Walk it Out

As an avid sports fan I love seeing certain athletes dominate their respective sports in ways that seem unreal. This has been the case in Floyd “Money” Mayweather. Earlier tonight he dominated yet another quality opponent Ricky Hatton in keeping his undefeated boxing record in tact. Athletes, especially ones that have dominated their sports have always had an extremely hard time in identifying when it was best to stop everything and walk away. This was the case with athletes such as Michael Jordan who had a few forgettable years in Washington and Jerry Rice who just would not call it quits.

It is easy to see why athletes stay in their sports longer than they should. Professional athletes are some of the most stubborn and competitive people, it is these qualities that help them get to where they are in their sports. The lure of money and fame also is blinding for many athletes who have grown to love all that comes with being a celebrity in American society. Who in their right minds would walk away from multi million dollar contracts, all the perks in the world, and the fame that comes with being a professional athlete. Unfortunately sometimes this stubbornness causes athletes to jeopardize their health as can be seen by Muhammad Ali, Barry Bonds, and Priest Holmes to name a few.

The athletes that do decide to walk away while still in their prime are often questioned and portrayed as foolish by the media. Jim Brown played only nine professional seasons in the NFL and when he decided to walk away from all of that many were very critical of his decision. However his legacy is still as strong as ever as many still regard him as the greatest running back in NFL history. He has also gone on to find success as an actor, and more importantly a black rights leader.

Home is Where the Heart Is

Someone needs to talk some sense into the Coliseum commission. The Coliseum Commission has remained stubborn in their negotiations with everyone, including NFL executives and now even with their most loyal friend and partner, USC. USC has finally become so fed up with the Commission’s ineffectiveness and their decisions not to fix the aging stadium that they have threatened to move across town to the Rose Bowl. USC who is the only regular user of the Coliseum right now an is in large part the only entity holding the stadium up wants to sign a new lease, since the present expires after the USC versus UCLA football game this weekend. USC is willing to pay for the much needed renovations totaling somewhere around $100 million if the Coliseum is willing to give USC some of the revenue that will come to the Coliseum because of these upgrades. The Coliseum Commission however does not want to give USC control of part of the revenue that will come in. The Coliseum Commission does not have very many other options at this point with the risk of USC leaving. The Commission has already succeeded in driving out UCLA football, both the Rams and Raiders, as well as the Lakers, Clippers, and USC basketball from the Sports Arena which the Commission is also in charge of managing.


If USC follows through on its word and moves to the Rose Bowl after this season the Coliseum will quickly fall into irrelevance as this article from the LA Times explains. Right now the Coliseum stands as both an architectural and historical monument for Los Angeles. It has hosted two Olympics, hosted professional baseball, football, and soccer games, it has been visited by Popes and Presidents so to let this monument fade into obscurity is a terrible decision. The Coliseum has been a part of my life as well as every other USC student and I can not imagine USC football without the Coliseum. Also as this is the week that USC plays UCLA in football I do not like the idea of having to share a stadium with our biggest rival. Many others share this same concern which is shown in this article.


One positive step for keeping USC in the Coliseum is that Mayor Villaraigosa is on our side and has spoken up to try and keep USC at home. He has publicly said that an NFL franchise moving to the Coliseum will not happen. This is a big step in keeping USC in the coliseum since the Commission has no leverage in negotiating with USC now, because if they lose USC then the Coliseum will not have any way of generating revenue.


The Coliseum Commission is a group made of 3 county officials, 3 state officials, and 3 city officials. Each of these groups and members has their own agenda and political aspirations and has their own ideas on what the Coliseum needs to do. As Todd Dickey, who is USC’s senior vice president for administration has said “there is no such thing as the Coliseum Commission, they are nine politicians with their own agenda, so it’s virtually impossible to negotiate with this nine-headed hydra.” The Commission needs to take a step back and look at all that the Coliseum means to the people of Los Angeles, and look at the history that it has in the city. The Commission needs to come together and take this opportunity to renovate and make the Coliseum better so that it can stand for future generations of Los Angelinos, especially for us Trojans. Fight on.

How low can you go?

Southern California home prices have been on fierce decline for a few months now. All of Southern California has been affected by this market slump but many areas have been hit much harder. The areas that have been hit hardest are the areas that have a high percentage of first time buyers. These new homeowners have seen their homes that they had just purchased lose up to 30% of their value in a few short months. This is causing them to have no choice but to walk away from these homes. The areas that have not been hit hard are areas that have relatively low new homes being built, many of these areas have not seen any decline in value at all.

