N.h is staying red (Londonderry, Freedom: house, layoffs, high school)

[sgthoskins]

GregW,

I wish most democrats had your thought process. I really do.

Derek

[elston]

While I lived in NH we had Democratic Governor Hugh Gallen, Gov. Jean Shaheen and now Gov. Lynch. They were each very popular. Congressman Norm D'Amours was another popular Democrat from NH. NH has a history of independance and that includes political thought. The opinions in the OP are not representative of NH....not traditionally and certainly not at the present.

I believe C-D provides forums and threads for the exchange of ideas and opinions....but starting a thread doesnt somehow provide anyone with a right to be rude and disrespectful.

[nicolem]

Originally Posted by Valerie C

Sorry, I can't agree with you here... Some folks that I know have been conducting informal polls in Rockingham/Hillsborough counties, mainly at the various rallies (both dem & rep) that have been so common in the last several months. The vast majority of Dem. voters in those polls have moved here from Massachusetts, California, NY & CT, and have lived in New Hampshire for 10 years or less. I notice many posts from left-of-center City Data posters who are also newer New Hampshire residents. In addition, the current dem. controlled state house/gov'na has increased state-level spending at obscene levels.

Excuse me, but I HAVE to quote this from a thread that was closed (dock some reps if necessary, but I need to do this:

Quoted from GregW "The Democrats in New Hampshire have are now closer to the Republican core values of frugal government, fair taxation, pay as you go programs."

I'm sorry Greg, but are you kidding me?? Frugal government??? Have you seen our state budget in the last year?? The 17.5% increase in spending was bad enough-- now we're looking at a possible $250 million shortfall???? What is going on with these CLOWNS that are the majority in our state government?? SHeeesh!!!

October 18, 2008 6:00 AM
CONCORD (AP) — Not surprisingly, upheaval in the economy is causing a larger hole in the New Hampshire state budget — but that could change for the better if measures taken in Washington turn around business earnings.
New estimates predict revenue for fiscal year 2009 will fall $250 million short of original expectations — $50 million worse than Gov. John Lynch estimated just two weeks ago.


Administrative Services Commissioner Linda Hodgdon said Friday the uncertain economy is to blame — especially the inability of businesses to get credit.


Business taxes are the state's largest source of general revenue.
( more here: N.H. budget woes grow)


New Hampshire HAS changed. Look at the budget, the state programs, and the "good for me/good for you" laws that are being passed... I generally try to stay out of the political threads (like the one was just closed before I had a chance to post there) but I've just got to get this typed out before I burst!!!

Absolutely awesome post Val!!

[vter]

People - Just another friendly reminder to PLEASE REMEMBER to ATTACK IDEAS, not individual posters. If the rules cannot be followed, then this post will be closed. Sorry.

[lisa g]

Originally Posted by GregW

But mostly I do not believe that children unlucky enough to be born in a nearly dead north or valley country town should have to have their futures threatened because they have a woefully underfunded school system instead of monument to excess spending that is the Londonderry High School. All the children of the state, and for that matter the country, deserve the same access to education as the luck kids of the prosperous towns or states.

You're all going to want to throw rotten tomatoes at me, but I don't agree with this. While all children deserve access to public education, the quality of the education will understandably vary. If public education is unacceptable where you live (not you, Greg, 'you' in general), then do something creative and intelligent to improve it, homeschool, move to where it is acceptable or send your kids to private school. You don't have the money to move to a better district or pay for private school? Well, then you have a goal. Something to work toward, ***no matter how hard and for how long you have to work and whatever you have to endure***. Many Americans have lifted themselves out of poverty and completely turned things around for future generations. We have many education choices, and public education can be improved without ridiculous spending.

People's personal preferences and priorities should certainly not be handed to them by the gov't., especially not at the expense of those who have worked very hard to achieve opportunities for their children. Nobody should be dissed for living in a 3500 sq ft home (from the previous thread in which rmcewan i think complains about that) in an affluent community with good schools. Aren't we *supposed* to want the best lives for our families and work damn hard achieving that? We all define success in independent ways, and it's baffling to me to see such a class struggle when every able bodied American has the same shot at it.

Fair does not and should not mean 'the same'. It comes down to the economic populists, the overly dependent entitlements cheering section, vs. the social populists, those who understand the pride of independence.

