Scottsdale Activist #75

Tomorrow, the popular and superficial news show 60 Minutes will broadcast a segment on the new Medicare prescription drug benefit, quoting the U.S. Comptroller General, who says that it is "probably the most financially irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960’s." He predicts that unless the status quo is changed, spending on this, on other entitlements, and on the interest on debt, won’t leave any money for anything else.

Actually, the die was cast 42 years ago with the passage of Medicare. And another die was cast 72 years ago with the passage of Social Security and the rest of the New Deal.

Or to use another metaphor, presidents Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Lyndon Baines Johnson essentially planted time bombs in the American economy.

How have FDR and LBJ been treated ever since by the establishment media? They have been revered as kind, caring and compassionate presidents, albeit less so in LBJ’s case because of the Vietnam War. How have opponents of both entitlement programs been treated? They’ve been castigated as heartless right-wing extremists. And, today, how are opponents of the new ticking time bomb of nationalized health care being treated? They’re being castigated as heartless right-wing extremists.

FDR and LBJ implemented pyramid schemes that will consign our children and grandchildren to lives of indentured servitude that will leave the nation without enough money for investments and defense, and that will tempt the government to print money to extricate itself from the political dilemma, as most governments have done throughout history in similar situations. Yet FDR and LBJ are revered and their opponents are reviled. Propaganda works. Or as Bertrand Russell said in 1950, "There is no nonsense so arrant that it cannot be made the creed of the vast majority by adequate government action."

Apologists say that neither president could have foreseen the demographic, economic and technological changes that have made Social Security and Medicare actuarially unsound and financially unsustainable. They have a point, but they overlook the fact that socialism is actuarially unsound and financially unsustainable by its very nature.

There were sound and sustainable ways of keeping the poor from destitution and illness in old age without resorting to the German-style socialism of Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, just as there are sound and sustainable ways today of fixing the problems with health insurance without resorting to the socialized medicine of Hillary Clinton et al. But such alternatives have been, and continue to be, waylaid by good people and by a widespread belief in the common good.

Let me explain this bizarre-sounding statement. Better yet, let Isabel Paterson explain.

Who is Isabel Paterson? She was a journalist, author and political philosopher. One of her books, The God of the Machine, published in 1943, was remarkably prescient about the fatal flaw of socialism and the danger of the common good and good people. As an example of how political labels have changed, she would be seen as a right-wing extremist today, although she was a steadfast liberal (in the classical sense), a staunch supporter of individual rights, and a relentless opponent of statism and authoritarianism.

A chapter of her book is titled, "The Humanitarian with the Guillotine." It begins with this sentence: "Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission."

What she meant by "good people" is people who wish well to their fellow citizens, who think they know what is best for their fellow citizens, and who want to use government power to compel them to do what the good people think is best. But such good people end up doing bad, because the method they embrace (government coercion) inevitably hurts people.

FDR and LBJ were good people. Hillary and the rest of the current presidential candidates are good people. That’s the problem, a problem that 60 Minutes and the rest of the mainstream media are incapable of understanding. They can’t see the connection between the "good" of FDR and LBJ, and the bad consequences of free medicine today. Forty years from now, some other news show won’t see the connection between a good president elected in 2008 and the economic disaster of nationalized health care.

A related problem is a widespread belief in the common, or collective, good. Paterson wrote that there is no such thing as the common good. There is only individual good, she said, based on natural rights, free will, voluntary charity, and personal morality and compassion. All attempts by the majority to achieve the common good through a government-imposed program are, by definition and mathematics, contrary to the wishes of the minority and thus against the true common good, for if there were unanimous support for the program, government coercion would be unnecessary.

As an example, government coercion is necessary to stick future generations with tens of trillions of dollars in bills for the medical care of current retirees. This may be good for the ones doing the sticking, but it certainly isn’t good for the ones being stuck.

Paterson said that it is "monstrous" to achieve the good of the majority at the expense of the minority under the platitude of the common good. In that sense, all of the current presidential candidates are monsters, for all of them are statists who espouse varying degrees of collectivism.

If the common good is the sum of what the majority decides, then "there can be no judge of what is good except the majority," according to Paterson. "This rule is, in fact, the justification alleged by the Nazis for the extermination of the Jews, as of the Russian Communists for the beastly murder of the most productive members of the population." (Remember, she wrote these words in 1943, when many American intellectuals were still enthralled with Bolshevism.)

Paterson was also remarkably prescient about LBJ’s Great Society, which was enacted 22 years after she wrote the following words: "Always collectivism denounces natural affections and relations and suggests shifting personal obligations onto society. It promises easy divorce, state support of children, the pleasures of promiscuity; it ends in slavery and violation of personality."

