Okay, let’s get back to a subject that has at least some relevance to DRIVE. In “Housing Prices in the Three Americas” on the New York Times site, Edward L. Glaeser, a Harvard University economist, notes that homes in the inner-cities of the country’s rust belt “have had little recent price volatility and don’t represent the core of today’s troubles.” In other words, they weren’t worth much before and they aren’t worth much now. (I should note that in DRIVE, I refer to these places — Detroit and St. Louis, for example — as second-wave cities because they were transformed by the car in a way that many older, pre-car cities — such as New York City — weren’t. Nor did they experience their most significant growth after the car took over, the way places such as Alburqueque did.)
Glaeser goes on to talk about a Second America, the pricey housing markets of places such as New York and Los Angeles, “where land is expensive and land use regulations are tough” but isn’t willing to hazard a guess on what will happen to prices here because they are solely dependent on demand.
But he is prepared to be bold with his predictions about the cities of the Third America, cities “like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Phoenix, where the housing supply is essentially unrestricted because there is abundant land and few building regulations.” Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Phoenix, eh? These are classic third-wave cities and four of the most sprawled places in the country. “In the unconstrained markets of the United States, that Third America, there is every reason to expect that in the long run prices will be close to construction costs,” writes Glaeser. “If this reasoning is right, then prices have plenty of room to continue falling.”
My (completely predictable) take: sprawl is a bad investment.
Since there are elections taking place on both sides of the border this fall, here in Canada on Thursday night we’ll have to choose between seing Stephen Harper embarrass Stephane Dion and witnessing Joe Biden embarrass Sarah Palin. I’ll be watching the latter debate because it promises to be a lot more fun, but afterward the big question will be: who’s the biggest loser?
(A clink of my glass to the B-Man for asking the right question.)
“I do look forward to Thursday night and debating Sen. Joe Biden. We are going to talk about those new ideas, new energy for America. I’m looking forward to meeting him too. I’ve never met him before. But I’ve been hearing about his Senate speeches since I was in, like, second grade.” — Sarah Palin
So let me get this straight: John McCain runs on the idea that he’s more experienced that Barack Obama and then chooses the woefully inexperienced Sarah Palin as his running mate. When Obama agrees with McCain a few times in the first debate, McCain’s team puts out an ad that’s meant to ridicule the Democrat, but really just makes him look sensible, polite and bi-partisan, all attributes independents are looking for after the last eight years. Then as Palin preps for her debate with Joe Biden, she mocks his age — even though the guy at the top of her ticket is 72 years old.
These guys couldn’t run a piss-up in a brewery.
CBC Ombudsman Vince Carlin has released his review of a controversial cbc.ca column about Sarah Palin by freelance commentator Heather Mallick. Now, let me first say that Carlin was my boss when he was the chair of Ryerson University’s School of Journalism and that he’s a guy I like and respect a lot. That bias declared, I think his report is well worth reading for anyone interested in journalism.
Carlin concludes that “portions of Ms. Mallick’s column do not meet the standards set out in policy for a point-
of-view piece since some of her ‘facts’ are unsupportable.” But, frankly, I am not much interested in any sins Mallick may or may not have committed. Instead, I was delighted to read Carlin decide that “the CBC should not necessarily avoid having people of strong views on the air, but we must ensure that people of differing views are given a fair opportunity.”
Most of the commentary about Carlin’s report — D.B. Scott’s Canadian Magazines blog, for example — seems to concentrate on the perception that Mallick was getting spanked, but it’s the bosses at cbc.ca who need a really soft chair. Hiring a controversial right winger to spew invective along with Mallick would have given everybody plenty of insulation from angry readers and wise ombudsmen.
I certainly thought Obama did as well as he needed to in the debate last night, but I have to admit that I was frustrated that he didn’t try to tie McCain to Bush on foreign policy the way he did on the economy: when they were in the midst of the debate over whether to meet the leaders of rogue nations with or without preconditions, I really wanted Obama to say, “Well, we tried that approach for eight years — without much success.” Or something even more sarcastic.
