citizen1 (David Reynolds)


Comment history

Federal 'religious freedom' bill likely to become a campaign issue in Kansas

The above conversation is interesting but it demonstrates why problems are difficult to resolve. Everyone is talking past each other &, based on the tone, trying to force their opinions on each other. Insults, implied or spoken, don't convince anyone of the point trying to be made.

I believe the situation involves 2 aspects:

1) Respect. Why is it necessary for anyone to "force" themselves on someone else because they believe or act differently or because we want our cause to be accepted, even if it is by force? Why can't we respect each other enough to recognize our differences, leave each other alone and go about our separate ways? Why do we have to force ourselves upon each other? It's like children forcing themselves on each other initiates "Belligerence which breeds contempt". As we all know, this is when the real argument starts. Thus, we get the kinds of arguments above.

2) Laws Versus the Constitution & Rights, inherent & granted, within the Constitution.
The question becomes, which is superior to the other? Is the first amendment superior to the 2nd, or you pick and 2, 3 or 4 amendments and say, which is more superior to the other? Are any of our laws written, regarding any aspect of our life, superior to any constitutional right? Can any law written tell us how we must behave when exercising one of our rights granted under the constitution (especially the inalienable rights)?

Through out my lifetime, until recently, it seemed we always resolved that conflict thru mutual respect. We may do well to practice the lessons from our mothers, “Live & Let Live”.

Abraham Lincoln once said: “No man is good enough to govern another man without
that other's consent.”

July 18, 2016 at 10:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence announced as Donald Trump's VP pick

It is interesting how some people never get beyond the first chapter of their lives. So limited is their world view.

July 16, 2016 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence announced as Donald Trump's VP pick

Jim sorry I have not responded sooner. I have been in Topeka.

Read your web reference. I would say that Dan is subjective in his analysis and manifests itself in various ways especially thru his use of pejorative terms to describe Donald's characteristics. I would say that Dan is correct in that Donald is a warrior. Donald works relentlessly to achieve the results he sets out to accomplish.

Dan's focus is on "Narcissism". Folks generally categorize narcissism as a negative personality trait. In doing so they miss it's positive side. It is fair to say that everyone who achieved something (won peace prizes, advanced scientific thought, granted patents, grew major corporations or raised their children to be accomplished people and great citizens) in their life was & is a narcissist. That is to say they have the personal self-confidence to believe in themselves and the courage to focus their efforts on achieving the desired results regardless of what others say or do. That is not negative. You may or may not like them personally but you use their achievements (example Stephen Jobs, Bill Gates or Thomas Edison, etc).

Some may not like Donald’s language. But in the world of high stakes politics & business, life is not a world of “refinement”. It can have the face of polite society & political correctness, but in reality it is a world requiring results, it is the world of warriors.

Given recent world events, the current poor economic & employment situation in the USA & world, if we are going to turn the situation around, it is time for a warrior.

July 15, 2016 at 10:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence announced as Donald Trump's VP pick

Bob Forer, You said above: "So you support misogony, racism and narcissism Justin?"

Bob, I am trying to follow your specific line of thought. Can you please state specifically who you think is exhibiting those characteristics & specific examples to support those allegations?

Thank, you

July 15, 2016 at 2:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: Carbon fee facts

Continued from above:
The history in countries where a carbon tax has been implemented is mixed. Have emissions been reduced, yes, by how much varies depending on their economy and implementation policies. British Columbia, Canada is one such country. It should be noted they have managed to use discipline in their rebate system. But they are running deficits and thus the carbon taxes must continue to increase with future economic impacts a major concern.

Besides the Global Warming Debate one has to consider the impact of energy on USA financial security, personal security of its citizens & geopolitical position of our government. Like it or not energy is the underpinning of all of the above. The USA has more energy reserves than any other country in the world. Energy independence says others will not control us.

We can constructively implement clean energy sources with the correct policies that reduce carbon emissions & protect our security, but not through using dictatorial policies where outcomes are unpredictable.

