Stimulus funds can rebuild passenger rail infrastructure
Matt Zimmerman - City Manager
Saturday, May 9, 2009
AS PEOPLE across Kansas observe National Train Day today, the anniversary of the first transcontinental railroad, Emporia should also consider a future that includes a thriving passenger rail system. Members of the Northern Flyer Alliance, a growing economic development alliance across Kansas, see an immediate opportunity to use the economic stimulus funding to achieve a long-time goal – reviving passenger rail as a tool for economic revitalization, energy efficiency and a solid transportation infrastructure.
Picture this. Passenger rail bringing visitors to downtown Emporia from rural Kansas and beyond, generating a vibrant cultural and economic environment that will bring people back to our city’s core. Passenger rail has the potential to connect outlying communities and stimulate economic recovery along the route. Rail transportation also will allow east central Kansas to become less vulnerable to energy, environmental, and infrastructure problems in the future.
The Northern Flyer Alliance believes this picture has a good chance of becoming reality. We’re working with Kansas legislators and the Kansas Department of Transportation to include passenger rail in the new 10 year Comprehensive Transportation Plan as well as to take advantage of economic stimulus funds that could put Amtrak trains back into service on existing tracks between Oklahoma City and Kansas City.
All we need to do is use existing tracks to extend AMTRAK’s services from Oklahoma City to Kansas City. Currently, a passenger train called the Heartland Flyer operates daily along a 206-mile route from Fort Worth to Oklahoma City. Oklahoma and Texas began service in 1999 and the train has become a success story, with the Heartland Flyer carrying on average 2.5 times the number of passengers originally projected. We project an even greater potential for ticket sales and tourism -related revenue if the route is further expanded to link Oklahoma and Texas to Kansas City.
The federal government is willing to make a substantial investment to rebuild our nation’s rail infrastructure, using the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. We think Kansas has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to push for stimulus funding to reinstate passenger rail in this state and reconnect communities like Emporia to tourism and business travelers. If you’d like to learn more about the North Flyer Alliance’s efforts for passenger rail in Kansas, visit our website at www.northflyer.org.
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
Passenger rail service isn't going to bring "tourism" to Emporia, its going to encourage people to LEAVE town on the weekend. I think it would be great, because you could catch the train to KC Friday night, take a cab or bus to go where ever in KC, then catch the train back to Emporia Sunday afternoon.
I'm curious how Mr. Zimmerman thinks it will bring people to Emporia, because I see it encouraging people to leave.
May 10, 2009 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justaflushaway (anonymous) says...
Picture this: Zimmerman, this is shall I say really crazy. bring in rural Kansans to down town Emporia, Just what do you plan on doing, having a track from downtown Hartford to the center of Emporia?? that's what you said kinda siad didn't you. If you get any money, you need to think about the street repairs, hire people , remember that was what your president said the money was for, you really need to get off the railroad crap, the government has been dumping money in amtrak for 40 years and its a joke.
May 10, 2009 at 7:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jcook66801 (anonymous) says...
I don't plan to spend every day, all day in Emporia. I like to travel -- regionally and nationally. What is wrong with having a Amtrak stop in Emporia? Surely there will a greater chance that more will stop in Emporia thanks to Amtrak than without the service.
If rail service is to be extended in Kansas, it seems that it could not hurt to get on the wagon and make Emporia a stop. Then, it will be up to Emporia to get the passengers off the train.
May 10, 2009 at 8:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
If people had the same attitudes some of you have here back in the 1800's there probably wouldn't have been any railroads built and we'd all be traveling in covered wagons. Why not look ahead a little bit and try at least to make some positive changes????
With negative attitudes here you are dooming this community to a self-fulfilling prophecy of disaster.
I for one would prefer to look to the future of possibilities, not the history of what should have beens.
May 10, 2009 at 10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
People will stop to meet all the people against burglary. It's going to be a thing.
