Review: The Santa Cruz Diner
Geoff Miller
You can see them all over Santa Cruz. "We [heart] Santa Cruz
Diner," the yellow and black bumper stickers say. Their pro-
fusion might lead one to suspect that the place is something
special. It isn't. It's just a fair-to-middlin' place to
have a meal of moderate quality at a moderate price. And
sometimes, that's all a body needs.
I stopped there at about 3:00 this afternoon on my way into
town. I hadn't eaten all day, so breakfast appealed despite
the late hour. The parking lot in back has a bunch of rather
brusque notices painted on the fence which read, "You Leave,
We Tow." Dunno why anybody would park there and then depart
for parts unknown, since the 'straunt isn't convenient to much,
but they've obviously had problems with parking. Whatever. I
locked the OppressorMobile and headed inside.
I noticed a sign on the way in informing all comers that the
place now wants payment at the time food is served, and
"Apologies to the honest majority." This place is big on
public notices, I thought. Cue the Five Man Electrical Band:
"Sign, sign, everywhere a sign..." Obviously, they've been
burned by their share of bums, surfers, college students, and
others of dubious ethics. Welcome to Santa Cruz.
The receptionist asked me if I required a table, presumably
as opposed to sitting at the long counter. That was a trifle
odd, since it's customary for people who eat at the counter
in coffee shops to seat themselves.
I allowed as how I'd like a booth. She bypassed the tiny
(ObBourdain) two-top that I figured I'd be seated at and
took me all the way to the rear corner, giving my a full-
sized booth to spread out at with my book. And why not?
The place wasn't that busy. I expressed my gratitude.
It took a good ten minutes for the waitress to arrive with
a menu. But she returned quickly enough after that. I
ordered the Pancake Special, which included a stack of
three pancakes, plus two eggs (over easy in my case), two
sausages, and two pieces of bacon on a second plate for
$6.19.
The food could've arrived more quickly than it did; it took
about fifteen minutes. I suspect that the reason for this
was that my dumb little bimbo of a waitress kept coming to
chat with a trio of her dumb little bimbo friends (all of
whom spoke in that annoying Valley Girl accent that all
young females in America seem to affect these days) in the
adjacent booth, and so wasn't paying as close attention to
orders coming up as she should've.
But the food was decent. The pancakes were even exceptional.
The other stuff looked a bit sparse, laid out on a plate of
their own, and was only of average quality. But at these
prices, I had no complaint. The sausage and bacon were low-
end institutional fare, and the eggs were just eggs. A
liberal (heh) sprinkling of Tabasco from a large bottle at
the table livened them up.
I washed it all down with a "large" milk, which really wasn't
all that large; I figure nine or ten ounces, in one of those
amber-colored, pebbled-plastic cups that a lot of pizza parlors
use for soft drinks. Payment wasn't demanded when my food
arrived. I guess I have an honest face. It must be that
clean-cut, "All American Boy" look I cultivate.
That's the same look, interestingly, that causes employees at
the local hippie markets to eye me warily because it brands me
as The Enemy(tm). One look at me with my unfashionably non-
disheveled appearance and my no-nonsense, tick-tock manner,
and the bastards just *know* I don't have a Kucinich For
President bumper sticker on my car. Go figure.
I didn't do my usual coffee shop thing of requesting my check
when my food arrived, in anticipation of the waitress getting
distracted by something shiny and wandering off someplace, being
nowhere to be found when I was getting antsy to leave, because
I'd been knocked off-guard by the aforementioned signage about
payment being expected at the time of service.
When I eventually finished my meal and wanted to ask for my
check, the waitress was standing about six feet in front of me,
but she was lost in earnest chick-conversation ("And then *she*
said... And so *I* said...") with her friends at the next table.
I began waving my arm back and forth in wide arcs from the
shoulder, as though I were a castaway on a beach trying to
attract the attention of potential rescuers in a far-away
boat. Nada. I think the wall could've been on fire behind
where I was sitting, and this dumb little spunk bucket wouldn't
have been aware of it.
Just as I was about to become vocal, I managed to catch the eye
of the one friend of the waitress who was seated facing me, who
"did the needful," as our Indian friends like to say. I had my
change in a reasonable interval and was on my way out the door
at last.
I hit the sidewalk and hooked a right in order to return to the
parking lot behind the building, politely saying "excuse me" as
I passed a cyclist in a yellow plastic poncho who was standing
astride his bicycle on the sidewalk.
A moment too late, I realized that not only had he been there
when I arrived, but that he'd been giving me the ol' thousand-
yard stare from the moment I'd stepped onto the sidewalk on my
way out of the restaurant, much like the way a snake focuses on
its quarry before striking.
Yup: "Excuse me, sir! I'm real hungry, and I..." "No thanks,"
I said, stepping gingerly around him. Welcome to Santa Cruz.
I'd been to the Santa Cruz Diner once before. My main memory of
the place, aside from getting similarly-distracted service, was
of seeing a waitress walking through the place singing. Not under
her breath, but at full volume, completely unselfconsciously, with
no regard to the concept of appropriate time and place. It was as
though she were inher living room at home, rather than at her work-
place.
It was both poor impulse control on her part, and a manifestation
of the Santa Cruz "anything goes" mindset -- the same mindset that
made it necessary to get payment from customers at the time their
food hit the table, as a bulwark against various dirtbags and social
parasites pulling the ol' dine-and-dash routine. Today's waitress
also reflected that flakiness, which was apparent not only in her
lackadaisickal attitude toward her job but by extension, her super-
visor's attitude toward his as well.
The food was okay, but next time I think I'll hit the Denny's up
the street.
Geoff
--
"Stick THAT in your theory and flap around like
a chicken in heat." -- Angel Of Mathematics
Tim May
<geo...@lava.net> wrote:
> I noticed a sign on the way in informing all comers that the
> place now wants payment at the time food is served, and
> "Apologies to the honest majority."
It was once a Sambo's, and the Oppressed Negroes have taken to walking
out en masse at places like that. Denny's, just up the street, has long
been a target of this kind of "wilding."
Regrettably, the courts decided in a famous case that Denny's was
guilty of "racial profiling" by not seating large groups of boisterous
Bloods and Crips and other negroes, and so now less-than-fine-dining
establishments like Sambo's (still one left, one the "Reverend" Jesse
Jackson has not managed to get closed), Denny's, and the Santa Cruz
Diner are forced to make even white people pay at the time of ordering.
I went into the Santa Cruz Diner once, saw the prices, compared them to
what I could get at any of several nearby Chinese and Indian
restaurants, and elected to leave. Someone else got to eat the $9.95
meatloaf.
--Tim May
Veronique
> You can see them all over Santa Cruz. "We [heart] Santa Cruz
> Diner," the yellow and black bumper stickers say. Their pro-
> fusion might lead one to suspect that the place is something
> special. It isn't. It's just a fair-to-middlin' place to
> have a meal of moderate quality at a moderate price. And
> sometimes, that's all a body needs.
[...]
> The food was okay, but next time I think I'll hit the Denny's up
> the street.
I like the Santa Cruz Diner: it is what it is. I join a friend there
for dinner occasionally; it's an easy walk from downtown to his
office, and the diner is enroute. I've taken my (non-foodie) parents
there, as the food is basically what you would expect and the prices
are reasonable. I've also gone there for late-night breakfast. I don't
think I'd ever make it a destination breakfast/brunch place, not when
Zachary's is right around the corner, but it's never been awful (faint
praise, I know.) I do think it's better than Denny's, so I'll be
interested in your comparison.
ObPanhandling and the Santa Cruz Experience: friend and I walked from
my house to the Town Clock on New Year's Eve at ten minutes to
midnight and there was a very unsober old guy sitting on the steps at
Pergolesi, so drunk he could barely spit out, "ima vietnamvet,
sparesum change?" I've been panhandled while weeding my front garden;
the youngish guy who was fairly well dressed looked rather taken aback
at my snappish response. I think I threatened him with a trowel.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Tim May
> I hit the sidewalk and hooked a right in order to return to the
> parking lot behind the building, politely saying "excuse me" as
> I passed a cyclist in a yellow plastic poncho who was standing
> astride his bicycle on the sidewalk.
>
> A moment too late, I realized that not only had he been there
> when I arrived, but that he'd been giving me the ol' thousand-
> yard stare from the moment I'd stepped onto the sidewalk on my
> way out of the restaurant, much like the way a snake focuses on
> its quarry before striking.
>
> Yup: "Excuse me, sir! I'm real hungry, and I..." "No thanks,"
> I said, stepping gingerly around him. Welcome to Santa Cruz.
Dan is no longer your friend. He wants to know why you didn't just
transfer some crypto money to his PayPal account.
--Tim May
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> writes:
> Dan is no longer your friend. He wants to know why you
> didn't just transfer some crypto money to his PayPal
> account.
Heh...
Julian Macassey
> less-than-fine-dining
> establishments like Sambo's (still one left, one the "Reverend" Jesse
> Jackson has not managed to get closed), Denny's, and the Santa Cruz
> Diner are forced to make even white people pay at the time of ordering.
The original Sambos is still in business and on the beach
in Santa Barbara. It does a fair breakfast at slightly above
market prices. They have free WiFi.
The place is owned by the original owner's son who also
owns a fancy restaurant called Chads a few blocks away. Chads
can be a fun place with impromptu conga-lines leadd by the
proprietor winding their way through the restauarant.
Monday nights they have "Flip nights" where they will
toss a coin and you may get a free entree or appetisers if you
win the toss.
The story of Sambo is about an Indian lad, I've never
heard any Indians complain about the place. Funny that.
--
People are tired of the Bush administration, with its partisanship
and incompetence. Economist 20 Dec 2007
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> writes:
> It was once a Sambo's,
I'm not surprised. There was something familiar about the
architecture and interior layout.
When I first moved to the area nine years ago, it was a Mexican
place. And quite a good one, too. But "they" found out I liked
it, and it was soon history.
> and the Oppressed Negroes have taken to walking out en masse at
> places like that. Denny's, just up the street, has long been a
> target of this kind of "wilding."
Funny how the news media ("They are *not* liberal-controlled! Are
*not!* Are *not!*") never told that side of the story. The whole
thing was presented as arbitrary and capricious discrimination, as
though anybody would risk antagonizing part of their customer base
(let alone risk a media scandal) by refusing service for no reasdon,
just for the hell of it.
> I went into the Santa Cruz Diner once, saw the prices, compared
> them to what I could get at any of several nearby Chinese and Indian
> restaurants, and elected to leave. Someone else got to eat the $9.95
> meatloaf.
Well, at least meatloaf is meat. Most of what's on offer at Chinese
and Indian places is vegetables, so it should hardly be surprising
that their prices are lower.
Speaking of which, what's the story on that Indian place on Soquel
over by the river, more or less across the street from the Hind
Quarter? I don't remember ever talking to anyone who's eaten there.
Geoff
--
"There are a lot of bad Republicans; there
are no good Democrats." -- Ann Coulter
Geoff Miller
Julian Macassey <jul...@tele.com> writes:
> The original Sambos is still in business and on the beach
> in Santa Barbara. It does a fair breakfast at slightly
> above market prices. They have free WiFi.
Does it still have the graphics over the kitchen counter
depicting the be-turbanned kid and the tiger?
The last Sambo's I remember going to was in Barstow, of all
places, in 1973. What's now Baker's Square on Hwy. 9 in Los
Gatos was still a Sambo's at around that time, too.
Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
Lake. (Unfortunately, I'd neglected to bring my "Fuck Mono
Lake" button. I could've worn it into the Mono Lake Resource
Center a few doors down the street, where all those bumper
stickers you see on old VW buses come from.)
The food was decent, the prices about what you'd expect, and
the waitresses were right out of Central Casting. It even has
a full bar, which it shares with the BBQ place next door.
SMS
> Julian Macassey <jul...@tele.com> writes:
>
>> The original Sambos is still in business and on the beach
>> in Santa Barbara. It does a fair breakfast at slightly
>> above market prices. They have free WiFi.
>
>
> Does it still have the graphics over the kitchen counter
> depicting the be-turbanned kid and the tiger?
