I have been thinking about GMC’s request to the federal government for a bailout on their debts. My mind goes back to Studebaker, Rio trucks, and the Nash Rambler. No one was around to bail them out of their financial difficulties or make up for lost jobs. They instead became part of our history. Maybe it is time for GMC to join them.
Donald A. Copeland
Island Falls
• • •
Medicare drug tool
It was unfortunate that Meg Haskell’s article regarding the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, “Time to decide,” (BDN, Nov. 11) failed to mention the powerful tool that Medicare makes available on its Web site for comparing the total costs of competing drug plans. Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Finder (medicare.gov/pdphome.asp) is an interactive tool that will allow you to enter the medications you are currently taking, as well as other personal preferences, and then provide you with a cost comparison of all the competing plans that are available in your area. I believe that it is the most effective tool available to assist consumers in finding their way through the Medicare Part D maze.
Joe Lallande
Fort Fairfield
• • •
Sales tax solution
Possible budget solution: Once upon a time Maine had a 6 percent sales tax. Then it was reduced to 5.5 percent and then down to 5 percent. Sales taxes are extremely equitable across the income ranges of the citizens. Even our welcome visitors share in funding our infrastructure via sales taxes.
I propose that bipartisan legislators explore the option of increasing the sales tax by one or maybe even two pennies on a dollar on all items across the board. Maybe the state would not have to cut educational funding and lay off workers. This option deserves a close look by the Legislature, in my mind.
Larry Wade
Bradley
• • •
Propane vs. electric
For years we’ve all been told that oil and propane are cheaper options than electric heat, and for quite some time that was true. I’ve suspected for months, however, that the situation had changed, and only recently had it proven to me — by a propane company.
Tiger Fuel of Virginia’s Web site, tigerfuel.com/calculator.htm, has a calculator that compares the cost of electric and propane heat, presumably because at the time the cost of propane was about 80 cents per gallon, and therefore it was indeed cheaper to heat with propane than electricity. However, current prices are nearly four times higher.
Using Bangor Hydro’s highest electric rate and rounding up to the nearest penny (.09 per kWh) and a propane rate of $3 per gallon — much lower than my last delivery that was nearly a dollar more expensive — the calculator tells me that propane is nearly twice as expensive as electric as a means for heating, $4.67 per 1000 BTU vs. $2.63.
I’m only mentioning this because wholesale propane rates have dropped nearly as quickly as oil prices, but retail costs to consumers have not followed, and I’m hoping that this situation is rectified immediately by our local propane dealers.
Eric S. Taylor
Bangor
• • •
Understand military
I disagree with Martha Dickinson’s take on Sarah Smiley’s column, Nov. 10 (“Election distressing to military families”). While I have not always agreed with the comments expressed in Smiley’s columns, I thought she did an excellent job at capturing some of the feelings that military families may have with the election of Barack Obama as our next president.
Although I can agree that military service does not, in itself, make a person (male or female) more qualified to be president, a clear understanding of what it means to be in the military does. For example, I would feel comforted to know that relatives or friends of President-elect Obama’s served in the military. Maybe he greeted a cousin or uncle returning home from serving in Vietnam or maybe a close family friend who was returning from service in Desert Storm. If President-elect Obama had personal experiences with those who had served in the military, I would not be as skeptical about his role as the commander in chief, the most awesome responsibility he will have.
My hope is that President-elect Obama recognizes that he needs to have on his staff people with military experience, such as Gen. Colin Powell, to give him credibility with military families and those of us who pay more than lip service in our support of the military.
Wanda L. Lincoln
Old Town
• • •
Attack mailings
On the day before the last election, some voters received attack mailers directly from the state political party headquarters in Augusta. In accordance with existing state law, the mailers were sent without the knowledge or consent of the candidate being supported.
In the House District 20 race, the mailer raised the candidate’s recall from the local school board while he was on active military duty in 1997. In another House race, the mailer raised 2001 allegations against the candidate which were later found to be unsubstantiated.
Such tactics are commonplace at the national level but have until recently been rare in local Maine politics. However, the recent apparent successes of unapproved, last minute, negative campaign tactics may indicate the nature of future campaigns.
Should state law be changed to require that government funded candidates approve of organized independent expenditures on their behalf by their political parties or should independent expenditures in clean elections be prohibited?
