Town Square

Post a New Topic

Our endorsements in local races, ballot measures

Original post made on Nov 1, 2010

The ==I Voice's== editorial recommendations for local races and select state propositions on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Sunday, October 31, 2010, 10:41 PM

Comments (23)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 1, 2010 at 2:14 pm

Hey MVV, you don't by any chance have liberal/green leaning do you?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Reader
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Nov 1, 2010 at 2:18 pm

The column didn't say how the Voice recommends voting on the Foothill/DeAnza thing. You just said what the measure would do if approved.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by vfree
a resident of Waverly Park
on Nov 1, 2010 at 2:22 pm

What a suprise, a newspaper recommending the same socialists and their failed ideas. If you believe in freedom just vote the opposite of these rccommendations.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Phil
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Nov 1, 2010 at 3:12 pm

Most of the rest of us are very tired of hearing whining "conservatives", who want police protection, fire protection, good roads, and good schools, but don't want to pay for these basic functions of civilization.

Every tax is either a "job killer" or "socialism", the notion of "common good" is alien to them, and the only thing they can agree upon is that *they* should not have to pay taxes.

These would-be freeloaders misunderstand the nature of our free market economy. Everything has a price, and taxes are the price that we pay for civilization.

This paper apparently has enough intelligence to realize that nothing's free, and recommends accordingly to its readership.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by please_vote
a resident of Cuernavaca
on Nov 1, 2010 at 3:57 pm

HOW ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AS A REASON TO NOT RE-ELECT 3 INCUMBENTS TO COUNCIL?

One example, as reported in The Voice:
"At 25 cents a page, finance director Patty Kong estimated that the city could save $18,000 to
$20,000 a year if the entire City Council used iPads to read the reports, and even more if the
city's 11 department heads joined in as well. That doesn't include the cost of having a private
courier service deliver the packets to council members' homes on Thursdays."

Any reasonable effort could have reduced that $0.25 per page copying cost enormously.
Going forward the use of an Ipad (or laptop, etc) to reduce paper waste
and cost to the tax payers makes sense.

> "Its fine for me but not everyone may like it," Abe-Koga said of using the iPad.
> "Maybe people won't like the fact they can't scribble on the page."

This remark by a member of city council in Silicon Valley shows the need to
have Tech-savvy people elected to the council. There are various free software
packages that enable .pdf documents to be annotated: preview comes standard with
Macs. Also SKIM is nice for Macs. I am glad to see that two candidates for
city council are from Google. It is time for a change ... sweep out the
3 current council members trying for another term & vote in the 3 others.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Liberty Advocate
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 1, 2010 at 5:37 pm

The MV Voice Publisher and Editor show their true Cultural Marxist perspective. Thank you. Now I know exactly where you stand and what you stand for.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by BD
a resident of North Whisman
on Nov 1, 2010 at 7:06 pm

What no Prop 19 endorsement? Vote Yes on 19!!!!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by @please_vote
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 1, 2010 at 8:55 pm

Yes, let's vote for tech-savvy council members.
Let's not worry that they have absolutely no experience.

How horrible of Margaret Abe-Koga to suggest that some people may not like it!
Let's not vote for her because she actually thinks of other people and listens to what they say. That would be terrible for our city.

It would be so great for our city if all our council members knew very little about how to run a city or balance a budget, but they would know what a SKIM is.

Boy, you sure changed my mind.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by @liberty advocate
a resident of Whisman Station
on Nov 1, 2010 at 8:56 pm

MARXIST.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Thanks for your comment


 +   Like this comment
Posted by @Reader
a resident of Waverly Park
on Nov 1, 2010 at 8:58 pm

It was easy to miss. They write the recommendation at the very end. It says VOTE YES.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bob
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 1, 2010 at 10:04 pm

One clarification about Proposition 23: the 5.5% unemployment threshold that the Voice describes as "very low" is actually HIGHER than the 4.8% unemployment rate that prevailed when AB32 was passed. In other words, proponents of 23 are asking only that the California economy recover to close to the level of health it enjoyed when the bill was being debated. Given the uncertain effects on jobs that AB32's emission restrictions will have, doesn't it make good sense to wait to risk any negative results until the state's economy is robust again? Is the Voice serious when it warns that it could take "decades" to regain the prosperity of only four years ago?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stereeh
a resident of Whisman Station
on Nov 2, 2010 at 8:24 am

There is no mention of Prop 19. This is because it is humanistic and actually has as its main benefit the alleviation of human suffering. Therefore, it is of no interest to populations with high income zip codes, because it has no apparent bottom-line appeal. That it is a long overdue, a wildly economically sane and rational approach to a festering american dilemma is more or less irrelevant, because if legal, it would benefit senior citizens in the extreme, but California's senior citizens don't tend to have the right 94040 income, so don't count. The reason Prop 19 will fail is that its supporters didn't just count for the voters the dollars to be saved by eliminating that stupid archaic prohibition. 8:20 on November 2 2010 and I will bet any person $1000 that prop 19 will fail. Because humans are its only beneficiaries. And we've been taught we're not worthy beneficiaries. Fear and ignorance will prevail and Prop 19 will fail and that's just plain sad.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Thomas
a resident of North Whisman
on Nov 2, 2010 at 8:44 am

I find it amusing that Prop 23 is constantly described as "what Big Oil wants" when in fact opposition to Prop 23 is led by businesses such as VC firms and investment banks.

