Bizzy’s AM Coffee Biz-Econ-Life Links (060606)
Free Links:
- BizzyBlog makes the Cleveland Plain Dealer — I’m in the body of the article on Ohio’s political blogosphere for a couple of sentences, and am included among the profiles. I thought the PD did a generally good job in its portrayal of the situation in Ohio. The one thing I wish it would have mentioned is the influence “we” have had in certain local races (e.g., the 2nd District 2005 Special GOP Primary, 2005 Special General , and 2006 GOP Primary), where some contend that the local right blogs contributed at least to some extent to three Jean Schmidt wins and two Bob McEwen losses (gosh, that was fun to type).
- Global warming believers need to explain this — “With a maximum temperature of just 10 degrees Celsius — both in Brussels and along the coast — Thursday was the coldest 1 June since measurements started in 1833.”
- This cannot be comforting to landline phone companies — 9% of phone users are wireless only (HT Club for Growth). If it’s practical, it’s definitely a money-saver.
- Columbus, Ohio’s leaders are getting bent out of shape over finishing last in SustainLane’s 2006 rankings of the top 50 cities/metro areas in the US (Cleveland was #28, and no other other Ohio city is large enough to have been in the survey). Sustainlane’s rankings are based on “sustainable living” criteria (y’know, the ones urban planners and enviros say we should care about instead of the ones people, especially families, really care about). It does NOT include crime, taxes, quality of schools, or housing affordability among its considerations — which explains the absolute comedy that Portland (OR), San Francisco, Seattle, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Oakland (I’m not kidding) make up SustainLane’s top six. Though Columbus does have a problem with traffic that needs serious work, I would nevertheless congratulate it on finishing last, because it appears to me that in general, SustainLane’s best cities are listed in reverse order of desirability for living, breathing humans who are not diehard enviros. After all, part of “sustainable living” includes staying alive.
- Leasing turnpike operations like those of the Ohio Turnpike, as Ohio gubernatorial candidate Ken Blackwell has proposed, is a great idea — as long as the money doesn’t get squandered. It appears that Blackwell has a plan (HT Right Angle Blog) for “targeted investing” in things like universal broadband, ethanol, urban renewal projecs, and the like. All of this has the distinct aroma of “boondoggle” to me. Why not use the results of the turnpike situation to cut other taxes across the board and make Ohio’s general business climate more competitive?
- Enron’s law firm will pay the bankrupt company $30 million to settle claims that it aided and abetted its now-convicted officers in their frauds — From here, it looks like the law firm was lucky it didn’t get the Arthur Andersen (first item at link) death penalty, or the Milberg Weiss treatment.
Tom, this is another example of you using your criteria as a measure instead of the study’s criteria. SustainLane is measuring sustainability, not the classic measure of livability, though in some categories the two are intrinsically linked. How can you say that Portland, SF, or Seattle are not desireable? If anything SF and Seattle (outside of Boston of course) are the two US cities that I would actually consider moving to.
Why does Columbus rank so low?
City Commuting - Columbus has no real noteworthy mass transit system. The COTA is mostly traveled by the elderly and the poor. The study shows that 83% of Columbus commuters drive alone to work every day.
Tap water quality - I can’t really speak to this as I have no background in Columbus’ water situation
Planning/Land Use - If you ever fly over Columbus, you’ll notice clumps of housing developments are dropped in and around 270 with thousands of vacant acreage in between. It’s not an efficient usage of land if you ask me.
Columbus’ good points
Metro Congestion - I don’t recall ever being stuck in traffic in Columbus and I highly doubt that people are stacked on top of each other like they are in my home state.
Housing Affordability - Columbus is cheap - case closed.
Comment by Kevin Irwin — June 6, 2006 @ 11:39 am
Additionally, you surely can’t dismiss all of the global warming research based on a single day in Belgium…
Comment by Kevin Irwin — June 6, 2006 @ 11:48 am
#2, I’m just having fun.
Comment by TBlumer — June 6, 2006 @ 11:53 am
Remember, not everyone is looking for the “Leave it to Beaver” lifestyle.
Comment by Kevin Irwin — June 6, 2006 @ 12:00 pm
I hate the word sustainability and how it has been hijacked because it implies that if we don’t follow its dictates we won’t be able to “sustain” ourselves. BS.
The four criteria ignored are every bit as important to holistic “sustainabiliy” as the definitionally challenged version used by SL. Cincinnati is NOT “sustaining” itself because its schools suck, its taxes are way too high (they take 2.1% of earnings of everyone who works there, regardless of whether they live there), crime is rampant, and the housing stock is either nothing you want or obscenely expensive, depending on the area.
The SL people have a bias towards belief that urban planners can make decisions that are superior to the rest of us dummies. Instead of asking “how can we accommodate what people want?” they ask “how can we make people want what we want”?
In a spread-out, relatively non-centralized area like Metro Columbus, people want roads. The fact that their mass transit is weak is irrelevant. Build the bleeping roads.
Sure I’m overreacting a little, because the Columbus city fathers are all worried about what SL thinks. Who cares?
On the top of the list, Portland and SF are both places where families with kids can’t stay within because of housing prices.
Comment by TBlumer — June 6, 2006 @ 12:02 pm
Families who can afford to live in those areas, do.
Comment by Kevin Irwin — June 6, 2006 @ 12:47 pm
Lots of toddlers, fewer school-age kids in S.F.
Only an estimated 12 percent of San Francisco households earn enough to buy a median-price home, which costs more than $760,000.
Yes, I acknowledge it talks about back yards and grass too.
Comment by TBlumer — June 6, 2006 @ 1:00 pm