Better Bowl
http://www.lingeriebowl.com/index.htm
Full Version: Business and Finance
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 6 2005, 02:58 PM)
I never care either who wins or to watch. I think it is the Stupidest Day of the Year. I generally keep that curmudgeonly opinion to myself so as not to rain on any parades or pleasures. 
I even occasionally go to a party and pretend to have my head aimed somewhere toward the TV. 
However, the spiraling crazy real estate market fascinates me endlessly, and I thought that was a lucid piece.
[right][snapback]48441[/snapback][/right]
I even occasionally go to a party and pretend to have my head aimed somewhere toward the TV. However, the spiraling crazy real estate market fascinates me endlessly, and I thought that was a lucid piece.
[right][snapback]48441[/snapback][/right]
This real estate market is crazy last year or two. Saw some of that when I lived in Seattle late 80s early 90s. Federal Way (the only way, open to midnight every day) was a little outside the really hot zones. Opens up a lot of possibilities being in a hot market if you can get up and go when the time is right.
QUOTE(arebuntz @ Feb 6 2005, 05:25 PM)
This real estate market is crazy last year or two. Saw some of that when I lived in Seattle late 80s early 90s. Federal Way (the only way, open to midnight every day) was a little outside the really hot zones. Opens up a lot of possibilities being in a hot market if you can get up and go when the time is right.
[right][snapback]48582[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]48582[/snapback][/right]
I used to buzz up to the Trader Joe's in Federal Way. Traffic throughout Pugetopolis astounded me. (So did the poor maintenance of roads.)
The RE market has been crazy in the Northwest, off-shoot of what goes on in California, for years. I believe Medford was named number one on the housing unaffordability index last year. That's where I grew up, and believe me, it was not ever thus.
As long as you are set for life, the rest of the world can go to hell. This is the absolute greed Wall Street and corporate America represents. That is the same exact attitude of the Bush administration. A bunch of rich elites just wanting more money and power. They are, and never will be satisfied with, the amount of control or money they have. It's never enough.
Nader was right.
My Avaricious Hero
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, February 8, 2005; Page A23
After it was revealed that Richard A. Grasso, once the chairman of the august New York Stock Exchange, had made an unseemly amount of money -- in other words, almost as much as his bosses -- a lawyer was hired and an investigation was launched, which proved, to my immense satisfaction, that his greed knew no bounds. His willingness to spend other people's money extended even to his secretary, paid $240,000 a year, and to his two drivers, each paid $130,000, and probably, for such is the custom, entitled to take the car home with them at night. Grasso is the face of corporate America. Put it on the $100 bill.
I have written before about the sainted Grasso and admitted that he is my hero. I confessed this even before the report prepared by Dan K. Webb, a former federal prosecutor, was recently made public by court order. Now that we know the full extent of Grasso's heroic sense of entitlement, my admiration for him grows by the storied leaps and bounds -- and throw in a scissor step. Here is a man who watched others make obscene amounts of money and figured that he could do the same. A little applause, please.
The critical difference between Grasso and his bosses, we are always reminded, is that he was running a nonprofit organization and his members, the banks and brokers of Wall Street, were not. It is this nonprofit status that has engaged the New York state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, who has sued Grasso, pointing out that under the law, executives of nonprofit corporations are supposed to receive only "reasonable" compensation. For some reason, Spitzer considers Grasso's $139.5 million payout in 2003 to be unreasonable. Go figure.
Now let us turn our attention to the payout James Kilts is going to get. Kilts is the chairman and chief executive of Gillette, which he recently sold to Procter & Gamble, ending 104 years of glorious razor blade history. According to the Wall Street Journal, Kilts will realize more than $153 million from the deal -- and that does not include his $1.2 million-a-year pension. Some of this money comes from the value Kilts supposedly added to the Gillette stock and so, in the tradition of American business, more power to him. But some of it -- $23.9 million, to be precise -- is what the Journal called a "one-time sweetener from P&G," and an additional $12.6 million is a "change in control" payment. Add it up and Kilts got $36.5 million for selling King C. Gillette's little company to P&G -- and, in the process, eventually eliminating some 6,000 jobs. I bet those workers will not be getting a "change in control" payment.
