Quote:
Originally Posted by elchase
Steve,
We disagree on a lot more than one issue. And thanks, but I'll decide which deserves my time and my money and you can decide which deserve yours.
Being from another state, maybe you don't mind seeing more of the NH taxpayers' money thrown at a problem, but I feel our MP get way more funding than they need and that if the personnel of the department were properly managed, they would have plenty of people and money to do their job. But like we are seeing with other state agencies recently, when the answer to every problem has been to raise taxes and throw more money at it, glaring inefficiencies and inadequacies just keep getting covered up and never solved.
It's time to start looking at the MP and figuring out not how we can get them more money, but why they have not been able to their jobs with the plenty of money they have been getting. Remember, this is an agency that basically works four months a year and pays people to do what most people pay big money to do...cruise around Lake Winnipesaukee in a boat. So no, I will not help you argue for more money for them. The problems on Winnipesaukee do not cry out for more money. If you think they deserve more money, make a personal donation.
I am on Lake Winnipesaukee more than most and I see four consistent safety problems; Failure to yield, passing too close while going too fast, BWI, and speeding...in no particular order. Slow boats down and the four of these goes away and the other three become more of a nuisance and less of a danger. While I agree the intent behind the safe-passage rule was good, enforcement is not practical and the law is a joke. I simply do not mind a boat going 20 MPH passing 75 feet away from me. I don't need him slowing to headway speed. But a boat going 90 MPH 155 feet away is still very uncomfortable.
And you don't slow people down by saying "use your own judgment". You slow them down by putting a reasonable limit on speed, then by giving violators cause to obey it. If you are running the MP, you don't tell the go-fast crowd "don't worry about the speed limit, we're not going to enforce it anyway". Yet this is exactly what go-fasters on this forum have reported. Then you say we should give this department more of my hard-earned tax dollars? No way.
We may be from different sides of the political aisle, but I'm very conservative and simply don't buy the notion that more taxes and bigger budgets will solve a problem. Sorry.
Sometimes when you hear crickets, its because someone doesn't agree with you.
|
Good starting point El, we don't disagree as much as you think.
We had many threads stating much of what you think are problems. Boats going too close, too fast, failure to yield. I know I personally posted some thoughts concerning the MP and their lack of focus to obvious problems. Many disagreed, in fact I think you might have (?) disagreed as well on my NWZ speeding problems and going too close posts, because you were agenda-driven then.
But as a fairly conservative guy, and not a fan of bigger government and higher taxes, I could see the wisdom for raising boat registration fees after staying so low for decades. Their fund was raided, negating that, because state government was in the hole. While being more moderate depending on the topic, I have no use for tax and spend government models. So no, we might not be on different sides of the aisle, not sure.
I think many problems could be reduced to nuisances if boneheads were specifically targeted. Maybe a simplistic view, but worth a try. I have repeatedly stated this in many past posts, but some thought I was unfairly bashing the MP. Regardless, I think they need more funds, you do not. The utter irony is that you support harsher laws and rules, less funding for the MP, yet agree mostly with what WE say are the problems on Winni, and most lakes and waterways.
At any rate, we do actually agree on most points, including the enforcement targets and the problems. Like any group, it's great to work together on what most everyone wants, rather than fight about one or two areas where there is no agreement. In the end, problems solved are problems solved. Once done, it leaves more time to focus on areas of disagreement, and see if they really are problems anymore.
Wow, almost back to the infamous Captain Bonehead thread again.
Thanks for the post El, it was a good one.
In fact, A very good one.