Jump to content
Omar, can you please explain when immigration stopped being a good thing for America and became a bad thing?
I know, you'll probably say it's illegal immigration you have a problem with. But our illegal immigration problem is the result of a dysfunctional legal immigration policy. When people who want to come here and work hard and become Americans, the way the ancestors of nearly every current day American did, and we tell them, wait twenty years, then something is wrong.
Here's a thought experiment for you. Imagine in the Mexican-American war of 1848 we'd kept going, and taken not only New Mexico and Arizona from the Mexicans, but also the northern half of current day Mexico (there were some leaders pushing to do exactly that at the time). If history had unfolded that way, a very big proportion of the current "illegals" would be American citizens by birth. In what meaningful way would a person moving from Chihuahua to Colorado be different?
Scott Wedel - I'm not entirely sure what your point is, but it looks like you think the DA should have taken the defendants to trial and held out for harsher sentences.
I actually think these sentences are appropriate and reasonable. They did something incredibly stupid, and they are going to do some jail time. But let's not ruin the lives of these young men for all time, at least not before we give them a chance to prove they've learned their lessons.
Remember, our society tells these young men they aren't mature enough to drink alcohol. We can't have it both ways. If we really believe that they lack the judgement to have a beer, we need to cut them a little slack when they exercise that bad judgement in other areas.
It's always interesting when voters and the politicians who pander to them pretend that choices don't have to be made. It would be nice to live in a world where trade-offs don't exist, but we don't.
By ignoring trade-offs the political process fails time and again to discover the optimum balance. In this particular case the question isn't "how can we have clean air and water without affecting resource production?" Even the most reasonable enviromental regs (unless they are totally ineffective) are going to have some impact on the cost of production and therefore reduce total output, even if only by a small amount. The point is, there is a real cost that ought to be considered. It's fine to say, "hey we can live with that cost, the benefits are much bigger," but pretending these costs don't exist is like believing in Santa Claus.
If United really is in a fight to the death with Southwest and Frontier at DIA, shouldn't they be using their network to their advantage? To put it another way, if you are United how do you stop someone driving from Steamboat to DIA to catch a flight with Southwest? Isn't the obvious answer, sell them a fare out of HDN that makes it a no brainer to fly out of there.
Are they too dumb to do this? (maybe they are, but as much as I hate UA, I doubt it.) More likely there are major economic trends at work that are killing regional air services across the country. That suggests that beyond the peak winter season flights, we can't realistically hope for much. I'm surprised about the new summer service to Houston. A 50 seat jet is about the least economical aircraft flying today with high fuel prices and increased hours for command pilots. Hate to think what this is going to cost us.
I'm sorry, it's not $98 round trip that causing me to drive 3+ hours to Denver, pay for parking etc, it's the fact that there is no @#$%^ service out of HDN, and even when there is, it gets cancelled half the time! I mean seriously, in Spring and Fall we're getting one flight a day - at 6am. If I'm going to get up at 3am for a business trip I may as well drive to Denver the afternoon before and at least get a decent night's sleep before my meeting. Stop wasting money on low frequency direct flights that don't change the game, go to United and pay them to run reliable, high frequency services with reasonable fares via Denver - year round. Either that or close down YVRA and fund free luxury shuttle vans to DIA on the hour every hour with the LMD money.
George, transparency that balances the short and long term is definitely a good thing. I'd go a step further and suggest the City publish a set of accounts prepared on an accrual basis that meet GAAP - like corporations are required by law to do (the louder the screaming you hear when suggesting this, the more you know that the books are being cooked).
Right now, we are still digging the hole deeper, spending every spare cent on new infrastructure, when we are struggling to maintain what we already have and our current budgeting processes serve to hide the facts. Don't see an entry for depreciation? Doesn't mean it isn't happening, just that we are pushing the costs into future years.
P.S. Accrual accounting also prevents nasty surprise on things like pensions, because then you have to explicitly acknowledge the (potentially unsustainable) promises for spending future taxes by showing them as liabilities on the balance sheet. Does anyone in Steamboat actually know what the City's future liabilities for pensions and health benefits are? Maybe it's not a problem, but the numbers ought to be readily available.
It isn't just lower airfares causing people to drive to Denver. It's also frequency and reliability of service, especially if you are travelling for business.
I think we are much too focussed on direct services. We'll never fund enough of those to be a game changer outside the peak winter season. What we need to focus on is reliable and affordable service to Denver year round.
I think the answer to your question Rob is Deb Hinsvark. Funny, I don't remember her name on any ballot. Or maybe it's Bart Kounovsky, and she's just doing his bidding. That might be appropriate if we had an elected full-time mayor, but we don't. Time for the other City Council members to start reigning this in. If they're being left out of the loop, they need to start kicking some butts.
The site at Pine Grove and the land swap with the hospital is the closest to a good idea I've heard during this whole police station drama. But this is NOT the way you make public policy, especially for major capital investment decisions.
"It won't add a penny to our deficit..."
So it's free. Yah, another free lunch out of Washington.
Hold on a minute, someone is going to have to pay for the systems and labor to track these drugs. It's OK, the evil, evil, evil big pharmaceutical companies will pay, right? They won't pass this on in the form of higher drug costs.
OK, maybe they will. But don't worry. Medicare / Medicaid / Obamacare is paying for your drugs so they'll pick up the extra costs. But it won't add a penny to our deficit. Or your employer will pay for it in your health insurance. Too bad the extra premiums will kill any chance you'll ever see another pay rise.
I don't know whether the benefits of this new legislation outweigh the costs, but when its proponents are pretending that there are no costs, which seems to be the standard political approach these days, I am deeply, deeply suspicious.
It's time the voters stopped falling for this nonsense. Believing in Santa Claus (benefits without costs) is cute in a five year old, not so much in adults.
Obviously they paid too much for the property during the boom. There's a lesson for others about taking what realtors say about property values with a does of salt.
This place must have been performing very poorly to close right before the ski season starts. Or perhaps they were up for a big expense (other than the roof) that they couldn't justify. Sad though to have another empty property in the middle of main st.
Last login: yesterday
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.