LETTERS

Are we only concerned about our own lot?

Posted 9/4/14

To the Editor:

Further to Chris Prata’s letter, “Why Avedisian” of Aug. 28, I would like to offer an alternative opinion for your consideration.

I, myself, have lived in the city since …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
LETTERS

Are we only concerned about our own lot?

Posted

To the Editor:

Further to Chris Prata’s letter, “Why Avedisian” of Aug. 28, I would like to offer an alternative opinion for your consideration.

I, myself, have lived in the city since 2007, only a few more years than Mr. Prata and basically I also could have no concerns. Financially, I am not wealthy, but fortunately there is enough for groceries, car, mortgage, taxes, etc., as well as my own 100-percent funded pension plan.

With my own children already gone before I moved here, and having reached an age where I am beginning to dislike the little monsters anyway, why do I care about the schools? Let them crumble and close.

I am married and do not get out much, but so long as I can get to the grocery store, the hardware store and the road out of town, the potholes do not bother me. The ones I do meet, I know personally and can often avoid. 

I have lived in other towns where waste disposal was my responsibility. If it saves me money, then I am willing to take my own rubbish to the dump.

So, selfishly, as long as I am OK, I do not care about anyone else … but hopefully I was raised better than that.

I have the utmost respect for any hardworking American and I do not care whether you are a high flying banker or someone working three part-time jobs just to make ends meet, but the money they earn is their hard-earned money, no one else’s.

To quote the late Margaret Thatcher, “…there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbor. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There’s no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation.” 

Mr. Prata said the city is running smoothly and he is happy with that. What he does not say is if he feels it can be run better.

So long as things are running smoothly, then let’s be satisfied with our lot, right? Even if things could be better, let’s not worry about it. Do not fight to improve our lot, just blindly accept it and do not dare to consider an alternative.

Selfishly again, we are only concerned about our own lot.

This race is now coming down to the wire and it is a very heated “them” and “us” fight.

Peel back all the layers of this dastardly onion and what do we really have? One group of people who are worried that money is going to be taken from them and another group of people who are tired of money being taken from them.

Solve that conundrum, and the roads, schools and small businesses will naturally fall in line.

I believe the city of Warwick can be run better and what Stacia can do, that the current mayor will not, is look people firmly in the eye and ask what burden of their own responsibilities are they willing to shoulder so that other people do not have to shoulder them as well as their own responsibilities.

One volunteer is always better than 10 pressed men, but if pressed they must, then Stacia will have the constitution that the current mayor does not, for that as well.

Capt. Ian Bowles, MNI

Warwick

Comments

2 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • ConcernedResident

    .

    Thursday, September 4, 2014 Report this

  • ConcernedResident

    Thanks for the feedback to my letter. Todays media is great for the chance to have dialog through reader comments. I'm certain you didnt intend to put words in my mouth, but I feel as though you may have done just that. Fortunately, I can respond to some of your concerns right here Mr Bowles. I ALWAYS feel the public sector can do better. If you notice, I called out the car tax effort as a positive, which brought attention to the burden of increasing the car tax. My MAIN motivation with my opinion letter was to call out the positives in our city and its administration (do you feel there are really no positives?), bring the tax increase issues into perspective (Petri's own property tax has risen 1.7% per year since she moved here), and especially call out the lack of a realistic plan by Stacia Petri, in my opinion. She certainly seems well meaning, and I read her information and watched the entire debate. I just do NOT see Petri as offering a specific plan to bend the cost curve very much if at all regarding our future obligations, much of which (Police/Fire 1 pension) was in place prior to this mayor. We wont solve our problems with slogans and good intentions. Petri offers the idea that she will approach the retirees for concessions. How far do you think that can go? Also, she floated the possibility that municipal bankruptcy was a possibility(!), which speaks to her lack of a solid grasp on such matters, as Warwick is MUCH too financially sound to escape its obligations that way. If Petri had something more to offer I would have been all ears. As a voter, who DOES have high hopes for the future, and who DID acknowledge others with my support at the time for adjusting the car tax, I decided that Avedisian is the better choice, of the two. I respect other's opinions, of course. Finally, I do not know the mayor, nor Ms Petri, but I applaud both for caring enough to step up into the public sector arena.

    Thursday, September 4, 2014 Report this