Our Sponsors:
Trending Stories
- Simple rules for staying sane in Seattle
- Seattle neighborhoods fight needed land use reform, density
- Morning Fizz: 'I'm Appalled'
- Monday Jolt: Community Council coup and McKenna misstep
- Wednesday Jolt: 'Seattle Times' wins fight against density; everybody (except Brett Phillips) wins key endorsement
- Morning Fizz: Some outstanding questions about the report
- Jolt: Parking Garages and Charter Schools
- Morning Fizz: $7 million committed to the charters cause?
- Tuesday's Scan: Costco? Who says we're from Costco?
- Morning Fizz: One step further
Most Commented
- Seattle neighborhoods fight needed land use reform, density (62)
- Jolt: Parking Garages and Charter Schools (47)
- Wednesday Jolt: 'Seattle Times' wins fight against density; everybody (except Brett Phillips) wins key endorsement (26)
- Morning Fizz: $7 million committed to the charters cause? (21)
- Monday Jolt: Community Council coup and McKenna misstep (20)
- Morning Fizz: In hope of reaching a consensus (28)
- Morning Fizz: Some outstanding questions about the report (22)
- Is Washington becoming 'happy with crappy?' (16)
- Simple rules for staying sane in Seattle (13)
- Tuesday's Scan: Costco? Who says we're from Costco? (11)
Follow Us »
Follow us on Twitter. |
Like us on Facebook. |
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds. |
Get our Daily Email Newsletter. |
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
SeaRod's comments
Posted Mon, Apr 12, 12:19 p.m.
From the Seattle Times: "He said the city does not inspect structural components of large buildings directly, but instead relies on a private report from a third-party inspection firm selected by the contractor." So, apparently this is an example of a government function being outsourced to the private sector (probably ...
MOREPosted Sun, Apr 11, 6:35 p.m.
WTF DPD? Did no one inspect this thing as it was being built? I thought catching these construction "mistakes" is why periodic inspections happen.
MOREPosted Wed, Sep 2, 9:56 a.m.
I always give a friendly wave, and still, quite often, get a friendly wave.
MOREPosted Tue, Sep 1, 9:14 a.m.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this research should not be applied if it is successful. I'm just saying that there are significant problems that need to be dealt with if this becomes available. It feels warm and fuzzy to think about granting everyone an additional 20-40 years ...
MOREPosted Mon, Aug 31, 8:38 a.m.
Social security is not a bottomless well. If everyone suddenly started living another 40 years, SS would very quickly have to change either revenue (tax increases) or expendtures (reduced benefits). The other thing is how do we allocate this new technology? Is it a pay as you go sort of ...
MOREPosted Sat, Aug 29, 1:47 p.m.
Not to throw cold water on such a hot topic... But how are we going to pay for all this longevity? Increase the retirement age to 80? Cut retirement and medical benefits in half for anyone over 100?
MOREPosted Fri, Aug 21, 4:04 p.m.
davidrsmithdvm, Good idea, I'll make sure that my grandmother, who lives on $600/month consults with her lawyer and CPA. I wouldn't want her to miss out on anything because she can barely afford food.
MORE