Skip to main content

Jason Gatties, won't you puh-leez come to Delaware and be a university trustee here?

For reasons both personal and professional that I won't (can't) detail, this letter to the editor (published by the Niles Michigan Daily Star) by Jason Gatties, the Libertarian candidate for Lake Michigan College Board of Trustees makes me crave elected trustees in the First State for UD, DSU, and DelTech.

Which ain't gonna happen.

[Reading this, understand that millage refers to the LMC ability to raise taxes--ala our own public education system--to support itself via referendum]:

To the editor:

As both a candidate for Lake Michigan College Board of Trustees and concerned taxpayer, I urge your readers to once again reject LMC's millage proposal that will appear on the ballot this November. The Board of Trustees may try to justify the need by saying the millage increase will be less than $25 per year for those who own a $100,000 home. However, the Board of Trustees must stop "begging" for taxpayers money and stop "threatening" to end certain programs and start acting fiscally responsible.

Under my plan, we could avoid a millage increase by thinking "outside the box." I call for the privatization of certain non-academic services, combining departments and the elimination of non-essential administrative positions. I would also explore other ways the private sector could donate to the school without forcing another millage. We are a very charitable community, those of us who can afford to give will do so, but do not force that action upon us with another tax increase.

It is not the fault of the taxpaying public for your continued mis-management of school funding. Don't ask the public to clean up the mess you helped create.

Jason Gatties

St. Joseph

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...