With low short term and long term interest rates, now is a good time to build or refinance. So, are there any Pacifica city council candidates with vision bold enough to describe a permanent path to city economic progress? Or is running for city council merely the same ol' wishful thinking popularity contest.
Silicon Valley Mercury News/Associated Press/Martin Crutsinger. "Federal Reserve to spend billions buying bonds to boost economy."
Now our city has an opportunity to do better |
The Fed said it will spend $40 billion a month to buy mortgage bonds for as long as it deems necessary to make home buying more affordable. It plans to keep short-term interest rates at record lows through mid-2015 -- six months longer than previously planned. And it's ready to try other stimulative measures if hiring doesn't pick up.
.... Stock prices rose steadily after the Fed's announcement. The Dow Jones industrial average climbed more than 200 points by midafternoon Eastern time.
43 comments:
Associating Fed action with Pacifica is a true leap of logic.
"..true leap of logic." Anonymous 12:48 PM
Then again, how logical are you? Where is your vision to pull this city out of the dumpster?
Nationally business money is sitting on the sidelines, and the cost to borrow for development, building, housing, and home mortgages is cheap. Now getting cheaper.
In the Fall we will elect a city council majority that is friendly toward a balanced city economy.
Hence, now is the time for city action. Now is a huge opportunity and motivational advantage to build Beach Boulevard, the quarry, and any infill projects. Its only logical.
Oh yes, logic tells us that developers are lining up to go "dumpster diving" in Pacifica. The Nimbys killed this town decades ago, no 380 highway, WWTP fouling prime parcels, no redevelopment, poison pill land use policies, decay and blight on every street. And the coup de grace? People who live here like it this way. This blog is not representative of most Pacificans. Sad, but just look around. That mess didn't happen by accident.
When a President can't lead, what does he do? Plays golf and parties with celebrities.He doesn't even show up for intel meetings. He failed in math. He never worked a day in his life. So this is what you get, a congress that is divided and a Senate lead by democrats that wouldn't even vote for their own party presidents budget.
Anonymous 6:21 PM, you're living in a weird, stifled fantasy land. How about just watching the news, or better turn on MSNBC or Current TV for a breath of fresh air?
Every one of your statements are false or misleading. Why I don't know? Accurate, factual information is easily available and you've proven you do know how to surf the internet.
Unfortunately ignorance seems to be the encouraged and condoned trend in the devolved, radicalized Republican party. And what you're supporting is a myth, a corporate oligarchy, feudal ideas, and a permanent wealth vs. peasant class. Where do you fit in?
This year political partisan voting choices are easy. Vote for Democrats who support human values, and a desire to transition back to a strong middle-class America.
Democrats need to 1) win the Presidency, 2) take back the House, and 3) gain numbers in the Senate to off-set the 60% filibuster. The once rare Senate filibuster is now used on a regular basis by Republicans as a strategy to block legislation, such as the jobs bill.
Until Republicans return to the savvy, moderate political party they once were, for elected partisan offices I'm voting for none of them. Nor should you, you're voting against your own best interest.
Non-partisan offices (such as city council), that's different. Vote for candidates who will act in the best interest of our city. After all, on a human level "we're all in it together."
Kathy, people like yourself who consistently demonize the other side are equally to blame for our current situation. Until people learn that we can disagree without being disagreeable, there will be little progress in Pacifica or at the national level.
Nope Anonymous 12:10 PM, I deal in facts as I understand them. The 9/14/12, 6:21 PM comment was a 100% lie which should never stand. I responded correctly to the 6:21 PM comment. Can't act like that nationally politicized comment never happened, unless it was spammed. In my opinion it should have been spammed.
Your comment, on the other hand, is directed at "demonizing" me, and others who respond with credibility. Too much your Anonymous comment sounds like the 30 year Pacifica strategy to turn this city into country: Let's all be nice, while providing excuse after excuse for inadequate economic development. Meantime, 60% of our city was moved into, or toward, GGNRA open space.
Lower interest rates through Fed action will affect Pacifica if the opportunity to develop and improve is taken. This is our opportunity, and you and the right-wing radical have chosen to waste your comments on deflection. Nice (not).