But then I read these wise thoughts on tactics and strategies from James Fallows: “Obama would have pleased his base better if he had fought back more harshly in those 90 minutes — cutting McCain off, delivering a similarly harsh closing judgment, using comparably hostile body language, and in general acting more like a combative House of Commons debater. Those would have been effective tactics minute by minute. But Obama either figured out, or instinctively understood, that the real battle was to make himself seem comfortable, reasonable, responsible, well-versed, and in all ways ’safe’ and non-outsiderish to the audience just making up its mind about him… For years and years, Democrats have wondered how their candidates could ‘win’ the debates on logical points — that is, tactics — but lose the larger struggle because these seemed too aggressive, supercilious, cold-blooded, or whatever. To put it in tactical/strategic terms, Democrats have gotten used to winning battles and losing wars. Last night, the Democratic candidate showed a far keener grasp of this distinction than did the Republican who accused him of not understanding it.”
I will be reading from DRIVE at the tenth anniversary of the Toronto Freelance Editors & Writers:
10th ANNIVERSARY TFEW CELEBRATION
*** Monday, October 6, anytime after 6 p.m. ***
Featuring…
● An encomium by D. B. Scott
● A reading by Margaret Webb from her recently published book, Apples to Oysters: A Food Lover’s Tour of Canadian Farms
● A reading by Tim Falconer from his recently published book, Drive: A Road Trip Through Our Complicated Affair with the Automobile
● An awesome 10th anniversary TFEW cake
● Door prizes, including magazine subscriptions & special surprises. (National Post graphic columnist Steve Murray will be sketching a large, ink wash New Yorker-style cartoon depicting the freelancers swirling around him during the event which will be a door prize for one lucky reveller)
● Best of all, lots of serious schmoozing with TFEWers & invited guests from the business
*** We need you to R.S.V.P. (by October 1st) to RSVP@jessross.com so we know how much space to reserve, appetizers to order, etc. (We’re expecting 50 or 60) ***
It’s all happening at:
BIG MAMMA’s BOY
554 Parliament St. (2 blocks north of Carleton on the west side, in Cabbagetown)
“Measure for Measure: How to write a song and other mysteries” is a excellent blog about songwriting on the New York Times site. One of the contributors is Suzanne Vega and this week she offers a great post called “Tom’s Essay.” Without being self-aggrandizing, she tells the story — or stories — of her song “Tom’s Diner,” which, as she says, “wasn’t just a plain ordinary hit, if there is such a thing. To this day it is sticky with the modern issues of technology and copyright law.” Along with being often remixed, the song was instrumental (no pun intended) in the creation of the MP3. In fact, some people consider Vega the “mother of the MP3.”
The secret is now out and the proof is irrefutable: even the New York Times crossword puzzle has a liberal bias. OBAMA has shown up as an answer in the puzzle several times, while MCCAIN never has. Both BIDEN and PALIN have appeared — but the clues for PALIN were along the lines of “Monty Python member” or “Cohort of Cleese and Idle,” never “Alaska governor.”
Metrolinx, the regional transportation agency, unveiled a $50 billion plan for the Greater Toronto Area. The impressive wish list offers no plan for how to pay for 1,150 kilometres of new transit lines over the next 25 years because the authors were too gutless to call for congestion tolls or higher gas taxes. So it doesn’t mean much when Metrolinx chair Rob MacIsaac says, “The cost of not proceeding with this plan would be higher than the cost of proceeding with it.” He’s right, of course, but being right won’t get anything built.
Meanwhile, the Globe’s John Barber says long-term planning is great, but he’d also like to see some short-term action. He suggests a good place to start would be Yonge Street, despite the failure of the pedestrian mall the city tried on a section of the main street when I was a kid. “There would be no need to close Yonge to cars to make a major difference,” writes Barber. “Devoting two of the lanes to bicycles, with landscaped buffers separating them from the car lanes and wider sidewalks for pedestrians, would be a healthy middle ground with a more balanced mix of uses than the old mall afforded.”
I was an early fan of AMC’s Mad Men and was delighted to see that in the second season the show touches on cars and the messages they send when Don Draper buys a 1962 Cadillac Coupe de Ville.
When he first visits the showroom, Draper
decides against even test driving it. This leads to a flashback scene
in which he is a young car salesman. But as soon as his bosses
put him on a museum board, he realizes he needs that Caddy.