What many people are asking is how much lower the market will fall and for how long before it turns around. Many experts predict that the housing market in Southern California has a ways to drop before it stops falling. Five experts recently interviewed in a LA Times article seen here all said that the market will still fall between 10 and 25 percent. Most also agreed that the market will not stop falling until late 2009 and possibly even 2010.

Many people that are interested in buying new homes are excited to see home prices fall however since they feel they will be able to buy at a very low price. However because of this market slump, many mortgage rates will be set at higher rates which they will be paying for over the life of their mortgage. I think the market will begin to correct when people stop buying property to as investments but buy property that they plan on living in for an extended amount of time. Only time will tell just how serious this housing slump will be but hopefully it will correct itself before it leads to more damage in other sectors of the market.

Bad Newz

The Mike Vick case has been discussed in much detail in the past few months, much of the discussion concerned with what his punishment should be for the crimes that he helped commit. While he needs to be punished for what he did, more of the discussion now needs to turn to what it is about professional athletes that often causes them to feel they are above the law and can get away with nearly anything. The recent OJ Simpson event as well as the Pacman Jones situation shows other examples of how American culture places such a high importance on celebrities that makes many feel like they are untouchable.

In this week’s Sports Illustrated article, seen here there is a very good article that discusses what factors led Michael Vick to believe he could get away with all that he did. Vick is similar to many professional athletes, in that he came from a family that often did not have much money and grew up with limited options. When this occurs most athletes find it very hard to deal and handle their new success and popularity so they turn back to what is familiar to them which is where they came from and the friends they had before they became famous. Sometimes these friends from back home as in Michael Vicks case have questionable motives for staying in touch with their new famous friends. Many feel like it is their ticket out of the rough neighborhood so they tag along and live the celebrity life through their professional athlete friends. This can be seen in many examples ranging from, Ray Lewis, Jamal Lewis, and Robert Traylor. All these people circled themselves with people that were blinded by their friend’s wealth.

Professional athletes often feel obliged to help those that they grew up with. They feel they owe it their friends to share their newfound wealth, and their friends are more than happy to live the good life with money that is not theirs. There are some reasons why athletes feel they have to give their money to the people they knew from home. The first reason is that they feel indebted and sometimes guilty that they made it big and their friends did not. Many people growing up in low income areas turn to gangs and violence as a means for making money and getting respect, athletes sometimes get a “free pass” from this life because they have a chance to do something without turning to the streets. If they do make it big they often feel like they have a debt to pay to those that let them not join gangs. Another reason that athletes feel obliged to bring people up with them is that they knew these people growing up and went through tough times together. They feel like they would not have made it without these friendships. Successful people are always told not to forget where they came from. This creates a sense of communal pressure that their community places on those that have come from the area. The biggest factor that leads professional athletes to surround themselves with people that they are familiar with is that they are often forced to grow up at very young ages and they want to have a sense of security and they accomplish this by bringing old friends around. Sports teams and colleges begin scouting and following athletes sometimes when they are as young as 13 or 14 years old. People see that these people can become wealthy and begin to try and associate with these kids. This creates a very tough wall of trust that athletes erect in order to protect themselves from being taken advantage of. This sticks with them even after they make it to the pros and often times they remain very wary of anyone that they haven’t known for an extended period of time. Unfortunately even when people are genuinely trying to help athletes, many do not listen because they immediately believe that everyone is just there to take advantage of them.

With more and more athletes getting in trouble because of the people they associate with something needs to be done to try and change this trend. I think more attention needs to be paid to what these sports leagues can do to help these young people who are thrown into an unfamiliar world and left to make their own decisions based on limited knowledge. Sports leagues such as the NFL have programs established to try and help this but it is only for first year players, after that they are left on their own to wade through the constant pressure of being a celebrity in American culture.

Let's Get a Move On

The Nokia Theatre in downtown Los Angeles opened last week to an array of concerts that included both the Eagles and the Dixie Chicks and is selling out its shows on a nightly basis. What is surprising is that this construction project was able to open on time. Far too many construction projects recently are failing to meet their scheduled finish dates due to the increasing and overwhelming “red tape” that government agencies require companies to wade through. As a current employee in the construction industry it is often maddening at the inefficiency and lack of urgency different government agencies show off. The age old expression is “time is money,” however that does not apply when discussing government workers since they have a very high job security and their salaries are basically set in stone no matter of their output of work. Many workers have no incentive to work hard or to work with private contractors to get projects completed in a timely fashion because it is easier for them to simply take their time.

