The 2016 election is likely the single most important election since 1860 to the direction of These United States.
Two roads diverged in this race and we must take the one less traveled if we want to truly make a difference.
We have the patron saint of the establishment crony political class against someone who has never been a politician before. There are many who want to paint Trump as "the same" as Hillary due to him knowing how to navigate his business through the political elites pay to play system. But in business you must adapt to the playing field and adjust to it as it changes or you won't have a business to navigate. To me this just means he knows how the system is corrupt and it's has cost him millions to negotiate through it, who better to ferret out the mess than someone who knows it from the outside not making wealth from the inside.
This is the bottom-line. If Hillary is elected she has promised in her first 100 days to give all 20 million illegal immigrants full legal citizenship status as well as all their families not yet here effectively adding 20-50 million New Democrat voters. She has promised to double down on the Dodd-Frank and CFPB. She has promised to double down on Obamacare. She has promised to do away with the 2nd Amendment. Donald Trump has promised the exact opposite of each.
Donald Trump has released the names of eleven possible Supreme Court Justices to replace Scalia who were all recommended by The Heritage Foundation and are a wish list of Constitutional Conservatives and pro-life believers.
Hillary would appoint more of the caliber that Obama has. The next president will likely appoint 4-5 justices. If they are in that eleven we will all be rejoicing, if they are Hillary's the Constitution will be no more.
With Hillary's 20-50 million more dependent voters there will never be another Republican or conservative ever elected president again. There will never be a Constitution again, there will never be an opportunity to roll back or end abortion. If any of those things mean anything to you, then you have to pray that Donald Trump is the next president or really nothing else matters. For me, I'm fighting to save this Free Constitutional Republic by working to elect Donald Trump, then plan to use equal vigor to hold his feet to the fire to do as he has said.
If Hillary wins, my thirty seven year fight for conservative political movement will come to an end because it's over, we can never even hope to win again in the lifetimes of anyone currently breathing. I will do what I can to protect my family as best as I can in what will become The People's Republic of America.
We have one last chance. Please put down our differences and save this nation. If you have emotional issues against Trump then do as I did with Dole, McCain and Romney and hold your nose and vote against Hillary. You, your family and your county are depending upon it.
Sunday, May 29, 2016
Thursday, May 26, 2016
No Matter Your Favorite We Are Watching History
When this election season began I was 100% for Scott Walker, and had been since 2012. My second choice was Bobby Jindal. For me the only intelligent choices would be someone with solid successful experience at a "C" level position either in business or with governorships. That meant that Walker, Jindal, Fiorina, Trump, Christy, Bush, Kasich were the ONLY ones qualified regardless of ideology and politics. While I align closer to Ted Cruz than any in belief systems and would vote for him over any of them as a Senator, I see him wholly unqualified and ill equipped for President at this time in his life. The same goes for Marco Rubio. They have never shown any evidence of having the required leadership skills to be President.
As to Trump, the day he threw his hat into the ring I knew, if he was serious, no one could beat him in either party due to our society's celebrity culture. He has a 98% name recognition and mostly positive in that he's a tough smart rich guy who fires people, and everyone hates politicians especially now. Further when you add that the results of a study done in 2006 where one of the questions was "Name Your State's Governor," and only 9% on average by state could do so.
I wasn't sure what I thought of Trump as president. But as I watched him being attacked financially by having one deal after another cancelled due to his involvement thus costing him hundreds of millions to his bottom-line and yet he didn't blink. I've never seen this before in my lifetime. Every other time any politician was attacked financially they bailed.
Was I actually seeing for the first time or at most the second time in my life someone who was actually following the model our founders had imagined? They never imagined career politicians who would go into politics for life as a career and to make their wealth. They envisioned that men would go into business, become wealthy, and then in the later part of their lives go do as a public service by bringing their expertise to elected position for a period without needing to be reelected to feed their families. We saw this with Reagan who made his wealth in Hollywood who late in life gave 8 years to his state and then 8 more to the nation.
