Commissioner takes both sides of issue
Much like John Kerry several years ago, Paul Wyman seems to have actually voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it. This chap cannot seem to make up his mind on the issue of industrial wind complexes.
Just two months ago, Wyman wagged his finger in front of the Tipton BZA, pleading for the safety and concerns of Chippendale residents of Howard County. My question is: What has changed in such a short period of time? What has changed so much that the concerns of the eastern part of Howard County do not warrant the same concern as Chippendale residents? Is it the dollar signs, Paul?
Our politicians are subsidizing the younger generations down the toilet. These wind companies cannot exist without our tax dollars. If and when a wind company can buy its own land, manufacture its own turbines and create its own profits without the backing of my tax dollars, I might be swayed.
In 30 years, when turbines have covered central Indiana and are no longer viable, who cleans up the mess for the next form of green energy to take over? It’s a sad day in America when good people are hiring lawyers to defend themselves and their property from the government’s misguided use of taxpayer dollars.
Paul Wyman, I ask you to publicly explain your actions and reasoning for this sudden reversal. Industrial wind turbines belong in areas zoned for industrial use and not among rural homeowners.
Do turbines promote the safety and well-being among citizens living within them? No! Do they provide many long-term local jobs? No! Do they provide long-term local economic development? No!
Do they rip communities apart? Yes! Do they harm property values? Yes!
Ask yourself, when the bank wants to know the true value of your home, whom will it call? Paul Wyman? Nope. The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory of horribly applied “scientific” real estate data? Nope. Farmer Joe? Nope. If you answered “a licensed home appraiser,” then you are correct.
Put your money where your mouth is, Paul.
Affordable Care Act just not affordable
Interesting article in a recent Kokomo Tribune: “Northwestern School Corp. will likely reduce the hours of about a dozen instructional assistants to avoid having to provide them with insurance … It stems from a new requirement in the Affordable Care Act that takes effect this school year.”
Of the many reports I have heard and read concerning the ACA, I have yet to discover anything about it actually being affordable. Every indication is that it is anything but affordable, as businesses and organizations of all types scramble to figure out how to minimize the increased costs associated with all this “affordable” care. Even our great government is trying to figure out how to make it affordable.
Every reader should be aware that a provision of the ACA is that hospitals that re-admit patients within 30 days after being discharged will have to pay fines. Inserted into the ACA as a cost-cutting measure, analysts predict that this will result in substandard care to the poor, elderly and chronically ill.
I have been a recipient of care through the Veterans Administration medical system for several years and have received what I consider very good care. However, through my contact with VA doctors, caregivers, administrators and veterans’ service organizations, I know full well that the VA system is always struggling to receive adequate funding. A casual stroll through most VA clinics and hospitals provides a quick observation that these are not the most up-to-date and modernized facilities around.
It would be worse than it is now, if not for the valiant battles year in and year out from the veterans’ service organizations’ lobbyists. Yet the same government that constantly and consistently under-funds the medical care niche for which it is supposed to be responsible now declares that it can adequately provide the medical care needs for all Americans. Affordable?
Charles A. Layne