To The Daily Sun:
In the effort to become more politically motivated and to get a better grasp on how the legislative process is handled, I have started going to the committee hearings on bills as they make their voyage to try and become a law. Doing this not only gives me the opportunity to put my name on record as someone who is in favor of or opposes the bill, but also give me a chance to hear what the other side has to say. My most recent venture was for the "Right to Work" bill which was approved by the committee but then killed in the Senate.
Since I am conservative minded and what I like to call a Constitutional Individualist, I am in favor of Right to Work laws. As stated by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, the Right to Work principle affirms the right of every American to work for a living without being compelled to belong to a union. It is based on an individual's rights. The opponents of the law are of course the unions, who can only thrive when the masses join, and the ME group, who are the employees covered by the unions. At the committee meeting, there was no shortage of union bosses talking about how Right to Work is anti-union, which is false, and the MEs who told their sob stories about how, if it wasn't for the unions fighting for them to get higher pay, they wouldn't be able to afford their house or take care of their kids. While I don't want to get too much into why the unions of today are nothing more than a con game, I have to explain why the MEs are misguided.
The unions fight for you to get a higher wage, this is true. But then they take part of that away from you for union dues. You're paying for a service and that is fine, but your wages aren't as much as they "fought" for you to have. And that's not all folks. Since they force your employer to pay more, those costs get pushed down the line. If you work for a manufacturer, it costs more to make the product. If you work for a trucking company, it costs more to deliver the product. If you work for a retailer, they are going to sell the product for more. All of these companies will raise their prices to cover the cost of your higher wages. Now it's bad enough that you will have to pay more for a product than you should have because you got paid more to make it. But what happens to those of us who aren't in a union, whether it is because we don't want to be or because there isn't a union organized where we work? We have to pay a higher price for something that wouldn't cost so much if it weren't for the greed of the unions or the MEs. That house that you "wouldn't be able to afford" probably cost more in materials and union labor than it should have and it would have been cheaper if it was built with non-union materials and non-union labor. And all that food and clothing that your kids need wouldn't cost nearly as much if it was delivered by non-union drivers. You are getting duped and the non-union workers are getting fleeced.
There are those who think Right to Work laws are not needed because the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 does the same thing that current right to work laws are supposed to accomplish. This is not entirely true. While the act kept union shops restricted, there was also a provision in the act for states to pass Right to Work laws themselves. Some people also like to say that even in a non-Right to Work state; you aren't forced to join a union. This is also not true; it depends on a state's laws. I have a friend who works for the state in a non-Right to Work state. Even though he wants nothing to do with the union, he was forced to join as a requirement for getting the job. How is that possible if Taft-Hartley does everything that Right to Work laws do? Lastly, there are those who believe that Right to Work is not as economically beneficial as reported. Why is it then that Boeing wanted to move part of its operation from Washington State to the Right to Work state of South Carolina? Could it have been the $8 billion that the union wanted to extort from the company?
One side of Taft-Hartley that I don't agree with, and from my research shows me it has nothing to do with Right to Work, is that people who don't want to join the union don't have to pay dues but still get the full backing of the union. One of the MEs brought this up at the committee meeting and while I didn't agree with most of what she said, I do believe if you don't contribute to something, you shouldn't receive the benefit. But this is a problem in the federal law, not in a state's Right to Work law. The unions and the MEs need to fight the federal law instead of fighting an individual's right to not join their union. When this legislation comes up again in a year, the Right to Work law should be passed.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 04 February 2014 11:29
To The Daily Sun,
To all the residents of Briarcrest Estates:
Re: Lakemont Cooperative Interim Board Meeting, Saturday, Feb. 1.
Hi! Just got back from the Lakemont Cooperative Interim Board meeting (open to all residents/homeowners of Briarcrest Estates) held at our own BcE Community Room! Sorry to say that we missed a lot of you at the meeting, but thanks to all who did attend! We got some great information from the interim board members and from Angela Romeo of ROC-NH with some lively discussions, and had some NEW members sign up after the meeting.