If you look at our founders they more resembled Reagan and Trump than any other candidate. Washington was the wealthiest man in America. He was not always with the best cash-flow but was hugely wealthy in land. He also was the largest whisky distiller in America producing 11,000 gallons a year, one of the largest commercial fishing operations and an innovative agriculture enterprise. In fact his land speculation company was one of the main reasons that drove him to war when the King took away his company's claims to millions of acres of land he held in the Ohio territories. He was also upset with the usury charges that the English banks and merchants charged to the colonies with the blessings of the King.
John Hancock who was the wealthiest man in Massachusetts in the shipping business. He was a Tory because he had business relations where he paid off the King's men to look the other way on what came and went on his ships. Then when the King cracked down and cost him business and money he started moving away from the English, but when they took over Hancock's home to use as the English General's home and base of operations it was the final straw.
We are seeing a peaceful revolution and a one time ever chance of the people taking power back from the back room deals of the establishment political elites who are in collusion no matter what label they carry.
As to Trump, the day he threw his hat into the ring I knew, if he was serious, no one could beat him in either party due to our society's celebrity culture. He has a 98% name recognition and mostly positive in that he's a tough smart rich guy who fires people, and everyone hates politicians especially now. Further when you add that the results of a study done in 2006 where one of the questions was "Name Your State's Governor," and only 9% on average by state could do so.
I wasn't sure what I thought of Trump as president. But as I watched him being attacked financially by having one deal after another cancelled due to his involvement thus costing him hundreds of millions to his bottom-line and yet he didn't blink. I've never seen this before in my lifetime. Every other time any politician was attacked financially they bailed.
Was I actually seeing for the first time or at most the second time in my life someone who was actually following the model our founders had imagined? They never imagined career politicians who would go into politics for life as a career and to make their wealth. They envisioned that men would go into business, become wealthy, and then in the later part of their lives go do as a public service by bringing their expertise to elected position for a period without needing to be reelected to feed their families. We saw this with Reagan who made his wealth in Hollywood who late in life gave 8 years to his state and then 8 more to the nation.
If you look at our founders they more resembled Reagan and Trump than any other candidate. Washington was the wealthiest man in America. He was not always with the best cash-flow but was hugely wealthy in land. He also was the largest whisky distiller in America producing 11,000 gallons a year, one of the largest commercial fishing operations and an innovative agriculture enterprise. In fact his land speculation company was one of the main reasons that drove him to war when the King took away his company's claims to millions of acres of land he held in the Ohio territories. He was also upset with the usury charges that the English banks and merchants charged to the colonies with the blessings of the King.
John Hancock who was the wealthiest man in Massachusetts in the shipping business. He was a Tory because he had business relations where he paid off the King's men to look the other way on what came and went on his ships. Then when the King cracked down and cost him business and money he started moving away from the English, but when they took over Hancock's home to use as the English General's home and base of operations it was the final straw.
We are seeing a peaceful revolution and a one time ever chance of the people taking power back from the back room deals of the establishment political elites who are in collusion no matter what label they carry.
Monday, April 11, 2016
We Are Watching A Case Study Of Hoizontal Hostility
Every day in today's news we see the battles between Trump vs Cruz vs The Establishment Republicans playing out in front of our eyes. Likely most reading this have picked sides and are passionately defending our turf, and possibly pointing out all the monsters in the other camps. Have you ever asked yourself why is it that the two most radically opposed to business as usual in D.C. are the most passionately fighting each other? Personally I took one of those "Who's the candidate for you?" Quizzes and predictably I was 94% aligned with Ted Cruz and 91% aligned with Donald Trump and significantly less with all others down to 11% with Hillary Clinton and 8% with Bernie Sanders. I am personally in favor of Trump but it's a coin flip on policies, I hold leadership skills and experience high on my decision process, if I was voting for a Senator where ideology is my primary measure I would vote for Cruz over any who ran. To me President is a bigger more broad thought process.
What we are seeing is what Dartmouth Psycologist, Judith White calls Horizonantal Hostility, that even though they share a fundamental objective, radical groups often disparage more mainstream groups as impostors or sell outs. Sigmund Freud wrote, "It's precisely the minor differences in people who are otherwise alike that forM the basis of feeling of strangeness and hostility between them."
