AtticaFlinch

I'd actually spent some time detailing the reasons why Houston shouldn't focus our attention on vacation travelers considering we're already a top destination for business travelers (according to Forbes we're the ninth most visted city in the US and that's almost completely all with business travelers), but then I figured, "why bother?" Some angry HAIFers are under the impression Houston needs to be all things for all people, rather than focus on our strengths of pragmatism and reliability, but whatevs. No amount of positive reasons not to focus our efforts on attracting a bunch of tourists would be enough to convince that angry contingent.

No, YOU complain about it. I don't any other people who complain about that at all. Edit: In other words, YOU don't take your own city serious enough. The rest of us workin' folk take it plenty seriously. We just don't have some goofy pie-in-the-sky expectation of what a city is supposed to be.

All I know about college basketball is "Go Memphis Tigers."

For years now, I've been advocating covering the buses and trains with several layers of marshmallows to soften the blow of impacts, but nobody listens.

I don't know. I kinda like it. Flying is such a mundane, prosaic task these days, I really don't mind a break in the monotony. For some reason, probably due to the intensity of the ambient noises associated with flying, I find it difficult to concentrate on a book, so I usually end up doing the sudokus in the in-flight magazine. That can only keep me entertained for so long, so if a wannabe comedian talling bad jokes or a wannabe Beyonce singing Boys II Men's "It's So Hard to Say Goodbye to Yesterday" takes a little time behind the intercom, it's ok with me. Amen to that. Flying out of IAH makes me feel like cattle going to slaughter, while flying from Hobby makes me feel the same but in a much smaller abatoire.

Those websites make instant the price shopping, and as price is often the decisive factor in consumption these days, regardless of quality, those sites in turn instantly make more amenity-laden choices less attractive. I don't know how to make more clear what I'm saying, though I admit maybe I'm at fault for expressing my point less than adequately. It's like having a McDonald's, a Burger King, a Wendy's, a Jack in the Box and a Beck's Prime all on the same block, and you really want a burger but your only factor in making a decision as to where to eat is based on price. If all you want is a burger, and if one of those places is as easily accessible as the next, you probably won't shop at Beck's Prime. More to the point, if Beck's has trouble communicating to the general public that their product is superior, or worse, if the public couldn't care less about quality over cost, then Beck's had either downsize and devote themselves to a smaller, appreciative group of consumers or start mass-producing crappy hamburgers. In that example, the ease of access to all those burger joints is those travel websites, and considering Continental doesn't want to downsize, they're now mass-producing crappy burgers. I realize the prices are the same from the travel websites to the airline websites, but the big thing is that all those prices are in one place.

I have a friend who think both Dallas and Houston suck, all cities in the world suck and that the people who populate them suck too. So, he moved into a tiny cabin in Montana and started mailing incendiary packages across the US. I guess his opinion must be right, because it's an opinion and my story is anecdotal, and everyone knows it's proof positive of a fact if I can support it with an anecdotal opinion.

Ultra-competitive pricing is great for the consumer (strictly in terms of dollars) but bad for the airlines. In order for Continental to compete with a Southwest or a JetBlue (competition which Priceline, Orbitz and Cheaptickets forces with their itemization), they have to remove a ton of amenities. Most people couldn't care less about inflight food or even the skill level of their pilot if they can save $30 on their roundtrip. Anyhow, my point about the food not actually being "free" is that if the food is left on the menu at no additional cost, the airlines would have to cut costs elsewhere in order to remain competitive. While I realize the price of the ticket won't go down, they probably won't now have to lay off any maintenance staff or tenured pilots.

You don't think so? So... how do you think the airlines pay for the food? Do they magically conjure it up? It may have been an expense on their balance sheet regarded completely separately from their ticket revenues, but I assure you that you're paying for that meal in the cost of your ticket.

It wasn't free. It was just bundled into your ticket price. But considering that extra cost multiplied several thousand times over daily caused those who provided free lunch to be less competitive with those who didn't provide lunch, it makes more sense to just dispense with the cost altogether. I like cheap tickets as much as the next guy, but when I'm faced with concession stand prices for a bag of almonds, I recognize my own culpability in the matter. I'll still use Priceline, Orbitz and Cheaptickets to get my tickets, and I'll just fill up before I hop on board. It'll be just like going to the movies - and when my pilot's a pimply faced teenager because no adult would work for what an airline can pay, I'll recognize my culpability in that too.

I for one am going to miss the microwaved chicken cordon bleus and the sandwiches with wilted lettuce.

CityKid is right. They need to raise the rail... but only at that one intersection.

Because he charges for use. You now owe IronTiger fifty cents.

What about Buffalo? Edit: Not to mention, even though not in the same state, Boston, Philadelphia and Providence are all closer to NYC than Houston is to either Dallas, San Antonio or Austin. Sure it's not the same state, but those other cities are far more accessible to each other.

If you say so. I'm very nearly at the point where I just don't read your posts. You can try that with mine if you're so terribly concerned about your time being wasted.

Welcome to Marksmu.

Plus. Exactly. We've already got a distinctive monument and it does nothing for the city in terms of reputation. Simbha, you need to narrow your focus to just the city center, probably somewhere inside the loop. But even then, the question is what. What do you build that's distinctive, non-derivative and screams Houston? Sadly, a giant oil derrick may be about the only thing. Gone are the days when a bridge or an observation tower alone will do it.

Housewives? Shouldn't they be at home? In the kitchen? Barefoot and pregnant? I'm curious how you knew they were housewives. Were they tourist housewives? Were they upper, lower or middle class housewives? How were you able to discern everybody else's social rank? Is there a class-based uniform in Atlanta? What other tales of the extraordinary can you tell us of this strange wonderland you call Atlanta? It sounds exotic. Did you, by chance, meet Dr Livingstone in this Atlanta?

They take the same crazy pills the politicians do. More wacky lawyerin' goin' on: Governor Rick Perry To Sue the EPA

That's unfortunate too. There are literally tens of thousands of attorneys (if not more), and this is just one guy doing something retarded. Like with every profession, there are some unethical boneheads trying to screw everybody over, and it seems they're the only ones who ever get any press.

I think the only road that needs extensive feeders is the beltway.

He was Smokey the Bear's evil doppleganger. He was the same in every way except instead of preventing forest fires, he ignited fires... of the heart.

Those parking lots are easy for the land owners. The parking income probably more than covers taxes, and overhead is minimal - occasional upkeep and maybe a security guard to patrol every so often. The biggest real benefit for owners though is the income is unreceipted cash only. It's great for laundering money. I wonder how many surface parking lot owners have ties to organized crime.

Oh, ok. Stating one true opinion therefore changes all non-opinions to opinions and eliminates accountability? I think I get it now. Interesting. I guess you and I have been to different Atlantas and different Dallases.

No, it's not. The intent is even further clarified here: You see, this is in direct response to my post which has apparently ruffled your feathers so much. As such, it's more than reasonable to assume he understood my response to be to his entire contention which was that Houston's central business district has more surface parking lots than any other city (edit: most other cities). That said, and regardless, mine was an example. Even still, if you continue to insist the "opinion" label was applied only to the post in which it was used, then it still isn't an opinion. Saying that zoning caused surface parking lots isn't stating an opinion. It still isn't a fact, but that doesn't make it an opinion. Perhaps my lauding your opinion discerning skills was a bit premature. For reference: Opinion: The above picture is a travesty. Not an opinion: The lack of zoning is responsible for the travesty in the above picture.