>
> The last Sambo's I remember going to was in Barstow, of all
> places, in 1973. What's now Baker's Square on Hwy. 9 in Los
> Gatos was still a Sambo's at around that time, too.
>
> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
> Lake.
If you're ever in Oregon Caves, check out The Caves Cafe,
"http://ivcdo.projecta.com/Page.asp?NavID=5". It's another "time warp"
place. The speed of service is reminiscent of Howard Johnson's service
on a good day.
Pete Fraser
news:13o4buj...@corp.supernews.com...
> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
> Lake.
I haven't eaten there for many Bizbees, but I remember it as
being a good place, with reasonable prices.
> (Unfortunately, I'd neglected to bring my "Fuck Mono
> Lake" button.
No need. Last time I was there they had a faucet running full
blast for the entire duration of my visit. Nobody was using
it for anything. It was pretty obvious, so I didn't say anything.
I wondered if it was a challenge to the customers "First customer
to whine about the faucet gets expelled".
Veronique
> Speaking of which, what's the story on that Indian place on Soquel
> over by the river, more or less across the street from the Hind
> Quarter? I don't remember ever talking to anyone who's eaten there.
Royal Taj? I've been there three times, the most recent probably at
least seven years ago. Undercooked potatoes, shockingly neon-red
paprika chicken (the friend I was with found it inedible). With Asian
Rose (now on Front Street) and Sitar of India on Pacific Avenue, I'm
surprised Royal Taj is still in business. Interesting building,
though.
spamtr...@gmail.com
Is it connected to the Royal Taj on Camden in SJ, off 17? Friends of
my wife like that one.
Tim May
<geo...@lava.net> wrote:
> Julian Macassey <jul...@tele.com> writes:
>
> > The original Sambos is still in business and on the beach
> > in Santa Barbara. It does a fair breakfast at slightly
> > above market prices. They have free WiFi.
>
>
> Does it still have the graphics over the kitchen counter
> depicting the be-turbanned kid and the tiger?
>
> The last Sambo's I remember going to was in Barstow, of all
> places, in 1973. What's now Baker's Square on Hwy. 9 in Los
> Gatos was still a Sambo's at around that time, too.
And that's what the current Santa Cruz Diner was after it was Sambo's,
a Baker's Square.
As I recall, most of the Sambo's became Baker's Squares.
By the way, anyone following The Reverend Jesse Jackson and the
Reverend Al Sharpton and their complaints about how Mike Huckabee is a
licensed preacher and should not be in politics?
Irony is a plate best served raw.
--Tim May
Tim May
<geo...@lava.net> wrote:
> > and the Oppressed Negroes have taken to walking out en masse at
> > places like that. Denny's, just up the street, has long been a
> > target of this kind of "wilding."
>
> Funny how the news media ("They are *not* liberal-controlled! Are
> *not!* Are *not!*") never told that side of the story. The whole
> thing was presented as arbitrary and capricious discrimination, as
> though anybody would risk antagonizing part of their customer base
> (let alone risk a media scandal) by refusing service for no reasdon,
> just for the hell of it.
I saw that covered, which is how I know about it. I didn't just invent
the account of the negroes walking out without paying.
Tru dat, the left wing rags portrayed it as callous and racist
diskimnashun.
>
> Well, at least meatloaf is meat. Most of what's on offer at Chinese
> and Indian places is vegetables, so it should hardly be surprising
> that their prices are lower.
At Indian buffets I usually get Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Curry, Chicken
Tikka, etc.
At Chinese restaurants I usually get various beef, chicken, or pork
dishes. I never feel I am being shortchanged on the amount of meat I
get.
>
> Speaking of which, what's the story on that Indian place on Soquel
> over by the river, more or less across the street from the Hind
> Quarter? I don't remember ever talking to anyone who's eaten there.
What do you mean, "what's the story"?
I've eaten there a dozen or so times. It's part of the Royal Taj
mini-chain, one of which is on Camden Avenue in San Jose.
Fairly standard Indian lunch buffet. Good Tandoori Chicken.
Instead of asking "What's the story?," with some mysterious implication
that there's a "story" behind the place, why not simply have lunch
there someday? Then you'll know.
--Tim May
Ciccio
news:slrnfo46e7...@adeed.tele.com...
> The story of Sambo is about an Indian lad, I've never
> heard any Indians complain about the place. Funny that.
Well, maybe if the name had been Little Black "Dothead,"*
it might have raised Indian ire. I guess you haven't lived in America
very long. I enjoy educating recent immigrants as to American culture.
So, allow me to explain. See, "Sambo" has long been a pejorative reference
toward Blacks*, much like the word Nigger*. When Sambo is modified by
"Black"*, it is not a large leap to the term being offensive.
What does irk me about the issue, however, is that some states sued Sambo's
to enjoin it from using the name because the name was racist. That is far
too much governmental interference with business. The government can't even
manage the government, I sure don't want it managing businesses.
Now, to further educate you, it was, indeed, the free enterprise system that
caused the name change. See, many years after those bullshit lawsuits,
Sambo's started tanking big time. Top management came up with the brain
storm to change the name.
I always thought that maybe keeping the name was a better idea. Whenever I
went into one, White* old farts greatly outnumbered Blacks* or young adults
generally. White* old farts are the ones who mostly use terms like Sambo,
Nigger*, etc. Perhaps, management thought White* old farts, even with a
name change, would still patronize the place, while becoming more appealing
to the younger progressive crowd. Anyhow, whatever the strategy, it was too
little, too late, as the chain went bankrupt.
Welcome to America.
Ciccio
*Capitalization based upon literary license.
Veronique
I don't know. And I can't recall the name of the Indian restaurant
I've been to a couple of times over thataway, which I found quite
good.
Ciccio
>
>
> You can see them all over Santa Cruz. "We [heart] Santa Cruz
> Diner," the yellow and black bumper stickers say. Their pro-
> fusion might lead one to suspect that the place is something
> special. It isn't.
On many a Sunday morn I'd see the throngs backed up out Santa Cruz Diner's
front door. I never go for such crap. Even at those places that serve
coffee, with perhaps some miniature muffins to nosh on, to the awaiting saps
rubbing their hands in the cold morning air.
Anyhow, one morning my golf buddies insisted upon stopping there. Based upon
your review, and my experience, I am bewildered by the place's popularity. I
found the food to be barely better than Denny's. Like you, we got put on
the "pay no mind list." That however, turned out to be a blessing in
disguise, once we encountered the surly bitch who waited on us. She was
complete with tobacco stench and nicotine stained fingers. That, along with
their prices, causes me to give Denny's the edge.
Ciccio
SMS
> "Geoff Miller" <geo...@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:13o3egd...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>
>> You can see them all over Santa Cruz. "We [heart] Santa Cruz
>> Diner," the yellow and black bumper stickers say. Their pro-
>> fusion might lead one to suspect that the place is something
>> special. It isn't.
>
> On many a Sunday morn I'd see the throngs backed up out Santa Cruz
> Diner's front door. I never go for such crap. Even at those places that
> serve coffee, with perhaps some miniature muffins to nosh on, to the
> awaiting saps rubbing their hands in the cold morning air.
I've seen the same thing at Stacks in Campbell and Burlingame, where the
food is mediocre at best, including terrible hash browns. Hobee's in
Cupertino is the same way, though the food is better than Stacks. I
won't go to the Cupertino Hobee's for political reasons, so that solves
that problem as well.
Julian Macassey
>
>
> Julian Macassey <jul...@tele.com> writes:
>
>> The original Sambos is still in business and on the beach
>> in Santa Barbara. It does a fair breakfast at slightly
>> above market prices. They have free WiFi.
>
>
> Does it still have the graphics over the kitchen counter
> depicting the be-turbanned kid and the tiger?
I can't recall. I'll have to pop back in soon and look it
over.
>
> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
> Lake.
I was driving up and down 395 and 95 going to Hwthorne,
Nevada. There is a BBQ place in Bishop where I reccommend the prime
rib sandwich. It's called Bills on the main drag. They have
Sierra Nevada Pale ale on tap.
Julian Macassey
> "Julian Macassey" <jul...@tele.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnfo46e7...@adeed.tele.com...
>
>> The story of Sambo is about an Indian lad, I've never
>> heard any Indians complain about the place. Funny that.
>
> Well, maybe if the name had been Little Black "Dothead,"*
> it might have raised Indian ire. I guess you haven't lived in America
> very long. I enjoy educating recent immigrants as to American culture.
I was working in the US when the Sambos whining from
Jessie (Photo opportunity) Jackson started. In fact my boss at
the time used to eat lunch at the City of Industry Sambos.
I thought the campaign was vindictuve then, I think it is
vindictive now.
>
> So, allow me to explain. See, "Sambo" has long been a pejorative reference
> toward Blacks*, much like the word Nigger*. When Sambo is modified by
> "Black"*, it is not a large leap to the term being offensive.
The book used the term black, I don't recall the
restaurants doimng the same.
For those American Natives, here are some pictures of the
old Sambos:
The current Sambos has a flash infected and broken site.
It does show the Indian boy and tiger of the old chain.
I will note that the turbaned Sambo bears a striking
resemblance to the Mascot/Logo of Air India in the 1950s. This
was as I and Salman Rushdie recall the "Air India Rajah". Does
Jesse "Shakedown" Jackson know this?
> Now, to further educate you, it was, indeed, the free enterprise system that
> caused the name change. See, many years after those bullshit lawsuits,
> Sambo's started tanking big time. Top management came up with the brain
> storm to change the name.
Maybe because I knew about the Indian turban, the books
and such things I failed to be offended.
But then I and others have got into trouble in the past
for using the term nigardly. Some people it seems just spend
their days looking to be offended.
>
> Welcome to America.
Welcome the the big wide world.
Al Eisner
> "Geoff Miller" <geo...@lava.net> wrote in message
> news:13o4buj...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
>> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
>> Lake.
>
> I haven't eaten there for many Bizbees, but I remember it as
> being a good place, with reasonable prices.
I've been eating at Nicely for many years. It hardly changes, and is
consistently mediocre -- not very good, but not bad. (Better than
Denny's level.)
>> (Unfortunately, I'd neglected to bring my "Fuck Mono
>> Lake" button.
>
> No need. Last time I was there they had a faucet running full
> blast for the entire duration of my visit. Nobody was using
> it for anything. It was pretty obvious, so I didn't say anything.
> I wondered if it was a challenge to the customers "First customer
> to whine about the faucet gets expelled".
Unlikely. The county as a whole is quite supportive of the work of the
Mono Lake Committee. And, I'd guess, business especially, since the
committee's achivements have turned a potential toxic dust bowl into a
prime tourist attraction.
--
Al Eisner
San Mateo Co., CA
Tim May
<jul...@tele.com> wrote:
> > Does it still have the graphics over the kitchen counter
> > depicting the be-turbanned kid and the tiger?
>
> I can't recall. I'll have to pop back in soon and look it
> over.
After those Indian kids (some name like "Dipwallah") were chased down
by the tiger they'd been taunted, I expect that now even the dotheads
will be demanding that the final Sambo's be closed.
P.S. I called a friend the day I heard about the tiger attack and said
that if the tiger had traveled 300 yards to get to the two boys, past a
lot of other "food" along the way, and it just so happened that the two
boys 300 yards away had been _with_ the kid who got munched on earlier,
then it was obvious what had happened: the three taunted or even threw
rocks at the cat, the cat said "Enough of this shit!" and jumped the
wall, mauled one of the kids, didn't stick around to eat, and went
after the other two, tracking them down by sense of smell.
(The same way Mark Geragos tracked them down from more than 300 miles
away, by smelling a big PR story and payoff.)
This looks to be the real story. Especially with the overheard
admission in the ambulance, "Don't say what we did to the tiger.:
--Tim May
Ciccio
> I thought the campaign was vindictuve then, I think it is
> vindictive now.
It was the times. Social movements go to extremes, then they get
centered. For quite awhile, Blacks would be thought of as "uppity
Niggers" if they dared complained about anything. Then, it went to the
extreme where if Whites made any racial reference, then it was
racism. It is more toward the center now. It will soon get to the
point where most people of all races won't give a shit one way or
another.