We notice Horizontal Hostilty everywhere. When a deaf woman won Miss America, rather than cheering her on as a trailblazer, deaf activists protested because she spoke orally rather than using sign language and "wasn't deaf enough." In a study in Greek politics it was found the members of the most Conservative party judged most harshly the most similar party even more than the most Progressive. Also the most liberal party most criticized the next most Progressive.
There is an excellent case study with the Women's Suffrage Movement started by Lucy Stanton who created the nationwide organization and was making remarkable progress until two of her lieutenants, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cade Staton broke away and went to war with Stone for not being radical enough. Stone was aghast that Anthony attached her own movement with a racist organization led by George Frances that was working to block the black community from the right to vote. Biographers of Anthony said her radical ties set back the movement at least twenty years.
Hopefully, we who want to see change can come together rather than follow basic human nature and fight among ourselves. To me, I still see the smartest, if not most difficult path would be an alliance of Trump and Cruz. Can we focus on the real enemy is the question.
What we are seeing is what Dartmouth Psycologist, Judith White calls Horizonantal Hostility, that even though they share a fundamental objective, radical groups often disparage more mainstream groups as impostors or sell outs. Sigmund Freud wrote, "It's precisely the minor differences in people who are otherwise alike that forM the basis of feeling of strangeness and hostility between them."
We notice Horizontal Hostilty everywhere. When a deaf woman won Miss America, rather than cheering her on as a trailblazer, deaf activists protested because she spoke orally rather than using sign language and "wasn't deaf enough." In a study in Greek politics it was found the members of the most Conservative party judged most harshly the most similar party even more than the most Progressive. Also the most liberal party most criticized the next most Progressive.
There is an excellent case study with the Women's Suffrage Movement started by Lucy Stanton who created the nationwide organization and was making remarkable progress until two of her lieutenants, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cade Staton broke away and went to war with Stone for not being radical enough. Stone was aghast that Anthony attached her own movement with a racist organization led by George Frances that was working to block the black community from the right to vote. Biographers of Anthony said her radical ties set back the movement at least twenty years.
Hopefully, we who want to see change can come together rather than follow basic human nature and fight among ourselves. To me, I still see the smartest, if not most difficult path would be an alliance of Trump and Cruz. Can we focus on the real enemy is the question.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
What Might Be Your Butterfly Effect?
Every day of our lives we could be impacting those around us and maybe even the world at large in ways we may never know. Who knows where an act of kindness might end, or something we teach another, or words of encouragement for someone at a critical time could be the catalyst, the butterfly wing, that changes the direction of someone's life. Who knows the ripples that will flow from such tiny events that can change the world.
Consider the story of Norman Borlaug, the Nobel Prize winner who is credited for saving at least two billion lives from starvation from his research and development of drought resistant grain hybrids. I knew I liked him when I learned that he was a member of the National Wrestling Hall of Fame who is credited with being the catalyst to start high school wrestling in Minnesota.
"Wrestling taught me some valuable lessons ... I always figured I could hold my own against the best in the world. It made me tough. Many times, I drew on that strength. It's an inappropriate crutch perhaps, but that's the way I'm made". Norman Borlaug.
Okay, so he saved two billion lives, was it him, or should we actually give some of that credit to Vice President Henry Wallace, FDR's second VP? Wallace was previously the Secretary of Agriculture, who through his influence as VP persuaded the Rockefeller Foundation to invest in Borlaug’s research making his discoveries possible. Wallace had a lifelong passion for experimenting with crops to help feed more of the worlds people. Without this passion of Wallace, Borlaug's research was floundering away in Mexico.
So, then should we share the credit with both Borlaug and Wallace, but maybe we should look back further. There was a young college student who was studying and experimenting with crops who a college president had allowed to live with them while he was in school. Part of how he paid his room and board was he helped look out for their young son and often took him with him on nature walks studying the crops and let him watch and participate with him in his experiments. That young boy was Henry Wallace, that student was George Washington Carver. So should the credit then go to Carver as well?
Okay, now we have Borlaug, Wallace, and George Washington Carver who had an impact on saving those two billion lives. However, should we look just a bit further?