In order to correct this trend something needs to be done. However the only people that have the power to enact new rules and laws are the government agencies that are dragging their feet in the first place. The best solution I can propose to help remedy this situation is to offer government employees incentives for doing a good job in a timely manner. At the end of any project all the private companies and contractors that worked on the project have an opportunity to give those government workers that helped and worked to make the project move along credit and have those people be rewarded by either a bonus, credit towards a future promotion, or even added vacation time. I believe this would create an atmosphere where everyone can work diligently and the outcome will be seen not only by the companies but also the overall society by the added projects around the country.

One big question that has been raised when I have discussed this idea with others as to where the money would come from to pay bonuses or pay for people to have extra vacation time. Many construction project contracts are drafted with a completion date set in stone. For every day that the project does not get completed by that date someone must pay liquidated damages, depending on whose fault the delays are. These damages can range from a $1,000 per day to $25,000 per day depending on the scope of the project. Often times these delays turn into huge arguments than can and do often lead to litigation. In the end the penalties are usually spread among all parties that have to do with the project including the owner which often times is the city, the general contractor and the various subcontractors with no one party actually getting in money for the added time but ultimately spending money to try and pass the blame to the other parties. In addition to this cost it is very expensive to have a construction project not be completed since the building is not creating any revenue itself since it is not being occupied. This again costs all parties involved. The money that would be saved by finishing projects in a timely manner will more than be enough to reward those that helped get it to that point, therefore there would be no need to raise taxes or make a special fund to draw from to give these bonuses.

I am sure that most people will agree that it is much easier to fix a problem before it starts than to try and fix a problem that has been in place for an extended period of time. That is what we are facing right now and unless steps are taken immediately the problem will continue to grow exponentially until any solution is simply not feasible.

Inmates Fighting Fires?

As everyone has seen in the news lately last week throughout Southern California fires were scorching the land. Thousands of firefighters came from all over the country to help battle the fires that extended from San Diego county all the to Ventura county. What many people may not know is that thousands of these firefighters protecting peoples homes are prisoners serving time in jail. An article on this program can be seen here.

California has a program that has been in place since the 1940’s which allows in times of emergencies convicted prisoners the opportunity to help fight fires. The prisoners must fit a certain description in that they must be physically fit, not be violent crime offernders and also have between 4 and 36 months left on their prison terms. What the prisoners get from such efforts is compensation of a whopping $1 per hour worked. In addition and maybe more importantly for every day the prisoners work to help fight fires they get two days knocked off their prison sentence, which can ultimately get prisoners out of an already crowded prison system in California.

This program also has many underlying benefits that may not appear at a quick glance. The prisoners have an opportunity to help in the communities they may have commited crimes in in the past. The prisoners save the state of California over $80 million dollars in taxes annually. Prisoners must go through a rigourous four week crash course in which they learn about firse safety and how to help supress existing fires. Also many prisoners learn practical knowledge that they can apply when they get out of prison.

There are mixed feelings among people whether this program is a good idea or if it helps convicted prisoners get out of their sentences and gives them to much freedom. Some argue that by giving prisoners this opportunity they are not being fully punished for the crimes they commited. The benefits of this program greatly outnumber any of the negative effects this program will have. This program rehabilitates and gives non violent criminals an opportunity to prepare for their life outside of prison and teaches them to become productive individuals in society.

Carry on, Public Intellectuals

Public intellectuals are an interesting breed of people. On one hand they are suppose to be the “experts” of their particular field, but on the other they often know very little outside there area of expertise. Public intellectuals often are critical of people that do not fit the public intellectual description, and in doing so alienate themselves from the people that they are often writing for. This is what creates the big difference in ideas and opinions between the two. It has been talked about that public intellectuals are becoming extinct as a form of expression as John Donatich expresses in a panel on Public Intellectuals seen here. The reasons that this decline is apparently happening is that people have far more access to public intellectual work than in previous times especially through the internet. While many see this as detrimental to the future of public intellectuals, I see this as a very positive fact that public intellectuals can use to have even more influence.

