Aside from numbered streets (like Fifth Ave.), the most popular street names are Oak, Pine, Maple, Cedar, and Elm. You know what this is leading to.
In Sacramento, (SACTOWN) there are numerous heritage trees -- both trees that existed before any development and planted trees. On SMUD property, we have two Quercus Lobata trees that might have been acorns three hundred years ago (or more). However, thousands of other heritage trees line many Sactown streets as they were planted several generations ago by 'developers' with a keen sense of the future.
Now even my little burg of Elk Grove has heritage trees...but only those in Elk Grove park (planted ~120 years ago) and any tree that stood before Elk Grove ever existed.
There will never be any more.
There won't be any more because Elk Grove planning guidelines outlaw development patterns conducive to heritage tree formation. There may well be towering canopy trees 50 years hence, but the questions are, will they be considered an integral part of Elk Grove? Will they help define communities? Would their loss result in the degradation of neighborhoods?
The answer is a resounding NO. Elk Grovian trees don't mean a thing to the occupants of this city, aside from those especially set aside in Elk Grove park, a park exclusively set away from the large format retail strip malls, high speed collector roads, and dozens of square miles of suburbanized shitbox sprawl that defines Elk Grove.
Find me one tree, planted in any 24/7 illuminated parking lot of any Best Buy, Target, or Petco that you think will one day rise to a condition that future Elk Grovians would want to preserve. Find me one. Truth is, you won't.
Find me one tree, planted on the margins or on the median of any four-lane collector roads such as Bruceville Rd., Elk Grove Blvd., or Elk Grove-Florin Rd., that you think will one day rise to a condition that future Elk Grovians would want to preserve. You won't.
Find me one tree, privately owned and planted in someone's yard, that you think might have intrinsic value to the Elk Grove public because of its size, historical association, or ecological value...sufficiently worthy to future Elk Grovians. You won't.
If they don't mean shit to us now, they will be worth less to us in the future.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
The Consumer of No Resort
One thing to watch out for is how exporting countries will fare in our pleasant economic environment -- China, Venezuela, Mexico, Korea, Iraq, Taiwan (if you can call it a separate country), India, Japan... If the U.S. indeed is consuming less, then that affects imported cars from Germany, cheap Chinese household shit, computer components from Korea, oil from Mexico -- because the U.S. is the Consumer of Last Resort.
Without us to suck up all these manufactured goods to fill U-Stor-It rental warehouses and county landfills, these nations will either have to turn towards domestic consumption or face reductions in production.
Really...do you think the telephone headset assembly worker in Guangzhou will take in $80 shoes while the sole-stitcher at a shoe plant in Whenzhou takes in a new $63.99 cordless telephone? I don't see this happening when the hourly Chinese wage is, say, $3 bucks. So another option is to reduce production, and the obviousdownsizing firings that will follow. The latter option is not comforting, but is a probable consequence of the failing of a U.S. consumer market that spent decades buying things it didn't need with money it didn't have.
My own personal consumption reduction program began in December of 2006. An epiphany in that month -- I sold off many of my own consumer trappings and have not once regretted the decision. Since then I've focused mightily on not following a hyper-consumptive lifestyle. My actions were consistent through 2008 and I did not increase my debt, so therefore I did not contribute to this U.S. financial 'crisis.'
I am a Consumer of No Resort.
Without us to suck up all these manufactured goods to fill U-Stor-It rental warehouses and county landfills, these nations will either have to turn towards domestic consumption or face reductions in production.
Really...do you think the telephone headset assembly worker in Guangzhou will take in $80 shoes while the sole-stitcher at a shoe plant in Whenzhou takes in a new $63.99 cordless telephone? I don't see this happening when the hourly Chinese wage is, say, $3 bucks. So another option is to reduce production, and the obvious
My own personal consumption reduction program began in December of 2006. An epiphany in that month -- I sold off many of my own consumer trappings and have not once regretted the decision. Since then I've focused mightily on not following a hyper-consumptive lifestyle. My actions were consistent through 2008 and I did not increase my debt, so therefore I did not contribute to this U.S. financial 'crisis.'
I am a Consumer of No Resort.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Motoring IS Our Economy
I'm curious...if GM turns to bankruptcy, would GMAC go under? And if so, does that mean I can stop making my mortgage payments to GMAC? Would I/Should I be absolved of my debt? Just write it off?
