text:
The world has never been a better place. Don't believe us? Look at this chart
After the Second World War, as the global population started to grow rapidly, so did the number of people in extreme poverty.
Image: REUTERS/Barry Malone
Keith Breene , Formative Content
World is 100 years away from gender parity but these countries are speeding things up
There's no shortage of bad news, so how about some good news? Some really quite exceptionally good news, in fact.
While the world continues to grapple with wars, a refugee crisis and the reality of global warming, the number of people living in extreme poverty around the world has done down. A lot.
Two paths diverged
This chart shows that back in 1820, the vast majority of the world's population lived in extreme poverty. That remained the case right through the first half of the 20th century.
Around 1970, though, something fundamentally changed: as the population continued to grow, the number of people living in extreme poverty started to fall, and has been on a downward trajectory ever since. Around 2010, the figure dropped below 1 billion for the first time.
Extreme poverty is defined as living at a consumption (or income) level below 1.90 international dollars per day. International dollars are adjusted for price differences between countries and for price changes over time.
The progress of the past 200 years was achieved as economic growth brought higher incomes to more and more people in the world.
With the onset of industrialization and rising productivity, the share of people living in poverty has been decreasing, and continues to do so as further economic growth brings greater wealth.
So, where are the people living in extreme poverty?
This second chart shows where the world's poorest live. Most live in Africa, although Asia is not far behind.
While it is sobering to see how many people still live in extreme poverty in these regions, the good news is that in both areas, economies are growing rapidly.
Africa has a young population with a growing labour force – a valuable asset in an ageing world. In 2034, Africa is expected to have the world's largest working-age population of 1.1 billion.
India's growth is outpacing China's. Here's how they did it
It matters how competitive your country is. Here are three reasons why
3 reasons things are looking up for African economies
And Africa is still urbanizing, so much of the economic benefit lies ahead. Productivity in cities is three times as high as in rural areas and, over the next decade, an additional 187 million Africans will live in cities, according to the United Nations. This urban expansion is contributing to rapid growth in consumption by households and businesses.
Meanwhile, the country with by far the largest number of people in extreme poverty, India, is also growing rapidly.
The IMF predicts a robust growth rate of 7.6% for India's economy in 2016 and 2017, and the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017 singled out India as the most improved nation.
Reasons to be cheerful
So not only has the number of people living in extreme poverty around the world reached historic lows, but the economic conditions for those still struggling are actually looking very positive.
Africa and Asia still have a lot to do, but they are showing every sign of continuing to make rapid progress in lifting their populations out of extreme poverty.
Keith Breene, , Formative Content
More on Future of Economic Progress View all
China to leapfrog U.S. as world's biggest economy by 2028 - think tank
China will overtake the United States to become the world's biggest economy in 2028, according to the Centre for Economics and Business Research.
Reuters Staff · Reuters 11 Jan 2021
What Hong Kong and Singapore can teach Africa on how to become an economic powerhouse
Michael Geiger and Moulaye Ibrahim Bamba · World Bank 05 Jan 2021
Are we experiencing a K shaped recovery from COVID-19?
Kariappa Bheemaiah, Mark Esposito, and Terence Tse · MIT Technology Review Insights 22 Dec 2020
How expanding mobile broadband coverage is lifting millions out of poverty
Carlos Rodríguez Castelán, Pau Castells, Takaaki Masaki , and Genaro Cruz · World Bank 16 Dec 2020
Global Competitiveness Report Special Edition 2020 launch: follow the livestream
Beatrice Di Caro 15 Dec 2020


The deer are treating Gandy's Garden like it's their own buffet, here's some things that work.
Jim explains that the banana peppers and bell peppers turned out great. The deer got in, however.
Hector Morales planto maíz, jalapeños, calabaza frijol y mucho más todo guiado por la cultura y comida Latina.


text:
HomeBeauty standards for women
Beauty standards for women
2 beauty standards for women
3 signs of inner beauty
It is known that a woman's beauty is a relative matter, that is, it differs from one person to another, and from one society to another, but there is a set of beauty standards for women that many may agree upon, and that attracts everyone who sees a woman who has a set of these characteristics, and in This article will talk about measures of beauty of women, and there are standards of beauty specific to some societies. For example, in Japan, beauty is represented for them by soft women who have small parties and a smooth face, but in the Pharaonic culture for example, the beauty of women is mainly represented in the beauty of eyes and hair. [1]
Beauty standards for women are as follows: [2]
The beauty of natural features away from falsehood and fabrication.
Soft long hair, as some studies have proven that the owner of long hair is more attractive than other women with short hair, especially if the hair is healthy, strong, and free from the signs of split ends and refraction.
The soft voice of women, which indicates the woman's delicacy and femininity.
Long fringes and thick eyelashes increase the size of the eyes, and hence their beauty.
The wide eyes, where this quality is considered one of the most frequently used qualities poets and writers throughout the ages.
Long and graceful neck.
Fine, delicate nose associated with the small ears.
Skin that is clear, clear, healthy, free from pimples, scars and acne marks.
Consistency in the body and weight, it is not necessary for women to be long, but more importantly is the consistency of height with weight, with the need for no increase in it, and an accumulation of fat in some areas of the body.
Full cheeks.
Little mouth.
Long and thin fingers.
The presence of dimples, which are pits in the cheeks or in the chin, gives a special charm to everyone who owns them.
The presence of a mole or a mole, especially if it is directly above the mouth.
Teeth arranged in a row, which has a healthy white color.
Healthy and shiny nails away from split ends and breakage.
Correct gait with shoulders raised.
Note: It is not necessary for a woman to possess all the characteristics of beauty together. We often see some women and stars who only have one or two of these beauty characteristics, yet they lightly managed to shadow the magic of the hearts of millions of people.
Signs of inner beauty
Among these signs: [3]
The cheerful personality, the lightness of the shadow, the permanent and natural smile , away from the artificial one.
Self-confidence represented by the balanced way of speaking, and the clear voice away from demagoguery.
The beauty of behaviors, literature, ethics and humility for humans.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Subject: Attention! Your PayPal account has been violated!
Someone with ip address 86.34.211.83 tried to access your personal account!
This Email with the Subject "Attention! Your PayPal account has been violated!" was received in one of Scamdex's honeypot email accounts on Sun, 27 Aug 2006 06:07:20 -0700 and has been classified as a Generic Scam Email. The sender shows as "PayPal Security"<security@paypal.com>, although that address was probably spoofed. We recommend that you do not attempt to contact any persons or organizations referenced in this email, as you may expose yourself to scammers and, at the very least, you will be added to their email address lists for spam purposes.


text:
Bitter Finger Lakes' apples primed for hard cider
Ithaca Journal
The next big thing in New York state's burgeoning craft farm-beverage industry may depend on bitter fruit no one will want to eat.
" 'Spitters,' actually, are what we call them," said Ian Merwin, a recently retired Cornell University horticulture professor and grower of rare and heirloom apple varieties at Black Diamond Farm in Tompkins County. "They are not apples you'd want to eat for dessert."
Hard cider containing alcohol can be made with just about any apples, like those in the Finger Lakes' nascent craft cidery business. But cider that could put the region on the map and match its success with farm wineries takes apples grown specifically for that purpose.
There's the Kingston black, for instance, one of those "spitters." Classified as bittersharp, the variety adds tannins and acidity. Apples such as Kingston can be blended with other varieties to make a drink with layers of flavors. The result is a beverage less resembling the alcoholic ciders sold like beer six-packs, and more like quality wines.
Cider-specific varieties were more common when cider was the predominant beverage of choice in the United States before the late 19th century. As consumers' interests changed, it was surpassed by beer, made year-round from easy-to-store grain, and by wine. Orchards shifted to apple varieties for eating, making sauce and filtered juice. New York remained the nation's second-biggest grower of apples, behind Washington, but cider fell by the wayside.
Hard moves
In October, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law a measure designed to stimulate New York's hard-cider business. The farm cidery law set up a low-cost license for cider makers creating up to 150,000 gallons a year and using only New York-grown apples. It allows hard cider to be sold at more retail locations as well as fairs throughout the state.
The law exempts cideries from collecting sales tax information, defines cider as up to 8.5 percent alcohol by volume, and allows the use of other related fruits such as pears for fermentation and flavor.
It also notes that farm cideries also might sell related farm products such as fresh apples, sweet cider and fruit jams to tap the tourist trade. Like other farm winery, brewery and distillery licenses, the law is intended to stimulate a native value-added agricultural product that also can bolster the tourism industry.
Several cideries are operating under older licenses, such as the farm winery law. But those in the business, and those looking to enter it, say the law can help the region and state meet their apple-growing promise.
"This area in particular, the Finger Lakes, really is a region where there's so much potential," said Autumn Stoscheck, of Eve's Cidery in Van Etten, Chemung County. "It has one of the best apple-growing climates in the world, in my opinion, and also already a sort of atmosphere of people being interested in local agricultural products. And I think this is going be a region where you see it sort of put itself on the map as one of the places that emerges as a cider area."
Six-pack or 750 ml?
When Merwin asked a class of 130 Cornell University students this fall if they'd ever had hard cider, nearly all raised their hands, in contrast to years ago, when maybe 10 had tried it. However, most of them probably had consumed what Merwin calls industrial-style ciders manufactured by a beverage conglomerate and sold in beer-style packages. Such mass-produced hard ciders, Merwin said, are typically made from fruit concentrate, perhaps with alcohol from some other source and apple flavors added in the manufacturing process, quite unlike the craft cider made in small batches.
But that's OK, he said.
"People start drinking sort of cheap sweet pop wines, and then you know, some of those people sort of get more and more interested in it, and they want to try something different or better," Merwin said. "Most of us think that we're going to have, over time, more and more people who are willing to pay 10 bucks for a 750-milliliter bottle, and know something about ciders and things like pairing ciders with foods. I think that's the trajectory that this is gonna take."
Stephen Wood sees it the same way. Wood is the cider maker at Farnum Hill Ciders, using cider-specific apples at his New Hampshire orchard. He is also the Northeast representative of the United States Association of Cider Makers, and he has no problem taking craft makers and companies that make what he calls "six-pack cider" under the same fermented-apple tent.
"People who like things like Woodchuck are probably not likely to like our cider very much, and vice-versa," Wood said. "The happy thing about this is it's easy for me to think of the Woodchuck people as colleagues. We're just selling different things to different people."
Wood could name only one other state, Virginia, similarly promoting hard cider. He expects apple growers will start offering cider varieties, just as many Finger Lakes grape growers a generation ago switched to varieties for farm-scale wine-making. He ships apples from New England to cideries in other regions for that reason.
"We sell this stuff for $20 a bushel, 10 times the rate for juice fruit. And we could have sold our crop three times," Wood said.
According to the 700-grower New York Apple Association, the state's official marketing agency, the price paid to farmers for apples for applesauce is about 10 cents a pound, four to seven cents for juice and sweet cider, and for fresh-eating, 30 to 45 cents.
DWHill@Gannett.com