May 10, 2009 at 10:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
I'm not saying having an Amtrak stop here is bad, I think it would be wonderful. I'm saying that I don't see it bringing people to Emporia. Why get off in Emporia and shop or whatever, when Lawrence and KC are right up the track...
May 10, 2009 at 10:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
Most Kansas residents are wise enough to recognize that when things haven't worked out well in the past, that it would be a poor investment to repeat the process.
I too see more local people getting on it to travel out of E-town to shop else where rather than non-residents coming here to shop.
May 11, 2009 at 5:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Air travel is quicker and more convenient for those that can afford it. Because of the taxes that will no doubt have to be raised to pay for all the recent government spending, less people will be able to fly. They get left with the inferior rail travel but really pay the same because the difference is taken out in taxes whether they travel or not. We will be paying for something whether we use it or not and when we do it won't be as good as what we had before. Wait a minute..... that sounds a lot like socialized medicine. lol
May 11, 2009 at 9:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
arminius (anonymous) says...
Good column Matt.
Numbers are up in the Topeka station considerably. Probably the same in Newton. Times are changing. Train travel is coming back. It's just a question of whether Emporia will be with it or not.
Passenger rail would give Emporians better access to KC & other places (a plus), AND it would bring people to town. It's a both/and, not an either/or.
Rail in American has been the Rodney Dangerfield of public transportation. If our government subsidized it they way they do planes and roads we'd be more like Europe. PLUS we wouldn't lose 45,000 people every year in car accidents.
May 11, 2009 at 10:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
When did the government get more money to "subsidize" something else? Did they hit the lottery and I didn't hear about it? LOL
May 11, 2009 at 10:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/...
May 11, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
arminius (anonymous) says...
When [will] the government get more money to "subsidize" something else?
Maybe from the 45,000 people who can still be alive to pay taxes? :)
May 11, 2009 at 11:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Last year's Social Security trustee report estimates that OASDI (Social Security retirement and disability) and HI (hospital insurance), excluding book entry interest for the trust funds, will have more revenue than expenses until 2015. If higher cost assumptions prevail, however, the last year of positive flow will be 2010.
That's next year.
I am not making this up. It is public record. You can see for yourself by examining table VI.F9 on page 191 of the 2008 trustees' report.
When Social Security and Medicare costs exceed their revenues, the Treasury will have to borrow money to cover the shortfalls. When that happens, today's stunning deficits will look small."
From the article I linked above.
May 11, 2009 at 12:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
seriously......so what do you suggest be done about social security. Its been no secret for years that this was going to happen at some point. Everybody already knows about the problem....what we need is a solution.
With gas prices on the way back up however....I think a cheaper alternative way to get to K.C. and back might be helpful to my personal economic situation.
May 11, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Everybody's got something they think this "stimulus" money should be spent on, we can't do them all.
May 11, 2009 at 1:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
While its very true that we can't do them all.....there seems to be a relatively small but vocal percentage of the population that either wants to do nothing...or wants to do something but is unable to communicate what that is.
Instead of always hearing what we shouldn't be doing.....I for one would like to hear more concrete ideas about what needs to be done.
May 11, 2009 at 5:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Slow down the spending. Cut unnecessary programs. Realize that it's not the governments job to do everything. No doubt their will be some one who posts a list of social "programs" such as police,fire,schools etc. in order to make an emotional appeal for socialism(the government doing everything). That is an extreme. I am close to the center on this. I believe that there are certain things the government does adequately such as the above list but the more they try to do the more those suffer. I remember a time when I could drive down the street and not have the fillings in my teeth rattle out of my head.... see what I mean?
May 11, 2009 at 5:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Alright...sounds good.....but then we get to the nuts and bolts what spending.....what programs.
Given a litle time, I'm sure that you and I and many others that post on these boards could come up with list of wasteful unnecessary programs to cut......and we would be real darn lucky if more that two or three programs got on more than one list.
