web analytics

JerseySmarts.com

Asbury Park’s “Esperanza” on Hold

Posted on by

Last month, The Esperanza was put on hold in Asbury Park. Some of you may remember this new luxury condominium building on the Asbury Park boardwalk as the place where rock n’ roll legend John Oates recently decided to purchase a vacation home. The development is put together by Metro Homes, who have been given 30 days to produce paperwork for the city before action is taken.

At this point, the folks in Asbury Park may be getting ready to see another steel skeleton on their beachfront. Most of this is probably due to the current housing crunch, but I have to believe that a great deal of the problems here are rooted in Monmouth County’s unwillingness to accept the fact that the housing crunch is here and that home prices must be lowered, period. There are homes in Monmouth County that were never worth more than $250,000 that eventually priced out at around $650,000. Mortgages were taken on these properties that are well above the $250,000 that these things are worth on today’s market and now the owners are stuck with a high-priced mortgage and a house that isn’t worth peanuts.

Having zero knowledge of the Esperanza development budget, I would wager that they needed to sell a certain number of condominiums before the construction really went into high gear and that they didn’t hit that number because of the downturn in the market. Hey, it happens.

And now we have another metal monster on the beachfront!

A Sad Day for The Founding Fathers

Posted on by

New Jersey, in its infinite stupidity, passed legislation yesterday endorsing the National Popular Vote movement. In short, this legislation has the potential to undermine the Electoral College and give the state’s Presidential electors to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. Think of it as the no-thought-needed “fix” to the Electoral College.

Of course by passing this legislation, the NJ lawmakers must assume that all of New Jersey believes that the Electoral College needs to be “fixed” in the first place (all of New Jersey – because every single New Jersey voter is affected). Further, this legislation assumes that not only should the Electoral College be fixed, but that this is the right way to do it (which it obviously is not). But in today’s world of quick fixes and easy answers, I’m not sure anyone would care why this is not the right way to handle the Electoral College. So for those of you who don’t want to think, go ahead and skip over to another website at this point – I’m going to attempt to explain why this legislation sucks.

First, it’s a fringe piece of legislation that could only actually take effect if states with a combined 270 electoral votes pass it. In other words, we’ve now suited up New Jersey in her best game garb and set her on the sidelines, waiting to be let into the game. Until enough states pass this legislation, it essentially means nothing and has no bearing on the current system. Why is this dangerous? Because by passing this bill, New Jersey’s politicians (who have proven their ineptitude almost on an hourly basis) now believe they are “done” with this issue. Nothing could be further from reality.

Second, the Electoral College was set up as a Constitutional compromise between those states who wanted direct election of the President and those who wanted a more Parliament-like system where the Congress chooses the candidate. People today think of the American system of government too much like the rest of the world’s governments. We’re not like the rest of the world! Direct elections in another country do not mean that Americans should have direct elections! Our Founding Fathers specifically moved AWAY from that form of elections. And don’t go crying about changing with the times. Bullshit on that relativist philosophy. Change is the precursor to revolution and in the only country in the world with mandated suffrage for each and every color, creed, and gender of human being, the only revolution that we truly need is an educational one (perhaps starting with history).

Third, the Electoral College gives the states power. Don’t believe me? Go back in time about 20 days ago before Iowa held their caucuses and New Hampshire held their primary and tell me that Iowa and New Hampshire voters didn’t have each and every one of their concerns addressed by the Presidential candidates. Take a trip down to South Carolina or Florida or over to Michigan and tell me that issues that directly effect those states aren’t being thought about, dissected, and presented with solutions by the candidates. The Electoral College ensures that ALL states have a say in who becomes President. To be an American is to accept that we are a nation that is comprised of 50 individual states who are joined together under a federal system of government. Period. This is not a nation that has federally controlled districts with federally installed Governors.