It also ends in 60 Minutes being 42 years too late in warning the American public about the economic folly of free medical care.

Americans are crying that health care is expensive. It’s irrelevant to the snivelers that the gross inefficiencies of the health care system are due to the government killing a consumer market in health insurance and care 65 years ago and then burying the corpse 42 years ago with Medicare. Like a baby having a temper tantrum, they just want the government to do something.

Meanwhile, roads are full of cars costing three times the cost of stripped-down models, restaurants are full of overweight people paying four times the cost of a home meal, bars are full of people paying five dollars for a margarita, shopping malls are full of people buying frivolous stuff on credit, convenience stores are full of people buying lottery tickets and four-dollar packs of cigarettes, casinos are full of people on fixed incomes, subsidized sports stadiums are full of people dropping a hundred bucks on tickets and five-dollar beers, a zillion Starbucks outlets are full of people paying five times what a cup of coffee full of fat would cost at home, ears are full of cell phones with high monthly charges, and houses that are twice as large as the houses of their grandparents are full of big-screen TVs, extra bathrooms and fancy stoves that are seldom used.

If you think that only rich people are spending money in these ways, you’ve been in a coma for the last 25 years.

Yet Americans snivel about rising health care costs and whine about a $25 co-pay for medicine or a visit to the doctor. Worse, in the worst case of convoluted thinking since Marx wrote Das Kapital, most Americans want the government to give them free medical care, which is the most expensive kind of medical care, even though the government caused the inefficiencies in the first place.

Of course they don’t. Babies can’t think beyond their immediate gratification.

The numbers are squishy and depend on the political agendas of the sources, but the average household spends per annum about $2,500 at restaurants, $9,000 in credit card debt, $8,000 in car expenses, and $13,000 in housing expenses.

Oh, let’s not forget the cost of government. City, county, school district, state and federal taxes vary by locale and family, but where I live they consume almost half of the average household income. The typical husband and wife will pay close to $200,000 in public education taxes over their lifetimes, and the cost of the federal government alone averages about $22,000 per household, not counting the $600,000 in unfunded liabilities per household for Social Security and Medicare. Curiously, Americans aren’t demanding that the government do something about the skyrocketing cost of government. Could the reason be that much of the cost of government is hidden?

If Americans downsized their homes and car engines by one-fifth, reduced discretionary spending by one-fifth, and cut taxes by one-fifth, they could easily pay their health care costs out of their own pockets and still have a higher standard of living than 98 percent of the world.

For god’s sake, please spare me claptrap about the poor not being able to afford health care. An altruistic concern about the poor is not why most Americans are crying about health care costs while drinking double lattes and running up cell-phone bills in their status wagons. They’re crying because they’re spoiled brats who are just as immature as when mommy pulled them in a little red wagon.

Besides, it’s not necessary to nationalize the health care industry to help the poor. Because some people can’t afford food, housing, clothing and transportation, everyone isn’t forced to buy food in government commissaries, to live in government housing, to wear government uniforms, and to take government transportation.

Don’t expect politicians to piss off voters by telling them to grow up, don’t expect newspapers to piss off readers by telling them to grow up, and don’t expect businesses to piss off employees and customers by telling them to grow up.

An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can’t be found at Starbucks, but he can be reached at ccan2@aol.com.

~Shout and Spout ~

shoutandspout@scottsdaleactivist.com

~ Our HOA thinks the idea of a Citizens Ombudsman for the city of Scottsdale is a wonderful Idea! It's becoming too difficult to discuss anything with anybody at city hall. Every time you want to talk to someone, they are either out or "unavailable" and don't return calls.

~I am sickened by the corruptness in Scottsdale City government. Our elected officials lie to us, our City Manager is a control freak with a mile long personal agenda, and we allow developers to run our city into the ground for purely personal profit through the DRB and Planning Commission. Who do we trust anymore? Time for change.

~ Interesting. Lisa Haskell get's her tidbits in both papers almost every week. Who does she know, or is it she is following the mandate for Manross media success in Scottsdale?

~ I am a canal walker. I walk along the canal for recreation and exercise. I have watched those ugly tanks for that PV arsenic removal be constructed in the Cattletrack area. What a waste of a historical area. I wonder how much of a kickback some of those residents or city staffers who agreed with their plan received. The City Council must have been absolutely lied to about this project – why would they allow a company who is catering to PV residents to deface a historical district in our City? Personally, I think they’ve lost it.

~ A big hand to the Park people for a good presentation concerning the plans for the former Villa Monterey Golf Course. The meeting was well organized and well presented. We personally liked concept "A" best and hope that some of the suggestions tendered as well as a bridge over or a tunnel under Chaparral become a reality.

