Many of you may know that I'm no fan of Thanksgiving. I don't like the food. I don't like the forced togetherness. I don't like concept that we should be thankful one particular day of the year. After all, what about the other 364 days?
We used to do a “thankful tree” in the Leffler house. Each day from November 1 until Thanksgiving, we'd each write something we were thankful for on a leaf and tape it to the fridge. It was a good way to remember to be thankful on more than just one day. And it reminded us that we really did have things to be thankful for.
Items included people, places we had gone to, things we had done, scenery we had seen, and anything that had made us happy, even if only for a smidgen of time.
I don't think I could do a thankful tree this year. True, 2009 has not been particular kind to this scribe. But it's not that I have nothing to be thankful for. Not by a long shot. It's that I've got so much to be thankful for, I'd have to do a “thankful forest.”
I have neither the time, nor the resources to do a thankful forest. So a thankful column will have to suffice.
I'm thankful for the people that have been in my life since my birth. My family. They've always stood by my side through each decision, right or wrong. Sometimes holding my hand. And sometimes kicking me in the rear. But one way or another, they've been there. And I thank them for that.
Particular thanks to my mom, who has been there to pick up the pieces on several occasions this year alone.
I'm thankful for the people I met in my youth, who in many ways helped to mold and shape me into the person I am today. I've reconnected recently with many people I had first met at the age of four, starting kindergarten. Truly life-long friends … even if there was a 15 year gap in the middle.
I'm thankful for many people I met in college, who – fortunately – keep the same awkward hours I do, always there eagerly awaiting my tales of that days victories. And on the days when the victories are outnumbered by the defeats, they remind me that the sun will rise soon and a new day will begin.
I'm particularly thankful for one friend from college, my best friend for the last 15 years. This has been a trying year for her as well, and yet she always seems to be willing to listen to my sorry tales and offer me the best advice she can give. I couldn't have blamed her had she disappeared this year, but she's still there every time I call. Every time I drop by. Moved on? Yes. Disappeared? No. I'm thankful I didn't lose that friendship.
I'm thankful for my children, who mean the world to me. They remind me that I was young once. And others have been my age before. They have their own trials and tribulations, similar to those I had at their ages. I thought then that I'd never get over the heartbreak of losing a friend or a loved one. But I did. And it reminds me that no loss is insurmountable. Even if you believe it is at the time.
I'm thankful for those who have come into my life recently. Or have had their roles in my life change recently. They've been bright spots in my life and I welcome the light. I'm particularly thankful for one friend who has been the central character in my life for the majority of this year. She's made me weep deeply. And smile broadly. But the highest highs were worth the lowest lows.
And I'm thankful for all the support and love I've received from people I barely know. It truly touches my heart to be looked-in on by people who's birthdays I don't know. Some of them, I don't know their ages. Some, I don't even know their names. And I was important enough to them at some point or another this year for them to call or write and ask how I was doing.
If you want to know how I'm doing, I'll tell you. I'm doing well … thanks to you.
This Thursday as you sit down for dinner with your friends, family, loved ones, or complete strangers, remember what you truly have to be thankful for. Someone loves you. And if no one else does, I do.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Kudos as warranted ...
Typically, my column is a rant. I'm upset or complaining about something. Frankly, people seem to like it that way. I mean, who wants to read a column about how awesome everything is?
Fortunately, there is a lot that goes wrong in the world and I never seem to lack for a rant-worthy topic.
But sometimes things go right. Okay, things go right a lot. But sometimes things go really right … and I feel compelled to offer some kudos. For example, kudos to Niagara County Manager Greg Lewis for holding the line on the county's property tax levy. This year, the county collected $67.5 million in taxes from county residents. He's proposing to collect exactly the same amount next year.
A lot of people get confused about the difference between a tax rate and a tax levy. And I can't blame most of them. It's confusing. Put as simply as I can, the tax rate is the percentage of your home's value you have to pay in taxes each year. The tax levy is the total amount the county collects. You want to watch the tax levy. If it goes up, your taxes are most likely going up. Sometimes legislators like to tout that the tax rate is decreasing, but that's usually due to revaluation. If your $100,000 home is now allegedly worth $110,000 according to your town, you could – in theory – pay a lower tax rate … but still pay more in taxes.
Even Lewis seems confused about the issue, saying “Most people living in Niagara County will experience a reduction in taxes on their bill.”
This can only possibly be true if the minority of residents pick up the tab for that reduction. Unlikely. I'd say odds are most people's tax bills will be about the same, with a few going up and a few going down.
