Comments by Newsworthy
Posted on February 25 at 8:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I heartily agree with Anthony about imposing term limits. Ronzo raises one of my other favorite points - voters have the ultimate opportunity to do something, yet nothing changes. Look at Joe Bruno and Sheldon Silver as sterling examples of bad politicians repeatedly re-elected.
The percentage of registered voters who actually exercise that cherished right is disappointingly low, time and again. Many then allow themselves to be told how to vote by (choose one or more): party, union, church, employer, etc. Until voters stand up and fully exercise their right, making their own choice on the secret ballot, nothing will change. Elected representatives have a vested interest in themselves and don't really care about the citizens they "represent".
All this has led to the partisan politics that is tearing our country apart and preventing a meaningful economic recovery. Who cares if Democrats of Republicans started the war or the economic crash, or whatever? We need CONGRESS, as a unified body, to solve the problems. That will take action by voters to remove the incumbents - thus, Ronzo's bleak outlook.
Posted on February 18 at 9:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jeff, I totally agree. I have had to deal with customers who won't stop talking to complete a transaction and it is frustrating, rude and disrespectful. It seems people can't refrain from answering a phone or asking a caller to wait, or call back; that call is more important than whatever current situation they are experiencing. Trust me, from the cash register side, it's hard to resist the temptation to grab the phone from their hands and throw it on the floor!
Posted on February 18 at 9:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
wmarincic, I am sincerely sorry to hear of your loss. A loving partner in life is a treasure that can never be forgotten.
Posted on February 11 at 9:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, obviously none of you work for minimum wage. We've been through it before - businesses have not gone broke when the minimum was raised. Otherwise, it would still be $1.65/hr. as it was when I started working. John, your researchers' credentials are "academic"; I did offer facts, based on my own life experience. The fact that you feel it necessary to attach a label to me indicates your bias.
Posted on February 7 at 8:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
John Gaetani, what an incredibly out-of touch with reality response. It's far too late to dream about an economy without government interference. Your comments regarding the people working for minimum wage were pure ignorance. While it's true that many of them work part time, that's because employers (particularly retailers and restaurants) refuse to offer full time positions. That makes it easier for them to adjust payroll hours and avoid offering benefits. Incidentally, this makes it impossible for those employees to predict their income for budgeting, or make meaningful plans.
For your additional information, John, a great many minimum wage-earners are forced to work 2 or even 3 jobs, because (you guessed it) THEY CAN'T LIVE ON PART TIME, MINIMUM WAGE JOBS! In fact, many of these people aren't students, they are victims of the "recession" - people who lost their full time jobs and can't find anything else. It's time to get your face out of papers written by people who have never actually worked; go out and talk to real people working to live and you'll find a whole new world.
Posted on January 20 at 10:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
With due respect, Mr. Wege is pushing the same old line. You don't have to possess an engineering degree to see that hydro-fracking is environmentally dangerous, as is conventional drilling. The real dangers represented by the energy industry's continued denials lie in the pollution from burning the natural gas and oil, and from the "kick the can down the road" mentality.
The industry's own ads mention enough oil and gas reserves to last 100 years. Apparently, we are expected to burn these fuels frivolously and leave our great-grandchildren to deal with the problem of exhausted energy resources.
A serious energy engineer would be working on solar, wind and hydro-electric energy use. There is more than enough such energy for all the world's needs, but at this point, the technology to use it efficiently is under-developed. The really cool factor of these energy sources is that, besides being non-polluting, they will never be exhausted! Instead of proposing arguments supporting obsolete technology, Mr. Wege should consider supporting technology that is appropriate for the future, not just for the profits of oil and gas companies.
Posted on January 3 at 8:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I hope you watched the TV today, when Sandy Hook Elementary re-opened. Everyone there, including the police chief, wants an environment where kids can be kids, rather than living in the fear of a police state. Giving everyone guns in expectation of a showdown is a knee-jerk fix, not a real long-term solution.
Posted on January 2 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Asking school staff to carry weapons puts them in the role of law enforcement; that's an unfair burden to place on them. A concealed carry permit not suffice. Serious tactical training needs to accompany such a permit, the alternative being wild shoot outs with more innocent people getting hurt or killed. While many would defend children with their lives, not all could deal with carrying guns all day.
I think the idea of dogs is worth consideration, with the realization that they would require a full time handler. Cost shouldn't be a serious problem. School boards find things to p_ss away tax dollars every year, because they can't stand the thought of not raising taxes. It shouldn't be a problem funding dogs and handlers.
By consideration, I mean that it should be one option among many considered for improving school security without turning schools into armed camps. Today's children have been robbed of enough innocence without seeing armed guards around them all day. They would feel imprisoned, themselves.
Posted on December 15 at 10:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bill Wragg, I agree with your idea of banning weapons of mass destruction, but why stop there? Look at how many people have been killed in Syria with "conventional" weapons. It's sad, but bullying is part of human nature; its' magnitude varies from the school yard to people like Hitler, the "Great Leader" of North Korea, President Assad of Syria and others. They will only stop being bullies when someone knocks them down and they will always seek greater means of power.
Similar to your description of how the nuclear bomb may have saved millions of lives in WWII, the MAD doctrine of the cold war (Mutual Assured Destruction) quite likely had the same result. It involved a lot of risk and new risks now face us in this area, as you pointed out. I don't advocate nuclear (or conventional) war, but history has repeatedly shown that we must be prepared to defend ourselves from those who use any means to achieve dominance for themselves.
Posted on December 14 at 11:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
While the historical information is interesting, the point I see in the original letter by Arlene Shako is that the Schenectady parade was, for years, a Christmas parade held on Thanksgiving week end. Now, to (seemingly) accommodate downtown merchants, the parade has been moved to an earlier date. At the same time, it's been re-named a "holiday" parade to be politically correct and avoid offending any non-Chrisitians.
I don't think anyone has a right to be offended by it being a Christmas parade. Other religions can stage parades to celebrate their holidays. The real issues here are that Christians are being told to be quiet about their beliefs and that financial gain of a favored few is more important than tradition (there's a surprise!).
For years, we had a family tradition of going to the Schenectady Christmas parade. Now, we boycott the parade because it's been prostituted. It doesn't fit a rational model of social evolution. Freuliche Weinachten! (Merry Christmas, auf Deutsch).