And BTW if you are not aware how obstructive this congress has been to the recovery of our nation (at the expense of unemployment and infrastructure), get information. But don't pretend that also didn't happen.
How could additional recovery stimulus funding have affected Pacifica? Possibly transportation project funding, such as widening highway 1. Then, supplemental funding of fire, police, teachers. School training programs: including university training for jobs now and future. Small business incentives. New technologies and research. Extended poverty and unemployment programs. Projects dealing with other infrastructure issues, such as cliff erosion, stream management, global warming issues, etc.
Your so-called facts are true fiction. Obama has screwed up the world. Turn on the tv. Every channel is saying the same. Obama does not show up for work. He never talks with anyone except sirian born valerie jarret who's father was a communist , and her thick ties with the muslim brotherhood are enough reason to demand that obama administration resign. Valerie Jarrett is Senior White House Advisor to Obama. He said he does not make any decisions without her making it for him first. Arab Spring? No. Arab Terror. Obama owns this.
@1210 You're right of course, but you've got to understand that being disagreeable scratches an itch for some people that being reasonable just can't reach. They gotta scratch!
Anonymous 2:11 I am glad I don't live in your world,what a dark fantasy.
You see what I mean? Scratchin' away.
There's an industry for us. The number of seniors 65 and older will double soon and many will need assisted living or senior housing options.
Anonymous 2:11 PM, your conspiracy funny paper news accounts, and accusations that "Obama screwed up the world" are ridiculous and simplistic. But, the good news sounds like you figured-out our President Obama was born in the USA.
Valerie Jarrett is a smart, and high powered, savvy, Senior Advisor to the President. Glad to learn more about her. I vaguely recall the names of her renowned parents: James E. Bowman (pathologist/geneticist) and Barbara Taylor Bowman (early childhood education advocate).
One of the New York Times comments referred to Valerie Jarrett as an "adult". And I'm glad to learn that she is an advocate for human rights: Women's health, equal protection, emigration reform. Unfortunately one of the NY Times articles indicates Jarrett blocked George Soros from some meetings with President. Busy schedule I guess. You know, when Obama wasn't hanging-out on the basket ball court (nothing else to do in the White House, lol).
Void of reliable back-up information from you, I've provided a few sources about Valerie Jarret and her famous family. General information Wikipedia. White house description. New York Times people/topic update, 9/2/12. New York Times article, 9/1/12. Fox News opinion, 9/13/12.
Sorry, no conspiracy in all those articles (not even Fox), but plenty family of talent. James E. Bowman, Valerie Jarrett's deceased father, seems to have been such a good man. I'm sure whatever junk you're reading, viewing and repeating won't besmirch his reputation.
@Tom, so true.
Kathy=the official 2012 Democratic Apologist
Kathy, you telling people that they need to get their news from MSNBC or Current TV is no different than tea baggers holding up Fox News as gospel. You all need to learn some critical thinking skills and emerge from the echo chamber of people screaming the same things about the other side over and over.
While Obama has the American taken away, for embarassing him, by making a you tube video spoofing Allah ,the democrats who vote for him will pretend they did not see that happen.
God Help Us.
".. learn some critical thinking skills." Anonymous 6:50 PM
No, my critical think skills are just fine. The difference is MSNBC values facts. Same with current TV (Al Gore's TV station, hard to find, 107 on my TV dial). Their commentary may be easily compared against any reliable reporting. (I periodically view a bunch of news sources, including overseas).
Where ever Anonymous right-winger is getting information, that information is manufactured, made-up. Not fact, then repeated. The reliability never checks-out, its always twisted. Hence, believing its true, or assuming its equivalent, is a false presumption. And not critical thinking.
However, I only suggested MSNBC or Current TV because I knew that would drive the right winger nuts.
656, what if there is no God. Or what if there is only Allah. Now what?
Kathy, please adjust your tin foil cap.
Its obviously too tight!
Anonymous, "please adjust your tin foil cap." Obviously, duh.
.... response to you from Kathy.
anon 731 not so fast. we will accept no faux Kathys.
