Archive
| Welfare for the Rich |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Pete Theisen |
| Friday, 28 January 2011 21:48 |
|
I am hardly the first to make the observation, but we take very, very good care of rich people - for free. To begin with, there is the small matter of tax breaks and "incentives" for "creating jobs". As many of these as have been granted - why ever do we have any unemployment at all? Because the jobs created aren't for us. They are in foreign countries or for out-of-town workers, that's why. In my last campaign I was approached by a group of workers who told me they had been rebuffed from project after project - they were told the subcontractors were from out-of-town and had their own people - "from Texas". Why do we approve these projects? To "take care of" developers. But the developers refuse to take care of us! By "us" I mean the people. They generally bankroll any compliant office seeker! Project after project creates wave after wave of new traffic with no remediation - unless we pay for it ourselves with taxes on neighborhood folks. Once lanes or signals are finally added to a road here and there the projects that caused the problems have changed hands or even been torn down. Needless to say the impact fees, if they are paid at all - often they are not - do not begin to cover the cost by the time they are received. The travesty of the other night at the County Commission meeting is the present example. One of the stupendously, redundantly rich developers was asked by commissioner Thaxton whether he would pass along the impact fee cut to consumers by lower housing prices. The reply did not answer the question: "We are a struggling industry and we are asking for your help." Translation: We aren't rich enough, give us more taxpayer money without asking for anything back. The measure passed 4 to 1. That my friends, is WELFARE. Imagine if the person appearing before the commissioners was a battered divorcée trying to get some sort of relief for her several children. There would be the usual "get a job" sneers. But since the petitioner is wearing fine clothing and could live a life of comfort and ease without ever working another day, we shovel untold millions in to his already well lined pockets. I, for one, will have none of it. I will always insist that each project shall have a full accounting of its impacts and will pay for all of them. Otherwise, I will vote against it. |
| Last Updated on Tuesday, 01 February 2011 20:41 |
Political Advertisement paid for and Approved by Pete Theisen for City Commissioner.
