Marksmu

Is he driving around with only one hand on the wheel? Just wondering....

I for one welcome our new insect overlords! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKbFb6TPVEA

There is some serious mud slinging going on in this thread...I'm inclined to just default to agreeing with whoever s3mh is arguing with, but since I really have zero opinion on what seems to be a cat fight, I will sit back and just watch the train wreck in slow motion. Im not really sure what all the hoopla is about anyways....only about 10 people even read the houston press....slightly more than the 8 who read the chronicle...

It probably meets the common carrier requirement of serving the public, but I can certainly see landowners challenging it. Also unless this thing runs on a highway right of way, the rail would have to buy a lot of land...wayward cattle are not as big of an issue as a track cutting through a large pasture...split one pasture and the rancher no longer has access to the other side in some cases...that makes things very complicated. Its a lot of land, alot of fencing, alot of crossings, its alot of everything. I don't see this happening....not with airline lobbies and landowners fighting it.

You can probably include private landowners in this deal as people who will not want their property criss-crossed by high speed rail. It would take an awful lot of money for someone to allow a train traveling 205mph to cross their property....since private groups do not possess the same condemnation powers in Texas as we just recently learned with the Denbury Green pipeline - it would be very interesting to see the route this train would have to take. I cant see many ranchers letting it cross through a pasture....and I cant see any homeowner wanting it near their house...a train at 205mph would obliterate cattle and I doubt any homeowner would want to be anywhere near it. Its a pipe dream unlikely to ever be realized. Just wasted resources in my opinion.

Que complaints about traffic, and nimbyism....wait for it...wait for it....

It is EXTREMELY hard to build anything in Pearland. Pearland is trying to improve its image and in doing so has passed multitudes of ordinances and zoning requirements that they enforce just to get a building permit. HEB may have gotten the zoning changed, but when they started laying out plans, Pearland may have started acting unreasonably....I have been through this myself. It took 19 months to get a building permit for our business in Pearland....We had to lease space because we needed to expand and Pearland was making it almost impossible. They attempted to strong arm un-related easements , road access, and water detention that were far in excess of our displacements in order to accommodate other businesses flooding and access problems In the end the Pearland Economic Development Council are the only reason we got the expansion done...the city and its bureaucrats are attempting to extract far too many concessions from employers who are coming in to give the city taxes....I could give you details that would blow your mind, but as an active business in Pearland I prefer not to upset the powers that be.... For some good examples of the city stepping out of its boundaries look at the shopping center on 35 that has the big lots and the village pizza/seafood...that shopping center wanted to do a face lift so it would get better tenants...in order to do a facelift on the facade of the building they required them to rip out their entire parking lot, plant trees in the parking lot, change the lighting, and upgrade fire protection...The city got its new lighting and trees, and the owner of the center probably spent well over $1,500,000 to do a project that should have cost less than $1,000,000. The city is difficult to deal with at times and HEB is probably just sticking to its guns on what it wants since it now owns the property and can hold the city hostage to a cow pasture.

How fast is the Moccamaster? I love the buns, but I find it extremely annoying that they are not programmable....I set my maker to be ready when I get up, I cant wait 4 minutes!

I am not actually opposed to birth control. I am opposed to the government dictating that it must be included in group policies when they object to it. Since I took over control of our Health Care plan I have implemented lots of changes...some went over well, others not so much....Year after year we look at how our plan operates and we make changes to our plan that are well thought out and based on trends in our individual group....the ACA takes away much of that freedom to make choices. I added free birth control and free immunizations to our plan in 2008, long before the ACA came around. In 2009 I added penalties for tobacco users. In 2010 I drastically raised the price of emergency rooms b/c our employees over utilized them and I forced generic drugs when they were available....its changes like these that are no longer available under the ACA. Specifically written into the ACA is a clause that requires an employers plan to meet every single requirement under the act if you make ANY change to your plan. Ive said it many times on this site - I am far closer to a libertarian than a republican...I am socially ambivalent...I dont care what you do to yourself...I only care when it affects me, and it costs me money...My objections to the ACA are primarily based on putting everyone, productive or not, on the same level, doctor access, and to the fact that the government is dictating to employers what they must provide...its all or nothing...they either meet all requirements or pay penalties for not offering insurance.. Finally, I understand well how insurance is a pool, but its a pool I voluntarily got into. I did not have to get in if I did not want.

