Friday, August 05, 2005

Comments on I-69 wall to help contain noise from I-69

Kevin Leininger wrote an interesting article in the Thursday News-Sentinel entitled "Wall not for all."

<http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/fortwayne/news/local/12303219.htm>

I think Kevin hits a lot of good point in this well thought out article.

This is a 13 million dollar project that benefits a few taxpayers, and in many cases does not protect other tax payers in the exact same situation. Of course it is not fair. This is a typical government project.

This project is a good example of how government has gone wrong.

What should happen is we all should pay LESS taxes and the government should not get involved in projects like sound barriers at all.

Since we all would pay less taxes we would have more disposable income. If a neighborhood decided to build a sound barrier it could, people in that neighborhood could pay for their own sound barrier. The government would not tax EVERYONE in a county and then pick and choose who to spend money on...

Believe it or not this is the way the government of The United States operated just 60 short years ago...

Search This Blog

Alfie Evans

1. When a doctor says A and a parent says B, I tend to go with what the doctor says. Usually the doctors are right. After reviewing Alfie...

Blog Archive

Labels


Brgd. General Anthony Wayne US Continental Army

Sitemeter




My blog is worth $11,855.34.
How much is your blog worth?

Followers

About Commenting

Keep it clean and relevant to the post. If you have a question that isn't related to a recent post, email me at enders.robert@gmail.com . You can also email me if you want to make an anonymous comment.

DISCLAIMER

Per the by-laws of the Libertarian Party of Allen County, the Chair is the official spokesperson of LPAC in all public and media matters.

Posts and contributions expressed on this forum, while being libertarian in thought and intent, no official statement of LPAC should be derived or assumed unless specifically stated as such from the Chair, or another Officer of the Party acting in his or her place, and such statements are always subject to review.