San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

If Americans somehow manage to choose a pro-life creationist global warming denier for a president, AGAIN, I'm moving to Canada.

I second that. Although if you go to pollster.com and look at the electoral map, it's hard to envision that happening. But it could...

........how cold is Canada? It can't be that bad....

This election could go either way. I don't think that either candidate is going to run away with a big majority of votes. McCain is banking on Palin bolstering the vote from women and blue collar workers. If he's correct, he would pick up enough extra votes in the swing states that could win the Presidency for him.

IMO: A win for either candidate means absolutely nothing positive for the future of America.......................just more of same of bullshit, feel-good platitudes and rhetoric that we've come accustomed to with politics. Good business people (like Romney) or people with solid ideas (like Ron Paul) will never make it to the Presidency because the majority of people will vote like sheeple and pick slick-talking bull-shitter's over solid candidates, every time.

I wouldn't start picking stocks based on a post-convention bounce in the polls. Eight weeks is a very long time in politics. The race is just getting started.

The USA Today Gallup poll is more than likely an outlier. Rasmussen daily tracker is better gauge followed by the Gallup daily tracking. Rasmussen has McCain up 1 point M 48 O 47. All interviews were taken after the GOP Convention.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c...

With the "right track wrong track" numbers such as they are you would think Obama would be further ahead. It makes me wonder if the electorate is weary of another round of One Party Rule.

........how cold is Canada? It can't be that bad....

Vancouver is 5-10 degrees cooler in the summer, average January high is 42 F. It's a lot wetter than San Diego.

It makes me wonder if the electorate is weary of another round of One Party Rule.

It represents the greatest bait-and-switch of the 20th century, and the amazing grip that backward conservative philosophy of the Republican Party has on the "unwashed masses" (white uneducated Christians). As long as a candidate stands up and loudly proclaims "I'm a Christian, I believe that life believes at conception, I'm against same-sex marriage, and I'm for abstinence education", he's pretty much guaranteed a vote of a large fraction of the population, REGARDLESS of his economic policies. (Which policies happen to be heavily unfavorable for those unwashed masses). McCain has a 15-20 percent lead among whites without any college education. You'd think that people who didn't make it into college would be all over Obama and his socialist policies. Yet, they are voting republican election after election.

That's why I thought that Sarah Palin was a bad VP choice. She is a perfect candidate for white uneducated Christians, who typically vote Republican anyway. But she's too far right to be attractive to democrats, independents, and anyone who does not believe that God has created the earth in six days. These polls are suggesting that I was wrong. We'll see in two months.

Obama is becoming more and more of a joke. By the time the elections get here he will be lucky to get 40% of the vote.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ted9Hzn8foY

John

The public is blaming Congress as much as the White House for being on the wrong track. Congressional approval ratings are much lower then for President Bush.

Congress is ran by the democrats. When people say they are sick of things they are talking as much or more about the way congress has handled things then anything else.

Obama should be leading big now and the fact that he is getting behind this soon after the conventions indicates a big lost for him.

John

The public is blaming Congress as much as the White House for being on the wrong track. Congressional approval ratings are much lower then for President Bush.

Congress is ran by the democrats. When people say they are sick of things they are talking as much or more about the way congress has handled things then anything else.

The public knows very little about Congress and the way it has handled things. Their anger is directed at the government as a whole, without any particulars. President Bush is likable for some people; but the Congress is a vague entity with no redeeming qualities.

I'm stunned Ex-SD . . . a point we are in total and complete agreement on!!!!

I lament the fact that a slash the fat and make an organization lean and efficient genius like Romney will not get the chance to dismantle the dysfunctional beast which is the US government. This is precisely what the US gov needs someone like Romney who is skilled at IDing the "deadwood", firing the slugs, closing down branches/departments which don't work, and making an institution profitable/efficient.

Too bad the rank religious bigotry of the evalgelical Christian community torpedoed his chances. The disgusting bigotry exhibited towards Romney was some of the most "un-Christlike" behavior I have ever seen. Idiots and bigots.