Steve Juskewitch
Dedham
• • •
Arms race
In reference to the article in the Bangor Daily News weekend edition (Nov. 8-9) about Maine citizens flocking to buy assault rifles out of fear that the new administration will immediately pass a law to ban them, I cannot comment on what the new administration has in mind, but the question that troubles me is: Where do we draw the line?
If we accept that citizens may own an operational assault rifle, then why not Stinger missiles or flame throwers or artillery pieces? Why not operational hand grenades? What is the tipping point for what is reasonable and what is not?
Growing up in the 1950s, most of my relatives owned guns and were avid hunters. I don’t recall that they ever claimed to need guns to protect themselves from their neighbors or their government. In fact, most people never even locked their doors. Where did this fear come from? Was it the Cold War? The civil rights and antiwar activity of the 1960s?
I believe Americans have the right to have guns for hunting or protecting hearth and home, but not guns whose only purpose is mass, indiscriminate killing.
On 11/14/08 at 5:54 AM,
WRofGlenburn wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Hate to break the news to you Eric Taylor, but you used only 1/2 of the electricity cost in your computations. You left off the generation or delivery cost. That would bring the total cost closer to $.18/kwh or nearly double what you calculated. Stay Warm!
On 11/14/08 at 8:23 AM,
Bangorean wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
No increased taxes of any kind until State Government learns how to live frugally. Cut administrative positions and waste first. Our legislature and Governor will simply take the money and give it away.
On 11/14/08 at 10:52 AM,
chemaine wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
"If we accept that citizens may own an operational assault rifle, then why not Stinger missiles or flame throwers or artillery pieces? Why not operational hand grenades?"
Agreed! These are all permitted by the second amendement, and my inability to go to my local gun shop and buy an RPG is a clear violation of my constitutional rights!
LIBERALS ARE KILLING THIS COUNTRY!!!!!!
Firt they gave women the vote, now they're taking our guns. What next, require the use of seatbelts or motorcycle helmets? I have a constitutional right to ride my motorbike without a helmet and to demand that the emergency room i end up in try to fix me and the taxpayers can dam well pay for my stupidity. GOD BLESS THE USA
USA
USA
USA!
On 11/14/08 at 10:53 AM,
anne_of_mdi wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Chemaine you have to wear a helmet if you collect food stamps.
On 11/14/08 at 12:30 PM,
Tellie wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I am a little ignorant on the subject of assault rifles and all, but what is the purpose other than to kill and slaughter? Do people take them into the woods to hunt? If so, I'll cancel my hunting for the weekend. I am serious, what other purpose for an assault rifle, other than assault?
On 11/14/08 at 1:28 PM,
duckwa wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Tellie, a lot of people such a myself, I own a sks which is an old style ak-47, like to target pratice for the sake of it. I don't hunt much as I believe you need to eat what you shoot, and my wife will only take so much. But my son and i love target pracice. Your average rifle holds 3 to 5 rounds. My sks has a 30 round clip. Bottom line it is a lot more fun for us with a lot less hastle. If I never slaughter anyone and obey the laws then what is wrong with that?
On 11/14/08 at 2:13 PM,
duckwa wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Chemaine, you said --"LIBERALS ARE KILLING THIS COUNTRY!!!!!!
Firt they gave women the vote, now they're taking our guns."
THERE YOU GO TAKING CREDIT FOR THINGS YOUR PARTY DIDN'T DO. YOU WANT TO BE PROUD TO BE A LIB FINE, STOP TAKING CREDIT WHERE IT ISN'T DUE. DON'T FORGET YOUR LESSON FROM YESTERDAY EITHER. tHE GOP ENDED SLAVERY, NOT THE DEM,S.
"While the ability to vote was a national trend forming since the progressive years of Republican President William Taft, Woodrow's predecessor, Taft's appointment as Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court in 1921 was seen as the watershed moment for equal-pay legislation. "
On 11/14/08 at 2:21 PM,
saltair wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
This "assualt weapon" title is very misleading. The reality is your typical "assault rifle" available at the local gun shop or gun show is no different than your grandpa's semi-automatic hunting rifle or shotgun. They are capable of no more no less. The only REAL difference is the way they look. The stock on an assualt rifle looks like something in the military and collectors and other gun enthusiasts buy them for display or shooting at the range. The automatic feature that the military issue weapons sport is not available on these guns. Owning fully automatic weapons requires federal permits that are very difficult to obtain and only serious collectors or dealers have them.