Many people my age...myself not included.....don't much like paying anymore for education programs.....of course its a safe bet many of them didn't always feel that way when they were still raising their children.....and many people raising children now don't feel that way either.
People still lucky or rich enough to still have affordable health care programs like things as they are......but it looks a lot different if your trying to raise a family with no health insurance or your on a fixed income dependent solely on Medicare.
And these are big differences.They don't even touch all the pork projects that are valuable and necessary when they apply to you but a terrible waste when going to that red or blue state over there.
Its real easy to stand on the sidelines and second guess every thing it gets much harder when you actually have to play the game. Maybe that explains why nothing changes very much no matter who' calling the shots.
So it still comes down to specifics.....cut what?......make who suffer.....and one thing you can almost always bet on......the one suggesting the cuts will not be the one to suffer.
May 11, 2009 at 7:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
We used to have a really cool historic depot that would have made an awesome stop with a museum. Too bad that's gone or this train idea would have a bigger following.
"the one suggesting the cuts will not be the one to suffer."
Is it really suffering to be made to support yourself? I say cut welfare and strengthen our nation. Keep minimal financial assistance programs with maximum eligibility requirements and make capable but lazy people get up. It's a start, but many places we could cut would make citizens work, which is different than suffering. If it is, then I am already suffering.
May 11, 2009 at 11:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
I never considered the police, fire, ems, and schools as social programs. I consider it scary if we didn't have them or they were severely curtailed. I agree with biscuitboy. No matter what is suggested, it most likely isn't going to impact the person making the suggestion. There are cause-effect and unintended consequences of cutting anything. Whether you agree with it or not, those receiving assistance, spend those dollars in grocery stores, medical facilities and other helping agencies. If they go without services, those of us who are trying to make our own way will have to pick up the difference in the costs, especially in the medical sector more than we already do. You can pay now or pay later. Realistically, are the police, fire, EMS not going to respond because someone didn't pay taxes, will the emergency room turn away someone gravely Ill? Doubtful. Einstein was right. For every action, there is an equal reaction. Might it be after 15 years of "no new taxes" that we have reached the point of diminishing return? I for one am tired of infrastructure that is failing, increased response times for public safety and the need for my grandkids to take extra money to school to pay for books, and paper in elementary school. I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again. I want to leave my kids and grandkids a legacy other than we left them a huge debt because we didn't have the stones to pay our own way.(taxes).
May 11, 2009 at 11:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
....oh4theluvof......Weather intended or not I believe you helped make my case. You work and pay your way...as do I....so the obvious place to cut is assistence to those who don't. But those who don't are not monolithic. They don't all not work for the same reasons.
As you stated on another thread the other day...everybody is not born equal. Some people are born with greatly superior abilities to "earn their own way" than are others. And I'm speaking here of people with so-called normal abilities. Add in physical and mental handicaps and the playing field becomes even less level Now you throw in an economy as we have at present.....where well qualified people are having a hard time finding a job.....and where do you suppose all of these marginally qualified people are going to find the ways and means to support themselves.
In this unequal world we live in there will always be those who remain incapeable of carrying their own weight for all kinds of reasons. So do we support them at some level like we do now.....or do we just let them beg and die by the side of the road as we see in some thirld world countries....and if we do that does that make us then a third world country?
I say all of this before I even start to address the definition of "welfare". We all recognize welfare as it applies to the uneducated and unkept......but what about welfare as it applies to business? What about tax breaks and business subsidies? What about agri-subsidies....paying farmers not to plant to artificially maintain a higher price for their product?
Are these not a form of welfare...especially as defined in the broadest sense of government paying taxpayer money so an individual can live better than they would be able to live on their own?
May 12, 2009 at 4:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
McCarthy's methods were wrong but it seems he was something of a prophet.
May 12, 2009 at 8:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I'm sorry Mr.Reagan we only thought we won the cold war.
May 12, 2009 at 9 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
it is said that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will never jump out.
