It was during the UDAG (Urban Development Action Grant) era that it became very apparent that government interference in the private marketplace subsidizing specific projects for parasitic developers was a road to failure. No one could compete with government subsidized projects and the creation of an unlevel playing field destroyed many good and in some cases historic properties in downtown Buffalo.
Everyone just waited in line for a UDAG. There was no incentive for the private sector to develop. Since that time, the ridiculous use of selective subsidies in the office market has continued the blight of our urban centers. For decades IDA's and Empire State Development have subsidized projects for tenants not otherwise disposed to leave the State of New York, to relocate from the urban centers out to affluent suburbs. . . .
I submit to you that it is illegal under the State Constitution for the State of New York to loan or advance monies in any form to private firms. Article VII, Section 8, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution states: "the money of the State shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking; nor shall the credit of the State be given or loan to or in aid of any individual, or public or private corporation or association, or private undertaking, but the foregoing provision shall not apply to any fund or property now held or which may hereafter be held by the State for educational, mental health or mental retardation purposed." The Section goes on to provide exceptions to the general rule of banning gifts of State funds to private organizations, but none of the exceptions authorizes the gift of State fund for "economic development" whose gifts are made directly by the State or through intermediaries.
That is the law of the land.
Our politically corrupt State government and its "challenged" elected officials through its various agencies and authorities has violated the Constitution repeatedly over the years. . . .
Allowing one developer to have an advantage over other developers because of political connections is a violation of the law. [emphasis mine]
I could not say it better!
16 comments:
Is this why Supervisor Tyksinski, Town of New Harford initiated the Motion to use Eminent Domain to further the private interests of Lawrence Adler, Developer of the New Hartford Business Park.
One only needs to go to the NYS Board of Elections and obtain a copy of all donations made to Patrick Tyksinski. Lawrence Adler is very prominent contributor as well as a Mr. Barkett who just happens to own Whitetail (of Oneida Street in Chadwicks) and the Applewood Housing Development where the Town Supervisor made a motion to use Mitigation Fees to install a $110,000 light. The only problem here is that Mr. Barkett entered into an Agreement to pay for the light.
Granted, granted and granted. So what can we do about it? Maybe a start would have been to elect a conservative governor. But that's just a wish and a prayer. We could refuse to pay our state income taxes, but oh, that's right, they're withheld from us before we get our hands on the money. We could stop paying our property taxes, but then we'll lose our homes and be accused of not forking over teacher salary money "for the children." We could organize our grass roots, but the media will say we're Neanderthals. Eventually we might revolt, but by then our guns will be confiscated. What to do?
I think change starts with efforts at consciousness raising. That's what I try to do here.
If more people talk about how all these "economic development" incentives really reduce freedom and competition, eventually people will see the policies as harmful rather than helpful, and they could no longer be used to "purchase votes."
Raising consciousness is a slow process, but it can be done. I've been discussing "sprawl" for years -- long before the concept was ever discussed in the Utica area. Now I see letters to the editors about sprawl (and not from me or people I know). I would like to think that I played a small role in getting that idea out there for discussion.
What do teacher salaries have to do with what is going on in N.H.? Or is the remark another attempt to demonize public employees who are being used as scapegoats for what Wall St. did to the economy of this country? And by the way, most teachers have Masters Degrees & are underpaid for what they do.
The article is not about teachers -- and is about a lot more than New Hartford.
But please stop the whining about teachers being underpaid because they are not. Compare the pay of persons with 20 years experience and you will find that teachers are generally better paid than staff lawyers or engineers who make their careers in public service when considering the hours actually worked. Also, pay increases for school systems have long outstripped most other forms of public employment. Instead of complaining, look at what is going on in the private sector where companies are downsizing. Public employees are lucky to be working.
Oh, you're correct. The private sector is downsizing all right. By sending American jobs overseas opening sweatshops & employing child labor while CEO's rake in millions in compensation & enjoying billions in tax breaks paid for by the middle class. If Wall St. haden't raped the economy of this country, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But, people like you want to blame middle class public employees for pension fund losses caused by the financial sector's greed & unwarranted risk taking. Yea, I'm a public employee. And I'm sick & tired of being made a scapegoat by you're ilk for what happened to the economy of this country. If it was up to people like you, nobody would get a pension or anything else for that matter. 401k's? Wall St. pretty much took care of that solution, now didn't they?
My, my, the liberal, public employee, paid for by those who pay taxes rant grows. To suggest that it is somehow wrong or immoral to seek profit that benefits both owners and workers is diengenious, at best, ignorant at worst. Where does anonymous think the money comes from? It is the private sector that generates all wealth. Government cost is whta drives taxers up and encourages companies to take their investments elsewhere. Our business tax, for example, is the second highest in the world. Investment is the key to all company and job creation. Wall Street facilitates investment. Of course there are problems of misuse and greed but that is a feature of capitalism since human error and falibility is a condition of free will and choice. But, to suggest that our system has not produced the most powerful economic engine in history is an indication that so callled puiblic servants have no idea of true production. Furthermore, we can thank the academic/government centralized planners and politicians for the warping of the housing market that was the primary cause of the current economic decline we are experiencing. It is governemnt that coerced and tempted banks and Wall St. to join in the bubble creation. Wall St. means companies. Companies mean people and investors. People and investors create economies and opportunites. Opportunity creates wealth. Wealth pays taxes. Taxes pay Anonymous. Do not so bite the hand that feeds you and your over blown salaries and perks. The party is over.
