Make a Comment to NCPR

We would all be a lot better off if we just bought fewer "things" but those that we did buy were of higher quality meant to last for a long time. Maybe we would buy more things that were human powered...here I'm thinking of a leaf rake, rather than a leaf blower, for example. I'm convinced that many of the labor saving devices we have been sold really don't save us all that much labor and they cost us a lot more in money, fuel/energy, and quality of life. And I know you didn't want to get philosophical here but our society needs to be re-structured away from the idea that growth equates to increased wealth.

Well, it usually is. Too bad we can't vote out the donwstate politicians.

To Anonymous,

Oh, I see. You mean the line that says "The law, however, emphasizes that an institution's CRA activities should be undertaken in a safe and sound manner, and does not require institutions to make high-risk loans that may bring losses to the institution."
You are "reading between the lines for what you think are implied meanings while the lines themselves say the opposite. When I hear the line that the government forced the banks to make bad loans I hear echoing in my head the old Flip Wilson line "The devil made me do it." The banks screwed up. Why are you making excuses for them?

Here's what I want to know: Why would anyone park a vehicle (or a towable trailer) near a project like these?

--Brian, NCPR

Sorry, I thought the issue here was the Ravitch budget proposal. When did it become a debate about the Post Star's journalistic credentials?

No scratchy,

I don't want to see prisons in the North country close, I don't want to see my property taxes go even more insane. There is a set amount that is always going to be spent in NYS, we should grab as much of it as we can. Yes I would like to see NYS radically change we agree on that, we are the highest taxed state in the Union, yet we have high rates of poverty, where is the money going? It is not going for social programs to help the poor that is for sure.

But moving the prisons around won't change anything at all, it will just push that economic burden on the rest of us.

I actually saw a similar event. Our back yard neighbors in one of the larger villages in this area were cutting down a tree. They tied a rope as high as they could reach and had several guys holding on to it to make the tree fall away from the house. My wife happened to be walking by the window, saw the event about to happen and called me saying... "This isn't going to end well" Yep... right on the garage. At least no one was hurt... so don't try this at home!

One of the problems with animal rights groups such as the Sea Shepherd Society is that they use the Canadian seal hunt as a fundraiser while not actually doing anything to help seals.

The Caribbean monk seal was declared extinct in 2006. Never heard a peep out of the Sea shepherd Society about that.

I, too, like Brian's work. But I find the "I'm objective" - "No, you're not," argument silly and, sometimes, on the part of some participants, disingenuous. Of course, accomplished reporters who know a lot about their subjects will make choices about how to frame their stories, and those choices reveal conclusions they have reached about the subject. What reveals most about the reporter's predilictions, probably, are the stories they choose to do. There's nothing wrong with this, in my opinion. I think it's a lot better to read the work of a reporter with years of experience in a subject, who has reached some conclusions about the people and the issues involved, than to read the work of a green reporter with a shallow understanding, who does not frame his story in any particular way, not because of his objectivity but because of his ignorance. Take Brian's original essay in the ADE and his comments on this site about Saranac Lake. He had reached some conclusions about Saranac Lake, that it has a lot going for it, despite some problems, that the cup is more full than not, and he made choices about what to highlight based on that viewpoint. He chose, for example, to play up the increase in population in GREATER Saranac Lake, including some outlying areas, over the last 18 or so years, rather than the decrease in Saranac Lake proper. Fine. But it was a choice, and it shows a leaning toward a certain point of view, based on his experience, his hopes, his feelings about what makes a good place and what makes a bad one, and so on. This is all to the good, in my opinion. The more you understand who Brian is, how he feels about things, the more you understand his work. Personal experience enriches journalism, I believe, and if reporters have come to informed conclusions about people or issues, through reporting and experience, that is a good thing. Not such a good thing is denying the influence of personal experience and point of view on reporting and pretending you approach stories with a blank slate when you do not.

"I felt it was necessary within the course of our on-going coverage to include the voice of someone sympathetic to the pick." Why did you feel this was necessary? If this was the case then why not speak to someone on the committee "sympathetic" to Peter nomination assuming you could find someone that countered what Little and the other member had brought up. Why go back to an earlier interview to find a quote supporting the case that there was not a problem with unbalance related to "environmentalists" on the board? You just want to cover the facts and give us the information correct, not frame the story one way or another.

Unfortunately, it appears that the one "result" of this crisis so far is a perception from large financial institutions that if the screw up again they have an out. Get ready for the next one it is going to be scary. Either you have a capitalist economic system or you don't. A mix will really lead to disaster.

