[Vision2020] What is Jeff talking about? (was something else)

[Joe Campbell]

Jeff,

Again, there is a lot to say!

First, you never answered this question: What is the GMA plan to keep Moscow
from eventually smelling like Lewiston? Keeping out the single type of 
business that you mention below won't do it.

Second, here's what you wrote to Bruce, which prompted my initial comment:
"My post was to highlight for Joe Campbell some of the issues that lead to a 
conclusion that the current city government (or the current climate 
in Moscow) is anti-growth or anti business."

By calling the MCA anti-growth I, of course, meant saying this about their supported candidates, who are all current council members. So, there it is.

Third, logic is the mother of all sciences. It is not an empirical science -- but 
neither is math! Logic, like math, is a formal science upon which all empirical sciences, 
like economics, are dependent. Logic is the science of correct reasoning and without 
correct reasoning all sciences are reduced to collections of data; they have no theoretical 
or predictive or explanatory significance. 

And I didn't say that economics was not a science. I implied that it was not an 
exact science, as you seem to think it is. I don't much care if your teachers 
told you otherwise. They were wrong. This is a matter of the philosophy of 
science, not a matter of economics. Your teachers are not the experts here.

The idea that economics is more rigorous than logic, or math, or physics, or 
philosophy for that matter is a complete joke. I'm not saying it isn't rigorous, 
of course it is. But it isn't more rigorous, nor is it as exact as the first three.
I will grant that it is more exact than philosophy but not more rigorous.

Fourth, 'fallacy' does not mean "deceptive" or "misleading." A fallacy is a bad argument 
that is psychologically persuasive. You can present a fallacy even if you are not intending 
to deceive or mislead anyone. All that matters is that it is a bad argument -- one with false 
premises or invalid reasoning, for instance -- that is nonetheless persuasive.

Fifth, I find it ironic that you keep accusing me of 'name-calling' since you've called me 
'anti-intellectual' among other things. It is clear there is a lot of name-calling from both 
sides and that the GMA does not have the moral high-ground, as you have suggested. 
Apart from my comments to Crabtree, you would be hard pressed to find much name-
calling in my posts -- though like you I enjoy pressing the envelope and putting in a few 
jabs with carefully constructed conditionals like: If Crabtree is right, then the GMA is ...

Certainly I've been pushing things lately but part of it was a response to your 
overly moralistic posts, and in particular the absurd suggestion that the GMA 
was morally superior to the MCA. Give me a break! The GMA website is run 
by Wilson's PR-guy and contains, among other things, a comment implying 
that the current council lacks common sense. If that isn't an instance of 
offensive name-calling, I’m not sure what is. In light of this, your calls for a 
nice, friendly campaign without name-calling sound fake. Let’s park the moral 
lectures and get back to the issues.

Lastly, I've never paid my MCA dues, so I'm not a member!
Can we leave the cheap technicalities aside, as well?

--
Joe Campbell

---- Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote: 

=============
Joe,

First, I am not on the Board of GMA.  If fact, I 
think I still owe my dues for this year, so 
technically, I am probably not a member in good standing.

If I were to have a say in organizing a forum on 
economic development, you can rest assured I 
would consider having you as a speaker.

As to your perception that I said that MCA is 
"anti-growth", I don't recall ever stating that 
specifically about the organization.  I do my 
level best to always analyze what people say and 
the positions that individuals take.  I try to be 
very careful in that regard and be faithful to 
the Kenneth Arrow mantra "groups don't make 
decisions, people do".  About the best that 
groups can do is vote; they really can't make 
decisions - that is a task left to each 
mortal.  That said, it is possible that my 
wording might be construed to infer that I was 
referring to the group.  I will try to be much more judicious in my language.

For the record, in our most recent posts, I have 
attempted to address individual positions - 
positions of the individual candidates for city 
council, positions of the current council, your 
positions, Bruce Livingstone positions, Mark 
Solomon's positions and so forth. If, in 
subsequent posts, that is not clear, let me know 
and I will make restitution quickly.

