Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

<

>

Today’s Explosive News: The Term “NIMBY” Dies at the Davis Vanguard – Sir Al Corner Vindicated

SUBJECT:  "2024 Figures to Be a Challenging Year to Make Progress on Housing"
Walter Shwe

Due to the tyranny of Measure J and its [edited] supporters, the ship for commercial development in Davis has long since passed. The owners of existing Davis commercial developments know they can continue to command high rents because they don’t have to concern themselves with very much competition. A while ago I found a quote in the Davis Enterprise about why the current owner of the Oakshade Town Center decided to buy that development. They don’t have to worry much about competition because as long as Davis thumbs its noses at brand new development, they have it made in the shade.

Moderator

Hi Walter,
We’ve edited your comment. We won’t allow ‘NIMBY’ any more.

Well blow me over with a feather.  The Davis Vanguard recognized NIMBY as a pejorative and followed their own rules.  Yours truly mentioned this hypocrisy to them several dozen times starting in . . . I'm not going to scour every comment going back a decade, but I'm guessing — 2017 ???  So, better half-a-decade late than never.

KO say, today, in Al's Corner:  "Once I see the monotonous headline [housing article in Davis Vanguard] I don't bother to read the article. Instead I head straight to the comments but that's a graveyard too these days."

I am going to take this monumental change in moderation practices as a sign that the Vanguard recognizes:  a) that Al was right; b) what a "graveyard" the comments have become, and; c) that David Greenwald wants me back commenting in the Vanguard comments section, and Ron and Rik as well, to "un-graveyard" the place.  We're all sitting here with a cup of green tea on this crisp, sunny Davis afternoon awaiting your phone call, apology, and invitation to return.

By the way, if the Vanguard comment section is a graveyard, then Walter Shwe, Don Shor, Keith Y Echols, Todd Edelman, Mark West, David Thompson, Richard McCann, Ron Glick, Tim Keller, David Greenwald and Matt Williams are the last eleven remaining ghosts swirling around said graveyard emitting the sound "Whoo-oo-oo-oo!". 

Or, in Belarus:  "Uuuuuu!".

Posted by

Alan C. Miller

on

in

Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

62 responses to “Today’s Explosive News: The Term “NIMBY” Dies at the Davis Vanguard – Sir Al Corner Vindicated”

  1. Ron O

    I am going to take this monumental change in moderation practices as a sign that the Vanguard recognizes: a) that Al was right; b) what a “graveyard” the comments have become, and; c) that David Greenwald wants me back commenting in the Vanguard comments section, and Ron and Rik as well, to “un-graveyard” the place.
    Personally, I don’t care what David Greenwald might “want”. One of the better decisions I made was to withdraw from commenting on the Vanguard itself. The problems on there go far-beyond the use of the word “NIMBY”.

    Reply
  2. Nancy Price

    NIMBY was an very easy label to put everyone into one group who opposed a project. In fact, over the years, I suggest, opposition to projects by some or many put into the NIMBY group was not because it was in my or your backyard, it was just a lousy project that could be much, much better – a model – forward leaning, inspired, exceptionally sustainable and very green, maybe even visionary, ….well you, hopefully, get my point, – project. So in place of NIMBY, what now?

    Reply
  3. Roberta L. Millstein

    Good point, Nancy. It has also been presupposed that someone who opposed one project opposes them all and assumed that everyone in this mythical “group” agrees with each other.
    Perhaps we can all just accept that crappy projects are good for no one, and hope that everyone takes an interest in avoiding crappy projects, and, as you suggest, trying to foster much better ones?
    And while we are on the subject, I can’t help but make the related point that many so-called YIMBYs are actually arguing for projects that are not in their backyards. (There is actually a group called “California YIMBY” — those folks have big backyards!) That they got this name to stick is pretty impressive. Again, wouldn’t it be better to just discuss the pros and cons of the projects themselves instead of falsely trying to claim some moral high ground?

    Reply
  4. Alan C. Miller

    RO say: The problems on there go far-beyond the use of the word “NIMBY”.
    You’re spoiling the fun, RO. Walk with me in the Valley of Illusion 😐

    Reply
  5. Keith

    Well one of the many pejoratives that have been allowed on the Vanguard has now been officially banned. Could calling someone a neo-fascist be next?