We got an update about the TD Bank loan from Kevin Kelly (interim board operation manager and 30+ years of banking experience) about the percentage rate and length of term TD Bank is offering to the Lakemont Co-operative. He's managed to get a terrific loan rate for us, but the rate will not be locked in until just before closing as is the usual and customary practice of banks. In order for us to get a great rate on our loan we need everyone to do their part as soon as possible, including turning in those income surveys that were mailed to you this past week. The income surveys do NOT have a name on them, only numbers, so that no one will know what number belongs to what residence (a "double-blind" survey). By turning in those surveys, it will help the Co-op now and in future years by showing that the Co-op does not discriminate as to the level of anyone's income in order to buy a home in the park. So, please, mail in your completed survey (in the provided stamped envelope), just
don't throw it away; send it in blank or write on it that you won't cooperate — in the long run it may help sell your house.
The other survey, about how you perceive the condition of the lot your home is sitting on and your opinion of the condition of the park in general, is very important for the engineering study and the bank. So, I urge you to send in both surveys as soon as possible — the more the merrier!
Another discussion you missed was on hiring a financial management company — should we? And who? Two companies presented themselves at last week's interim board meeting (1/25/14) and a third has yet to come to present its proposal. Although we eliminated one proposal last week, the discussion is ongoing about why we need a financial management company — "why do we need to hire someone at some cost to just collect rents?" Well, the financial management company does more than just collect the rents. They will do: monthly processing of fee billing, monthly processing of payment collections, monthly posting of invoices, account reconciliations, preparation of monthly trial balances with recommendations on operating budget and report preparation/submission, accounting compliance with lender requirements, track membership fees, year-end submissions to independent accountant for preparation of financial statement and tax returns, and provide collection efforts on delinquent accounts.
A lot of the information needed for the Co-op's "due diligence" is coming in as we speak, but a lot more work needs to be done. Mr. Mark Mooney and his staff has been very helpful in this process including taking time to help the engineering assessment company.
So, if you want to liven up your Saturday mornings, please come to the OPEN Interim Board meetings held at our own BcE Community Room at 10:30 a.m. The next Interim Board meeting is February 8, where discussions may take place on a financial management company, a procurement policy, promise to pay and other outstanding policy items; getting insurance quotes for general liability, bond and property; status of the surveys; status of Co-op loans; status of the ongoing assessments and engineering studies; security in the park (due to previous and recent incidents); "Watch Community" presentation by Belmont PD; coordinating carpooling on a field trip to Medvil Estates (a cooperative manufactured home park in Goffstown that is bigger than BcE); and maybe much more! You never know what subject will come up in the open forum section of the meeting!
PLUS! Attend a FREE 2014 ROC-NH Boot Camp Saturday, May 17th here in Laconia! If you want to help your resident-owned community grow and stay strong, this is for you! "Whether you're a seasoned board member with years of experience, a new board member eager to strengthen your skills, or a resident eager to have a voice in your community, Boot Camp will provide you with information that is sure to improve your understanding of co-op management and governance — and provide you with more confidence to lead your co-op into the future." This is so you can learn the nuts and bolts of how a co-op works and there's no charge to attend! ROC-NH will provide lunch and an opportunity for you to meet other co-op residents from around your region. They'll even reimburse your mileage! Look for the poster on the Briarcrest bulletin board! Limited space is reserved on a first-come, first-serve basis. For more information or to register, call Trina at (800) 432-4110, ext 237 or e-mail her at
Last Updated on Tuesday, 04 February 2014 10:15
To The Daily Sun,
Once again, my insensitive sense of humor has offended some readers. In my short letter The Sun printed on Jan. 16, I compared some inconsiderate joggers to dumb animals that end up squashed by cars. I did alter some of the details of a tragic accident on North Main street, to protect the identity of the families involved. However, Mr. and Mrs. Weatherbee chose to be offended anyway, so I'll make the most of it.
As you said, I'm sure the pedestrian in question was a wonderful person. That is not the issue. As you admit in your attack on me, she was in the WRONG place, distracted by inspirational messages (?) on her headphones and wandered into traffic. She and she alone was responsible for her death by her own thoughtless action.
The real victim in this was my friend and coworker Victor, the driver of the car. He has since passed away, but I can tell you that he was a kind and gentle man who loved animals and hated no one. For weeks afterwards he would be overcome with grief and anxiety at work and we would tell him over and over that it wasn't his fault. He was never the same happy guy after that.