> The book used the term black, I don't recall the
> restaurants doimng the same.
As you stated, however, the theme, symbols, trademark, etc., were
based upon the book.
> For those American Natives, here are some pictures of the
> old Sambos:
> http://www.sambosphotos.com/
Thanks, I do remember them quite well. Especially, the ones in
Oakland and Alameda.
> But then I and others have got into trouble in the past
> for using the term nigardly. Some people it seems just spend
> their days looking to be offended.
Yep. And if one is going to be in business, one had better keep that
in mind. The owners/shareholders of Sambo's probably wish they had
thought about that when the bankruptcy court exercised its
jurisdiction.
Ciccio
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> writes:
> I saw that covered, which is how I know about it. I didn't just
> invent the account of the negroes walking out without paying.
I didn't suspect that you did. I always figured it was the
subtext of the story.
> At Indian buffets I usually get Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Curry,
> Chicken Tikka, etc.
Well, so do I. The fact remains that Indian buffet food is
vegetable-heavy compared to normal American white-people food.
(No need to capitalize the names of those dishes, by the way.
They aren't proper nouns.)
> What do you mean, "what's the story"?
What the fuck do you *think?* I mean? How's the food? How's
the service? How are the prices? How's the atmosphere and
level of cleanliness? In other words, is it worthwhile?
> I've eaten there a dozen or so times. It's part of the Royal Taj
> mini-chain, one of which is on Camden Avenue in San Jose.
> Fairly standard Indian lunch buffet. Good Tandoori Chicken.
Thank you, your grace. Now, was that really so difficult?
> Instead of asking "What's the story?," with some mysterious
> implication that there's a "story" behind the place, why not
> simply have lunch there someday? Then you'll know.
If I want any comeback from you, I'll scrape the back of your
goddam throat. Either answer the question, _sans_ gratuitous
editorial commentary, or don't answer the question.
Geoff Miller
Al Eisner <eis...@slac.stanford.edu> writes:
> The county as a whole is quite supportive of the work of the
> Mono Lake Committee. And, I'd guess, business especially,
> since the committee's achivements have turned a potential
> toxic dust bowl into a prime tourist attraction.
It is pretty cool. I was surprised to learn that the tufas
(tufae?) are as hard as concrete. I'd always imagined them
to be soft and crystalline, easily crumbled by hand.
And if you're in the area, the nearby ghost town of Bodie is
not to be missed.
Tim May
<geo...@lava.net> wrote:
> Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> writes:
>
> > I saw that covered, which is how I know about it. I didn't just
> > invent the account of the negroes walking out without paying.
>
> I didn't suspect that you did. I always figured it was the
> subtext of the story.
>
>
> > At Indian buffets I usually get Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Curry,
> > Chicken Tikka, etc.
>
> Well, so do I. The fact remains that Indian buffet food is
> vegetable-heavy compared to normal American white-people food.
>
> (No need to capitalize the names of those dishes, by the way.
> They aren't proper nouns.)
They are the names used by restaurants. I could write "kung pao
chicken" or "Kung Pao Chicken" or Kung Pao Chicken, but saying I had
kung pao chicken at some place would be potentially misleading, mixing
Manarin words in with English. Some kind of name delineator is called
for. Either quotes, or caps, or both. I opt for simple caps. The
Germans were right about this.
>
>
> > What do you mean, "what's the story"?
>
> What the fuck do you *think?* I mean? How's the food? How's
> the service? How are the prices? How's the atmosphere and
> level of cleanliness? In other words, is it worthwhile?
"What's the story?" being some kind of trailer trash lingo for "Can
someone write a review for me?"
You might as well start using "Zup wit dat, nigga?"
>
> > Instead of asking "What's the story?," with some mysterious
> > implication that there's a "story" behind the place, why not
> > simply have lunch there someday? Then you'll know.
>
> If I want any comeback from you, I'll scrape the back of your
> goddam throat. Either answer the question, _sans_ gratuitous
> editorial commentary, or don't answer the question.
>
I'll respond to you as I wish, and as you warrant.
--Tim May
RWW
> Well, at least meatloaf is meat. Most of what's on offer at Chinese
> and Indian places is vegetables, so it should hardly be surprising
> that their prices are lower.
What in God's name are you talking about?
Yes, Southern Indian cuisine, for which
restaurants here are out of the ordinary, but
Chinese? All chinese restaurants are
at least 50% 'non-veg' (as they say in
American-accomodating restuarants in Eurasia).
Maybe your google alerts that were set for Tim's
posting activity woke you out of a nasty dream,
and into a waken stupor, which you failed to
recognize before you robotically initiated
your daily perfunctory spewing into the usenet
atmosphere?
Steve Pope
>Geoff Miller wrote:
>> Well, at least meatloaf is meat. Most of what's on offer at Chinese
>> and Indian places is vegetables, so it should hardly be surprising
>> that their prices are lower.
>What in God's name are you talking about?
>Yes, Southern Indian cuisine, for which
>restaurants here are out of the ordinary, but
>Chinese? All chinese restaurants are
>at least 50% 'non-veg' (as they say in
>American-accomodating restuarants in Eurasia).
I would guess the reference here is to the percentage
of meat, not the prevalance of meat.
Steve
Jeff Liebermann
<tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>It was once a Sambo's, and the Oppressed Negroes have taken to walking
>out en masse at places like that. Denny's, just up the street, has long
>been a target of this kind of "wilding."
Wrong. The Santa Cruz Diner was once Golden West Pancakes. There was
sme other owner in between these, but I forgot the name.
What is now a large dental office, was previously Bakers Square.
Before that, it was Sambo's.
I eat dinner at the SCZ Diner about 2-3 times per week. The place is
usually full. Down the street, and closer to my palatial office, is
Denny's, which is usually empty. There's a reason.
More later, as I'm running on a rapidly discharging battery.
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
Queenie
<je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>More later, as I'm running on a rapidly discharging battery.
That's life in Californistan.
~Queenie
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
I think the complainers about there not being enough meat in Chinese
and Indian food are Atkins Diet Enthusiasts.
"Look, Wong Fat Fu, when I ordered Orange Peel Beef I said "hold the
noodles, just deliver me a pound of beef with some orange peels."
As a meat liker, I'm very satisfied with the proportion of meat I get
in dishes such as Kung Pao Chicken, Orange Peel Beef, Hunan Chicken,
Chicken Tikka, Tandoori Chicken, etc.
(Indeed, at Indian buffets is almost too easy to OD on protein by
piling on only the items like Tandoori Chicken.)
Though I'm 180 degrees out of phase with leftist blissninnies, I think
a limited amount of meat with a lot of vegetables and some carbs is a
reasonable diet.
"But I ordered the Kung Pao "animal style," meaning, no noodles, no
vegetable, just the meat. Don't you understand In-N-Out in China?"
--Tim May
Peter Lawrence
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Pete Fraser wrote:
>
>> "Geoff Miller" <geo...@lava.net> wrote in message
>> news:13o4buj...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
>>> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
>>> Lake.
>>
>> I haven't eaten there for many Bizbees, but I remember it as
>> being a good place, with reasonable prices.
>
> I've been eating at Nicely for many years. It hardly changes, and is
> consistently mediocre -- not very good, but not bad. (Better than
> Denny's level.)
If Nicely's is consistently mediocre, why do you keep coming back?
Doesn't the Whoa Nellie Deli down the street at the Mobil Gas Station
serve better food? Or do you keep going back to Nicely's because you
enjoy its ambiance, or for some other reason? Or is it just the next
best dining option in Lee Vining after the Whoa Nellie Deli and the Mono
Inn.
- Peter
Peter Lawrence
>
> It is pretty cool. I was surprised to learn that the tufas
> (tufae?) are as hard as concrete. I'd always imagined them
> to be soft and crystalline, easily crumbled by hand.
Maybe it's as hard as some types of cement, but it's definitely not as
hard as concrete. While it's not easily crumbled by hand, it can be
easily crumbled by foot. It doesn't really take that much effort to
crumble the tufa by stepping hard on it or kicking it. Of course if one
walks gently over the low-lying tufa, there's usually only minimal, if
any, damage.
- Peter
Geoff Miller
RWW <R...@rww.net> writes:
> What in God's name are you talking about?
I was talking about the food at Chinese and Indian
places. Maybe if you took your hand out of your
pants, you'd have sufficient cognitive bandwidth
available for effective reading comprehension.
> Yes, Southern Indian cuisine, for which
> restaurants here are out of the ordinary, but
> Chinese? All chinese restaurants are at least
> 50% 'non-veg' (as they say in American-accomodating
> restuarants in Eurasia).
Compared to an American-style meat and potatoes dinner,
which was my basis of comparison (we were talking about
meatloaf, remember?), Chinese cuisine is nevertheless
vegetable intensive. Even most of the so-called meat
dishes are mostly vegetables, with tiny morsels of meat
interspersed therein. Contrast the classic American
meal featuring a bleeding slab of dead animal.
Does that clarify things for you? Or will we have to get
out a knitting needle and "pith" you like a frog in a high
school biology lab, then start over?
Ciccio
news:070120082133157483%tim...@removethis.got.net...
> As a meat liker, I'm very satisfied with the proportion of meat I get
> in dishes such as Kung Pao Chicken, Orange Peel Beef, Hunan Chicken,
> Chicken Tikka, Tandoori Chicken, etc.
I have found the same in the East Bay as well. There is an abundance of
meat/chicken at Chinese or Indian buffets. I went to a Japanese buffet
once, and I found the meat selection to be skimpier than I found at Chinese
or Indian buffets. At the Korean Barbecue* places I've gone to, one can
really pile on the meat sans veggies.
Ciccio
*Grammatical license to capitalize...to annoy schoolmarmish Cliff Clavin
Clones*[Iteration Intended*].
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> keeps it real
down at the crib:
: (No need to capitalize the names of those dishes, by
: the way. They aren't proper nouns.)
> They are the names used by restaurants.
Oh, somebody else does it, too! That makes it okay, then.
Good Lord, what was I *thinking?*
*snort*
If the proprietors of those restaurants jumped off a bridge,
would *you* jump off a bridge, too?
It's a small conceptual jump from "Others do the same thing"
to "I vass only followink orders." Your Germanic heritage is
well in evidence.
> I could write "kung pao chicken" or "Kung Pao Chicken" or
> Kung Pao Chicken, but saying I had kung pao chicken at some
> place would be potentially misleading, mixing Manarin words
> in with English.
Why would that be misleading? Please posit a scenario wherein
someone might be misled by your simply writing "kung pao chicken"
in all-lowercase and _sans_ quotation marks. Do try and stay
within hailing distance of plausibility, mmmkay?
> Some kind of name delineator is called for. Either quotes,
> or caps, or both. I opt for simple caps. The Germans were
> right about this.
Then why don't you write the names of other foreign dishes
with either caps or quotes? After all, they originated in
languages other than English, too.
> "What's the story?" being some kind of trailer trash lingo
> for "Can someone write a review for me?"
Oh, please. You can't claim to be a stickler for semantics
*and* pretend to be unfamiliar with common figures of speech.
The former undermines the latter. Either you're a language
and usage maven, or you aren't. Pick one.
> You might as well start using "Zup wit dat, nigga?"
Say, blood, what it is? What it be like?
: If I want any comeback from you, I'll scrape the back of your
: goddam throat. Either answer the question, _sans_ gratuitous
: editorial commentary, or don't answer the question.
> I'll respond to you as I wish, and as you warrant.
Then you forfeit any legitimate right to act as though your
precious goddam time is being wasted by any alleged lack of
laser-like linguistic precision on my part.
Geoff Miller
Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> writes:
[to RWW]
> I would guess the reference here is to the percentage
> of meat, not the prevalance of meat.
<DINGDINGDINGDINGDING!>
"We have a *winnah!*"
I wouldn't have thought that so difficult to grasp. Is
there a sudden outbreak of Minamata Disease hereabouts?
Geoff Miller
Peter Lawrence <humm...@aol.com> writes:
> Maybe it's as hard as some types of cement, but it's definitely
> not as hard as concrete.