    Reply
  6. Ron O

    I actually think that “NIMBY” is a real thing, to some degree.
    Specifically, it refers to folks who support increased density (in the abstract), but not when it’s literally next-door to them. In other words, build it “somewhere else”.
    It’s a natural reaction (e.g., when a large apartment building is approved right next-door to single family dwellings).
    That’s why I generally don’t support increased density (in some locations) OR sprawl.
    I’m essentially a proud “no-growther”, or BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone), if you will will.
    But seriously, I’m inclined to think that there’s ALREADY been too much sprawl (everywhere).
    There are places that can accommodate more infill, and be “improved” as a result. Places like parts of Woodland, West Sacramento, Sacramento, etc. And yet, the effort is rarely made in THOSE places. Instead, the interests which are forcing growth attempt to do so where it’s not needed or welcome, primarily because it’s more profitable.

    Reply
  7. Ron O

    Could calling someone a neo-fascist be next?
    Whatever happened to the “old-fashioned” fascists? Is that the group that escaped to Argentina after WWII?
    And is there any difference between, say, a millennial fascist and a boomer fascist? (One of them owns a house – from the time it only cost about $500, while the other pays that same amount for avocado toast?)

    Reply
  8. South of Davis

    Keith asks: “Could calling someone a neo-fascist be next?”. My guess is that they will just replace “NIMBY” with “Racist” (the go-to term for most on the far left for anyone that does not agree with them). P.S. I recently read something that a gay black guy was surprised that he was being called “far right” just because he said he was happy he did not get “gender affirming” surgery when as a young gay boy he went through a time when he was telling his parents he thought he was a girl…

    Reply
  9. Alan C. Miller

    SoD: Can you cite?
    Seems the most venom directed by far left, and I stress FAR, not left, is at members of identity groups that they claim as “theirs” who identify as conservative, such as gay conservatives, or black Republicans. Such as when Larry Elder was called “The black face of white supremacy”.
    I was listening to a podcast last night of a debate between conservative lesbians and liberal lesbians. The liberal lesbians were incredulous that a lesbian could identify as conservative. Like, puzzled. Like, almost angry. Yet, why should one’s race or sexual identity require them, according to the far left, to hold a particular set of political beliefs?
    To me, isn’t the greatest achievement of society when individuals from groups that have been, or still are, oppressed, may identify openly with whatever political affiliation they choose? Is it not great for our country to have the perceived conservative party more diverse with identities outside of cis white males?

    Reply
  10. Ron O

    The liberal lesbians were incredulous that a lesbian could identify as conservative. Like, puzzled. Like, almost angry.
    I suspect that they feel “betrayed”, since discrimination was previously viewed as practiced primarily by conservatives.
    This is what’s wrong with painting others with a broad brush. And yet, many people to this day seem to take some kind of pride in identifying as “conservative”, “progressive”, “liberal”, etc. As if doing so makes oneself a “good guy” (or gal), vs. the “bad people” on the other side.
    I prefer to paraphrase Trump: “There’s bad people on BOTH sides”.
    I’ve had several conversations with someone who is on the “slow-growth” side of the spectrum, who strongly believes that this view is “progressive”. And yet, you have folks like David Greenwald (who no doubt views himself as “uber-progressive”) who have aligned themselves with development interests – almost word-for-word.
    It’s a microcosm of politics at large. And is probably related to the reason that someone like Anoosh feels a need to distract using a hand puppet when someone like Beth is engaging in public speaking. (Video can be found on Beth’s Facebook page.) Personally, I think Gloria should disavow this type of behavior – since it’s damaging the reputation of the organization that Gloria founded.

    Reply
  11. Keith

    “And is probably related to the reason that someone like Anoosh feels a need to distract using a hand puppet when someone like Beth is engaging in public speaking. (Video can be found on Beth’s Facebook page.) Personally, I think Gloria should disavow this type of behavior – since it’s damaging the reputation of the organization that Gloria founded.”
    Ron, well said, I totally agree. I wonder if that type of behavior would be allowed if someone with the same views as Beth had been acting accordingly? I’ll bet not.

    Reply
  12. Alan C. Miller

    I agree with y’all. But I also believe BB should disavow many of the comments of those that support her beliefs, some of which are at least unhelpful and at most hateful. I find both A&B to be obnoxious in their own special ways. If they had a duel at 50 paces in Central Park (with Nerf guns of course!) I wouldn’t know who to root for.

