LincolnKennedy

Donny: Are these the Nazis, Walter? Walter Sobchak: No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there's nothing to be afraid of.

^Yeah, there's already a new Neyer building at that corner, so I suspect they are trying to shift it from offices to apartments since I don't think it ever got rented.

Apparently Kasich doesn't oppose all rail plans in Ohio funded at taxpayer expense, just the ones... oh hell, I can't even understand his reasoning enough to figure out how to make some joke about it: http://www.morningjournal.com/articles/2010/11/12/news/mj3656104.txt http://www.ridewestshore.com/

Who did the narration on the video?

That is awesomely awful information. Totally ridiculous how the system is gamed. Thanks.

It's really all going to come down to how spiteful Kasich wants to be. He's got an easy out (just say Strickland tied his hands during the post election. He can even say that's why the Republicans aren't confirming S's nominees, because Strickland's actions were "unprecedented" or some such b.s.) He won't have to run for four years and he's never going to be a presidential contender, so there's absolutely no political downside to him if he just lets it go on. If he doesn't it is a willful act of sabotage.

I agree with this. Also you don't want to subsidize something that the internet is inevitably replacing, though I don't think this is exactly the case for retail. Not sure how you do that without rapid transit between these places and the places that currently are large office centers, particularly since those areas have plenty of space that is underutilized. Also why would a private company build offices at Swifton Commons when they can do it easier in Deerfield or Liberty townships? That's the crux of the problem.

If you assert an opinion it is no big deal if someone says it is laughable. If you assert an opinion and a bunch of people shoot you down, you may be getting blasted because all those guys are assholes, or you might be getting blasted because your opinion is ill-conceived and sloppy. Or maybe there's another reason. That's one of the many things that happens when you assert an opinion. Then of course, there's the question of "who is 'regular folks'?" and "when does blasting of an opinion begin?", because if regular folks are blasting other regular folks then the fact that they are both regular folks becomes irrelevant, and if brutus_buckeye's points are within the definition of "blasting" than he's merely receiving fire in return. But the point of course is that he is making a major political error by refusing the money out of spite. If people are indifferent than he can just as well say that Strickland tied his hands. People aren't going to care if he back tracks anyway if they are indifferent. Kasich's planning on allowing funds that can only be used for 3C to go to another state out of spite. He's not anti-federal funds, because he asked if they can be spent here but for other things. So he's anti-3C. And the reasons he states for being anti-3C are false. He either knows they are false, or he doesn't care that they are false. How do you convince someone who refuses to admit the possibility that independent, objective, measurable criteria exist? I agree a different approach should be sought -- but not so much in the marketing/education of the project. Rather, I think it should be in creating a Public Private Partnership which Republicans seem to prefer. This is an interesting idea and something that is a clear attempt to rebundle the same proposal so Kasich can say he did it and it's not "government" or whatever. It seems like an attempt to save the project based on what's really happening and not some strange assumption that the project hasn't been explained enough.

No, I meant to say exactly what I said. Re-read what went down: On the contrary, my wife would have went with my son to Cincy last weekend if the train were an option. She loves to visit her best friend who moved there from NJ a few years back, but riding with my son and without me can be a difficult 5 hours. Plus, she is not that familiar with the area. Riding a train and getting picked up at the station, on the other hand, would have been a breeze for her and my son, who loves everything about trains, would have got a real kick out of it. You have a reason to travel from Cleveland/Columbus to Cincy. The train would make that easier for you. I don't have anybody to visit in Cleveland/Columbus. The train would not make my trip easier, since I'm not being stopped from making the trip due to the costs associated with travel, I'm not making the trip because I don't want to go there. I don't really care why someone would want to make take the train. Maybe they just like riding in trains. The point, once again, is that a project has utility beyond and outside of one person's personal reason for potential using it. I think it is worthwhile even though I don't see myself using it (though I may, I don't know). But I don't travel to Columbus or Cleveland because I don't have any reason to go there. Nevertheless that's a strange prism to view the utility of massive state infrastructure projects.

The point is that it is worthwhile to pursue under the circumstances of federal expenditure, other transpo expenditure choices, state competitiveness, etc. One's personal travel plans aren't particularly relevant when it comes to the state building roads, either. I find it highly unlikely that one is going to convince someone to visit Cleveland from Cincy or vice versa simply because you can take a train to do it. That's a subjective reason. The virtue of this plan is its efficiency vis-a-vis a host of objective factors. If you're going to sell something, at least emphasize the products strengths and the corresponding virtues in the individual you are selling to (e.g.- "You like saving money, right?" not "This is a great reason to catch a Cavs game!")

Regular folks aren't "getting blasted for being ignorant or not understanding". Regular folks aren't the problem. 3C is being stopped because one group of elites is telling another group of elites that they are going to stop this project simply out of spite, because they can. Regular folks are generally indifferent to process, unaware and uninterested in the difference between various governmental budgets. They generally expect that they are electing people with the intention to govern in the best interest of the polity (even if they think that that interest corresponds with their own private interest). Your friends who say, "Why wouldn't I just drive" are being perfectly reasonable. I don't plan to use 3C to visit Columbus or Cleveland, primarily because I don't have any reason or desire to go there. But how a single person would assess their transportation choices for a particular trip doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the state should engage in this project. Should a company not offer a product simply because a shareholder doesn't plan on using it? Exactly. This idea that everyone would be on board if only the messaging was better is a dead-end for 3C advocates. One party is trying to kill the project because they can. They are ignoring objective evidence, or even the very idea of objectivity, simply because they have the power to do so. If the Ohio Republican Party let this go through, it would not effect their election prospects for good or for ill. If you consistently defend this project you invariably impart the message that it needs to be defended and therefore something must be fishy about it. That's why you need to say, "This money is going to go to another state if we don't use it,"; "The cost to operate this passenger rail is less than the cost to repave X miles of highway,"; "Freight does X amount of business in Ohio and employees X number of people. This would increase that to Y and Y."; "The Governor and so and so are lying to you about this project."