Now then, you asked me to identify a "bad growth" 
activity.  After considerable thought, and given 
the constraints in real estate that exist in 
Moscow (no need to preclude businesses that 
couldn't locate in Moscow because there is no 
room for them or they require infrastructure that 
we don't have), heavy manufacturing (large heavy 
equipment, aircraft, large-scale auto) would 
probably not be a good fit.  That said, a custom 
manufacturer - say manufacturing small hybrid 
cars, wind turbines, solar energy systems, ATV's, 
bicycles, garden power tools, farm implements to 
serve Palouse farming specifically could fit very 
nicely.  Also, I have long advocated wood 
manufacturing - furniture, etc.  Hopefully, that answers your question.

But, given your premise to our continued 
discussion - that you would point out my 
"additional fallacies"  where fallacy means 
"deceptive" or "misleading", I would not have an 
interest in that activity.  Use your time for something else.

Thanks for the invitation to your class, given 
your recent propensity to emotional outbursts and 
name-calling, I doubt that sitting through your class would be of value to me.

I think the economists at the University of 
Washington (my alma mater) would have a good 
chuckle over your statement that "...Economics is 
not a SCIENCE like lgic oand (sp) math and 
physics are sciences.  Yes, they would say - you 
are right - it is much more difficult!  The 
science of choice is much more rigorous.

I am curious though - were you inferring that 
"logic" is a science like math and physics. Is 
there a branch of logic that goes beyond the 
study of correct reasoning, valid induction and 
deduction?  Is there more to the discipline than 
describing relationships among propositions in 
terms of implication, contradiction, contrariety and conversion?

Cheers Joe - it has been ..... not very enjoyable.