Mr. Lewis, be proud enough for holding the line. Don't try to make it sound like you're lowering people's taxes. No one likes a braggart. Especially when the claim is false.
Despite my kudos, there are some things to be concerned about. One of the ways in which the county was able to hold the line is because the state will be asking for $5 million less for the county’s share of the cost for Medicaid programs. Had the state not asked for less, the tax levy would be $5 million higher. As it is, county officials expect the state to ask for a more than $7 million increase next year. If everything else remains flat, that's a 10 percent increase in the levy … or to reiterate, a 10 percent increase in the average homeowners tax bill.
Another area of concern is that the county workforce is growing. The 2010 budget calls for 1,714 employees, up from a total of 1,671 in 2009. That's 43 more jobs that taxpayers are footing the bill for. Which might sound more reasonable if Niagara County were growing, but it's not. The population continues to shrink. Unemployment continues to rise. That means less people paying, but more people receiving.
Legislators are expected to meet individually to go over the spending plan. They have the final say and could, of course, increase it, but I don't see that as likely, to be honest.
I know I threw in some negative things there at the end, but all-in-all holding the line should be appreciated. Call your legislator and tell them you appreciate Mr. Lewis holding the line. And would appreciate it if they kept that line held … or better yet, do a little cutting.
Fortunately, there is a lot that goes wrong in the world and I never seem to lack for a rant-worthy topic.
But sometimes things go right. Okay, things go right a lot. But sometimes things go really right … and I feel compelled to offer some kudos. For example, kudos to Niagara County Manager Greg Lewis for holding the line on the county's property tax levy. This year, the county collected $67.5 million in taxes from county residents. He's proposing to collect exactly the same amount next year.
A lot of people get confused about the difference between a tax rate and a tax levy. And I can't blame most of them. It's confusing. Put as simply as I can, the tax rate is the percentage of your home's value you have to pay in taxes each year. The tax levy is the total amount the county collects. You want to watch the tax levy. If it goes up, your taxes are most likely going up. Sometimes legislators like to tout that the tax rate is decreasing, but that's usually due to revaluation. If your $100,000 home is now allegedly worth $110,000 according to your town, you could – in theory – pay a lower tax rate … but still pay more in taxes.
Even Lewis seems confused about the issue, saying “Most people living in Niagara County will experience a reduction in taxes on their bill.”
This can only possibly be true if the minority of residents pick up the tab for that reduction. Unlikely. I'd say odds are most people's tax bills will be about the same, with a few going up and a few going down.
Mr. Lewis, be proud enough for holding the line. Don't try to make it sound like you're lowering people's taxes. No one likes a braggart. Especially when the claim is false.
Despite my kudos, there are some things to be concerned about. One of the ways in which the county was able to hold the line is because the state will be asking for $5 million less for the county’s share of the cost for Medicaid programs. Had the state not asked for less, the tax levy would be $5 million higher. As it is, county officials expect the state to ask for a more than $7 million increase next year. If everything else remains flat, that's a 10 percent increase in the levy … or to reiterate, a 10 percent increase in the average homeowners tax bill.
Another area of concern is that the county workforce is growing. The 2010 budget calls for 1,714 employees, up from a total of 1,671 in 2009. That's 43 more jobs that taxpayers are footing the bill for. Which might sound more reasonable if Niagara County were growing, but it's not. The population continues to shrink. Unemployment continues to rise. That means less people paying, but more people receiving.
Legislators are expected to meet individually to go over the spending plan. They have the final say and could, of course, increase it, but I don't see that as likely, to be honest.
I know I threw in some negative things there at the end, but all-in-all holding the line should be appreciated. Call your legislator and tell them you appreciate Mr. Lewis holding the line. And would appreciate it if they kept that line held … or better yet, do a little cutting.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
What we deserve?
In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.”
It was either Alexis de Tocqueville or Hunter S. Thompson who penned the preceding phrase, depending on which source you believe. Also could have been William Shakespeare or Thomas Jefferson.
It matters not who said it, I believe the principal to be true.
Note that the quote says “the people” and not just “people.” It's a collective statement. If you're the only person with any brains living on an island of idiots, you might not necessarily get the government you deserve. But your society as a whole, does.
I can't help but wonder how many of you felt I was talking about them specifically in the last paragraph. I won't ask for a show of hands, though. There was apparently plenty of hand raising last week. But that's neither here nor there.
It could be said that in this quasi-capitalist society in which we live, the people get the customer service they deserve. After all, what is capitalism but democracy with dollar bills?
