Letters to the Editor
Why all the fuss over Iran?
To the Editor:
I don’t know why so many people are worried about the nuclear treaty with Iran
Before Iran comes anywhere near to completing a nuclear bomb the Israelis will blow the manufacturing facility into 100,000 pieces.
Marvin L. Nelson
Back to school with Lyme disease
To the Editor:
Lyme disease is a significant infectious disease that has become much more common lately in the area in which we are living. Not only that, but other parts of the country have their ticks as well. Vacationing elsewhere does not eliminate you from being bitten by a tick as Lyme disease is prevalent across the United States.
Fewer than half of patients with Lyme disease recall a tick bite, or rash. Adolescents and children are probably at a higher risk for this illness because they spend more time in areas where they could be bitten. Even more concerning is the fact that current research indicates that the Lyme disease bacteria can be transmitted within hours after an infected tick attachment.
Failure of parents and teachers to recognize Lyme disease early in its course can result in a child developing a chronic, difficult to treat, infection in the brain, eyes, joints,heart, and elsewhere in the body.
The nervous system is frequently affected by Lyme disease, resulting in learning disabilities, difficulties with attention span, memory and word finding, and will often be accompanied by a headache. These symptoms, along with depression and the inability to organize, focus and sustain attention may cause these kids to be misdiagnosed with having primary attention deficit disorder.
Teachers, when your students return to the classroom this fall, please be vigilant. If they are tired, wilt easily, have dark circles under their eyes, they are sick.
Parents, if your child presents any of the above symptoms, please consider Lyme disease and seek medical treatment as soon as possible.
To learn more about this disease, plan to attend our Lyme support group’s Aug.27 meeting. At that time we will be welcoming Dr. Kelley Haugenbuch, whose practices in Taylors Falls, Minn. She is a doctor of chiropractic, functional medicine and kinesiology, which enables her to understand the chronically ill Lyme patient and treat each individual according to their needs.
Our meetings are held the fourth Thursday of each month, 7 p.m., at Our Saviors Lutheran Church, 217 Deronda Ave., Amery, March through October. For more information, call Ann at 715-268-2856; Bonnie at 715-268-9557; or Paula at 715-268-2035.
To the Editor:
Over the past few years we have seen tremendous growth in the efficiency, effectiveness, and use of wind power. In our report, Zoned Out, we analyzed different approaches to zoning commercial wind energy systems. The report (cfra.org/zoned-out-wind-energy-analysis) also broke down the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches, and what makes for effective zoning standards.
Wind energy zoning remains generally uncoordinated and subject to state and local regulations, resulting in a piecemeal approach where zoning standards vary between states and within states.
In order for wind energy development to continue increasing, there must be an effective approach to wind energy zoning implemented that reduces inconsistency and unpredictability.
Zoning authorities must aim for efficient and effective standards, incorporating considerations from the local areas where wind development would take place.
The key to effective wind siting and zoning regulation, however, is to strike the right balance between local and state control. Authorities at the state and local level must consider the pros and cons that can result from difference ordinances.
As wind power continues to play a bigger role in meeting our energy demands, controversies and questions from local communities have arisen. How will this affect my community? What are the rules for wind energy development?
These questions, and others, make it vitally important that we craft regulations that incorporate local preferences and address local concerns, while also providing clear and consistent standards for developers.
Center for Rural Affairs
Have versus have not
To the Editor:
I never thought the day would come that a person would have to pay to watch a political presidential debate.
Paying to watch sports, movies, concerts and other enjoyable entertainment is understandable, it’s your choice.
Having to pay to watch a United States presidential debate places it in the same category as paid entertainment.
I didn’t realize it wasn’t free to watch until I was ready to watch it on my antenna TV. I must have missed that announcement on the news.
My question: Is it still free to vote?
Tony R. Huppert
Wisdom, not hypocrisy
To the editor:
In his letter published 8-13-2015, Thomas R. Smith tells us he supports President Obama, and the new EPA regulations. He is opposed to Gov. Scott Walker, the state of West Virginia, “money, polluting energy, and the Koch brothers,” because those people are opposed to the new EPA regulations.
I appreciate Mr. Smith’s opinion and support a few of those things.