What is this, Pedantry Week in ba.food?
The point is that the stuff isn't soft and crystalline, as I'd
imagined it to be. How hard it actually is relative to various
reference materials which *also* aren't soft and crystalline is
clearly well beyond the scope of anything I said.
Yeah, I came upon a few examples of where various troglodytes
had broken off chunks of the stuff by kicking it.
Tim May
<geo...@lava.net> wrote:
>
> Then why don't you write the names of other foreign dishes
> with either caps or quotes? After all, they originated in
> languages other than English, too.
ObGeofftheSchoolMarm: "What is this, Pedantry Week in ba.food?"
--Tim May
Al Eisner
> Al Eisner wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Pete Fraser wrote:
>>
>>> "Geoff Miller" <geo...@lava.net> wrote in message
>>> news:13o4buj...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>> Speaking of coffee shops, I unearthed a real time warp of a
>>>> place back in August: Nicely's in Lee Vining, close to Mono
>>>> Lake.
>>>
>>> I haven't eaten there for many Bizbees, but I remember it as
>>> being a good place, with reasonable prices.
>>
>> I've been eating at Nicely for many years. It hardly changes, and is
>> consistently mediocre -- not very good, but not bad. (Better than
>> Denny's level.)
>
> If Nicely's is consistently mediocre, why do you keep coming back?
Because everything else in town was worse. It's pretty good for breakfast,
and a few dinner items, like their fried chicken, are also decent. However,
for just the past few years there has been a better option just outside of
town, as you note:
> Doesn't the Whoa Nellie Deli down the street at the Mobil Gas Station serve
> better food? Or do you keep going back to Nicely's because you enjoy its
> ambiance, or for some other reason? Or is it just the next best dining option
> in Lee Vining after the Whoa Nellie Deli and the Mono Inn.
so I rarely go back to Nicely's for dinner any more. Whoa Nellie is a
worthwhile place -- limited but interesting menu, enormous portions (too
large for lunch I find) and much of the food is quite good (although on
any given plate some items tend to be better than others).
I regard Mono Inn as a very good restaurant, especially for east of the
Sierra, but it's not a place to go to routinely, more like once per trip.
(It's more expensive, of course, and its menu is too brief to sustain
every-night visits.)
Geoff Miller
Veronique <veroniq...@gmail.com> writes:
> Royal Taj?
Yeah, that's the place. I couldn't remember the name.
> Interesting building, though.
Not to mention location. Both of which made me curious.
That building strikes me as a fitting location for a
quirky, independent niche-market bookstore.
Geoff
--
"You have enemies? Good! That means you've stood up
for something in your life." -- Winston Churchill
Geoff Miller
SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> writes:
> Hobee's in Cupertino is the same way, though the food is
> better than Stacks.
I used to go to the Cupertino Hobee's often, but it's been
a long time since I was a regular. I love their coffee cake,
and they serve (or at least, used to serve) excellent orange
juice.
The only disadvantage with Hobee's, whatever the location, is
that due to the chain's healthy and wholesome image, there are
always lots of yuppie parents with their babies and small chil-
dren.
> I won't go to the Cupertino Hobee's for political reasons,
> so that solves that problem as well.
Do tell, if you wouldn't mind.
Karen
> so I rarely go back to Nicely's for dinner any more. Whoa Nellie is a
> worthwhile place -- limited but interesting menu, enormous portions (too
> large for lunch I find) and much of the food is quite good (although on
> any given plate some items tend to be better than others).
>
> I regard Mono Inn as a very good restaurant, especially for east of the
> Sierra, but it's not a place to go to routinely, more like once per trip.
> (It's more expensive, of course, and its menu is too brief to sustain
> every-night visits.)
Seems like a good name for a bed and breakfast inn near Mono Lake
could be Arsenic and the Old Lace...
Karen
RWW
> Veronique <veroniq...@gmail.com> writes:
>>Royal Taj?
> Yeah, that's the place. I couldn't remember the name.
>>Interesting building, though.
> Not to mention location. Both of which made me curious.
> That building strikes me as a fitting location for a
> quirky, independent niche-market bookstore.
A few doors up, just beyond the Assembly of God church,
there is a quite nice Guns and Ammo depot. I think it goes
something like:
Carlisle Hotel
Der Weinerschnitzel
Royal Taj
Fosters Freeze
Beacon Gas Station
Day Care Center (Now a Subway?)
Assembly of God Church
Guns and Ammo Depot
Taco Bell
Phillips 76
Tim May
<df2483c4-99a6-4a74...@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Karen <kso...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 11:21 am, Al Eisner <eis...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > I regard Mono Inn as a very good restaurant, especially for east of the
...
> Seems like a good name for a bed and breakfast inn near Mono Lake
> could be Arsenic and the Old Lace...
Anything with the word "Mono" in it seems like an appropriate name for
a bed and breakfast, nooner special, or romantic getaway.
--Tim May
Veronique
Der ain't no Weinerschnitzel der no more.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Steve Fenwick
geo...@lava.net (Geoff Miller) wrote:
> > Yes, Southern Indian cuisine, for which
> > restaurants here are out of the ordinary, but
> > Chinese? All chinese restaurants are at least
> > 50% 'non-veg' (as they say in American-accomodating
> > restuarants in Eurasia).
>
> Compared to an American-style meat and potatoes dinner,
> which was my basis of comparison (we were talking about
> meatloaf, remember?), Chinese cuisine is nevertheless
> vegetable intensive. Even most of the so-called meat
> dishes are mostly vegetables, with tiny morsels of meat
> interspersed therein. Contrast the classic American
> meal featuring a bleeding slab of dead animal.
While I understand your point, meatloaf often has vegetable (onion,
celery) and starch (bread) fillers. A better example might be pot roast.
On the other hand, herself and I had lemon chicken and orange peel beef
tonight. Only the fried rice (which contained chicken and scrambled egg)
was not meat-based.
> --
> "There are a lot of bad Republicans; there
> are no good Democrats." -- Ann Coulter
I would swear I saw Ann Coulter at the Capitol Grille a couple of weeks
ago, but it could have been some other ditzy blonde Republican...
Steve
--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
SMS
> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> writes:
>
>> Hobee's in Cupertino is the same way, though the food is
>> better than Stacks.
>
> I used to go to the Cupertino Hobee's often, but it's been
> a long time since I was a regular. I love their coffee cake,
> and they serve (or at least, used to serve) excellent orange
> juice.
>
> The only disadvantage with Hobee's, whatever the location, is
> that due to the chain's healthy and wholesome image, there are
> always lots of yuppie parents with their babies and small chil-
> dren.
>
>
>> I won't go to the Cupertino Hobee's for political reasons,
>> so that solves that problem as well.
>
> Do tell, if you wouldn't mind.
Michael Lashen, the owner is a big supporter of the developers agenda to
tear down commercial buildings (including part of the Oaks Shopping
Center) for high-density condos. He is also the former mayor's boyfriend
(also a big supporter of tearing down commercial, i.e. the monstrosity
at Stevens Creek and De Anza).
Here his is with Hobee's "best customer" who happens to be his girlfriend,
"http://www.community-newspapers.com/archives/cupertinocourier/03.10.99/taste-9910.html"
Of course the article fails to mention the link between her and the
owner when she states: ""This is my favorite restaurant," James said
last week after yet another breakfast meeting. "It's like a home away
from home." She usually sits at the same table every time. "A lot of
important decisions have been made at this table," she said, including
her decision to run for City Council two years ago.""
Here she is again:
"http://www.community-newspapers.com/archives/cupertinocourier/20040317/images/decinzocu.gif"
This was before the developers got Silicon Valley Community Newspapers
(owned my the Mercury News) to fire De Cinzo. They were really upset
over a comic where he showed the goons that the developers sent to
disrupt a referendum signature gathering, see
"http://www.community-newspapers.com/archives/cupertinocourier/20060412/images/decinzocu.gif".
Lashen also got the restaurant across from the library, where his
girlfriend was instrumental in getting a massive condo project approved
to feed customers to the new restaurant, see
"http://www.community-newspapers.com/archives/cupertinocourier/20060215/cu-taste.shtml".
Alas, the food was truly awful, and it closed after a year. It's been
empty for a long time, but something else is about to go in there.
Too much corruption for me.
Peter Lawrence
>
>> I won't go to the Cupertino Hobee's for political reasons,
>> so that solves that problem as well.
>
> Do tell, if you wouldn't mind.
My guess, it's probably the same reason why he won't eat at Alexander's
Steakhouse. They supported the wrong side of a ballot measure.
- Peter
RWW
It was there when I drove by last Sunday.
Al Eisner
???
I'm afraid this has gone completely over my head. (And I certainly
haven't figured out its relevance to what you quoted of mine.)
Al Eisner
Although merely supporting the wrong side sounds fairly innocuous
compared to the rather damning behavior described by SMS in another
post.
Peter Lawrence
Honestly, except for the "goon squad" that he had mentioned previously,
I really don't see any real damning behavior, especially on the part of
owner of Hobee's, Michael Lashen. And if the former mayor's behavior
was truly corrupt, then she should be reported to the proper authorities.
But what I see mostly is that Steve has a big philosophical and
political difference of opinion with the owner of Hobee's in regards to
high-density housing for Cupertino. I really don't see what the owner
of Hobee's did that was ethically wrong. And it should be noted that
Cupertino has a council-manager form of government where the City
Council selects one of themselves to be the mayor for a year and where
the mayor's main duty is to chair the city council meetings. Cupertino
doesn't have a "strong mayor" system of government like San Francisco or
Chicago. So that Lashen being the boyfriend of the former mayor of
Cupertino really doesn't mean squat. It's just local town gossip. At
least two other Cupertino council members (of the five-member city
council) would have had to agree with the former mayor to get any thing
done that would have favored Lashen over the other applicants for the
restaurant that's across the library.
- Peter
Al Eisner
> Al Eisner wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Peter Lawrence wrote:
>>
>>> My guess, it's probably the same reason why he won't eat at Alexander's
>>> Steakhouse. They supported the wrong side of a ballot measure.
>>
>> Although merely supporting the wrong side sounds fairly innocuous
>> compared to the rather damning behavior described by SMS in another
>> post.
>
> Honestly, except for the "goon squad" that he had mentioned previously, I
> really don't see any real damning behavior, especially on the part of owner
> of Hobee's, Michael Lashen. And if the former mayor's behavior was truly
> corrupt, then she should be reported to the proper authorities.
>
> But what I see mostly is that Steve has a big philosophical and political
> difference of opinion with the owner of Hobee's in regards to high-density
> housing for Cupertino. I really don't see what the owner of Hobee's did that
> was ethically wrong. [etc.]
You're right that the damning behavior was distributed in SMS's post.
Clearly the "goons" would qualify, although since I have no independent
knowledge about that i can't be certain of it. And the behavior of the
community newspaper was, if described accurately, way out of line on
a number of occasions. Of course, if the publication is simply an
outlet for the devlopers, and doesn't pretend otherwise, then one
can't hold it to higher standards.
Still, I'd say that your comment about Alexander's was extremely
mild compared to that tirade about Hobee's. Maybe just a difference
in philosophy between you, to use your term.
Peter Lawrence
In my last post, I just wanted to point out that I didn't feel the
behavior of Michael Lashen, the owner of Hobee's, was damning in any
way. Not that I agree with Lashen politically. I'm actually more in
agreement with Steve when it comes to tearing down commercial property
for high-density condos.
But I would never boycott a restaurant I enjoyed eating at because the
owner of that restaurant disagreed with my political viewpoints on
important local issues. I would respect an owner's opinions and
viewpoints even though I might be personally opposed to them.
- Peter
SMS
> Honestly, except for the "goon squad" that he had mentioned previously,
> I really don't see any real damning behavior, especially on the part of
> owner of Hobee's, Michael Lashen. And if the former mayor's behavior
> was truly corrupt, then she should be reported to the proper authorities.
LOL, who would those authorities be? Nothing illegal was done. Others
may have different opinions on the ethics of it all. I'm not telling
anyone to not patronize these places, just explaining the reasons that I
won't, because someone asked me to explain.