More jobs gone. Yaaaay!! You see where this is headed? Asters, Gettys, Carnegies, the BUSHS.
Where is the sacrifice from these rich scumbags? Why does everyone else have to get hit while they make out so well?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...6-2005Feb7.html
Nader was right.
My Avaricious Hero
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, February 8, 2005; Page A23
After it was revealed that Richard A. Grasso, once the chairman of the august New York Stock Exchange, had made an unseemly amount of money -- in other words, almost as much as his bosses -- a lawyer was hired and an investigation was launched, which proved, to my immense satisfaction, that his greed knew no bounds. His willingness to spend other people's money extended even to his secretary, paid $240,000 a year, and to his two drivers, each paid $130,000, and probably, for such is the custom, entitled to take the car home with them at night. Grasso is the face of corporate America. Put it on the $100 bill.
I have written before about the sainted Grasso and admitted that he is my hero. I confessed this even before the report prepared by Dan K. Webb, a former federal prosecutor, was recently made public by court order. Now that we know the full extent of Grasso's heroic sense of entitlement, my admiration for him grows by the storied leaps and bounds -- and throw in a scissor step. Here is a man who watched others make obscene amounts of money and figured that he could do the same. A little applause, please.
The critical difference between Grasso and his bosses, we are always reminded, is that he was running a nonprofit organization and his members, the banks and brokers of Wall Street, were not. It is this nonprofit status that has engaged the New York state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, who has sued Grasso, pointing out that under the law, executives of nonprofit corporations are supposed to receive only "reasonable" compensation. For some reason, Spitzer considers Grasso's $139.5 million payout in 2003 to be unreasonable. Go figure.
Now let us turn our attention to the payout James Kilts is going to get. Kilts is the chairman and chief executive of Gillette, which he recently sold to Procter & Gamble, ending 104 years of glorious razor blade history. According to the Wall Street Journal, Kilts will realize more than $153 million from the deal -- and that does not include his $1.2 million-a-year pension. Some of this money comes from the value Kilts supposedly added to the Gillette stock and so, in the tradition of American business, more power to him. But some of it -- $23.9 million, to be precise -- is what the Journal called a "one-time sweetener from P&G," and an additional $12.6 million is a "change in control" payment. Add it up and Kilts got $36.5 million for selling King C. Gillette's little company to P&G -- and, in the process, eventually eliminating some 6,000 jobs. I bet those workers will not be getting a "change in control" payment.
More jobs gone. Yaaaay!! You see where this is headed? Asters, Gettys, Carnegies, the BUSHS.
Where is the sacrifice from these rich scumbags? Why does everyone else have to get hit while they make out so well?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...6-2005Feb7.html
QUOTE(davisął @ Feb 8 2005, 06:01 AM)
As long as you are set for life, the rest of the world can go to hell. This is the absolute greed Wall Street and corporate America represents. That is the same exact attitude of the Bush administration. A bunch of rich elites just wanting more money and power. They are, and never will be satisfied with, the amount of control or money they have. It's never enough.
Nader was right.
My Avaricious Hero
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, February 8, 2005; Page A23
After it was revealed that Richard A. Grasso, once the chairman of the august New York Stock Exchange, had made an unseemly amount of money -- in other words, almost as much as his bosses -- a lawyer was hired and an investigation was launched, which proved, to my immense satisfaction, that his greed knew no bounds. His willingness to spend other people's money extended even to his secretary, paid $240,000 a year, and to his two drivers, each paid $130,000, and probably, for such is the custom, entitled to take the car home with them at night. Grasso is the face of corporate America. Put it on the $100 bill.
I have written before about the sainted Grasso and admitted that he is my hero. I confessed this even before the report prepared by Dan K. Webb, a former federal prosecutor, was recently made public by court order. Now that we know the full extent of Grasso's heroic sense of entitlement, my admiration for him grows by the storied leaps and bounds -- and throw in a scissor step. Here is a man who watched others make obscene amounts of money and figured that he could do the same. A little applause, please.
