End of Month Situation Report, plus Odds and Ends.

If there's one thing that this month has taught me, is that what you think might happen at the beginning of the month may not be the same as what you think might happen when you reach the end of the month.  I'm talking specifically about the machinations that have been going on behind the scenes that I can't talk about.  In and of themselves they do suggest a light at the end of the tunnel, but at this time I don't know where the other end of that tunnel is.

Once this is over, I'll go into more detail as to what took place.  I don't know when I'll be able to do that, so please stay tuned.

* * * * * * *

The monsoon season, I think, is over.  We had an extension of it thanks to the help of a hurricane which spared Tucson from the intense rain and flooding that other areas got.  Phoenix got some flooding at the front end of the month, and I've been told they got some more a week or so ago.

I should be better informed of things like these days as far as local events go, and I try to be, but my main source of information for southern Arizona now wants to start charging for that information.  As that most of their so-called "news" is editorial opinion in the first place, I'm not paying the charge.

* * * * * * *

I think Sheila and I will end up getting married shortly after the first of the next year.  I've been more focused on fighting my forced retirement than on most other things these days.  There isn't going to be a big wedding anyway.  She doesn't want anyone there except us and the pastor.  I'm not sure, but I think state law here might require a pair of witnesses, and there are about ten people I'd like to see show up for this one.  I'd like for Mark to be the best man, as he was for my previous wedding, but if he can't make it then I've got someone else picked out who will gladly do it.

 

* * * * * * *

The honeymoon won't happen right away after the wedding.  I haven't forgotten that we'd like to do US66 for this one.  If it can be arranged, I'd like to pick up the Main Street of America in Santa Fe, and then take as much of we can of it over to Kingman, and then swing up to Las Vegas for the finale.

* * * * * * *

And that is going to be it for this entry.

Don't forget to pet a dog or a cat.

40 Years Ago Today

Forty years ago I was a high school student in Randolph, NJ.  I was attending Randolph High School and had recently discovered this new band called Bachman-Turner Overdrive.  I was in my junior year, a move away from New Jersey was on the horizon, and some weeks previously I had completed the written examination for my ham radio license.

It was Friday, a Friday the 13th at that, and I was waiting for the FCC to send me my license.  It had been maybe four weeks or so since I had taken the written test.  That was preceded two weeks prior by my Morse Code test.  I knew that the FCC would take anywhere from four to six weeks to send me my license, and on that Friday, I looked over at a then-classmate of mine named Steve Bxxx and said, "I wonder if the FCC has sent my license yet?"

In those days, getting a ham license was different than it was today.  My uncle Keith was my "Elmer", or ham radio mentor if you will.  I had developed an interest in ham radio that summer and was studying the Morse Code.  I had some familiarity with electricity and theory by then, but I still studied that, as well as rules and regulations, since half of the test would be on the rules and regs.

Uncle Keith said that when I was ready for the Morse Code test, he couldn't do it since he was a relative.  He suggested contacting a local ham.  I knew of one, a Mr. William H. Rawson, K2AX, out of nearby Dover.  I looked him up in the phone book, called him up, introduced myself, and would he be willing to administer the examination?

He said yes, and a few days later I was at his house.  With a 1 x 2 callsign he had been a ham for several years, and an Extra Class one at that.  He administered a Morse Code test, with the requirement that I demonstrate proficiency at five words per minute.  I passed the test, whereupon he signed the paperwork that he, as a volunteer examiner, had certified my proficiency, and he had mailed off the paperwork to the FCC.

Some two weeks later, I was back at his house for the written portion.  It was a simple test, with half of it devoted to simple theory.  It's been so long that I can't remember what the specific questions were but I think I had to understand the relationship between voltage, current, and resistance.  I had to know what frequencies that a Novice Class License could operate on.  I may have been questioned on the relationship between wavelength and frequency.  And I may have had to know how to calculate series and parallel resistance in an electric circuit.

So, a few weeks after that, it's Friday the 13th on a September afternoon, and I'm wondering where my license is, and if it's going to be in the mailbox at home; waiting for me.

Unbeknownst to me that afternoon, the FCC had already acted.  I was issued my license, effective 9/13/74, for the callsign WN2WVB.  However, I wasn't going to get it for another week.  It arrived one week later, and when it did, Uncle Keith drove over from Long Island to help me get set up.