I used birth control as an example b/c it is the most talked about & debated drug. There are actually a litany of free pharmaceutical products included in the act...Most are preventative care type that are supposed to reduce future illness costs, but there is no such thing as free anything....if the insurance company previously charged the individual for the drug, now they must charge the whole group. Its not free. Instead of a single person paying for their own lifestyle, everyone must pay for it. Its the democrats mentality....its cheaper for most people if everyone pays for it. However most people is not all people. Under the ACA an 18 yr old male in great health is now subsidizing birth control for a woman,b/c she is unable or unwilling to be personally responsible and pay $16/mo to not get pregnant. Its always easy to tell when your talking to an uninformed supporter of the ACA because they make ridiculous statements like pregnancy is covered by insurance. It has been and continues to be an option for an employer to choose to cover or to exclude. There is no question that a pregnancy costs much more than a bottle pills. However, many insurance policies, exclude pregnancy. Ours does not and most employer provided comprehensive plans do not. However all individual plans that you buy outside of a group option, ie directly from Blue Cross, or United, do exclude pregnancy....if you are a woman its specifically excluded unless you pay extra for it.... You need to do more research on Group/Individual health insurance plans before you make blatantly incorrect statements like the one above.

Many of the requirements of the ACA such as no preexisting condition exclusions, no cost coverage of birth control no wait for benefits to begin, etc will quickly bankrupt employer sponsored plans. That is, at least I believe, the governments plan all along as they really want a single payer system anyway. The expectation among the professionals I deal with is that the states will each end up offering a government plan at a reduced price from federal subsidies and it will be administered through existing TPA's such as blue cross or united, etc. Essentially the only options will be deductible and max out of pocket.

There is not currently a name for any plan in Texas as they are not available yet. All major carriers though (Blue Cross, Aetna, UMR, etc) are expected to administer the plans but nothing has happened yet. Texas has chosen not to extend some of the benefits, and its still undecided how that is going to play out. Under the ACA the states were supposed to lose funding for not complying, but that was the one part of the ACA the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional...As its not currently required by law none of the carriers are offering anything yet as their base plan is more profitable.

Try going to a surgeon without health insurance....try getting an elective surgery, like an ACL repair without insurance. They will not do it....unless you pay cash in advance of the procedure. Most people who cant afford insurance don't have $35,000 laying around to book an O.R. anesthesiologist, and a surgeon. So good luck with that. Under the ACA there are relatively few choices of significance. That is not propaganda or misinformation....The law states what must be covered and every single plan in America must fit that bill. What must be covered is so broad, that it is essentially comprehensive insurance for everyone....I am intimately aware of the nuances of this law. I run a self insured health care trust for our company and I purchase health care for more than 800 lives . I have been through over 30 classes, lectures, and compliance lunches and they are all being put on by compliance experts, many of whom favor the law...ie, not people I politically agree with. Doctors do over practice, but the run-up of the bill is just as much to blame on lawyers as doctors. What is needed in this regard is significantly more patient education. Doctors do not spend enough time talking to patients about their options and the costs of those options. They just come in and tell you what is happening. That is a problem, the ACA did not solve that problem...it just blanket dictates what tests are authorized for what symptoms. Its basically a redi-clinic for all doctors who want to be paid. If your patient does not have all of the symptoms necessary to justify the test it will be denied coverage. Well I for one do feel sorry for them. They provide an extremely valuable service and to make ends meat now they have see WAY too many patients in order to make what they deserve, or they have to charge an annual fee just to have access to them Our pediatrician is trying to make it without doing either, and I dont see how much longer she can do it. I told my daughters pediatrician the other day that I felt sorry for her....I told her that I got her bill from the last time we visited for my daughters fever and sore throat and that I was not sure how she could stay in business based on the rate of pay the insurance gave her. We called for an appointment, got one, saw a nurse for about 5 minutes to go through the temperature, weight, height, etc....then the doctor came in talked to us for about 10 minutes about her symptoms and how everything was going - answered another 5 minutes of unrelated child health care questions, and then did a step test. We used about about 15 minutes of the doctors time, 5 minutes of the nurses time...couple that with building rent, medical record filing staff, receptionist, and insurance and her overhead is pretty substantial. I paid my co-pay $15 and she billed insurance $185....her time, plus lab work on the strep test. My insurance paid - $18....so on my visit she received $33 and I was being tended to for about 20 minutes.. Why would anyone go through all that school/money for such a pathetic sum of money? Doctors deserve to make more so that we always have the best in the medical field...take away the incentive to be a doctor and you will be left with terrible doctors.

