Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I couldn't disagree more. It is indeed the role of government to increase diversity. And the idea that paying taxes means that you should decide exactly what the town does on every level is, in my opinion, beyond silly. I totally disagree with the idea that there should be "broad agreement" about exactly how tax dollars are spent. The point of government is to have people who can see the big picture and are not completely ruled by petty self-intrerest. Obviosuly govrment often, if not usually, fails--but giving tax payers any more say is the stupidest possible thing we could do.
Indeed this is the perfect example of that problem. If taxpayers had less say and if local government had more backbone and were not so scared of upsetting voters then we would already have adequate affordable housing and a reasonable degree of diversity and the courts would not have been forced to mandate this program. So if you don't like the decison, you have no one to blame but yourself.
Tosh!
Government should always be accountable to the people who put that government in power. While that concept may be difficult to fully bring to fruition at the federal level, there is absolutely no dispute that local governments have to be intimately accountable to the local voter and taxpayer. It is not a matter of "backbone". Those elected are elected to represent the wishes of the people, not to impose their own personal preferences against the wishes of a majority.
FYI, I personally have no position on this decision except to disagree with the notion that Westchester county should have the authority to force (emphasis on "force") the development of "affordable housing" anywhere.
ping pong, I hear you loud and clear. Unfortunately, our 'representatives' don't. They go where the most noise and money is. If you can get the insurance companies and Big Pharma to agree that affordable housing is a threat to them, they'd buy every politician in sight and the term 'affordable housing' like the term 'affordable health care' would go the way of the Dodo Bird.
ping pong, I hear you loud and clear. Unfortunately, our 'representatives' don't. They go where the most noise and money is. If you can get the insurance companies and Big Pharma to agree that affordable housing is a threat to them, they'd buy every politician in sight and the term 'affordable housing' like the term 'affordable health care' would go the way of the Dodo Bird.
HMM, will we start seeing the manufactured protests around here?
Especially in Westchester, there's too much of the "I have mine, too bad you can't have yours" mentality. There's a big difference between a "project" and housing for moderate income working people, and this sounds a lot more like the latter.
Government should always be accountable to the people who put that government in power. While that concept may be difficult to fully bring to fruition at the federal level, there is absolutely no dispute that local governments have to be intimately accountable to the local voter and taxpayer. It is not a matter of "backbone". Those elected are elected to represent the wishes of the people, not to impose their own personal preferences against the wishes of a majority.
FYI, I personally have no position on this decision except to disagree with the notion that Westchester county should have the authority to force (emphasis on "force") the development of "affordable housing" anywhere.
Government is fully accountable to the people who put them in power--its called elections. Elected officals need to have the balls to do what is right regardless of how unpopular it is and hope that the majority of the population will see the wisdom of their choices by election day. If not, they're out. That is how the system works. I vote for the person who I think can make the best choices and who I think will have the backbone to do what is best for the town/county/state/country regardless of the pressure he or she gets from the assorted special interest groups. I do not expect to agree with every decison he or she makes. When election time comes around I review that person's decisions and decide if I think he or she made the right ones most of the time. If not, I vote for someone else.
You are right. As a stupid taxpayer who acts stupidly we need the smart people in government to take our money and shape everything in our world. Loads of wars overseas and programs over here. They are so smart and everything they do always works out so well especially in those much desired government housing projects. Anyway enough "drible" from this taxpayer time to go make the doughnuts and pay more taxes so more smart people can take the money I would have acted so stupidly with. You know stupid things people do with money like working hard and paying market rate for a place to live.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dma1250
Government is fully accountable to the people who put them in power--its called elections. Elected officals need to have the balls to do what is right regardless of how unpopular it is and hope that the majority of the population will see the wisdom of their choices by election day. If not, they're out. That is how the system works. I vote for the person who I think can make the best choices and who I think will have the backbone to do what is best for the town/county/state/country regardless of the pressure he or she gets from the assorted special interest groups. I do not expect to agree with every decison he or she makes. When election time comes around I review that person's decisions and decide if I think he or she made the right ones most of the time. If not, I vote for someone else.
You are right. As a stupid taxpayer who acts stupidly we need the smart people in government to take our money and shape everything in our world. Loads of wars overseas and programs over here. They are so smart and everything they do always works out so well especially in those much desired government housing projects. Anyway enough "drible" from this taxpayer time to go make the doughnuts and pay more taxes so more smart people can take the money I would have acted so stupidly with. You know stupid things people do with money like working hard and paying market rate for a place to live.
Living in Rich Neighborhoods in Westchester...A right?
Read the Journal News 2 days ago. The county lost a federal lawsuit where they have to pay 8.4 million dollars. The issue is that minorities have a right to live in places like Chap, Scarsdale, Harrison, Pound Ridge, etc where it is predominatantly white. They are required by law to put up low income housing in these areas. Anyone else hear about this?
Last edited by BLUEDIAMOND64; 08-13-2009 at 03:52 PM..
Reason: add on
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
stop paying taxes
Loads of wars overseas and programs over here. They are so smart and everything they do always works out so well especially in those much desired government housing projects. Anyway enough "