Click on the links below to download some useful Member forms.
All forms are in Adobe pdf format.
Once the form is completed, please hand into a member of staff in any of the Core Credit Union offices for processing. If you have any questions or need any help completing the form please ask a member of staff for help. These forms are also available in any of the Core Credit Union offices.
Core Credit Union is here to help you, the Member, not to make profit for someone else. It's the money that Members save that provides the money to lend to other Members. Core Credit Union encourages you to manage your money carefully by structuring loans around your needs and your ability to repay.


text:
✉ Subscribe to our newsletters
Transitioning From Puget Sound Oil Refineries
A Federal Child Credit, Explained
Fairer Elections in Portland
How Oregonians Re-Legalized 'Missing Middle' Housing Statewide
Introduction to Ranked Choice Voting
Housing & Urbanism
Farms & Forests
Strategic Messaging
Transportation & Transit
The Thin Green Line
Directors & Advisors
Our Equity Commitment
Ways to Support Us
Gratitude Reports & Financials
Sightline Speakers
Alaska British Columbia Oregon Washington
Climate & Energy Democracy Economy & Jobs Environment Farms & Forests Housing & Urbanism Strategic Messaging Sustainable Living Thin Green Line Transportation & Transit
Alan Durning Anna Fahey Aven Frey Dan Bertolet Kristin Eberhard Margaret Morales Michael Andersen Tarika Powell
Making Sustainability Legal
HALA and the $100,000 Question
What kind of city does Seattle want to be?
Author: Alan Durning
(@) on July 13, 2015 at 11:30 am
This article is part of the series Making Sustainability Legal
In the last ten months, Zillow says my house in Seattle's Ballard neighborhood has appreciated by more than $100,000. Seattle has about 135,000 houses like mine. The owners of every one of them have been getting richer daily from the city's housing affordability crisis. One person's affordability "housing emergency," in other words, is another person's cha-ching.
That's the harsh economic and political reality that made the Seattle Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA) committee, on which I've served with 27 other Seattleites during these last ten months of surging home values, such a challenging undertaking: demand for housing in Seattle is white hot, property owners are making money hand over fist, and low-income families are getting squeezed out. But do the privileged in Seattle actually want housing to be more affordable? Is there any political coalition with enough power to overcome the desire among 135,000 homeowners for the next $100,000?
As of this hour, HALA is done, its report released, and the ban its members agreed to on public comment is over. So I can finally say some things publicly about HALA. For months, I wondered if I'd be publishing a detailed critique of the process and outcomes at this point: it's been an extended hair-pull. But to my delight, HALA did better—much better—at rising to this fundamental challenge than I expected. I'm not saying I love every one of HALA's 65 recommendations. I don't. That's the nature of a 28-person compromise.
The heart of the plan, however, stands a better chance of working, economically and politically, than anything I expected to emerge from our deliberations; it could prove a breakthrough in the quest for equitable, climate-friendly cities. It stands a chance of countering the self-interest of property owners.
Much More Housing
The crux of the HALA plan is to allow much more housing construction while also requiring developers to build—and raising taxes to pay for nonprofits to build—at least three times as many apartments per year that are affordable to low-income people.
"What makes Seattle Seattle is not the particular blend of ramblers and Craftsmans on 5,000 square-foot lots. What makes Seattle Seattle is that it is a welcoming green city for all classes, races, and ages."
The plan unleashes the private housing market by changing zoning, parking, and building rules and streamlining the processes the city uses for permitting and for environmental and historic preservation reviews—processes that NIMBYs have perverted from their true purpose into means of stopping construction. It includes many of Sightline's past recommendations on parking (parking benefit districts and parking "cap-and-trade," for example) and housing (more backyard cottages and in-law apartments, more neo-rooming houses, and fewer restrictions on shared housing).
It also includes many other strategies that complement and expand them: extending the boundaries of urban villages (designated growth zones, where taller buildings are paired with frequent transit, parks, and shops); updating antiquated fire codes that have kept buildings shorter because hook-and-ladder companies once couldn't reach any higher; adding subsidized housing around parks and reservoirs and above the parking lots of high schools and community centers; and more. These strategies for compact growth should win accolades from urbanists and sprawl fighters. They deserve rhapsodies from climate hawks, because density may be the most important part of beyond-carbon living.
The HALA consensus—the new starting place in Seattle housing politics—is that the only way to hold onto Seattle's fundamental values of opportunity, inclusion, and livability is to stop denying the reality of market pressures for growth. More limits on housing will not stop the growth of my property value; it will speed it. The opportunity to live affordably in the city depends on building much more housing.
To hold onto our values, HALA is saying, we must let Seattle's housing stock change: physically. It'll become more like Amsterdam or Paris, less like Sammamish or 1978. What makes Seattle Seattle is not its current particular blend of ramblers and Craftsmans on 5,000 square-foot lots. What makes Seattle Seattle is that it is a welcoming green city for all classes, races, and ages. To hold onto the latter, we have to let the former evolve. If we do, we can again be a city where everyone—barista or brogrammer, home health aide or harp teacher, roofer or retiree—can find a place to live.
Replacing the "Linkage Fee"
"Mandatory inclusionary zoning (MIZ)" is the beating heart of the HALA plan. It couples permission for taller, bigger buildings (aka, "upzones") in much of the city with mandates on developers: under MIZ, for example, four-story zones become six-story zones, but developers must reserve a large share of the additional apartments for low-income households. Under MIZ, building more market-rate housing automatically generates more affordable housing too.
MIZ is HALA's alternative to the city council's proposed linkage fee—a stiff tax on construction of new commercial and multifamily residential buildings that would fund subsidized housing. MIZ builds substantially more subsidized housing than would the linkage fee. It also increases the supply of market-rate housing substantially. What's more, MIZ means that Seattle will build affordable housing in the same neighborhoods—indeed, the same buildings—where market demand is strongest. And it means that the entire development industry, not just the city's nonprofit housing developers, will marshal its forces to provide affordable housing.
Find this article interesting? Support more research like this with a gift!
The "more housing, more affordability" approach is not limited to mandatory inclusionary zoning. Read HALA's 65 strategies and you'll find echoes of it again and again. A few examples:
HALA's parking reforms relax off-street parking quotas and better-manage public curb spaces, so that parking requirements are no longer a brake on the supply of housing. One person's curb parking should never matter more than another person's housing.
HALA's redoubled commitment to preserving large buildings of old, inexpensive, private apartments—through repair subsidies, a new tax exemption, and even public purchase—all paid for (by us Zillow-rich homeowners) with an increased affordable housing property tax levy.
HALA's plan for strengthened transitional assistance to displaced renters, including bigger cash grants and better counseling and referral services, again paid for by taxes that recoup some of the wealth that housing price escalation is showering on developers and property owners.
HALA's stand for banning discrimination against prospective tenants on the basis of past felony convictions, because Seattle's housing market should be no part of the "new Jim Crow."
HALA's call for everyone in the city who is benefitting financially from the hot real estate market to chip in to the housing fund for those left behind, through the housing levy, a new real-estate excise tax, and other revenue sources.
Changes to Single-Family Zones
"More housing, more affordability" is also the principle behind the lightning-rod section of HALA's report. That section concerns increasing flexibility in single-family zones, and it's the part that drew the ire of Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat when he published a leaked early draft last week.
Single-family zones across almost two-thirds of Seattle are, by their very existence, the principal barrier to housing growth in Seattle. They are economically exclusive by nature: scarcity means only well-off people can live there, and a large and growing share of detached houses in Seattle now cost more than half a million dollars. Their roots are tangled together with the history of exclusion by race and class in Seattle.
Still, HALA's recommendations for single-family zones are modest. HALA suggests upzoning a tiny slice of the city's area that is currently zoned single-family and that sits inside of or adjacent to the city's designated urban villages. Other single-family zones would stay under existing rules for how big their buildings can be. What would change is the forms those buildings could take. HALA recommends more in-law apartments, backyard cottages, clusters of cottages, small and separately owned duplexes and triplexes, courtyard housing, rowhouses and townhouses, and flats within single detached houses. The neighborhoods will feel the same, but more people—maybe our children—will be able to live in them, for less money. In some parts of Vancouver, BC, such flexibility has allowed a more-than-doubling of population density without any change in the architectural ambiance of the neighborhoods.
"More housing, more affordability" is good policy, in my view. It's not perfect policy. Were I the czar of land use and housing, and were politics and law immaterial, I would implement sweeping upzones, a stiff land-value tax, and a guaranteed minimum income, plus much more supported housing for the most vulnerable among us. But here on Earth, HALA's plan is by far the best we can hope for. In fact, it's much better than I expected even two months ago.
HALA's report could be a breakthrough, not just because it has sparked a long-needed discussion about single-family zoning, but because it presents a plan built on a compelling political logic. "More housing, more affordability" forges a new coalition that includes urbanists, affordable housing advocates, developers, climate hawks, and many others. Imagine developers asking the City Council to impose mandatory inclusionary zoning on them, while affordable housing advocates organize low-income tenants to march for taller apartment buildings. This new coalition could form an effective counterweight to the neighborhood obstructionism that too often rules City Hall.
It might even be able to withstand the political firestorm of 135,000 homeowners eager for their next $100,000 of Zillow appreciation.
Alan Durning
Alan Durning is founder and executive director of Sightline Institute. His current topics of focus include carbon pricing, housing affordability, and democracy reform. Read his full bio. Email: alandurning [at] sightline [dot] org.
To Stop Building Heat Islands, Stop Overbuilding Parking Lots
Yes, Even Walmart Wants to Build Smaller Parking Lots
Will Portland Finally Accelerate the Pace of Parking Reform?
Verified: More Parking Puts More Cars on the Road
Zombie Scooters to Invade Boise
For press inquiries and interview requests, please contact Steph Routh
Sightline Institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization and does not support, endorse, or oppose any candidate or political party.
You can power us forward on sustainable solutions. Make a donation to Sightline now.
Tagged in: Affordable housing, HALA, Housing, Seattle
Previous article in series: « "I Love the Change I've Seen in My Neighborhood in the Last Ten Years"
Next article in series: HALA and the Neighborhoods: What's the Story? »
One of Westneat's main points is that you need to build infrastructure (transportation, schools, sewage treatment) to accomodate more people. The simplest thing to do is to tie those costs to the developers and landowners who are raking it in over increased real estate values. It doesn't appear that HALA addresses infrastructure needs at all, though.
Yes, why didn't the (developer-heavy) HALA committee address impact fees? They are not just the simplest but also the most equitable method of paying for the transportation projects and school capacity needs created by increased density.
If you're talking about increasing the property tax to pay for badly-needed improvements, I'm fine with that. If you're talking about charging "developers" only (which cost is passed along to the buyer), I can't get behind that. If we as a community want to have more subsidized housing and improved transit and other things, we all need to pay for it, not just those who buy brand new housing.
I totally agree Eric. Impact fees are appropriate in greenfield development, where there was no population base at all, and now there is. In a city, the newest person to the city shouldn't have to bear the entire burden of constructing a new school. The new school/subway/bus/police station benefits all the residents, not just the new ones.
Eric said: "If you're talking about charging "developers" only (which cost is passed along to the buyer), I can't get behind that. If we as a community want to have more subsidized housing and improved transit and other things, we all need to pay for it, not just those who buy brand new housing."
Developers MUST pay impact fees.
I can't figure out if you're a shill for developers, Eric. But quite a few of your answers are seem so incredibly biased in favor of developers that I suspect you have a hidden agenda.
RossB
The problem is that developers just pass the fees onto renters (all renters) in the same way that sales taxes are passed onto customers. Of course the store could just pay the tax and not charge any more, but the store owner has no incentive to do that. No can undersell him/her. The same is true when you charge a fee for development. New developers must charge more, or it isn't worth the cost of building. Existing landlords can charge more, knowing a new building won't be built, because the costs are so high. Ultimately, the cost is paid for by renters.
It's unfortunate that you were on the HALA committee and yet left out this part of the final report. You stated:
"HALA suggests upzoning a tiny slice of the city's area that is currently zoned single-family and that sits inside of or adjacent to the city's designated urban villages. Other single-family zones would stay under existing rules for how big their buildings can be."
but the report also suggested (section MF.4) upzoning single family zones that are near arterials and nowhere near urban village boundaries. The Mayor's office released a not-very-detailed map showing this.
But the bigger picture is that the 6% of homes in the upzoned single family areas will suffer a decline in property values, increased construction noise, and other ills associated with increased density, while home owners a block away will be unaffected. And this change will make little difference in the number of homes developed: given an average 10 year residence in a home, and assuming all homes are replaced with duplexes after a sale, then this would add about 450 homes a year, which is less than 10% of the planned growth in the Mayor's plan.
So, why was this proposed? I believe that it was a cynical attempt by developers to make inroads into potentially lucrative single family zoned regions of the city. If you only pick off 6% of the SF areas, there's less likely to be outrage because 94% of SF homeowners won't be affected. I guarantee you that if this is approved by the City Council, there will be further efforts to gradually eliminate single family zoning (as stated in the leaked proposal).
Why do you assume an upzone would decrease property values in the affected area? Your house will be just as useful as a house regardless of its underlying zoning, but the value of the land it sits on would increase because there are so many more lucrative ways to redevelop it.
"Your house will be just as useful as a house regardless of its underlying zoning, but the value of the land it sits on would increase because there are so many more lucrative ways to redevelop it."
Are you kidding? You're absolutely wrong, Eric. The value of the houses on my street would go DOWN as more and more triplex's are squeezed in.
Sure, to developers the value of the land goes up. But the quality of life for those of us living here goes down.
Those are two different things, though, aren't they? Some people like the increase in density, you obviously do not. But to suggest that property values decrease because the land is worth more sounds rather backwards. I can't think of any case where this has happened. Quite the opposite. Areas like Capitol Hill and Fremont have seen very rapid house price increases. This is anecdotal (it may be a case of price increases first, followed by new development) but this is consistent with standard economic theory. If you allow more uses, then the value goes up.