Perhaps he will get a cabinet post. He was my pick as well and I do not think it was just the evangs. that ruined his chances. I think that Dems. voted in the primary for McCain to get rid of Romney. Be careful what you wish for. Now they have to defeat McCain. Serves them right for being political operatives.

This is what you call a convention bounce. Obama has the same bounce after his convention.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/p...

What I am saying, then, is that we should evaluate the robustness of the Republican bounce by how well it holds up to the currents of political time, rather than any specific date on the calendar. Specifically, I would want to see how the bounce holds up to the next major development of the campaign, particularly if it is a pro-Obama development. For example, let's say that Colin Powell endorses Obama tomorrow morning. I might expect a fairly strong reaction to this in the polls, not because the endorsement is all that important unto itself (most endorsements aren't), but because it displaces the GOP Convention as the most recent event of the campaign -- it pushes political time forward. And if the polls didn't move in reaction to such an endorsement, I'd think Democrats would have reason to worry.

I also wonder what will happen to McCain's bounce as Palin comes out of her bunker and starts making gaffes, such as the one today where she clearly has no idea what Fannie & Freddie are:

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers."

Of course we all know that Fannie & Freddie were private companies. You would think that the VP candidate should know that too.

There are still plenty of game changing events out there that can happen between now and the election. We still have the debates and major endorsements in the pipline (what would Powell and Hagel endorsements do for Obama's numbers?). Of course if we invade Iran, we might as well hand the election to McCain now.

Americans are wising up and seeing the lack of substance and experience in Obama.

No one wants higher taxes, a president who has a record of not voting, and someone who isn't capable of defending the country. The fact that he is a smooth talker means nothing to the average person.

McCain's service to his country is second to none, I think Americans appreciate that. Combine that with his rare ability to reach across the isle and accomplish things, gives Americans hope. Palin is obviously helping McCain as well. Looks like all the hypocritical left wing trash talk on her backfired.

Fannie & Freddie are not purely private. They are hybrids.

Oh brother, we're not going to start talking trash about moving to Canada AGAIN are we? Unless you are really going to do it, why do you say it? Are you always in the habit of lying or only when it involves moving?

Let me just state now that I am not moving to another country no matter which man I don't want for president gets elected.

Clearly, esmith and Mark Holmes are white people:

#75 Threatening to Move to Canada

So had they "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers" before or after the bailout?

hahahahaha, that's great! I've only skimmed that site so I totally missed that gem.

Hilarious. And yes, I am white... and wouldn't really move to Canada. I love the US too much, and it's too ingrained in my identity, having descended from pre-Civil wat Irish-English stock, but you get my point. I'm tired of semi-literate bible-thumpers running the country into the ground.

Hilarious. And yes, I am white... and wouldn't really move to Canada. I love the US too much, and it's too ingrained in my identity, having descended from pre-Civil War Irish-English stock, but you get my point. I'm tired of semi-literate bible-thumpers running the country into the ground.

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers."

HAHA.. That is hilarious. She probably got a standing ovation after that line too. I does not really matter what she was talking about as long as she said the buzz words "too big", "too expensive".

No one wants higher taxes, a president who has a record of not voting, and someone who isn't capable of defending the country.

I'm assuming you've seen this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

You won't have to worry about cutting grass so much up there. Growing season is a lot shorter!

My Daddy made me cut the grass every other day and I swore when I left home I was not going to cut grass anymore! Canada sounding even better now that I think about it. We can always depend on the US to protect us and we can always come across the border for medical services.

John

We can always depend on the US to protect us and we can always come across the border for medical services.

Also we don't have to worry that our government's meddling in other countries' internal affairs (killings of civilians, military bases, etc) pisses off Iranians or North Koreans and someone finally detonates a dirty bomb in LA.

As for the medical services, you must be confused. Canadian healthcare system is much cheaper than American and it manages to achieve superior results (longer life expectancies, lower infant mortalities) despite spending only half as much per capita. You're better off receiving medical treatment or buying drugs in Canada. Have you ever heard about drug-buying bus tours? American seniors in northern states sometimes go on dedicated bus tours to Canada to buy prescription drugs. They are much cheaper there.