June 18, 2016 at 3:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter to the editor: Carbon fee facts

From the letter it is evident that the “Kansas Chapter of Citizen’s Climate Lobby” has issues with bias they same as they are accusing of others.

To be really objective regarding the subject of a Carbon Fee/Tax one has to know the history. Rather than have your eyes glaze over with reams of data & discourse a few summaries may suffice.

Let’s clarify the difference between “Cap & Trade” & a “Carbon Tax”, they have different goals: A cap-and-trade system includes a strict limit on the amount of GHG emitted but has unclear costs, while a carbon tax imposes higher known costs but has unclear emissions reductions.

The CBO issued a report in 2013 regarding the impact of implementing a carbon tax in the USA. The net result is fatal to the taxpayer. The reason is a lack of will power by the congress & president for their insatiable appetite for taxes to support their favorite social program or give away. Their point is the Carbon Tax would not end up revenue neutral, thus negatively impacting some income groups.

The following are a few CBO quotes:
1) The effects of a carbon tax on the U.S. economy would depend on how the revenues from the tax were used. Options include reduce budget deficits, decrease tax rates, or other tax relief programs.
2) Without accounting for how the revenues from a carbon tax would be used, such a tax would have a negative effect on the economy. The higher prices diminish purchasing power, effectively reducing their real (inflation-adjusted) wages. Lower real wages reduces the amount people work, decreasing the overall supply of labor. Investment also declines, further reducing the economy’s total output.
3) The costs of a carbon tax would not be evenly distributed among U.S. households. For example, the additional costs from higher prices would consume a greater share of income for low-income households than for higher income households, because low-income households generally spend a larger percentage of their income on emission-intensive goods. Similarly, workers and investors in emission-intensive industries, who would see the largest decrease in demand for their products, would be likely to bear relatively large burdens as the economy adjusted to the tax. Finally, areas of the country where electricity is produced from coal—the most emission intensive fossil fuel per unit of energy generated—would tend to experience larger increases in electricity prices than other areas would.

See next post for rest of comment.

June 18, 2016 at 3:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence neighborhood association asks city to terminate contract with Chamber of Commerce

Dorothy, I believe you missed the entire point of my post above. Possibly rereading it may help answer your questions. Economic Development has multiple faces. In our case if the City & Chamber aren't fully together then it is difficult to bring new businesses will come to Lawrence. The two law suits speak volumes regarding prospects that the city had, but refused.

There was a mention above about how the Chamber is spending money. I ask you Dorothy if the actions of the city are causing us to be sued, is that a good use of tax payer money? The city's legal department has, I believe, 11 full time staff plus outside attorneys. Somewhere along the line we have to ask ourselves why & how do we reduce the requirement for such a large expenditure.

With regard to the Menards project, yes Menards placed the project on hold, the question is why. Is the situation something the City & Chamber can address & thus allow the project to proceed; or is the situation not recoverable based on something Lawrence did or didn't do; or is this an internal issue within Menards and having nothing to do with the Chamber and the city? The problem is the curtness of the reporting (transparency) leaves doubt regarding any future prospects of the Menards project proceeding. The Chamber worked diligently on this project & everyone thought the city was fully on board and everything was agreed to. Yet it went on hold. I realize no one wants to air particulars & there may be contractual reasons why this cannot occur, but it would be nice to know any future probability of the project going forward. This project exhibits the quandary regarding transparency, when you can have it & to what degree.

With LAN making the request to terminate the contract with the Chamber of Commerce, then who picks up this responsibility, the City, LAN? Where is the historical expertise & record of achievement in economic development with LAN & the current staff & commission? The solution is as I mentioned above, there needs to be joint cooperation based on a business to customer attitude with common achievable goals.