There are exceptions, of course. If they allowed a city dump on your neighbors property, then the value of your house would go down. But we are talking about a housing structure that went along with most of the development in the city (small apartments along with houses). Places like Wallingford are not exactly hell holes.
The other thing I understood from the report is that all Single Family housing will be redefined to allow things as large as duplexes and triplexes to be built on single family lots anywhere in the city. This isn't "leaving 96% of the single family zones unchanged". It IS a change. It removes Single Family Zoning altogether in my book. And doesn't do much for affordable housing either. The biggest benefit will be to developers themselves.
Could one of you summarize what this "6%" issue is all about? I'll admit that I'm more likely to read a lengthy comment section than the report itself. I've heard that 6% of SF zoning will be upzoned, and I've heard that all SF zone will be upzoned. And it seems this incongruity is the ammunition for the Westneat crowd with regard to the Mayor's defense of the committee's recommendations. It sounds to me like each side is simply referring to different aspects of the changes in zoning to SF zone. Am I missing a real nuance?
Alan, thank you for laying out your full analysis (and defense) of the HALA committee recommendations. I agree that the best part of the process is that people are being forced to confront how their seemingly benign preferences (easy parking, traffic, construction disruptions, crowded schools, ugly housing, noise) have some seriously harmful undertones, such as not letting poor people in your neighborhood, not letting different kinds of people in your neighborhood, high carbon footprint, making the city unaffordable to their own children when they grow up, and profiting personally through inflated housing prices when they sell.
I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that SFH in MF zones have decreased property value. All the evidence I have seen says the opposite. Maybe I just haven't seen everything, but could you please link in your source for that assertion?
A follow up to my last post: you used Vancouver B.C. as an example of where density has doubled due to infill development, but you omitted the fact that the cost of a single family home in Vancouver is now around $1,000,000 and prices for a two bedroom condo are running about $500,000. Certainly not affordable for a median wage earner.
In fact, are there any locations where population in a relatively urbanized city have rapidly increased and housing prices have stayed affordable? If not (as I suspect), then what's the basis for believing it will work here?
Sarajane Siegfriedt
To be clear, housing is not affordable in Seattle now. Developers have hijacked the term. One always has to ask, "affordable to whom?" Those making less than $20 an hour will not benefit from inclusionary zoning. Loss of affordability is the reason 70% of attendees in the three outreach meetings said displacement was their #1 concern.
Keep in mind that 20% of SF homes are rented, and rented homes are the only option for families who need 3+BR. The report has no real recommendations for family housing.
For both homeowners and renters, stacked levies are escalating property taxes far beyond the cost of living. We are facing the gargantuan $930 million Move Seattle levy and the $350 million King County Children's levy in November, followed by the ST3 and the double-or-nothing $300 million Housing Levy gamble in 2016. It is unwise to base all of the very low-income housing either on asking the State Legislature to further increase the State Housing Trust Fund $6 million (city's projected share of 2-year $75 million capital budget) or three other funding recommendations that depend on asking the State Legislature for favors they are not inclined to grant.
The report has no real recommendations for family housing.
Read the report again, with special attention to pages 28-29. The suggested reforms on this front may not be adequate to meet the full demand, but they're there, and they're not nothing.
I had to look it up, but the term you are looking for is "Ceteris paribus". It means "all other things being equal". So, all other things being equal, houses in Vancouver are cheaper. In other words, if not for the changes, houses would be worth 2 million.
Seattle is booming right now, and all of this development puts a negative pressure on rent. But at the same time, employment is booming as well, putting positive pressure on rent. Without one, the prices would change dramatically (up or down).
But generally speaking, the development in this city has been expensive, for several reasons:
1) It is limited to a handful of areas. These areas tend to have expensive property.
2) Development tends to involve throwing away perfectly good houses. This is because of the high value of the land and parking costs. It usually doesn't pay to add a couple bungalows and convert a big house to an apartment, because once you get done with the new parking, you are better off throwing away the house and just building bigger.
The new laws would change this. Adding a bungalow is very cheap. That doesn't mean that housing will be cheap — it just means that all other things being equal — it will be cheaper.
Mark Hinshaw
Excellent summary, Alan!
Paul Byron Crane
Good work! Now let's see what is eaten away when it goes to Council.
We need a more detailed map – with street names. Does one exist?
seaphotog
I'm with you – can't tell if my block is "upzoned" or not.
Fred, it has indeed worked in Vancouver, B.C. Years ago, when that city was experiencing it's own rapid development, it identified a number of single neighborhoods located meet transit corridors to receive a different kind of zoning by-law. Unfortunately, there isn't a simple counterpart name in the U.S. for what was done.
The City allowed each house to have a second unit built within it so long as the entry was to the side, not facing the street. That is much like our ADU ordinance in place today.
But Vancouver went beyond that by allowing TWO additional small units in the rear, accessed from the alley. Canadians call this "laneway housing." They are typically several hundred square feet in area and located above a garage.(Many U.S. cities used to allow this under the name "carriage housing.") These units are aimed at singles and young couples.
The end result was four units per lot but with the appearance of detached housing. Being simple wood frame construction, this kept the cost of rental units more reasonable. So that kind of zoning creativity has worked.
As a final note, Canada does not provide a tax break for owning a home. (Not to most other countriwe) The U.S. has only allowed it since the early part of the 20the Century. Over the decades this has been, in effect, a massive subsidy of single family home owners.
But, how affordable are these ADUs? This site indicates it's about $700/sq ft to purchase an apartment in the city center, so even a tiny 500 sq ft. apt would be pretty expensive. And, while a tiny ADU is good for singles or couples, not so good for families, no?
And one correction: the mortgage interest deduction applies to any kind of condo or home, not just single family homes. So your "massive subsidy" to single family home owners statement is just not true.
In my mind the right question would be: How expensive would things be *without* these ADUs? Basic supply and demand says that if there were less housing available, prices would be even *higher*. Living in a modern city center is always expensive, but these are helping keep costs lower. Also, even if smaller units are mainly good for singles and couples, it means that in some cases they will live there, leaving bigger spaces available for larger families who need them.
Two comments
1) No one unit types will accomodate all populations. ADUs are better for singles or childless couples and inappropriate for families. True. But 3 Bedrooms are inappropriate for singles and good for families. Being inappropriate for families doesnt make ADUs not useful for a real and growing population. We cant look to any one housing type as going to solve everyones problems.
2) The subsidy is real, in that it makes people who have wealth more wealth. Renters do not get the subsidy. Thus people with equity are getting a government break while those without wealth just have to deal with it.
You were looking at the site in CAD, not USD. It is already cheaper to rent an 1 BR Apt. in downtown Vancouver than it is in Seattle.
You are looking at the website in CAD, not USD. Vancouver's rent for a 1 BR downtown is already cheaper than Seattle.
You're ignoring Fred's point about affordability. Vancouver's increased density hasn't made living in the city affordable. This plan won't either.
Greg Flood
The tax subsidy for home ownership is absolutely NOT a massive subsidy for single-family home owners, but rather is a subsidy for the mortgage and banking industry. The tax write-off of interest will recover, at best, 25 percent to 35 percent of the interest paid to the bank, making some folks think they are saving money when they are still paying between 65 and 75 percent of that interest to the bank.
The tax code DOES, however, directly subsidize landlords and developers through tax write-offs and waivers of fees.
"Please keep it civil and constructive" is the wording used about making comments.
Mr. Durning starting out the gate with making everyone who owns a house in Seattle greedy doesn't really lend itself to civil conversation. He doesn't define "privileged" unless he means you own a house. (He also seems to somewhat accuse homeowners of being racist because redlining happened here. It's true it happened – I read up about it – but my owning a house doesn't make me racist.)
I live in Roosevelt/Ravenna so I know about density and welcome it. But yes, if you throw "rowhouses" up, you will change the neighborhoods. The backbone of this city is our neighborhoods (no matter what developers or downtown interests think). Radically change those neighborhoods and you will not know Capitol Hill from Wallingford.
I didnt get the impression that he said that SFH owners were personally racist. He pointed out that SFH were originally concieved as a way to keep out minorities, and that even though the current residents don't have that as a goal, they are still effective at keeping out minorities.
Melissa, since your comment and thinking is typical, I'd like to respond to it and others like it.
When it comes down to it, the correct economic choice for Seattle homeowners is to fight tooth and nail against relaxed zoning and up zoning. I don't think this is greedy (your words) but simply a product of sensible self-interest. It's the government working for you, as they say.
In terms of neighborhood personality, I hear this a lot. It seems that building greater density destroys a personality of a neighborhood. Is the personality of the neighborhood determined primarily by the age and architecture of the original buildings? Nobody seems to have a good explanation for what they mean. Why does the preservation or personality of a neighborhood trump the need for affordability?
You need to read Mr. During first two paragraphs – greedy is the right word for what he is describing. And, I agree to many things that are being suggested so thanks for ignoring that and saying "I'm fighting tooth and nail." I'm not.
I didn't say that the neighborhood is about the buildings – you inferred that so let me make it clear. The neighborhood is about the people who live and work there and make a conscious decision about what it looks like, feels like and how liveable it is. That's not about buildings.
And that last sentence of yours? Quite the twist of words because I think most Seattle residents believe we CAN do both. But this hurry up and get it done timetable makes some of us very suspicious. And, that some of us have been "abused" (that would be City Attorney Peter Holmes' word usage) by the Sisley brothers – for decades without the City doing, well really, anything – tends to make us a bit suspicious about what is to come.
You can't blame us for that.
I agree Melissa. What is the timetable for all this building? From what I have read most of our neighborhoods have enough housing to accommodate the population for the next ten years. Are we going to complete the rest in the next 5 years? Will there be a building moratorium after that? Or will there be a housing value collapse due to all this available housing. We should be going for slow steady growth. Not boom and bust.
Ooh, can I register my vote for "housing value collapse?" I"m a renter, with a working class job and a family, so all that home value appreciation some of you are enjoying will soon push me down to Kent.
From my perspective, a decrease in property values would be a boon to our thriving diverse city.
SlyMar,
Those figures about available zoning capacity are bad data. It includes unbuild but potential stories above existing MF structures. That means that a 4 story apartment building would get torn down to make a 6 story one. That almost never pencils out financially, so it isnt good to include those 2 stories as unused capacity.
David Moser
Melissa, no of course owning your own house doesn't make you racist, and the report neither says nor implies that. The fact is that like all American cities Seattle's defining land use policies were mostly enacted during a time of widespread racism, and the policies reflect that. The fact that leadership at our city is for the first time acknowledging this fact should not be threatening to you.
Well, During said this:
"They are racially exclusive in historical fact: their roots are redlining and racial covenants."
He points this out as if anyone who might buy in those areas is supporting those historical roots. And, therefore, probably doesn't care. That's how I read that sentence.
It does not threaten me in any way; I just don't like the linkage.
He points this out as if anyone who might buy in those areas is supporting those historical roots.
That seems like a deliberatively uncharitable reading. That you choose to interpret it that way says more about you than the words on the page, I think. I live in a SF zone, and I certainly didn't take from that statement any such accusation directed at me. As an educator, I teach college students about American history and politics. They know all about the classic civil rights stories–bus boycotts and lunch counter sit-ins and MLK–but they know virtually nothing about redlining and the role zoning played in segregation. It's just nice to see a part of our government actually acknowledge this shameful part of our history, rather than gloss over it as usual. There's no reason at all to take it personally.
The city has never enacted racist policies or any racist zoning, per the UW professor who wrote the book. Redlining was a policy of the banks, and was ruled illegal. Racist covenants were written into sales contracts by developers. Don't blame past racist practices on homeowners. Keep in mind that 20% of people who live in SF home are renters, and this is the only option for large immigrant families who need 3+ bedrooms.
Melinda McBride
I don't know where the idea comes from that Seattle never enacted racist policies. In Seattle's ealiest days Native Americans were barred from living inside the city limits. Chinese too.
If you are African American or Asian American or another group that was historically excluded from certain parts of the city, it doesn't probably matter if it was because of city ordinances, Federal home lending policies, or restrictive covenants.
These practices did not end instantly when fair housing laws were passed. Alan is right. Though long ago outlawed, past racist practices still influence the shape of our cities today.
Have you seen the statue in that little park at the end of the Streetcar line at Westlake? That guy got famous because he managed to talk the white citizens out of forcing all the Asians out of the city. The whites had forced them onto boats at gunpoint, and this guy convinced them that the Asians were too useful to get rid of. Seattle was not a bastion of racial integration or tolerance. It still isn't.
It seems like a leap to imply that because codes were written when there was racism, that therefore all codes are racist. My own neighborhood began as area covered in coal dust (my attic was covered by black dust) where low-income families could afford to live. It is far more likely that economics drive where a family chooses to live rather than race. The quotes discussed were inflammatory, incorrect, and likely intended to try to deflect opposition to the HALA Report by making folks fearful of being called "racist". The report is a give-away to developers.
I would argue that what makes Seattle Seattle is a combination of our varied single family neighborhoods and our access to so many beautiful natural resources.
Refusing to give up our peaceful neighborhoods doesn't make us selfish or racist. There are other solutions. Come back with these suggestions for zoning changes after the urban villages (and SODO) are completely built out.
Refusing to give up our peaceful neighborhoods doesn't make us selfish or racist.