> political difference of opinion with the owner of Hobee's in regards to
> high-density housing for Cupertino. I really don't see what the owner
> of Hobee's did that was ethically wrong.
Promoting the conversion of part of the Oaks from commercial to
residential, which would benefit his business, at the expense of the
rest of the community. To the credit of the mayor, she recused herself
from voting on the rezoning ordinance citing her personal relationship,
and it went down to defeat by a 2-2 vote.
The ultimate irony is the plaque honoring Lashen's girlfriend for the
new condo development, immediately adjacent to the restaurant that the
city council insisted that the developer include, that was leased by
Lashen and two others. You've to at least be amused by one of the owners
of Lucky Cupertino proclaiming that "We emphasize catering to the
Caucasian appetite." Can you imagine a poorer business plan in
Cupertino, where even most of the Caucasians don't want to eat
American-Chinese food? That building would do well as something like a
Tea Cafe, that would appeal to multiple ethnicities and multiple age
groups, but especially to teens. It's a terrible location, and the
developer didn't want to include it, but was forced to do so.
Steve Pope
>The only disadvantage with Hobee's, whatever the location, is
>that due to the chain's healthy and wholesome image, there are
>always lots of yuppie parents with their babies and small chil-
>dren.
In the past couple days there was a news report regarding
the Wetherspoon pub chain in the UK. They instituted a
new policy that parents with children can only be served
two drinks, then they are kicked out. The quotes from the
press release are pretty funny -- along the lines of "our pubs
are not a baby-sitting service".
Steve
Steve Pope
>Promoting the conversion of part of the Oaks from commercial to
>residential, which would benefit his business, at the expense of the
>rest of the community. To the credit of the mayor, she recused herself
>from voting on the rezoning ordinance citing her personal relationship,
>and it went down to defeat by a 2-2 vote.
So what is your alternative plan for increasing the housing
density in Cupertino?
Steve
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
First, many are schizophrenic on whether high-density is bad or good.
For a long time, the mantra was that high-density is bad. Now it's just
the opposite, that towns need denser urban cores and more verticalness.
Second, it shouldn't be any of our concerns, nor government's, about
how to "plan" for housing. Let builders build on land they own, let
renters or buyers decide to move in or not.
No more a job of government to help with buildings than it is for it to
help with sports stadiums. (Doesn't matter what the alleged tax
benefits are....it wasn't a job in 1790 Philadelphia for the city to
construct factories to help the tax base and it wasn't even the jobs
[SIC] of Cupertino to build factories for Apple in 1977 to lure them to
the city.
As for the Oaks complex, that's an old and decaying and
obsoletely-designed strip mall. It was decent when it still had A Clean
Well Lighted Place, Swenson's, and when the Oaks Three Theater was
semi-competitive with other theaters (such as the nearby Meridian
Quad). And before Valley Fair was renovated.
But now all the reasons for going there have vanished. Even The
Sandpiper, a decent restaurant, is now (or last time I drove by) a Tom
Shane diamond place.
If the owner wants to put in condos, his business.
The very act of having the City Council in the process is why the kind
of potential corruption happens. Let government stick to only
government issues, not trying to plan, Soviet-style.
--Tim May
SMS
You're assuming that it needs to be increased.
The first thing that commercial property owners have to realize is that
it's not okay to let your property become so run down that no one will
lease it, or to get rid of your retail and commercial tenants by other
means, then go crying to the planning commission for rezoning so you can
tear down your buildings, make a fortune by selling to a housing
developer that will build condos, and leave the city and school district
with all the financial liability.
HP could have sold it's land to a commercial buyer, but they would
receive far less for it than if it was rezoned for high-density
residential, so naturally they pushed hard for rezoning. Can't blame
them for that attempt. If there had been plans for some new schools, to
support the new developments (HP's and Vallco's) which would have added
about 500 more students, then they might have prevailed. They were in
shock that anyone opposed them, in further shock that they couldn't
negotiate with the opposition, incompetent in their campaign, and angry
that Vallco got them into the mess in the first place. The developer
(Toll Brothers) ended up paying the citizens group a lot of money to
avoid a lawsuit over their campaign tactics, including their lawsuit to
stop the referendums.
If housing density is to be increased, it has to be done in conjunction
with traffic improvements, transit improvements, and the construction of
additional schools. Kind of like developers in other areas have done. It
may require a Mello-Roos tax district, or it may require developers to
voluntarily make concessions in order for rezoning to be considered.
There would be little opposition to higher density housing if it was
done in a systematic approach.
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> So what is your alternative plan for increasing the housing
>> density in Cupertino?
>You're assuming that it needs to be increased.
My position is that averaged over the population as a whole,
people need to be living in places denser than present-day Cupertino,
otherwise there is too much enviromental impact going forward.
To move towards this goal, generally places like Cupertino need to
increase density.
(I guess an alternative would be depopulating Cupertino entirely.
Thanks, it does sound like you do have a plan. The only thing I see
missing is any element that would attract developers to do a
Cupertino project, as opposed to just razing more Central Valley
farmland for suburbs. Perhaps the solution is to throw up
even higher barriers to the latter projects.
Steve
David Arnstein
SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>The first thing that commercial property owners have to realize is that
>it's not okay to let your property become so run down that no one will
>lease it, or to get rid of your retail and commercial tenants by other
>means, then go crying to the planning commission for rezoning so you can
>tear down your buildings, make a fortune by selling to a housing
>developer that will build condos, and leave the city and school district
>with all the financial liability.
The last sentence above indicates that condominiums are a financial
drain for city governments.
My understanding is that in California, cheap housing is bad for city
budgets because the property taxes that cities and counties collect is
not high enough to pay for schools, sewers, etc. that the residents of
those condominiums demand.
Steve can correct me if I am wrong, he seems to be involved.
If I am correct, then here is a force that is distorting the free market
in land development. I blame prop. 13 for this. In my opinion, people
should pay for the services they get from government, including their
local government. Then the free market approach that Tim May likes would
make a lot more sense.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstei...@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
SMS
> Thanks, it does sound like you do have a plan. The only thing I see
> missing is any element that would attract developers to do a
> Cupertino project, as opposed to just razing more Central Valley
> farmland for suburbs. Perhaps the solution is to throw up
> even higher barriers to the latter projects.
You make the classic error of assuming that the developers will somehow
give up on razing central valley farmland if only they are able to turn
every temporarily empty industrial or commercial building into
high-density housing. You're also assuming that buyers that want a
single family home and can only afford one in the central valley, will
instead settle for a condo.
If California were serious about housing issues, the first thing they'd
do is to find a way around Prop 13, which discourages people from
selling their single family homes to the next generation of families,
rather than staying in too big of a house for the rest of their lives.
CJ
>
>
> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> writes:
>
> > I won't go to the Cupertino Hobee's for political reasons,
> > so that solves that problem as well.
>
> Do tell, if you wouldn't mind.
>
Jesus H Christ onacrutch!! You had to ask!!
Now you've started a thread that will last for the next 6 months.
--
Cliff
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> Thanks, it does sound like you do have a plan. The only thing I see
>> missing is any element that would attract developers to do a
>> Cupertino project, as opposed to just razing more Central Valley
>> farmland for suburbs. Perhaps the solution is to throw up
>> even higher barriers to the latter projects.
>You make the classic error of assuming that the developers will somehow
>give up on razing central valley farmland if only they are able to turn
>every temporarily empty industrial or commercial building into
>high-density housing.
Uh, no, exactly the opposite. I said perhaps we should "throw up
barriers" to the latter. That would seem to be an
acknowledgement they won't do it on their own.
>You're also assuming that buyers that want a
>single family home and can only afford one in the central valley, will
>instead settle for a condo.
Nope, for the same reason.
>If California were serious about housing issues, the first thing they'd
>do is to find a way around Prop 13, which discourages people from
>selling their single family homes to the next generation of families,
>rather than staying in too big of a house for the rest of their lives.
Interesting choice of demon. California's a very high-tax
state, in general; Prop 13 is the one are where taxes here
are comparitively low. If it is to go away, would they
lower income and/or sales taxes to compensate? Fat chance.
Sorry, Prop 13 stays.
Steve
SMS
> If I am correct, then here is a force that is distorting the free market
> in land development. I blame prop. 13 for this. In my opinion, people
> should pay for the services they get from government, including their
> local government. Then the free market approach that Tim May likes would
> make a lot more sense.
Yes, the core problem is Prop 13. Prop. 13 is not going away, so there
need to be workarounds to the inequities it has created.
What I see in my area is families that live in houses passed to them by
their parents. They're paying $1000/year in property taxes on houses
worth around 1.2 million dollars (but with assessed values of around
$80K), yet they're earning high professional incomes as DICKS (dual
income, coupla kids). Meanwhile, new homeowners, with similar incomes,
are paying $15,000 per year on similarly valued houses. The new owners
are heavily subsidizing the owners that inherited property in terms of
paying for schools and other essential services.
One proposal is to increase the state tax deduction for property taxes
from the current 1x of the property taxes to a multiple of the property
taxes, such as 5x. This would lower the taxable income for everyone, but
especially for homeowners with high assessed value homes. The decrease
in taxable income would be offset by raising income tax rates, which are
more progressive. The high-income, high assessed value taxpayer would
pay about the same total tax as they're paying now (income plus property
taxes), while the high-income, low assessed value taxpayer would have
much lower deductions, so they'd be paying more income tax to make up
for their lower property tax). Property owners with very low property
taxes and low incomes, would not be hurt, which was the premise of
proposition 13 (or at least that's how it was marketed). Something would
have to be done about bringing back the renters credit so that renters
would not be hurt by the higher income tax rates, which weren't offset
by the lack of a property tax deduction. The higher deduction would only
apply to one property, not to vacation homes.
The other big change that should be made, in order to send less income
tax money to the feds, and keep more in California, is to eliminate the
sales tax, and replace it with higher income taxes. State income tax is
deductible from federal taxable income, state sales tax is not. Paying
the same total amount, but as state income tax rather than state sales
tax, will reduce taxpayer's federal income taxes, and increase state
revenue. Sales tax is extremely regressive, and it also promotes poor
land-use decisions, such as cities building those huge auto-malls.
Ironically, a lot of this mess is due to the recall election, and all
the lies put out by the Republicans regarding the vehicle license fee.
Davis didn't increase the VLF, he eliminated the temporary cut that was
enacted when the state was running a big surplus. If he had never cut
the VLF, and instead just mailed out checks only when there was a
surplus, he wouldn't have been recalled, and the state would have about
$25 billion more in the bank. Blame Darrell Issa!
SMS
> Interesting choice of demon. California's a very high-tax
> state, in general; Prop 13 is the one are where taxes here
> are comparitively low. If it is to go away, would they
> lower income and/or sales taxes to compensate? Fat chance.
> Sorry, Prop 13 stays.
What they should do is make the state income tax deduction for property
tax 5x the amount of tax paid. This would lower taxable income,
especially for recent home buyers. Next they raise the income tax so
that high-income residents with very low property taxes, are paying
their share, while those with high property taxes are paying the same
total as before.
They should dump the sales tax because a) it's regressive, and b) it'd
be better for the state to have no sales tax but a higher income tax,
because the state income tax is deductible from your federal tax.
Geoff Miller
Veronique <veroniq...@gmail.com> writes:
> I like the Santa Cruz Diner: it is what it is.
Both times I've been there, it's been noisy out of all
proportion to how crowded it was. This last time, there
was some guy seated at a table across the room who would
periodically erupt in a loud, braying horse-laugh. Like
the aforementioned singing waitress, he showed none of the
self-restraint that's the norm in other places. It all
seems to be part of the "anything goes" Santa Cruz culture.
> I do think it's better than Denny's, so I'll be interested
> in your comparison.
Well, I wasn't planning on writing a review. I've been to any
number of Denny's over the years. But maybe I'll write one of
that particular Denny's, the one on Ocean St. at Felker, just
for grins.
> I've been panhandled while weeding my front garden; the
> youngish guy who was fairly well dressed looked rather taken
> aback at my snappish response. I think I threatened him with
> a trowel.
