As long as neighboring cities allow them, your choice is either to allow them also or see them built just across city lines and then lose the sales tax dollars.

I can't stop anybody from reading what they want to read regardless of the intent. I'm gay myself and I've known and written with Malcolm for five years and he's nowhere near homophobic - he couldn't be more pro-gay without actually being gay. Calling somebody homophobic because he expressed himself ambiguously isn't helping anybody and, frankly, it causes some supporters to remain quiet for fear of being misunderstood. And where you say "Having said that I thought the Spock/Uhura romance was odd because it didn't helped the storyline at all. The relationship wasn't even pivotal to Spock embracing his human side. So it just seemed to be a silly distraction." - you're basically in agreement with Malcolm. You have to remember this is a franchise that specifically had Kirk kiss Uhura in 1968, making a political statement in the process. Absent such a message, you and Malcolm both think the Spock/Uhura relationship is poorly handled.

I think Malcolm was trying to make a slightly different point - albeit perhaps ambiguously. When the first series aired an inter-racial kiss, it was groundbreaking, both socially and in terms of what TV showed. These days, as Malcolm pointed out, one of the principle actors in a film franchise of this magnitude can come out with almost no media or societal response - times have changed and for the better. Which leaves the Spock/Uhura romance without any underlying message and simply seeming somewhat flat. It doesn't carry any groundbreaking social or political significance, especially alongside an inter-species threeway elsewhere in the film - it's just an awkward relationship that I think Malcolm has a hard time reconciling with the characters (independent of who happens to be playing them) I don't think he was saying that because the actor is gay, he shouldn't or can't play a straight role - or suggesting that has anything to do with its believability.

Two cars don't mean twice as much driving and they can result in greener driving. When people have two or more cars, they often have vehicles of different sizes and share the driving between them - and so you get local trips in a Smart/Mini/Fiat/etc and longer trips in a larger sedan or SUV, rather than everything being done in the larger vehicle. This is even true of some people who live alone.

"I don't think it takes a genius to understand that when people are asked to think of Sacramento they generally or almost never be thinking of Natomas or Greenhaven." I don't think this is a true statement, in sentiment (i.e., if it includes other similar areas of the City). I think it would actually be nice if it was true. But the vast majority of Sacramento looks more like those places, and most people live in places like that. So their visitors/friends/family also see those places more. And for many (sadly), Downtown and Midtown are trip destinations for once a month Second Saturdays or occasional excursions to K Street. Many visitors, or those passing through town, are also limited to views of the airport or the area immediately surrounding the current arena, for example. Others who come for conventions see an area of Sacramento limited to a 2-3 block radius of places like the Hyatt and the Sheraton. For those of us who run events at places like the Crest (my home away from home), It's incredible the number of people we talk to who say they simply never come into the central City - almost to the point of forgetting it's there. People who say they're confused by one-way streets and can never find parking (despite the Crest having validated, covered parking one block away). And I'm constantly disappointed by people from other cities/countries who've visited Sacramento and describe it as a wasteland of strip malls and cookie-cutter suburbia, having obviously never been downtown. The other recurring and consistent refrain from others is that Sacramento is a neat place because it's close to other, nicer places. I've seen that from recruiters, residents, visitors, etc. And they're not coming to that conclusion based on a love of Downtown/Midtown - it's based more on a false assumption that one would have to travel to SF to get anything artsy or cool/urban. So I don't think there's any great evidence that Downtown/Midtown is what most people think of when thinking of Sacramento.

But that dynamic is often embedded in many of the conversations around here. The whole arena debate has been that way - "Build in downtown, it will be great for Sacramento!" - while ignoring the fact that the Natomas site is also in Sacramento. So, it sometimes is a case of pitting one part of the City against another. Folks in Midtown, for example, don't want to live in the shadow of big box stores or live alongside car lots. But many would like those things to exist elsewhere within the City if the alternative is that the retail sales taxes get siphoned off the the Roseville Galleria, or to auto malls in Roseville, Elk Grove, and Folsom. Midtown folks, and those in toney neighborhoods like East Sac and Land Park should be thrilled that there are people happy to live in areas like Arden and Natomas - because it's a symbiotic relationship we've all got going on.