The critical difference between Grasso and his bosses, we are always reminded, is that he was running a nonprofit organization and his members, the banks and brokers of Wall Street, were not. It is this nonprofit status that has engaged the New York state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, who has sued Grasso, pointing out that under the law, executives of nonprofit corporations are supposed to receive only "reasonable" compensation. For some reason, Spitzer considers Grasso's $139.5 million payout in 2003 to be unreasonable. Go figure.
Now let us turn our attention to the payout James Kilts is going to get. Kilts is the chairman and chief executive of Gillette, which he recently sold to Procter & Gamble, ending 104 years of glorious razor blade history. According to the Wall Street Journal, Kilts will realize more than $153 million from the deal -- and that does not include his $1.2 million-a-year pension. Some of this money comes from the value Kilts supposedly added to the Gillette stock and so, in the tradition of American business, more power to him. But some of it -- $23.9 million, to be precise -- is what the Journal called a "one-time sweetener from P&G," and an additional $12.6 million is a "change in control" payment. Add it up and Kilts got $36.5 million for selling King C. Gillette's little company to P&G -- and, in the process, eventually eliminating some 6,000 jobs. I bet those workers will not be getting a "change in control" payment.
More jobs gone. Yaaaay!! You see where this is headed? Asters, Gettys, Carnegies, the BUSHS.
Where is the sacrifice from these rich scumbags? Why does everyone else have to get hit while they make out so well?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...6-2005Feb7.html
[right][snapback]49165[/snapback][/right]
Nader was right.
My Avaricious Hero
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, February 8, 2005; Page A23
After it was revealed that Richard A. Grasso, once the chairman of the august New York Stock Exchange, had made an unseemly amount of money -- in other words, almost as much as his bosses -- a lawyer was hired and an investigation was launched, which proved, to my immense satisfaction, that his greed knew no bounds. His willingness to spend other people's money extended even to his secretary, paid $240,000 a year, and to his two drivers, each paid $130,000, and probably, for such is the custom, entitled to take the car home with them at night. Grasso is the face of corporate America. Put it on the $100 bill.
I have written before about the sainted Grasso and admitted that he is my hero. I confessed this even before the report prepared by Dan K. Webb, a former federal prosecutor, was recently made public by court order. Now that we know the full extent of Grasso's heroic sense of entitlement, my admiration for him grows by the storied leaps and bounds -- and throw in a scissor step. Here is a man who watched others make obscene amounts of money and figured that he could do the same. A little applause, please.
The critical difference between Grasso and his bosses, we are always reminded, is that he was running a nonprofit organization and his members, the banks and brokers of Wall Street, were not. It is this nonprofit status that has engaged the New York state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, who has sued Grasso, pointing out that under the law, executives of nonprofit corporations are supposed to receive only "reasonable" compensation. For some reason, Spitzer considers Grasso's $139.5 million payout in 2003 to be unreasonable. Go figure.
Now let us turn our attention to the payout James Kilts is going to get. Kilts is the chairman and chief executive of Gillette, which he recently sold to Procter & Gamble, ending 104 years of glorious razor blade history. According to the Wall Street Journal, Kilts will realize more than $153 million from the deal -- and that does not include his $1.2 million-a-year pension. Some of this money comes from the value Kilts supposedly added to the Gillette stock and so, in the tradition of American business, more power to him. But some of it -- $23.9 million, to be precise -- is what the Journal called a "one-time sweetener from P&G," and an additional $12.6 million is a "change in control" payment. Add it up and Kilts got $36.5 million for selling King C. Gillette's little company to P&G -- and, in the process, eventually eliminating some 6,000 jobs. I bet those workers will not be getting a "change in control" payment.
More jobs gone. Yaaaay!! You see where this is headed? Asters, Gettys, Carnegies, the BUSHS.