Prolly 6 years ago now, I re-financed through Ditech...which I think is just a web front for GMAC mortgage. GM made more money in home mortgages (and the subsequent mortgage derivatives) than they ever did selling cars. Some of my earnings supported this endeavor, I suppose. But since then I've substantially paid off my debt and today I owe them $37,8oo. Interest payments are less than $185 a month now. Next year, for the first time in fifteen years, I don't expect to itemize.
If I were a typical Elk Grovian like my next door neighbors, in 2005 I would have never bothered with paying down my mortgage, and would have spent in excess of $37,800 to purchase a new family rig. A Tahoe. A Yukon. A Highlander. I find it surreal that a vehicle would cost that much, but now I find it more surreal that my mortgage is less than what an average suburban rig would cost.
The vast majority of all these owners are still paying on them...and they will still be paying on them through 2011. The end result, of course, is that GM made a fucking killing on the initial sale of each SUV and then in the financing of the vast majority of them...and even though people are still paying on them today, that's obviously not enough to keep them afloat.
I particularly love the argument we're now hearing that "we can't allow them to fail in this tough economic enviroment." This is total horseshit, because that's the argument we would have heard in any economic environment. Good or bad.
To validate everything I've ever wrote about how our economy is wholly based on the development of suburbanized sprawl and the building of motor vehicles necessary to live in and service it, comes doomerish projections that to allow any of these three to fail would precipitate a collapse in parts supply manufacturers, in thousands of dealerships, in the complete drying up of local tax revenues upon which local services are wholly dependent on the sales taxes of said vehicles.
Prolly 6 years ago now, I re-financed through Ditech...which I think is just a web front for GMAC mortgage. GM made more money in home mortgages (and the subsequent mortgage derivatives) than they ever did selling cars. Some of my earnings supported this endeavor, I suppose. But since then I've substantially paid off my debt and today I owe them $37,8oo. Interest payments are less than $185 a month now. Next year, for the first time in fifteen years, I don't expect to itemize.
If I were a typical Elk Grovian like my next door neighbors, in 2005 I would have never bothered with paying down my mortgage, and would have spent in excess of $37,800 to purchase a new family rig. A Tahoe. A Yukon. A Highlander. I find it surreal that a vehicle would cost that much, but now I find it more surreal that my mortgage is less than what an average suburban rig would cost.
The vast majority of all these owners are still paying on them...and they will still be paying on them through 2011. The end result, of course, is that GM made a fucking killing on the initial sale of each SUV and then in the financing of the vast majority of them...and even though people are still paying on them today, that's obviously not enough to keep them afloat.
I particularly love the argument we're now hearing that "we can't allow them to fail in this tough economic enviroment." This is total horseshit, because that's the argument we would have heard in any economic environment. Good or bad.
To validate everything I've ever wrote about how our economy is wholly based on the development of suburbanized sprawl and the building of motor vehicles necessary to live in and service it, comes doomerish projections that to allow any of these three to fail would precipitate a collapse in parts supply manufacturers, in thousands of dealerships, in the complete drying up of local tax revenues upon which local services are wholly dependent on the sales taxes of said vehicles.
Friday, December 12, 2008
CARB
The CARB (California Air Resources Board) website is down right now, but the internet chatter confirms that CARB today approved the most sweeping regulation on diesel truck particulate and NOx emissions in state history...and will prove to be the most expensive regulation as well. I'm thrilled.
The line from the American Truckers Association is that this is going to bankrupt many truckers. Well...good. Those that do make it through the regulations (read: most of them) will come through with cleaner trucks. As they all have to retrofit, all will stand to pass on these costs. If several go bankrupt, well, that's the price to pay for better air. I've got not one shred of sympathy.
I saw almost a dozen cars today with expired tags and the DMV "12" on the window. Most of these cars failed emissions tests. It costs to prevent emissions. Period. It always has. If these cars can't pass SMOG then they are [eventually] removed from the road...and the drivers be damned. We wouldn't exempt a driver of a gross polluter just because he's bankrupt, would we?
This is a bullshit argument and they know it...but they need to tow the line. The whole bankrupt thing. Detroit said the same thing about catalytic converters; the single most effective piece of emissions control equipment ever, and when introduced it was going to bankrupt Detroit. It didn't happen, and today they're perfectly capable of bankrupting themselves with or without catalytic converters.
The next argument, we're going to hear over and over and over in the coming months and years from every sector -- "given the dire state of the economy, we should not be expected to comply at this time."