On 11/14/08 at 2:26 PM,
anne_of_mdi wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Duckwa, I think the Republican Party of the 1850's and '60's was the more liberal party at the time.
On 11/14/08 at 5:22 PM,
Keith132 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
The bullet that killed the President who freed the slaves by raising taxes to pay for a Civil War that cost $62 billion in 2000's dollars was a .41 caliber bullet fired through a .44 caliber Derringer.
On 11/14/08 at 8:31 PM,
BillORight wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Re: Studebaker, Rio, Nash:
Mr. Copeland offers some good examples why Chapter 11 works better than bailouts. Although the auto industry is far more integrated today, most government intervention to prop up private industry is ill conceived. Nash, Studebaker and Diamond Rio trucks, all suffered the pains of acquisition and restructuring (something private enterprise and free markets determine quite well). Take Studebaker's case: Studebaker entered the automotive business in 1902 (ironically with electric vehicles) and later had subsidiaries of, or business relationships with, the following: STP, Gravely, White Consolidated, Auto Union, Mercedes Benz, Wagner Electric, AM General, Federal Mogul, and Onan.
Nash (Nash-Kelvinator) became American Motors (AMC), a creation of the acquisition of Hudson by Nash. Kaiser/Jeep was added to the AMC stable, and again, AMC was acquired by Chrysler, entering as the Jeep/AMC Eagle division. Incidentally, while some may point out that Lee Iacocca successfully petitioned Congress for a loan to save Chrysler, the government only acted to "guarantee" a loan, under which Mr. Iacocca worked for only $1 in salary -- a far cry from today's scenario. Chrysler quickly turned itself around (partially due to their well-engineered mini-vans), and paid off their debt early.
The point is that these companies survived or transitioned in various forms, while drawing the best from engineers and forward-looking management, and also cleaned up their balance sheets. As an added benefit, technological advances produced a new level of industry standard along the way. The process of allowing businesses to fail, while messy, generates it's own dynamic that is exponential. Maybe Studebaker can be resurrected to absorb GM and produce the next line of electric cars -- and do it right.
On 11/15/08 at 12:54 PM,
boogyman wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
The 2nd amendment was designed to protect the public from a government that would intend to disarm it. Back then, the government's weaponry was no different from what the citizens had. In my opinion, based on the intent of the 2nd amendment, I should be able to park a fully armed M1 tank in my garage. Read what you want into the 2nd amendment, I will simply read what it says. Its pretty clear to me.
I guess If I had to "draw the line" somewhere it would be nuclear weapons, I don't think I could properly maintain one, and I don't like the thought of having my hair fall out every time I go to the basement. And, there would be no way for me to effectively use a nuke without killing inoocent civilians (I'm only concerned about that domestically, all bets are off when using it on other countries). I think that the governmet would be hesitent to use one against a homeland militia uprising, so it's kind of like mutually assured destruction anyway.
On 11/16/08 at 7:04 AM,
duckwa wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Boogyman, I'm think based on your sarcasism we disagree on this, but i love how peoples opinions cross on issues. i agree with much of what you say, just not this. On another post about the ministers, mainelyme, who i thought i would never agree with...had great things to say. It goes to show it pays to read what people think, and we are all so mixed up and diverse in our opinions. its good.
Anne, your point is true, and in fairness, chemaine has clarifed that in other posts, that she said liberial, not democrat.
On 11/17/08 at 9:33 AM,
boogyman wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
What is it you disagree with duckwa, you think I should be able to keep a Nuke?
On 11/19/08 at 6:34 PM,
sickntired wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
If you want to educate yourself on the second amendment and the rest of the constitution read the writings of the founding fathers. In their papers they explain their thinking on why they wrote the constiution as they did. They felt that an armed populace would deter the government from violating your rights. Not so today as the government is armed with weapons that far exceed anything a citizen is allowed to own. The only power we have now is the vote. If the government tomorrow said they are instituting martial law and suspending the constitution there isn't a dang thing we could do about it.
On 1/16/09 at 4:04 PM,
redreader73 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
My opinion. If all state employees from the governor on down would take a 5% salary cut, none of them would freeze or starve this winter.
In return, 290 employees would retain their jobs---pay taxes and support their families. This in turn would reduce the state deficit and show
that they care about the state economy. Why hit on the poor defenseless people on Medicaid and other such programs all the time?
Red St Pierre
Post a comment about this story
You must be logged in to post a comment.
click here to log in.
