Two things occur to me regarding the discourse on
trucks and idling. First, many posters who usually
argue that the City Council is in the pocket of big
developers are now contending that the Council is
anti-commerce. Can anyone explain exactly how this
makes sense? I could perhaps believe one proposition
or the other (although neither are exactly nuanced
readings of the situation), but certainly not both.
Also, many people have relatives who are long-haul (or
short-haul, for that matter) truckers. I am one of
them. And it smacks of crocodile tears to complain
that truckers have a really hard life (some do) and
thus we should preserve the status quo.
It seems to me that about 70 years ago, in this very
city, exploited truckers did something about their
problems through collective action, a decision that
has had positive results for workers in this town ever
since. As other posters have pointed out, our economy
depends on truckers for the bulk of our commodity
transportation needs. If truckers don't like a
particular aspect of their situation, then history
indicates that are in an exceedingly good position to
do something about it directly.
Niels Strandskov, A&E Editor, Minnesota Daily
Phillips
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