The idea that a duplex across the street or a basement studio apartment next door would make your neighborhoods less "peaceful" has no basis in reality. Why on earth would that disturb the peace? I live in an SF zone next to an old, grandfathered triplex that rents for a fair amount less than anything else on the block. I know all the neighbors. They're great. There's an elderly couple in one of the units who are neighborhood stalwarts–they know everyone, keep an eye out for trouble, and even watch another neighbor's kids after school a couple days a week. They also could never afford to live in this neighborhood had the SF zoning come in a bit sooner and banned the triplex. The neighborhood would not be better off without them. What do you think is so awful about living near people like this? What public good would be served by preventing these lovely people from living in the neighborhood they know and love, just because they're not well-off enough to afford a whole house here?
Straw man argument. Couldn't you have the same neighbors if they lived in an ADU or DADU, either of which could be built in a single-family zone under current code? The urban village in our neighborhood has not even come close to being built out under current code, yet exceeded its growth target for 2024 several years ago. Developer self-interest is a horrible basis for setting city policy.
Greg, you don't seem to get it. You don't want neighborhoods to be "built out under current code". If that happens, there is NO FLEXIBILITY for the market to function. If that happens, you have a housing shortage and nobody can build additional housing. It is wasteful and awful for a neighborhood to be "fully built out".
You have to make the zoning *more flexible* than you want the neighborhood to actually be.
PS. No, those neighbors could not live in DADUs or ADUs under the current code. Please look up the extreme restrictions under the current code on ADUs and DADUs. For one thing, they allow no way for three separate families to rent from the same landlord.
Matt Taylor
So will this set-aside for low-income or affordable housing actually work? Because from what I have seen of recent new apartments in Seattle is that they are tiny and prohibitively expensive. For several years now, we have seen a boom in apartment construction in neighborhoods like Capital Hill. They are all over the place. And they run $950 a month for 400 square feet. I am all for more housing inventory in Seattle, but I am dubious about claims rent will come down.
Matt, I lived in SF for several years. Despite more apartments, the rent never went done. Fast forward a couple of decades and it's even worse.
More apartments will NOT make the rent come down for the vast majority of people who do rent.
Despite more apartments, the rent never went done.
San Francisco has restricted new housing far more than Seattle. It added very, very few units 1990-2010, and is only just now starting to them a bit more aggressively. The demand for housing in San Francisco has gone up much, much faster than the supply. The only way to keep prices stable is for demand to keep up with supply, not just a tiny fraction of it.
djw: Yet, as mentioned earlier in this thread, Vancouver B.C. has doubled density and real estate prices there are among the highest in North America. I will repeat my mantra: find me a city, anywhere in the developed world, where massive development has restored affordability to a rapidly growing city. It hasn't happened in other cities and it won't happen here.
Affordability is a sliding scale, of course. When you have a highly desirable rapidly growing city, where the growth is fueled by high-tech jobs, there's probably no set of policy tools, given standard political constraints, available to most North American cities that will get that city to the affordability level of Cleveland or even Columbus. But the variations within expensive cities are important as well. Seattle and Vancouver are both considerably cheaper to live in than San Francisco, and that's in large part because they allowed more growth to occur than San Francisco did. See also DC–it was growing fast and getting more expensive fast, then they started getting serious about adding more units, and rents have stabilized in the city and started to fall a bit in the surrounding suburbs. This isn't rocket science; you can't entirely solve the problem merely by adding demand (as HALA obviously acknowledges) but without a serious boost to demand the problem is going to be a lot harder to solve.
The Mayor is selling this proposal as an affordable housing proposal. To most people, including me, that means affordable by at least a majority of residents, which would mean that a household with median income should be able to purchase some sort of housing (a condo or house). According to Census figures, median household income in Seattle is around $65K, which would allow you to purchase roughly a $270K condo. If you read today's Seattle Times article, one of the HALA committee members talks of developers developing new $600K condos, which would require $130K of income, more than twice the median income.
So, no matter how you spin it, this proposal largely benefits wealthy developers and very well off home buyers. The Mayor also throws a few crumbs to housing advocates, but it's hard to see how you get to 20,000 affordable units in 10 years with this proposal.
But this attitude just doesn't make sense. You seem to be saying, in essence, "if we can't reach the full goal, it doesn't really matter how close we get."
I don't think the policy and political environment we've currently got has much of a chance of making Seattle fully "affordable" across all or even most income levels, or anything like the benchmark you propose. As far as I can tell, neither do you. Where we differ seems to be on whether we think getting as close as we possibly can to that goal "counts" for anything. To me it seems fairly obvious that it should–if, say, and anti-poverty program proposes a 50% reduction in poverty and only achieves a 40% reduction, in a sense it failed, but in a very important sense it was a whole lot better than doing nothing. This isn't a sporting event where losing 15-0 is the same as losing 15-14, these are people's real lives we're talking about. Seattle is better than SF on affordability right now in large part because we've added more units during times of growth. The relationship between new units added and affordability in the tech hubs in this country is very, very strong.
It seems obvious to me the closer we can get to affordability benchmarks, the better. Do you disagree? If so, why?
First, the graph you linked to is very misleading — it's comparing apples to oranges. With the exception of Seattle, all of the cities to the left of San Diego (Raleigh, Austin, DC+suburbs, Bethesda, Middlesex County) are low density regions — all less than 3K sq/mi, and all, by the way, dominated by single family homes. By contrast, Seattle is near 7K sq/mi. I'm guessing that if you plotted price as a function of density you'd get a much stronger correlation.
My argument is not that this program won't have *any* effect, just that it will have a marginal effect. Think about it: the Mayor is calling for building 5000 housing units per year for the next ten years. That will add about 1.5%/year to the housing stock, all while population pressures continue. The only people that this will help will be people on the upper end, with the exception of the indeterminate number (probably smaller than predicted) of low income residents who benefit from inclusionary zoning. If that $600K drops to $500K it will still be unaffordable for 75% of Seattle residents. So it's not a case of not reaching the goal; its a case of not even being on the same playing field.
The starting point of 7K density–low by and reasonable global standard for developed cities–means adding more housing wouldn't help. Your point isn't wrong; it's easier to build more and stay cheap when there's lots of cheap land around. But the overall effect of building more is the same, at a different level.
Even if all the new housing built ends up being expensive, it still doesn't just help the wealthy. The think is, rich people are coming, whether we build houses for them or not. Each rich person storage unit is one less fancy unit a rich person won't be bidding on.
Cathy Jessup
The HALA recommendations are a direct assault on what little is left of the middle class in Seattle, and a HUGE gift to the developers. They are the only real winners here. Oh and the tech elite which are the only class of people that will be able to afford the new housing created by the decimation of the neighborhoods most affected. As stated in Danny Westneat's article today, none of the upzone is likely to affect the wealthiest neighborhoods. But in less affluent neighborhoods like mine, doubling the housing levy will push out older, less affluent homeowners who have no choice but to sell. Developers are already salivating. Those of is in those neighborhoods have benefited financially on paper only, we only realize those benefits when we sell and cash out. The HALA recs are specifically designed to force that to happen sooner than later, and sacrifice the those who don't have the resources of a Laurelhurst to fight back. Older folks will just lose their houses sooner and head for the nursing home. Better to get those old people out of the way. How progressive.
Thank you Cathy I agree wholeheartedly.
I agree as well; I've been in my modest home since 1999. It is practically the cheapest home in the 'hood (which is another form of diversity–significantly less expensive houses next to more expensive ones). Soon (too soon, actually), I will reach retirement age. I've been a professor in the Washington state system, and I'm only, ONLY this year getting my first cost of living raise in ten years. I also bicycle all over–for exercise, for joy, and to reduce my use of fossil fuels.
Soon I, I who have paid taxes; voted on taxes for education, parks, transportation, etc.; I will be one who is likely to be tossed out of my 'hood at some point due to aspects of what HALA has set up. To echo the writer above, how progressive is that?
Finally, most of us wish to create affordability; however, density does NOT seem to equal that in the way it is marketed. We will have dense housing near sorely needed public transportation, but will that new housing be affordable? I find it an immense delusion to believe developers will develop affordable housing in any meaningful fashion.
Clay Shentrup
> density may be the most important part of beyond-carbon living.
> It'll become more like Amsterdam or Paris, less like Sammamish or 1978.
Oh. YES.
Thank you so much for writing this. Heartening and inspiring.
By the way, here are some pictures I recently took of Capitol Hill train station. I'm sure many here will enjoy them.
https://plus.google.com/photos/107090943568338203448/albums/6168608223864859393
Naïve comments about the funding for affordable housing. Right now it seems we mostly consider property taxes and taxes on developers. What about a small income tax (or corporate tax) that would make the basis much broader and include all the rich renters who are part of the problem (along with the corporations that employ them).
If you look at France for example, there was initially a 1% tax on all compensations. I think it was later reduced but it's still there and it funds affordable housing. If you compare Seattle with Nantes (Nantes is half smaller) they have Nantes Habitat, an agency that manages the public funding and from the data I have seen they built as many new units and renovated ones than Seattle does with half the population). The ultra rich corporations could easily fund affordable housing as could also the uber-rich individuals if they were willing to use some of their billions to fund impact investments. How much money would be needed, is needed? I bet any amount would be attainable from rich pockets (with a small amount of their wealth). They just have to decide to do it. Let us take Microsoft for instance: what would be a $100 million a year investment for them? pocket change. Same for the Gates Foundation of the Gates family…
The claim "It'll become more like Amsterdam or Paris" is at best disingenuous. I'm sure Alan During knows that those cities' public transportation systems enable the density. There is zero likelihood that we'll develop equal transportation systems here. We don't have the publicly owned space needed, nor the political will to finance such an effort.
So HALA is aiming to give us Parisian density without the Metro, without the trams, without the buses, without the RER, without the trains.
I was not represented on the HALA committee. It was a committee of developers and low-income housing advocates. They developed a compromise that worked for them. What about the rest of us? Getting rid of SFZ? What were they thinking?
David Kerlick
I was surprised at seeing higher Zillow, but it mostly means higher taxes and insurance as I am retired in place below the median income, and only developers would buy, leaving me with worse housing st higher cost. I would propose dual rolls for taxed, with a break for owner occupancy, and a so-called homestead exemption on the first $50K or so to make it more progressive for lower-income owners who live in their homes.
For the health of a neighborhood and our City, I will trust the self-interest of the resident property-owners far, far more than the self-interest of developers. I have witnessed the damage that a bad-apple developer can do. My opinion of the HALA report is that it places the future of our City in the hands of the speculative development.
All of the growth needed to meet housing needs into the future can be supplied under the EXISTING code, up to 250,000 new units. Affordable housing is existing housing. We need incentives for mom-and-pop to hang onto that old apartment building, or for homeowners to consider adding a DADU or ADU, not encouragement for more rampant speculation and development that the recommendations in the HALA report will create.
Under the existing, highly restrictive code, in order to meet all those growth needs, pretty damn near every existing building in every "multifamily" zone would have to be knocked down and replaced with a code-maxed building. Do you really want that? Because, Greg, that's what you're advocating for: slash and burn destruction of historic properties.
Patricia Malone
Every one of Seattle's single family homeowners is not getting as rich as you want people to believe Mr Durning. I paid $400K for my modest two bedroom home in the Ballard area ten years ago. It is worth about $75K more than I paid for it, if that right now. I have paid $35K in property taxes in that ten years. Add to that the fact that it would cost me about $40K in real estate commissions and costs to sell it and I haven't even broke even in ten years. Modest home improvements, interest, insurance aren't even accounted for in that. There is your ca-ching. Insulting modest homeowners in Seattle isn't going to help this cause and I am suspicious of the rhetoric behind this whole thing from saying single family housing has it roots in racism to saying modest homeowners are greedy all the while not one word of this plan touches the wealthiest neighborhoods in town. No wonder there is little support for the HALA committee.
Dave Danielson
I've not read all of HALA, nor every single thing written by Sightline about housing density and the cost of parking cars. I do believe in affordable housing, and in reducing the use of cars – though I am a bit less anti-car than this organization (which I have supported financially).
All of the actions to reduce available parking, decrease the number of vehicle lanes, add bike lanes and increase housing density depend on viable and available transit options. Seattle does not have adequate transit.
The actions taken to date are making the city a miserable place to live, and do have an impact on commerce and cultural activities. We need transit options first – not as an afterthought once the ability to get around is curtailed. People may be guarding their neighborhoods, in part, because it is becoming impractical to mix with others throughout the city.
Ralph Edwards
I have a desperate situation in that I am a 72 yr old male on SSI and Social Security with a set income of less than $9,500.00 per year.
I have lived in my own Apt. for the past 10 yrs, and been able to pay my rent every month without tardiness. However, on March 4, 2016 my Apt Building was sold and will not be able to afford the more than double rent increase.
I am also a Master Leather Craftsman with 4 comercial sewing machines for making custom leather projects and have all the necessary tools/equipment for the trade of my past 60 yrs.
It is apparent I'll soon be out on the streets without a home or a work place for all my leather equipment.
Is there any kind of hope for me and my situation?
http://www.re4leather.com
Any assistance would be deeply appreciated.
Please keep it civil and constructive. Our editors reserve the right to monitor inappropriate comments and personal attacks.
You may add a link with HTML: <a href="URL">text to display</a>
Sightline Institute's work is made possible by the generosity of people like you!
Thanks to Pat Ford for supporting a sustainable Northwest.
Subscribe and stay up-to-date on the policies and issues that impact your community.
✉ Sign Up
Becoming a Democracy: How We Can Fix the Electoral College, Gerrymandering, and Our Elections
Thin Green Line
Founded in 1993, Sightline Institute is committed to making the Northwest a global model of sustainability, with strong communities, a green economy, and a healthy environment. We work to promote smart policy ideas and monitor the region's progress towards sustainability. Sightline Institute is non-partisan and does not oppose, support, or endorse any political candidate or party.
Sign-up for our Newsletters
© 2022 Sightline Institute. All Rights Reserved.
Site designed by Pivot Group marketing agency
✉ STAY INFORMED
Subscribe to our newsletter to get more Economy & Jobs research, analysis, and other policy updates delivered to your inbox