My first QSO, or "contact", was with Mr. Rawson.  I was nervous at the last half of it and missed some of the Morse Code he had sent me, but the gist of it was congratulations, and to now get going and contact some more people.  That was on or about 9/22/74, and later on that weekend I was on the air.  The second QSO after that was a local one, and one later that night was with a novice ham in Framingham, Massachusetts.

Here I am forty years later, and my license is still active.  I've been on and off the air in several cycles since then.  Due to moves later on in high school, my callsign was changed to WN4ROS, then WN6MPP, and when I upgraded I became WA6MPP for many years.  I climbed my way up the ham radio ladder, getting my Extra Class license in 1983. 

Throughout the years in this hobby, I've made some good friends, and have talked to hams in more countries than I can remember.  And on this anniversary, I'm thinking, I need to get back into it......once the work situation is resolved.

Things have changed in that hobby over the years.  For all examinations since my Novice, I had to appear at the FCC in San Francisco to take the code and written tests.  These days, volunteer examiner committees administer the tests, and I think the Advanced Class license was phased out.  Frequency bands for phone (what we call "voice") have been adjusted, and some new bands have been created. 

But some things won't change:  the thrill of speaking to someone in a foreign country.  The camaraderie that you find in a local ham radio club.  The fun of building a low power transmitter and seeing if it works. 

Yes..........I need to get back into this.

Sunday Evening, 8/31/14

I probably ought to have a post that's going to tell the two or three readers that I have what's going on in my life these days, and what I'm doing to keep busy. 

I am these days, considering myself as "between jobs".  If anything, I have realized that at this point in my life, I'm not ready for retirement, even if I have managed to find enjoyment in my time off.  I have caught up on a lot of reading and have had some fun in working on my coin collection.  I've picked up the guitar again and have gotten my chops back, and I may start a new songwriting project even though I should finish those that I started some time ago.  But songs can take time to develop.

So what's happening on the job search front?  Plenty.  I am not at liberty at this point in time to disclose the machinations that are going on behind the scenes, other than to say that there are machinations.  If for some reason in my next post I'm able to tell you something, then I'll also tell you what else had been going on.  Right now it's stay tuned.

Now for some other observations.

* * * * * * *

In some conversations that I've had with my father and with Sheila, both of them independently brought up this feeling that the nation will be at war soon.  I passed that along to a good friend of mine who agreed with that, and even went so far as to say that the nation needs a war in order to get back that sense of unity that we once had.

He wasn't advocating that we go start a war somewhere, and neither were Sheila or my father.  The feeling is, and I'm beginning to suffer from that as well, is that we are due for another terror attack on our country.

The King of Saudi Arabia (who our President bows down to) has stated that terrorist actions against the United Kingdom and the United States are coming and coming soon.  We've had generals state that we need to do something about ISIS, a group that no one had heard about until recently.

What is President Obama doing?

He has admitted that there is no strategy, which is possibly the first time in his life that he's told the truth about anything.  No strategy.  None.

His defenders are praising him for being brilliant, for not advertising his strategy, even though he has no strategy in the first place.

However, his defenders are squirming because instead of having a strategy, that he's doing fundraisers, out on the golf course, or out riding this girlie bike while wearing a pair of mom jeans.

As for that coming war itself, it will not be a war that Obama wants to win, but it will be a war falling into the lap of his successor.

 

* * * * * * *

The Arizona primary elections were held last Tuesday.  From what I can tell the Establishment Republicans, who along with ISIS are a threat to our national security, didn't get all of the candidates that they wanted, but they got a few of who they wanted the most.

One of them is Martha McSally, who is running once more for Congress against incumbent Ron Barber.

I'm no Ron Barber fan, but I'm going to be brutally honest and state that I want to see him win.

Martha McSally, when she first ran two years ago, stated in her campaign that she deserved the seat because she was the first female Colonel to lead a flight squadron in the Air Force.  Hello?  Air Force service is a plus, and most (but not all) bird colonels I've met were great people.  One of the best bosses I ever had was a bird colonel. 

But what Martha McSally isn't telling you is that her supporters, when she lost the special primary to Jesse Kelly, went behind the scenes to support Ron Barber and to sabotage the Kelly campaign.  The Establishment Republicans here came out to voice their support for Barber, and even though McSally wasn't one of them, she wasn't supporting Kelly either.  She wanted him to lose so that she could run again in November against Barber, which she did.  She narrowly lost that election and my conscience is clear in telling you that I did not vote for her.