Most people are only going to be interested in reading a public intellectual article or paper if they are interested in the topic that is being discussed. With new forms of sharing of ideas it is easier to find articles that are interesting. It has been written that Americans are hostile towards public intellectuals however I do not believe this to be true. More people than ever are attending college and are being exposed to those that used to and still do make up the public intellectual fraternity. With this new exposure of intellectual ideas and forums to a growing number of people, more people are in turn becoming public intellectual participants. To some that have been writing public intellectuals for a long time this is a threat since it is making what had been an exclusive group much more populated. Public intellectuals however do not have to be on purely academic ideas and theories they can also discuss practical matters that people are faced with everyday.

Public intellectuals in my opinion are far to concerned on who can carry this title and what qualifications one must have. Stephen Mack shares this same idea and explains it in further detail in his article “The Decline of Public Intellectuals?” seen here. Spending too much time ad energy debating who can be considered a public intellectual takes away from the main purpose of public intellectuals, which is to analyze and critique society. Richard Prosner debates in his book Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline that public intellectuals are becoming far to numbered taking away from the quality of the public intellectual forum. He argues that public intellectuals are not holding to the old expression of “quality over quantity.” What Posner tries to do is attack the most widely viewed public intellectuals to take away from the credibility of them strengthen his argument that there are too many public intellectuals and the quality is poor. This is a completely invalid way to analyze the quality of a public intellectual. This is like saying a movie such as Top Gun which nearly every American as watched at least once is more influential then great movies such as Citizen Kane, which many people may not have seen. Both have an effect on American culture however it is not valid to say all movies are poorly made simply by looking at the movies that are viewed the most and attacking what each of those have done wrong.

Public intellectuals must continue to diversify their subjects and people who write them in order to continue to incorporate new ideas. The internet is making it much easier to share ideas that many public intellectuals would have been hard pressed to share many years ago. This increases the amount of influence that public intellectuals can have in expressing their opinions to others.

Politics and Religion

The relationship between religion and politics is not only one of the most ancient social phenomena, but also one of the most controversial. Politicians throughout history have justified their rule over the masses by aligning their agendas with various religious movements, often to unsettling effectiveness. Logically, it makes sense for a politician or other social leader to sync his or her message with that of a higher power. Think about it: what better way to sway the masses than to threaten the security of their eternal afterlives? When a political candidate or party allies itself symbolically with a person’s most closely held beliefs about morality and spirituality, voting against that candidate or party can feel for some people like a personal betrayal of everything they stand for.
At various points throughout history, this strategy has proven successful. Yet, it should not be thought of as too simplistic to be plausible in today’s world: look at the U.S. presidential election of 2004.
In this most recent election, the conservative Christian base in America wielded extraordinary power over many of its followers and other traditionally right-leaning groups by associating George W. Bush with the traits deemed favorable to those groups. His campaign messages stressed family, loyalty, morality, and played heavily on the theme of good vs. evil. Indeed, this cut-and-dry logic employed by the Bush campaign strategists proved to be one of the deciding factors in his victory over Senator John Kerry. A breakdown of what percentages of religions voted for each of the candidates can be seen in this article by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public life. For many conservative thinkers who prefer quick, decisive action to some sort of organized rational thought, voting for Bush was a “no-brainer.” The way in which he likened the war on terror to some sort of biblical crusade, with defined good guys and bad guys, and a simple plot line ending in an American victory, was very convincing to those who base their lives around similar stories in the Bible. Kerry’s approach to problem-solving, which emphasized collaboration and rational debate, was deemed as ineffective if not cowardly. The truth of the matter is that Bush’s stance embodied more of the classic traits of a religious leader: he was passionate, clear-cut, steadfast, and decisive. His presence told his voters that if a conflict arose, he had an answer waiting for it, whereas Kerry would have to think and consult with others, possibly entertaining many options before making a decision. Not Bush. He knew his responses before the questions were asked. This certainty, although not necessarily wise, was comforting for those who do not want to be troubled with the global concerns of modern life. They just want a leader who will take charge and work for their interests. The problem with this deferment of responsibility is that the nation is not wholly comprised of Bush voters, or Christians, or conservatives.
This brings to light a fundamental problem of the interaction between religion and politics. Both societal constructs are meant to give guidance by creating and enforcing morals and rules to live by. Stephen Mack discusses this topic in his essay “Wicked Paradox: The Cleric as Public Intellectual” seen here. Mack argues that “religious experience and democratic politics make overlapping—and often competing—claims to the deepest meanings we attach to our humanity.” He is correct that both religion and politics force us to dive deep into our fundamental moral set to decide what is right and wrong and what rules to live by. The problem with the rules enforced by religion, however, is that those rules were defined in a time when the world was much simpler. True, many religious tenets are just as valuable today as they were 5,000 years ago, but many others are not. It is simply impossible to apply these rules, which are largely based in black and white logic, to our modern day world, which is comprised of shades of gray. Politics however can be applied to issues of today since the political world is able to change at a much faster pace than religious principles. Faith and spirituality are different concepts than religion, yet all too often they are lumped together. Where faith and spirituality leave the door open to interpretation, religion slams it shut by giving people rules to follow without question. With such rules already in place, it is exceedingly easy for governments and political groups to simply apply their labels, and defy anyone to challenge their principles, for fear of challenging God himself.