    Reply
  13. Ron O

    If they had a duel at 50 paces in Central Park (with Nerf guns of course!) I wouldn’t know who to root for.
    I’d ultimately root for whomever is the “slow-growther”.
    And now that I think about it, it’s probably those in the LGBQT community who generally aren’t “breeders”.
    So “round one” goes to them. (Or should I say, “they”.)

    Reply
  14. South of Davis

    Most people in politics are “obnoxious” but I have never understood why anyone needs to “disavow” anybody (or any group) and like Alan I don’t think small town government officials should get involved with “picking sides” in international conflicts. If a “hateful” person agrees with me that the burritos at Taqueria Guadalajara taste good do I need to “disavow” them? If a “hateful” crazy person agrees with Alan that A&B are obnoxious (something I agree with) does he need to “disavow” them? I have always hated when people on both sides tar politicians with someone they are associated with.
    P.S. I wonder if the Vanguard will ban the new term “DWIMBY”:
    https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/bay-area-housing-debate-yimby-nimby-18592294.php

    Reply
  15. Alan C. Miller

    SOD, let me give you an example. There’s a person who posted on BB Facebook page who happens to be the only person I’ve had to edit words out of repeatedly on Al’s Corner due to their just being insults. That person was criticized by another person and accused of having a serious medical condition and of being a pedophile who hangs out around Davis schools.
    Much as I agree with unlimited free speech, if you allow people to meaninglessly insult and accuse people of vile crimes with no limitation, any forum will turn into a hateful abyss. You can allow all ideas to be heard without limitation, while limiting insults and accusations that add nothing to the conversation about ideas. BB in her quest for all to be heard fails in this.
    To a certain degree I allow some of this, because in most cases it backfires on the person doing the accusing. But I will not publish someone only insulting someone else with no ideas whatsoever, and won’t allow someone to accuse someone else of a vile crime with zero evidence. Because BB allows almost total ‘free speech’, and because the Vanguard often allows insults from one side only, they become, at times, cesspools.

    Reply
  16. Ron O

    Regarding “disavowing” a member of any particular group, it seems to me that a founder of the group would normally care if a highly-visible member of it is engaging in questionable behavior (supposedly in support of) that group’s mission.
    Especially if they’re also a council person.
    Perhaps it’s even more-concerning if someone in that type of position sees “nothing wrong” with that type of behavior, and/or provides support via public resources in support of “their” group.
    Which also reminds me of those apparently running the library and school systems.
    Regarding DWIMBY, that sounds about right: “Depends What’s in My Backyard.”

    Reply
  17. Ron O

    Of course, as an alternative to expressing concern regarding a member of one’s own political group, it’s probably a lot easier to just call for a cease-fire, overseas.
    Depending upon how cynical one is, one might even view that as a “distraction” away from how their own group operates.

    Reply
  18. Keith

    “obstructionist Measure J zealot”
    Is this the new term for “NIMBY”?
    It was used by Walter and got by the moderator so I guess in the eyes of the Vanguard it’s not a pejorative.

    Reply
  19. Alan C. Miller

    Well, that’s why not allowing pejoratives is a fool’s game. Better to just allow pejoratives. But of course, what the Vanguard really meant is ‘we’ll allow pejoratives, unless they insult OUR God’.

    Reply
  20. R Keller

    Update: the Vanguard is allowing the use of the term “NIMBY” in its articles again. That was fast!
    What David Greenwald doesn’t tell you: “Special to the Vanguard” means that he is simply regurgitating a press release without identifying it as such and without attribution. This is, course, a violation of journalistic ethics. Then again, Greenwald isn’t actually a journalist.
    https://www.davisvanguard.org/2024/01/yimby-law-and-yimby-action-support-homeless-housing-in-millbrae-yimby-law-defends-homes-in-lawsuit/