Fox = MSNBC = crap.
harsh
Anon, 7:34 PM, interesting you noticed I was the "fox"* Kathy.
The comment received its proper response. And BTW Steve, 7:40 PM, your equation = 0. MSNBC is a reliable news and extended news discussion source.
*Disclaimer: The word "Fox" and the comment above are not associated with any news network, the "tin foil cap" referred to by Anon 7:12 PM may be.
somewhat incomprehensible, must be the real Meeh, all is right in the world once again
"..harsh." Anonymous 7:49 PM
I agree Steve's 7:40 PM comment that "Fox = MSNBC = crap" is both harsh, and inaccurate.
TV - MSNBC, CNN, PBS, BBC, Journal, Asian news, etc. are good. Once in a while, Fox and RT have a program worth viewing.
i prefer the BBC for my news. love how they say the word aluminum.
sorry, no, just harsh
How do they say aluminum?
al-u-min-eeum, pip pip and cheerio
Do you mean that bloody tin foil stuff? Al-u-min-ium, to you upstarts.
So the Brits are wearing tin foil hats, too? Little Union Jacks flying up top?
Anonymous 8:39 PM, I stand by my comment, and you and Steve are welcome to stand by yours. I don't think anyone confused you with my 8:37 PM opinion that MSNBC is a solid news source.
Big treat this morning, while scanning two Sunday newspapers, I viewed four national/world political news programs.
MSNBC:
1). Melissa Harris-Perry (Ph.D.) program/moderator, news, historical, social insight).
2). Meet the Press, David Gregory, moderator, not very "warm and fuzzy" but cuts through issues.
CNN:
3) Candy Crowley,program/moderator, iron trap brain.
4) Fareed Zakaria, program/moderator, bright, global.
All excellent political programing. And, while we're at it Channel 2 is a local Fox news station, and its pretty good.
People have a hard time recognizing their own biases.
Fine by me, Ms. Meeh. Sorry, I missed Fareed Zakaria. Who was he channeling today?
"People have a hard time recognizing their own biases."
Here's a good test of whether or not people are intellectually lazy and just parroting what they hear (whether it's Limbaugh or Maddow):
Can you accurately predict their position on an issue 90% of the time? If so, they might not be a critical thinker and should probably learn to exercise their gray matter a little more.
"Can you accurately predict their position on an issue 90% of the time?" Anonymous 6:57 AM
And IF you can only predict the position of a reasoned thinker only 10% of the time, that "thinker" is crackers.
Everyone has "bias". "Bias" is predisposition based upon a wide or narrow range of human and learned factors. "Bias" may occur based upon a lifetime of understanding, or a transient judgement.
At the core of what might be considered "critical thinking" there is reason and fact. And underlying considerations should include a broad scope of history, existing trend, and prospect of the future. Otherwise the argument in total has gaps and may fail.
"Intellectually lazy" (your comment)? Since you focused upon Rachael Maddow, and Rush Limbaugh, you might consider these these personalities as carriers of source information. However, the difference is that Maddow provides reliable facts, whereas Limbaugh is a windbag.
And, how could I possibly jump to such conclusion? Try the general background of each: Rachael Maddow (Rhodes Scholar, Oxford/Sanford educated, DPhil (equivalent to Ph.D.) politics) vs. Rush Limbaugh education: "flunked everything", and apparently was only interested in being a commentator. Setting aside other considerations, with Limbaugh, there is an initial indication that the source information he presents may be "intellectually inadequate."
I get my news from the Onion News Network. Most reliable news on tv
Maddow on MSNBC and Van Susteren on Fox are fairly reasonable.
The problem with MSNBC are people like "Screamin'" Ed Schultz, "Screamin'" Lawrence O'Donnell, and "Screamin'" Chris Matthews.
They're the lefty answer to "Screamin'" Sean Hannity and "Screamin'" Bill O'Reilly on Fox.
How is this any different from:
Screaming Sinai?
and
Screaming Meeh?
How's it different? They're not on TV. BBC rocks!
What is the most watched News channel?
Post a Comment