Good for you. The panhandlers who are well-dressed and obviously
well-fed piss me off even more than the standard, run of the mill
shambling wrecks of humanity do. Especially when they use a dog
or cat as a prop to generate sympathy.
The trouble is, Santa Cruz, being liberal and tolerant, is full
of the sort of people who make the problem worse by giving money
(and sometimes food) to panhandlers. Word gets out, and so the
town has become a hotbed of social parasitism.
Panhandlers are savvy and street-smart enough to know their
"clientele." There used to be a real problem with them at Tower
Records in Mountain View. Record stores attract young people,
and young people, being idealistic by nature, are easy marks for
that sort of thing. It was so bad there for awhile that if you
delayed for even a moment while getting into or out of your car,
they'd spot your open door and be on you.
Geoff
--
"There are two advantages men have over women: They can
pee standing up, and they can fuck dead people."
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> writes:
> ObGeofftheSchoolMarm: "What is this, Pedantry Week in ba.food?"
Being a stickler for the proper use of the English language is
hardly pedantry. It's shameful that someone as educated as you
are comes up so visibly short on the basics.
Geoff Miller
CJ <cj...@hotmail.com> writes:
: Do tell, if you wouldn't mind.
> Jesus H Christ onacrutch!! You had to ask!!
> Now you've started a thread that will last for the next 6 months.
Yeah, no kidding. It seems I stepped on a "high-density housing"
landmine.
Veronique
> Veronique <veroniqueuni...@gmail.com> writes:
[Santa Cruz Diner]
> > I do think it's better than Denny's, so I'll be interested
> > in your comparison.
>
> Well, I wasn't planning on writing a review. I've been to any
> number of Denny's over the years. But maybe I'll write one of
> that particular Denny's, the one on Ocean St. at Felker, just
> for grins.
That was the point, right? Not a wholesale retrospective of the
Denny's Experience, but whether, on any given day, a meal is more
enjoyable at the Santa Cruz Diner or the Denny's on Ocean Street a few
blocks away.
>
> > I've been panhandled while weeding my front garden; the
> > youngish guy who was fairly well dressed looked rather taken
> > aback at my snappish response. I think I threatened him with
> > a trowel.
>
> Good for you. The panhandlers who are well-dressed and obviously
> well-fed piss me off even more than the standard, run of the mill
> shambling wrecks of humanity do. Especially when they use a dog
> or cat as a prop to generate sympathy.
This one was particularly egregious, as he appeared completely taken
aback at my snapped, "How DARE you panhandle me!"
Part of what gets me about panhandling, and accepting it as a normal
human interaction, is that the panhandler has reduced the community to
a series of marks. It is NOT normal human interaction, and to respond
the way I've often seen those more sympathetic do buys into the
fiction that the world is made up of an inexplicable divide of haves
and have-nots, relieving the panhandlers of their personal
responsibility to support themselves. Their situation becomes all MY
fault (as my front-yard panhandler implied) because I don't want to
share those quarters that magically appear in my pockets.
V., sitting on her hands to stifle rest of non-food-related rant.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Steve Pope
>Yes, the core problem is Prop 13. Prop. 13 is not going away, so there
>need to be workarounds to the inequities it has created.
The part about inequities is fairly ridiculous -- it's not as
if governments have a fundamental right to tax your property
without the taxpayers voting on it (which is all Prop 13
prevents).
Steve
Steve Pope
>What I see in my area is families that live in houses passed to them by
>their parents. They're paying $1000/year in property taxes on houses
>worth around 1.2 million dollars (but with assessed values of around
>$80K), yet they're earning high professional incomes as DICKS (dual
>income, coupla kids).
This is simply because the local voters have not voted to apply
increased taxes.
Steve
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
They cannot (except for minor fees, seldom amounting to even 10%
overall of the state taxes).
Section 1 of Proposition 13, passed in 1978 and upheld by the court
system:
"ł
SECTION 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real
property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of
such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties
and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.
Steve Pope
><spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> What I see in my area is families that live in houses passed to them by
>>> their parents. They're paying $1000/year in property taxes on houses
>>> worth around 1.2 million dollars (but with assessed values of around
>>> $80K), yet they're earning high professional incomes as DICKS (dual
>>> income, coupla kids).
>> This is simply because the local voters have not voted to apply
>> increased taxes.
>They cannot (except for minor fees, seldom amounting to even 10%
>overall of the state taxes).
>Section 1 of Proposition 13, passed in 1978 and upheld by the court
>system:
>SECTION 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real
>property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of
>such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties
>and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.
Sure, we all know this, but there are two mechanisms to implement
property taxes that have most of the beneficial effect of the
old ad valorem tax:
(1) An assessment that is based on square footage, and/or
square footage of improved property.
(2) Assessments that are specific to a local district, which
can be as small as a neighborhood, and therefore can be
scaled to property values in that area.
Both of these are widely used in California jurisdictions where
there is not a political barrier to getting the required 2/3 vote.
And that higher bar is a good thing; before Prop 13, cities
and counties could just unaccountably grab money from homeowners.
And taxation based on assessments was (still is, to the extent
it's still around) riddled with inequities as well. I think square
footage is a more objective and equitable measure.
Steve
SMS
That's right, but the government does have the power to tax your income
without you voting on it.
Adjusting the tax system to eliminate the freeloaders that pay miniscule
property taxes while using massive amounts of the services that the
property taxes pay for, is the only way to fix the system in California.
Hell, eliminate the property tax completely, and increase less
inequitable taxes to compensate for the lost revenue. Even the sales tax
is less inequitable than the property tax mess we have now.
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
> Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>
> ><spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>
> >> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> What I see in my area is families that live in houses passed to them by
> >>> their parents. They're paying $1000/year in property taxes on houses
> >>> worth around 1.2 million dollars (but with assessed values of around
> >>> $80K), yet they're earning high professional incomes as DICKS (dual
> >>> income, coupla kids).
>
> >> This is simply because the local voters have not voted to apply
> >> increased taxes.
>
> >They cannot (except for minor fees, seldom amounting to even 10%
> >overall of the state taxes).
>
> >Section 1 of Proposition 13, passed in 1978 and upheld by the court
> >system:
>
> >SECTION 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real
> >property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of
> >such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties
> >and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.
>
> Sure, we all know this, but there are two mechanisms to implement
> property taxes that have most of the beneficial effect of the
> old ad valorem tax:
>
> (1) An assessment that is based on square footage, and/or
> square footage of improved property.
No, the language of Prop 13 is quite clear on this. Read the whole
thing. I quoted the essence of it, that the "The maximum amount of any
ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of
the full cash value of such property. " (At the time of passage, with
2% increases per year.)
Prop 13 does not allow the full cash value (aka assessed value at time
of passage or at time of sale) to be altered by square footage, number
of bathrooms, size of plasma televisions, income of owners, or anything
else.
Try to change Prop 13 if you can, but your interpretation of of ad
valorem and full cash value will not fly.
>
> (2) Assessments that are specific to a local district, which
> can be as small as a neighborhood, and therefore can be
> scaled to property values in that area.
>
> Both of these are widely used in California jurisdictions where
> there is not a political barrier to getting the required 2/3 vote.
> And that higher bar is a good thing; before Prop 13, cities
> and counties could just unaccountably grab money from homeowners.
Mello-Roos Districts, which is what I gather you are referring to, have
specific restrictions, applying to new developments. (These give rise
to the developer fees, known as Mello-Roos fees, earmarked for new
sewer, road, and school construction. Houses in areas where such things
have already been built are not subject to Mello-Roos.)
>
> And taxation based on assessments was (still is, to the extent
> it's still around) riddled with inequities as well. I think square
> footage is a more objective and equitable measure.
Take that up with both assessors and the market as a whole. The "full
cash value" is what a buyer decides a property is worth to him. He may
decide that a great view is worth a lot of money, he may decide that
square footage is more valuable to him. But the "objective" standard of
value, at least outside the socialist regions, is what someone will pay
for the item in a fair market.
If you think square footage is the determiner of objective and
equitable value, you are free to pay twice as much for a 4000 square
foot house in the flats of Richmond than a 2000 square foot on top of a
hill in Mill Valley sells for.
(Don't demand that I do so, though, either in price paid or in taxes
collected.)
A lot of you guys here just have no common sense about basic economics.
Beggar Dan, I can understand having no common sense. But all of you
others?
--Tim May
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> The part about inequities is fairly ridiculous -- it's not as
>> if governments have a fundamental right to tax your property
>> without the taxpayers voting on it (which is all Prop 13
>> prevents).
>That's right, but the government does have the power to tax your income
>without you voting on it.
>Adjusting the tax system to eliminate the freeloaders that pay miniscule
>property taxes while using massive amounts of the services that the
>property taxes pay for, is the only way to fix the system in California.
This is just pure hyperbole. People who pay their Prop 13 taxes
are not "freeloaders". All homeowners at time of purchase agreed
to pay a base Prop 13 tax rate, which is in effect a transfer
tax, just paid in installments. Just because people who buy
homes more frequently pay a tax on each such purchase does not make
other people "freeloaders". Are all the renters also "freeloaders"?
You're not going to get anywhere with such hype.
>Hell, eliminate the property tax completely, and increase less
>inequitable taxes to compensate for the lost revenue. Even the sales tax
>is less inequitable than the property tax mess we have now.
What you may not be seeing is that the Prop 13 baseline tax
*is* a sales tax. Barring some second order effects, at the time
you buy a house, this tax obligation has a net present value of
(0.01) * (purchase price) / (r - 0.02)
where r is the risk-free rate of return. As you can see this
is a tax obligation proportionate to the sales price, so it
is a sales tax rather than an asset tax.
Steve
Steve Pope
><spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>> Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>> >They cannot (except for minor fees, seldom amounting to even 10%
>> >overall of the state taxes).
>> >Section 1 of Proposition 13, passed in 1978 and upheld by the court
>> >system:
>> >SECTION 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real
>> >property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of
>> >such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties
>> >and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.
>> Sure, we all know this, but there are two mechanisms to implement
>> property taxes that have most of the beneficial effect of the
>> old ad valorem tax:
>> (1) An assessment that is based on square footage, and/or
>> square footage of improved property.
>No, the language of Prop 13 is quite clear on this. Read the whole
>thing. I quoted the essence of it, that the "The maximum amount of any
>ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of
>the full cash value of such property. " (At the time of passage, with
>2% increases per year.)
Right.
>Prop 13 does not allow the full cash value (aka assessed value at time
>of passage or at time of sale) to be altered by square footage, number
>of bathrooms, size of plasma televisions, income of owners, or anything
>else.
I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that localities can impose
a tax based on square footage of improvements (structures) instead of
assessed value. These can add up to a reasonable fraction of a
property tax bill.
(Are there Prop 13 limits on such taxes? Not that I'm aware of.)
>Try to change Prop 13 if you can, but your interpretation of of ad
>valorem and full cash value will not fly.
>> (2) Assessments that are specific to a local district, which
>> can be as small as a neighborhood, and therefore can be
>> scaled to property values in that area.
>> Both of these are widely used in California jurisdictions where
>> there is not a political barrier to getting the required 2/3 vote.
>> And that higher bar is a good thing; before Prop 13, cities
>> and counties could just unaccountably grab money from homeowners.
>Mello-Roos Districts, which is what I gather you are referring to, have
>specific restrictions, applying to new developments.
Existing neighborhoods can also vote in such a tax. This is commonly
done for things like undergrounding utilities. I'm not sure
it can be done for things like schools, fire protection etc.
without splitting off a new school or fire district. But it
can in any case be done.
Steve
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
> Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
> >Prop 13 does not allow the full cash value (aka assessed value at time
> >of passage or at time of sale) to be altered by square footage, number
> >of bathrooms, size of plasma televisions, income of owners, or anything
> >else.
>
> I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that localities can impose
> a tax based on square footage of improvements (structures) instead of
> assessed value. These can add up to a reasonable fraction of a
> property tax bill.
You need to get yourself educated. Not meaning to sound _too_ snarky,
but there are gaping holes in your understanding of property tax and
Prop 13.
