327

Your positions on these issues direct an obvious conclusion, no? You have to call the police. It's not what I would do, but it's what you would do, so do it. As you said... you won't feel right if you don't. We aren't really talking about this party, we're talking about the larger philosophical issues at play, the ones from the other thread(s). Your beliefs on those issues apparently demand that you intervene in this person's graduation party.

Not good for whom? To a poor person seeking a home, having watched in horror as prices annually raced past your earning potential, this is fantastic news. How? Most people can't even qualify for home even though prices are falling. There is a point on the graph at which they will qualify. With each drop in prices, more people are brought into the fold. The market is trying to correct itself. Raising average incomes would help stabilize home prices, as it would cause that same point on the graph to arrive at a higher value. I agree with part of that. But what you state, is only part of the equation, there are still many people who are out of work, or don't have a steady income. They cannot nor shouldn't buy. Then there are those who have just gawd awful credit. Now that borrowers are under scrutiny, the qualifiy rules are different. My assistants are going thru this now. When a significant portion of the market is thus screwed, I would expect home prices to continue plummeting indefinitely. We need to examine whether the current mortgage system still has any merit at all. Very few modern jobs last as long as the standard note does. If neither side moves, steadiness of income OR flexibility of housing commitments... we're stuck in this whirlpool forever. Housing will get cheaper and cheaper until todays Wal-Mart greeters and burger-flippers can afford it. Those who currently have money tied up in housing might want to consider the effect that other people's pitiful wages might have on their investment. If you want to make money on real estate, you need people around you to be doing OK. Who woulda thunk that a functional free market may, by its own nature, require income parity? Seems ironic, given the false dichotomy we're so frequently presented.

I would not notify the police unless you live in a crime-free town and they need to be kept awake. We have laws for a lot of different reasons, and my skeptical opinion about this law is detailed in another thread. It is curious to me that anyone of any age could be mature enough for contracts and artillery fire, but not for beer. Live and let live. Calling the parents, however, sounds more than appropriate. As many people have pointed out here, that invitation is a red flag. Sounds like something that might not be well run.

Not good for whom? To a poor person seeking a home, having watched in horror as prices annually raced past your earning potential, this is fantastic news. How? Most people can't even qualify for home even though prices are falling. There is a point on the graph at which they will qualify. With each drop in prices, more people are brought into the fold. The market is trying to correct itself. Raising average incomes would help stabilize home prices, as it would cause that same point on the graph to arrive at a higher value.

Has anyone considered using these trolley cars in a practical manner, and attempting to apply some stimulus funds to a project their existence would render partially complete? I'm suggesting an actual trolley route that would carry people from some Cleveland neighborhood to and from downtown. This seems like it would fill a much greater need than would a tourist-focused downtown loop like the one Detroit has.

Not good for whom? To a poor person seeking a home, having watched in horror as prices annually raced past your earning potential, this is fantastic news.

I should have made two paragraphs there. The lack of police is a Warren city issue, related to the 46 retail explosion only in the sense that so much tax revenue has left the city. Howland still has plenty of police. Agreed, the situation is horrible. Downtown Warren has really improved itself with its riverfront park/stage area. But the region is still 10 years behind the times and urbanism has no meaning there. Hopefully that is changing. People are starting to say "that traffic on 46 is getting stupid," and they're confused why two Wal-Marts had to be built along Elm Road in such a short time. Many now think a train to Cleveland would be neato and they wish WRTA ran more buses in Trumbull County. Unfortunately too many young people move away before having any socio-political impact on the region.

I would be concerned that whoever printed the smoking-gun flyers is also careless enough to not run this party very well. I would avoid it. There will be other parties. In my youth, if the illegal party was at the park (which it frequently was), it was under threat of police action from beginning to end, and many such parties were indeed busted.

I believe that retail area is within Howland Township, unless Niles has annexed it recently. The mall itself and the ballpark are in Niles, but all the new stuff north of 422 that fronts 46 is in Howland... I think. It's sketchy. Either way, Warren gets none of the revenue. Some friends there have told me you can't get police help during the day, unless you're in the process of being shot, because they only have 3 officers on duty for the whole city.

Warren suffers from the same planning issues Cleveland does. Every development dime is spent along a 1/2 mile stretch of route 46 by the mall. That area has changed from a minor pass thru to a suburban mega-strip in about 10 years. All the while, downtown Warren continues to empty out, and entire strip plazas within city limits are abandoned.

It may be only marginally safer and not worth its cost. The insurance companies have no motivation to worry about other peoples' opportunity cost. If we were driving 25 encased in foam, commerce would grind to a halt but insurance firms would flourish. The insurance companies have an incentive to prevent/discourage all human activity, or at least all activity save whatever amount is needed for their clients to earn just enough to pay the premiums.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1088/did-whites-ever-give-native-americans-blankets-infected-with-smallpox http://academic.udayton.edu/health/syllabi/bioterrorism/00intro02.htm http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/smallpox1.html http://biochem118.stanford.edu/Papers/Simone_Brutlag/Amherst%20&%20Smallpox.pdf

Maybe people didn't know they were spreading disease in the 1500s, but by the revolutionary era I don't think it was quite so unclear. I had thought the intentional spreading of smallpox through dirty linens in the northeastern US was accepted historical fact. However, I can't recall where I got that and I can't cite anything at present to back it up.