    Reply
  21. Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “YIMBY Law and YIMBY Action Support Homeless Housing in Millbrae – YIMBY Law Defends Homes in Lawsuit” [2-day’s Bavis Banvard]
    Keith Olsen January 9, 2024 at 6:18 am
    “The proposal was met with swift and livid opposition from NIMBYs who used common yet offensive talking points to express their opinions.”
    Now wait a minute, I thought the term NIMBY wasn’t allowed on the Vanguard anymore.
    David Greenwald January 9, 2024 at 6:28 am
    You remind me of my kids.
    Kid 1: Kid 2 said “s”
    Me: Don’t use that word
    Kid 1: I didn’t say “s” I said Kid 2 said “s”
    To answer your question: I trust California YIMBY isn’t going to come on here and start calling participants NIMBY, therefore they get some leeway. Just as we occasionally use profanity in articles to illustrate points or quotes even though we don’t allow the commenters to do it. Same basic principle.
    David Greenwald January 9, 2024 at 7:38 am
    All you need to know is don’t use NIMBY.

    Reply
  22. Ron O

    All you need to know is don’t use NIMBY.
    And yet, David just used the “N” word, himself. 🙂

    Reply
  23. Keith

    Keith Olsen January 11, 2024 at 6:49 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Commentary: NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY
    Why do I picture David sitting at his computer typing this title while saying ‘na na na-na na nah’ I can say it and you can’t?

    Reply
  24. Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “Commentary: NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY” [yesturday’s Zavis Zamblard]
    David is sending a secret smoke signal message letting us know that he reads and loves the Davisite 😐

    Reply
  25. Keith

    “David is sending a secret smoke signal message letting us know that he reads and loves the Davisite :-|”
    Oh yeah, he reads it. So do several other Vanguard commenters.

    Reply
  26. Ron O

    So I see (on the “other” blog) that they’re still yammering about finding new ways to overturn Measure J, while also pretending that DISC wouldn’t have created more demand for housing.
    Meanwhile, they’re claiming that Woodland has essentially “stolen” Davis’ “innovation center”. But to this day, there’s (still) been no announcement regarding ANY business moving into Woodland’s technology park.
    It is true that Woodland’s technology park is essentially what’s left of the “Davis Innovation Center”, which failed before it even reached voters.
    But even in Woodland, they had to add 1,600 housing units (on a site that was previously-zoned for commercial only, I believe) just to make it plausible. And yet, there’s still no activity on the site.
    It also seems strange that (after doing everything they could to derail the University Mall proposal), there’s not a peep out of any of these growth monkeys regarding how lucky Davis is to have a developer interested in leveling the entire site, for the sole purpose of redeveloping it as a BRAND-NEW RETAIL SITE. (I recently saw how there’s nothing left of University Mall, to clear it for BRAND-NEW BUILDINGS.)
    Compare THAT to (Woodland’s) County Fair Mall, which at this point is almost completely-empty!

    Reply
  27. Keith

    “Compare THAT to (Woodland’s) County Fair Mall, which at this point is almost completely-empty!”
    Last time I went to that mall it was about as dead as the Vanguard comment section.

    Reply
  28. Ron O

    So I see that David is STILL trying to convince the council to gut Measure J on an upcoming ballot.
    While also trying to convince voters to simultaneously support existing Measure J proposals.
    And yet, he notes that NONE of the proposals are actually intended to address the state’s housing targets in the first place.
    Then, he brings up other cities (in regard to actions taken by the state) which have NOTHING TO DO with the conversion of farmland outside of city limits.
    Does any of this make sense?
    If Measure J is actually as vulnerable as David wants it to be, it’s only a matter of time that it would be challenged – regardless of how much David and others try to hold it for “ransom”.
    And if that ever occurs, an actual, long-term political war will commence. It will be a new beginning – not an end.
    It’s unfortunate, in some ways, that the state’s efforts have not (yet) caused cities to sufficiently suffer to the point where voters remove power from the state, via initiative. Perhaps if the state’s population wasn’t DROPPING, along with the housing market itself – there’d be a better chance of a revolt sooner, rather than later.

    Reply
  29. Ron O

    As far as Tim Keller’s complicated proposal to gut Measure J, developers can ALREADY propose whatever he’d like to see, under Measure J.
    So if it would be as popular as he claims it would be, those type of proposals would be easily-approved, under Measure J.
    I’ve noticed that Tim Keller repeatedly attempts to build a coalition, where none exists. He’s now claiming that Eileen Samitz would likely support his proposal to gut Measure J. (Uhm, homey don’t think so.)
    I do wish that the city would stop subsidizing Tim Keller’s business, via loans, etc. Especially when he’s simultaneously working AGAINST Measure J. (Perhaps that’s a reason that those on the council support him and his business?)