First, structures or improvements ARE part of the value of a property
when the property is sold. For example, my property had something on
the order of $125,000 for the putative value of the land and something
on the order of $240,000 for the putative value of the structure (my
house) on the land, adding up to the total market (sale) value of
about $365,000 when I bought my place in 1995. This assessed value has
gone up by the Prop 13-permitted 2% every year since.
Second, any additional structures or improvements ALREADY DO TRIGGER
Prop-13 permissiable reassessments. If I added a room to my house, for
example, the County Tax Assessor would send me a revised property tax
calculation.
(Important note: the addition of a room to a house, or the addition of
an outbuilding to a farm, or the addition of parking garages to a
corporate building, and so on for many such examples, DOES NOT trigger
a complete reevaluation to "current market values" for the entire
structure. This was covered specifically in Prop 13 and exists for
obvious "unintended consequences" reasons, to wit, if even minor
improvements triggered 2x or 3x or 5x changes in Prop 13 basis value,
nobody and no corporation would ever make any improvements or changes.)
The usual mechanism by which the Tax Assessor knows of changes that are
worthy of a 5% or 10% or potentially even 30% reassessment are through
the building permit process. Some people build additions to their
houses which are not permitted (in the building permit sense) and maybe
they get caught, maybe they don't. Not germane to your point anyway.
Notably, maintenance issues, such a re-roofing a house, repairing a
deck, doing other such things which do not change the footprint of a
house, are not Prop 13 events, though they may require building
permits.
(They also are not considered as having increased the basis value of a
house, as they are considered maintenance, not improvement. Even
installing a fancy Wolf/Subzero/Gaggenau yuppie dream kitchen is
generally not considered an improvement, for similar reasons.
Basically, tax assessment is based on what can be seen from the road,
or the air--footprint--and what is deducible from building permits,
such as extra bathrooms added. Other improvements are considered
discretiionary changes, or repairs, or replacements.
Also, outbuildings below a certain size do not trigger Prop 13 events.
Nor is landscaping, though this often "improves" the sales value.
Again, this all makes complete sense (even to a government hater like
myself).
So you whole point is specious. Prop 13 **ALREADY** takes into account
structures and improvements, with the details about what are
improvements roughly as I described above. A corporate building which
does not change footprint is not reassessed, no matter the internals of
it. A house is not reassessed, no matter the replacement of worn-out
carpeting with fancy wood floors. And so on.
>
> (Are there Prop 13 limits on such taxes? Not that I'm aware of.)
Read Prop 13. There are indeed many such limits. The triggers, the
thresholds, the amounts.
--Tim May
Steve Pope
><spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>> Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>> >Prop 13 does not allow the full cash value (aka assessed value at time
>> >of passage or at time of sale) to be altered by square footage, number
>> >of bathrooms, size of plasma televisions, income of owners, or anything
>> >else.
>> I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that localities can impose
>> a tax based on square footage of improvements (structures) instead of
>> assessed value. These can add up to a reasonable fraction of a
>> property tax bill.
>You need to get yourself educated. Not meaning to sound _too_ snarky,
>but there are gaping holes in your understanding of property tax and
>Prop 13.
As far as I can tell my statement above is true and let me try to
explain it. (I'm open to being told I'm wrong, but so far I don't
see your arguments pointing to me being wrong.)
Prop 13 limits both the assessed value, and taxes based on
assessed value -- ad valorem tax. But Prop 13 does not limit
voter-approved taxes based on the square footage of structures.
As an example, my property tax bill is 65% ad valorem taxes
and 35% "other". Among the "other" is 2006 Berkeley Measure A
which was approved by 2/3 of the voters (amounting to 10% of
my tax bill). It is not an ad-valorem tax, and is not based on the
Prop 13-defined assessed valuation. It is described here:
http://www.berkeley.net/uploads/bsep/Meas_A_2006finalmeasure.pdf
with the relevant city code section here:
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/bmc/berkeley_municipal_code/title_7/56/020.html
If the voters of Cupertino wanted to, they could approve similar
taxes. We don't need to ditch Prop 13 for this to happen.
Just one technical point, "improvement" in this context does
not mean improvements the current property owner may have
made since purchase, it means any structure built on the
property at any point.
Steve
SMS
> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Steve Pope wrote:
>
>>> The part about inequities is fairly ridiculous -- it's not as
>>> if governments have a fundamental right to tax your property
>>> without the taxpayers voting on it (which is all Prop 13
>>> prevents).
>
>> That's right, but the government does have the power to tax your income
>> without you voting on it.
>
>> Adjusting the tax system to eliminate the freeloaders that pay miniscule
>> property taxes while using massive amounts of the services that the
>> property taxes pay for, is the only way to fix the system in California.
>
> This is just pure hyperbole. People who pay their Prop 13 taxes
> are not "freeloaders". All homeowners at time of purchase agreed
> to pay a base Prop 13 tax rate, which is in effect a transfer
> tax, just paid in installments. Just because people who buy
> homes more frequently pay a tax on each such purchase does not make
> other people "freeloaders". Are all the renters also "freeloaders"?
You don't understand one of the major problems, which shows up in all
cities to some extent, but is especially a problem in cities like Palo
Alto, Saratoga, and Cupertino. The problem is when the owners of the
house are paying the proposition 13 tax rate based on the assessed value
in 1978, but are not the original owners that purchased the house. For
example, two families that I know of in my neighborhood, have the
parents living in their childhood homes, paying taxes of about $800 per
year, but using all the expensive services such as public schools that
are supported by property taxes. These are high income professionals,
that should be paying their fair share of property taxes since they're
sending their young children to the same public schools as everyone else.
More and more, the beneficiaries of Proposition 13 are not low-income
seniors that would lose their homes due to the inability to pay property
taxes based on the assessed value, but businesses and large property
owners. In fact, the poor, elderly, handicapped, etc., are suffering
because of reduced government services.
Proposition 13 is sacrosanct. However working around it in order to make
the total tax burden more equitable is not sacrosanct. We have seen
extra city and county assessments added onto property taxes (by a 2/3
majority), that aren't based on assessed value. To me, $40 added onto a
$7000 tax bill is lost in the noise, but to my next door neighbor, a
senior living on social security, and paying $800 a year in property
tax, it's a significant amount.,
Todd Michel McComb
SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>Proposition 13 is sacrosanct. However working around it in order
>to make the total tax burden more equitable is not sacrosanct.
Personally, I'd like to flush the entire state constitution and
start over. What a mess.
It'd be nice, though, if Prop.13 only applied to residences and/or
individually owned property.
Steve Pope
>Steve Pope wrote:
>> People who pay their Prop 13 taxes
>> are not "freeloaders".
>You don't understand one of the major problems, which shows up in all
>cities to some extent, but is especially a problem in cities like Palo
>Alto, Saratoga, and Cupertino. The problem is when the owners of the
>house are paying the proposition 13 tax rate based on the assessed value
>in 1978, but are not the original owners that purchased the house. For
>example, two families that I know of in my neighborhood, have the
>parents living in their childhood homes, paying taxes of about $800 per
>year, but using all the expensive services such as public schools that
>are supported by property taxes.
If we were starting from scratch, I would not support the grandfather
clause in Prop 13. The step-up in basis at death should trigger
a reassessment. However, flawed though this feature is it's
not remotely sufficient to get me to want to recall 13.
And I reitereate that you Cupertino people haven't passed enough
special assessments if these individuals are truly paying $800
tax bills. In Berkeley, they'd be paying a few thousand.
Steve
SMS
> In article <4786a96d$0$84207$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Proposition 13 is sacrosanct. However working around it in order
>> to make the total tax burden more equitable is not sacrosanct.
>
> Personally, I'd like to flush the entire state constitution and
> start over. What a mess.
Perhaps we could start by requiring that every time voters vote
themselves a huge tax cut they also vote on which programs and services
will be cut, or conversely, when they vote for expensive new programs
such as 3 Strikes, they also have to agree to tax increases to pay for
the new programs.
> It'd be nice, though, if Prop.13 only applied to residences and/or
> individually owned property.
LOL, while large commercial property owners are huge beneficiaries, it
was sold to voters by the commercial property owners mainly on the
residential benefits.
They could have fixed the problem like some other states did, by
allowing homeowners to defer the property tax on the portion of the
assessed value higher than the purchase price. When the property is sold
or the owner(s) pass away then the deferred taxes must be paid.
SMS
> If we were starting from scratch, I would not support the grandfather
> clause in Prop 13. The step-up in basis at death should trigger
> a reassessment. However, flawed though this feature is it's
> not remotely sufficient to get me to want to recall 13.
That's why rather than getting rid of it, we need to find ways to work
around the negative parts of it, such as the grandfather clause.
> And I reitereate that you Cupertino people haven't passed enough
> special assessments if these individuals are truly paying $800
> tax bills. In Berkeley, they'd be paying a few thousand.
I agree. The special assessments are one of the best ways to decrease
the inequities of Prop 13. Some have passed, but not enough. Whenever
there's one on the ballot, someone screams about the special assessments
being a fixed amount, rather than being a percentage of the property tax.
Golden California Girls
> No, the language of Prop 13 is quite clear on this. Read the whole
> thing. I quoted the essence of it, that the "The maximum amount of any
> ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of
> the full cash value of such property. "
Interesting, just pulled out the tax bill.
1.00000% general levy all agencies.
Voted Indebtedness
Water .004500%
Community College .019720
Unified Schools .054911%
District Assessments
Standby $xx
Storm Drain $xx
San Dist $xx
County Park $xx
Library $xx
Flood Control $xx
Trauma $xx
Sounds to me like they get more than 1% total. Do I need to sue them Tim?
> Try to change Prop 13 if you can, but your interpretation of of ad
> valorem and full cash value will not fly.
>
> Mello-Roos Districts, which is what I gather you are referring to, have
> specific restrictions, applying to new developments. (These give rise
> to the developer fees, known as Mello-Roos fees, earmarked for new
> sewer, road, and school construction. Houses in areas where such things
> have already been built are not subject to Mello-Roos.)
New, well not mine. Got that magic 1978 assessment.
So Tim do I sue them? Or could Tim be wrong like usual?
David Arnstein
SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>Perhaps we could start by requiring that every time voters vote
>themselves a huge tax cut they also vote on which programs and services
>will be cut, or conversely, when they vote for expensive new programs
>such as 3 Strikes, they also have to agree to tax increases to pay for
>the new programs.
You have stated exactly what is wrong with government, both state and
federal. People need to feel the consequences of their actions.
I know you have a few kids. It's a shame that they will be paying for
our heedless borrowing. Forever.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstei...@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
Steve Pope
>First, many are schizophrenic on whether high-density is bad or good.
>For a long time, the mantra was that high-density is bad.
The mantra from *whom*?
Among left-liberals and progressives, high density has always been
the goal. Jane Jacobs wrote her pivotal work in 1961. I do
not recall a time when the political left opposed higher housing
densities. Individual lefties might stray into nibmyism and
oppose a given development, of course.
>Now it's just
>the opposite, that towns need denser urban cores and more verticalness.
>Second, it shouldn't be any of our concerns, nor government's, about
>how to "plan" for housing. Let builders build on land they own, let
>renters or buyers decide to move in or not.
"Should" is a tricky word. Now that we have vast tracks of
unwanted, in some cases unoccupied suburban homes whose values have
crashed and whose mortgages have defaulted, some believe that
it "shouldn't" have been set up so that builders and lenders could
make a quick profit even though the demand for the housing isn't there.
Meanwhile, housing in Manhattan is at historically high valuations.
The same is true in other urban cores. There's really no question
that high-density housing is underbuilt relative to demand, and
low-density housing is overbuilt. This can only be the result
of the permitting process and financial industry skewing the
market.
Steve
SMS
What really annoys me is that one of the families in the neighborhood
that's paying 1/10th of the property tax they should be paying (due to
the clause that doesn't reassess when ownership passes from parent to
child) are the same people that won't pay the "voluntary" classroom fees
for field trips, supplies, etc. So they're freeloading on property taxes
and their public school education, and doing it a second time by being
so frickin' cheap that they won't pay $125 a year per kid for field trips.