You are mixing apples and oranges, Anonymous.
New York State sent its jobs to the South and elsewhere LONG BEFORE the USA liberalized its trade laws and sent jobs overseas. This was due to the high cost of doing business in NYS, which has a lot to do with its public employee unions' constant demands, their failure to curb pension abuse by members who were in a position to abuse pensions (by padding overtime during the last 3 years of employment, etc), by Labor Laws that made it an offense to publicize contract negotiations while they were ongoing (even though the public would be paying for them), and by a Public Employees Relations Board which disregards a community's economic health when ruling on contract disputes.
While I as a shareholder don't like the outlandish Wall St. CEO pay any more than you do because it cuts into my dividends, you can thank your union pension fund managers -- who control a lot more share votes than my minuscule holdings -- for allowing CEO pay to get out of control.
You obviously don't know what you are talking about, Anonymous, when you blame pension fund losses on the financial sector's "greed" because the last I checked the market is back up close to its high. The losses are there because the amount promised to be paid out far exceeds what the market is capable of delivering.
I'm a public employee too, and I'm sick and tired of being forced to pay into an "agency shop" of a Union that constantly plays politics and supports the big spending programs that have grown government so much that there is no room left for private enterprise to survive.
Well if you don't like paying agency shop fees, then give up the benefits sush as health care that you're union negotiated for you. Nobody is forcing you to accept the benefits that you enjoy, thanx to your union. You don't know what you're talking about. If there's no money left for private enterprise to survive, then why is the market up so high, which you mentioned? And to the other anon poster. I'm not a liberal, nor am I against the private sector making profits. But, I do think it's immoral for companies to employ child labor, & to have people in third world countries working in sweatshops. You apparently believe otherwise. And when the public sector is decimated, you'll be the first to rant when services are cut.
The banks were "tempted"? Ahahahaha! Gimme a break. Who tempted Wall St. during the tech bubble? And who tempted mutual fund outfits like Strong Investments, & T.Rowe Price in the early part of this decade when they were putting the screws to investors with their illegal trading practices? The devil?
To Anonymous two posts above . . . private enterprise survives elsewhere, hence the market, but not so well in NYS, which is why jobs and population loss have become a way of life Upstate way before we ever began exporting jobs over seas.
I'll take my Union benefits while I can, thank you, because I am paying for them (and if they were not there, I would make other arrangements on my own). Its the Union politicking I can't stand because they pretend they are speaking for me when they don't. In this day and age when we have all sorts of labor laws to protect workers, the need for unions is rather minimal.
On the point of it being immoral for companies to employ child labor and use sweatshops, you will find agreement from me. I think that trade liberalization was a huge mistake. Liberalization allowed transnational corporations to avoid our labor and environmental laws by exporting jobs while, at the same time, having access to our markets to sell the goods that they produced. "Free Trade" not only undermines our cultural values, it leaves us vulnerable to other nations when our ability to produce essential items (food, clothing, energy, steel, etc) has been destroyed.
Strikeslip, thank you for giving us hope. Your posts, grounded in fact, not hype, provide a glimmer of hope during a seemingly hopeless time.
Well, if I'm not mistaken you can arrange to have a portion of your union dues refunded back to you if you don't agree with "Union politicking". And I don't agree with your opinion that the need for unions is minimal. I believe just the opposite. In this day & age when big business wants to strip workers of all their benefits in order to increase profits, we need unions to look out for the best interests of working people. Public employees, who for the most part are middle class are the next target. There is a concerted effort going on by the likes of the Heritage Foundation to demonize all public employees as parasites. Yes, I agree that there are pension fund abuses such as padding. That must be stopped. But, for the most part the average retiree recieves no where near the pension each month that is frequently quoted in the press when the OD & others run one of their ed pieces lambasting public employees. The GOP in the next session of Congress plans on introducing legistlation allowing states to file bankruptcy. This is a blatent attempt to nullify union contracts & to defund public employee unions who contribute mainly to the Democratic Party, while the the GOP accepts hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from corporate America. The last thing we need in this country is a one party system.
Two points are seldom raised much less discussed among those commenting on these topics. First, no one has ever argued that business, big or small is lily white. Incompetent and/or illegal business practices are part of the landscape, always were always will be. You simply don't indict an entire system over a failure of parts. To indict Wall St. as evil is like indicting unions as evil because of misconduct of a few leaders. We have our own local expamples of that. Where their is human invovement there is human fraililty and error. No government system nor any government regulation has eliminated or controlled the actions of flawed actors within a system. It is completely simplistic to make a general indictment of Wall St. or any other institution in our economic system. And, government through regulation often creates a more harmful situation. Just look at the corn ethanol debacle. Secondly, no one can legitimately discuss labor standards and conditions without grasping the relationship between the value of what is being produced and the output of the worker producing it. That relationship even more than tax and regulation factors is the basis of the global production issues. One man's sweat shop is aniothers path to economic progress. We also cannot judge the standards of other societies not their needs while sitting at our computers, drinking our coffee and planning our vacations. Not too long ago our grandfathers worked in extremely poor conditions at young ages to create our path to more prosperity. Itb was called necessity.
Excellent points, Anonymous.
This is an unrelated topic. What happens if the OIN is declared to be non-exsistant? I read some things online that said that they were no an official part of the Treat of Canandaguia, which they claim gives them their power. The article stated that they were not considered a part of the Iroquois Confederacy. That would surely makes the playing field totally different. Have a Happy and Healthy New Year.
Post a Comment