To answer your question, community impact and community opinions are taken into account by the state in determining whether to grant a liquor license. It's part of the legal process.

I second that recommendation.

New Rome no longer exists, due to their outrageous speed trap abuses. The land that was formerly New Rome has been subsumed into whatever township surrounded it. Franklin County took over its legal records. This was all ordered by a judge somewhat recently. Having slower truck speeds is dangerous because it leads to constant lane shifting on the freeway. Things flow much better on a road like the turnpike, where vehicles are simply vehicles. Also, any drop in truck speed reduces how much each truck can accomplish in a day, thus increasing the cost of everything you buy. I'm all for this bill.

Short answer to the original question: Yes. If not, where did they go? I mean the tribes in North America. Like most here, I'm not up on the Phillipine conflict and can't really assess it. I'm not sure we can write off what was done just because a state of war existed between the US or colonial powers and the natives. Why did that state of war exist? Not because anyone was invading western Europe. And to the extent disease was the culprit, keep in mind that this was well known to Europeans by the time the North American tribes were involved, and there was at that time no Geneva Convention or anything like it. Biological warfare was considered OK. Blankets tainted with smallpox were essentially WMD, and were sometimes employed against eastern tribes.

^ I couldn't agree more.

To the extent that they disrupted intra- and inter- neighborhood access, of course they're bad. But mistakes made back then (if we can even call them mistakes because there appears to have been some disruptive intent) don't automatically mean roads or even highways are bad in themselves. The extent of the "cutting through" is the part I'm following closely on this one. How many crossings for cars? for pedestrians? How functional are they? Another issue in this area of town is that there isn't all that much to cut through, comparatively speaking. There are obsolete factories (unsuitable for conversion), plus housing that was built to be lo-end originally and which is now old and poorly maintained, as well as entire neighborhoods that were zoned atrociously if at all and will be most difficult to renovate in any meaningful way. I'm not sure how a new road could make the area any worse. It's not like we're fighting to preserve an intact functional neighborhood in this case. The part of town this road would go through has suffered a near total collapse. Its problem is not too many roads, nor is its problem too many roads minus one. If this new road causes one factory to open in Central employing one person, I would rate it a success.

So regionalism may have to be achieved through political force rather than a true meeting of the minds between city and exurb? Not surprising. Let's get going on the political force.

What I don't get is why Central/Kinsman/Fairfax residents would oppose something on the rationale that it helps University Circle. They're cutting off the nose to spite the face. Doesn't helping UC also help their neighborhoods? And are they actually viewing pass-thru commuter traffic as a boon? Most people don't. Commuters aren't on any given road to go shopping, they're there because they want to be elsewhere. Let them go. They might have more time to visit neighborhoods between home and work if their commute was quicker. But they're certainly not going to patronize your antique store just because you funneled them there and put a stop sign out front. Access is good, blockage is bad.

A lot of the money supporting Shaker Square comes from the county in the form of RTA service. I can't think of another Cleveland neighborhood (excepting downtown of course) for which this is true. So there's a perfect example of the larger community helping one inner city neighborhood be all it can be.

It may surprise you, but I don't come to this forum to talk about myself. If there are professional insider bits of knowledge you feel I may lack, why not just share them with the class instead of issuing a personal challenge to me. My resume has nothing to do with any of this and I'm really tired of having it called into question. Either I'm right or I'm wrong about any given issue, but that question is never answered by going after my personal background. So quit it. My only complaint about Positively Cleveland involves the image put forth by their name, which is something one doesn't need advanced certification to notice. I'm not going to call them and tell them I don't like their name. That sounds like a job for MTS. I only bring up the name because the issue here is their attempt to counter these joke videos. I like that they're doing so. I would prefer they did so with a different name, and I wonder (non-professionally, I suppose) how that name and its implications might play into their overall effort.

Isn't it Jeff Daniels on the Michigan voiceovers? He often appears in their tourism ads and considers it a pet cause. As a spokesman, he has a lot more gravitas than Drew Carey. And I still don't trust the PR skills of any group that calls itself Positively Cleveland. Dropping that name would improve their effectiveness immediately. Overtly cliched humor is a sign of discomfort with the message on the part of the messge-bearer. I know i'm going to regret this, but I must ask, from a professional point, what makes you an authority on PR & Marketing to make a statement like the above? What have you done to help positively cleveland? Have you shared any of your ideas with the group? Why is this at issue? What are you getting at by demanding my qualifications, on a freaking message board? Are you hoping I'll say something that opens the door to some sort of gotcha comment on your part? What is the sense in questioning another forumer's personal bona fides? I don't need to justify my career to you, or justify my opinions by means of my career. I don't misrepresent myself on here, I don't assume anyone else does, and that's all you need to know. This personal confrontation BS has got to go. If you must know, I've done significant PR work for a couple of nearby government agencies. My comment about the name Positively Cleveland is that of a concerned citizen, a citizen who like many others is aware of media tropes. Puns are not considered cutting edge, and puns hardly seem appropriate if one is using them to mock one's own central purpose.

Isn't it Jeff Daniels on the Michigan voiceovers? He often appears in their tourism ads and considers it a pet cause. As a spokesman, he has a lot more gravitas than Drew Carey. And I still don't trust the PR skills of any group that calls itself Positively Cleveland. Dropping that name would improve their effectiveness immediately. Overtly cliched humor is a sign of discomfort with the message on the part of the messge-bearer.