May 12, 2009 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy:
I don't know what former post of mine you are referring to about not all being born equal. I am not denying its truth, I just don't remember being the one to say it. I did, however, acknowledge that keeping some welfare might be considered necessary. I phrased it, "Keep minimal financial assistance programs with maximum eligibility requirements...." This would be for those who have actual impairments.
justthefacts:
Those people who are forced to earn their own or starve are going to find a way to earn their own--they will not stop buying food. And if they do discontinue use of a few services, what does it matter to the employees?? What it matters is that they will be taxed less, so when they lose those two hours of work that were being taxed away from them before to pay for that dead weight, they wouldn't have lost anything. They would have gained a couple of hours in their week to spend on their own life instead of being required to spend it on a person who's services they were simultaneously paying for. It really isn't a loss when you consider the whole picture.
Also, I believe that these program cuts would affect me.....I would no longer wonder how many hours I worked to pay for that WIC or food stamp order that just preceeded me in the grocery line. I have worked at a grocery store and seen the abuse of those programs and know that I paid for a few of those orders as well as the processing costs behind them---all the man hours and materials that are required to turn my tax money into that person's cart full of more expensive food than I can buy. I was also required to be there working to be able to sell them that stuff that I paid for with my taxes. You better believe I would be affected by it. I and the person now forced to earn their own would both benefit.
May 12, 2009 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
I've seen people starving because try as they might, they could not find the resources to feed their families. It's not because they are lazy or that they didn't try to find a job. If you are homeless it's darned hard to get a job when you don't have an address. I don't mind providing assistance for those in need and a process to help them out. It's hard to pull yourself up by your bootstraps if you don't have boots to wear. The privilege of living in this country carries an obligation to assist those in need. I can live without a big screen TV or a trip to KC a few times to help out those less fortunate that me.
May 12, 2009 at 12:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof.....You are correct.....the all people are not created equal statement was not made by you.....memory is often faulty. I still stand by the rest of the statement however.
Am I to assume then that you feel the other forms of welfare I mentioned.....corporate and agricultural......are ok? I don't have specific figures but am quite certain that tax breaks and subsidies to business and agriculture are far greater than what's handed out in food stamps and housing assistance.
I'm sure you will correct me if I.m wrong.
May 12, 2009 at 12:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Sometimes I think that war is necessary
Every night I pray for peace on earth
I hand out my dollars to the homeless
But believe that every able soul should work"
Toby Keith
I haven't been to KC or even Topeka in well over a year.
I don't have a cell phone.
I don't have a big screen or flat screen TV.
I don't have cable or satellite.
My newest car is 14yrs old.
My house is at least 59yrs old.
I personally give to charity out of every one of my checks.
I guarantee that money that goes directly to the charity is used for what it's for. I've seen how the government operates and it's not very efficient. Your conscience may be soothed by the idea that the government is doing all your charity work for you but the way they do things it will break us all.
May 12, 2009 at 1:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
If I did that my mattress would be lopsided!
May 12, 2009 at 1:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
spuds4all (anonymous) says...
(CNSNews.com) -- The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job.
May 12, 2009 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
A private enterprise could have trained them for half that much, with 4 times the success rate. Typical government inefficiency.
May 12, 2009 at 3:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I'm glad that my frugal living can help those poor Chinese prostitutes learn to drink responsibly. I really do need to think of who would be affected by cutting government programs before spouting off about the government spending "their" tax dollars responsibly. I feel bad now.
May 12, 2009 at 6:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Sorry, seriouslyfolks, you're going to have to shoulder the Chinese drinking problem yourself. My tax dollars all got spent on a tattoo-removal machine, and a study to figure out why pig poop smells so bad - (Actually, I could tell them the answer to the latter - its because pigs are all politicians, or visa versa - LOL)
Of course, you understand, we're both racists (according to Garafalo & Olbermann) for those views....... Instead of "Fox Lies" T-Shirts, how come we're not printing T-shirts saying get an education, or you'll end up like those two????