Where is the sacrifice from these rich scumbags? Why does everyone else have to get hit while they make out so well?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...6-2005Feb7.html
[right][snapback]49165[/snapback][/right]
Sacrifice? Not only is there no sacrifice, they're getting extra relief. Those thiefs will have to pay taxes at a lower or zero rate on their loot. And their heirs, for the great feat of having chosen their parents carefully, will get to enjoy their unearned benefits tax-free. It's grand.
QUOTE
Nader was right.
No poop!
QUOTE(Nomarchy @ Feb 8 2005, 12:37 PM)
Sacrifice? Not only is there no sacrifice, they're getting extra relief. Those thiefs will have to pay taxes at a lower or zero rate on their loot. And their heirs, for the great feat of having chosen their parents carefully, will get to enjoy their unearned benefits tax-free. It's grand.
[right][snapback]49247[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49247[/snapback][/right]
The boomers at the top end of the pyramid need to pass on their loot tax free to their heirs, while they "fund" private accounts with loans that the next generation of proles will have to pay back.
Sweet deal.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 6 2005, 07:20 PM)
I used to buzz up to the Trader Joe's in Federal Way. Traffic throughout Pugetopolis astounded me. (So did the poor maintenance of roads.)
The RE market has been crazy in the Northwest, off-shoot of what goes on in California, for years. I believe Medford was named number one on the housing unaffordability index last year. That's where I grew up, and believe me, it was not ever thus.
[right][snapback]48662[/snapback][/right]
The RE market has been crazy in the Northwest, off-shoot of what goes on in California, for years. I believe Medford was named number one on the housing unaffordability index last year. That's where I grew up, and believe me, it was not ever thus.
[right][snapback]48662[/snapback][/right]
Manteca falls between Stockton (which was top (or bottom)20) and Modesto (also top(or bottom)20) geographically. It's also less affordable than either town, yet didn't make the list.
What's up with that?
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 04:21 PM)
Manteca falls between Stockton (which was top (or bottom)20) and Modesto (also top(or bottom)20) geographically. It's also less affordable than either town, yet didn't make the list.
What's up with that?
[right][snapback]49488[/snapback][/right]
What's up with that?
[right][snapback]49488[/snapback][/right]
So Stockton and Modesto are unaffordable? Compared to what (in Calif)?
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 03:21 PM)
Manteca falls between Stockton (which was top (or bottom)20) and Modesto (also top(or bottom)20) geographically. It's also less affordable than either town, yet didn't make the list.
What's up with that?
[right][snapback]49488[/snapback][/right]
What's up with that?
[right][snapback]49488[/snapback][/right]
I couldn't answer that. I don't remember the details or too much of the scope. I remember being a little startled at Medford's placement, and amused that Portland came in higher, I think, than San Jose. It was an amusing little something to toss in the face of all the stupid smug Californians who keep blathering that Oregon is "cheap."
Thank heavens none of my message board Californian friends are of this poor variety.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 06:42 PM)
I couldn't answer that. I don't remember the details or too much of the scope. I remember being a little startled at Medford's placement, and amused that Portland came in higher, I think, than San Jose. It was an amusing little something to toss in the face of all the stupid smug Californians who keep blathering that Oregon is "cheap."
Thank heavens none of my message board Californian friends are of this poor variety.
[right][snapback]49537[/snapback][/right]
Thank heavens none of my message board Californian friends are of this poor variety.
[right][snapback]49537[/snapback][/right]
The Nantucketization of Oregon is almost complete. We Californians might have to ply our home equity ponzi scheme elsewhere. Washington State is nice, I hear...
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 06:36 PM)
The Nantucketization of Oregon is almost complete. We Californians might have to ply our home equity ponzi scheme elsewhere. Washington State is nice, I hear...
[right][snapback]49564[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49564[/snapback][/right]
They've been coming to Washington for years -- particularly the ghastly sprawl of Pugetopolis. The only couple I know locally I like, and they are from the different tier of the totem pole. I'm successfully encamped. I don't think Californians can or will spoil my view.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 07:41 PM)
They've been coming to Washington for years -- particularly the ghastly sprawl of Pugetopolis. The only couple I know locally I like, and they are from the different tier of the totem pole. I'm successfully encamped. I don't think Californians can or will spoil my view.