PGA Status: Class A, elected to PGA Membership in 1997. Started in Golf business in 1992 in Pennsylvania.
Graduated from University of Delaware in 1989 with a degree in Political Science. Recruited to play golf and was a member of 4 straight ECC Championship teams. Member of the Sigma Phi Epsilson Fraternity. Golf industry experience includes employment at 10 different golf facilities in both Pennsylvania and Florida. Became a full time Floridian in 1997 and began working at Highland Woods in 2003.
Years of experience in the Golf Business: 10 years (Outside Services, Caddy, Assistant Golf Professional) Graduated from The Golf Academy of Orlando with a degree in Golf Operations Management. Worked as an Assistant Golf Professional at Old Marsh Golf Club in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida from 2012 -2014. Worked as 3rd Assistant Golf Professional at Hollywood Golf Club in Deal, New Jersey from 2013-2015. Worked as Assistant Golf Professional at Shadow Wood Country Club in Bonita Springs, Florida from 2015–2016. Joining the staff at Highland Woods in July of 2016.


text:
Q: need to find the number of Distinct records based on 2 columns of data in Excel I have two columns of data (Username and date) and I need a way to find the number of distinct records for each match of username and data. One username can have multiple dates attached to it, which represents multiple requests made to a system on that given date. I am trying to show only one record per username and date match. I need a way to do this in excel since I can't use SQL for this. I know I can use a Select Distinct in SQL, but is there a way to do this in excel?