Two years later, McSally's back at it, and with the support of the Republican National Committee.  You know, that Committee that is on record for stating that they wanted to see President Obama succeed. 

This time around, Martha McSally isn't taking any positions on the burning issues.  Two years ago she was in favor of "amnesty" for illegal aliens, but she's not taking a stand on that issue this year.  She also isn't stating her position on the Second Amendment.  Her ads feature testimonials from people who know her who tell you what a great person she is, but her ads do not state in any way what her position on Obamacare is.  She simply isn't taking any positions.  We don't know what she stands for because she's not going to tell us.

At least, those people who speak about her aren't telling us. 

They probably don't know either.

 

* * * * * * * *

In the race for governor, Doug Ducey has won the nomination, much to the chagrin of the Republican National Committee.  We know where Doug Ducey stands on the issues, and I agree with his stand on all of them. 

However, Doug Ducey isn't running against President Obama for the governor's chair.  He isn't telling us what he plans to do for Arizona. 

It seems to me that Arizona has an opportunity to attract businesses from other states which would bring us jobs.  He might want to capitalize on that and take some lessons from Rick Perry of Texas.

* * * * * * *

That's it for this evening.

Time for Some Tunes!

We did this kind of post once before, and I think it's time to do it again:  a selection of tunes that I hope you will enjoy as much as I do.  These are all YouTube links; if you want to come back to this blog you'll have to hit that "return" arrow that's in your browser.

I apologize for any ads that you're forced to endure.  In picking these out, I have tried to select links where there aren't any ads, but the Google Boyz have a way of sneaking them in there anyway.  Look at the bright side......they didn't make you pay to come here, or to watch these.

 

* * * * * * *

Our first selection for this evening is from Randy Bachman.  I've linked to it before in a previous post, but I thought it would be a good leadoff for this collection.  Its' from his Survivor album, released in 1978, and it's the leadoff track.  You might notice a Beach Boys influence in this one.

Just a Kid

* * * * * * *

Next up is April Wine.  This is track #2 off of their Harder....Faster.... album, which was released in 1979.  This was released as a single in 1980 in Canada as well as stateside.  I think it's better known up there than down here.  It's a longtime favorite of mine.

Say Hello

 

* * * * * * *

The third selection for this evening is from the Smithereens.  This is a interesting song, in my opinion.  Well structured, with an interesting concept about having to leave something behind.

House We Used to Live In

 

* * * * * *

The fourth song is a classic from Foreigner.  It was one of Hal's favorite tunes due to its science fiction theme.  It remains in Foreigner's set list to this day, testifying to its staying power. 

Starrider

* * * * * * *

The next tune is one that comes from an album that I do not own, and I'm going to have to get off of my sitting end to rectify that situation.  From north of border, where a lot of good music comes from, we have Kim Mitchell!

Lager and Ale

* * * * * * *

Now we're at side two, and the first track for side two has to come from a vinyl album that had its song positioned at side two, right?  That's how I see it.

So..........this next one is from Tom Petty's solo effort Full Moon Fever, from 1989.  This is one of my favorite albums. 

Feel A Whole Lot Better

* * * * * * *

This next one is a bit difficult to play on guitar, and if you don't believe me then give it a try and let me know how you make out.  Its claim to fame is that it was the B-side to the BTO single "Let it Ride".  It is from the album Bachman-Turner Overdrive II, released December 1973.

Tramp

 

* * * * * * *

This next song is an old classic from Creedence Clearwater Revival. 

 

Run Through the Jungle

* * * * * * *

This next one is what you call a song.  As Greg Kihn would say, they don't write 'em like that anymore.  I'd like to think that I can write one like this.  It's from one of the best albums ever recorded, American Woman, by The Guess Who.

Proper Stranger

* * * * * * *

Our final song this evening is from the Smithereens.  One this one we have a rare vocal by Jim Babjak.  And I'll admit, this one has influenced a song that I've co-written that's called "Junkyard Road".  "Junkyard Road", of course, is the closing track of the first album that we did, that hasn't been recorded yet.  Maybe one day it'll be on YouTube.

Anyway.........I thought of this song when I was doing yesterday's post.  I like not only the song but I wish this burger chain would open up here in Tucson.

White Castle Blues

* * * * * * *

 

That's all folks!

 

 

Don't forget to pet a dog or a cat!