I would not call what was done not anywhere close. That is 100% dishonest. Usually you are just wrong or stretching the truth...here you have outright lied. You are a liar. The opposition came extremely close and did it in a very short period of time during the Christmas holiday when have the home owners are traveling. Your argument above is a total and complete fabrication of the truth.

The single largest thing not to like about reform is the lack of access to care under the new plan. Currently if you have a good job with good insurance you can get good care and you can get it fast. Under the new plan everyone becomes insured...The reimbursement rates that the government has set for the care are so low that employers who do not drop their high quality coverage will eventually become priced out of their markets....some employers are large enough it wont matter, but smaller employers will universally drop their coverage in favor of the far cheaper government plan. Democrats would have you believe that is a good thing because there is savings to be had in terms of sheer volume getting better pricing....Its not true though because there simply are not enough doctors to meet the new demand. Right now if you don't have insurance you only goto the doctor when you are very sick because it is too expensive to just wander into a doctors office (or the doctor wont accept patients without insurance)....People without insurance go to rediclinics or other PA run places b/c they are cheaper than a doctor....but once everyone has insurance, people will expect to be able to use it. These people who currently don't go to the doctor will start going to the doctor more often because they have paid for it and expect a service for what they have paid. So now a hard working person, who has done everything right their whole life, and has earned better access to care is going to placed in the same line for health care with people who do not work nearly as hard as they do, and legitimately have not earned the same access to care...The law puts everyone on the same plan with the same priorities. So the accountant or lawyer who is far more productive, actually pays taxes, and has a net positive impact on our Economy has insurance dropped from a great plan, to the same plan as the people who have not worked as hard as he and whom are detractors from our economy....actually consuming more services than they contribute back. One size fits all care does not work. It sounds cruel but there are not enough doctors to care for the productive and the non-productive. There needs to be a graduated scale for care. Look at it from a primary care physicians perspective......College + Med School = $200,000. Time lost with zero income -8 years. Residency -3 years- income $30,000 (hardly a living wage for a doctor)....this doctor can now be a primary care physician....12 years and over $200,000 in debt....Monthly payments on that $200,000 loan over 15 years $1687/month. Median primary doctors income $168,000.....that puts them in the 28% tax bracket...take home pay of approximately $120,000/yr...minus their annual student loans of $20,244 = $99,750. Why would a person put themselves through that much school for 11 years of their life, to earn $99,000? They could have gotten an engineering degree in 1/3 of the time, started working, and been earning $99,000 within 4 years....if they are smart enough to be a doctor they are likely to be in the $125-$200,000 range in engineering by year 10.... The incentive for a doctor just isnt there and the programs that the government offers are not nearly a strong enough incentive. There are lots of other bad things about the law...the reduction in govt payments for medicare/medicaid has already driven doctors away from accepting new patients, and a recent survey I read showed that something like 30% of doctors that are currently in their 50s or above plan to retire or close thier practice rather than take the new rates and mandates...turns out doctors wont work for free....even if you legislate that they have to.

It is not in any way possible that what was done was an election. NOBODY, not even the dumbest historical preservation crazy, can claim with any intellectual integrity of any kind that any election took place. I know of no election in the history of elections where NOT VOTING means you agree anything....S3MH even you cant honestly believe that was an election... No election ever took place, thus the election code has no bearing on this lawsuit.

I drive by this thing every single day, twice per day, and even though I do not personally shop at Walmart, the development on the Walmart side of Yale is not ugly....I dont really know what you think you deserve, or why you think you deserve anything, but as far as Walmarts, and for that matter strip centers in general go this thing is beautiful....Look at the Kroger on 11th, or any of that crap that is on 11th between I-10 and 11th...its all Hideous...this story is quite beautiful in comparison....even the sub-tenant shops are being made of a very attractive stone. If you dont like this, you just don't like strip developments in general. If you don't like strip center developments you need to move to another country as these styles are all that is being built EVERYWHERE. Its not isolated to Houston or Texas - its the entire country. Its not necessarily a trend I like, but landlords want money and strip centers cost less to make, command similar rents to standalone buildings, and are more easily rented to just about any type of business. You are just banging your head against a wall complaining about it b/c nothing is going to change....ever.