In the mid 1800s there was a raid on a community of Free African Americans in Missouri. The village was destroyed and the people captured to be taken to Arkansas to sell back into slavery. One of the youngest was a very small baby. A local farmer and his wife were heartbroken by this attack and Susan Carver was able to find a way to get a message to those raiders and negotiate a price to return that baby. She sent her husband Moses to ride to a meeting place near the Arkansas line where he traded their last horse for that stolen baby. The raiders threw a sack toward Moses and he caught that nearly frozen child inside. He took him and put him under his shirt and coat to try to warm him and rushed back home to Susan who nursed this baby back to health. Moses and Susan a white farmer couple adopted this child as their own and gave him their last name and raised George Washington Carver.
It could easily be said if not for Moses and Susan Carver those two billion people would have starved.
You never know what you may do or say that might make a difference to someone who might make a difference to millions. I know that helps me to keep a bit of perspective and try to leave people lifted.
Consider the story of Norman Borlaug, the Nobel Prize winner who is credited for saving at least two billion lives from starvation from his research and development of drought resistant grain hybrids. I knew I liked him when I learned that he was a member of the National Wrestling Hall of Fame who is credited with being the catalyst to start high school wrestling in Minnesota.
"Wrestling taught me some valuable lessons ... I always figured I could hold my own against the best in the world. It made me tough. Many times, I drew on that strength. It's an inappropriate crutch perhaps, but that's the way I'm made". Norman Borlaug.
Okay, so he saved two billion lives, was it him, or should we actually give some of that credit to Vice President Henry Wallace, FDR's second VP? Wallace was previously the Secretary of Agriculture, who through his influence as VP persuaded the Rockefeller Foundation to invest in Borlaug’s research making his discoveries possible. Wallace had a lifelong passion for experimenting with crops to help feed more of the worlds people. Without this passion of Wallace, Borlaug's research was floundering away in Mexico.
So, then should we share the credit with both Borlaug and Wallace, but maybe we should look back further. There was a young college student who was studying and experimenting with crops who a college president had allowed to live with them while he was in school. Part of how he paid his room and board was he helped look out for their young son and often took him with him on nature walks studying the crops and let him watch and participate with him in his experiments. That young boy was Henry Wallace, that student was George Washington Carver. So should the credit then go to Carver as well?
Okay, now we have Borlaug, Wallace, and George Washington Carver who had an impact on saving those two billion lives. However, should we look just a bit further?
In the mid 1800s there was a raid on a community of Free African Americans in Missouri. The village was destroyed and the people captured to be taken to Arkansas to sell back into slavery. One of the youngest was a very small baby. A local farmer and his wife were heartbroken by this attack and Susan Carver was able to find a way to get a message to those raiders and negotiate a price to return that baby. She sent her husband Moses to ride to a meeting place near the Arkansas line where he traded their last horse for that stolen baby. The raiders threw a sack toward Moses and he caught that nearly frozen child inside. He took him and put him under his shirt and coat to try to warm him and rushed back home to Susan who nursed this baby back to health. Moses and Susan a white farmer couple adopted this child as their own and gave him their last name and raised George Washington Carver.
It could easily be said if not for Moses and Susan Carver those two billion people would have starved.
You never know what you may do or say that might make a difference to someone who might make a difference to millions. I know that helps me to keep a bit of perspective and try to leave people lifted.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
The Fiscal Cliff Poison Pill
Okay, the Republicans capitulated and gave in on most of Obama's demands to stave off the "Fiscal Cliff" so we should hang them and vote a third party right? I truly understand the emotions behind feeling like that. However, right now we need thinking not feeling. No matter what is passed this next two to four years anyone who has any sense, who understands even basic economics or civics will hate it. However, elections have consequences and we are in for a very rough ride. The final verdict is not yet in as to any chance of saving any semblance of our once great nation from the hands of those in power bent on destroying it. One thing is sure, if we stand fast and draw a line in the sand, we won't save her at all.
Let's take a look at what we are up against in this "Fiscal Cliff" debate. Obama controls the White House, the Senate, the Media, and through that the American people who 56% approve of his job performance. I understand that is difficult to grasp if you have ever used your brain for anything but a garbage can. However that is where we are. Most Americans have bought the class envy politics where they want the top earners to get punished, they don't understand they are talking about their boss who may lay them off when his income is diminished. Too many do not understand cause and effect in economics.