It is ironic that on page 3 of that same edition, appears the story "Man struck crossing S. Main". the pedestrian was not on a crosswalk and wearing dark clothes. It goes on to say, "Laconia Police ask that pedestrians use care in crossing roads and to use sidewalks, especially in inclement weather". In other words, if you don't obey the rules of the road, and you get hurt, you won't get much sympathy from them either. It is true that drivers must share the road with pedestrians, bicycles, wheel chairs and all, but to do it safely we must all play by the same rules. Dumb animals get an exemption but dumb people will not. If this letter still offends the Weatherbees or any one else, I'll just tell them to go play in the street.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 04 February 2014 10:07
To The Daily Sun,
This is in to response to Bernadette Loesch's letter in the August 31st Sun:
First, while I can agree with you that poverty has been a problem in the U.S., it has been with us for more than just "too many decades". It's been here since the first Europeans arrived on the American shores.
Second, you make a point about poverty and Mr. Boutin's observation about how it has increased since 1964, but your observation about why it has increased is wrong on just so many levels I don't know where to begin. Saying the failure to raise the minimum wage is the cause sounds good, at least to you and your leftist brethren, but it overlooks so many of the real causes. I am, however, going to address your assertion that it's all the fault of the failure to raise the minimum wage.
What kind of jobs are usually minimum wage? Mostly it's entry level jobs. And of all jobs out there how many of them are minimum wage jobs? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' 2012 metrics, it's about 2.5 percent. And of that 2.5 percent only 0.8 percent of all working Americans over the age of 25 are earning minimum wage. The problem with poverty isn't the minimum wage. With approximately 16-percent of Americans defined as living in poverty, and a quarter of them defined as the working poor, how does raising the minimum wage for the 0.8 percent solve the problem with the 4 percent who are the working poor?
The way to solve the problem is not to raise the minimum wage, which very few are actually making, but to create new jobs. One does not do that by artificially raising the cost of labor. One does that by getting government out of the way of job creation (government in and of itself can't create jobs in the private sector, and never has, but it sure as heck can prevent it). One does not lift the poor out of poverty by providing for them ad infinitum, but by providing them with incentives to get off of welfare, be it federal or state assistance. One means of doing so is by making reception of welfare of a limited duration, as was done during the Clinton Administration, and making sure recipients receive training/education for jobs that actually need filling. If they refuse the education/training, then they don't get welfare benefits. (Yes, I know there are those legitimately incapable of doing so for one reason or another, but they are the exception and not the rule, and they would continue to be assisted.)
If you make receiving government assistance attractive enough to those who are otherwise capable of working, they will take the assistance over having to work to support themselves. It's human nature. Remember, if you subsidize something, you get more of it. In this case if we continue to subsidize poverty we will only get more of it, just as has been done since LBJ's misguided Great Society and War on Poverty in 1965 stopped all progress towards diminishing poverty. All it did was subsidize generation after generation of the poor, made it difficult to get out from underneath the government dole, and in the process generated a whole new series of ills that plague the poor in this nation to this day. That is what has been a major contributing cause of poverty in the U.S., not the lack of a higher minimum wage.
Dale Channing Eddy
Last Updated on Tuesday, 04 February 2014 10:02
To The Daily Sun,
On January 21, Joe Kenney took the Republican nomination for Executive Councilor District 1 seat, after Ray Burton's death. My January 22 Citizen (a Laconia paper) reports Mr. Kenney thanking "all his supporters and various coalitions, including the Tea Party, Pro-Life Groups and the Wind Coalition."
On June 22, 2011, three Executive Councilors swung the vote to defund Planned Parenthood clinic that provides general health services to women and families, along with family planning/birth control and abortion services. Ray Burton was never among those councilors defunding family planning. By 2013 the three who voted that way in 2011 were replaced: districts 2, 4, 5 now have councilors supportive of women's health services.
Why would any thinking voter in Executive Council District 1, knowing that Ray always supported women's health services, now support Mr. Kenney, who counts himself Tea Party and Pro-Life supported? The right choice is Mike Cryans, who will support health services for women and their families. A March 11 vote for Mike Cryans continues the work of Ray Burton. Please tell your friends and neighbors that Mike Cryans will have your vote, and urge them to cast this important vote for Mike Cryans too.
Lynn Rudmin Chong
Last Updated on Tuesday, 04 February 2014 09:57