And fourth, in our current system, a candidate needs to win all of those middle states with lower electoral vote counts in order to be competitive in the final count. But – did you know that you only need to win the 12 states with the biggest electoral vote counts to win the Presidency? That means that 38 other states can think one thing, but if the 12 biggest states think something else, they win. That’s an abomination of what the Founding Fathers wanted for this country. And whether the relativists of today like it or not, what the Founding Fathers wanted hundreds of years ago IS relevant to today’s politics because this is America, the great political experiment in liberty.

Under the national popular vote system, all that matters is that a candidate win major population centers, not states. Endorsing the national popular vote system is endorsing the idea that states’ rights don’t matter – the exact opposite of what our Founding Fathers fought for so many years ago. How could ANY of the concerns of middle America or rural areas ever be addressed if all a candidate needed to win the election was to win the New York City area, Los Angeles area, Dallas area, Chicago area, and Atlanta area votes? What about Fort Worth, Texas? What about Bismark, North Dakota? What about the entire states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming?

Endorsing the national popular vote says that we don’t care about what our fellow Americans needs are in other, smaller states and other, smaller population centers. It’s an abomination. If the national popular vote succeeds and enough states endorse it, then it really might be time to change the name of this country because we will no longer be the America that was founded on all of those idyllic principles so many years ago. We’ll be a different country with different goals – hell, we might as well erase the lines between our states because they won’t matter any more.

It’s disgusting.

A better option would be to follow what Nebraska and Maine do with their electors. Since each state has a number of electors equal to their number of Senators and Congressmen, the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state gets the 2 “senator” votes and the rest of the electoral votes and divided into Congressional districts. If you win all of the Congressional districts in a state, you win all of the electoral votes. If you win 3 of 7 districts, you get 3 electoral votes.

This is the only fair, reasonable, LOGICAL alternative to the current system.

Katrina Claims Total $3,014,170,389,176,410

Posted on by

Yes, you read that right. The “victims” of Hurricane Katrina are suing the US Government for $3,014,170,389,176,410. In the written word, we’d call that three quadrillion, fourteen trillion, one hundred and seventy billion, three hundred and eighty nine million, one hundred and seventy six thousand, four hundred and ten dollars. This is absolutely disgusting.

I was among the first to say that the US Government really bungled the clean-up efforts with Hurricane Katrina. It was obvious and we all watched it happen on every cable news network.

However…

We watched BEFORE the storm as thousands of residents said they were not leaving their homes in New Orleans no matter what. We watched BEFORE the storm as local politicians allowed dozens and dozens of school buses to sit empty on school property as opposed to transporting out those residents who did want to leave. We watched AFTER the storm as roving street gangs fired gunshots in the air to ward off other street gangs. We watched AFTER the storm as residents who were given relief debit cards to buy food and clean drinking water spent that money on alcohol, Victoria’s Secret, and $100+ sneakers.

If this case isn’t immediately dropped as soon as it hits a judge’s desk, then I think the rest of America has the right to file a one hundred quadrillion dollar case against New Orleans. That’s right…one hundred quadrillion dollars!

This whole thing is so stupid it actually makes me sick.

Enough with the Commercials, Stern!

Posted on by

A few weeks ago I read an article that decried the satellite radio business as not living up to its promise. No, not the promise of commercial-free content because that’s not what they are promising (except with music – Sirius XM promises commercial-free music and boy do they deliver). What I am referring to is the theoretical promise of satellite radio.

That promise is a marketplace where YOU can pay for services that are to your liking and receive them on a limited interruption basis. For the purposes of this entry, I absolutely believe that Howard Stern is delivering on the promise of specific content tailored to a certain demographic. His channels are not only the most listened to on all of satellite radio (including the higher subscribed to XM), but they actually have a variety of topics and personalities that appeal to a broad audience (you’d be surprised). I’ve personally become a big fan of Bubba the Love Sponge since I first heard him on Howard 101, but that’s a different story.