I agree with you 100% and I suspect most people on both sides of the isle do as well - the difference between the political parties is the method of doing what you just said. All of the social programs that Democrats push are disincentives to actually go improve your situation. Democrats believe if they make life easier for those who have it hard that it will enable them to improve their situation more easily. If they dont have to worry about food/rent health care they can concentrate on school....unfortunately many of the people receiving benefits are content with a life of doing nothing and being provided for....So they want to raise tax rates on those who have more to enable them to provide for those who have less. Republicans, in general, believe that if you reward someone who is successful, that he in turn will reward those who work for him. A single good idea may need 10 people to implement it, or it may need ten thousand. Without the incentive of wealth to bring your good idea to market people would just say, why bother? I believe wholeheartedly that the only way to put this country on a strong footing is through science, engineering and manufacturing. Those are the things that made this country great. An economy based entirely on banking, finances, and service is doomed to fail. I don't remember the statistic but it was something like 70% or more of our economy is now in the service or retail business. That is unsustainable. We must diversify the economy to avoid these massive swings. We are building countries like China and India by outsourcing our jobs and selling our intellectual property. The only way for us to build a strong manufacturing and development environment is for people to accept the fact that they will have to put in a real days work in real world conditions. Couple real work with the government stepping back and letting business function and we have it!....the regulation and paperwork required to just operate is onerous and needs to be shortened. I personally do paperwork for something like 14 different government reports at our business and most of them take between 1 and 4 days to complete. I spend about 12-15% of my time doing reports that generate nothing and are never read unless they determine that they want to fine us or audit us for something. Its counterproductive. Lets get rid of government constraints and let business do what business does best. Build things and employ people.

I dont disagree with you...Im glad we do drone strikes, kept gitmo open, torture terrorists, kept the secret prisons... The Bin Laden Happy dance was obnoxious b/c it came a whole day or two after he said he wasn't going to do it. Then he let the press into the situation room and granted hollywood supporters access to secret intel in order to do a movie about it that will, I am sure, portray their hero Obama as our savior. And the class warfare & wealth transfers I am highly opinionated on....His theory that you cant build something and succeed without government is wrong on so many levels...The government did not create the things that allowed the country to succeed. Education/roads/cars all of it would exist without the government....just in a very different form.

People are highly cautious about granting the President any more power b/c he has already shown his absolute disdain for the legislative process.... 1. He refuses to enforce immigration laws, bypassed congress by directing ICE to stop deporting non-felony illegal immigrants, and issuing work visas to people here illegally (basically the DREAM act) 2. He refuses to enforce actual election laws when non-whites are the perpetrators - dropped the case against the new black panthers in 2010 3. He refuses to enfoce the laws when it comes to gay marriage (which I dont actually care about, but its another example) 4. He unilaterally changed welfare laws by waiving the requirement you actually work 5. He bypassed congress by sending funds frozen by Congress to Palestine 6. He bypassed congress by unilaterally using policy to control EPA emissions in spite of congress blocking his laws to do so 7. He bypassed congress when he sent money to the Muslim Brotherhood 8. He bypassed congress when he appointed 3 members to the NLB board when congress was in session 9 He negotiates with the UN to reduce American influence throughout the world 10. He is fighting the states on simple state rights issues like requiring ID to vote (how heinous) 11. He is misusing executive privilege by is stonewalling fast & Furious 12. He crammed healthcare reform down everyones throats 13. He intentionally incites racial violence....Trayvon Martin, Professor and police acted stupidly, etc 14. He is actively recruiting people to sign up for food stamps and other government assistance programs by attempting to remove the stigma associated with being a leach on society 15. He is constantly attacking businesses and successful individuals by outright stating that he thinks the government solves all our problems - when in reality the government is creating them. 16. Killed the Keystone pipeline to appease his crazy environmental wacko base.... I can go on and on and on....He is the worst president in my lifetime....its pretty easy NOT to trust someone like Obama, when he says one thing and does another...if given another term it is extremely reasonable to expect that his policies and dictatorial tendencies will only grow as he no longer has to appear even remotely neutral.... Finally, in regards to most of your complaints about Bush 1. Obama kept Gitmo open 2. Obama has increased drone strikes worldwide 3. Obama spiked the football repeatedly when the seals caught Osama Bin Laden 4. Obama has transferred more money from the working class to the government class than Bush ever cut to the "wealthy" which is ridiculous class warfare. 5. Obama has continued the secret prisions 6. Obama has continued the torture techniques So what have we gotten from Obama? The largest increase in the defecit ever....Highest unemployment in years, class envy & class warfare, the worst race relations we have ever had in my lifetime, a health insurance program that has zero chance of working....Ya, he is terrible. Obama is a one trick pony - His plan for reelection is simple. The rich have too much, corporations are evil, and the government can provide for you....He knows that will not be enough to get him reelected so he went ahead and bypassed congress with ICE deportations, and then fights diligently to ensure that no id is ever required to vote...if you can't sit back and objectively look at everything this president has done and be deeply disturbed by it, then you are most likely a recipient of one of his policies, ie a government worker, a union member, a contractor who benefits from government compliance costs, a teacher, a lawyer, or unemployed. Nearly all productive industry where things are actually being accomplished in this country (not merely the service industry or the banks) realize how much he has done to kill this country.