Boycott Burger King? or, the Law of Unintended Consequences

In the business headlines today it was announced that Burger King is in talks to buy Tim Horton's, a well-known chain in Canada, and that BK will move its headquarters to our northern neighbor and become a Canadian corporation for tax reasons.  This is a move that is called a "tax inversion", which means that the acquiring company obtains a tax benefit by leaving the United States for a country where the corporate income tax rate is lower.  This is due to somewhat recent changes in the tax code.  Corporate income taxes are hiked since those hiking them think that the corporations aren't doing their "fair share", and by hiking their taxes the government gets more money in the process.

This seems like a good idea to Joe and Jane Citizen and it seems like an even better idea to the government taxmasters.  Make the corporations pay more; they've got the money, right?  But as is often the case where what seems like a new law is a good idea, that new law fails to take into account what I call the Law of Unintended Consequences. 

The Law of Unintended Consequences, in the instance of increasing corporate tax rates, can have two obvious results.

The first result is higher prices passed on to the consumer.  Think about this for a minute.  A corporation isn't in business to provide you with some sort of service.  A corporation is in business to make money.  Oh, there are some enterprises out there who are very customer-service oriented and they see their revenue as an indication as to how they are succeeding in providing customer service, but even those corporations are not going to remain in business if expenditures outpace revenues.  Corporate beancounters are all well too familiar with the "cost of doing business", and although they accept that as a reality, another reality is that they are going to keep that under control.  Increased costs will be passed along to the consumer of the product if those increased costs are seen as remaining for any foreseeable future.  Higher prices for the product is the most likely consequence of increased corporate tax rates. 

The next obvious consequence is what you're seeing happen with Burger King.  It's nothing new as that it's had precedent for several decades in one sense.  Increasing the corporate tax rate to something that the corporation is not willing to live with can and will result in that corporation relocating its headquarters in some cases and relocating its state of incorporation in many other cases.

How many of you have heard the term "Delaware corporation"?  I use to work for one.  The corporate headquarters were in southern California, and later on in Maryland, but for legal (tax) reasons the corporation was incorporated within the State of Delaware.  A corporation doesn't incorporate in Delaware because the CEOs want to live there.  The corporation incorporates there because Delaware doesn't charge them as much to incorporate there as California does.  (When I was living in San Jose, I heard frequent ads on the radio encouraging business execs to incorporate in Nevada for similar reasons). 

But this second consequence isn't limited to where a corporation files their articles of incorporation.  Corporations will also migrate to states that are more business friendly.  Governor Rick Perry of Texas has mounted efforts to bring corporations to Texas, where residents do not pay state income tax and where the regulations not as burdensome.  Huntsville, Alabama has seen major defense companies expand there while contracting facilities that are elsewhere (as in California).  A good friend of mine back in San Jose works for a company based in Tennessee, and the parent in Tennessee seems to be making preparations for work to be done there and not in California. 

So if regulation and tax rates are having the unintended consequence of corporate assets from one state to another, is it really a surprise that the bigger corporations who have overseas assets would want to base in other countries if the tax rates upon them here are hiked?  Corporate lobbyists warned our lawmakers what would happen if their tax burdens were increased.  They said they would up and leave if the new tax rates are too high.  That might have been seen as threats and bluffing, but corporate CEOs are beholden to the bottom line so that institutional investors such as mutual funds will invest in their companies.  Reduced profits leads to reduced investment.  They can only pass along so much of their cost of doing business to the consumer.  Eventually, a  point is reached to where their corporate lawyers discover ways to legally pay lower tax rates, which is why tax inversions are now becoming popular.

Now let's get back to Burger King.

Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio is now calling for a boycott of Burger King.  He wants consumers to go to Wendy's or White Castle.  He's calling for people to patronize companies based in his state, and he very likely wants you to think that he's eating there too.

First of all, United States Senators aren't known for going for fast food meals unless they're on the campaign trail and they want to be photographed at one.  They eat in their own private cafeteria or have their staffers bring food to their offices.  Oh, I'm sure there are a few who like the occasional Big Mac or the Chinese takeout, but when they go on their lunch break they're not going to walk around in public until they find themselves at a Wendy's.  It's simply beneath them to do that.

Second, as far as boycotting goes, I'll eat where I damn well please.  I may or may not go to Burger King.  I normally don't here in Tucson since Burger Kings in this town tend to have bad service (if you can call it service in the first place), and plus, since we have Culver's, Freddy's Steakburgers and In-N-Out the odds of my going to BK aren't that great in the first place.  However, I've been known to stop off at them while on the road, as that the BK restaurants outside of Tucson seem to have decent service and I happen to like flame-broiled Whoppers. 

