June 30, 2016
Jun 30 03:40 LRT destroys jobs, businesses Jun 30 11:06 ISD742 at it again Jun 30 15:57 Trump vs. Reagan, Friedman
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
LRT destroys jobs, businesses
Julia Erynn's article provides proof that the people closest to light rail projects don't like them. Ms. Erynn's article starts by saying "Dozens of business owners in St. Paul are speaking out against a light rail addition to West 7th St, placing signs in their windows urging patrons to sign a petition against the additional mass transit" then adding "The local business owners fear growing crime rates (which are proven along light rail routes), loss of parking for customers, and loss of revenue."
That's fantastic. Crime increases and taxpayers subsidize the criminals' 'getaway car'. I don't know the specifics of this neighborhood but I know that other neighborhoods affected by light rail have been decimated because they've relied on walk-up business. Light rail demolishes that business model. Why can't city planners leave well enough alone? Why do they have to side with the special interests all of the time?
As bad as that is, this is worse:
Several of the local owners say they feel they are not involved enough in the decision making process.
This information isn't surprising either:
Alpha News has reached out to local lawmakers Senator Sandy Pappas (DFL) and Representative Carlos Mariani and have yet to receive comment.
Why would elected officials think that they need to be accountable? What St. Paul needs is their STPexit.
Posted Thursday, June 30, 2016 3:40 AM
No comments.
ISD742 at it again
Dave Unze's latest article about ISD742's new bonding referendum is must-reading for the districts' residents because of its multiple potential impacts.
First, it's important to consider the impact the referendum will have on local property taxes. The impact will undoubtedly be gigantic, especially for people living on fixed incomes. Next, it's important that residents question whether this is the wisest choice in terms of whether School Superintendent Willie Jett's proposal fits St. Cloud's and the area's future. Many residents see the city and the region looking much different than it currently looks. Third, residents should tell the district that they're voting no unless they see the blueprint for the proposed Tech High School. They should tell the School Board that the questions must be worded so that no changes to the blueprints can be made once voters approve the issuing of bonds.
Last year, when the proposed bonding referendum was defeated 8,460-7,393, many voters that I spoke with said that they weren't willing to approve a blank check to the school board. They said that there wasn't much information put out there about what the new Tech High School would look like.
Since then, the landscape has changed significantly. People question whether there's a need to build a new Tech. Voters should question whether refurbishing Tech might not be a better option. Residents should also question the size of the new Tech building. Last year's referendum called for Tech and Apollo to both hold 1,800 students. This past year, there were approximately 2,700 students attending the 2 schools.
It's foolish to think that enrollment will increase by one-third over the next 25 years. If anything, it's likely to continue shrinking. Here are the basics of the proposal as reported by Unze:
St. Cloud schools superintendent Willie Jett is recommending that school board members ask voters for $137.9 million to build a new Technical High School and renovate Apollo High School.
The vote would be Nov. 8, with two questions on the ballot. The first, asking for funding to build a new Tech, would have to pass in order for the money to renovate Apollo to be provided. The Apollo funding would be a second ballot question. Jett recommends asking voters for $100.5 million for a new Tech and $37.3 million for Apollo renovations.
Voters should keep this in mind when they vote this November:
School board members at a work session Thursday morning all voiced support for Jett's recommendations.
What did these people base their support on? If they're just going to rubberstamp Jett's recommendations, why do they even exist? Seriously, it's time to vote for new ideas on the board. I don't care what age the people are. I care about whether they're willing to question conventional wisdom.
Posted Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:06 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 30-Jun-16 12:53 PM
Why haven't all the options been laid out for the voters? When our district had a bond issue, the initial ask of some $300 million got pared down to about $60 million after public input, and then it was handily approved. These school districts have champagne tastes and beer budgets, and only because somebody else picks up the tab do they keep ordering the bubbly.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 30-Jun-16 04:07 PM
Jerry, our school board thinks that they're so entrenched that they think we're obligated to vote for their proposals because their opinions shouldn't be challenged. It's the EU's pre-Brexit attitude on a smaller scale.