If you want some kind of elective surgery like a boob job or an IVF, neither Canada nor the US is a good choice. Mexico is the best choice. Tijuana has a booming healthcare industry that provides all kinds of services to Americans. For example, Mexican dentists have similar training and equipment to their American counterparts, but they are five times cheaper.

TJ is fine, if you do not get kidnapped for ransom. Other than that, getting dental work there is a great idea.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/weekly_2...

This article is dated, but some things can't wait.

"In Canada's public-health system, which promises free, equal-access care to all citizens, medical resources are explicitly rationed. For the country as a whole, that works -- Canada spends far less on health care, yet the health outcomes of its citizens are generally as good as those in the U.S.
But the trade-offs are steep: Canadian hospitals are slower to adopt the latest technology, meaning patients have more limited access to cutting-edge medical equipment. There are fewer specialists for patients to see.
The riskiest trade-off of all is troublingly long waits. Once patients see a family doctor and get a referral for specialist care, it can take weeks or even months to get an appointment. In some parts of the country, patients waiting for admission to a hospital sometimes find themselves waiting for hours and even days on gurneys in the corridor, and receiving treatment there.
Waiting is the giant flaw in many national health-care plans. A study this year by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found waiting times for elective surgery are a "significant health-policy concern" in about half of the group's 30 members, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Sweden, Canada, Italy, Denmark and Spain. Waiting times weren't a problem in the U.S., the group said.
In Canada, the long waits stirred a public outcry and a government inquiry when a 63-year-old heart patient at St. Michael's died in 1989 after his surgery had been canceled 11 times. While the inquiry concluded the death wasn't caused by the delays, it highlighted the long waiting lists and called for better management of patients in the line."

Once patients see a family doctor and get a referral for specialist care, it can take weeks or even months to get an appointment.

Sounds exactly like my HMO plan. See the primary physician, pay $10, get a referral, wait six weeks for the appointment with the specialist.
We have problems with ER waiting times too, though they vary from place to place. There's usually no wait or very little wait in the ER in Pomerado Hospital. Rady Children's ER is usually packed and I remember waiting 3 hours with my son there, on more than one occasion.

I visited Canada about 30 years ago and thought it was a beautiful country, but I did not need any social services, I was only a tourist. The Vancouver area especially is very upscale and the weather there is not severe. If you have to have sunshine, it is probably not the place for you. It rained several days in the middle of summer.

To esmith,

Maybe you shouldn't generalize. I think Palin was a great pick and I am a Christian, who happens to have 2 Masters and am 1 year away from a Computer Science PhD. I am also a successful software consultant and make more money that most doctors, so I don't consider myself uneducated or stupid.

There are plenty of intelligent people who actually have the guts to question the status quo in the scientific commmunity and research the claims of ancient literature including the Bible as well as dig into the logic behind all of the evolution hype. When I was a kid, the earth was 2 billion years old, now what is it - 4.6 billion? I haven't gotten that much older. They keep having to extend time to allow for all of the impossibilities of life growing in complexity when all evidence is that things left to themselves breakdown.

Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that's your only choice.

As far as creating the earth in 6 days, God could have done it in 6 seconds, and it still would look like it took several billion years to us, God invented time, so he can do what he wants with it. Your whole generalization is one based on believing what you hear rather than really investigating the facts and not allowing for the supernatural to exist.

Go study all the facts behind those who ridicule Christianity including the convoluted theories for the empty tomb and the lame explanations for why a handful of individuals would change the world of their time and die for something that was a lie. Look at some of the great scholars of history and of modern times such as Newton, C.S. Lewis, and see if you can refute their logic.

Takes one to know one.

A simple Google search will turn up many examples of functional transitional forms of the eye.

Wouldn't you find a biologist who spouted uninformed nonsense about computer science to be arrogant and presumptuous?