Show Me the Money

Hillary Clinton said on Friday, September 28 that she wanted to set aside a $5,000 bond when any child is born in America, to help with college savings or a down payment on their first homes as described in this article. What happened to my money? The young person would get their money when they had got their high school diploma. I agree in principle that this is a great idea that would help teach the younger generation to save and hopefully give young people incentives to graduate high school since high school graduation is one of the stipulations Clinton said to acquire the money.

Clinton however throws this idea out without giving any kind of feasible plan on where this money would come from. There are approximately 4 million babies born in America annually. That comes out to $2 billion dollars per year. Where does Hillary propose we get that money from? Clinton says that this money will be given to those that graduate high school, and she also says that this proposal will greatly help the poor class in American society. As far as I know, in poor urban areas in America, high schools resources are extremely limited. Poor teachers, lack of funding, and overcrowding of schools leads many young people to drop out of school. I propose investing some of that $5,000 dollars into redeveloping schools and hiring adequate teachers needs to be done as well.

Once someone graduates high school and gets this bond, Clinton does not go into any kind of details on what this money can be spent on or how one can even regulate what the money is spent on. Some young people in America, especially those just graduating high school who have not had very much money in their lives, will want to spend this money on material items such as cars, clothing, or even drugs. Another possible negative affect this bond proposal may have is if low income parents see this money as their money for raising a child and force the young person to hand over the money to them as soon as they get it. Clinton throws this idea out to get young peoples votes, but does not back this proposal up with any kind of concrete research on where, how and when this money will change hands from the government to the young people who earn it.

LA Live: Go For It

LA Live: Go for It

Los Angeles is one of the most unique cities in the world, in that it really has no borders and includes such a wide expanse of area. Because of this Downtown Los Angeles has never had the same draw and feel as many other cities downtowns. There is no distinct center or exact place that can be identified as downtown in Los Angeles. Some say downtown is where the Disney Concert Hall is on Hill Street, others identify downtown as the big buildings they see passing on the 110 Freeway, some even see downtown as being Exposition Park near the USC campus. All these places present one or two attractions but not places that offer a wide array of options for people to spend their time. The LA Live Projects goal is to create a downtown feel that people can identify with, and a place that will attract people to come spend their time by adding to the existing Staples Center, and Convention Center a new 7,100 seat theater, 8 premier restaurants, night clubs, and a Ritz Carlton and Marriott combined use hotel and condominium building. A complete list of attraction can be seen here. There have been numerous obstacles that have arisen as this project has progressed and much opposition to this project, the fact of the matter remains that the LA Live project is a necessary improvement Downtown Los Angeles needs to make if they are going to compete with the other major cities of the world.

For anyone that is unfamiliar with the LA Live Project, it is a $2.5 billion project that is being constructed on Figueroa St. south of Olympic Blvd. A map can be seen here. The project is set to be completed in three phases with staggered completion dates, ultimately finishing in late 2009. The first phase contains the Nokia Theatre which is a 7,100 seat venue that plans to hold Espy Awards show, Miss USA competitions, the Grammy’s, in addition to numerous other events and the Nokia Plaza which is an open area that will serve as a pedestrian walkway from the Staples Center to the Nokia Theatre. Construction began on September 15, 2005 and the first phase is set to be completed by October 18, 2007. The second phase includes the ESPN West Coast Studios, eight premier restaurants including P.F. Chang’s, ESPN Zone, two nightclubs; The Conga Room and Club Nokia, and a bowling alley. This phase of the project is set to be completed a year later by October of 2008. The final and biggest phase of the project is the 55 story Ritz Carlton and Marriott hotel and condominium building, as well as a 14 screen Regal movie theater. Over half the condominiums have already sold, with their price tag being between $1.5 and $6 million dollars. This final phase of the project will be completed by late 2009, with residence being able to move in before 2010.