The line from the American Truckers Association is that this is going to bankrupt many truckers. Well...good. Those that do make it through the regulations (read: most of them) will come through with cleaner trucks. As they all have to retrofit, all will stand to pass on these costs. If several go bankrupt, well, that's the price to pay for better air. I've got not one shred of sympathy.
I saw almost a dozen cars today with expired tags and the DMV "12" on the window. Most of these cars failed emissions tests. It costs to prevent emissions. Period. It always has. If these cars can't pass SMOG then they are [eventually] removed from the road...and the drivers be damned. We wouldn't exempt a driver of a gross polluter just because he's bankrupt, would we?
This is a bullshit argument and they know it...but they need to tow the line. The whole bankrupt thing. Detroit said the same thing about catalytic converters; the single most effective piece of emissions control equipment ever, and when introduced it was going to bankrupt Detroit. It didn't happen, and today they're perfectly capable of bankrupting themselves with or without catalytic converters.
The next argument, we're going to hear over and over and over in the coming months and years from every sector -- "given the dire state of the economy, we should not be expected to comply at this time."
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Civic Lessons
I started my blog to broadcast how to self-install a PV solar system, and it morphed into little more than delusional rants about energy and our living environments. The two are wholly linked, however. I live squarely in suburbia and despise it...and it took over a decade to develop a set of coherent thoughts on exactly why I despise it. I knew the day I moved to Elk Grove I'd be just another motorized, blinkered consumer...and I did it anyway.
Truthfully...I didn't have much choice.
I spent most of today in the Sacramento county court building. I received a jury summons, and in the span of less than 5 minutes this afternoon I went from being a remote prospective juror to landing the juror #5 spot. I am actually totally thrilled that I was selected, having never done this before. I have a distinct memory of my dad describing to me, many years ago, the first time he had to do this and how he relished the experience. I will be doing my civic duty starting next week.
At lunch, I walked about two miles to the Blue Diamond almond factory store. Lunch was a homemade cabbage salad before hoofing it to the store and a half a can of almonds on my walk back. On my lunch break, breaking from my civic duty, I walked through the civic fabric of two distinct neighborhoods that were made for walking.
There were several dozen Japanese Zelcova, Dutch Elm, London Plane, and Tulip trees formally planted four generations ago along the roadside that provided both a physical barrier between me and traffic and a canopy to 'contain' the neighborhood. These were fantastic trees and without them the neighborhoods would have felt entirely barren. I passed corner stores that weren't slumified, several streetfronts with two or three story buildings (lofts, condos, what have you), and street-level businesses mixed in here and there. For someone willing to walk, as I did today, virtually all of my daily living needs could be addressed within a half hour's distance, as well as access to two light rail tracks. There were other people outside walking as well. A neighborhood with a steady volume of people engaging in human interactions, however minimal they might seem, is vibrant and safe.
I said I didn't have much choice but to live in suburbia. This is because the neighborhoods I walked through today are only available to the wealthy. The homes are outrageously expensive precisely because they are in neighborhoods scaled to Homo Sapiens, not General Motors. That they are located in the city core is really incidental; people find value in such arrangements everywhere, but which haven't been built since World War II. Elk Grove could have done the same thing -- build a vibrant city core that's connected to Sacramento but distinct and separate, a complete community. But they didn't.
Instead, Elk Grove chose the route towards inevitable suburbanized slumification. Think of all the earlier generations of failed suburban Sacramento experiments: Del Paso Heights, Valley Hi, Rosemont, Colonial Heights, Orangevale, Rancho Cordova; this is what Elk Grove will become, just another place people won't care about.
They won't care about it because Elk Grove is a place not worth caring about. Homes are somewhat kept up for now, but after a few more years, without corner stores, without formally planted trees, without the feel of it being a human enterprise, it will drift into non-owner occupation. Rentals. Dead cars in driveways. Dead cars in garages. Dead cars in backyards. Absolutely no interaction between humans in one private dwelling with humans in adjacent private dwellings. Unpruned trees. Speeding thru commuters. Recalcitrant teenagers. Latchkeyed adolescents.
Truthfully...I didn't have much choice.
I spent most of today in the Sacramento county court building. I received a jury summons, and in the span of less than 5 minutes this afternoon I went from being a remote prospective juror to landing the juror #5 spot. I am actually totally thrilled that I was selected, having never done this before. I have a distinct memory of my dad describing to me, many years ago, the first time he had to do this and how he relished the experience. I will be doing my civic duty starting next week.