So here is what the Republicans have had to deal with, a truly no win situation against an opponent who cannot lose. Negotiating against someone who really wants the "worst case" situation to happen, the only threat you can hold against them being their own best case scenario makes it an uphill climb. Obama and the Democrats truly wanted the Fiscal Cliff to happen, it is their political wet dream, with it they get to raise taxes massively on EVERY working American to where Bill Clinton left them, and get to gut the military as well, even better they would be able to blame the Republicans for it happening.
There are so few who understand what is happening the Republicans couldn't win a dog catcher race in 2014 after EVERY American family sees 300-500.00/month disappear from their monthly paychecks. We would see a recession that would make 2008-2009 look like a Bull Market, jobs disappearing, massive foreclosures both in residential and commercial markets. It would be Grapes of Wrath kind of things. Thousands of military and defense industry personnel would be cut loose and unemployed all at once as well.
Last month Boehner tried something that even the Republicans didn't understand, he took a bill that Nancy Pelosi was pushing last summer and rewrote it verbatim to prove that the Democrats had no intention of accepting ANY bill from the House Republicans. Obama promised to veto it, Reid said it would never be voted on in the Senate. This proved that nothing the House did would ever see the light of day in the Senate, and only a Senate bill would have any chance to be passed.
The Senate Republicans hashed out a terrible bill with the Senate Democrats, but it does limit the damage marginally from no bill at all that the Democrats would actually prefer. It protects the military short term, it gives permanent tax relief to everyone under 400k individually, and 450k as a family, but there is bad news for those making 250k and up with loss of deductions, (read tax increases) just not increased tax rates which Obama wanted both, just got one.
These are the key victories if we want to call them that, maybe better said, the areas we didn't lose as much:
•Raises taxes on incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for households instead of everyone.
•Raises taxes on investment income for those taxpayers as well
•Limits tax deductions for incomes over $250,000—raising their taxes, too
•Increases the death tax rate for estates over $5 million
•Extends long-term unemployment benefits for one year
•Postpones sequestration’s automatic spending cuts (including those to defense) by two months
Elections have consequences, and we are all going to feel them for a long time. This is going to be ugly, but we MUST learn how to play politics on our side. The Democrats are masters at it, we as a party suck, mostly because our voting base doesn't understand the game. It is like my Daddy always taught me, it is better to get a little of something than a lot of nothing. We will have to fight for scraps and try to save as much as we can, but when we lost the White House and the Senate we guaranteed that we and our country was going to pay deeply and dearly. It is survival mode now.
As to third parties, who knows, but if we don't play this game very well and very smart getting the little things we can, there won't be anything left to save after a third party would come about.
Let's take a look at what we are up against in this "Fiscal Cliff" debate. Obama controls the White House, the Senate, the Media, and through that the American people who 56% approve of his job performance. I understand that is difficult to grasp if you have ever used your brain for anything but a garbage can. However that is where we are. Most Americans have bought the class envy politics where they want the top earners to get punished, they don't understand they are talking about their boss who may lay them off when his income is diminished. Too many do not understand cause and effect in economics.
So here is what the Republicans have had to deal with, a truly no win situation against an opponent who cannot lose. Negotiating against someone who really wants the "worst case" situation to happen, the only threat you can hold against them being their own best case scenario makes it an uphill climb. Obama and the Democrats truly wanted the Fiscal Cliff to happen, it is their political wet dream, with it they get to raise taxes massively on EVERY working American to where Bill Clinton left them, and get to gut the military as well, even better they would be able to blame the Republicans for it happening.
There are so few who understand what is happening the Republicans couldn't win a dog catcher race in 2014 after EVERY American family sees 300-500.00/month disappear from their monthly paychecks. We would see a recession that would make 2008-2009 look like a Bull Market, jobs disappearing, massive foreclosures both in residential and commercial markets. It would be Grapes of Wrath kind of things. Thousands of military and defense industry personnel would be cut loose and unemployed all at once as well.
