The election season was so much fun that now I need to sleep somewhere for a solid week.
So here I am, living in a campsite yurt on the beach in north Oahu, surrounded by feral chickens and a limited selection of local surfers who have hunted out this little gem, a perfect, building-free cove that feels like the Hawaii of a century ago. (I’m sure sharp-eyed Bill Lee will remember my previous trip here and even knows my GPS location.)
I have to note that, passing through Honolulu, I was startled by the numbers of homeless people, sleeping on the sidewalk next to my hotel, all along the beach at Waikiki, and elsewhere.
It reminds me again that cities with warmer weather don’t so much attract homeless people as render them extremely visible because they can sleep outside (instead of in parking garages or in sheds or on someone’s floor) more comfortably.
Oh, and for transportation buffs, you’ll be thrilled to hear the whole city is embroiled in a fight over heavy rail vs. light rail for the new, much needed transit system in this sprawling city.
So, as usual, feel free to post here on interesting city topics that come up until I return.
65 responses so far ↓
1 Silly Season // Dec 9, 2011 at 11:27 pm
Wonderful! L et’s DO this!
2 Michael Geller // Dec 10, 2011 at 9:04 am
So Frank, Bobbie, Silly Season, JJJ et al…4:30 on the 6th of January at Bitter…no need to confirm, just show up!
Frank Ducote and I are the bald ones!
3 Frank Ducote // Dec 10, 2011 at 4:39 pm
Hey, didn’t you say you going to try and be nicer? Oh well, what can one expect? Looking forward to a non-digital conversation over beer, though!
4 Lewis N. Villegas // Dec 10, 2011 at 6:38 pm
I’ll shave my head.
5 Jason // Dec 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
I thought this op Ed was rather bang on, and a cautionary tale for Vancouver… http://alturl.com/mnhq4
Just thought I’d share…
6 Jeff L // Dec 11, 2011 at 10:01 am
I enjoy Rex Murphy’s articles, but he paints a pretty broad brush here.
“And, sadly, there seems to be no other area of public policy in which fitful enthusiasms, pie-in-the-sky thinking, under-researched proposals and the mere hint of possible benefit get so respectful a response and are shielded — almost as if by magic — from the criticisms and analysis that would greet proposals from any other policy area whatsoever.”
The danger with that thinking is that it suggests that other government policy initiatives are much sounder, and that all green initiatives, by extension, are unfounded. That is nonsense.
I think back to BC government initiatives like the fast ferries. While not green at all, they fit this description perfectly. So does the Gateway road construction program. In fact many government programs suffer the same lack of critical thinking. Absolutely, it is possible for government to waste money on green initiatives. But articles like this suggest that therefore, all green initiatives are worthless. That is a shortsighted view, IMO.
7 Roger Kemble // Dec 11, 2011 at 10:12 am
Jason @ #55
Good post.
Gregor isn’t far behind!
8 Jason // Dec 11, 2011 at 2:48 pm
“The danger with that thinking is that it suggests that other government policy initiatives are much sounder, and that all green initiatives, by extension, are unfounded. That is nonsense.”
I think the point is that no other policy area comes with such sanctimony. Green initiatives, like all iniatives can be good or bad..and they need to be examined just as thoroughly. The ends doesn’t simply justify the means.
9 Chris Keam // Dec 11, 2011 at 5:19 pm
“I think the point is that no other policy area comes with such sanctimony”
I would argue that military expenditures/policies tend to suffer from the same issue.
10 Jason // Dec 11, 2011 at 8:48 pm
“I would argue that military expenditures/policies tend to suffer from the same issue.”
I’m sorry, what country are you referring to? Because it sure ain’t Canada. Even among conservatives (the fighter jet expenditure is an excellent example) there is questioning of every single military expenditure…they are also put under the microscope more often than perhaps ANY expenditure….and rightfully so.
11 Chris Keam // Dec 11, 2011 at 8:54 pm
Hi Jason:
You said ‘sanctimony’ not ‘scrutiny’. IMO, those who support military spending are quick to proclaim it’s inherent rightness and necessity in much the same way as those who claim environmental initiatives are unquestionably a good idea. Maybe I misunderstood your original statement?
12 IanS // Dec 12, 2011 at 7:39 am
@Jeff L #56:
“The danger with that thinking is that it suggests that other government policy initiatives are much sounder, and that all green initiatives, by extension, are unfounded. That is nonsense.”
FWIW, I don’t read the article as saying that, so much as suggesting that, so called “green” initiatives should not be permitted to escape the same kind of scrutiny as other initiatives.
I doubt Rex Murphy is suggesting that all other gov’t initiatives are well founded.
“In fact many government programs suffer the same lack of critical thinking.”
Again, FWIW, I’m right with you on that one.
13 MB // Dec 12, 2011 at 10:19 am
Sadly, geothermal power is usually left out of the discussion on green energy. Unlike solar, hydro and wind, it is steady (i.e. not intermittent), and does not occupy vast tracts of landscape (save new corridors for transmission lines).
Moreover, BC has a huge potential for development of this underrated resource.
14 Lewis N. Villegas // Dec 12, 2011 at 2:23 pm
I just came across the following statement in the Bartholomew Plan:
The construction of the Distributor Street and the absence of skyscrapers will spread business evenly over the area and prevent undue traffic congestion.
Bartholomew. Plan for the City of Vancouver, 1929 (p.25)
Keep in Mind that the Sun Tower and the Dominion Building are circa 1910; and the Marine Building must have been completing while Bartholomew and team were on site here in Vancouver. My musings on the subject here:
http://wp.me/p1mj4z-tp
It’s a revolution in my thinking, or at least in the presentation of urban ideas in our city.
15 Andy // Dec 12, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Uh Jason (#60) just to pick on the JSF, we see Julian Fantino (naming only one) blindly asserting that the wholly unrealistic price the Cons say they will pay is beyond debate. Even as, in the real world, we see the F-35 price shooting up. Please remember that I’m saying that public statements by Federal Government reps are strong signs of sanctimonious groupthink and not some random Con blogger.