At lunch, I walked about two miles to the Blue Diamond almond factory store. Lunch was a homemade cabbage salad before hoofing it to the store and a half a can of almonds on my walk back. On my lunch break, breaking from my civic duty, I walked through the civic fabric of two distinct neighborhoods that were made for walking.
There were several dozen Japanese Zelcova, Dutch Elm, London Plane, and Tulip trees formally planted four generations ago along the roadside that provided both a physical barrier between me and traffic and a canopy to 'contain' the neighborhood. These were fantastic trees and without them the neighborhoods would have felt entirely barren. I passed corner stores that weren't slumified, several streetfronts with two or three story buildings (lofts, condos, what have you), and street-level businesses mixed in here and there. For someone willing to walk, as I did today, virtually all of my daily living needs could be addressed within a half hour's distance, as well as access to two light rail tracks. There were other people outside walking as well. A neighborhood with a steady volume of people engaging in human interactions, however minimal they might seem, is vibrant and safe.
I said I didn't have much choice but to live in suburbia. This is because the neighborhoods I walked through today are only available to the wealthy. The homes are outrageously expensive precisely because they are in neighborhoods scaled to Homo Sapiens, not General Motors. That they are located in the city core is really incidental; people find value in such arrangements everywhere, but which haven't been built since World War II. Elk Grove could have done the same thing -- build a vibrant city core that's connected to Sacramento but distinct and separate, a complete community. But they didn't.
Instead, Elk Grove chose the route towards inevitable suburbanized slumification. Think of all the earlier generations of failed suburban Sacramento experiments: Del Paso Heights, Valley Hi, Rosemont, Colonial Heights, Orangevale, Rancho Cordova; this is what Elk Grove will become, just another place people won't care about.
They won't care about it because Elk Grove is a place not worth caring about. Homes are somewhat kept up for now, but after a few more years, without corner stores, without formally planted trees, without the feel of it being a human enterprise, it will drift into non-owner occupation. Rentals. Dead cars in driveways. Dead cars in garages. Dead cars in backyards. Absolutely no interaction between humans in one private dwelling with humans in adjacent private dwellings. Unpruned trees. Speeding thru commuters. Recalcitrant teenagers. Latchkeyed adolescents.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Styrofoam
The bailing of the big three looks to be eminent.
I read the other day how many homeowners who have been 'rescued' -- that is, they found a way to renegotiate their deals, etc. -- end up defaulting anyway. Even though thesejokers hapless victims staved off massive rate adjustments, many now are losing their jobs...so the end result is the same. Default.
Now as the gov'ment is set to throw borrowed cash at Detroit, it's at least plausible that they will still default farther down the road. Restructuring or not, if they can't sell cars to people who can't buy them because they're either in debt from neck to nuts or they're out of work... the end result is the same. Default.
Two things about this bailing really, really pisses this Monologueonian off -- 1) by March 31, the big three are supposed to "submit detailed plans for profitability producing fuel efficient vehicles that can succeed in the marketplace." and 2) dropped out of the bill was a provision that would have barred Detroit from pursuing lawsuits from states trying to implement tougher emissions requirements.
Detailed plans. Tell me how, exactly, how! will fuel efficient vehicles be profitable in a nation of moronic NASCAR idol worshippers when gasoline is a buck a gallon? Without a coherent NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY that sets a floor on oil prices or otherwise encourages conservation, why the fuck would anyone want to buy a fuel efficient Detroit.hybrid at a premium when they can get a Dodge SRT-10 truck that shits and gits? For that matter, why would anyone buy a Prius at a premium when a gas-only Camry accelerates faster?
Funneling borrowed money past the event horizon of this fiscal black hole is one thing, but that a portion of our tax dollars will be used to finance automotive lawyers' pursuits to keep state emissions requirements (read:fuel efficiencies) lower is unbelievable. Totally unbelievable. The detailed plans that they will submit, I'll bet you, would then be pinned upon "favorable judgements regarding state emissions litigation."
Therefore, I am hoping to see a large chunk of this nation's future wealth squandered in a bill that's the equivalent of drilling another hole in the boat to let the water out. I don't see this as a bailout, it's just bailing with a Styrofoam cup. I'm hoping the boat sinks with our money in the bilge. Then perhaps we'll learn not to loan out Styrofoam cups to any more sinking ships.