Third, why is the Senator surprised at what Burger King is doing?  If a corporation can reduce their expenses by basing themselves in Canada, why wouldn't they go there?  Canada will not be raising their tax rates, especially if they're collecting unintended revenue from American corporations relocating there.  They might be tempted to lower corporate tax rates in order to attract more outside investment.

I don't particularly like to see the corporations here move overseas.  I want to make that clear.

However, if you have a bunch of Tax Nazis in the government who want to confiscate more money from them since they can't get the budget under control, can you blame them?

Will Obama be Impeached? (or, the Fallacy of Appeal to Fear)

The past few days has the news from Organized Media as well as from other outlets chattering about the possibility of Obama being impeached.  This chatter is no doubt driven from speculation that he is about to issue an Executive Order where he will grant amnesty to several million illegal aliens, using the excuse that it's necessary to bypass Congress since Congress has not passed the so-called "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" legislation that he so desperately wants.  The arrival within the past months of children from Central America has made headlines for the past few weeks as the Border Patrol has been tasked with dealing with this influx, and that no doubt is catalyzing the situation.

Impeachment talk is also being driven by the decision from House Republicans, led by Speaker Boehner, to start the processing of a lawsuit against President Obama.  Obama seems to be bothered not one whit about the lawsuit and doesn't care if it happens or not.  I don't have any reason to believe that he would care about the verdict going against him, and he certainly seems, by his actions, to be begging for an impeachment.

The thinking among the Democrats is that impeachment proceedings against the President will motivate their base to come out to the polls and vote to protect control of the Senate by the Democrats.  From what I have been reading lately, a lot of incumbent Democrat Senators are worried about being voted out.  From my Qualitative Reasoning and Logic class that I had several years ago at San Jose State, the argument suffers from the Fallacy of Appeal to Fear.  Simply stated, the argument is "you Democrats, you better come out and vote for us because if you don't Obama will be impeached".  Do you see the Appeal to Fear here?  The tactic has been used before, as in by the Republicans in 2006 when they told their voters "you better come out and vote for us because if you don't Nancy Pelosi will become Speaker of the House".  They could not provide a legitimate reason for being allowed to continue controlling the House, so they had to use the Fallacy of Appeal to Fear.

The Republicans lost control of the House in the 2006 midterm, and the Democrats fear losing the Senate in this year's midterm.  Thus like their Republican counterparts, it seems as if they can't come up with any valid reasons to be allowed to retain control of the Senate, and thus the return of the Fallacy of Appeal to Fear.  They are stating in their fundraisers that we'd better vote for them or Obama will be impeached.

In this instance, we have something different here.  I don't think the Republicans wanted Pelosi as Speaker but I do think the Democrats, especially Obama himself, do want the House to take up Articles of Impeachment.  The Republicans seem to be aiding and abetting this by pressing forward with their lawsuit.  However, that should not be taken in any way that the Republicans necessarily want to begin the impeachment process, and here's why.

The Republicans tried that in 1998 against Bill Clinton.  They presented four Articles of Impeachment against a sitting President who won re-election, alleging obstruction of justice and perjury, and succeeded in getting the impeachment part of the process done.  However, impeachment is not the removal of an elected official.  It's more like a criminal indictment, and the actual process of prosecution and conviction take place in another chamber.....the Senate in this case.  The trial takes place in the Senate, and at the end of the trial the vote takes place.  Clinton was impeached, but he was not convicted.....and in case you haven't read the Constitution, you need two thirds of the Senators to vote in favor of conviction before the President or a federal judge can be removed from office.  Clinton of course, was not convicted, and finished out the remainder of his term.  The Republicans lost.

The memory of that loss is still freshly resident within the minds of the Republican Establishment.  They do not see this as a winnable fight, and even if they did, I'm not convinced that they have the political will to do so.  It would be so much easier for them to sit back and do nothing while Obama shreds the Constitution.  Oh, they might issue a token protest here and there, but it's easier to do nothing.  They would gladly allow the President to take us further down the road in this handbasket that we're all in.

