Sunday, January 02, 2005


I like to visit and post at blogs elsewhere. Some of my words posted recently at the blogs of others are in the comments section.

If you know of other blogs and comment areas on the net that would appeal or call for my comments, I'd love to see those pointers too.


Mark Rauterkus said...

About the new PIAA rule that allows high school basketball coaches to stretch their legs at courtside in games.

Sadly, there are countless times in sports where the are hurdles put into the way for coaches to coach. Coaches are teachers first. I think there are real lessons to be taught and understood. These are school settings and the coach should have as many avenues as possible to educate, lead, guide, teach, model, motivate, enforce the good, and so on.

One Technical foul and the coach is on his seat the rest of the game. That's fair enough. The coaching box needs to be put onto the floor and enforced. Good frameworks for coaches make sense. But being able to scoot along the bench to talk to a player just pulled from the game should be encouraged -- and not punished -- as was the way the rules were enforced in the past.

When a coach doesn't teach -- or teaches the wrong lessons -- then that coach is worthless. But there are few -- except in the city -- who are there just for the antics or for the grandstanding.

In the city, we've got different struggles as to the hiring of coaches via the UNION pull in the contract provisions. But that is another rant.

Mark Rauterkus | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 4:55 pm | #

Mark Rauterkus said...

At a new blog on Social Security. Mark Rauterkus wrote...

Bush doesn't want private accounts for the sake of private accounts. Plus, these accounts will give not be "PRIVATE" in any sense of the word.

Bush doesn't want smaller government. Bush is okay with same size or larger government.

IMHO the Bush motivation is to put more control into the hands of the citizen / taxpayer / individual and less control in the hands of the monopoly / state / government / techno-crats.

Think again.

And why does a non-retired worker mean less productivity? That assumption is another I'm not going to swallow without proof.

For example, how many police and/or crossing guards retired in Pittsburgh in the past month or so that were even in their 60s?

Low productive workers are generally the rookies.

Mark Rauterkus said...

About PAT at Furrow's Place, I wrote:

Perhaps you need to look a little farther if you really are not aware of any example of any self-sustained private service fitting the loosest possible definition of public transit actually making money anywhere in time or space.

Plus, your formula for Financial Deficit might be missing a little wrinkle called CAPITAL expenses. Not a breath given to that MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT, IMHO, when talking about Pittsburgh's mess.

To let the Port Authority go into a modest short term deficit once in a while without cutting heads is NOT even funny since you've ignored capital costs. Since it is your first post -- I'll just say the rant is "not for everyone" -- as advertised.

Mark Rauterkus said...

I posted this over at GrassrootsPA about the non-news of domain name purchase.

FWIW, buying a domain name is no big deal. Think of the buying of a domain name much like seeing one in the post office. Does that mean those stamps are for letters to send to campaign donors?

Others have speculated and purchased domains for years. Speculating on speculators makes a bad endeavor.

Furthermore, the coverage of domain name traffic is a bit like taking the photo of a grafitti vandal and putting it into the newspaper. It only makes it worse.

If you want, cover the opening of new web sites -- not the purchase of domain names. It just gets too out there and could be worth NOTHING in the real world.

My $.02 advice....

Mark Rauterkus said...

Under Diaries elsewhere I posted:

Suburban Shopping Mall in wetlands with Tax Subsidized Allowances

I'm in Pittsburgh (very much a blue state region). Went to a public hearing in county government and spoke against a development deal.

We have a thing called TIFs (Tax Incremental Finance deals). They are clever ways to make corporate welfare work. Now there is a plan that calls for a new shopping mall, with some eating establishments and a small hotel to be built in a wetlands near one of our rivers.

Free markets work, don't they?

In the old days, and in the UK, there used to be a 'free market party.' When I ran for public office in 2001 I called myself a "Free Market Republican."

Can't we expect people to buy the land, build what they want, and pay their share of the taxes too?

I support property rights. I don't like zoning laws. But, I hate corporate welfare.

I think it topic is one where the Dems and the GOPers agree -- in a blue state. We've got both parties on board with these TIF deals.

Furthermore, I'm for growth. But this isn't about growth because it is about CHURNING. We build one, but tear down another. That isn't growth to me.

Our new retail developments, build with TIF packages, have killed the established retail locations. Now the dense areas are past floundering stages. The retail just moves from one point to another.

If we were putting up a FUEL CELL plant, then we'd have a different perspective. And, if the developer wants to pull his own weight and do the investment with private money -- fine.

Thanks for your feedback, as always.

What goes on in your neck of the woods? Where do the others stand where you are? How are those issues framed among D & R and such?