Could it be said that the people get the health care they deserve? Really? Could we be so screwed up as a whole that we deserve the broken mess we have?
Cause let's face it, the health care system is broken from the top down. Or might it be from the bottom up. Really, who is to blame? The system? Or the system?
Yes, I realize I said system twice. The first system was the insurance carriers and the health care providers. The second system referred to us, the users.
Surely there is enough blame to go around. Yes, the insurance industry reeks of greed. I know of no other industry where you pay for something … and then have to pay extra if you actually use it. Anyone who's been to a hospital lately can attest to the fact that something is amiss there. You've got doctors and nurses answering to lawyers and bean-counters as if that somehow makes sense to anyone … other than the lawyers and bean-counters. It is, however, the “us” part of the equation that concerns me most. For I am not an insurance executive, nor a doctor, nor a bean counter. I am – for better or worse – part of the collective, “the people.”
So in steps government to fix things. The democratically elected government. The one we deserve.
God help us all.
Truly, one of the few things on the planet that I detest more than lawyers is politicians. Maybe it's because such a large percentage of them are actually just reformed lawyers.
I tend to believe less government is best, and as such abhor government involvement in most aspects of my life. I can only imagine what Thomas Jefferson would have thought of his government running the health care industry. I've been to President Jefferson's grave. I
imagine if I revisited it, I could hear him rolling over in it.
After all, it was definitely Jefferson who said, “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”
I tend to agree with the Democrats that the health care system is broken. I just don't tend to agree with their idea on how to fix it.
But mine is a lonely voice, drown out by the collective, getting the government – and the health care – that “the people” deserve.
It was either Alexis de Tocqueville or Hunter S. Thompson who penned the preceding phrase, depending on which source you believe. Also could have been William Shakespeare or Thomas Jefferson.
It matters not who said it, I believe the principal to be true.
Note that the quote says “the people” and not just “people.” It's a collective statement. If you're the only person with any brains living on an island of idiots, you might not necessarily get the government you deserve. But your society as a whole, does.
I can't help but wonder how many of you felt I was talking about them specifically in the last paragraph. I won't ask for a show of hands, though. There was apparently plenty of hand raising last week. But that's neither here nor there.
It could be said that in this quasi-capitalist society in which we live, the people get the customer service they deserve. After all, what is capitalism but democracy with dollar bills?
Could it be said that the people get the health care they deserve? Really? Could we be so screwed up as a whole that we deserve the broken mess we have?
Cause let's face it, the health care system is broken from the top down. Or might it be from the bottom up. Really, who is to blame? The system? Or the system?
Yes, I realize I said system twice. The first system was the insurance carriers and the health care providers. The second system referred to us, the users.
Surely there is enough blame to go around. Yes, the insurance industry reeks of greed. I know of no other industry where you pay for something … and then have to pay extra if you actually use it. Anyone who's been to a hospital lately can attest to the fact that something is amiss there. You've got doctors and nurses answering to lawyers and bean-counters as if that somehow makes sense to anyone … other than the lawyers and bean-counters. It is, however, the “us” part of the equation that concerns me most. For I am not an insurance executive, nor a doctor, nor a bean counter. I am – for better or worse – part of the collective, “the people.”
So in steps government to fix things. The democratically elected government. The one we deserve.
God help us all.
Truly, one of the few things on the planet that I detest more than lawyers is politicians. Maybe it's because such a large percentage of them are actually just reformed lawyers.
I tend to believe less government is best, and as such abhor government involvement in most aspects of my life. I can only imagine what Thomas Jefferson would have thought of his government running the health care industry. I've been to President Jefferson's grave. I
imagine if I revisited it, I could hear him rolling over in it.
After all, it was definitely Jefferson who said, “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”
I tend to agree with the Democrats that the health care system is broken. I just don't tend to agree with their idea on how to fix it.
But mine is a lonely voice, drown out by the collective, getting the government – and the health care – that “the people” deserve.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Less is better ...
Less is not more. Never. But it might be better.
That's the question Niagara County voters have to answer for themselves as they pull the lever today on a ballot initiative to reduce the size of the Niagara County Legislature from 19 members to 15.
Proponents say the measure will save the county money by eliminating the salaries of the four legislators – a $60,300 savings per year. Opponents say it will reduce the level of representation for county residents as each legislator will have to look after a larger number of incumbents. Each legislator currently serves about 11,000 constituents. If the downsizing goes through, each will have about 14,000 constituents.