Thank you for diving back in today :)

Leo is good - except the one, repetitive line delivery. How one feels about the rest is probably somewhat dependent on whether one simply wants a glitzy 143m experience, or if one wants a faithful adaptation of the book. I've liked some of Luhrmann's other work, such as Moulin Rouge and Romeo+Juliet, so it's not an anti-Luhrmann response. I just think his style lends itself well to certain things and not others. In Moulin Rouge he creates a place and story that can live by its own internal logic and rules. In Romeo+Juliet he moves the story to a modern times and can then break all the rules about style and context compared to 16th Century Verona. In Gatsby, he maintains the time and place of the book but still wants to break out of that mold stylistically and the result is an awkward clash of styles and tones. I made a Speed Racer reference before - but imagine Speed Racer driving fast through the set of a Polo Ralph Lauren commercial and you get close to the Gatsby look.

I explained why I thought the two situations were related in terms of local residents lamenting the presence of outsiders who also help support and justify the facilities they value - I didn't make any claim about the situations being identical/equivalent. Not surprisingly, I think to make the claim that they are "completely unrelated" is "kind of silly." As to who would care if assorted neighborhoods no longer existed, presumably the people who enjoy living there - some of whom rarely ever visit the central City. Just as there are Midtown residents who wouldn't miss Carmichael, there are, presumably, many Carmichael residents who wouldn't miss Midtown, for many of the same reasons. The article author himself cites having been told by suburbanites not to go Downtown. My earlier point was very simple - that we don't have a clear dichotomy of places - we have a great many people who live in one and work in the other (in both directions) or who rely on both for various aspects of their lives. And to call one Sacramento and claim the other isn't is also "kind of silly."

That's why I said "in its current form" - there are a lot of people around who like the bars and clubs (as well as those who don't), the galleries, and other businesses that wouldn't survive without the commuters and the folks who come in from outside the grid and spend their money there. It reminds me of towns that grow and transform over time with tourism and retiree in-migration (who often first came as tourists). There was an article years ago about Estes Park, CO where residents were complaining about the tourists clogging up the local hospital, without acknowledging that they wouldn't have had a local hospital except for the tourists.

Not engaging the points that are being made makes the original article seem even more like an attempt to drive traffic to your website, as was suggested earlier.

But that argument also goes both ways even if you believe that the City would not exist without the Grid, as the Grid would also not exist in its current form without the rest of the City around it.

According to the author, you don't live in Sacramento!

This link might add context to one of my comments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzbvqW_dOwY

I think there's a false dichotomy being employed here - there are plenty of us who have one foot in the grid (for work, life, entertainment, whatever...) and one foot in another neighborhood (with plenty of choices like Oak Park, North Sac, East Sac, Tahoe Park, etc. that aren't all beige box suburbia - and there are those that enjoy their beige boxes too). It's a shame it took you so long to cross that divide, but many of us cross it on a routine basis and enjoy both sides.

Oops - I corrected a spelling error as I was writing tags but forgot to correct it in the text: "Guy Pierce" should be "Guy Pearce."

Will the current Seattle group pursue another team - perhaps the Milwaukee Bucks? Edit: Oops - just noticed that question is raised in the article - I should read more slowly/thoroughly.

By the way, in case that comment came across the wrong way, I actually very much appreciated the quick article and the heads up on the decision as soon as possible - it just reminded me of times I've rushed to type something on my phone, for example, and mangled it with my thumbs. I'd rather have fast news with typos when it's a breaking story and my comment was written with a "been there!" attitude rather than a critical eye. (I even had to edit this comment - and I was at a full-size keyboard with all the time in the world!)

Wow - that was typed in a hurry on a tiny keyboard!

There's a significant different between actions that last a year or two, and which might be reversed by voting certain people into or out of office, and actions that have clear and intentional financial implications for decades to come.