Prop 13 and Prop 58 are here to stay. The state needs to find ways to
minimize the inequalities of these propositions.
I think the best way is the proposal to allow taxpayers to deduct 5x the
property tax as a state tax deduction, then raise income tax rates in
each bracket by 3%, along with bringing back a renters credit. This
would result in the taxpayers paying their fare share of property tax
paying about the same as before in total tax (property plus income) but
would increase the income tax of those paying less property tax than the
assessed value would otherwise require.
Al Eisner
> I think the best way is the proposal to allow taxpayers to deduct 5x the
> property tax as a state tax deduction, then raise income tax rates in each
> bracket by 3%, along with bringing back a renters credit. This would result
> in the taxpayers paying their fare share of property tax paying about the
> same as before in total tax (property plus income) but would increase the
> income tax of those paying less property tax than the assessed value would
> otherwise require.
And you don't think that would just result in another initiative to undo
it, and perhaps worse?
--
Al Eisner
San Mateo Co., CA
Jed
(Steve Pope) wrote:
>Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>
>>First, many are schizophrenic on whether high-density is bad or good.
>>For a long time, the mantra was that high-density is bad.
>
>The mantra from *whom*?
>
>Among left-liberals and progressives, high density has always been
>the goal. Jane Jacobs wrote her pivotal work in 1961. I do
>not recall a time when the political left opposed higher housing
>densities. Individual lefties might stray into nibmyism and
>oppose a given development, of course.
Mother Earth magazine, yurts, living off the grid, growing your own,
the Back to the Earth movement was pretty big back in the late 60s,
early 70s among those with proclivities to the sinister side. Although
you could argue that many combined Back to the Earth with communal
living, but even that isn't very high density.
SMS
You mean an initiative to lower the state income tax? I'm not sure that
that's even possible.
Steve Pope
>On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:18:33 +0000 (UTC), spo...@speedymail.org
>(Steve Pope) wrote:
>>Tim May <tim...@removethis.got.net> wrote:
>>>For a long time, the mantra was that high-density is bad.
>>The mantra from *whom*?
>>Among left-liberals and progressives, high density has always been
>>the goal. Jane Jacobs wrote her pivotal work in 1961. I do
>>not recall a time when the political left opposed higher housing
>>densities. Individual lefties might stray into nibmyism and
>>oppose a given development, of course.
>Mother Earth magazine, yurts, living off the grid, growing your own,
>the Back to the Earth movement was pretty big back in the late 60s,
>early 70s among those with proclivities to the sinister side.
This fails to point to anyone authoratative among liberals/leftists
who ever supported low housing density as a matter of policy.
If you can come up with someone on the order of Jacobs, or
David Brower, or similar reputation who advocated for low
density rather than higher density, then I'd start to believe
Tim's claim that the mantra among left-liberals has changed.
(If indeed this is the claim, I can't really tell.)
So far as I am aware, the U.S. trend to lower densities in the
last century was rightist rather than leftist; mostly a manifestation
of flight to the suburbs.
Steve
Tim May
<spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
...much discussion of yurts, Mother Earth, etc. elided...
> This fails to point to anyone authoratative among liberals/leftists
> who ever supported low housing density as a matter of policy.
>
> If you can come up with someone on the order of Jacobs, or
> David Brower, or similar reputation who advocated for low
> density rather than higher density, then I'd start to believe
> Tim's claim that the mantra among left-liberals has changed.
> (If indeed this is the claim, I can't really tell.)
>
> So far as I am aware, the U.S. trend to lower densities in the
> last century was rightist rather than leftist; mostly a manifestation
> of flight to the suburbs.
Fact is, many liberal types (negroes, Muslims in Europe, poor people,
etc.) migrated to large cities in large numbers in the past several
decades.
Many liberal politicians built large housing projects for them,
including such landmark projects as Cabrini Green in Chicago, large
tenement projects in Washington, Cincinnati, Cleveland, New York City,
Detroit, and other large urban areas.
This was repeated in Europe, where liberals built large housing
projects to handle very large numbers of migrants from Syria, India,
Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, and so on. They have filled up
high-density antheap tenements in all major European cities. German,
Dutch, Danish, and French versions of Cabrini Green.
Meanwhile, white people and Republicans exited the cities just as
quickly as they possibly could.
Look at the outcome. Those who live in antheaps live in areas of high
crime, drive by shootings, terrible school systems, and leftist
politics.
So, in a sense Pope is right: the liberals have long encouraged
high-density housing. The rest of us fucking GOT AWAY.
I'm happy to give him this one. The burnoff of 50 milliion liberal
lefty useless eaters is already happening. The completion should be
even more entertaining to watch. The burnoff of hundreds of millions
in Europe and other Islamist-infected regions will be truly fun to
watch.
Two billion dirt people basically have nothing to contribute to the
rest of us, and we are tired of supporting them.
Fuck them all dead.
--Tim May
Steve Pope
226"And were they not his?"
227Rom. 12:2 "But overcome evil with good."
2282 Tim. 4:3. "Shall they heap to themselves teachers."
229Ps. 81:6. "Ye are gods."
[230]"To your tribunal, Lord Jesus, I call."
231Wisd. of Sol. 19:4. "Doom which they deserved."
232"Most impudent Liars." See Provincial Letter xvi.
[233]Prov. 12:8. "A man shall be commended according to his wisdom."
==========================================================================
A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God
by Jonathan Edwards
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God is Jonathan Edwards'
own account of the mighty way in which God moved among the people of
Northampton, Massachusetts and other nearby communities in the early
stages of what has become known as The Great Awakening. There is much to
be learned from Edwards regarding the nature of true conversion and how
God's Spirit works in awakening and converting sinners. A Faithful
Narrative is reproduced here in its entirety with the hopes that many
will profit greatly from the observations of the greatest evangelist
ever to grace the American continent.
The Narrative is divided into three sections:
I. A General Introductory Statement,
II. The Manner of Conversions Various, Yet Bearing a Great Analogy,
III. This Work Furth
Steve Pope
that of his drunkenness has made intemperate. It is not shameful not to be
as virtuous as he, and it seems excusable to be no more vicious. We do not
believe ourselves to be exactly sharing in the vices of the vulgar when we
see that we are sharing in those of great men; and yet we do not observe
that in these matters they are ordinary men. We hold on to them by the same
end by which they hold on to the rabble; for, however exalted they are, they
are still united at some point to the lowest of men. They are not suspended
in the air, quite removed from our society. No, no; if they are greater than
we, it is because their heads are higher; but their feet are as low as ours.
They are all on the same level, and rest on the same earth; and by that
extremity they are as low as we are, as the meanest folk, as infants, and as
the beasts.
104. When our passion leads us to do something, we forget our duty; for
example, we like a book and read it, when we ought to be doing something
else. Now, to remind ourselves of our duty, we must set ourselves a task we
dislike; we then plead that we have something else to do and by this means
remember our duty.
105. How difficult it is to submit anything to the judgement of another,
without prejudicing his judgement by the manner in which we submit it! If we
say, "I think it beautiful," "I think it obscure," or the like, we either
entice the imagination into that view, or irritate it to the contrary. It is
better to say nothing; and then the ot
Geoff Miller
without truth, deceitful in heart, deceitful in speech; for which that
amphibious animal in fable was once reproached, which held itself in a
doubtful position between the fish and the birds...
It is important to kings and princes to be considered pious; therefore they
must confess themselves to you.
THE END
[1]"Abstain and uphold." Stoic maxim.
2Petronius, 90. "You have spoken more as a poet than as a man."
[3]"Nothing in excess."
[4]Horace, Epistle to the pisos, 447. "They curtailed pretentious
ornaments."
5Title given by Pico della Mirandola to one of his proposed nine hundred
theses, in 1486.
[6]Tacitus, Annals, iv. "Kindnesses are agreeable so long as one thinks them
possible to render; further, recognition makes way for hatred."
7St. Augustine, City of God, xxi. 10. "The manner in which the spirit is
united to the body can not be understood by man; and yet it is man."
[8]Virgil, Georgics, ii. "Happy is he who is able to know the causes of
things."
[9]Horace, Epistles, I. vi. 1. " To be astonished at nothing is nearly the
only thing which can give and conserve happiness."
[10]Cicero, Disputationes Tusculanae, i, ii Harum sententiarum quae vera
sit, Deus aliquis viderit. "Which of these opinions in the truth, a god will
see."
[11]Montaigne, Essays, ii.
[12]Montaigne, Essays, ii.
[13]Treatise on the Vacuum.
[14]Terence, Heauton Timorumenos, III. v. 8. "There is one who will say
great foolishness with great effort."
[15]Montaigne, Essays, ii.
[16]Pliny, ii. "As though there were anyone more unhappy than a man
dominated by his imagination."
17Cicero, De Divinatione ii. 22. "A common happening does not astonish, even
though the cause is unknown; an event such
Steve Pope
This is absurd; for since, though having faith, we cannot have virtues, how
should we have faith? Is there a greater distance between infidelity and
faith than between faith and virtue?
Merit. This word is ambiguous.
Meruit habere Redemptorem.78
Meruit tam sacra membra tangere.79
Digno tam sacra membra tangere.80
Non sum dignus.81
Qui manducat indignus.82
Dignus est accipere.83
Dignare me.84
God is only bound according to His promises. He has promised to grant
justice to prayers; He has never promised prayer only to the children of
promise.
Saint Augustine has distinctly said that strength would be taken away from
the righteous. But it is by chance that he said it; for it might have
happened that the occasion of saying it did not present itself. But his
principles make us see that, when the occasion for it presented itself, it
was impossible that he should not say it, or that he should say anything to
the contrary. It is then rather that he was forced to say it, when the
occasion presented itself, than that he said it, when the occasion presented
itself, the one being of necessity, the other of chance. But the two are all
that we can ask.
514. "Work out your own salvation with fear."
Proofs of prayer. Petenti dabitur.[85]
Therefore it is in our power to ask. On the other hand, there is God. So it
is not in our power, since the obtaining of (the grace) to pray to Him is
not in our power. For since salvation is not in us, and the obtaining of
such grace is from Him, prayer is not in our power.
The righteous man should then hope no more in God, for he ought not to hope,
but to strive to obtain what he wants.
Let us conclude then that, since man is now unrighteous since the first sin,
and God is unwilling that he should thereby not be estranged from Him, it is
only by a first effect that he is not estranged.
Therefore, those who de
Tim May
Id maxime quemque decet, quod est cujusque suum maxime.53
Hos natura modos primum dedit.54
Paucis opus est litteris ad bonam mentem.55
Si quando turpe non sit, tamen non est non turpe quum id a multitudine
laudetur.56
Mihi sic usus est, tibi ut opus est facto, fac.57
364. Rarum est enim ut satis se quisque vereatur.58
Tot circa unum caput tumultuantes deos.59
Nihil turpius quam cognitioni assertionem praecurrere.60
Nec me pudet, ut istos, fateri nescire quid nesciam.61
Melius non incipient.62
365. Thought.--All the dignity of man consists in thought. Thought is,
therefore, by its nature a wonderful and incomparable thing. It must have
strange defects to be contemptible. But it has such, so that nothing is more
ridiculous. How great it is in its nature! How vile it is in its defects!
But what is this thought? How foolish it is!
366. The mind of this sovereign judge of the world is not so independent
that it is not liable to be disturbed by the first din about it. The noise
of a cannon is not necessary to hinder its thoughts; it needs only the
creaking of a weathercock or pulley. Do not wonder if at present it does not
reason well; a fly is buzzing in its ears; that is enough to render it
incapable of good judgement. If you wish it to be able to reach the truth,
chase away that animal which holds its reason in check and disturbs that
powerful intellect which rules towns and kingdoms. Here is a comical god! O
ridicolosissimo eroe!
367. The power of flies; they win battles, hinder our soul from acting, eat
our body.
368. When it is said that heat is only the motions of certain molecules, and
light the conatus recedendi which we feel, it astonishes us. What! Is
pleasure only the ballet of our spirits