Comment 2 by JerryE9 at 04-Jul-16 07:38 AM
You would be surprised what a small opposition group can do by openly challenging the Board in public meetings and LTEs. All you have to do is ask questions, most of the time.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Jul-16 12:18 PM
That's exactly what we did last fall when we defeated the Board's blank check.
Trump vs. Reagan, Friedman
Apparently, this nation has undergone a significant transformation from being a confident nation that loved free trade to being a nation that thinks the middle class gets screwed over by every free trade agreement. It's sad to see the Party of Reagan getting duped into believing that we're a nation that can't compete by our party's nominee.
Let's unclutter this argument. Do you trust Donald Trump more than you trust Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman? That's what this comes down to. Ronald Reagan took over a struggling economy, cut taxes and dramatically reduced regulation while negotiating trade deals. As a result of President Reagan's economic policies, the US economy created over 20,000,000 jobs in 8 years. In September, 1983, the economy created 1,100,000 jobs.
Compare that with Donald Trump's record of failed businesses and bankruptcies. That's right. That isn't a comparison. That's more like Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn. It isn't much of a fight. That's before getting into Milton Friedman's lecturing Phil Donahue on the virtues of capitalism and free trade:
Here's what Milton Friedman told Donahue:
In the only cases in which the masses have escaped the types of grinding poverty that you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history, and where they have had capitalism and largely free trade.
Anyone that thinks that Trump knows what's best compared to President Reagan and Dr. Friedman isn't dealing with reality. The biggest reasons why jobs have moved overseas are the overtaxation and overregulation, the increase in regulatory compliance costs here in the United States and the lowering of marginal tax rates in other countries. Add into that Obamacare and this administration's war on cheap energy prices (think Solyndra and Hillary's statement that she was going to shut down coal plants) and it isn't surprising that companies are leaving.
Without question, we've hesitated to call trading partners out when they've broken the agreement's provisions. That's proof of political spinelessness. It isn't proof that trade agreements are counterproductive.
Anyone that trusts a man who opened a casino in flush economic times, then saw that casino go bankrupt, more than they trust the greatest president of the last 125 years and one of the most accomplished economists in modern history is a blithering idiot. I'll trust President Reagan and Dr. Friedman over Donald Trump any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Posted Thursday, June 30, 2016 3:57 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 01-Jul-16 11:25 AM
Too bad that isn't one of the two choices on offer.
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 01-Jul-16 11:29 AM
On trade, as everything else, Agent Orange is clueless.
Comment 3 by eric z at 02-Jul-16 08:34 AM
"Let's unclutter this argument. Do you trust Donald Trump more than you trust Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman?"
Absolutely. No f_____g question. 100% so, while, admittedly it's very, veyry faint praise.
Comment 4 by Doug W at 04-Jul-16 09:49 AM
Gary, haven't seen you in forever.
1. "Free Trade", if you are mired in huge regulatory and tax burdens, is ludicrous unless the agreement is with a country with similar internal structures.
2. As Charley Reese once put it, "free trade" means you set up a blanket tariff/duty policy and then trade with everyone with those rules. Not entirely sure how to describe what we have, but that ain't it.
3. Stop freaking out over Trump. Shrug your shoulders and realize that the republican congress will make common cause with the democrats and oppose him at every turn. Which is far more than they will do against Hillary Clinton. That could be quite healthy for the country. Think about it.
4. If the republican congress does not oppose Trump it means deals are being made which are making all the Washingtonians happy. And nothing changes.
5. "Do you trust Donald Trump more than you trust Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman?" Never trusted Friedman, Reagan I've always had mixed feelings about, and, no, I don't trust Trump one bit. I do trust self-interested politicians to fight him to protect their turf.
6. If you call yourself a "conservative", I assert that the greatest president in the past 125 years was Grover Cleveland.
Happy 4th.
