Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, March 5, 1995 TAG: 9503040005
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: G2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Driving through some of the rougher neighborhood areas, I've noticed a disturbing sight: dozens of children that should be attending school roaming the streets. They are mostly products of single-parent families without the involvement of fathers, and are often being raised by grandmothers or foster parents. Responsibility isn't a common term in these children's vocabularies, and it is more than likely never uttered by their mothers.
At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, orphanages worked just fine in days gone by. Children raised in state-operated institutions may not have a one-on-one relationship with any adult in particular. However, the sense of family, responsibility and purpose is taught to these children from the moment they arrive. They are required to attend to their personal responsibilities or face discipline - another term that many children found roaming the streets today are unacquainted with. Many of our nation's heroes were raised in orphanages. They turned out just fine, with a clear sense of responsibility and self.
The voice of Virginians and voting Americans was loud and clear in November. If those who voted Gov. George Allen into office are objecting to his proposed cuts in welfare, they only need to ride through any neighborhood in our state to see that orphanages and welfare cuts will help make individuals a bit more cautious in their choices of personal activities. I, for one, am weary of working-class taxpayers being forced to support many who simply refuse to behave responsibly.
Is education the answer? It seems to me that many who have their education guaranteed by our state and local governments could really care less. Instant gratification, life without responsibility and existing without effort seem to matter much more to many than choosing to improve their quality of life.
ELIZABETH MURPHY
ROANOKE
The world's best term-limit system
I LISTENED to a retired professor stating why our high court should decide in favor of term limits, and end the careers of many longtime Congress members. Some assigned to any position for too many years become complacent, smug, self-satisfied, overbearing and arrogant, due to unwarranted pride and self-importance.
I suggested all professional positions - teachers, professors, doctors, lawyers - should be limited to 10 or 12 years. Also, limit the military, especially our generals, who serve 30 or more years in the same position. The professor said, ``You go entirely too far.'' Without many highly trained, competent, experienced and respected military leaders, he said, ``we would have lost the war.''
Indeed, why should we have well-trained, experienced old-timers in other professions, then limit the years and necessary experience to properly operate the world's largest $1.5 trillion-a-year business?
We already have the world's best term-limit system devised by man, if and when voters exercise their rights. Our 1994 election should convince everyone that this system can and does work. We eliminated those we desired not to hold office longer. (And we gave a dishonest but clever scoundrel no term, even though this con man raised between $18 million to $50 million to run on. We may never know the exact amount since Oliver North carried a miniature shredder in his briefcase.)
I bet in 1996 that ``Slick Willie,'' our skilled talker who changes his mind daily on every issue, will be limited to only one term unless he resigns or isn't renominated.
Virginia's No. 1 perplexing problem is caused by forcing our governors out of office before they become well-acquainted with their duties and responsibilities. Many only use this office as a stepping stone to enhance their own future, and spend much time planning and running for higher office.
What a stupid mistake it would be to change the world's best term-limit system.
MELVIN C. GREEN
SALEM
American Theater was first to go
ROANOKE city cries that we need to bring business downtown. Along comes Spanky Macher who takes his hard-earned money to open a business, with a novelty attraction, to bring business downtown. And the city fights him over his Big Boy sign.
Leave the man alone. The city did the stupidest thing when it tore down the American Theater - a beautiful landmark.
What is the next stupid thing the Roanoke clique will do? Do they really want to bring business downtown? They don't act like it.
Here's the old double standard again: Debt clock vs. Big Boy.
DAVID SISSON
ROANOKE
Overtaxed majority seeks fair play
A TRUE democracy should be of the majority, for the majority and by the majority, tempered by concerns for individual rights and freedoms. But our country now suffers minority rule. The majority (middle class) is expected to pay the bills while the minority (disadvantaged) reaps the benefits. No matter whether that minority is a religious order, a socioeconomic class (either poor or wealthy elite) or an ethnic group, their needs shouldn't supercede those of the majority. Unequal taxation without equal representation is arbitrary, discriminatory and should be struck down.
Either big business should be more thoroughly incorporated into the present income-tax structure (and pay a more responsible share) or private citizens should be treated as a business entity, thus allowing each individual or family unit to deduct from their gross incomes the costs of doing business (making a living). Costs would include meals (groceries), transportation expenses (auto, insurance, gasoline, maintenance, etc.), investment and expansion (home repairs and additions), employee costs and benefits (dependents' clothing, medical expenses), etc. Only when we're taxed on our net incomes will there be relief and equity for the silent, overtaxed majority.
ARNOLD D. ST.CLAIR
HARDY
Everybody talks about it but ...
DOPPLER RADAR sailed into port for Western Virginia early in 1995. What an advancement we were promised. Wooly worms and groundhogs are a lot cheaper, and at least as accurate.
I'd be ashamed to show my face in public if I built houses with the same degree of reliability as weather people forecast the weather.
One suggestion: Start forecasting yesterday's weather. They could probably hit it 50 percent of the time.
DOUG PRILLAMAN
ROANOKE
Sam's relatives can use the money
I LISTENED recently to a CNN political talk-show host discuss the financial impact of the Mexican peso rescue. Graphics on the screen showed where the money President Clinton has promised Mexico would come from, at which point the host said: ``And look, the U.S. is only providing $20 billion.'' This spurred me to get some statistics as to what ``only $20 billion'' means to the average person.
If you took that money and returned it equally to every man, woman and child in the United States (255,077,536), it comes out to $78.40 per person. As we all know, every man, woman and child isn't footing this expense. It will be borne by tax-paying Americans in our labor force. So, if you took that $20 billion and returned it to those in the labor force (125,182,378), it comes out to $159.76 per person.
This might seem like a small price to pay to support our neighbors to the South who, due to poor planning on their behalf, have created a crisis on our behalf. But I think if you asked America's workers whether they could use an extra $160 in their pockets, compliments of Uncle Sam with no strings attached, the response would be predictable and overwhelming. My question to Sam: If you give Mexico $20 billion, can you guarantee that it will put $159.76 back into my pocket before the end of the year? Before the end of the decade or the century? Can you guarantee that it ever will?
THOMAS R. KELLEY
MEADOWVIEW
by CNB