Over at the New York Times Wheels blog, there’s been a discussion about whether the Draper picked the right car.
John McCain has thirteen cars, according to this CNN story. Barack Obama has one, a Ford Escape Hybrid.
Sunday, September 21 is World Car Free Day. Here’s what Streets are for People! is planning in T.O:
THREE WAYS TO PARTY
PARKING METER PARTIES - What can you do with a 6′x12′ parking space?
Queen St. West - from Bathurst St. to Trinity Bellwoods Park
All day - pay for a parking spot then breathe culture back into public space normally used for car storage. Bring a band and play music, have a picnic, play games, whatever you like. The space is yours for only $2/hour.
BELLS ON BLOOR - Bike Ride
4pm - meet at Bloor and Spadina for a special critical mass style ride, then join up with parade.
PARADE - 4th annual parade down Queen St.
4pm - meet at south gates of Trinity Bellwoods Park
5pm - Parade east to Old City HallBring horns and bells and drums. Bring your friends. Bring your mums. Bring bikes and trikes and things that are silly. Bring costumes and banners and wings that are frilly. Bring sense of humour, and sense of fun. We’ll party like our team just won. (ok-that’s enough. You get the idea.)
Don’t miss the surprise when three parties meet!
Sarah Gilbert gave up a Mercedes ML320 for a bike and some bus tickets. Twenty-seven months later, she reports, she has “saved thousands of dollars and become an entirely new person; happier, more balanced, and much more muscular.” If the comments are any indication, plenty of Americans would like to do the same thing — if only they lived near good public transit.
I hope to check out this exhibit:
Automotivology
Photographs by Anthony Tremblay
Automotivology’ features photographs taken of automobiles seen on road trips around North America. Tremblay suggests that as society’s relationship with the automobile has shifted from adaptation to dependence, automobiles have come to symbolize societal beliefs and values.
Sept 17-28 2008
Opening Reception 7-10pm, Thursday Sept 18
Gallery 1313 is at 1313A Queen Street West in Toronto
Hours: Wed-Sun 1-6pm
Ever since GM first announced plans to introduce a plug-in hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, some skeptics have doubted the company could do it by 2010 (and some doubted the company could do it all). But according to this Toronto Star piece, which includes a Q&A with vice-chairman and head of global product development Bob Lutz, the Volt is ahead of schedule: “About 50 pre-production Volt cars will be produced this year, and more than a 100 next year. By fall 2010, when GM expects to commercially launch the Volt, several hundred of the cars will have been road-tested in all seasons, all conditions. GM is betting the Volt can help it leapfrog Toyota and its successful Prius.”
Toronto is finally growing up — at least when it comes to housing. In fact, there are now 99 high-rise buildings going up in the city, second most on the continent, after only New York, according to this column by the Globe and Mail’s John Barber. “Today Toronto is unquestionably a city of apartments, extremely compact in its core, with steadily intensifying suburbs,” concludes Barber. “The sprawl that seemed to characterize it for so long was never as bad as it seemed, at least in comparison with similar U.S. cities - and now it has stopped.”
I’ll be on Driving with Zack Spencer talking about DRIVE and we’ll apparently be taking calls.
The Corus Radio show is heard across Canada on CKNW-Vancouver, CFAX-Victoria, CHNL-Kamloops, CKOV-Kelowna, CKOR-Penticton, CJOR-Oliver, CHED-Edmonton, CHQR-Calgary, CKOM-Saskatoon, CJME-Regina, CJOB-Winnipeg, CFPL-London, CHML-Hamilton, CFMJ-Toronto, and CINW-Montreal.
It airs live at 10am Pacific, 11am Mountain, Noon Central and 1pm Eastern time.
Okay, I don’t pretend to be an expert on US politics — just a fascinated observer — and electoral politics isn’t the purpose of this blog (Watchdogs and Gadflies was about political activists, the citizens working for change outside electoral politics). But sometimes I can’t help myself, especially when I see the media doing such a dreadful job. Andrew Sullivan has it right: “While the media demands that Obama respond to things he never said and never meant, McCain is not even asked to retract a bald-faced, massive, obvious, refutable lie. In the last month, McCain has become the biggest liar in the modern history of presidential politics. He makes Bill Clinton look like George Washington.”