~I have been eagerly reading little things here and there about front-runners for the next election in the Activist and doing some research on my own. Sounds like we have some excellent candidates-to-be in the running. Perhaps the Manross and Dolan regime will take a well deserved "severe drubbing" in 2008.

~ I have to agree that greed is driving our City development. The Council should take note and give only what they think we can afford for the budget requests. There should be a ground rule…no personal agendas. If they were to think in terms of what’s important to our city, and frankly, building more condos which destroy neighborhoods is not, then they should have no problem correctly allocating funds with a conservative eye.

~ I have met both Jim Derouin and Nan Nesvig. Both are bright and articulate Scottsdale citizens who will do the best possible job for our fine city. We now know that Ms. Nesvig will run. What can we do to convince Mr. Derouin that his services and vast experience are desperately needed in the mayoral seat by the very residents pleading for his help?

~ Interesting - - So a few of the members of the DRB and Planning Commission are working on projects in Scottsdale on a professional basis; Isn't that a conflict of interest according to the new Scottsdale City Code of Ethics? Maybe we need a full review of their positions and what they have done and are doing as well as their future plans which also might be a conflict of interest.

~I went downtown to "Ra" at lunchtime last week to grab a bite to eat with a client. It took me 20 minutes to find a parking space and that was after I hounded some elderly people who were walking back to their vehicle! Then, it took me six lights to get north past Indian School Rd after getting my food just ¼ mile from there! The restaurant had NO WAIT, but the roads had a steady stream of uptight honking horned stress-filled people! How long do you think it will be before we experience a death from road rage in Scottsdale? A stupid light rail or streetcar system won’t help – widening of Chaparral will - people still want to use their cars! Think parking structures and better organization downtown.

~ Citizen Ombudsman for our uncommunicative city staff and council? Excellent Idea! How soon can we have one? Maybe before Hell freezes over?

~ I heard Jeremy Jones, Vice Chairman of the DRB tell how he was hired by the city to design the Appaloosa Library for the city. Isn't that an Ethical conflict of interest in the first order?

~If anyone is interested in the city-related damage that Jan Dolan has done during her past jobs, "Google" her name. Dolan is infamous for housing developers in her back pockets and favoring personal agendas. Sound familiar? She has ruined more than one beautiful city and the only way to get rid of her is to do what they did…FIRE HER BACKSIDE. Dolan is a REPEAT OFFENDER! There should be national registries for people like her.

~ Councilman Jim Lane: We have always thought the world of you and trusted you, but the Earll Drive thing has us in a bit of quandary; what in heaven's name brought you to vote that way you did with the majority, and if you are trying to be a "centrist", stop it and be yourself. It's much more attractive and honest appearing.

~If I see a request for one more condo project in this city, I think I’ll puke! We have so many empty condos and condo conversations now, we are losing money over that whole bad decision. Stupid city leaders! Maybe you should think about building RV parks instead! What? Too lame and low life for the likes of Scottsdale? People aren’t going to pay for your $450,000 vanilla brand 1100 square foot boxes in cement environments. Get a clue! A rental is better than nothing and good apartments are affordable by many who work in and for the city.

~ It would appear from the comments of members of the Planning Commission and the Development Review Board, that the citizens of Scottsdale don’t have a clue what they as citizens want for their city. In addition, these boards and commissions appear to think they are the be-all, end-all answer to the problem. With all due respect, if any is due at all, the current composition of the boards and commissions need to be totally revised with no more that 20% of them consisting of the specific field that board or commission deals with and the remainder of the position filled with regular, everyday citizens who care about the community.

~ Why are we taking the word of the Planning Commission and Development Review Board, who are tied to the developers and are building and designing projects of their own within the city, on what's best for this city when we are paying huge amounts of money in salaries to a professional staff of Planners and Designers? If this isn't a crock of total BS, I don't know what is!

~My husband and I were driving in Chandler last weekend. For a brief moment, I was confused as to where we were because the series’ of mini-malls and larger mall structures that we passed looked identical to others in Phoenix, Tempe and now, Scottsdale. How sad, I thought, that we here in Scottsdale are becoming victims of the Anywhere, USA syndrome. Even sadder is that fact that the same people developed all these malls. They are making a tidy living from our ignorance.

~Our hats are off to the Activist. People say that they only print what’s bad with Scottsdale, but the fact is, there is more bad than good with this beautiful city right now. This is truly a sign of inadequate leadership and change is necessary. We are devoted readers and thank you, the editors and contributors, for a great, informative newsletter every week.

