A+ A A-

Wind turbines not synchronized, they can 'thump' together or not

To The Daily Sun,
People from other wind farm communities continue to tell us "you don't want wind turbines in your community" They do not create local jobs, they will encroach on existing biomass and hydro plants, property values will decline, turbines will deter tourists, turbines are noisy and will be seen — day and night — for miles in every direction.
People live here, retire here, vacation here because of the natural beauty. I come here to breathe the fresh air and see the natural landscape from our family home. These proposed wind farms will forever ruin the beautiful views of the mountains I love.
Make no mistake about it — Mount Cardigan State Park is basically the only tourism draw for Alexandria. Your new neighbors (454-ft. - 500-ft. turbines) will significantly reduce your tourism levels and your property values. Four reasons why: noise, visual, safety, and essential character.
Wind turbines are not synchronized, they can "thump" together or separately, creating an unpredictable or chaotic acoustic pattern. Turbines will line your mountaintops and destroy the natural views. Turbines will be established on trails leading in and out of the park. Visitors that hike here will think twice about returning to this "industrial overlay".
This is pristine property — most of us bought property here for the peace and quiet and unobstructed views. These wind farms will change everything.
I am shocked that the State of New Hampshire is not fighting to protect the Lakes Regions — at all costs. Everything man does has an impact on the land. Blasting away mountaintops will have a direct effect on our waters below — and the waters below are our watershed.
Ray Cunningham
Bridgewater

Last Updated on Thursday, 27 June 2013 06:23

Hits: 364

Say prayer for those who can only find the negative about U.S.

To The Daily Sun,
1776 was a really great year, starting out with the people of New Hampshire declaring its independence from the British Crown and its oppressive government. A government denying its people their rights under common law and the Magna Carta denying the representation in governing. Not all of the British subjects in the colonies were so brave and clear minded as to realize that loosing their lives physically would be better than living them as slaves to the crown. It has been pointed out that for some it was a terrible year, but then that is speech come 230+years late. To say that, however we may read the history, is to say the idea that freedom from an oppressive ruler was a sad and lousy turn of events. To guess the mind of Washington! Thinking that it was the British which chased him and not he leading them to where he wanted them. To imagine only one Benedict Arnold, or that all of his officers gleefully submitted to Washington isn't a good read of history. To suggest that troops deserted "taking their weapons with them" as if they were expected to leave them, further shows a lack of understanding of the reality.
Washington managed to concentrate the majority of the British forces to the NY/NJ area and convinced Gen. Howe he "destroyed the continental army". Howe sent a lesser General Cornwallis, who was on Christmas holiday, to "chase" Washington after the "guns for hire" Hessians were defeated. As a later general said, "War is Hell", he might have added, "and it knows no holiday". Washington was not a narrow minded, clueless individual who gave orders and stood back; he learned and listened, kept his own consul, he knew that men fighting for their freedom were to be led and he stood with them.
As far as Washington's Army being ill-clothed and sick, it was the continental government that didn't hold up to its promises, (nothing has really changed since).
Be thankful we still can celebrate the birth of "our" nation; and say a prayer for those billions in the world who don't have such freedoms and a prayer for those in this nation who can only find the negative and want the rest of us to accept it as truth.
G.W. Brooks
Meredith

Last Updated on Thursday, 27 June 2013 06:19

Hits: 250

Liberals can't comprehend difference between opinion & lie

To The Daily Sun,
Starting out this week in The Sun, it appears I've been taken out to the wood shed once again by letters from Henry Osmer and L.J. Siden. Henry asks, what I have ever done for America? Well gee Henry, I'm sorry, but I just don't have a great long list of sterling accomplishments to present to you. The sorry fact is that I am very average, much like millions and millions of other average Americans. I have never done anything of great merit nor have I done anything of great disrepute. I'm just average, so by that measure do you judge that I have no right to an opinion or more importantly no right to express my opinions? Seems that tends to be the general feeling I get from you and many others on the left.
L.J. Siden appears to share a trait with Bernadette Loesch and others on the left — they fail to comprehend the difference between an opinion and a lie. Anyone who dares disagree with them must be lying. They allow for no other possibilities and in most instances they attribute this to racism. It's all nonsense of course.
L.J. makes his case that no one is trying or would be able to deny Americans their 2nd amendment rights, yet just a couple of months ago Diane Feinstein, on a Sunday morning TV show, said if she had the votes it would be turn them in Mr. and Mrs. America. She was talking about our guns, not big gulp drinks.
We have seen Obama's practice of circumventing Congress, selectively failing to enforce federal laws, stonewalling congressional hearings, violating laws and the civil rights of American people, using the power of federal agencies to harass and intimidate political opponents and generally acting like a potentate rather then the president of a republic. Because I point out these and other things L.J. labels my opinions as lies. He can't deny the facts of Obama's record so he resorts to the standard tactic of the left, character assassination. How pathetic.
Steve Earle
Hill

