Conservative News & Commentary

from March 2012, Culture

Mar 21, 2012 — by: P. Henry
Categories: Culture

Rising Costs are the Real ProblemWe can breath a sigh of relief now that the County Commissioners have come to their senses and removed the three year Public Safety levy off of May's ballot. It is amazing that when properly motivated the commissioners could find the needed money that was there all along. Apparently, it was just in a different account they weren't allowed to touch without the Governor's permission. Imagine that. Government regulation getting in the way of being able to govern. Laughable if it wasn't so sad.

So now it's the Klamath Falls City School District's turn. They don't have enough teachers and their text books are old and outdated. Well who has been in charge the past ten years to let such a thing happen? We're supposed to pretend that the powers in charge just found themselves in this situation by no one's fault. It just happened. And now the taxpayer needs to dig deep into their pockets to help the City Schools out (again).

We need to remember that the district receives around $10,000/student per year from the county, state and federal government. If a class room has 22 students it means that class room gets funding of $220,000 each year. If the average teacher's salary & benefits package is $100,000, there is still $120,000/class room per year to account for. Seems one could buy new text books every month with that amount of cash!

 Read More

Mar 18, 2012 — by: J. Madison
Categories: Culture

Dutch Bros Coffee CupHello. My name is J. Madison. Well,... not really, but that is my pen name and I'm new to Below is my first blog here and I hope you will provide feedback. One of the hallmarks of this site is to promote conservative ideas and then to show why they make more sense than the conventional wisdom paraded around as the only reasonable game in town. Part of that process is to get feedback from readers, so I would encourage you to enter the arena of ideas and let me know what you think. We may agree; we may disagree. The point is for robust discussion and finding the truth of a matter, rather than a complacent nodding of heads.

So onto my question: What If Government Ran Dutch Bros? What would we expect? Well first we would see an option for "free coffee." The government would claim that there are some people who can't afford a cup of coffee and that is not fair, and government must be fair. So there would be "free coffee". But really it wouldn't be free, because government has to pay for the coffee and the labor to make and serve it — and of course that labor would be union labor. Therefore a special levy would need to be passed. It may start as a seemingly harmless three year ballot initiative. It may be as little as $0.03/$1,000, but it would be there and everyone would pay it, even those who don't like coffee or don't drink coffee. The paper and government officials would claim that the Klamath County resident would only pay $75/year. Those who would stand opposed to this tax would be demagogued as mean spirited, selfish and the privileged class that don't care about the less fortunate.

How about the other coffee shops in the area? What would happen to them. Well one of two things: they would close shop or their prices would increase. In our market economy when a competitor (in this case the government) offers something for free, others in the industry lose business. So to make up for lost business and in order to stay profitable, either costs need to be reduced and/or prices must increase. Expect a little of both. Moreover, expect the quality of the coffee to decline. Since coffee is now free, the government will offer the minimal USDA and FDA level coffee in order to say the coffee is "safe". Whether it tastes great or not, is far less important. Government has a budget too and with unlimited demand, quality will be the first thing to suffer.

 Read More

Mar 1, 2012 — by: P. Henry
Categories: Culture

Someone once said that rhetoric can be defined as "non-rational persuasion." Or maybe a simpler way of stating it, rhetoric is "emotional persuasion." In politics rhetoric is used all the time to justify programs, causes and candidates. Most recently rhetoric was used when re-playing a horrific 9-1-1 call in front of the commissioners. The result was the commissioners voted 2-1 to increase the public safety levy from $1.5 million to $1.8 million. Their reasoning was that this group that replayed the 9-1-1 call needed to be funded by government. The thinking is that with proper funding these types of calls would not happen.

But is that true? Will more funding designated for a particular group guarantee horrific 9-1-1 calls are never heard again in Klamath County? That seems to be the rationale for the increase in the levy. But again, is it true? Here is where reason comes in. Up until that particular question, rhetoric was at play. Our emotions were engaged, not our minds. "This 9-1-1 call is awful", we think. "We can't have these kinds of evil things going on in our community. Someone needs to do something! Increase the levy, fund Group A whose mission it is to help stop these sorts of bad things and we'll all be safer." But the reasoned approach dares to ask the tough questions such as will extra funding really stop these sort of acts of evil?

When we take the emotion out of the air then we get down to what government can do, what government can afford to do and what government's proper role is. Also we begin to ask the question, when is the citizen responsible? The 9-1-1 call was of a woman screaming because her boyfriend was beating her, again. When is it the responsibility of the woman to leave the boyfriend? When is it her responsibility to seek help and protection from friends, family, neighbors, churches or synagogs before this beating happens again? Or is the woman completely innocent and therefore has no responsibility. Instead she expects that it is all of our responsibility to fund a government program to protect her from a poor choice in boyfriends?

 Read More