[right][snapback]49567[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49567[/snapback][/right]
We can jack up your property taxes a little, but I am largely in agreement with you. Mr Vandelay and the nation of Costa Rica have more to worry about.
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 06:53 PM)
We can jack up your property taxes a little, but I am largely in agreement with you. Mr Vandelay and the nation of Costa Rica have more to worry about.
[right][snapback]49568[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49568[/snapback][/right]
Washingtonians seem to have jacked their own taxes up, and quite regressively so, which is what Mr. Gates Sr. rails about (and studies, for the legislative task forces). Taxes here are high. What little I would argue for would be lower and fairer. I don't love this state. I will never love this state. Therefore, there will be no love lost.
Now, this little town I am rather fond of. And the threat to it is the Olympian government "workers" moving down and in.
Meanwhile, government here, as everywhere, could use a bigger check (not checks) from the public. Most people around here live with low expectations and even wants .... it suits me well.
Now if Congress cuts off Amtrak funding, I will be a hurtin' for certain.
It's one of the only government programs that has ever meant anything to me.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 08:07 PM)
Now if Congress cuts off Amtrak funding, I will be a hurtin' for certain. It's one of the only government programs that has ever meant anything to me.
[right][snapback]49571[/snapback][/right]
It's one of the only government programs that has ever meant anything to me. [right][snapback]49571[/snapback][/right]
You likie ride choo choo, eh. Do you drive at all, or just as little as possible?
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 07:29 PM)
You likie ride choo choo, eh. Do you drive at all, or just as little as possible?
[right][snapback]49579[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49579[/snapback][/right]
There isn't much difference between "as little as possible" and not at all.
I wouldn't/couldn't drive on freeways. I can drive in towns, not cities, if I must. I toodled my father's old Camry around when I needed to. Loved that car. It was stolen and crashed in Portland. One more thing that made me hate that place. That was 1-1/2 years ago and I haven't driven since. (I barely put a few hundred miles a year on a car.)
Oh, I do wish I didn't hate it so much and wasn't so terrified, because I fear the utility will be needed again. But I have not even dared to shudder at the thought of freeway driving. I rely on Amtrak. Sure, it's inefficient -- like almost every other government program of which I've ever known. It's just one of the few I would like to see kept.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 08:55 PM)
There isn't much difference between "as little as possible" and not at all. I wouldn't/couldn't drive on freeways. I can drive in towns, not cities, if I must.
I toodled my father's old Camry around when I needed to. Loved that car. It was stolen and crashed in Portland. One more thing that made me hate that place. That was 1-1/2 years ago and I haven't driven since. (I barely put a few hundred miles a year on a car.)
Oh, I do wish I didn't hate it so much and wasn't so terrified, because I fear the utility will be needed again. But I have not even dared to shudder at the thought of freeway driving. I rely on Amtrak. Sure, it's inefficient -- like almost every other government program of which I've ever known. It's just one of the few I would like to see kept.
[right][snapback]49588[/snapback][/right]
I wouldn't/couldn't drive on freeways. I can drive in towns, not cities, if I must. I toodled my father's old Camry around when I needed to. Loved that car. It was stolen and crashed in Portland. One more thing that made me hate that place. That was 1-1/2 years ago and I haven't driven since. (I barely put a few hundred miles a year on a car.)
Oh, I do wish I didn't hate it so much and wasn't so terrified, because I fear the utility will be needed again. But I have not even dared to shudder at the thought of freeway driving. I rely on Amtrak. Sure, it's inefficient -- like almost every other government program of which I've ever known. It's just one of the few I would like to see kept.
[right][snapback]49588[/snapback][/right]
The old boxey framed Camrys had great 360 degree visibility. Now they look like every other aerodynamic sedan. As the "Caaaah Tauwk" boys on PBS say, they all look like "squashed chili beans."
Radio news here says if you want to take the Amtak to Chicago, better do it soon...