Web Link

Interestingly, these VC firms and investment banks admit that Prop 23 "would take away the certainty needed to invest for the long term". In other words, renewables are unlikely to make economic sense without public subsidies for a long time. Look at what happened to the solar sector in Spain when the government reduced subsidies due to their high cost a few months ago...

What renewables need is long-term, sustained R&D and scientific breakthroughs that will allow their economics to improve by several orders of magnitude, not short-sighted and expensive government subsidies that stake everything on the rapid deployment of a product that cannot compete on its own.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by SLR
a resident of Waverly Park
on Nov 2, 2010 at 11:55 am

Posted by vfree, a resident of the Waverly Park neighborhood, 21 hours ago

What a suprise, a newspaper recommending the same socialists and their failed ideas. If you believe in freedom just vote the opposite of these rccommendations

~Thanks for the suggetion!!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Hardin
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Nov 2, 2010 at 12:39 pm

"Any reasonable effort could have reduced that $0.25 per page copying cost enormously...Going forward the use of an Ipad (or laptop, etc) to reduce paper waste and cost to the tax payers makes sense."

--------------

"Going paperless" has been a popular mantra the last 10 years I've worked at various high tech firms. Even though the technology has improved since then, there are still hurdles (some psychological) that inhibit this being a reality just yet.

An 8.5" x 11" blank sheet of paper still has an amazing amount of resolution, that is difficult to capture with a stylus, or your finger on a capacitive touchscreen, and does not require any hardware or software to generate, store, or recall information from it. I'm sure we'll get there someday, but its not yet mainstream.

Consider also the cost of purchasing iPad's, and readapting the entire office to accomodate no paper, not to mention retraining folks to work in an entirely different process, and $18,000 savings doesn't seem so great anymore.

I think the iPad is an important step to a paperless future, like the Kindle, but I don't see it replacing paper entirely right now.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Disgusted
a resident of Monta Loma
on Nov 2, 2010 at 12:40 pm

Is the MV Voice truly incapable of impartiality? Does every endorsement really have to synch with extreme socialist viewpoints. AB32 will kill business statewide and it needs to be repealed.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Hardin
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 pm

"Is the MV Voice truly incapable of impartiality? Does every endorsement really have to synch with extreme socialist viewpoints. AB32 will kill business statewide and it needs to be repealed."

----------------------

I don't get this.

Would MV Voice be any more "impartial" if their endorsements aligned perfectly with yours?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Can't we all just get along???
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Nov 2, 2010 at 12:55 pm

Look for what we have in common, not for our differences! I'm feeling great that I agreed with ONE of MVV's endorsements ;)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by jupiterk
a resident of Gemello
on Nov 2, 2010 at 2:32 pm

I will vote exactly the opposite of MV Voice recommends. I think MV Voice represents the city council and the other status quo who are simply bankrupting our system and want more of our money to fund their lifestyles. I don't trust these rats, period.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Seer
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Nov 2, 2010 at 3:39 pm

> Cultural Marxist
Well, Marxism isn't a cultural philosophy. Apparently you don't know what you're talking about. Easy to use a word that you think might get you points, apparently harder to understand what it means.
> Does every endorsement really have to synch with extreme socialist viewpoints.
The only think extreme around here is how extremely you don't understand what socialism is. Try looking in a dictionary. Or asking someone who lived in the USSR. Clue: the Russians laugh when they read your hyperbole.
> If you believe in freedom just vote the opposite of these rccommendations.
How exactly is letting public education collapse going to promote "freedom"? Our nation's founders created the public education system to *ensure* freedom. How exactly does concentrating power in the hands of large corporations and mega-wealthy corporate leaders ensure "freedom?" If you have any interest in seeing what corporations have done without regulation, try going to some third-world countries (including China) and asking the people there if they are more "free" than you are.

The problem with making this an us-vs-them argument in which the other side always is labeled with a stereotype label like "socialist" is that in this country, us IS them and them IS us. Including the poor that you're so eager to throw under the bus - if you hadn't already made sure the bus service was cancelled. It is only forgetting that simple fact about our society which will destroy the country.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by phm
a resident of The Crossings
on Nov 2, 2010 at 4:04 pm

Thought I'd see what Town Square commentators had to say about this election. About what I expected: Any idea to the left of Ayn Rand's is "socialist." By the standard of some of the comments above, Ronald Reagan was a socialist. And I'm not kidding.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by USA
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 2, 2010 at 5:55 pm

USA is a registered user.

Pretty much a straight-line liberal tax-and-spend agenda at the Voice.

The liberal press is nothing if not predicable.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kristine
a resident of Monta Loma
on Nov 3, 2010 at 5:05 pm

Well tax and spend is sure more responsible than borrow and spend. Republicans Love to spend just as Much as Democrats do they just don't like to paying for it.
Demanding tax cuts without a plan to cut anything first is like eating your cake before your vegetables.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Cho's, beloved dim sum spot, to reopen in Los Altos
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 5,464 views

Where DO The Elite Meet?
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 2,698 views

Why I Became Active in Palo Alto Forward
By Steve Levy | 10 comments | 2,050 views

Early Decision Blues
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,454 views

With a Perspective....
By Ms. Jenson | 0 comments | 324 views