~Wasn’t it just like John Berry to do a favor for Frank Gray? That guy is all about the money and how much he can make from developers interested in City of Scottsdale projects. Berry won’t take a project he can’t win so that should tell you how he operates. He hangs out at City Hall twisting Council members’ arms and favorably framing projects until he has four votes. Maybe John should start looking for other clients. I bet more than 90% of his business is City of Scottsdale related projects. Perhaps the Activist can do an audit of City of Scottsdale Berry projects, past and present…while you’re at it, do Bitter Smith and Technical Solution projects too, or are they a team?

~ Hasn't anyone suggested the light rail follow the freeways and canals with Park 'n Rides located in strategic locations with economic mini busses running on schedules necessary to deliver passengers to their destinations at a far cheaper cost than light rail or a modern (turn of the 20th century technology) streetcar?

~We could do a lot to improve transportation right now. There are numerous empty lots scattered throughout South Scottsdale. We could create parking structures, instead of worthless condos, which could serve as Park and Ride facilities that would be frequented by trolleys to specific designations. We also desperately need Chaparral Road widened. C’mon City Council…think for once! These are no brainers.

~Why is Manross always referencing our "General Plan" – the one that’s 20 years old? Can’t she see that the "plan" needs revision? It is obvious that she doesn’t know what the heck to do about it or what it's about for that matter! Face facts…she can’t LEAD! Why is she still hanging around? Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way for someone who can, who cares, and who can reopen city government to the citizens again: James Derouin!!

~ Lofts and condos are a fad which will fade with time leaving rentals which will become the slums of tomorrow. If in doubt, look at any major city in the United States who has foolishly fallen for the failed concept over the last 50 years. Keep Scottsdale open including low heights with the local residential areas fully intact with ZERO urban, high density centers scattered throughout the city as we hear "they" are planning to strangle us with.

Every American should check out all of these websites to learn more about what the American population is about to have to deal with.

I don't normally allow anything but Scottsdale information in the Scottsdale Activist but after receiving many emails about this and viewing it, I think that it's imperative that every adult at least look at what's offered here if for nothing more than their own education and to have everyone stop and think about the future of our country. Click on the link below,

If you don't have Adobe Flash, install it from the bottom of the page that comes up after you click on the link above. You should be able to view all available links within the main page.

The website below is of great interest as seen from a Lebanese point of view:

If you have any problems, check your firewall and other safety features which could block access to the city site.

The Scottsdale Citizens Transportation Study Committee invites you to view their website for more questions and answers at www.norailforscottsdale.com .

================================================================

Simply click on the links below to get all the information you'll ever need concerning Light Rail.

If you have any questions about light rail, send them to editor@scottsdaleactivist.com and we'll get the answers to you as soon as we can.

These modern-day robocops make ticketing easier and can be huge moneymakers for local governments. But critics question their accuracy and fret over privacy issues.

The Scottsdale Activist is very pleased to announce an effort on the behalf of the residents and taxpayers of the city of Scottsdale to promote open, honest and accountable city government. The Scottsdale Legal Defense Fund (SLDF) has been created to take legal action to hold the City accountable when its actions are contrary to state law, the City Charter, City ordinances or the public interest.

The most necessary ingredient to make the SLDF work will be confidential contributions from concerned Scottsdale citizens who are willing to help their community. By contributing, we can change the way City Hall does business and insure that our tax dollars will be spent wisely.

Contributions shall be kept confidential as permissible by law and can be made in any Washington Mutual Bank to account number 3114165786 for the Scottsdale Legal Defense Fund. Branch locations are listed below. Contributions are not tax deductible.

The SLDF has retained the law firm of Miller LaSota & Peters, PLC, in connection with the patently illegal action taken by the Mayor and Council appointing the most recent Scottsdale City Attorney, while ignoring the residency requirement of the Scottsdale City Charter even though the new City Attorney’s contract (according to Scottsdale Republic reporter Laurie Roberts) requires that she reside in Scottsdale. The City Council action was based on a legal opinion which was reportedly rendered during a closed door Executive Session of the City Council by a subordinate to the then acting City Attorney, who was subsequently appointed to the City Attorney position by a vote during a public City Council meeting. The opinion has been requested as a public document under state law, but the City has not yet provided it. The SLDF will take other appropriate legal actions based on the conduct of the Mayor and Council.

Washington Mutual Bank Locations at which contributions to the SLDF can be made are:

72^nd & Shea                    7337 E. Shea Blvd #120                480-609-8524
Hayden & Chaparral     7908 E. Chaparral # C-113            480-949-0069
Horizon                            14854 N Frank Lloyd Wright         480-614-6660
Scottsdale Ranch          10155 E. Via Linda Blvd #131       480-767-2060
Kierland Village              6501 E. Greenway Pkwy #133     480-315-2905