Last Updated on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 08:40

Hits: 322

Low skilled immigrants pay less in taxes than value of benefits

To the editor,
Let's be frank, our politicians are trying to force Comprehensive Immigration Reform down our throats because it benefits the politicians themselves, even though it hurts most Americans.
With 20 million unemployed or underemployed Americans, we don't need the low skilled, poorly educated immigrant workers who flood this labor pool driving down wages and taking jobs Americans desperately need.
They tell us this cheap immigrant labor keeps prices down, for example, that immigrants provide us with cheap lettuce and apples because Americans won't pick fruits and vegetables for the average farm worker pay of about $8.65 per hour.
But many Americans already work at the current wages, so many more unemployed or underemployed Americans would take jobs held by illegals if the jobs paid more. Employers would have to pay more if the labor market was not flooded with low skilled (immigrant) workers. Labor is only about 10 percent of the produce cost so doubling farm labor pay would provide a decent income to workers at only a minor cost to consumers. (Small compared to the food stamp program cost for each net income tax payer of about $1066/year.)
The worst cost of illegal immigration is that many Americans are victims of accidents and violent crimes committed by people who shouldn't even be here. The next worst cost is probably to the poverty, depression and dependency that harms so many low skilled Americans because of illegal aliens. But, let's consider the financial cost of this "cheap" labor.
Each average illegal immigrant household receives approximately $16,000 more in benefits that it pays in taxes (legal immigrants receive more). Assuming two workers per household, that works out to about $4/hour. In addition, Americans, who lose jobs to illegal workers, receive various unemployment and welfare benefits that average about $30,000. That is a cost to the taxpayer of about $14.50 per hour.
Adding the above, the true cost of allowing a farmer to hire cheap illegal workers is $27.15 per hour, not just the $8.65 paid by the farmer. Even $27.15 understates the real cost. It doesn't include the cost due to depressed wages, the cost of imprisoning violent criminal immigrants, and the cost of property stolen by illegal alien criminals; I don't know how to estimate these and other real costs.
The low wages paid to illegal workers allow farmers and other employers to earn big profits. Portions of those profits go to taxes and to influence politicians to continue taxing other Americans to subsidize their businesses.
A recent study by the OECD says that immigrants, all together, annually cost American taxpayers $140,000,000,000 more than they pay in taxes. High skilled immigrants pay more taxes than they receive in benefits. Low skilled workers take far more in benefits than they pay in taxes. The Senate's Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill will allow 7 unskilled immigrants for every high skilled immigrant worker, thus this bill will create a huge additional cost for American taxpayers.
The beneficiaries of the Senate's Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill will be politicians, employers, and special interest groups. The claims they are making are intended to deceive us. We'd be stupid to believe their promises again. The vast majority of the American people will continue to be victimized by immigrant criminals, competition from surplus and illegal labor that lowers wages or takes our jobs, and from increased taxation to subsidize rich people and benefit the politicians.
Call, write, or e-mail Senators Ayotte and Shaheen and your congresswoman and demand that they oppose this Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill. Tell them to just enforce current immigration laws.
Don Ewing
Meredith

Last Updated on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 08:36

Hits: 259

Need to go back to recognizing bicycle riders as pedestrians

To The Daily Sun,
Back during WWII, gas rationing led to many people riding bikes, and too many accidents. The quick cure was to recognize that bikes are more like pedestrians than cars, so should ride on left side of the road facing auto traffic, so they can see and avoid danger from cars and trucks. That worked excellently.
Sometime later, the insanity of treating bike riders as cars got established, resulting in many deaths and injuries.
The path of a bike is highly unpredictable, since steering is also a part of balancing. The slower they go the more unpredictable the path.
Let's all spread the word and get government to correct the rules to make bike riding Safe!
Jack Stephenson
Gilford

Last Updated on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 08:33

Hits: 235

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN