the hell does this really mean in terms of strategy? He was already effectively neutralized in some forsaken corner of Pakistan. Does that mean that we win? Can we bring everyone home now? Does it also mean that the trillions of dollars that we have spent in the last ten years on these wars was worth it? Or does another terrorist simply take his place? This reminds me of when law enforcement leaders and politicians declare a big public victory when some gangland drug kingpin is taken out. You haven’t eliminated the problem. You neutralized one small symptom. And another will simply step into the power vacuum because you’ve ignored the root problem which is: why would kids turn to drugs and gangs in the first place? You think this is going to stop terrorism? Why do people turn to it in the first place? I’ve got some news for you, those people do NOT hate us for our freedom. They hate us because our government has meddled in their affairs and we have propped up some pretty awful people as rulers in those countries who have plenty of blood on their hands as well.— May 2, 2011 7:57 a.m.
Lerach: Don't Blame Public Union Members. Blame Wall Street
That's an excellent question and I'm not sure that I have an answer. If I did, it would most likely involve a combination of things, and yes, benefits modification would be one of them. In a just world, there would be massive clawbacks for the fraudulent inducement by the Wall Street banks in selling a lot of this garbage. There would also be a 1 or 2 percent Wall Street transaction tax. In the municipalities like Bell, CA there would be clawbacks also. That was just so clearly over the top fraudulent that the authorities should not let that stand. I just wanted to throw my question out there to see what people thought because we are fast approaching (if we haven't already got there) a point where a signature on the dotted line means absolutely nothing. And I see that having serious legal, financial, and social ramifications.— March 5, 2011 4:45 a.m.
Lerach: Don't Blame Public Union Members. Blame Wall Street
SurfPuppy, I am curious as to where you stand on the "contract law" aspects of these cases (I am curious as to your opinion too Don). I don't know if I read it here or on another blog that I frequent, but the subject of Hernando de Soto's opinion of why capitalism in America actually worked was applied to the whole fraudclosure issue and how fraudulent mortgage notes and illegal foreclosures undermined or outright violated contract law and was thus ensuring capitalism's failure in our country and speeding our descent into banana republicanism. Basically de Soto said that the reason capitalism worked here was our respect for private property rights, contract law, and the rule of law. I think this applies in the pension case as well because, well, the states and municipalities signed contracts with these unions and their members. What does that mean for contract law if these entities can now say "Sorry, we don't have it and this contract we signed means nothing." What kind of precedent does that set for the future? Will a signed contract mean absolutely nothing?— March 3, 2011 9:32 a.m.
Lerach: Don't Blame Public Union Members. Blame Wall Street
You're absolutely right in the facts that the municipalities cannot print money and that it's absolutely not fair. (Though make no mistake, even though the feds can print money, higher taxes are coming in one form or another. You can bet on that. Already seeing think tanks floating the VAT). What I think a lot of these unions and their members were thinking/hoping was that the Federal Reserve, since it is already buying Treasuries, would step in and buy muni-bonds as well. I can't say that I disagree--entirely. I can see why the little guy would say, "Hey, you stepped in and bailed these guys out of their bad bets, when you were under no contractual obligation to do so. Where's ours?" I think that the unions are sorely mistaken. They are floating the prospect of state bankruptcy now. All of this is being done not only because the states and municipalities are broke (they definitely are), it is being used as the excuse to destroy the unions. It's also being played as the reason that the country is in such dire financial straights right now. And that simply isn't true.— March 2, 2011 10:50 a.m.
Lerach: Don't Blame Public Union Members. Blame Wall Street
SurfPuppy, while I agree with you about 90 percent of the time, I have to say that I most vehemently disagree with you on the argument that public unions are a bigger threat to the poor and middle class, and to the nation as a whole, than the banking sector and Wall Street, and on the argument that it wasn't at least partially Wall Street's fault that the pension funds invested poorly. On the first argument, the amount of money lost, and the political influence of the perpetrators cannot be compared. We are talking billions as compared to over a quadrillion dollars of bad bets that we, the tax payers, will be on the hook for. And while public unions may have some influence in political circles, it is nothing, and I mean NOTHING compared to the number of congressmen, senators, governors, and presidents the banking and Wall Street sectors can buy. On the second point, let's not forget that it was the corrupt Wall Street machine that had these investments rated as AAA. They were supposed to be as safe as Treasuries. I want to point out SurfPuppy, that I agree with you that there needs to be pension reform in the public sector. I live in NYC and have seen many instances of people retiring by age 45 with very sweet deals. As I have pointed out before, they can collect that sweet deal for potentially twice as long as they actually worked the job. That is nonsense and it needs to be fixed. But what I do not like is that public unions, and by default all unions, are being set up as the ultimate bad guys in this story--as if they were the ones responsible for all the ills of our economy right now. How perfect for Wall Street. Deflect the attention. The public unions are not, I repeat, the public unions are NOT the primary reason for all of our ills.— March 2, 2011 6:23 a.m.
Still Another SD Ponzi Schemer Headed for Slammer
You know what this reminds me of? The mafia. The small timers and goons low on the totem pole are the ones that do the time. Not the big boys. Same with drugs. Small time street dealers do the time. Not the higher ups who run the show. While I'm tickled that this skunk and others like him are going to prison, stories like these leave me wondering where the prosecutorial zeal is in persuing the capos in this plundering scheme and their political enablers. We all know who they are.— February 12, 2011 5:09 a.m.
New York State Takes Over Finances of Wealthy Nassau County
And please don't do the "Noo Yawker" thing. We don't all sound like Vinny Barberino.— January 28, 2011 4:43 p.m.
New York State Takes Over Finances of Wealthy Nassau County
Let's not forget that San Diego has an awful cost of living as well fellas. And they don't have the salaries that you would get in NYC.— January 28, 2011 4:41 p.m.