I say both arguments are hogwash.
The real savings comes not from the reduction of salaries in the legislature itself, but from the reduction of salaries of friends and loved ones who get themselves plum jobs in government. Instead of 19 people with pet projects trying to find family members and neighbors jobs, there will only be 15 people doing such. The nepotism savings alone could be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year … not to mention the potential savings from having less pet projects to worry about.
Meanwhile, the argument that a smaller legislature will be less responsive to residents needs makes an assumption that the legislature is responsive to your needs. I'm pretty sure we can agree that's a flawed argument. I mean, really, how often do you see your legislator? I'm going to guess you see them every other October when they're on your doorstep telling you what a great job they've done, right?
There's another theory that certain members of the legislature only favor the reduction because they can then reduce the number of seats allocated to Niagara Falls, thereby reducing the Falls' political power … and the number of Democrats in the legislature.
While I could see the benefit of such a power grab, it seems a bit too conspiracy theory for me and I thereby reject it. That said, I would like to see the districts redrawn by some sort of neutral third party when it's time for redistricting. I would also like to win the lottery. Odds are probably about the same. And I don't play the lottery.
Personally, I support the reduction of the legislature and think you should, too. I think the positives of potential savings far outweigh the negatives of unresponsiveness, mainly because I don't buy the argument to begin with.
I'll make it easy on you if you've yet to cast your vote. If you like to save money hold up one hand. If you only see your legislator around election time hold up another hand. If you've got both hands in the air, vote yes to downsize. If you've only got one hand in the air, vote no. And if you have no hands in the air, you've got more money than brains.
A personal side note: This is the first election in about a dozen years where I'm not working as a reporter or commentator election night. I have done so my entire time I've been back in Western New York and had also been a reporter my last two years in Ohio.
I'm not sure how this makes me feel, to be honest. It's weird, that's for sure.
But I'll still be participating in the election … by voting. Odds are, actually, that I've already voted by the time you read this. If you haven't voted yet and the polls are still open, please go vote. Men and women have died so you could.
That's the question Niagara County voters have to answer for themselves as they pull the lever today on a ballot initiative to reduce the size of the Niagara County Legislature from 19 members to 15.
Proponents say the measure will save the county money by eliminating the salaries of the four legislators – a $60,300 savings per year. Opponents say it will reduce the level of representation for county residents as each legislator will have to look after a larger number of incumbents. Each legislator currently serves about 11,000 constituents. If the downsizing goes through, each will have about 14,000 constituents.
I say both arguments are hogwash.
The real savings comes not from the reduction of salaries in the legislature itself, but from the reduction of salaries of friends and loved ones who get themselves plum jobs in government. Instead of 19 people with pet projects trying to find family members and neighbors jobs, there will only be 15 people doing such. The nepotism savings alone could be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year … not to mention the potential savings from having less pet projects to worry about.
Meanwhile, the argument that a smaller legislature will be less responsive to residents needs makes an assumption that the legislature is responsive to your needs. I'm pretty sure we can agree that's a flawed argument. I mean, really, how often do you see your legislator? I'm going to guess you see them every other October when they're on your doorstep telling you what a great job they've done, right?
There's another theory that certain members of the legislature only favor the reduction because they can then reduce the number of seats allocated to Niagara Falls, thereby reducing the Falls' political power … and the number of Democrats in the legislature.
While I could see the benefit of such a power grab, it seems a bit too conspiracy theory for me and I thereby reject it. That said, I would like to see the districts redrawn by some sort of neutral third party when it's time for redistricting. I would also like to win the lottery. Odds are probably about the same. And I don't play the lottery.
Personally, I support the reduction of the legislature and think you should, too. I think the positives of potential savings far outweigh the negatives of unresponsiveness, mainly because I don't buy the argument to begin with.
I'll make it easy on you if you've yet to cast your vote. If you like to save money hold up one hand. If you only see your legislator around election time hold up another hand. If you've got both hands in the air, vote yes to downsize. If you've only got one hand in the air, vote no. And if you have no hands in the air, you've got more money than brains.
A personal side note: This is the first election in about a dozen years where I'm not working as a reporter or commentator election night. I have done so my entire time I've been back in Western New York and had also been a reporter my last two years in Ohio.
I'm not sure how this makes me feel, to be honest. It's weird, that's for sure.
But I'll still be participating in the election … by voting. Odds are, actually, that I've already voted by the time you read this. If you haven't voted yet and the polls are still open, please go vote. Men and women have died so you could.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)