May 12, 2009 at 7:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I am not denying there are people living off the public dole that are as capeable of working and supporting themselves as I am. In fact I see several of them everyday setting on their porch doing nothing as I head for work and they are still there when I get home. In my block alone there are 4 white females, 2 white males and one black male drawing disability.....while there is one mexican female, 3 white males (myself included), and six mexican males that work full time. In my block its not too hard to tell who's carrying their weight.
But for all the money spent supporting all these people that don't work for whatever reason.....there is much more spent on various subsidies, tax breaks, expensive pork barrel projects from both sides of the aisle, and thingd like government building projects that keep much of the construction industry busy. I do realize that many of these things do provide reciprocal benefit. But those benefits often go to the very same people that are calling the loudest for cuts in welfare. It appears welfare must be hard to recognize when its setting on your porch.
May 12, 2009 at 8:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy, I'm just curious......how do you know who's "carrying their weight"? Do you personally know the stories of those drawing disability? Are any of them in wheelchairs? Any of them recovering from chemo? Over 60? Suffering from MS? Or maybe their disabilities are mental, or not visible?
The reason I ask, I remember in an earlier thread someone mentioned a hispanic in a fancy car sending money south, they were jumped all over for not knowing that person's personal situation, and making assumptions (based on race, if I remember correctly). I don't remember who or by whom. You seem to be weighted in one direction with your descriptions of race, I was just wondering how you know who's carrying their weight, or how much weight they are each capable of carrying....... or are we only to prejudge whites? (And one black, in this case) - but always assume the best if the person is Latino?
Just curious.........
May 12, 2009 at 8:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
In the article about the absolutely necessary government spending to teach ladies of the night in China how to drink they called the pimps "gatekeepers". Are the "johns" "key masters"?
"Are you the gatekeeper?"
"I don't know? Are you the key master?"
"Hey wait! Is she drunk?"
"It's not my fault. Blame the selfish Americans!"
BAM! WW3
May 12, 2009 at 8:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy and others:
I have very little time this week to debate all this so I will give you a blanket statement of my economic policy. I believe any and all tax money is to go toward the government functions outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution: courts, law enforcement, military defense, and legislating for the safety and freedom of the citizens. If any program does not fall within the parameters of these four functions (three if you count law enforcement and military defense as two levels of the same category) I do not believe it should be government funded. That is not to say that there should not be financial vehicles to assist those in need or programs that further our society in the world. It simply means that, to me, those things should be privately funded and operated. To me, this is all very black and white. Honestly, and I know this will be VERY unpopular, I don't think education should ever have become part of the public system. Even though I have a child in the public school system (two in the near future), I believe all schools should essentially be private, operating on tuitions and voluntary community support (fundraisers, donations, volunteer positions, etc.). So, for anything that you think of as a welfare that you question my view of, you may feel free to see where it fits in my statement and then draw your conclusions from that instead of just making random assumptions.
May 12, 2009 at 9:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Does teaching Chinese hookers the difference between a good buzz and being completelly drunk count as public education?
May 12, 2009 at 10:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
open_eyes......I found your last post to be curiously interesting. Usually your post are thoughtful and fair...even if "weighted" with facts and data of sometimes dubious (lol) orgin. But you really seemed to be reaching on this one.
First.....no I do not know every detail of the life of every person I mentioned on disability. None are in wheelchairs.....one however uses a walker. None of them are young....but they are all younger than me (68). Some of them are obviously in poor health...some appear fine.....and one has helped me paint houses on occassion.....(before you get too carried away this was before he got on his disability....but while he was waiting on it). But my post refered only to who was carrying the weight....it made no value judements about those that weren't.... I do however find your concern for the plight of the disabled heartening....and hope it translates into working to keep their benefits from being cut.
As to the racial breakdown of my neighborhood.....I had nothing to do with that and certainly did not weight it to my advantage. In fact I only included the race to keep some from jumping to the conclusion (as some surely would have) that all those that were carrying their weight were of course white. If you however consider the results of that racial breakdown to be pre-judging whites you then are doing some prejudging of your own.