It’s true — most media reports on the ads (or the Bridge to Nowhere or earmarks or any one of a number of other controversies) present them as differences of opinion when the facts are readily available to prove who is lying. Isn’t that exactly how Joseph McCarthy got away with destroying so many American lives?
After disgracing their profession on WMDs and the reasons behind the Iraq war, you’d think at least some reporters would at least try to redeem themselves. Apparently not. The sad truth is the media aren'’t elitist, they’re incompetent.
The subtitle for That Good Night keeps changing. When my agent and I first pitched the book back in 2002, we couldn’t come up with a good title so we went with The Ethicists in full knowledge that it would change. Once I started focusing my research on end-of-life ethics, I came up with That Good Night, which in retrospect seemed pretty obvious, and this subtitle: “Ethics, Euthanasia and the End of Life.” Lots of Es. I liked it.
Recently, Penguin decided it made more sense to go with “Ethicists, Euthanasia and End-of-Life Care.” I liked the change from Ethics to Ethicists and understood that while it didn’t sound quite so elegant, End-of-Life Care made sense from sales perspective. But there were more changes to come.
I realize that subtitles can help sell a book. Given the number of people who asked me what a gadfly was after Watchdogs and Gadflies came out, I’m glad we went with “Activism from Marginal to Mainstream” as a subtitle. And while DRIVE is short, snappy and active, it doesn’t give a browser in a bookstore much sense of what it’s about, so we needed to add “A Road Trip through Our Complicated Affair with the Automobile” — though even that created confusion: some people wondered what was so complicated and others expected a raucous road trip akin to the one in Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
Anyway, all this got me thinking about a great Ben Yogoda essay called “The Subtitle That Changed America” that appeared in the New York Times back in 2005. Yogada talks about various trends in subtitles, one of which is to make them really long — and that was before Robert Sullivan’s Cross Country: Fifteen Years and Ninety Thousand Miles on the Roads and Interstates of America with Lewis and Clark, a Lot of Bad Motels, a Moving Van, Emily Post, Jack Kerouac, My Wife, My Mother-in-Law, Two Kids, and Enough Coffee to Kill an Elephant came out. Yagoda concludes: “Elongated voguish subtitles are harmless enough, but I miss the time, not so long ago, when it was possible for a book to go out into the world with only a strong title followed by a few hundred pages of outstanding writing. That was certainly the tack taken by most mid-20th-century nonfiction classics: Hiroshima, All the President’s Men, The American Way of Death, The White Album, Elvis, Dispatches, Joe Gould’s Secret, The Executioner’s Song, Lillian Ross’s Picture, The Right Stuff, The Soul of a New Machine, The Kingdom and the Power, just about everything ever written by John McPhee, and a book that, were it published today, would tote a subtitle like ‘The True Story of How the Ivy League Elite Developed Strange Ideas About the World, Got America Into Vietnam, and Messed Up Foreign Policy for a Long Time.’ Back in 1972, David Halberstam called it The Best and the Brightest and then shut up.”
Oh well, I’m not Halberstam and, as of now, it looks as though Penguin wants to go with That Good Night: Ethicists and the Dilemmas of End-of-Life Care. Utilitarian, rather than elegant, but if it helps sell books…
Look, I’m not naive, I know that distorting the positions — and, alas, the character — of political opponents has long been part of the game when it comes to elections campaigns. Regrettable, but true. And Obama is certainly guilty too, but the McCain campaign is worse: in fact, according to this New York Times piece, the non-partisan group Factcheck.org, which does an excellent job, “has cried foul on Mr. McCain more than twice as often since the start of the political conventions as it has on Mr. Obama.”
But it’s not the number, it’s the nature. Accusing Obama of calling Palin a pig was just moronic (though it was a good way to keep the focus on the vice-presidential candidate, who has energized the Republican base, and away from the the presidential candidate, who was unable to do that), but lying about Obama’s support for kindergarteners getting sex education is nothing but slime. The bill Obama supported helped educate young kids about sexual predators and only sexual predators could possibly be against that.
But McCain, who once had the respect of people across the political spectrum, is so desperate and he went on The View and denied these ads are lies. Straight talk, my ass.