Critics of the LA Live project have described the project as trying to make Los Angeles into a replica of Manhattan, New York, in which the city becomes so concentrated in a small area that the sun and the outdoors becomes overlooked in favor of human activities. Joel Kotkin is one of the most notable critics of making downtown Los Angeles have a central location; his blog can be read here. He argues in one of his articles seen here, that there is a trend in Los Angeles to make downtown much more dense, with residential, commercial, and entertainment venues in favor of spreading to more of the wide open space that Los Angeles has. One of Kotkin’s main arguments as to not make the LA Live project is that Los Angeles has been expanding outward for over 100 years and should continue to do so because of the natural beauty and car crazed society that Los Angeles has become. I agree with Kotkin that Los Angeles is blessed with natural beauty and Los Angelinos are some of the most car dependent people in the US, but I cannot disagree more that because of this Los Angeles should not try and establish an identity in its downtown. The land that is being used for the LA Live project is land that before the project was being used as a parking lot which is not some of the most beautiful land in Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Live project is making that land exponentially more aesthetically pleasing and useful than what was there before. It is true that the LA Live project does resemble Times Square in some respects, but what is wrong with that. Nearly everyone that goes to New York makes Times Square one of their destinations because many associate New York with Times Square. This is a perfect opportunity for Los Angeles to follow in the footsteps of Times Square and make something in Downtown that people will identify Los Angeles with. Some may argue that Los Angeles has much more to offer than to be known for their Downtown, such as the beaches, Hollywood, or Sunset Blvd to name a few, but what is wrong with adding even more to one of the most diverse cities in the world.

Another argument against the LA Live project is that it seems to be catering to tourists, as opposed to making a project that people living in Los Angeles will use. Since there is a lot of Los Angeles tax dollars going into this project many feel that it should serve those that are paying those taxes. LA Live will be a big draw for out of town visitors, but it will also be a place that people from Los Angeles can use as well. An article discussing many of these topics can be read here. Being a student at the University of Southern California I have found that my options are somewhat limited in what I can find to do for entertainment in close proximity to USC’s campus. To see a movie the closest nice theater would be at The Grove which is a pain to get to at many times during the day thanks to Los Angeles traffic. The nightlife is also limited, as there is only one bar in close proximity to USC. LA Live will completely change this for the thousands of students living in and around downtown Los Angeles. The Nokia Theater would also cater to people from Los Angeles as it would serve as a venue for many musicians to stop at on their tours. LA Live will also bring in over 13.5 million visitors a year to Los Angeles and this will produce an estimated 25,000 jobs creating nearly $10 billion in revenue to the area.

A very recent development in this project took place less than a week ago. Legislation approved in a last minute bill to let AEG, who is the developer of LA Live to use state funds for street and sidewalk improvements near their development. LA Live is looking to get around $50 million from this fund to use. The state funds that they were approved to use comes from a fund that is designated to help with the construction of affordable housing. Many argue that the street improvements that are going to take place with this funding do not facilitate the growth of affordable housing but instead add to the aesthetics of the LA Live project. Governor Schwarzenegger has the opportunity to veto the bill but it is highly unlikely that he will exercise that authority. Although it is true to some extent that the money does not directly benefit affordable housing, according to AEG the money will be used to improve the street and sidewalks along the whole Figueroa corridor which stretches from the Staples Center and LA live, to Exposition Parkway. If the money does get spent on improving the Figueroa corridor I believe it will indirectly help with affordable housing in that the improvements on the street will help attract potential developers and residents to build and move into housing along this stretch of road. More on this topic can be found in this LA Times article. What AEG and LA Live are doing is creating a livable community, which is what the fund is holding money for and supporting.