[GregW]

I am an environmental scientist that has studied energy flows in natural ecosystems. I have applied this technique to human social systems and my observation is that most able bodied Americans or their children do not have a fair shot at the target. Most of us are trying to hit a 1,000 yard target with a .22 rifle while a few are 10 yards away. Keeping most people beyond the 1,000 yard range is the goal of many social and governmental policies. A disparate educational system ranging from poorly funded K-12 education to legacy admissions is only one of the factors used by the privileged classes to achieve these ends. Even if the lower classes were to completely give up struggling the warfare would not end. The end results would only become more certain. The privilege would be protected.

[rmcewan]

Originally Posted by lisa g

People's personal preferences and priorities should certainly not be handed to them by the gov't., especially not at the expense of those who have worked very hard to achieve opportunities for their children. Nobody should be dissed for living in a 3500 sq ft home (from the previous thread in which rmcewan i think complains about that) in an affluent community with good schools. Aren't we *supposed* to want the best lives for our families and work damn hard achieving that? We all define success in independent ways, and it's baffling to me to see such a class struggle when every able bodied American has the same shot at it.

I don't disagree with your statement - it's the American Dream. But, I feel compelled to claify the record:

I dissed nobody for living in a 3500 sq ft home. I said that "Private property ownership as we know it ceases to exist because homes become affordable due to the fact that Americans wake up and realize that 4 people don't need 3500sqft and a 3 car garage and loans are responsibly made."

This was a parody of Comet's end-of-the-world post, so at any rate it was tongue-in-cheek. However, what I tried to imply is that many American's allowed LUST to overcome their DREAM. They ended up foreclosed upon because the desired more house than they needed relative to their income level or capital position. They were of course enabled by irresponsible lenders offering Jumbo 80/20 loans - but that customer must share the blame, and change their desires to effect a cure.

Heck, I'm only a few sheets of drywall away from 3500sq ft myself. But then, I have a 45% LTV and an affordable fixed mortgage.

[GregW]

I was offered a huge mortgage (get out of the crowded condo and into a big house) when I refinanced and, realizing my actual income would not support such a thing, I politely refused because the increased cost of a larger dwelling would overpower the benefits. I am not a speculator, so I did not figure in any expected price increase in my calculations. Turns out I was right to be frugal. Besides it has kept my property taxes down to just above an affordable level.

[seamusnh]

Originally Posted by sgthoskins

I am one of those conservatives who left MA because it was trying to become a socialist utopia. I and at least 7 of my other conservative friends have moved to NH in the last two years.

You can count me in as a conservative that left MA for NH. I grew up in Boston, the son of Irish immigrants. Pops worked blue collar jobs at the railroad and post office. He was a lifelong union guy and a Democrat until the Carter administration. The Democrat party left guys like him behind long ago. He never finished high school but his three kids all finished college and have three masters degrees. Now his grandchildren are going to college. Anyone who tells you the opportunity is not there is just being negative and pessimistic. It takes a solid family and hard work....

[Captjob]

Now I generally do not wade into political discussions because it really never gets you anywhere. I would rather expand my friendship circle.

However, we are all given the right to vote once, well, unless you were registered by ACORN, ......and exercising that right is your voice in an election.

Having said that, from a red family trapped in a deep sea of Blue (California). Obama supporters be careful what you wish for....you just might get it.

California, like MA, has long been a blue state and run by tax and spend liberals. This is the home base of Nancy Pelosi after all. California is now billions and billions in the red and is now also asking the feds for a bail out....this is to get us through just one budget year. Nice.

I am no fan of Bush and I do believe this country needs change; however, this change should be moderated and not an extreme leap to the left. A left wing white house, senate and house followed around by a left wing media is a very scary scenario for me. No balance at all.

Not only do I work in public asfety but I also own and run a small business. I am a member of several local and regional Chambers of Commerce and I can assure you, many many people are going to be losing their jobs under Obama's tax plans. I know not one single business owner that has any expansion plans at all and are actually preparing for layoffs and a contractionary business cycle under Obama.

Another note for those that like the Obama speeches and rhetoric about taxing the rich, Joe the plumber, spread the wealth etc. Although capital gains is going up on small and large business alike,(already the highest in the world at 31%) not ONE of us plan on just paying Obamas new tax.

YOU WILL pay this tax as we raise prices for goods and services you try to get and then also cut back on business spending, investment and hiring. In the end you are paying for Obamas "Tax Cut" not the businesses. This is yet another hidden tax on the very people he is trying to sell his message to.

If your still undecided, just do a little research (on everyone) and vote for the totality of your educational process, beliefs and personnal issues.

No matter what happens....peace to all.

Captjob