A: I don't know your precise dataset, but the answer is yes.
In a formula: you could use index and match and count and sum. See an explanation here: http://www.get-digital-help.com/2009/03/30/how-to-extract-a-unique-list-and-the-duplicates-in-excel-from-one-column/
With the ribbon: you can use data/remove duplicates. Select your two columns and then undupe on the first column. If I understand your description correctly... And then add a count in your formula or select the remaining rows and see the count in the lower right of your window, or in the right up part of your window in the cell selection.

A: In excel you need to select the columns (Username and date) and then -

*

*Click the "Data" tab in Ribbon.(in excel 2003 it is in Data->Filter->Advanced)

*Select the Advanced in the Sort & Filter section

*Select appropriate action in the dialog box and get the distinct values in place or in different sheet.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Tony Parrott, our VP of sales, looks at how technological innovation has affected emergency call handling in the 50 years since the first 9-1-1 call was made.
Pierre Plangger reflects on the importance of call takers, and how technology is only one-half of the emergency call handling equation.
Get your free copy of the Solacom infographic, which explores the evolution of 9-1-1 — from 1937 to now.


text:
Carlos Sastre Candil (; born 22 April 1975) is a former Spanish professional road bicycle racer and winner of the 2008 Tour de France. He consistently achieved outstanding results in the Vuelta a España and in the Tour de France. Sastre established himself as a strong and stable climbing specialist, and after working to improve his individual time trial skills, he became a contender for the top GC spots in the Grand Tours. In total, Sastre finished in the top ten of fifteen Grand Tours during his career, and finished on the podium of each of them. Sastre never tested positive for drugs, nor was he implicated in any doping investigation, even though he performed at the top level of cycling.

Sastre continues to be widely regarded, following the Lance Armstrong affair, as one of the very few 'clean' riders to have won the Tour de France in the period from 1996-2013, as he has never been involved in a doping affair. In fact, with respect to doping allegations and admissions that have surrounded Tour winners in recent decades, Sastre has been called "Don Limpio" ("Mr. Clean" in Spanish) by the press and others.

Biography
When Sastre was young, professional cyclist Francisco Ignacio San Román lived in his parents' house during military service. Sastre was at first coached by his father, until he became an amateur.

Sastre signed his first professional contract in 1997 with . In his five years at ONCE he mostly served as a domestique and only managed a few wins, though he showed his strength in the mountains with several good results, most notably winning the mountain competition in the 2000 Vuelta a España.

In 2002 he switched to , where he filled the role of captain in the Vuelta a España and, until 2005, had a free role in the Tour de France. This resulted in his winning the 13th stage of the 2003 Tour de France, which Sastre won with a pacifier in his mouth, as a greeting to his infant daughter. Sastre finished 2 minutes 32 seconds ahead of team captain Tyler Hamilton on the stage.

Before the 2004 season, Carlos Sastre and teammate Ivan Basso trained extensively to improve their individual time trial skills, making them better all-round riders. They went to Boston to train on MIT's wind tunnel. This helped Sastre improve his Vuelta a España performance, ranking 6th in the overall classification, as well as 8th in the 2004 Tour de France.

In the 2005 Tour de France he was a domestique for Ivan Basso, and 21st in the overall classification. However, as the captain of Team CSC's 2005 Vuelta a España campaign, Sastre finally reached the podium of a Grand Tour, finishing in third place behind Denis Menchov and initial winner Roberto Heras. Heras was later disqualified due to a positive EPO test, making Sastre the de facto second placed rider of the competition. After the Vuelta a España, he extended his contract with Team CSC for another year. In May 2006 he signed a new contract which expired after the 2008 season.

2006
Before the 2006 Giro d'Italia in May, Sastre decided to ride the Giro d'Italia to help Ivan Basso to win, indicating that he would ride all three Grand Tours; the Giro and Tour in support of Basso and the Vuelta as team captain. In the Giro, Sastre's pace on select mountain stages helped Basso win the overall classification. Sastre finished 43rd in the GC of the 2006 Giro.

Days before the 2006 Tour de France started in July, Team CSC suspended Ivan Basso as his name was brought up in the Operación Puerto doping case. This meant Sastre became the CSC team captain at the 2006 Tour. Even though his main focus for the season had been the 2006 Vuelta a España in September, this Tour was a great opportunity for Sastre to prove himself as a Tour GC contender. Through the mountain stages, Sastre proved himself the strongest mountain rider in the peloton, beating Floyd Landis by one minute and 59 seconds and Andreas Klöden by two and a half minutes on mountain climbs. Sastre was placed well on stage 15, and came in 2nd on both stage 16 and 17, where he closed the gap to the then yellow jersey Óscar Pereiro. Before the penultimate stage of the Tour, the stage 19 individual time trial, Sastre was the second placed rider overall, trailing race leader Óscar Pereiro by 14 seconds. However, on the final time trial, which stretched 57 kilometres between Le Creusot and Montceau-les-Mines, Sastre finished 20th, losing several minutes to Pereiro, eventual overall winner Floyd Landis and Andreas Klöden, who took third place overall. Sastre thus finished the 2006 Tour in 4th place. Floyd Landis has since been stripped of this title, making Sastre 3rd in the 2006 Tour de France.