Last month Boehner tried something that even the Republicans didn't understand, he took a bill that Nancy Pelosi was pushing last summer and rewrote it verbatim to prove that the Democrats had no intention of accepting ANY bill from the House Republicans. Obama promised to veto it, Reid said it would never be voted on in the Senate. This proved that nothing the House did would ever see the light of day in the Senate, and only a Senate bill would have any chance to be passed.
The Senate Republicans hashed out a terrible bill with the Senate Democrats, but it does limit the damage marginally from no bill at all that the Democrats would actually prefer. It protects the military short term, it gives permanent tax relief to everyone under 400k individually, and 450k as a family, but there is bad news for those making 250k and up with loss of deductions, (read tax increases) just not increased tax rates which Obama wanted both, just got one.
These are the key victories if we want to call them that, maybe better said, the areas we didn't lose as much:
•Raises taxes on incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for households instead of everyone.
•Raises taxes on investment income for those taxpayers as well
•Limits tax deductions for incomes over $250,000—raising their taxes, too
•Increases the death tax rate for estates over $5 million
•Extends long-term unemployment benefits for one year
•Postpones sequestration’s automatic spending cuts (including those to defense) by two months
Elections have consequences, and we are all going to feel them for a long time. This is going to be ugly, but we MUST learn how to play politics on our side. The Democrats are masters at it, we as a party suck, mostly because our voting base doesn't understand the game. It is like my Daddy always taught me, it is better to get a little of something than a lot of nothing. We will have to fight for scraps and try to save as much as we can, but when we lost the White House and the Senate we guaranteed that we and our country was going to pay deeply and dearly. It is survival mode now.
As to third parties, who knows, but if we don't play this game very well and very smart getting the little things we can, there won't be anything left to save after a third party would come about.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
We Speak Our World Into Existence. What Are You Saying About Yours?
We are told in three times in the Bible that We are Created in God's Own Image. Shouldn't that make us question, what that image might be? What does that make us? God, is the great Creator, if we are created in His image wouldn't that also make us creators? How did God Create? He spoke the world into existence, couldn't that mean that we are too creating our own world by the words we speak?
If that is true, and I believe it is, shouldn't we be very careful what we say? Yet, we seem to be so cavalier with what we say about ourselves and others. It makes me cringe when I hear people speak about themselves in negative terms, when they speak of "Their depression," "their cancer," even "their overwhelming debts," quit owning those things. What you speak of you will get more of.
Remember you are creating your world by the words of your mouth, make sure that words you are using creates a world that you want. Speak of where you want to be, where you want to go. If you are struggling financially, speak of where you want to be, speak of being debt free, secure, independent. If you are fighting illness speak of health, speak of where you want to be. Speak of overcoming a disease if you want, but NEVER claim the disease, never call it yours.
Never accept anyone else's label for you or your life, unless it is the same vision you have of where you want to be. You do not need anyone else's permission for you to reach your goals and dreams, only your own. Les Brown tells a story of when he was in school, he had been labled "Educable Mentally Retarded," once when a coach/teacher saw him hanging out near a class room he told Les to go to the board and work out a problem, Les explained why he couldn't by using his label he had been given. This coach threw a fit, "Never accept someone else's label, go do the problem." It was one of the key turning points of Les Brown's successful life journey. Do not allow someone else's opinion of you rob you of yours.
God didn't make any junk, you are a miracle of birth, you have unlimited potential but that is up to you to turn into reality. Watch you words, speak the world you want, and if you must be Hung by the Tongue makes sure it is a masterpiece.
A good book on this topic is "Hung By The Tongue," by Francis P. Martin.
If that is true, and I believe it is, shouldn't we be very careful what we say? Yet, we seem to be so cavalier with what we say about ourselves and others. It makes me cringe when I hear people speak about themselves in negative terms, when they speak of "Their depression," "their cancer," even "their overwhelming debts," quit owning those things. What you speak of you will get more of.
Remember you are creating your world by the words of your mouth, make sure that words you are using creates a world that you want. Speak of where you want to be, where you want to go. If you are struggling financially, speak of where you want to be, speak of being debt free, secure, independent. If you are fighting illness speak of health, speak of where you want to be. Speak of overcoming a disease if you want, but NEVER claim the disease, never call it yours.