    Reply
  30. Ron O

    Uh, huh – who would have guessed that there’d be a “problem” regarding the state providing funding for Affordable housing. (Citations from two different CalMatters articles linked below.)
    California’s state housing department is suing a Los Angeles developer that last year defaulted on private loans it took out on seven state-funded motel conversions, putting the homeless housing projects at risk of “imminent foreclosure.”
    https://calmatters.org/housing/2024/01/california-homeless-housing-lawsuit/
    The Monterey County community last year partnered with Los Angeles-based developer Shangri-La Industries to land a grant from Homekey, California’s $3.1 billion program to help cities build affordable housing for their homeless residents.
    Other problems with the projects have stemmed from that, he said. Projects are over budget, in part because Shangri-La has had to pay property taxes, when they would be eligible for abatements if the properties were recorded as affordable housing. Lenders also expected the affordability agreements to be recorded, causing some loan defaults on technicalities, he said. Meanwhile, he said, high interest rates the past two years have made refinancing difficult. The loan defaults were first reported this month by the real estate news outlet The Real Deal.
    Although this isn’t the “primary” issue that’s causing the attorney general to get involved, I’d also point out the bolded text above – that Affordable housing apparently skirts property taxes. Just what Davis “needs”, in regard to fiscal issues.
    https://calmatters.org/housing/homelessness/2023/12/california-homeless-developer-investigation/

    Reply
  31. Eileen Samitz

    As Ron posted:
    “I’ve noticed that Tim Keller repeatedly attempts to build a coalition, where none exists. He’s now claiming that Eileen Samitz would likely support his proposal to gut Measure J. (Uhm, homey don’t think so.)”
    Ron is correct. Eileen does not support Tim Keller’s Village Farms proposal nor his Measure J amendment proposal. The entire point of Measure J is to allow Davis voters to decide to approve, or not approve projects which would use ag land or open space. Tim’s proposal is really a circumvention of Measure J.

    Reply
  32. Alan C. Miller

    I think people need to face a reality: there is NO MODIFICATION of Measure J. There is only the termination of Measure J, along with the adoption of something new that 51% of Davis actually-will-vote voters will support . . . . . . . . Fucking Period.

    Reply
  33. Ron O

    So, it’s back to Beth-bashing in the Vanguard, today:
    Sunday Commentary: Moms for Liberty May Be Imploding, but the Damage Is Done
    I’m not sure what “damage” is being referred to here, other than to kids’ genitalia.
    I’d put a smiley-face after that, but it actually is a pretty serious issue.

    Reply
  34. Ron O

    “The state’s own competency tests, as well as nationwide tests, show little, if any, overall improvement and the achievement gap is as wide as ever.
    K-12 enrollment peaked at 6.3 million in 2004, is now below 6 million and is expected to drop to under 5 million in the next decade due to low birthrates and the state’s overall population decline.
    It will test whether money is truly the key to educational achievement, as the education establishment contends, or other factors are preventing California kids from realizing their potential.”
    https://calmatters.org/commentary/2024/01/californias-budget-deficit-school-impact/
    It’s “other factors”. Then again, how is “potential” defined?
    In any case, I’d suggest it’s increasingly outside of white-collar jobs / student loan debt.
    Those who know how to actually do things that others value always have a job (and/or business). And probably half (at least) of college degrees do not provide this.

    Reply
  35. South of Davis

    Ron may think those “Gender Studies” degrees are worthless but with 72 genders now (and an even bigger number of pronouns) we will need someone that understands all this stuff.
    The biggest change I see in America is the massive drop in the number of people in their 30s that have never been married (and probably never will get married or have kids).
    My pushing 60 sister never married since like most woman wanted to find someone smarter and richer than she was, but as more and more women go to college this gets harder (not a lot of guys have degrees from Cal and Stanford and homes in Hillsborough and Aspen like my little sister).
    In 1970 ~16% of the adult men in America had a 4yr degree compared to ~8% of the adult women. In 1990 ~25% of adult men had a degree vs. about 18% of the women and today almost 40% of the adult women have degrees compared to ~35% of the men. For young people the degree gap is pushing 20% with almost 60% of women getting degrees compared to just over 40% of the guys.
    As a 60 year old guy it seems like once a week I get an obituary via email about the parent of a friend and it is amazing how many times I read “He was one of six kids, he is survived by his three kids and three grandkids” (My parents were both one of five had three kids and have four grandkids). People are just having WAY less kids these days and getting married WAY less often so the state and schools will continue to shrink (unless we totally open the borders).