At 07:19 PM 10/26/2007, you wrote:
>Jeff,
>
>I've been busy lately and unable to keep up with 
>your posts. I've read them There is so
>much wrong with what you've written it is hard to get started.
>
>First, let me point out that I've organized, as 
>a board member of the MCA, a public forum
>with you as a speaker. No one in the GMA has 
>ever organized a forum with me as a
>speaker -- least of all you. I’m not afraid of 
>talking to you in a public forum.
>
>But I don't want to focus on that. Instead, I 
>want to point out one of your many fallacies.
>
>You claim that the MCA is 'anti-growth' and 
>mentioned a few cases. In reality, the GMA
>holds the extreme view.
>
>My posts have tried to point out the 
>contributions to growth that the MCA has supported
>-- contributions noted by BJ and Bruce. You 
>ignore these. That doesn't mean that they
>aren't contributions to growth. The MCA is not anti-growth. This is a lie.
>
>I believe that some, but not all, growth is 
>good. As far as I can tell, you and the GMA
>believe that ALL growth is good. That is why you 
>were able to come up with such a long
>list to shove in our faces. But you hold the extreme view.
>
>Maybe I'm wrong, maybe there is some growth that 
>the GMA doesn't like. Steed wants to
>find a home for pig farms. You’d like to put a 
>Super Walmart on the east side of town
>without first solving the west-east traffic-flow 
>problems. I'm pressed to find an example
>of growth that the GMA does not like.
>
>Here is the challenge to you, Jeff, and the GMA 
>candidates. What would count as bad
>growth? How will you help Moscow from eventually 
>looking like Las Vegas or smelling
>like Lewiston? I can’t see it, so I can’t vote that way.
>
>Answer that question and I take the time to 
>point out some of your other fallacies!
>
>Best, Joe
>
>PS Economics is not a SCIENCE like lgic oand 
>math and physics are sciences. I’m teaching 
>the Theory of Knowledge next semester. It is an 
>undergraduate course but I beg that you take the class. I’ll even pay for it.
>
>At 11:20 PM 10/25/2007, you wrote:
> >Jeff,
> >
> >Labels like 'anti-growth' are gross over exaggerations yet even
> >below you continue to perpetuate this myth, just like other members
> >of the GMA. Nor do I see satisfactory responses to posts by BJ and
> >Bruce to your false charges. That was my point.
> >
> >I don't see that as being anti-intellectual. 
> I'm just calling it as I see it.
> >
> >--
> >Joe Campbell
> >
> >---- Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
> >
> >=============
> >Joe, I do not appreciate my honesty being called into question simply
> >because we disagree on selected issues.  It is a very disingenuous
> >tactic that you and your political allies use to obfuscate the
> >issues.  It is unbecoming of you and very "anti-intellectual".  I
> >would have presumed that you would not resort to such
> >behaviors.  Perhaps it is because you have nothing else to offer and
> >can only resort to name calling.
> >
> >If you disagree with me, fine - state your case, I'll state mine -
> >and we will move on.
> >
> >As to the topic we were engaged in, "No Joe", you appear to have a
> >significantly different view about our local government.
> >
> >Let's take a close look at what the council has done (and not done) -
> >here is a sampling:
> >
> >Remember the ice rink decisions - and the impact on the hundreds of
> >ice rink users.
> >
> >Remember the posturing for "no development in the corridor"  - which
> >has resulted in significant friction with our neighbors to the West.
> >
> >Remember the handling of the removal of Mr. Jon Wheaton from his 15
> >years of volunteer service on Board of Adjustment.  Local government
> >can certainly make changes in positions, but to "fire" a volunteer,
> >just because he has a different opinion?
> >
> >Remember the WalMart and big retail store decisions.
> >
> >Remember all the rhetoric concerning the development of the 77 acre
> >Thompson property - are you proud of how that was handled?
> >
> >Remember the 3rd Street decisions - and the fact that folks living on
> >D St and 6th Street have been waiting for years for their quality of
> >life to improve (and their traffic to abate some) - a clear example
> >of protect the few and punish the many.
> >
> >Remember the New Cities Vision - thousands of tax dollars to obtain a
> >recommendation that Moscow should have high rise apartments and
> >condos in downtown - and oh, downtown visitors should also have an
> >unobstructed view of the surrounding countryside.
> >
> >Remember the fight with the County over who should manage the impact
> >zone and the City's position on that - a rather clear end run around
> >state protocols.
> >
> >Remember the effort to bring firearm bans to Moscow - another effort
> >to go around state protocols.
> >
> >Remember the handling of the trees around the Moscow Mall.
> >
> >Need I mention all the angst over selected religious organizations
> >and their occupancy of downtown spaces.
> >
> >Remember the decisions about whether we could cooperate with Whitman
> >County in sharing in development of shared government services
> >(utilities, fire, security) in the corridor.
> >
> >Recall the decision on "living wages"?
> >
> >Granted, you will no doubt favor the actions that the council took on
> >several of these issues (the issues are necessarily philosophical and
> >ideological in tenor).  But the fact is that each of these decisions
> >casts a cloud on some aspect of economic development.  If you are
> >persuaded that their actions were appropriate, then you are espousing
> >"anti-growth" and "anti-development" sentiments.  And contributing to
> >the view that Moscow is "anti-business" and "anti-growth".
> >
> >
> >At 07:55 AM 10/25/2007, you wrote:
> > >The real question, Jeff, is now that BJ has responded to your
> > >question will you
> > >read it and take note of it or will you continue to spread the lie
> > >of anti-growth
> > >just to get some of your friends elected?
> > >
> > >I'm betting the latter!
> > >
> > >Best, Joe
> > >
> > >------------------------------
> > >
> > >Message: 5
> > >Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:15:57 -0700
> > >From: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>
> > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] real economic development in Moscow
> > >To: bjswan at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> > >Message-ID: <200710250416.l9P4GBfJ070204 at mail-gw.fsr.net>
> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> > >
> > >Perhaps Ms. Swanson would provide us with a list of the economic
> > >development accomplishments of the current city government.
> > >
> > >
> > >=======================================================
> > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > >                http://www.fsr.net
> > >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > >=======================================================