Additionally, what if Obama does issue a blanket amnesty to the illegal aliens?  News flash: the Establishment Republicans want amnesty too!  They lost the House in 2006 while trying to be better champions for amnesty than the Democrats were.  They tried again to help the Democrats pass this the next year.  The Establishment Republicans in the Senate helped their fellow Democrats in the Senate pass a bill earlier this year.  So if Obama does go forward with amnesty, guess what?  Those Establishment Republicans who are in favor of this, while knowing all along that the voters don't want it, all know damn well that Obama's fingerprints, and not theirs, will be all over the amnesty.

In a way, it's clever.  Amnesty becomes law of the land by Executive Order, and the Establishment Republicans escape credit for an unpopular idea.  They then become positioned to campaign on the promise of "we'll repeal amnesty", hoping that the electorate will have no memory of the "we'll repeal Obamacare" promise that we heard four years ago.

But let's get back to the impeachment thing for a minute.

I am hearing the argument that Obama will do everything he can to provoke impeachment proceedings against him.  He's going to wait until on or about Labor Day before he does this, which will give him some time to figure out how far he wants to go in his Executive Order.  He knows that no matter how far he goes, there will be no retaliation from the so-called opposition party, but he needs to figure out how far he can go before he acts.  He may not care if he loses the Senate, and he might want to for all we know as that this will give him two more years to pick fights that he knows he will win.

So where's the downside to him in all of this?  None, if he doesn't care about losing the Senate. 

However, in the long term, he may be destroying his own party from within. 

I don't see that bothering him any since he knows his own party will never give him the credit for that. 

He'll still be their Adored Leader.

Sunday, 7/27/14.

I haven't posted as much as I thought I would be with all this time off.  I almost weighed in with my thoughts about what's going on in Ukraine and with the border, but didn't feel the motivation to do so.  There's some chatter this weekend that the Obama administration is going to issue an executive order tomorrow that will grant refugee status to five million or so who are in this country illegally, and I guess if I want to I can weigh in with my two cents' worth on that.  I have a belief that Obama will do it, though more for ulterior reasons than in helping out a future voting bloc for his party.

As it is, I'm still undergoing this transition of sorts.  I'm finding things to do with the coin collection to help me keep busy, and I'm looking online for work.  I haven't heard of any movement from the Colorado opportunities and so last week's focus was on contracting opportunities in Phoenix. 

If I were to have my druthers, I'd rather work locally, but I'm not sure there's much in the way of work here.  Two of my former co-workers who were forced out/let go months before I was have just now been picked up by another aerospace firm here in Tucson.  Both of them are in contract-to-hire positions and I think I was in the running for one of them.  That one firm was letting go of people last year but with them now having contract openings, it suggests that things are picking up in that segment of the industry.

They also have operations in Phoenix metro, and as of last week I learned that I was on the "short list" of the candidates they are considering.  I would have to temporarily live in Phoenix out of a long term residence inn type hotel, or a one bedroom apartment for six months while Sheila runs things here in Tucson.  We're hoping for Phoenix anyway as that I can come home on some weekends and Sheila can come up on the other weekends.  That would give me time to figure out where in Phoenix I would want to live in case the firm decides to hire me after the contract is finished.  And logistically, it would be easier to move there than to Colorado. 

A lot of people in Tucson hate Phoenix, but I'm not one of them.  Likewise, a lot of people in Phoenix hate Tucson, but I think the hate that Tucson has for Phoenix is borderline vitriolic while the Phoenicians tend to look down their noses at Tucson and leave it at that.  As far as I'm concerned, I've really got better ways to expend energy than to hate a city that's a two to three hour drive away and a city that I don't pass through all that often.  I mean, they're there, they're out of sight, they're some distance away.......why waste mental energy hating them?

As for Tucson, I really enjoyed many of my years here, but if an offer were to come from Phoenix I'd move there in a minute.  The City Council has been suffering from an anti-business attitude for several years and it's getting to where the high tech firms don't want to come here.  California has its Silicon Valley and Arizona has its Silicon Desert.  Phoenix is adding jobs while Tucson is chasing them away.  Why not move to Phoenix?

One drawback to Phoenix is the heat.  It's worse there than it is here.   The Valley of the Sun is roughly 1200 feet above sea level while Tucson is roughly 2500.  Phoenix also doesn't get as much rain, so the desert looks a little more desolate.

As for positives, it's closer to Flagstaff, Roosevelt Lake, the Grand Canyon, and Prescott.  And, they've got jobs.  Not to mention I have friends up there already.

If a contract position should be offered me from up there, I won't waste very much time in signing. 

That said, I'll still look around here.