    Reply
  36. Keith

    “So, it’s back to Beth-bashing in the Vanguard, today:”
    Yea Ron, I guess David couldn’t come up with a housing article this morning so he reverted back to Beth.
    “Keith January 14, 2024 at 4:06 pm
    What, was it a slow day at the Vanguard?
    So David had to whip up another M4L and Beth Bourne story?”

    Reply
  37. Ron O

    My pushing 60 sister never married since like most woman wanted to find someone smarter and richer than she was, but as more and more women go to college this gets harder (not a lot of guys have degrees from Cal and Stanford and homes in Hillsborough and Aspen like my little sister).
    I recently met someone whom I believe has no college degree, and told me that he was homeless as a young adult. Came from a dysfunctional family.
    He became a contractor, and is now a millionaire. (I saw direct evidence of that.)
    Ron may think those “Gender Studies” degrees are worthless but with 72 genders now (and an even bigger number of pronouns) we will need someone that understands all this stuff.
    It’s a lot more than “Gender Studies” degrees which are worthless. Employers want to know what you can DO for them, and are increasingly less-impressed with degrees.
    The biggest change I see in America is the massive drop in the number of people in their 30s that have never been married (and probably never will get married or have kids).
    At least there’s some good news. Though it doesn’t bode well for college towns, unless they can poach students from other systems (or countries). In Davis’ case, at least it’s an adjacent “UC” – so there’s some panache from that.

    Reply
  38. Ron O

    Another example: About a year ago, a childhood friend contacted me. (We lost touch when his family moved away.)
    He’s now living right on the coast in the northwest, in a house worth at least $1.5 million. He told me that he “gave himself a job”, by opening (3?) pizza parlors, and became relatively wealthy from that. He subsequently sold them.
    Interestingly, he brought up how he wouldn’t try this today, since he apparently views the location(s) where his businesses were as inhospitable. (I believe he was referring to the riots that occurred, a couple of years ago.) This isn’t something I brought up with him – he mentioned it himself. He mentioned Portland as an example, though I don’t think his businesses were located in that city.
    I don’t think he went to college, either. In any case, his success was not based upon that.

    Reply
  39. Ron O

    Wow – this can’t be any clearer, than this:
    In response to Andreessen’s issue with student loan forgiveness, A16z cofounder Ben Horowitz responded with the argument that, although the action provides relief for some, it does not address “the real issue.” That, according to Horowitz, is “that for a large swath of the population college is not worth the money.”
    “What’s happened is for a huge percentage of the degrees, the degree is worth less than than the job,” Horowitz continued. “So, basically we as a society are running a scam and ripping off a huge percentage of our young people who are going to college with the clear expectation that they’re going to get a higher quality job and they’ll be able to pay for college. That’s absolutely not the case and that’s the real issue.”
    Horowitz added that with all of the recent advances in technology, including things like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and generative AI, technology that A16z invests in, a college education should cost much less.
    “There is no knowledge that you can’t get from your smartphone very cheaply and easily,” Horowitz said, “so why am I paying $300,000 for the credential?”
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/personalfinance/marc-andreessen-says-student-loan-forgiveness-is-a-bailout-ben-horowitz-thinks-college-is-mostly-a-scam/ar-AA1n1R9L?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=384d25408c694b8ab762cccd39c13fb5&ei=26

    Reply
  40. South of Davis

    Andreessen is a smart guy and I hope that more people will talk about the “scam ripping off a huge percentage of our young people”. I think that over half of the kids today should get a college degree (the new “high school diploma”) but most of those kids will be better off getting a free (or almost free) degree from a JC and State School vs. borrowing $100K+ and taking 4-5 years to cover all their living expenses with borrowed money (with rare exceptions the kid goes to a private liberal arts college and graduates with $400K in debt will be worse off than the kid that works part time and gets a degree from Sac State or SF State with $0 debt. P.S. Andressen’s wife Laura is an example of a woman who was able to find someone smarter and richer than she was to marry (and with three degrees from Stanford and a Dad who donated over $300 Million to Stanford that was not easy).