^What do you think is the node most in need to be revitalized? I'm not sure if you can double the residential population outside of tax subsidies, but if you double the residential population, you could probably create a more competitive retail environment without the tax subsidies.

^Is that what's on your family crest? Burn.

I see.

^The only silver lining is that 1) Ohio's geographic position makes it much more difficult / nearly impossible to become completely irrelevant (unlike Michigan or western New York); and 2) between 2006 & 2008 we know that there are Democrats in Ohio who will vote, so long as you get them out to do it. After the election I was reminded of Pitt the Younger's quote: "Roll up that map; it will not be wanted these [four] years."

I'm curious what these things are you speak of that have occurred "in practice", because I'm getting the impression that you realize that you've asserted an opinion that you know you don't really have a firm grasp on. This I find amusing. However this I find bizarre. I respect your opinion, primarily because unlike most people on this forum you actually know how to write an opinion, assert it, and back it up. I really do. But are you seriously saying that of all the governments out there you think the best one is a government that doesn't even provide for universal adult suffrage and relies primarily on unelected civil service bureaucrats to formulate policy?

^I'm slightly curious as to what exactly that was. Hong Kong was directly ruled by the British in a manner similar to how China does it today until. They didn't even have 'one-person, one-vote' until the very end before the handover. I guess Gramarye and I at least share a Calvinistic view of the depravity of man.

^No, it's the anti-Democrats (sometimes referred to as the Republicans) who are doing the disservice by lying to their constituents. The LaHood letter to Kasich tells half the story- $900+ million spent on road infrastructure v. $400 million for rail infrastructure. The seperate ODOT operating budget tells the rest of the story. Those are facts, unopen to interpretation, unlike what one means by "high-speed".

What I wrote was entirely about university education in Ohio. Not quite sure if you are aware of that. If you want to talk about primary public schools, its clear that most people send their kids to public schools and those kids go on to be fine contributing members of the society/economy. Also, private schools routinely spend more money per pupil, which makes sense, because why else would rational economic actors choose to engage in that added expense? You don't view universal primary education as a priority; I do. You view test scores as a useful tool; I do not. We are going to be talking past each other on this issue. This is a bald and completely unsubstantiated claim that is simply not true when you compare how public schools operate institutionally with private schools, how different state school systems compare with one another, and how U.S. public school education compares with foreign public school education. Maybe I would be, but I suspect the scale of such moves isn't like it once was. Between 1965 and 1989 you likely had a much greater trend of moves (or more likely, new factories simply set up there rather than in the Rust Belt). Then, after the end of the Cold War settled the question of centrally planned development v. capitalist development, a massive exodus to foreign lands began. It's also sort of a silly point to make because of all the federal expenditure in the South and West via the New Deal, Federal Interstate Highway System, Great Society and intervention to protect Civil Rights (why would you want to locate a business in a place where juries routinely ignored law and rendered verdicts that an insular society felt was right?). We've also hashed this out before.

^Have you pre-purchased your seastead platform?

Which policies, specifically? Maybe his failed policy (well, soon-to-be-failed policy, after Kasich & Co. ruins it) of actually investing in higher ed in this state: After a five-year decline, state support for instruction per student for the public, four-year universities increased from 2007 to 2010. Still, Ohio remains well below the national average in per-student legislative funding, at $4,901. The average annual out-of-pocket cost in Ohio is $5,433 for university students, $2,561 for regional campus students and $613 for community-college students. In Strickland’s first two years as governor, universities froze tuition rates in exchange for strong state financial support. In the current two-year budget, state spending on higher education was less robust, so colleges could raise tuition up to 3.5 percent each year. Before Governor Strickland, Ohio was cutting state support per student at Ohio’s colleges and universities. During the 1990s, we saw annual tuition increases in the double digits. This during good economic times in Ohio. Then Governor Strickland turned it around. He kept tuition frozen for the first half of his term while keeping tuition increases capped to a modest 3.5% annually for the final two as state funding per student increased. This during very difficult economic and budgetary times in Ohio. In-state enrollment at Ohio’s universities and colleges hit historic highs. But even as Governor Strickland closed that gap, Ohio still is below the national average in state funding per student. Because businesses clearly want to locate in a low-tax state filled with uneducated workers, and they can't get enough in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc. Kasich's really divesifying the product.

Good thing we don't live in Haiti.

+ = So when the debt was either positive or negative, even Keynes didn't advocated that nations already heavily in debt borrow even more in order to try to revitalize their economies? ---------------- The U.S. should really be spending more on worthwhile infrastructure projects to maintain our infrastructure, improve what we've got, and reduce unemployment.

Why would you do this at the same time a new episode of Community is on the air?

^I suspect that, even when boxed into a corner, he will return the money out of pure spite. But better that he affirmatively kill it than have someone else kill it for him.