When he finished the 2006 Vuelta 4th overall, Sastre, who also rode the Giro d'Italia and Tour de France in 2006, became one of a rare breed of riders to finish all three Grand Tours in one year.

2007
In the 2007 Tour de France, Sastre finished 4th overall, 7'08" behind race winner Alberto Contador. He finished 2nd overall in the 2007 Vuelta a España, 3'31" behind race winner Denis Menchov.

2008 Tour de France

Coming into the 2008 Tour de France, Sastre was considered one of the favorites to win the race along with Australian Cadel Evans of Team , Spaniard Alejandro Valverde of  and Russian Denis Menchov of . He also faced competition within his own team from brothers Andy and Fränk Schleck, despite officially being the leader of .

Sastre had a quiet, understated opening to the tour. After a lacklustre opening time-trial, he remained relatively restrained in the opening mountain stages in the Pyrenees and opted to stay defensive and follow the wheel of his main rivals. This allowed his CSC teammate Fränk Schleck to claim the yellow jersey at the finish to stage 15 at Prato Nevoso. However, on the crucial 17th stage, Sastre showed his class and mountain climbing prowess, attacking at the bottom of the final climb of the day, Alpe d'Huez, finishing 2 minutes and 15 seconds ahead of Evans, claiming both the stage win and the yellow jersey. Sastre, knowing that a slender lead over a strong time-trialist like Evans may not have been enough to secure overall victory going into the penultimate stage, sought to gain an advantage of at least a couple of minutes over his closest rivals.

Following his victorious Stage 17 attack, Sastre took a lead of 1 minute and 24 seconds over teammate Fränk Schleck into the final time trial, although, more crucially, he had a further 10 seconds advantage over Evans, a man considered to be a more accomplished time trialist, who was widely expected to overcome the deficit and leapfrog Sastre into first place.  However, Sastre managed to hold onto his lead in the time trial, finishing the Tour with a 58-second lead.  Following his overall victory in the general classification, Sastre found it hard to express his joy at finally achieving a boyhood dream;

Sastre's victory capped an exceptional 2008 tour for , as they also won the young rider classification with Andy Schleck, the overall team classification, as well as 2 stages, the latter being won by Sastre, on l'Alpe d'Huez.

His victory was however criticized by Lance Armstrong, who said the 2008 Tour was a joke. Armstrong later apologized for this to Sastre.

Sastre and CSC could not agree on a new contract, so Sastre left the team at the end of the year.

After the Tour, Sastre ended up focusing on the Vuelta a España looking to double his victories. He later finished 3rd overall.

2009
Sastre joined the new  for the 2009 season. He won the high mountain Stage 16 of the 2009 Giro d'Italia, which had been called the Giro's queen stage, after seven hours and twelve minutes. His decisive attack saw him break free from a group of general classification contenders to get to the summit of Monte Petrano just under half a minute faster than the group he left. After seeming off his form in Stage 17 of that race, Sastre rebounded with another solo ride to victory in Stage 19 to Mount Vesuvius.
He then completed the Giro with a solid ride in the final time-trial around Rome to hold off Ivan Basso and finished 2nd overall.

In the 2009 Tour de France, Sastre attempted to defend his title but had a quiet year finishing 16th overall.

2010
In 2010, Sastre raced all three Grand Tours, finishing 8th in the Giro, 20th in the Tour and 7th in the Vuelta.

He announced that he would join Geox-TMC for the 2011 season.

2011
In the 2011 Vuelta a España Sastre himself finished 20th overall, but helped his teammate Juan José Cobo, who was later, in 2019, considered ineligible for results due to the use of performance-enhancing drugs in the period between 2009 and 2011, claim the overall title ahead of Chris Froome. Chris Froome was later recognised as the 2011 champion. Bradley Wiggins was promoted to second place, and Bauke Mollema promoted to third.

Shortly afterwards, he announced his retirement, bringing an end to a professional career spanning 15 years.

Personal life
Sastre is married to the sister of cyclist José María Jiménez, who died in 2003. Sastre dedicated his 2008 Tour victory to his memory.

Career achievements

Major results
Source:

1997
 3rd Overall Vuelta a Navarra
 10th Overall Grand Prix Guillaume Tell
1999
 4th GP Villafranca de Ordizia
 10th Subida a Urkiola
2000
 2nd Subida al Naranco
 4th Clásica a los Puertos de Guadarrama
 4th Memorial Manuel Galera
 8th Overall Vuelta a España
1st  Mountains classification
2001
 1st Stage 3 Vuelta a Burgos
 9th Overall Tirreno–Adriatico
2002
 5th Overall Tour de Romandie
 5th Züri–Metzgete
 10th Overall Tour de France
2003
 6th Overall Tour de Romandie
 9th Overall Tour de France
1st Stage 13
2004
 4th Classique des Alpes
 6th Overall Vuelta a España
 8th Overall Tour de France
2005
 2nd Overall Escalada a Montjuïc
1st Stage 1
 3rd Overall Vuelta a España
 6th Giro dell'Emilia
2006
 1st Stage 5 (TTT) Giro d'Italia
 1st Klasika Primavera
 3rd Overall Tour de France
1st Stage 17
 4th Overall Vuelta a España
1st Stage 1 (TTT)
 5th Overall Escalada a Montjuïc
2007
 2nd Overall Vuelta a España
 3rd Overall Escalada a Montjuïc
 4th Overall Tour de France
 7th Clásica de San Sebastián
2008
 1st  Overall Tour de France
1st  Mountains classification
1st Stage 17
 3rd Overall Vuelta a España
 9th Overall Vuelta a Murcia
2009
 2nd Overall Giro d'Italia
1st Stages 16 & 19
2010
 3rd Clásica de San Sebastián
 7th Overall Vuelta a España
 8th Overall Giro d'Italia
2011
 3rd Overall Tour of Austria
 7th Overall Tour of Slovenia

Grand Tour general classification results timeline

References

External links

 Official homepage
 Cervélo TestTeam profile

1975 births
Living people
Cyclists from the Community of Madrid
Spanish Tour de France stage winners
Tour de France winners
Spanish Vuelta a España stage winners
Spanish Giro d'Italia stage winners
Cyclists at the 2008 Summer Olympics
Olympic cyclists of Spain
People from Leganés

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
STF is pleased to celebrate the Cinema Eye Honor winner for Best Feature, Cinematography and Production and to welcome director Louie Psihoyos.
Description from the Sundance Film Festival:
Flipper was one of the most beloved television characters of all time. But ironically, the fascination with dolphins that he caused created a tragic epidemic that has threatened their existence and become a multibillion dollar industry. The largest supplier of dolphins in the world is located in the picturesque town of Taijii, Japan. But the town has a dark, horrifying secret that it doesn't want the rest of the world to know. There are guards patrolling the cove, where the dolphin capturing takes place, who prevent any photography. The only way to stop the evil acts of this company and the town that protects it is to expose them….and that's exactly what the brave group of activists in The Cove intend to do. Armed with state-of-the-art surveillance equipment, the members of the small group, led by the most famous dolphin trainer in the world, devise a covert plan to infiltrate the cove to document the horrifying events that happen there. Along the way, they uncover what may be the largest health crisis facing our planet— the poisoning of our seas. Part environmental documentary, part horror film, part spy thriller, The Cove is as suspenseful as it is enlightening. The final result is a heart-wrenching, but inspirational, story that shows the true power of film in the hands of people who aren't afraid to risk everything for a vital cause. (Recipient of the Sundance Audience Award presented by Honda: U.S. Documentary)
STF Screening
Feb 9, 2010 7:55 PM
Venue:	IFC Center
Q&A with director Louie Psihoyos and producer Fisher Stevens
Louie Psihoyos
What Does a Sundance Doc Prize Mean at the Box Office?
THE COVE and STARTUP.COM come to STF


At N2A we only use Sandisk Class 4 miroSDHC cards and we state on all our download versions of N2A. No other card will work or is supported.
Many of the reports we receive about problems turn out to be from users who are NOT using Sandisk Class 4 miroSDHC cards. Our support teams spend a lot of time dealing with customers requiring support who are having problems solely because they are using the wrong make and class of card.
During our testing, we discovered many other makes and classes of cards would often appear to initially work, especially on fresh setups. Then as the card got used, various issues would begin to appear. Some cards only had small issues that you wouldn't necessarily attribute to the card while others had glaring issues that stopped the card from working at all.