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:03 PM)
The old boxey framed Camrys had great 360 degree visibility. Now they look like every other aerodynamic sedan. As the "Caaaah Tauwk" boys on PBS say, they all look like "squashed chili beans."
Radio news here says if you want to take the Amtak to Chicago, better do it soon...
[right][snapback]49604[/snapback][/right]
Radio news here says if you want to take the Amtak to Chicago, better do it soon...
[right][snapback]49604[/snapback][/right]
Really?
Oh Wardlet, that could just about make me cry.And I ain't just playin' with words.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 6 2005, 10:20 PM)
I used to buzz up to the Trader Joe's in Federal Way. Traffic throughout Pugetopolis astounded me. (So did the poor maintenance of roads.)
The RE market has been crazy in the Northwest, off-shoot of what goes on in California, for years. I believe Medford was named number one on the housing unaffordability index last year. That's where I grew up, and believe me, it was not ever thus.
[right][snapback]48662[/snapback][/right]
The RE market has been crazy in the Northwest, off-shoot of what goes on in California, for years. I believe Medford was named number one on the housing unaffordability index last year. That's where I grew up, and believe me, it was not ever thus.
[right][snapback]48662[/snapback][/right]
Medford?
I thought it was Fairfield CT, or was that just the town unfriendliest to low incomes?
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 09:08 PM)
Really? Oh Wardlet, that could just about make me cry.
And I ain't just playin' with words.
[right][snapback]49611[/snapback][/right]
Oh Wardlet, that could just about make me cry.And I ain't just playin' with words.
[right][snapback]49611[/snapback][/right]
I doubt they will shut down the west coast line. "Starlight" is that called?
QUOTE(Bee @ Feb 8 2005, 08:11 PM)
Medford?
I thought it was Fairfield CT, or was that just the town unfriendliest to low incomes?
[right][snapback]49618[/snapback][/right]
I thought it was Fairfield CT, or was that just the town unfriendliest to low incomes?
[right][snapback]49618[/snapback][/right]
I have no idea; I paid attention to my necks of the woods. It wouldn't surprise me that Connecticut would house the town unfriendliest to low incomes.
Do you have a nostalgia thing for old square Camry's little bart?
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 10:18 PM)
I have no idea; I paid attention to my necks of the woods. It wouldn't surprise me that Connecticut would house the town unfriendliest to low incomes.
[right][snapback]49628[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49628[/snapback][/right]
And some of the unfriendliest libs as well.
Bloomington/Normal to Chicago will be hurting if Amtrak is cut.
The agriculture folk are getting all worked up over Bush's proposed cuts too.
Guess they figured they'd ride the gravy train with the mega-wealthy.
The agriculture folk are getting all worked up over Bush's proposed cuts too.
Guess they figured they'd ride the gravy train with the mega-wealthy.
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:18 PM)
I doubt they will shut down the west coast line. "Starlight" is that called?
[right][snapback]49627[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49627[/snapback][/right]
Coast Starlight is the major West Coast line. Cascades is a northwest line. It is usually on time. The Coast Starlight is wildly, spectacularly late. It shares tracks with commercial freight trains in second-tier status. When they come, it has to move -- off. Over the distances, those delays add up.
The Cascades runs Spanish-designed (Spain) Talgo trains. Not the comfiest; more of a commuter line. It is a highly reliable run.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 07:55 PM)
There isn't much difference between "as little as possible" and not at all. I wouldn't/couldn't drive on freeways. I can drive in towns, not cities, if I must.
I toodled my father's old Camry around when I needed to. Loved that car. It was stolen and crashed in Portland. One more thing that made me hate that place. That was 1-1/2 years ago and I haven't driven since. (I barely put a few hundred miles a year on a car.)
Oh, I do wish I didn't hate it so much and wasn't so terrified, because I fear the utility will be needed again. But I have not even dared to shudder at the thought of freeway driving. I rely on Amtrak. Sure, it's inefficient -- like almost every other government program of which I've ever known. It's just one of the few I would like to see kept.
