Protecting the poor from the rich


What did you think it was about?

30 thoughts on “Protecting the poor from the rich

  1. It is not they relative handful of waterfront homes that will bear the brunt. We have thousands of low and middle income residents in flood zones not even close to waterfront.

    So you want to raise taxes on those folks? You benefit directly and indirectly from this harbor and it massive military and industrial presence due to shipping access. It is the lifeblood of around a million people and thousands of jobs.

    Flooding is happening in areas that were just fine a few decades ago. You want to cripple us?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Why should an apartment dweller in Farmville pay for it?

      If an area is experiencing flooding that did not happen a few decades ago, sea level rise is not the problem.

      It’s less than 10 inches since 1930, and at least half of that is subsidence.

      Further, many Norfolk neighborhoods are built on fill, which is compacting.

      The RGGI will have no effect on those problems.


      1. The guy in FarmVille would have fewer goods, service and roads if Hampton Roads sinks. He might have to actually pay for them out of his own pocket when the major tax sources are gone.

        It is not all about you.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The guy on the water uses just as much of those goods, services and roads. That’s a wash.

          I checked the flood maps when I bought. It’s due diligence.

          As long as people who don’t do their due diligence can use government to force those who did, or who were just lucky, to bail them out, people will continue to build and buy where they should not.

          People build on the coast, and expect others to bail them out if there is a hurricane. They build right up to the edge of the swamp and complain when they are flooded. Some places are not fit for habitation and should be left wild.


          1. “Rural people pay more than their share because they drive longer distances.”

            Uh, their share is determined by the use they make of the road. It is NOT a per capita tax. It is a per mile tax.

            And, of course, your response misses the point. There is no rate high enough to support the roads that rural people use. There are simply not enough of them versus the population levels where we urban elites live.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Do you have any evidence to support urban people paying a larger share of the fuel tax than rural people and trucks bringing food, fuel, and fiber to the cities?


          3. “Do you have any evidence . . . blah blah”

            Uh, do you have any evidence to support your laughable claim that rural people are unfairly taxed when they drive on the roads that we urban people have paid for? Or even that they drive longer distances? Someone living in this urban area goes to and from work on a daily basis. It is called commuting and can easily be fifty miles a day. A farmer goes to work on a daily basis right where he lives. Zero miles each way. So where is YOUR evidence?

            Liked by 1 person

          4. I didn’t make the claim that urban people pay for rural roads, Len did, as justification for forcing people who live far from the coast to pay to protect people living where they were prone to flooding. You supported that contention.

            When you make a claim like that, the burden of proof is yours.


          5. What is it that I am supposed to prove?

            Len claimed a fact to support his views – there are too few rural people to pay for the roads that rural people use. That is self-evident.

            You claimed a fact to support your views – rural people drive further and (illogically) are unfairly taxed. Is it true? Do they drive further? Where is the evidence? They work where they live. Without evidence it seems more probable that they drive less.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. Because you say so?

            And I did not say rural people are unfairly taxed on roads, I said they aid their share or more.

            They, and many others, are unfairly taxed to bail out people who unwisely built on low lying, subsiding land.


          7. Some areas in Ghent are built on fill and will subside no matter what anyone does. Most of Ghent is not.

            In any case, the RGGI will do nothing to prevent sea level rise and there is no justification for taxing people who did not build on low lying, subsiding land to bail out those who did any more than to bail out those who build million dollar beach houses in hurricane zones and then don’t pay for insurance.


          8. No, because MIT calculated the effect that amount of carbon reduction would have in millimeters almost 10 years ago, and there were 3 zeros to the right of the decimal point before the first digit.


          9. Got it. A bit of progress is just as good as no progress. With thinking like that, I wonder how you continued as a dentist and was able to treat your patients with as little pain as possible.


          10. Oh, you want a dental analogy? OK

            So, I detect a peridontal(gum) condition in a 60 year old patient that, if allowed to progress untreated at its current rate, will cause him to lose his teeth in 200 years.

            Do I subject him to expensive and painful surgery that will leave him with teeth excruciatingly sensitive to cold the rest of his life so that his teeth will last 210 years?

            Don’t laugh, there are scores of periodontists who own yachts, airplanes and multiple summer homes on just that business model.

            Their neighbors sell windmills and solar panels.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. What if the periodontal condition leads to other health problem in say 6 months if it goes untreated? You are aware, I hope, that those conditions that you discuss do not just relate to the loss of teeth.

            And your analogy has zero to do with PROGRESS. No progress is good at the Tabor Compound. Understood.

            How are those LED lights working for you? Progress.


        1. What personal attack?

          Addressing an adult male as “boy” is one of the oldest and smarmiest of insults. You – not being a racist and all – might not know that, but actually, it is quite offensive. And uncivil.


          1. Jeez man don’t be such a sissy. I didn’t address anyone as boy. Should I have referred to him as binary?


      1. I’ve tried many times. I’ve even offered to come by your work location. So please, please, let me know when and where I can pursue the opportunity.


          1. I’ll apologize to you Dr. Tabor and I appreciate your offer of having a cold one. Heck, maybe one day after some range time. With that guy I don’t think so. He’s way beyond reproach. I responded to one of his posts in The Pilot many years ago. He called the original US Flag a racist type symbol. I responded to his post with a photo of Pres. Obama’s second inauguration with two of those flags bookending all the US flags. If it were racist I doubt Obama would include it twice. He couldn’t respond. I watch these guys call you and anyone that doesn’t agree with them stupid, effed up, obtuse and ignorant. It gets to a point where I read responses and these same folks are firing off F this and F you. They are so hypocritical as they accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with them guilty of the same thing they have become. And yet they want me moderated for using the term boy. Again, thanks for the intervention


          2. Back when the Pilot forum was alive and lively, we periodically had a ‘Beer Summit’ so everyone could meet face to face.

            It really helped with civility.

            Perhaps we should revivie that practice.


          3. I respect your word Dr. Tabor. But there are things I can’t accept. These cretins post all kinds of BS and we all take it. When it’s given back to them they shrink like the wicked witch of the west. They’re pathetic pieces of detritus and I no desire to sit with them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s