It appears to me on this one...your primary goal was to discredit my post with out giving much thought to how you did it.....but that of course is my opinion...and is also judgemental.
May 13, 2009 at 4:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof.....I admire your position as outlined in your last post even though I do not agree with your views on the strict limitations of the role of government. In my opinion....the preamble to the constitution was written at a time when this country was a relatively small agrarian society. Times have changed as have the needs for government.
But if your life and livelihood is not touched or affected by any of the types of programs that you decry (or would really be willing to live without such impact) then I do truely admire you.
Most people however live lifes that are affectted in a positive way by government spending in myriad ways every single day.....yet these same people rise up in arms when that same government spends money in ways that doesn't help feather their nest. And that is the point I'm trying to make here. Most of us have or hand in the till everyday weather directly or indirectly....and are only bothered when it' s somebody else's hand.
May 13, 2009 at 4:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
oh4 obviously doesn't have the compassion for the poor drunk ladies of ill repute that the rest of us do. Many people here have made emotional ploys for everyone to accept all current and future social programs that our government provides with their money and I must say that my heart was hard. I thought surely there must be some places in the budget that could be cut(using common sense of course) but after reading of the "low cost providers" in China and their plight with martinis I was cut to the heart and now it surely bleeds. President Kennedy I am sorry sir, you asked the wrong question, you should have asked, "Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you and Chinese hookers." Socialism, is there anything it can't do? Fire departments, police, schools, mostly sober Chinese hookers.......... the possibilities are endless for this countries money. It's like that movie Yes Man, we don't have to think which ones are a waste of money because they aren't to some one, we just print more money and say "YES!". I am really starting to see the appeal of socialism and liberal spending!
May 13, 2009 at 8:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy, yes, I probably should have left the racial component out of it, it was only interesting because you felt it necessary to specify everyone by their ethnicity, as if trying to prove some point. But I see the point in your explanation to keep anyone from jumping to the conclusion that those "carrying the weight" were all white, so point taken, and I was wrong to ask about that slant. But saying that it is easy to tell "who's carrying the weight" implies that it is easy to tell who is NOT...... and I don't consider disabled people to "not be carrying their fair share". Besides, I know lots of fully-employed people who I do NOT consider to be "carrying their fair share" (I work with some - LOL). I guess my point it it is unfair to say on one particular block that only the healthy people are carrying the weight while those on disability are not. That is different from a group of people who were all healthy and able to work, while half carry the weight and the other sponge off the government (and us).
And, as I said, the only reason I brought that up at all was because an earlier thread someone was chastised for not knowing the specific circumstances of someone who did not appear to be "carrying their weight"......
As to my links of "dubious" origins, I don't post a link if I can't find more than 1 or a small handful of links to support it, I just pick what seems to be the best out of them, and anyone is welcome at anytime to post data to the contrary. I've gotten used to people considering anything they don't necessarily agree with as being of "dubious origin"...... LOL
May 13, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
open_eyes.....
.....I also take your point about carrying the weight....it wasprobably a poor chice of words but it was intended as a reference to an earlier post on the thread where comments had been made about people not carrying their weight. I apologize about sounding judgemental about the disabled, becuse if they are disabled I certainly don't feel that way.
...as to my comment about dubious orgin, I mean't that as a joke. If anything I envy your having the time and talent to back up what you say with specific data. That is often in short supply on these boards.
May 13, 2009 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I think we both probably didn't choose our words as well as we could have, that happens, but I understand your point now as well, thx for clarifying.
I really DON'T have the time - something always suffers as a result - guess that's why I work long hours :). At the very least, I think I need a more ergonomically correct keyboard..... carpal tunnel.....- LOL
May 13, 2009 at 12:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C97P1...
May 13, 2009 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sC7xcI...
May 13, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
headed to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
May 14, 2009 at 6:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )