Proactive City Officials and Growth

By Jeff Neff

The more I learn about city government, the more I believe that things can change for the better for the Altoona rather quickly. For this to happen, city officials should be proactive and smart about seeking opportunities with outside businesses. Here is how I think Altoona City Council can bring in business.

Just recently, N.E.W. Customer Service Cos. Inc. was in the news again for their plans to bring hundreds of jobs to our area to train people how to work at home. Although they are a Virginia-based company, we can benefit from their achievement.

Altoona has the population and capacity for a skyward expansion. But what will cause this expansion? I believe that city council members should research existing business friendly ordinances (especially ones that may have been beneficial to Sheetz, during its rise) and exploit them

Political movements, organization missions, and even shopping sales have something in common: Awareness. Without awareness, people wouldn't know about them.

How did N.E.W. Customer Service Cos. find Altoona? What helped them make the decision to expand into Altoona? These questions need to be answered in collaboration with ABCD Corp. When these questions have been answered, the ordinances determined to be helpful for expanding businesses can then be used as an additional incentive to attract outside corporations.

Getting their attention is another obstacle. A city is like a business. You want it to grow, while keeping its operating costs low at the same time, which is why reaching out to outside resources is important. Presentations and direct talks with business owners as well as press releases and TV commercials in their communities could be greatly beneficial to attracting growing businesses; and increase their awareness of Altoona. With exception to TV commercials, the other options are either cheap or free.

The goal of bringing businesses in isn't abstract or impossible. It's not even an uphill battle. We just need to answer the above questions and see city council implement a genuine effort, along with appropriate departments, to set pending growth in motion. Raise awareness around the country of Altoona's existence, and Altoona can raise its skyline. The only question remaining is: who will take the initiative?

What Child is This?

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

In today's society, the value of a child is not very highly regarded. In fact, a teenage girl looking to exterminate an unborn infant in Western PA can end up paying anywhere from $360 to $950 (not to mention a drive to one of Planned Parenthood's area locations).

Now consider another pregnant teenager. She lives well below the poverty line. Her engagement is on the rocks. Accusations are hurled at her as to her unborn child's father. Where are her health services? Where is her welfare check? Is she scared? Of course--but look at her answer to life's most fearsome challenges:

"My soul glorifies the Lord
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed,
for the Mighty One has done great things for me-- holy is his name.
His mercy extends to those who fear him, from generation to generation.
He has performed mighty deeds with his arm; he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble.
He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty." (Luke 1:46b-54)

Notice the audacity of her hope: does she appeal to the Roman government? No. Does she appeal to her own powers of thrift, ingenuity and enterprise? No, she has one reason for her appeal, and He has already told her that the child is special in His eyes. That--and only that--drives her ability to care for and raise this child.

Even in the first century though, children could prove to be inconvenient. King Herod, the petty ruler-by-proxy for Israel, was so filled with rage at Jesus' having been born that St. Matthew records, "he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: 'A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.'" (2:16b-18)

What crime had these little children committed, that they were worthy of death? How callous can a man be that his selfish purposes were served by killing an innocent human being? What kind of royalty perpetrates genocide against their people?

And more importantly, how far have we come in over 2000 years?

Disclaimer: The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com, its owners, or advertisers.

Our 2008 Investments

By Jason Ibrahim

For the last couple months, conventional wisdom has indicated that now is the best time to invest in the stock market. Fortunately, you and I have jumped in with both feet, buying up stock in American industry like it's going out of style. Buoyed by the rays of optimism from our fund managers, we have determined that, recession or not, we're going to get our money's worth, and then some. So what's the problem?

For starters, we should have read the prospectus more carefully. There are lots of good investments out there, but you can avoid the ones labeled Fannie Mae, Citigroup, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler without losing any sleep. (While the last three have not yet occurred, I think it's fair to assume they will.) As Pennsylvanians (and, doubly, Blair County residents), we can soon add Boscov's to our investment portfolio. What do all these companies have in common? We purchased stake in them only after (or at the precipice of) their spectacular failures. We loaned money only to the companies who showed they are incapable of handling it.

This might not be so bad; buying up stock at fire sale prices--then making a killing from it--could be very lucrative, but to have this risk foisted on us by officials who claim to protect our best interests is ludicrous. If I had intimate knowledge of Citigroup's inner workings and wanted to take a chance on them, that's great--but I don't see why my next-door neighbor needs to jump on the bandwagon as well.

To see the alternative, let's take the auto industry as a case study. As Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd said the other day, "We cannot lose the automobile industry in America. That cannot happen." While his thinking is right, it's also incomplete. For one thing, if the Big Three curled up and died tomorrow morning, the US would still have an auto industry. For over a decade now, foreign automakers like Honda, Toyota and Nissan have been moving their production and design operations into the US, in places like Tennessee, Alabama and Ohio. Also, if the Big Three simultaneously filed for Chapter 11 tomorrow, I would be surprised if Honda, et al, didn't rush in, buy their operations and equipment, and employ significant amounts of their workforce, which negates the unemployment impetus for the bailout frenzy. Finally, the Big Three's sales numbers have for some time sent a clear message: they're dead (here, here and here). It's not heroic of Congress to try to prop up the corpse and buy it a $14 billion lunch.

As always, that's just my opinion. How about yours?

Altoona's Chance of a Lifetime

By Jeff Neff

With an economy in a deep recession, this is the opportune time for new businesses and entrepreneurs to step up in the Altoona area. Real estate prices are low and more people are looking for jobs, which means lots of opportunities for the little guy. Some of the most familiar household names in business took a giant leap during the Great Depression. New industries like the automobile, radio, and print media expanded largely by keeping their eyes open to all of the opportunities around.

Remember that in capitalism, there are always opportunities available for anyone. When big companies struggle, smaller companies can grow. When the national economy is down, local economies can grow. Big cities are expensive to live in, and the national employment rate typically reflects the unemployment of larger cities rather than less populated areas like Altoona. If you hear of an economic crisis, but the only thing in your life that has changed is that gas prices went down; then it means that opportunities are everywhere to be found for you.

Altoona is a town full of entrepreneurs. A while ago two residents, Josh Klausman and Aaron Tippett, created Altoona's first concierge service called Your Personal Services. This was great news for Altoona . Although I have not heard much in the news about their progress, companies like this are what Altoona needs. If I were a city government employee or policymaker, I would seek out ways to encourage entrepreneurs to establish new businesses. More Keystone Opportunity Zones, tax breaks for advertising in Altoona, or donating seized city property to start-up businesses. There are hundreds of ways for Altoona to make the best of the national "crisis."

Some resources for new businesses:

http://www.sba.gov

http://www.dos.state.pa.us/dos/site/default.asp

For this short period though, let's put our minds together to see how Altoona can use its resources to make it easier for entrepreneurs to take advantage of this situation by working with community members, Blair County officials and other communities. Does anyone out there have any ideas?

Elders and Debtors

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

In a story aired Friday by WTAJ, Cambria County's economic planners boldly reasserted their intent to stay in the nursing home business with Laurel Crest. This is in sharp contrast with Blair County's Tomassetti, et al, who are still deciding how best to nurse the ailing Valley View Home back to fiscal health.

WTAJ's Sean Dreher notes that Cambria's Commissioners "said they are still committed to serving the county's elderly", but I wonder if there's any possibility that selling off the home would be the best act of service. It's true that the President Commissioner P.J. Stevens assures us the residents "would have difficulty receiving care in a private facility", but there are a couple reasons I'm skeptical:

1. Remember that Stevens is not just wearing his "county commissioner" hat at this time, but also fighting for the county's cashflow. As Dreher reminds us, "Every additional resident means more revenue for the county."
2. The commissioners have shown an inability to run this business thus far. Much about this story suggests the commissioners have an unhealthy streak of idealism in them. Namely, the need to "apply for a $6 million loan just to stay in the black" that has apparently not tempered Commissioner Gjurich's unrestrained enthusiasm for the current management; and the hoped-for 28% increase in population that (presumably) will act as a shot in the arm for the anemic healthcare provider.
3. As with all government forays into industry, while private businesses are subject to the laws of sink or swim, it's virtually impossible to punish mismanagement in a publicly-held property like Laurel Crest. It's true that the commissioners are elected officials, but seriously, this is Jack Murtha country: will enough people remember this issue when Election Day comes around?

Now you know my opinion. What do you think?

Disclaimer: The views presented here do not necessarily represent ILoveAltoona.com, its owners or advertisers.

City-Wide Construction

By Jeff Neff

Recently, I attended an Altoona City Council meeting where big plans were discussed for Altoona's transportation system during a presentation by Karl King of the Allegheny Ridge Corp. In case you haven't heard of the 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation (CAT), I would like to share with you what I learned about this project coming to Altoona.

The 2010 CAT is a national initiative that is federally funded under two programs called the SAFETEA-LU and Transportation Enhancements. The purpose of the initiative is to create better walking and biking routes in Altoona, as an alternative to driving everywhere. This will mean that Altoona's infrastructure may look very different five years from now.

Some council members mentioned how unsafe, and sometimes illegal, it is to try to cross the busy Plank Road. This project will create pedestrian crossings, sidewalks, and thruways for commuters who choose not to drive throughout the city.

By the tone of the conversation and affirmation of some council members at that meeting, it sounded as though the 2010 CAT project will go through.

Now for some pros and cons. The downside to this project could be both short-term and long-term. For the short, the entire city would seem to be under construction for a while with temporary problems which may cause costly satellite projects to be started within the city. But my main concern would be the funding issue. If this expensive program isn't fully funded by the feds (read the fine print), then Altoona residents could face a mountain of bills.

What about pork? I would disagree with someone who claims this to be an unnecessary program because upgrades to infrastructure can save an enormous amount of money and congestion. Even if Altoona declines the offer, the project will be directed to another city. Let's just hope that federal funding pulls through.

When it is all said and done, Altoona will increase in population (and tax base), which could give opportunity for decreased taxes and a better transportation system. But, if city officials even hint that a tax increase may be needed due to this initiative: watch out.

It would be nice to see this project happen as long as Altoona's financial needs are met with compliance by the above programs.

Depending on the time line of events, this may be a good ballot question for the next local election. I only have a limited knowledge on this, so I suggest that you please look into the 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation for yourself or ask a Council Member about it.

- Jeff

Expulsion and Revulsion

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

A little over two weeks ago, the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed was released on DVD to furious criticism. The film--which has inspired the uniform ire of self-styled freethinkers and nonconformists everywhere--makes the bold assertion that the scientific community needs to apply its principles of free inquiry and unbiased review to the evolution/intelligent design debate. For this act of heterodoxy, groups of no less esteem than the National Center for Science Education have turned their weapons on their fellow scientists, waging a friendly fire war that is, at best, counterproductive.

Possibly one of the most controversial claims the movie makes is in linking twentieth century eugenics theory--which applies breeding and stock principles to human reproduction--to Planned Parenthood, the worldwide healthcare services provider. Cinematically, Expelled's directors choose to make these claims via the narrator (Ben Stein's) voice over footage of Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger. I think this was a good idea for a couple different reasons, but there is still some truly embarrassing history to be found in Planned Parenthood's--and Sanger's--past.

Although widely condemned as a racist, the term far from does justice to her complex views on the subject. It is true that she wrote that "the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets." It is also true that she was on friendly terms with chapters of the KKK and Nazi party, but these are merely parentheses in her greater eugenics philosophy.

In an ode to the Social Darwinism so prevalent at the time, Sanger wrote,

It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization.

Regarding racial policy, here's one of the most common Sanger quotes regarding African-Americans: "We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." According to Planned Parenthood, this quote was merely taken out of context, and a larger quote they provide indicates that she was trying to dispel the myth that they are trying to "exterminate the Negro population." Unfortunately, this passage is not independently verifiable, and is in fact refuted by a couple different sources. Sympathetic histories of the birth control movement render the extended quote as follows:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

Perhaps you're saying, "All of that took place almost a hundred years ago! That's water under the bridge. Planned Parenthood is now about the business of empowering women, especially minorities." Sadly, Planned Parenthood hasn't strayed too far from their founder. In a series of widely publicized incidents, Planned Parenthood representatives from across the country gladly agreed to accept money from donors with racist intentions. The abortion provider has also done what they could to illegally loosen up the age restrictions put in place by their elected officials.

Regrettably, Planned Parenthood has not done anything to eradicate the eugenics philosophy of its founder. They have subdued it, hidden it and even justified it--anything but repudiate it. It seems ironic that the Democrats (and even many Republicans) work so hard to earn their endorsement when they would spurn endorsements from other odious groups like the KKK and Nazi Party. The real question, I think, is not why this information was omitted from Expelled, but why we as Americans are willing to give Planned Parenthood a pass, while other groups get the disdain they so richly deserve.

Disclaimer: The views represented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com, its owners or its advertisers.

The Mendacity of Hope

By Jason Ibrahim

mendacity: (noun) 1. the quality of being mendacious; untruthfulness; tendency to lie. 2. an instance of lying; falsehood.

In U.S. history, we will look back upon 2008 as the year we saw the first African American run for president on a major party's ticket. This is no small feat, since this would have been implausible 50 years ago. In Barack Obama's second autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, he begins making a case for himself as president. The book is very well written, makes careful arguments, and poses thoughtful questions. Read merely as a work of political theory, it is very commendable.

Unfortunately, Obama's opponents have ample reason to work for his defeat. For all of his high-sounding rhetoric, the man has a complete lack of executive experience. He has never been in a position that required him to balance a large organization's budget, or receive competing opinions and then choose one, taking the full responsibility of that decision on himself. People will often point to Sarah Palin's so-called "inexperience", but the invaluable work that she did as mayor and governor are substantially better preparation than Obama's terms as state or U.S. Senator.

In The Audacity of Hope, Obama spends scant time on the abortion issue. For those who have studied this man's career, this is ironic to say the least. He has a long record of voting on abortion measures and speaking about the issue before groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL. His sympathetic self-portrait glosses over a 100% approval rating from these abortion special interest groups, and a record of never--never--seeing any reason to ever restrict a woman's so-called "constitutional right" to an abortion. In fact, he opposed the Infant Born-Alive Act on three separate occasions; this measure decrees that a child who survives an unsuccessful abortion attempt should receive life-saving treatment from the medical staff which had just been trying to kill him or her. His voting record is in direct contrast to the reasonable, nuanced impression the book presents.

In fact, while the entire book paints the picture of a man who keenly senses both sides of the problems facing this nation, the reality is very different. Congressional Monthly's study of Senator Obama's voting record shows him voting along party lines 96 percent of the time--in contrast to Senator McCain's 86 percent party-line vote over a 22 year period. Mr. Obama is a thoroughgoing liberal in moderate's clothing.

A couple different people have made the point recently that we know more about Joe the Plumber's personal life than we do about Obama's--in spite of the fact that Obama has been running for the presidency for going on 2 years, and Joe rose to stardom in the last couple months. From his political coming-out party at the home of strident terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, to his hush-hush keynote speech about Rashid Khalidi, Senator Obama has become surprisingly tight-lipped about his circle of friends. This secrecy hasn't always been the norm--his 1995 work, Dreams from My Father, recounts his radical, communist associations in college and beyond.

Many in the Republican party seem to have found their champion in John McCain. In contrast, conservatives regard him, at best, as a stop-gap measure to prevent Obama's media-orchestrated ascendancy to the throne...er, Oval Office. The Democrats have been loudly sounding the drum about McCain being much like George W. Bush, and I think they have a point, but that's no reason to sign on to any change for change's sake. The devil you know is still better than the devil you don't. Also, McCain will almost definitely grow the size of government; his performance in the bailout bill fiasco shows that. Granted, he wants to grow Washington at a linear rate, but contrasted with Obama exponential aspirations, McCain almost looks Spartan.

We also have reasons to vote for McCain and not just against Obama. His selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate not only electrified the party's conservative base, it also showed how much venom the feminist wing of the Democratic party could expend on one of its own. The McCain-Palin team's combined wealth of experience and ability will bring a confident, steady hand to the White House.

John McCain is no stranger to courage--his four years as a prisoner of war, and the valuable lessons he learned, have definitely earned him his stripes. His time spent at the mercy of an oppressive regime has surely clarified the wages of victory versus defeat in the War on Terror, a clarity that his opponent seems to have in short supply.

When the Republican primary narrowed to John McCain, I had my doubts. I questioned the validity of voting for a moderate with a good abortion record, but meager conservative principles. I thought the Republican party could use some time in the political desert to underscore the difference between McCain's attempt and a true reincarnation of the Reagan Revolution. While all of that may be true, we have too much at stake to vent those frustrations right now. We are faced with a man who has basically invalidated the oath he would take if elected by the people, and anything within reason and ethics must be done to prevent his election.

We are also faced with the most pro-abortion major candidate for president in U.S. history. Any politician--I don't care how good his health plan is--who not only consents to, but celebrates, the systematic homicide of 4000 human beings each day, sacrificed at the altar of convenience, is not fit to be president. This applies especially to socialists-turned-rhetoricians masquerading as statesmen.

So please, I urge you, go out there Tuesday and vote for John McCain. If you live in Pennsylvania especially, urge your friends to do the same.

Disclaimer: The views represented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com, its owners or its advertisers.

Altoona's Untapped Resources

Not very long ago, the Altoona Mirror had a story about Altoona making a promotion video. The video itself is great and long overdue idea, but I'm afraid it may be targeting the wrong people. I would like to point out some things concerning Altoona's marketing efforts and offer some suggestions for all of you to consider.

Depending on how much time you have spent outside of Altoona in Pennsylvania, you may notice that Altoona is known mostly for the Horseshoe Curve, the Curve Ballpark, and the hospital amongst the business community leaders. What about everyone else?

These commercial attributes are good, but there are other unexploited areas that haven't even been touched. Areas like unconventional recreation, automobiles, and road races.

Most people overlook parks that are already in Altoona like Lakemont Park, Valley View Park, or even the many public ballparks and playgrounds. Places like these draw families and friends when they can get together, especially when budgets are tight.

On multiple occasions when I lived in the Harrisburg area, I knew some people (in different social groups) who asked me where I was from. I told them, "Altoona." They went on to say that they buy their cars in Altoona, and will continue to do so because of our unbeatable prices and customer service. This is more than two hours away, but they still make the drive to buy their cars here because of our reputation.

In addition to that, they mentioned the car shows we have throughout the year. Should I mention poker runs for bikers? People take both of these very seriously, and many drive great distances to get to these events.

Another event that happens frequently in Altoona is a 5k, 10k, or 15k road race. These are often overlooked as well, but they attract the most active and hard-working people in the community. Some of the best times of my life were spent sweating early in the morning with another buddy in a town other than my own. Again, people go great distances to do a race they have never done before, and often come back if they liked the run.

Now that I've pointed out some untapped resources, I would like to explain how I believe these could be used to promote Altoona.

Targeted marketing includes knowing your audience and directing your message straight to them. If we are only trying to attract baseball fans, train enthusiasts, and health care professionals and patients, then we can continue to advertise that.

But if we are trying to attract productive, growth-oriented people to Altoona, who value the non-commercial assets that strengthen communities, we need to narrow the scope of city advertising to an extremely targeted audience. When they come to Altoona and have a good time, they will tell their friends and family who will, in turn, make the trip too.

Our reputation is already solid in many areas like baseball and trains, which don’t seem to attract the numbers we’re looking for, so it’s time to reach to other areas to build our reputations even farther. It will take variety of opinions and perspectives to reach agreements on which target markets Altoona should exploit, which is why I offered mine above.

Altoona has the assets, but nobody outside of our city knows about them. It’s about time they hear what we have, and they will bring their business with them.

- Jeff

A Rose by Any Other Name

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama writes of an experience he has dialoguing with some pro-life protestors at one of his rallies. As he tells the story, he meets them at the front entrance, and says:

"'You folks want to come inside?' I asked.

"'No, thank you,' the man said. He handed me a pamphlet. 'Mr. Obama, I want you to know that I agree with a lot of what you have to say.'

"'I appreciate that.'

"'And I know you're a Christian, with a family of your own.'

"'That's true.'

"'So how can you support murdering babies?'

"I told him I understood his position but had to disagree with it. I explained my belief that few women made the decision to terminate a pregnancy casually; that any pregnant woman felt the full force of the moral issues involved and wrestled with her conscience when making that heart-rending decision; that I feared a ban on abortion would force women to seek unsafe abortions, as they had once done in this country and as they continued to do in countries that prosecute abortion doctors and the women who seek their services. I suggested that perhaps we could agree on ways to reduce the number of women who felt the need to have abortions in the first place."

Now, just from a communication perspective, let me just say: Obama never tried to address the man's implicit question, which is, "Don't you believe abortionists murder babies?" He just pushed forward and assumed he was talking apples to apples with this man. He chose to talk past the protester. (If not, and he agreed that abortion is murder, then he was directly rationalizing infanticide.) As a result, let me give you a small taste of how his response sounded to this man (and indeed, sounds to me):

"I told him I understood his position but had to disagree with it. I explained my belief that few people made the decision to rob a bank casually; that any bank robber felt the full force of the moral issues involved and wrestled with her conscience when making that heart-rending decision; that I feared a ban on bank robbing would force people to rob banks unsafely, as they had once done in this country and as they continued to do in countries that prosecute bank robbers and their accomplices. I suggested that perhaps we could agree on ways to reduce the number of people who felt the need to rob banks in the first place."

But that's just me. What do you think?

A Horse is a Horse...of Course

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

Here's some breaking news from the Humane Society. Apparently, A horse from the Fair Dinkum Farm in Evansville, WY was on its way to Illinois recently, enroute to be slaughtered with nine of its fellow kind. In the middle of the trip, Snickers gave birth to a new foal, Willie, while on the truck.

The Humane Society opines:

"The surprise birth of this Miracle foal underscores one of the most gruesome aspects of the horse slaughter industry -- the fact that mares heavily pregnant and due to give birth are are shipped thousands of miles in crowded trucks to be butchered-their unborn killed and cast aside, never living to take a single breath or see the light of day." [Emphasis mine]

Soon after, the Illinois Senate passed a resolution banning horse slaughter in the state. While I have mixed feelings about the merit of this resolution, I think that something needs to be done to protect unborn foals on their way to slaughter. In fact, I call on the Junior Senator from Illinois to take the next logical step, and work to extend the ban to slaughtering unborn horses, not just in Illinois but across the whole country. (After all, the equine abortionists did have to cross state lines to perpetrate this ugly deed, since there were probably no facilities to terminate a horse pregnancy at the Fair Dinkum Farm.)

But then again, that's just me. What are your thoughts?

Epilogue: This is a previously unpublished piece that I wrote several months ago, before Sarah Palin's vice-presidential nomination. In light of her candidacy, and the inspiring story of Sarah, Todd and Trig Palin, this is yet another issue that distinguishes the candidates.

Disclaimer: The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com or its advertisers.

Student Homes Ordinance Violates Property Rights

By Jeff Neff

(Note: This issue is a current issue before Council. One of the team members of ILoveAltoona.com, Matt Garber, is a Councilman. The following opinions are not necessarily representative of Matt's.)

Let's talk about property rights. This entire issue of mandating who can live where in the city of Altoona has me wondering if city politicians really believe that this is the way to protect property owners' rights. Freedom and liberty are rooted in property ownership and this ordinance will destroy hopes of having the freedom that owners should have. This is not a debate. This is a Constitutional Right under the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania. Please look into these.

Before I begin telling the political side of this argument, I'll give you a common sense argument. Why would a person live next to a college campus and expect not to have parties nearby? Seriously, think about the sense in punishing the entire city for a few complainers who would rather inconvenience everybody else instead of make a tough decision to move someplace else- or not to have moved there in the first place.

Isn't it funny that this ordinance is intended to prevent growth? Altoona is known, or at least claims to be known, as a college town. Why on earth would city officials pass an ordinance to prevent student housing growth; especially in a time when the housing market is so volatile?

Does the city really need to get involved with something that does not concern them? Certainly some officials believe that it is their job to meddle in these affairs or else this ordinance would not have passed in the first place, but the truth of the matter is that it is not the City of Altoona's job to control Penn State's students. Penn State should be able to handle their students without help from the government. Instead of letting campus officials pass the buck to the Altoona City Council members, why don't city officials put the people in mind first?

Concerning the U.S. and PA Constitutions, you must understand that private property ownership and the pursuit of happiness are inseparable. The Constitution does not include a clause for "college towns" with neighbors who insist on telling others what they can do with their property through pushy big government ordinances. There are already existing laws for noises violations, disturbances, and other annoyances. Anything further is just big government getting in the way.

If a landlord's vision for The American Dream includes owning rental property (anywhere he chooses), then he is pursuing his dream. If a homeowner decides that he disapproved of how another person is using their property and uses coercion to make them stop, it is infringing the rights of the other person. Unless that homeowner is misusing the property at the entire city's expense (for instance, a drug dealer safe-haven), there is no justification for using government coercion to bully a homeowner around.

If the plan is to make the nearby houses worth more by restricting landowner rights; then the market is no longer running itself, and there is nothing better for an economy than a free market.

I see no examples of how properties proximal to the Altoona campus are negatively effecting society-at-large, because we are talking about properties which affect an extremely limited amount of people who should have a basic knowledge of what it means to live right near to a college campus.

The choices are clear: Compromise constitutional principles and reason or discontinue the ambition to grow Altoona as a college town and forfeit Altoona's free market. While we're at it, why don't we propose an ordinance to limit the amount of Sheetz stores in Altoona since they attract kids, cars, and are just too loud for neighbors when they say, "Welcome to Sheetz, pump 3." It only makes sense when big-government politicians let a little power get to their heads.

Po-tay-to, Po-tah-to

Posted by Jason Ibrahim

Last week, Vice Presidential candidate and Delaware Senator Joe Biden used his command of the past to interpret the present, providing Katie Couric with wit and wisdom for our troubled financial markets from the Great Depression of the 1930's. Biden said, "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened.'"

There are a couple aspects of Professor Biden's lecture that should make us want to cut class, namely:

1. Roosevelt wasn't elected president until 1932. It would be well over three years between the crash of 1929 and his inauguration in 1933.
2. His famous "Fireside Chats" were conducted over the radio, as television had by that time just been invented, and was decades away from either 1929 or 1933.

There's nothing unusual about politicians misspeaking, even in public. Everyone remembers President Clinton's infamous "that depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"; President Bush has even made misspeaking a central part of his "strategery", causing his opponents to "misunderestimate" him. The granddaddy of them all though, for those of us born since Nixon's resignation, was uttered by J. Danforth Quayle in Trenton, New Jersey. While officiating a spelling bee, the vice president corrected a contestant's spelling of "potato", to which he affixed an extraneous, trailing "e". The media and fellow politicians ate this up, of course, subsequently lambasting Quayle for his gaffe. Many of his detractors claimed, with tenuous logic, that a man who could not spell the word potato was unfit to be making high-level executive decisions for the country. Leaving aside the valid etymological debate, I can see at least one significant difference between the Quayle and Biden blunders.

What makes Biden's anti-historical revisionism the height of irony is this: Biden is being sold to us as the experience on the ticket. In the 1992 election Dan Quayle was by far the more untested of the candidates. His running mate, George H.W. Bush, was already president, had had previous executive experience as the vice president for eight years, and as the head of the CIA before that, not to mention prior legislative experience as a Congressman. No one in his right mind thinks that Obama, a man whose previous credentials include only 11 years in deliberative, legislative bodies-and 0 in an executive position higher than a lemonade stand-is fit to be Chief Executive without a little help from an old hand. Obama's campaign staff understands this, and, in large part, it drives their selection of Biden, the six-term Senator from Delaware. If these kinds of missteps are the experience Obama and Biden wish to bring to the executive branch, well...can I see my other options?

Thankfully, our founding fathers put in place a robust and well-planned government that could withstand four or even eight years of Obama (although our founding documents would seem rife with misspellings to our modern eyes.) I hope that, if elected, Messrs. Obama and Biden would rise to the challenges put before them-but I also hope it won't come to that.

Now that you know my opinion, what's yours? Drop me a line and let me know what you think.

Disclaimer: The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com or its advertisers.

How the Government Wastes Your Money

By Jeff Neff

Today, let's look into how the government works -- or doesn't. Having spent over six years working for the government, I've seen how wasteful and greatly unproductive the government really is. We can talk all day about the great things our federal, state, or dare I say local governments have been doing for us with our own dollars, but I want to share some things with you that go to show how wasteful our government really is as compared to privately owned businesses.

Now understand that the majority of government employees are ordinary people who aren't necessarily wasteful people themselves, but the way the system is set up invites the abuse of tax dollars.

A big difference between privately run businesses and government organizations is the actual management of money. When a restaurant owner finds that his employee has been stealing small amounts of food over a period of time, he corrects that employee. Or sometimes the owner may allow his employees to take home a few extra pies or meals for free. Either way, if the employee steals the food or if the food is given to him; the owner takes a financial loss. This doesn’t have to apply to the food industry only. Companies who do allow freebies usually limit how much is handed out, and do it sparingly.

Any company with a payroll must deal with managing their employees' schedules and a great deal of time goes into avoiding paying out too much overtime. Of course it is sometimes needed, but private businesses would rather limit its use. Doing it this way leads to saving money and the better use of employees' time.

Between "freebies" and overtime pay, private companies tend to get the most out of their money. What about the government? This may apply to any level of government, but in my federal experience over the last six years, freebies are handed out like candy.

While restaurants adjust for how much food they buy and sell, they always try to minimize how much food is actually thrown away, while the government only increases its size and production of materials.

For a government entity, money saved is money wasted. If they do not deplete their budget, their budget is decreased the following year. This is not a myth or a joke. Money allotted for a specific purpose must be spent to ensure future funding. In a certain place I used to work at, money that was saved in my department throughout the fiscal year was given to all employees as a bonus for Christmas, only after management vehemently searched for ways to use the majority of it for useless purchases.

We had unnecessary office renovations. We got new vehicles, printers and computers to replace ones which were already in perfect condition. Ever heard of a government surplus auction?