We cut down a 75 foot tall balsam that was leaning toward a camp I have this fall. The tree was partially uprooted by the big wind we had a few years ago in June. We threaded the tree between a shed and the camp. It was perfect, several feet from both ends. We should make a video of trees that went the "right" way. But it takes the right perspective to appreciate that. These are more fun! Thanks.

So we all agree it is time to pay the piper?
IF true leadership is invoked at all levels of government, then this can also be the "greatest generation". The one that brought the country back from the brink. Problem is we stopped electing leaders a while ago.

Always use a wedge.

Mike

Oooops.

JPM, I would agree with 99% of what you posted, except the politicians were not asleep at the wheel, not by a long shot. Chris Dodd and Barney Frank in particular were right in the middle of this and they maintained right along everything was just dandy. Then when it burst they came riding in on white horses to fix the problem they'd overseen the creation of. I forget who the other major players were, seems like Maxine Waters was in the mix too. The point is the people charged with overseeing Gov'ts part in this were well aware of what was happening. Whether they were complicit in the breakdown or just not cognizant of the inevitable result the fact remains they have managed to avoid responsibility almost entirely. IIRC Bush and his administration did make some half hearted warnings but since Bush was an idiot he was ignored. He's responsible as is everyone else in Congress who took part in this.

I would also argue "It is the responsibility of government, not the market, to ensure that individuals, firms, nations, etc. are protected from financial losses." That responsibility is limited. I would argue it is the responsibility of Gov't to ensure a legal set of rules is obeyed, to maintain certain oversight and regulation, but not to "protect" anyone from financial losses through unwise investments. The investor/borrower assumes the risk, not the Gov't. To say otherwise is to imply Gov't will take up the slack on any defaulted loan or lost stock market investment. I'm don't think that's what you meant, but the wording could be construed that way.

?at levels consistent with Aaa ratings will invariably require fiscal adjustments of a magnitude that, in some cases, will test social cohesion.?

That sounds to me like someone has figured out the party is over for entitlements. How will the near and over 55 crowd feel when it gets out that our Social Security payments aren't going to be what they were projected to be, or when it finally becomes apparent that a whole lot of public sector jobs are going to be cut? Fun, fun, fun. And those will be nothing compared to what happens when the welfare checks stop going out, and I mean ALL forms of welfare- food stamps, WIC, ADC, HEAP, farm subsidies, Amtrak, corporate subsidies... the list boggles the mind.

I'm also one of those big money donors to NCPR. I don't care if they support or do not support a particular issue. I like the conversation. In fact, I lean towards supporting the TL project, if it's done right.

No, I don't get all my news from NCPR, in fact I get little of my news from NCPR. I do love Radio Bob however. I read NYT, Wash Post and Christian Science Monitor backed up by material I get from several blogs I respect. There is no real news on tv anymore.

I think Brian is a good writer and what he writes makes me think. I enjoy that.

As long as you don't have a problem with you being the first one we club...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...

I UNDERSTAND NOW BECAUSE IT'S IN ALL CAPS.

March 15, 2010 3:01 PM"


DEAR ANONYMOUS,

ARE YOU KIDDING?

I READ THE ARTICLE.

THE ARTICLE IS A DIRECT APPEAL FOR CONSTRUCTIVE COMMUNICATION IN OUR SOCIETY.

POSTING ANONYMOUS BITES DERAILS HONEST COMMUNICATION.

POSTING ANONYMOUS SHORT CIRCUITS HONEST IDEAS FROM BEING CONSIDERED IN LOGICAL DISCOURSE.

AGREE OR DISAGREE.

There are seven billion people on this planet,maybe we should start clubing some of them over the head?I,ve heard there's a market for the meat in africa.

Hornbeck said he would probably recuse himself from a vote on the ACR if appointed. I am no lawyer but that would be the same as a no vote. I believe it takes six votes to approve a project. A five-five vote would not be enough to approve the project. Hopefully the APA legal experts out there can correct me if I am wrong.

I donated $40 at the last fund drive. Am I one of the "big money donors" that Anon 3:22 is talking about?

Trust me, if that gave me any influence on NCPR's reporting, I'd use it to get more than token coverage of smaller party and independent political candidates. But I mostly respect NCPR's journalistic integrity and have yet to hear anything serious and concrete to call that into question.

If Cod and Salmon stocks didn't need management, then I guess the seals wouldn't either. But in the grand scheme of things, I suppose it can't be much different than killing a white tail deer, or a brook trout for that matter.

My mom is from Newfoundland and they say, " Hit 'em 3 times, once to stun 'im, once to kill 'im for the skinner, and once for the activists."

It takes a Sealer 2 seconds with a pike pole to send one to heaven. Not a bigs deal 'By.

I concur. Who cares what the Post-Star thinks - they have no credibility left whatsoever.