Never accept anyone else's label for you or your life, unless it is the same vision you have of where you want to be. You do not need anyone else's permission for you to reach your goals and dreams, only your own. Les Brown tells a story of when he was in school, he had been labled "Educable Mentally Retarded," once when a coach/teacher saw him hanging out near a class room he told Les to go to the board and work out a problem, Les explained why he couldn't by using his label he had been given. This coach threw a fit, "Never accept someone else's label, go do the problem." It was one of the key turning points of Les Brown's successful life journey. Do not allow someone else's opinion of you rob you of yours.
God didn't make any junk, you are a miracle of birth, you have unlimited potential but that is up to you to turn into reality. Watch you words, speak the world you want, and if you must be Hung by the Tongue makes sure it is a masterpiece.
A good book on this topic is "Hung By The Tongue," by Francis P. Martin.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Mass Transit in Indy? Now?
Today Mayor Ballard has come out saying that "Now is the time" we put forth a mass transit plan in Indianapolis. There are a small group of people pushing for this, politicians, politicians in REALTOR clothing, and politicians in downtown development clothing. They all want to rush something through during their election cycle so they can be the ones who "gave" Indianapolis this great "gift." Or better said, give them the gift that just keeps on taking.
Indianapolis does not need an enhanced mass transit system right now, in fact it is likely at least twenty years from that need. Our current one is anything but well utilized, or self-sustaining. We would be spending 1.3 billion dollars shared between us and the Federal Government, who by the way is also us, to purchase something we don't yet need, and likely will barely use. Then we will be given the opportunity to pay millions more per year in operating losses over the next twenty years hoping that it will be mostly covering its own costs by then. After twenty years, how much of that initial infrastructure purchase will be required to replace? How much will that be?
After a brutal fight to cut our property taxes, we are being asked to allow them to be raised so we can see a train running through town several times a day. Has any thought been given to the traffic jams that it will cause at every intersection from the North side to Downtown to allow the trains to go by all day? Has any thought been given to the cost in human lives and property damage to the danger of these trains running all day in a densely populated area? What consideration has been given to the property values and quality of life issues, such as noise, dirt, and danger that will be a result of the trains running up and down along homes along the way?
I agree we should be looking into long-term solutions, but by taking a long-term approach. We have the benefit of time, let's use it, rather than jumping in as if we are backed into a corner, let's take our time, and explore options. If we feel we have a good solution, if we feel we are well served to start procuring land and property, then start that process.
However, right now it seems more that a group of politicians in all walks of life, are just wanting to have their pictures taken cutting the ribbon with no thought of the massive losses of dollars and frankly quality of life for the city in the near term.
Indianapolis does not need an enhanced mass transit system right now, in fact it is likely at least twenty years from that need. Our current one is anything but well utilized, or self-sustaining. We would be spending 1.3 billion dollars shared between us and the Federal Government, who by the way is also us, to purchase something we don't yet need, and likely will barely use. Then we will be given the opportunity to pay millions more per year in operating losses over the next twenty years hoping that it will be mostly covering its own costs by then. After twenty years, how much of that initial infrastructure purchase will be required to replace? How much will that be?
After a brutal fight to cut our property taxes, we are being asked to allow them to be raised so we can see a train running through town several times a day. Has any thought been given to the traffic jams that it will cause at every intersection from the North side to Downtown to allow the trains to go by all day? Has any thought been given to the cost in human lives and property damage to the danger of these trains running all day in a densely populated area? What consideration has been given to the property values and quality of life issues, such as noise, dirt, and danger that will be a result of the trains running up and down along homes along the way?
I agree we should be looking into long-term solutions, but by taking a long-term approach. We have the benefit of time, let's use it, rather than jumping in as if we are backed into a corner, let's take our time, and explore options. If we feel we have a good solution, if we feel we are well served to start procuring land and property, then start that process.
However, right now it seems more that a group of politicians in all walks of life, are just wanting to have their pictures taken cutting the ribbon with no thought of the massive losses of dollars and frankly quality of life for the city in the near term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