The most challenging part of the LA Live project and the portion that has given rise to the most obstacles is the Ritz Carlton and Marriott hotels that are being constructed. In the beginning of the project Hilton hotels was planned to be the operating hotel company for this building. They withdrew their bid for the hotel because of rising construction costs in Southern California. This presented a problem in that LA Live had a huge hotel that was planning to be built but no one to finance it as Ted Tanner, AEG’s Senior Vice President of Real Estate explains in this interview. What ended up happening was that AEG decided to finance the hotel on their own until they found other investing hotel companies to come in and help. In addition to this the city has seen the need for this project to be completed, with the hotel as a cornerstone of the project and the city council has given many rebates to AEG on this project. The Los Angeles city council has called for AEG to get a rebate of at least $246 million in the hotel bed taxes and is also giving a $5 million grant from the city and a $4 million in building fees. What this shows is that many people in the Los Angeles area are in support and want this project to be complete, since they are allowing their city council members to use their vote to agree to help with much of the taxes and fees associated with the construction of this project. Hopefully this will attract other prospective designers and contractors to find creative ways to build projects similar to the LA Live project, in helping to make downtown Los Angeles a place that people will want to travel to.

All large scale construction projects will have their fair share of dissenters. Those that are against the building of LA Live have very valid and thoughtful arguments which need to be addressed in order to come up with a solution that the majority of the people in Los Angeles will be happy with. The fact of the matter remains that the people of Los Angeles need to have some location that they can distinguish as being downtown. A place where Los Angelinos can be proud of and a place they will want to spend time. This is an essential part of all great cities, the characteristic of having place that can serve as the heart of the city, a place that is vital to the growth and recognition of a city. LA Live will be that heart to the Los Angeles area, it will serve as a center for people from not only Los Angeles but all over the world to be drawn to, to experience what Los Angeles has to offer. LA Live will work in harmony and compliment all the other aspects Los Angeles has to offer and add to one of the most interesting and diverse cities in the world.

Works Cited

DiMassa, Cara Mia. “2 Projects, 2 Visions of Downtown’s Future.” Los Angeles Times. 15 September 2005. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/los_angeles_metro/la-me-downtown15sep15,1,6257379.story?coll=la-commun-los_angeles_metro&ctrack=2&cset=true

Hymon, Steve and McGreevy, Patrick. “Last-Minute Bill boosts Anschutz’s L.A. Project.” Los Angeles Times. 13 September 2007. http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-me-anschutz13sep13,1,3209318.story?track=rss&ctrack=3&cset=true

Kotkin, Joel. “Joel Kotkin Blog.” http://www.joelkotkin.com/

Kotkin, Joel. “Why the Rush to Manhattanize L.A.?” Los Angeles Times. 12 August 2007. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-kotkin12aug12,1,3406838.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Nokia Theatre LA Live. 2007. http://www.nokiatheatrelalive.com/lalive.php

Tanner, Ted. LA Live’s Nokia Theatre Opening in the Fall; Downtown Becomes a Destination.” The Planning Report. July 2007. http://www.planningreport.com/tpr/?module=displaystory&story_id=1256&edition_id=92&format=html

Getting Out

As many of you have heard President Bush has finally announced that there will be a cut in the number of troops that the US will have in Iraq. More recently the Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced he plans on cutting that amount even lower to about 100,000 troops, as seen here. It is about time that The Pres has realized that we have far to many people occupying that country, its only a shame it took him 5 years to long to realize that.

The situation in Iraq has dragged on for so long my room mate and I were jokingly discussing why the US went into Iraq in the first place. Unfortunately I believe this is a question that many Americans would not know the answer to. The American military is stretched so thin that we simply do not have the resources to keep sending more and more people to Iraq. Senator Joseph Bidden of Delaware called Bush a "phony" when Bush said the reason that he approved the troop reduction was because of the huge progress the military has made in Iraq, he believes Bush is doing this for the sole reason that the military is stretched to thin. Either way I am just glad there won't be as many troops there.

Two of my close friends are Marines and each has gone to Iraq, one is getting ready to go for the second time and the other just got back from his second tour. After hearing their stories about their time in Iraq, it is scary to think that many people my age and even younger may not make it back to America. But I am very thankful for the job all of the military people are doing for us Americans.

So Bushman thanks for finally listening to people who know what they are talking about and making a good decision before you are out of here.

Ready To Go

I am in the blogging world for the first time and ready to begin commenting and sharing ideas and information with the rest of you out there. Please offer as much feedback as you can to help improve my site. I will do the same. Take it easy.