In a real emergency? Yes - In a politically created or motivated emergency? No....I have quite a bit more faith in our government to act properly and in a bipartisan way in the event of a real emergency.... Unfortunately I think the only types of emergencies that could trigger something like this may be political in nature.

I dont think anyone is worried about the government having the power in a real emergency to do it - the real question is what the considers an emergency....for instance if we had an anti-obama uprising being fueled by some right wing extremist group sometime around election day...those people may be able to disrupt the ability of the police/local authorities to ensure that everyone has an equal right to vote...now suppose Obama saw that as an emergency and shut down cell towers, twitter, facebook, and other popular forms of social media to control their ability to communicate. It may be highly effective in curtailing a small revolt like that in terms of communication, but was the loss of systems for law abiding citizens really worth that? It really depends on what type of emergency qualifies and who has the power to authorize its use...ifs its a full congressional authority type of law its less prone to abuse, especially when we have split houses. But if the power rests on Obama himself - then I don't blame anyone for being a skeptic. Obama has proven himself to be incompetent and at times dictatorial...people who question his policies and authority are not all crazy.

S3MH is so blindly in support of the ordinance she fails to see the potential problems with it....there are those, myself included, who may have exaggerated the points we made, but the fact remains that the specific wording of the text in the ordinance gives the HAHC wide latitude to determine what they approve of and what they do not. It is not an objective ordinance, it is a subjective one. You are at their mercy....good mood/bad mood, its all a crap shoot. With the quantity of nice lots that are unrestricted and still located right smack in the middle of the Heights (sometimes even on the same block) if you are planning on new construction I have no idea why anyone would intentionally subject themselves to the opinions of some subjective board with the largest investment in their lives.

Ive got a 6600 sqft lot and a 3100sq ft house with a driveway and a pool - and HCAD seems to think its built out of gold...Im just hoping that when its time to sell that the new buyers agree with HCAD. I did not fight my appraisal for the first time this year...

I agree with those above, its not a simple process to tear down in the historic districts and then you have to build your new house to their standards which are very subjective...if they like you, then you could have an easy time of it, if they dislike you or your project, you could be in for a long ride....There are still quite a few properties in the Heights, especially the area West of Heights Blvd that are not in the Heights historic district that are for sale.. and you are still smack dab in the middle of the Heights...Land values in the non-historic areas are up a bit though since the ordinance passed so you should expect that a 6600sqft lot capable of building your 3000sqft house will likely run you somewhere between $260,000 and $300,000 depending on your neighbors, and then you should expect about $7500 to remove the old house. Also if you have kids the schools in Heights west are not up to snuff compared to the East side of the boulevard....just something to think about as well. Otherwise there are quite a few places to choose from still...with all the BS that is the districts it is just much easier to buy around them....If all of the negatives of the Historic Districts come true, you will see better values based on the fact that your not in the districts, and if the bad things about the districts turn out to not matter, then you will be close enough for it to benefit you as well...the true effect of the historic districts will be difficult to gauge accurately as the properties outside of the districts will still have an effect on those inside it....a rising tide floats all boats and whatnot....