[right][snapback]49588[/snapback][/right]
I wouldn't/couldn't drive on freeways. I can drive in towns, not cities, if I must. I toodled my father's old Camry around when I needed to. Loved that car. It was stolen and crashed in Portland. One more thing that made me hate that place. That was 1-1/2 years ago and I haven't driven since. (I barely put a few hundred miles a year on a car.)
Oh, I do wish I didn't hate it so much and wasn't so terrified, because I fear the utility will be needed again. But I have not even dared to shudder at the thought of freeway driving. I rely on Amtrak. Sure, it's inefficient -- like almost every other government program of which I've ever known. It's just one of the few I would like to see kept.
[right][snapback]49588[/snapback][/right]
Driving can be loads of fun. Unfortunately, there always seems to be those pesky towns and freeways between the really good mountain and canyon runs.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 11:18 PM)
I have no idea; I paid attention to my necks of the woods. It wouldn't surprise me that Connecticut would house the town unfriendliest to low incomes.
[right][snapback]49628[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49628[/snapback][/right]
It was probably a state ranking thing. When I lived in Norwalk we were fairly low income. The proximity to NYC, (and the excellent train service) makes that area more inflated then it ought to be.
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Feb 8 2005, 08:19 PM)
Do you have a nostalgia thing for old square Camry's little bart?
[right][snapback]49631[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49631[/snapback][/right]
I s'pose I do. My father bought his '84 new. He took care of it as he does everything -- immaculately. It was my favorite car I have ever driven. And believe it or not, I have driven quite a few different cars. It was a honey of a car -- that some psycho drugfreak stole and crashed after a few days' binge.
He was outrunning the cops when he jumped out and ran, letting the car keep going till it crashed.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 10:26 PM)
I s'pose I do. My father bought his '84 new. He took care of it as he does everything -- immaculately. It was my favorite car I have ever driven. And believe it or not, I have driven quite a few different cars. It was a honey of a car -- that some psycho drugfreak stole and crashed after a few days' binge.
He was outrunning the cops when he jumped out and ran, letting the car keep going till it crashed.
[right][snapback]49639[/snapback][/right]
He was outrunning the cops when he jumped out and ran, letting the car keep going till it crashed.
[right][snapback]49639[/snapback][/right]
That's terrible. Them Toyota's will run forever too.
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Feb 8 2005, 08:28 PM)
That's terrible. Them Toyota's will run forever too.
[right][snapback]49641[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49641[/snapback][/right]
I visited him in the towyard and just wept. I didn't have it insured for comp or collision either. That little sadness cost me about $500.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 09:21 PM)
Coast Starlight is the major West Coast line. Cascades is a northwest line. It is usually on time. The Coast Starlight is wildly, spectacularly late. It shares tracks with commercial freight trains in second-tier status. When they come, it has to move -- off. Over the distances, those delays add up.
The Cascades runs Spanish-designed (Spain) Talgo trains. Not the comfiest; more of a commuter line. It is a highly reliable run.
[right][snapback]49634[/snapback][/right]
The Cascades runs Spanish-designed (Spain) Talgo trains. Not the comfiest; more of a commuter line. It is a highly reliable run.
[right][snapback]49634[/snapback][/right]
I haven't taken the train in a long time. Do they have special smoking cars? LA to Seattle is too long for smokers to abstain I would think.
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:31 PM)
I haven't taken the train in a long time. Do they have special smoking cars? LA to Seattle is too long for smokers to abstain I would think.
[right][snapback]49646[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49646[/snapback][/right]
No, they have no smoking cars. This is the new improved America. You may pollute everyone's air with auto exhaust but almost no one's with cigarette smoke.
You may be able to smoke in a sleeper car.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 09:36 PM)
No, they have no smoking cars. This is the new improved America. You may pollute everyone's air with auto exhaust but almost no one's with cigarette smoke. You may be able to smoke in a sleeper car.
[right][snapback]49652[/snapback][/right]
You may be able to smoke in a sleeper car.[right][snapback]49652[/snapback][/right]
Oh my gawd. That's a two or three day cold turkey up the coast.
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:40 PM)
Oh my gawd. That's a two or three day cold turkey up the coast.
