Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

This'nThat · 09-23-2010, 07:55 PM

It looks like the writer of this article has an agenda. He's pointing out that "things aren't equal". Well, duh! Go around the country. When you talk about property values, it's all about location. Vail, Colorado is more desireable than North Platte, Nebraska, so the property values will be different. Hollywood attracts different people than, say, Fargo North Dakota. So what? Life isn't about equal outcomes.

But it also sounds like this writer wants to blame New Hampshire for this difference in outcomes. Why would he do that? Maybe he doesn't like New Hampshire? Or perhaps this is the beginning of an effort to force equal outcomes across the state by taking money from one community and giving it to the next? Or perhaps this is a lead-in to "state-wide taxes" so as to "make those outcomes a lot more equal"? I'm suspicious whenever an article starts out with "delivery of Government services" or "relatively little money trickling down from state government". Sounds an awful lot like a gripe that Government services are just too small for his taste.

In any event, something smells fishy here.

09-23-2010, 07:55 PM	#7
This'nThat Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 534 Thanks: 19 Thanked 134 Times in 61 Posts	Agenda? It looks like the writer of this article has an agenda. He's pointing out that "things aren't equal". Well, duh! Go around the country. When you talk about property values, it's all about location. Vail, Colorado is more desireable than North Platte, Nebraska, so the property values will be different. Hollywood attracts different people than, say, Fargo North Dakota. So what? Life isn't about equal outcomes. But it also sounds like this writer wants to blame New Hampshire for this difference in outcomes. Why would he do that? Maybe he doesn't like New Hampshire? Or perhaps this is the beginning of an effort to force equal outcomes across the state by taking money from one community and giving it to the next? Or perhaps this is a lead-in to "state-wide taxes" so as to "make those outcomes a lot more equal"? I'm suspicious whenever an article starts out with "delivery of Government* services" or "relatively little money trickling down from state government*". Sounds an awful lot like a gripe that Government services are just too small for his taste. In any event, something smells fishy here.