This explains the amount of overtime given or mandated to government employees, since the money seems to just appear out of nowhere. Supervisors don't worry about budgeting when all they are concerned with is spending as much money as they can.

This is why new taxes appear and why existing taxes are increased.

What kind of savings can we make in our local government? That’s a question our local officials need to ask themselves when they oversee budgets. Does the city really need new vehicles, computers, or other "replacements" for its departments? Ordinary citizens like us can bring wasteful spending like this to their attention by attending council meetings, writing a letter to the editor, or simply by voting out the wasteful spenders.

Instead of finding new ways to spend money, we need to start saving money first.

Jeff Neff

The Mortgage Crisis

By Jason Ibrahim

I like to be in America,
OK by me in America.
Everything free in America
(For a small fee in America)
--West Side Story

Lots of people in the media nowadays like to refer to the "mortgage crisis", which they state as if not knowing what they mean-or worse, disagreeing with their interpretation-is tantamount to being an uncouth barbarian. The fact of the matter is I have a hard enough time keeping up with what the crisis of the week is, so anything I can do to separate the fake crises from the real ones is progress to me. It's also a fact that I don't think there is a mortgage crisis at all. Before you burn me at the stake, let me explain.

I do think there's a subprime mortgage crisis, but I think this began when subprime mortgages were instituted, not now that they're coming unraveled. Basically, a subprime mortgage occurs when a person or group of people decides to borrow more money than their means allow, and a mortgage company colludes with them, at usurious rates, for sure, to give their customers their own overzealous slice of the American Dream.

Let's just pause right here and make one thing clear: this is a voluntary agreement. No one's forcing the borrower to sign the document, and no one is compelling the creditor to lend the money. That means if the borrower defaults on the loan, he has no one to blame but himself. If the lender has to file bankruptcy, his own decisions brought him to that point. (If the government deems the lender "too important" to go out of business, well...more on that later.)

So what about me? Who am I to criticize people just struggling to get ahead, when I probably inherited the money to pay for my house when my wealthy great-uncle, the owner of a vast pancake-flipper-selling empire, mentioned me in his will, right? No, actually, I too have a mortgage, but one that is well within my means to pay; I didn't opt for the Altoona Taj Mahal. I get up and go to work every day; I'm thankful to God for my house and my job.

There's a quaint old saying that has gone way out of style over the last couple decades, the idea of "living beneath your means." I think it's the key to understanding the subprime crisis, on both sides of the transaction. I think a lot of people nowadays take that to mean "living beneath your worth," because if there's anything that our increasingly consumerist, image-obsessed popular culture is telling us, it's "what you have is who you are." In contrast, "living beneath your means" suggests exactly the opposite: that your character, your work ethic and your perseverance go a long way to determining your standard of living.

Someone that was undoubtedly in favor of the value of thrift was Abraham Lincoln. He wrote, in a strongly-worded letter to his shiftless brother in 1848,

"You are now in need of some ready money; and what I propose is, that you shall go to work, "tooth and nail," for somebody who will give you money for it....I do not mean you shall go off to St. Louis, or the lead mines, or the gold mines, in California, but I mean for you to go at it for the best wages you can get close to home, in Coles County. Now if you will do this, you will soon be out of debt, and what is better, you will have a habit that will keep you from getting in debt again....You say you would almost give your place in Heaven for $70 or $80. Then you value your place in Heaven very cheaply..."

In a way, both the lender and the borrower in the subprime crisis are like Lincoln's immobile brother. The borrowers are perhaps hard-working, honest people, but they have no appreciation for the fruits of their labor, and pine away for $70 or $80 while hundreds of dollars are wasted on all kinds of luxuries, when they could store this away for savings.

Meanwhile the lender has picked up his ax and shovel and headed for the Promise Land. If gold has a scent, these people have noses for it. Unfortunately, the gold in their mines is the same gold at the end of the rainbow. Did they really think they could get something for nothing, hawking high-interest mortgages to people who've demonstrated an inability to pay them? All good delusions must come to an end.

Or do they? Our leaders in Washington have determined that the best people to shore up these lenders-by the way, encouraging more subprime borrowing-are you and me. Through federal bailouts, we now own very minute portions of companies like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and others. Only the government would say, "Let's see, you obviously can't handle money, so the best thing to do is...give you MORE money!"

Maybe what we really have is a subpar governmental crisis.

--Jason

Disclaimer: The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of ILoveAltoona.com or its advertisers.