I read the other day how many homeowners who have been 'rescued' -- that is, they found a way to renegotiate their deals, etc. -- end up defaulting anyway. Even though these
Now as the gov'ment is set to throw borrowed cash at Detroit, it's at least plausible that they will still default farther down the road. Restructuring or not, if they can't sell cars to people who can't buy them because they're either in debt from neck to nuts or they're out of work... the end result is the same. Default.
Two things about this bailing really, really pisses this Monologueonian off -- 1) by March 31, the big three are supposed to "submit detailed plans for profitability producing fuel efficient vehicles that can succeed in the marketplace." and 2) dropped out of the bill was a provision that would have barred Detroit from pursuing lawsuits from states trying to implement tougher emissions requirements.
Detailed plans. Tell me how, exactly, how! will fuel efficient vehicles be profitable in a nation of moronic NASCAR idol worshippers when gasoline is a buck a gallon? Without a coherent NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY that sets a floor on oil prices or otherwise encourages conservation, why the fuck would anyone want to buy a fuel efficient Detroit.hybrid at a premium when they can get a Dodge SRT-10 truck that shits and gits? For that matter, why would anyone buy a Prius at a premium when a gas-only Camry accelerates faster?
Funneling borrowed money past the event horizon of this fiscal black hole is one thing, but that a portion of our tax dollars will be used to finance automotive lawyers' pursuits to keep state emissions requirements (read:fuel efficiencies) lower is unbelievable. Totally unbelievable. The detailed plans that they will submit, I'll bet you, would then be pinned upon "favorable judgements regarding state emissions litigation."
Therefore, I am hoping to see a large chunk of this nation's future wealth squandered in a bill that's the equivalent of drilling another hole in the boat to let the water out. I don't see this as a bailout, it's just bailing with a Styrofoam cup. I'm hoping the boat sinks with our money in the bilge. Then perhaps we'll learn not to loan out Styrofoam cups to any more sinking ships.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Twelve Grand
I admittedly had some harsh comments regarding the hordes of Christians who drive their precious Land Rovers and Mercedes to drop off their kids at Christian Bros. High School. These are the people I commute alongside on my little bicycle on MLK Jr. Blvd. in the morning.
I don't usually cast 'success' in a negative light. But when you're driving a $45k+ rig through Oak Park well in excess of the speed limit with complete disregard to the less-financially-abled local bicyclists and pedestrians, to drop off your children at a school located in a community you wouldn't be caught dead in at any other time other than child-drop-off-time, then I've got a problem with that.
I recently learned that Christian Bros. is suffering from the same economic quagmire that the rest of this great nation is suffering from. Lower enrollment quotas...primarily due to the $12,000 annual tuition fees.
Damn! Twelve grand! On top of the property taxes they pay to support public education, they also intentionally yield this expense to send their child to a private school. Now I understand why I see all these expensive motor vehicles driving through the most economically depressed section of the city; they have to make bank to fund this enterprise.
The wealthy, Christian or otherwise, never allow themselves to be put into a position to have to say they're sorry, and they make every effort to ensure you know they are successful, to show that they 'have arrived'. And what better way to demonstrate this than to drive a vehicle with wanton disregard through a neighborhood worth more than two times the annual gross income of any of its inhabitants?
It's surreal to see this, it really is. But it isn't anything I wouldn't come to expect from my Merika. We are fond of flaunting our excesses. I infer from my observations that this is what Jesus would do, too.
I don't usually cast 'success' in a negative light. But when you're driving a $45k+ rig through Oak Park well in excess of the speed limit with complete disregard to the less-financially-abled local bicyclists and pedestrians, to drop off your children at a school located in a community you wouldn't be caught dead in at any other time other than child-drop-off-time, then I've got a problem with that.
I recently learned that Christian Bros. is suffering from the same economic quagmire that the rest of this great nation is suffering from. Lower enrollment quotas...primarily due to the $12,000 annual tuition fees.
Damn! Twelve grand! On top of the property taxes they pay to support public education, they also intentionally yield this expense to send their child to a private school. Now I understand why I see all these expensive motor vehicles driving through the most economically depressed section of the city; they have to make bank to fund this enterprise.
The wealthy, Christian or otherwise, never allow themselves to be put into a position to have to say they're sorry, and they make every effort to ensure you know they are successful, to show that they 'have arrived'. And what better way to demonstrate this than to drive a vehicle with wanton disregard through a neighborhood worth more than two times the annual gross income of any of its inhabitants?
It's surreal to see this, it really is. But it isn't anything I wouldn't come to expect from my Merika. We are fond of flaunting our excesses. I infer from my observations that this is what Jesus would do, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