He then uses a logical fallacy called a “red herring” to distract us from recognizing that this is his political opinion, to imply he is right, and that all of us should agree with him: “the rest of us should have a say in whether our state accepts or rejects this measure.” This irrelevant statement touches our emotions and might keep us from noticing that Mr. Smith doesn’t present any facts to prove his opinion is correct.
His red herring is also simply not true. We have a republican form of government where we the people elect by majority vote representatives to serve our interests in the government. Three public elections have upheld Gov. Walker’s leadership. Mr. Smith has had a say in determining the leadership of this state, and therefore he has had a say in how this state addresses energy policies.
“Common sense” does tell us we shouldn’t pollute the environment, and it also says coal miners shouldn’t be thrown out of jobs. It says a new way of producing energy should be proven before a tried way is thrown out. We should list the facts of both arguments and not base our decisions on opinions.
Mr. Smith states Gov. Walker “opposes the new EPA rules because energy rates will soar.”
The governor’s statement is supported by facts. The volume of energy produced by wind or solar means is very low per the cost of the equipment, and is heavily subsidized by federal and state governments. The equipment is costly to maintain, has a relatively short life span, causes its own pollution, and kills bats and birds. Read the arguments for and against wind energy in Forest Township, published by this newspaper.
Mr. Smith writes that supporters of the new EPA regulations “argue that any costs incurred will be more than matched by gains in public health and the shift to a renewable energy economy.” This is another logical fallacy called “proof by lack of evidence.” What might happen in the future is not evidence until it happens, it is only opinion. How many of us think that if energy costs go up, then health costs will go down? Where is the proof?
Mr. Smith transfers the subject of his editorial from the EPA energy policy to the Affordable Care Act. This propaganda technique tries to make us transfer our good or bad feelings about one thing to another unrelated thing. It proves no point, but shows us where Mr. Smith’s feelings lie. He writes our “leaders lacking wisdom waste our time and resources.”
“Wisdom is the exercise of sound judgment either in avoiding evils or attempting good,” American Dictionary of the English Language. Wisdom is based on knowledge of the truth.
Mr. Smith, do you believe there is one truth? What do you base your wisdom on? Is the truth more important than your feelings, or do you change the truth to coincide with your feelings and the feelings of your friends?
Maybe this will help: “the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.” James 3:17. It’s not my opinion.
John G. Richey
Who is in charge?
To the editor:
St. Croix County taxpayer alert - administrator Pat Thompson’s primary job is to manage a budget and 625 employees who provide services to us taxpayers. A strange process is taking place. The finance and human resource directors quit during this year (January and April). Yet, instead of filling these important roles, Mr. Thompson is busy creating a new costly high level assistant county administrator position.
Recently, a consultant was identified by Thompson to interview employees, resulting in having the employee describe or write his/her own job description (the more you embellish your duties, the higher your wages!). Given this crazy process, is it any wonder that a new assistant county administrator position previously unknown and unauthorized by the county board has been identified?
The new consultant/employee data was supplied alphabetically by title to the board who are asked to blindly rubber stamp the new cost of $525,000/year. To make this process even more bizarre, the consultant won’t share comparative market data. Simultaneously, the employees pressured board members to adopt the new grid without scrutinizing detail or making any changes - all or nothing!
As a retired business analyst for a large corporation, I ask business people if you would allow your employees and a hired consultant to tell you what job they will do and what wage you will pay without knowing if you can afford the new costs or be forced into bankruptcy. Does this process make any sense to you?
Administrator Thompson gave no long-term review of the negative unsustainable financial impact on county services, but could only address his “inability” to handle the administrator job without an assistant executive county administrator. What are we paying Mr. Thompson to do?
Why wouldn’t the county hire a new administrator rather than add an assistant for an inept leader?
Submit a letter
The New Richmond News wishes to serve as a forum for the exchange of opinion. We encourage readers to write letters to the editor adhering to the following guidelines:
-- Letters should be as brief as possible, preferably fewer than 500 words.
-- Letters must be signed and include a phone number and home address for verification. Anonymous letters will not be printed.
-- A letter from a group must be signed by the person who actually wrote it.
-- For their protection, letter writers will be contacted to confirm the authenticity of their letters.
-- Letters will be edited for style, length and libel requirements.
Letters may be emailed to firstname.lastname@example.org no later than noon on Monday for publication.