This space retail space is located in the fashionable area of Le Marais. It is perfect for Pop-Up Stores, Showrooms or Product Launch events.
With a vast frontage and partial display windows, this store is impressive in both exteriors and interiors. The space is divided over two floors with modern white walls, spotlights, wooden floors and a modular layout. This boutique has a welcoming atmosphere and also has a private courtyard. Available to rent partially or entirely, this space is flexible and easily convertible making it suited to brands looking to transform a space and make it their own.
Located in a prime area of Le Marais, close to République and Arts et Métiers, this space benefits from good foot traffic from a trendy demographic of shoppers and tourists alike.


text:
Happy birthday Phil Morris, born April 4, 1959.
Posted by travelingwithjim on April 4, 2019
Posted in: April, marvel, Random Movie, Random TV, Smallville, Star Trek, star trek deep space nine, Star Trek Voyager, Uncategorized, x-men.	Leave a comment
Phil Morris is an actor who has made appearances in the original Star Trek, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager. He also appeared in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. The characters he played in Star Trek were three Humans, a Klingon and a Jem'Hadar.
Morris is the son of the late Greg Morris, who played Barney Collier on the 1960s-70s spy series Mission: Impossible, which was filmed at the same studio where TOS (and, specifically, the Phil Morris episode, "Miri") was filmed. His sister is Iona Morris.
Morris shares an acting coach (John Lehne) with Robert Picardo, who directed him during his appearance in VOY: "One Small Step".
His television guest appearances include roles on Cheers, Babylon 5, Smallville, Murder, She Wrote and, in his best known role, as lawyer Jackie Chiles on Seinfeld (copulating with Teri Hatcher's character in the series finale).
Phil later starred as Grant Collier (Barney Collier's son) in the 1988-90 television remake of Mission: Impossible.
Morris co-starred with Leonard Nimoy in Disney's 2001 animated film Atlantis: The Lost Empire.
Morris voiced the recurring villain Vandal Savage on three episodes of the animated series Justice League, appearing in episodes with Larry Drake and Michael Dorn. He has also provided voice work for other comic book-based animated series, such as Green Lantern: The Animated Series, Ultimate Spider-Man, Batman: The Brave and the Bold, and Wolverine and the X-Men.
He has recently been seen in the role of Martian Manhunter on television's Smallville which has also featured John Glover, Robert Picardo and Felecia M. Bell.
#philmorris #phillipmorris #startrek #babylon5 #thesearchforspock #startrekdeepspacenine #startrekvoyager #smallville #missionimpossible #murdershewrote #cheers #seinfeld #atlantis #thelostempire #justiceleague #greenlantern #ultimatespiderman #batman #xmen #april4 #birthday #nerdnewsnow #therealnerdherd #nerdherd #nerd
← Happy birthday Estelle Harris, born April 4, 1928.
Remembering Frank Gorshin, born April 5, 1933. →


text:
Q: Minimum and maximum response time for the server-side action in Lightning component From the documentation, it is said that server-side actions are asynchronous in Lightning. So, how long will it take for the server-side method to respond back to callback function.
If so, what would be the maximum duration in milliseconds/seconds for the response to come back? What would happen if the transaction that will take a long duration than expected? Will it throw timeout exception?


text:
Spanish Black Metallers BALMOG have been signed by War Anthem Records. The band's third full-length "Vacuum" will be released on March 16, 2018 on CD, the vinyl edition is announced through Black Seed Productions. The album was recorded at Moontower Studios by Javi Félez and mastered at Necromorbus Studio, Sweden. It features the following tracks: 'Qui Immolatus Iam Non Moritur…', 'Eating The Descendant', 'Hodegetria', 'Vigil Of The Blinds', 'Inde Deus Abest', 'Come To The Pulpit', 'Gignesthai' and '…Sed Semper Vivit Occisus'. The track 'Hodegetria' is already streaming at this location. More about BALMOG at www.facebook.com/balmog-365630056846060
"Kingdom Of Nothingness", the new album from Turkish Black Metal duo ZIFIR, has just been released via Duplicate Records. The tracklist reads like this: 'Befog', 'The Relief In Disbelief', 'Mina', '769', 'Diabolis Praescriptum', 'Common Insanity', 'A State Of Chaos', 'As Weak As Your God', 'Abet', 'Echoes From Nowhere', 'The Ascension', 'A Crowded Nothingness' and 'Evoke' (CD bonus track). ZIFIR have existed for more than a decade and previously released two full-lengths and one split album with CULT OF ERINYES. All additional band information at www.facebook.com/zifirband


text:
Home » OddsUSA College Football Best Bet of the Week: Miami at Clemson
OddsUSA College Football Best Bet of the Week: Miami at Clemson
Jan 18, 2021 7:09 PM ET | By: Travis Pulver
Spread: Clemson -14.5
Moneyline: Clemson -625; Miami +450
Over/Under: 63.5
*Odds via DraftKings.com
While it would be nice to say the four College Football Playoff spots are up for grabs every season, it is no mystery who one of the teams will likely be—the Clemson Tigers. They have been one of the best college football teams in the country for a few years now.
You could try to argue that they should not start at the top every year. But when you have been as good as they have been from one year to the next, you deserve to be on top until someone knocks you off. During the regular season, there just has not been anyone good enough to get the job done.
However, there is one team that might be able to do the deed this year—the Miami Hurricanes.
Miami Hurricanes Betting Preview
If fans were expecting another mediocre season like they saw last year out of the Hurricanes, they must be pleasantly surprised with what they have seen this year. As usual, the defense is stout, one of the best in the country. But unlike last season, the offense has been clicking as well.
With the addition of D'Eriq King at quarterback and new offensive coordinator Rhett Lashlee, the Miami offense is averaging 43.3 points a game and 499.0 total yards of offense. King has been everything he was believed to be and has accounted for 893 total yards and seven touchdowns.
Clemson head coach Dabo Swinney had this to say recently about King:
"He's a great quarterback — he can do it all. There's really nothing he can't do. He can make all the throws and when he runs it, he's a running back. He's got that mindset of a running back, too. You'd better have your big-boy pads on. He's averaging 5.4 yards after contact, so this is a very physical player."
Having a good running back like Cam'Ron Harris certainly helps. If Harris and King can get the ball moving early, the Hurricanes will have an honest shot at winning the game. That will, of course, not be easy to do against Clemson's defense.
But if their defense can live up to its reputation and just slow Trevor Lawrence down, the outcome may not be what oddsmakers think.
Clemson Tigers Betting Preview
The Tigers have ruled the ACC and the national scene for year. So far, there has been little to no reason to think this season is going to be any different. Trevor Lawrence has been playing as good as ever. Through three games he has already tallied 848 yards in the passing game and ten total touchdowns.
He still has one of the best running backs in the backfield with him in Travis Etienne. When they two are on their game, Clemson's offense is virtually unstoppable. But they have yet to face a defense quite like Miami's.
However, what will be even more important for the Tigers will be how the defense steps up to the challenge of containing Miami's offense—especially D'Eriq King and Cam'Ron Harris. The front has been holding opposing running backs to 2.3 yards a carry and will need to do the same.
Clemson's linebackers will get the unenviable task of keeping King from breaking into the secondary when he runs.
OddsUSA NCAA Football Best Bet of the Week Betting Prediction
Miami is going to give Clemson a much better game than anyone expects. The Hurricanes defense will succeed in slowing down Lawrence and Etienne, but they will not be able to stop them altogether. Clemson's defense will have a similar impact on Miami.
If the Hurricanes are going to win, they will need to score touchdowns rather than settling for field goals. They can't let Lawrence start to build a lead; when he scores, Miami needs to follow suit. Most of all, their defense has to play their best game ever if they hope to contain Trevor Lawrence.
While they may do so for a half or maybe even three quarters, they are not going to do so for the entire game. Eventually, Dabo Swinney is going to figure out what adjustment he needs to make to get the offense rolling.
Miami makes a game of it but falls short in the end. So, take Clemson to win, but take Miami to win against the spread. As for the over/under, go with the over. Defense is going to win the day in the end, but it is not hard to see both teams
Author Profile on Twitter
@FatManWriting


Be sure to avoid some of these common, yet costly hiring hang-ups.
If your organization is on the market for a talented technology lead, be sure to look for candidates with some of these essential qualities.
If you're looking to overcome this barrier and reinvigorate your company with highly-skilled, diverse executives, review these specialized recruitment strategies.
Executives with the right attitude can transform entire organizations, facilitating innovation with each project they touch.
Employers have more open positions than ever before and are working with retained executive recruitment firms to fill them.
If you find yourself in need of a CEO to run your growing startup, consult these tips.
As you search for your next business leader, be sure to focus on finding someone with these salient soft skills.
The next time you find yourself sitting across from a potential hire, remember these tried and true behavioral interview questions.
While you may never be able to avoid some of the awkwardness that accompanies phone interviews, you can get more out of these interactions by following these guidelines.
Great executives bring to the table common traits that make them reliable, business-driving performers.
As you navigate your industry and look for ways to develop your enterprise, be sure to avoid these common HR mistakes.
To retain talented contributors with ample executive experience, you should develop a robust onboarding plan that facilitates engagement and gives new hires the tools they need to succeed.
Growing startups can overcome their fear of hiring by developing a plan and following some salient guidelines.
The next time you sit down across from a potential employee, be sure to evaluate some subtle, yet telling behaviors.
Though making the occasional recruiting error is unavoidable, you can improve your odds by identifying and addressing bad hiring behaviors.
As you think through what you might ask during job interviews, be sure to focus on these key question types.
Finding an effective executive recruiter who meets your specific business needs can be difficult. So, as you review your options, keep in mind these essential firm-finding guidelines.
To overtake your competitors and nab brilliant C-level staff, you should reevaluate your organization and make key changes to your operational and recruitment processes.
Before you draft a job description, familiarize yourself with some essential hiring guidelines for marketing professionals.
Businesses must sharpen their branding apparatuses to attract millennial workers.
These days, modern professionals search for purpose in their work lives.
Consider a few key strategies for establishing and navigating a recruiter-employer relationship.
Interviewers must sharpen their skills to meet the demands of modern job seekers.
For those who have worked with both HR recruiters and third-party firms, the advantages of the latter are clear.
Organizations young and old are changing their ways to attract professionals from this unique generation.
As employers spend more time looking for the perfect candidate, they end up costing themselves both revenue and talent.
A well-polished onboarding process can help combat costly turnover.
How do you know whether to hire a proven all-star or a talented rookie prospect?
Although they may feel like a chore to write, rejection letters are an opportunity to create a relationship with talented candidates you were unable to hire.
When it comes to attracting the best minds in your industry, the standard recruiting process will always fall short.