June 14, 2016 at 4:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence neighborhood association asks city to terminate contract with Chamber of Commerce

While the question of transparency is interesting, one has to ask what aspect of transparency is desired & how it relates to the actual economic development goals of Lawrence, Kansas. To just comment on the money spent or salaries paid, may be of some interest, but of little value. It is the transparency of the combined effort of City Hall & The Chamber that is of critical importance. How well are they working together? Is there real cooperation? Are both entities on the same page with the same goals; the same desire to be competitive; does everyone have a “WE” attitude. Or are some team members working in an opposing manner? Those involved have to understand the competitive nature of economic development & great customer service. That is the transparency & understanding we need & should have presented.

As an example I know that many opportunities are presented to Lawrence, but few see the light of day. The Chamber can present opportunities but City Hall has to actively & creatively pursue the business; create an environment where the business feels welcome & wanted; and then constructively work to meet their needs to sign them up.

We need to understand that when it comes to Economic Development Lawrence Kansas is the “Business” & the businesses we are trying to recruit are our “Customers”. Without having “Affordable Prices & Excellent Customer Service”, our business loses our customers, future opportunities & our business declines and struggles economically! This point of view seems lost in this discussion & Lawrence's economic development process. Those critical of economic development in Lawrence Kansas need to understand this concept, promote it, & get on board or Lawrence will always struggle economically.

In summary some examples are: The city commission having to be sued & lost the fight against Wal-Mart @ 6th & Wakarusa. The K-10 Crossing project where the city is being sued. And currently the city is very silent regarding why the Menards project is suddenly & inexplicably on indefinite hold, & probably lost.

The question is this: Do we really want economic development in Lawrence Kansas or do we want the politics of LAN to take control and continue to have the mess that currently exists.

I truly hope our new city manager, Tom Markus, is objective regarding this issue & can strengthen Economic Development results in Lawrence, Kansas.

June 14, 2016 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lawrence neighborhood association asks city to terminate contract with Chamber of Commerce

The citizens of Lawrence should know that LAN does not speak for all of Lawrence’s citizens, as they represent a very small, but vocal, minority of the citizens of Lawrence. It is fair to say that in some segments of the city there is a greater involvement in a neighborhood organization than other neighborhoods. I can also strongly say I am very much against the recommendation to defund the Chamber & basically take the Chamber out of the drivers seat for Economic Development.

Mr. McClure, the drafter of the letter, has a history of making recommendations to the city that, let’s say, could be more understanding of the needs of businesses.

Regarding LAN’s representation of the citizens of Lawrence. I have lived in Lawrence for 31+ years and never once has anyone from LAN ever contacted my wife & I, sent us emails to update us and get input about anything, etc; yet when contacting the city they imply they represent a broad based opinion of what the citizens desire. Really? LAN members have been so publically involved with all Lawrence citizens that their names are not even recognizable, nor associated with neighborhood issues except by their few constituents, those at city hall & some existing businesses.

Yes the policies of economic development for Lawrence need to be reviewed. Included in that review needs to be the “Attitude” of some of those involved, inside city hall & outside. Lawrence historically has not been business friendly. Example, in our public communication we use terms like “corporate welfare”, “greed”, etc. In our negotiations we stretch the limits of competitiveness with our request for exactions.

Lawrence has always exhibited the attitude “We are special” thus we don’t have to provide incentives to businesses. I have lived and traveled to many cities in America, and Lawrence is not the only attractive city to live in. We should be proud of our city & it does have a lot to offer. But, if we are serious about attracting businesses to Lawrence we must compete in a “Business Like Manner”. After all it is the cooperativeness of the city & economic value of the city’s location to the businesses markets and labor force, that is the businesses priority. The attractiveness got their interest; it’s a supportive business community that closes the deal.

June 13, 2016 at 11:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Is there anything you routinely leave Lawrence to shop for?

Restaurants. No variety in Lawrence, & few with atmosphere. it's either, tex-med, pizza or sports bars.

We don't buy much but Lawrence lacks variety of product & pricing for household & clothing items, so we shop out of town or on-line to compare.

Lawrence is tuned for KU student shopping which limits opportunities for families.

So Lawrence gets some & out of town gets some.

June 11, 2016 at 11:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )