[Winona Online Democracy] Bob and all:
I would agree and disagree with your view, Bob. Not all taxes benefit all citizens. That would be impossible--we are too diverse in needs. And yet, when the community can serve it's members with special needs, we all benefit from the stability and health of those individuals. For every mentally ill person who loses case mangement services and becomes acutely ill, there are family members, neighbors, and others who will be negatively impacted responding to that person's illness--that means lost time from work, poor productivity, not being able to sleep at night (not necessarily in that order). It also means more work for our local law enforcement and courts who are left to deal with these individuals when preventive services are withdrawn. We need to decide, "On what end do we wish to pay?" I think that Craig's point is that simple demand and supply (i.e., the more people who demand a service from the commissioners, they will feel compelled to supply it) is just that--an oversimplification. If the Historical Society proponants are more vocal than the MI, DD, and poor women (folks who may be less able because of their circumstances to be vocal participants in local politics) is it right that the Historical Society's funding remain intact and cut services to poor and differently abled persons? I think the State says it is wrong and has legislated otherwise (hence Craig's criterion regarding what counties' legal responsibilities are). We seem to be in a time of great privatization of things that have long been thought of as services for everyone and paid for by everyone in a community--libraries, higher education, mental health services, parks, and museums (and the list goes on) are all competing for private dollars in a time when everyone is feeling a need to tighten their belts. I don't have the answers, but I hope the answer is not to balance the budget on the backs of "the least of our brothers." Again I am reminded of John Nash (_A Beautiful Mind_) and his Nobel Prize th eory that basically proved that the best solutions are those that strive to meet group vs. individual needs. I think that Craig is trying to say that, in the short term, a lot of the cuts we are seeing proposed will help with the community's financial goals of reducing the deficit, but that in the long-term it is in the community's best interest to fund prevention rather than pass another disaster on to future public officials to deal with. Is that basically correct, Craig? Kathy Seifert _______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