However, Howard Stern and his crew are NOT delivering on the promise of limited interruptions for this PAY service. I understand that the talk channels do have some degree of commercial interruption and that’s fine by me. Gotta pay the bills, right? But the commercial breaks on Howard 100 and Howard 101 are – at this point – out of control. And I stress “at this point” because this was not always the way it was on these channels. When Howard started on Sirius XM, he had such limited interruptions that they amounted to some 20 minutes or so on his first show and even that was just a musical break or two.

But today, not only are we (the paying subscribers) subjected to 10 minutes or more of straight non-original, commercial content, but we are subjected to this crap on an increasing basis. I should take this opportunity, though, to point out that my definition of commercial and their definition of commercial is almost certainly different. I define anything that is not original, live content as a commercial. And please, don’t try to use 3rd grade logic with me about how by my limited definition then all of the replays are commercials. That’s BS and anyone with an education higher than grade school should understand that concept.

When Howard goes to commercial and you hear some lead out garbage phone call or sound clip, that doesn’t count as original, live content for me. When it flips to Howard 100 news for 5 or 6 minutes, that is also part of my definition of “commercial” – as is the downright insulting “lead-in” when they are back from commercial break. Why is the lead-in insulting? Well, they generally play some song during the lead-in. That’s what I want from the talk channel…a song. A fucking song?!?! Are you kidding me? I have dozens and dozens of commercial-free channels and one of the few talk channels that I listen to is going to play a fucking song? What bullshit.

On a related note, I can’t tell you how amazingly arrogant and aggravating it is to hear him say with such concern that he and the gang, “have GOT to take a commercial break!” Alright, we understand that Stern has contracts with advertisers and he must live up to his end of the contract. But we’re not dipshits! We’re not stupid! He has these contracts in place NOT because management is forcing him to have a ton of advertisers; rather he has those contracts in place because he’s trying to maximize his profit potential. Any business student understands that and they, like me, are probably fine with it. The problem is that Stern is not living up to the theoretical promise of satellite radio.

In any event, the next time you are on a long trip in the car take out your watch and time how long it takes from Howard to say, “We’ll be right back,” to him actually talking on the air again. It’ll be ten minutes at least (if you can stick with it that long). This is not the promise of satellite radio. In some respects, all Howard has managed to do on satellite radio is re-create the terrestrial radio template. It’s sad. Is it enough to have me cancel my Sirius subscription? Well, I don’t think so – unless, of course, they don’t bring back Bubba the Love Sponge after his contract expires!

Some Dummies for You: Comcast Cable

Posted on by

Earlier today, CBS News posted a story on their website about the FCC lifting certain restrictions on apartment buildings with respect to cable services. They cite the ability for low-income folks who live in apartments or government-sponsored housing projects to have a choice in their cable provider. In other words, the ability to choose a lower cost provider (which is great!).

As someone who works in an industry closely related to these large-scale, low-income developments I can tell you that the folks who live in these places need all of the breaks that they can get. If that means they can save $5 per month on the cable bill, then so be it!

And isn’t this logical? That competition for services SHOULD lead to a net decrease in costs? Well, not if you’re Comcast Cable. A spokesperson for the company said:

“The net result is that many consumers are likely to wind up paying more for services if the FCC’s interference in the competitive marketplace stands,” Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice said in an e-mailed statement.

Huh? Isn’t the “interference in the competitive marketplace” the fact that there is NO competition in these apartment buildings? For those of you that don’t know, many of these apartment buildings sign contracts with cable providers for the entire building, which restricts tenants to using that provider.

I mean come on! This is a no-brainer. For Comcast to come out and make the dumb comment that lifting this restriction will have a net result of higher cable prices for consumers is all sorts of idiotic. First of all, you have the logic argument cited above. Second, you have the fact that a rate increase is decided by the cable companies! In other words, you have cable companies saying, “If you take this action, we will be forced to raise rates. If we raise rates, then prices go up for consumers.”

Here’s an idea, dummies – DON’T RAISE YOUR RATES!

Idiots…