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
Paycheck politics
#10 with a lawyer, obfuscation comes with the territory.— October 19, 2009 8:31 p.m.
UCSD's Gary Jacobson frets about polarization
Fair enough Pete. My lady has been enjoying a ladies night out tonight so I probably had a little too much time on my hands anyway. Lucky for me though, she just got home, so there are more important tasks at hand. Sooooooooo, I'm gone.— October 17, 2009 12:25 a.m.
UCSD's Gary Jacobson frets about polarization
Pete, if you posted it, why shouldn't it be believed that it's your point of view? And no offense but if you posted something 5 months old, you gotta know you're gonna here about it. I happen to agree with you about the media hype at least as to how much it's being overdone.— October 17, 2009 12:06 a.m.
UCSD's Gary Jacobson frets about polarization
"If I have to read anymore of these comments I am going to put a bullet in my head....." Surfpuppy, quit teasing us. Didn't you say you don't own any fire arms?— October 16, 2009 11:57 p.m.
UCSD's Gary Jacobson frets about polarization
Pete, actually that came from you. Or more accurately, you used it in your post in a context so as to give the impression that the figures are what you personally believe."1 death out of every 1,000 cases doesn't sound so scary,does it?" Why rely on sources like that when it's just as easy to look at data fron someplace like the CDC or the WHO. Here's the info I found from the CDC. On average,37.5 million people come down with seasonal flu each year. On average, each year 40,000 people die. Thats a mortality rate of just over .001%. The current swine flu mortality rate for San Diego, based on the figures they list is just over .07%. The worldwide figures I gave show a mortality rate of about .0118%. Even at that lower rate, if only the same amount of people are infected with swine flu as with seasonal flu, that means almost 450,000 people could die. That's way more than a 1 in 1000 chance the swine flu could kill you're if infected. If my math skills haven't eroaded to badly, that's closer to a 1 in 100 chance. If you don't believe what you get from the mainstream media, do a little research and find out for yourself— October 16, 2009 11:51 p.m.
UCSD's Gary Jacobson frets about polarization
Pete, perhaps it's the word pandemic that bothers you. It has as much to do with the geographical spread as the number of cases or fatalities. 1. a widespread epidemic of a disease. 2. a widespread epidemic that affects whole countries or the entire world. 3. (of a disease) occurring throughout the population of a country, a people, or the world. As of 11 October 2009, worldwide there have been more than 399232 laboratory confirmed cases of pandemic influenza H1N1 2009 and over 4735 deaths reported to WHO. That's quite a bit more than 1 death per 1000 cases as is the 24 deaths in 332 cases in San Diego county.— October 16, 2009 9:59 p.m.
Degrees
"Not if there is a pre nup." I could have sworn I said that.... "Community property is not divided equally if there is a written agreement to the contrary." I know I didn't specifically use the term prenup, but that's what I was refering to. "Minor exceptions" Depends on what your definition of minor is. Unfortunately, during my marriage I lost both of my parent, at separate times. As an only child, basically their whole estate was bequithed to me, with the exception of some charitable contributions. A few years later, when my ex and I divorced, she felt she was entitles to half. That included my parents home, which at the time was valued at almost 400k and was paid for. I certainly would not consider that a "minor exception". I don't know about student loans because neither of us had any, but I do know that when she went back to school to finish her last year towards her BA nad then got her MS, that was community property and she had to "reimburse" me for half of the cost. My attorney said the because she was able to go back specifically because of what I recived from my parents estate, I probably could have tried to get it all back, but I chose not to.— October 14, 2009 2:05 p.m.
Degrees
CuddleFish, my understanding is that adultery, or any other valid grounds for divorce, would have no affect on any financial agreements made, unless it is specifically included. The example that comes to mind is the prenup that has a clause in it for adultery; A couple divorce, the prenup give the spouse X amount, if she gets caught cheating, she gets zip. And even then, some of those get successfully challenged in court. Think Marvin Mitchelson.— October 14, 2009 1:33 p.m.
Degrees
Daniels, my response to the surfpup was based on my own previous experience and what I learned during that processas the petitioner. As far as adultery is concerned, it is not grounds for divorce. Assuming the marriage is a legal one, not bigamous, incestuous or under age, Ca. only recognizes 2 reasons for divorce; insanity or the ubiquitous " irreconcilable differences". This is straight from Form FL-100, petition for dissolution, separation or nullity of marriage. "Irreconcilable differences are those grounds which are determined by the court to be substantial reasons for not continuing the marriage and which make it appear that the marriage should be dissolved." That leaves the interpretation pretty open. I'm not an attorney but I do know that during my divorce, my attorney told me that the reason for the divorce had absolutely no bearing on the asset division or spousal support. We had no children, so I imagine it is possible it could have a bearing on custody, but I think it would would have to a really unusual circumstance.— October 14, 2009 1:24 p.m.
Degrees
"CA is a "community property" state-everything acquired during marriage is split 50/50 no matter what." I hate to disagree with you surfpup, but it is not always"50/50 no matter what. Community property is not divided equally if there is a written agreement to the contrary. Property aquired during the marriage by gift, devise or bequest is also not considered community property. All that the law requires is that the net value of the assets received by each spouse must be equal. The court determines the total fair market value of the community assets, subtracts the joint obligations of the parties,which gives you the net community estate. In some cases, even pensions and retirement are subject to division at a later date.— October 14, 2009 11:38 a.m.