[Vision2020] Leadership
Jeff Harkins
jeffh at moscow.com
Wed Oct 31 12:43:13 PDT 2007
Again, thanks for a gentlemanly reply.
Ms. Swanson is free to expand her comments or explain her
comments. But as I noted to Bill London, she said what she
said. And she referenced me personally. Since I have not kept my
support for unfettered market based economies a secret, it is
difficult for me to accept that she meant anything more that what she said.
And more to the point, in a direct correspondence to the viz on the
new businesses that have been started in Moscow, my views on economic
development were rather clear:
"The list provided by Brandy Sullivan is indeed good news, but as has
been noted in all of the economic development forums the past couple
of years, including last weeks' venue, (while providing more consumer
choice) does little if anything to add "high paying" jobs to the
area. It appears that all of the businesses named are retail stores
(I am not sure about Bio-Tracking) which do help to keep local
dollars here, but they must compete with neighboring retail shops to do that.
The expansion of NW River Supplies does count, but remember, that was
a "dark store" that was put to use. It is unclear as to whether Bill
would have expanded if it weren't for the abandoned Tidyman's.
It is very helpful to have Alturis Analytics expand their
operation. Their ability to survive the early years and make it to
expansion is a credit to the management. And this is how a research
park is supposed to function - help a firm get started and nurture
them through the early years.
The most efficient and effective form of economic development is to
expand our exporting capacity - thereby bringing new dollars into the
community. That means we need to encourage the production of
something (goods and/or services) that can be sold outside of our community.
New retail doesn't hurt us - in fact it may make the community more
attractive to potential residents, but it doesn't really mitigate our
need for new economic development.:
And since she responded to the particular reference regarding dark
stores, it is evident that she was aware of my position on economic
development. Are you suggesting that she intentionally
misrepresented my views on economic development and market based
economies or was she just very careless?
I agree with Stephen that it would be appropriate to begin to move to
a discussion of "oversight" which I prefer to call "strategic
planning for economic development". The collective experience of
Walter Steed, Dan Carscallen and Wayne Krauss in strategic planning
and execution of those plans at various levels is why I think our
community would prosper from their leadership.
Again, thanks for a civil post.
At 10:53 AM 10/31/2007, you wrote:
>Before you go asking others whether they agree with B.J.'s
>statement, why don't you first get clarification on what BJ meant by
>"the economic model that no longer works". The quote you reference
>does not say what that economic model is. How can anyone possibly
>agree or disagree with the statement, without first getting an
>understanding of what she meant by "economic model that no longer works"?
>
>And then, once we know what that statement meant, why don't we go to
>all the candidates and find out if they agree with it?
>
>And while we're at it, at that point of going back to the candidates
>to see if the agree with BJ that whatever economic model she is
>talking about has failed or not, why don't we also ask them their
>response to what seem the more interesting questions to me, as posed
>by Steffen Werner:
>How much oversight should the community, represented by the city
>council, have over proposed business development?
>
>Should this be relatively unfettered with very lax oversight, or
>should it increase oversight if a development might have a large
>impact on the community?
>
>
>Bruce
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jeff Harkins" <<mailto:jeffh at moscow.com>jeffh at moscow.com>
>To: "Sunil Ramalingam"
><<mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>;
><<mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com>vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 10:25 AM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Leadership
>
> > Sunil,
> >
> > Thanks for the post.
> >
> > If you want to know about a candidate's position on waterboarding,
> > etc., then you are well within your rights and political protocol to
> > ask that question of a local candidate.
> >
> > I reject the notion that we should restrict our candidates to
> > "relevant" subjects they've already brought up. We sponsor and enjoy
> > candidate forums in our community precisely because the audience can
> > raise issues of importance to them.
> >
> > What I find fascinating about the responses to my posts back to Ms.
> > Swanson is that the issue was raised because she claimed:
> >
> > "It seems that Jeff Harkins and the conservative candidates continue
> > to advocate an economic model that no longer works - (B. J. Swanson,
> > Oct. 30, 2007)"
> >
> > My response was well within relevance and protocol for our local
> > election. I await a response from Mr. Ament, Ms. Pall, Mr. Lamar and
> > Mr. Holmes. One of their supporters raised the issue.
> >
> > Is she their spokeswoman on economic policy for the local level?
> >
> > At 06:03 AM 10/31/2007, you wrote:
> >>If we're going to turn this into a 'wrap ourselves in the flag'
> exercise and
> >>launch into irrlelevancies not yet raised by the candidates
> themselves, then
> >>I want to know where they all come down on waterboarding, permanent
> >>detentions, the suspension of habeus corpus, secret prisons, and the war in
> >>Iraq.
> >>
> >>Or we can let the candidates discuss the relevant subjects they've already
> >>brought up.
> >>
> >>Sunil
> >>
> >>
> >> >From: Steffen Werner <<mailto:swerner at uidaho.edu>swerner at uidaho.edu>
> >> >To: <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com>vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Leadership
> >> >Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:10:40 -0700
> >> >
> >> >I don't think that a discussion of basic economic theory is what will
> >> >move this discussion forward to a constructive and meaningful
> >> >exchange about local issues. BJ unfortunately started her post with
> >> >a general statement that Jeff then responded to scholarly - but
> >> >unfortunately this focus is missing the main point that followed in
> >> >BJ's post. I think all of the candidates running for office in this
> >> >local election (and probably most around this country) have no
> >> >objections to our basic economic principle of a free market economy.
> >> >The candidates also all share the same sense of duty when it comes to
> >> >making payroll (Tom has quite a few people working for him, none of
> >> >whom have filed complaints against him for not doing so - Linda the
> >> >same). So - the real issue in this context is a rather small one
> >> >given the big issues raised (and probably not worthy of a Nobel, but
> >> >still relevant here in Moscow): How much oversight should the
> >> >community, represented by the city council, have over proposed
> >> >business development? Should this be relatively unfettered with very
> >> >lax oversight, or should it increase oversight if a development might
> >> >have a large impact on the community? I think that this is a
> >> >reasonable discussion to have - and neither side of this discussion
> >> >is anti or any growth automatically just by preferring one over the
> >> >other. Coming from a system (Germany) where there is a lot more
> >> >oversight and zoning restrictions than here, I find some of the
> >> >recently voiced positions quite baffling. If probed I can give some
> >> >interesting examples in another post. So - why don't we focus on the
> >> >local issue at hand, instead of going off on a tangent (even though
> >> >that might make for better sound bites)
> >> >Steffen
> >> >--
> >> >Dr. Steffen Werner, Associate Professor
> >> >Dept. of Psychology and Communication Studies
> >> >University of Idaho
> >> >Moscow, ID 83844-3043
> >> >
> >> >=======================================================
> >> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >> > <http://www.fsr.net>http://www.fsr.net
> >> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> >=======================================================
> >>
> >>
> >>=======================================================
> >> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >> <http://www.fsr.net>http://www.fsr.net
> >> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>=======================================================
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > <http://www.fsr.net>http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071031/21cc61c7/attachment.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list