[right][snapback]49657[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49657[/snapback][/right]
They have stops. You'll be fine.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 10:42 PM)
They have stops. You'll be fine.
[right][snapback]49661[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49661[/snapback][/right]
Can you even smoke anywhere in California?
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Feb 8 2005, 08:43 PM)
Can you even smoke anywhere in California?
[right][snapback]49662[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49662[/snapback][/right]
People still smoke in bars. Wait for the police to come and hide the ashtrays. If I were a smoker I'd be outraged, but I'm not so I just laugh about it.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 09:42 PM)
They have stops. You'll be fine.
[right][snapback]49661[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49661[/snapback][/right]
Not me. When I last took the train the sleeping cabin (whatever they call those) smelled like an ash tray. It was deep into the upholstry. That's my memory of the trip. A freshly lit cig doesn't smell bad to me, but stinky ash tray residue for 2 days was unpleasant.
I suppose I deserve an eyeroll either way.
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:50 PM)
Not me. When I last took the train the sleeping cabin (whatever they call those) smelled like an ash tray. It was deep into the upholstry. That's my memory of the trip. A freshly lit cig doesn't smell bad to me, but stinky ash tray residue for 2 days was unpleasant.
I suppose I deserve an eyeroll either way.
[right][snapback]49667[/snapback][/right]
I suppose I deserve an eyeroll either way.
[right][snapback]49667[/snapback][/right]
Smoking aside, when was your trip and where did you go? How (minus the smoke) was the sleeping car?
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 08:52 PM)
Smoking aside, when was your trip and where did you go? How (minus the smoke) was the sleeping car?
[right][snapback]49668[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49668[/snapback][/right]
ROFL. You want him to comment about the trip but not about the ciggy smoke? Am I following?
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 08:55 PM)
ROFL. You want him to comment about the trip but not about the ciggy smoke? Am I following?
[right][snapback]49671[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49671[/snapback][/right]
You betcha. Train trips fascinate me, and I've long fancied a sleeping car someday.
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 09:52 PM)
Smoking aside, when was your trip and where did you go? How (minus the smoke) was the sleeping car?
[right][snapback]49668[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49668[/snapback][/right]
To Portland and eventually Seattle. It made automobile transporation seem sensible. Something about the rythm and rocking that put me to into a coma. Read a paragraph, sleep 5 hours, read another paragraph...
QUOTE(lil bart @ Feb 8 2005, 08:56 PM)
You betcha. Train trips fascinate me, and I've long fancied a sleeping car someday.
[right][snapback]49673[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49673[/snapback][/right]
I thought for sure you'd have done that by now. I'd like to do that whole long coastal trip thing myself. Ward, how was it?
QUOTE(Ward @ Feb 8 2005, 08:57 PM)
To Portland and eventually Seattle. It made automobile transporation seem sensible. Something about the rythm and rocking that put me to into a coma. Read a paragraph, sleep 5 hours, read another paragraph...
[right][snapback]49674[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49674[/snapback][/right]
you romantic heart you.
I'd just as soon fly into Baghdad as ride on an Amtrak train.
Sometimes on my coastal drives, I see where the tracks run and think that the vantage point is so much nicer than the roadway. And I like the view from the roadway.
QUOTE(Bart Katz @ Feb 8 2005, 09:02 PM)
I'd just as soon fly into Baghdad as ride on an Amtrak train.
[right][snapback]49679[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49679[/snapback][/right]
On a carpet?
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 11:03 PM)
On a carpet?
[right][snapback]49681[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49681[/snapback][/right]
Of course. With virgins.
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 09:59 PM)
you romantic heart you.
[right][snapback]49677[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49677[/snapback][/right]
Oh, that. Yes, I suppose I am a member of the 12 foot high club, but it was cramped and an exercise in being..er..quiet.
QUOTE(Human Ills @ Feb 8 2005, 11:59 PM)
you romantic heart you.
[right][snapback]49677[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]49677[/snapback][/right]
All this train talk reminds me of the joke about the Italian guy who took a train trip up the eastern seaboard.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.