    Reply
  41. Keith

    “That, according to Horowitz, is “that for a large swath of the population college is not worth the money.”
    What, those ethnic and gender studies majors aren’t paying off?
    Just an opinion from one of the “4 or 5 middle aged or senior men” that comment on this blog.

    Reply
  42. Ron O

    “It is a common phenomenon on a blog that the same group of folks comment so often and so unpleasantly that other commenters are driven away.”
    “And that’s likely why overwhelmingly only these same 4 or 5 middle aged or senior men circle jerk each other on the regular in the comments here.”
    What time does the “circle-jerk” start? I didn’t get the memo.

    Reply
  43. Keith

    “What time does the “circle-jerk” start? I didn’t get the memo.”
    Sorry Ron, you missed out.
    I hope your fee fees aren’t hurt.

    Reply
  44. Ron O

    Just found a link to the article below, posted by someone on Beth’s Facebook page. This is apparently what happens when you ban flags in the classroom. And yet in Davis, all we incessantly hear about are bomb threats, with the implication that they’re coming from the “other” side.
    “Enjoy your weekend. It might be your last,” one email filled with expletives partly read.
    Another message shared by Jergensen with KTVU said, “watch yourselves” and “you may need to hide your kids… and anything you love.”
    https://www.ktvu.com/news/sunol-school-board-president-says-his-family-received-death-threats-after-flag-ban-decision?fbclid=IwAR2q9icHWS7wb7b92WxJOfL2TWDRtODO5XOePqpC7wXPHInplF-wp5b7sKQ
    I don’t know at what point those who claim to be “on the left” embraced this type of thing, but I can see how folks like Kendra inflame it.

    Reply
  45. Alan C. Miller

    I put KS’s comment into ChatGPT (also known as “The Oracle of THE TRUTH”) and asked if zer comment was derogatory and homophobic.
    ChatGPT replied: “In this case, the comment seems to contain derogatory language that implies a negative stereotype about a specific group of individuals based on their age and gender. While it doesn’t explicitly target sexual orientation, it may still be considered disrespectful and offensive.”
    As an aside, for those curious, I am informed by a participant that the aforementioned jerk was not circular. More hexagonal. Like a stop sign.

    Reply
  46. K Smith

    I’m not inflaming anything, [insult removed].
    [insult removed] when you’re done with your [insult removed] that’s already gotten started up in here.
    The vast majority of violence and violent threats are from the right. Per the DHS and FBI. But I’m sure you’ll just claim they are lying or are deep state.
    Keep cozying up with fascists, though and fluffing them. It’s a [insults removed] look, [insult removed].

    Reply
  47. Ron O

    Take a [insult removed] when you’re done with your [insult removed] that’s already gotten started up in here.
    Keep cozying up with fascists, though and fluffing them. It’s a [insult removed] look, [insult removed].
    Maybe you’d like to join us, next time? Though I’m not sure you’d [insult removed]. Pretty sure you’d [insult removed].

    Reply
  48. K Smith

    [re-quote removed]
    Don’t blame the woman when [insult removed].
    You probably have stock in the [insult removed]. [insult removed]!
    The [insult removed] seems to be more your speed anyway. I pity [insult removed].

    Reply
  49. Keith

    “Keep cozying up with fascists”
    I was wondering when that was coming, it was just a matter of time.
    Like a broken record.

    Reply
  50. Alan C. Miller

    Hello everyone. Sir Al Corner here, host of Al’s Corner . . . You may have noticed this article disappeared for awhile, though you probably didn’t notice. I was discussing with Davisite management how to deal with the insults that added nothing to the conversation and violate our very few rules here. I don’t like to remove comments, but do at some point in the comment thread start to remove insults that add nothing to the conversation, as insults tend to just invite more insults. I do my best to keep the substance of the comments, if any.
    So for the last few comments I removed insults so as not to degenerate into an insult hurtling gallery. The reason I don’t like to remove comments completely without explanation is because that is a lousy, lazy and disrespectful form of moderation. That the moderation modus operandi at the Davis Vanguard, as many of you on this blog can attest. Because of this, the Davis Vanguard sucks donkey balls.

    Reply

Leave a comment