Economic Boom?

I keep hearing about how southeast Texas is experiencing an economic boom. There are multi-million...even billion dollar plant expansions coming to the area. The plants will bring all sorts of jobs to the area and will pump large amounts of cash into the area's economy. Goodie goodie!

I'm sure thousands of folks will benefit from all of this, but I question just how much this will help the Ingram household.

I don't have a degree in engineering. At this point in my life, with 6 kids to feed, going back to college is not an option. I am not a welder and really have no desire to become one. I'm sure there will be quite a few desk jobs for paper pushers making around $20K a year. That won't cut it for a family man. So for someone like me, what does all of this “good news” really do?

I seriously doubt any of the companies I work for now will take a look at some economic index of the area and give me a raise because of how well industries are doing. In fact, even though there is all of this growth, I'm told one of channel 12's competitors has laid off a number of its production staff. The lay offs are said to be due to the addition of robo cams and other automation. Ah yes, the fruits of a company's growth!

(By the way, for a quick laugh, check out the wonders of a robo-cam)

I'm sure property values will go up even more, so I'll pay more in taxes. I'm sure there will be more businesses in the area and the population will go up. This means the crime rate near my home will go up and prices will get closer to the inflated numbers we see in Houston.

More crime... higher prices...higher taxes... help! Save me from economic growth!

Kick Them Out!

Last month we had a man shot and killed during a robbery in Port Arthur. The twist on this crime is that it was the criminal who ended up dead. He wasn't the only one with a gun. He picked a store where the clerks have had enough of making themselves a target. I agree that robbery is not a crime worthy of the death penalty. But if you expect me to shed a tear for an armed bandit who got blown away while committing a crime... well, that isn't going to happen. When police did their investigation they found that this man had robbed this particular store more than once. He even served prison time for one of the robberies at this same location.

It's no secret that Port Arthur has more than its share of violent crime. The 3-strikes and your out punishment mode has helped get some repeat offenders off the street, but it is far far from a solution. I wonder we could take the idea a little further.

What change would we see in the crime rate if the state passed mandatory expulsion from the city for all persons convicted of a violent crime? Lets dramatically increase the prison stay for violent crimes, but offer the offender parole after several years with the restriction that he or she must live outside of the city limits. If the bozo who can't get armed robbery out of his or her mind is taken away from the tempting targets, he or she will have less opportunity to put others at risk. If you're worried about paying for prison overcrowding then lose the misguided idea that it's cruel and unusual punishment to make a prisoner pay for his room and food. Put the bums to work.

Most crime is committed by repeat offenders. Most cities have areas like the Carver “Terrorist” Apartments that are known as criminal havens. Find a way to break 'em up! You can't have a gang if the gang's all gone!

A FEW THOUGHTS AT 4AM

LIVE AND LET DIE

All of the media folks are fired up over the 12 murders Beaumont has had this year. (Port Arthur isn't keeping up! Guess they all went to B-town for a break?)

It seems most of the murders are the result of drug use or domestic violence. Some of the domestic violence is due to drug issues, so I'll give drug use the edge in the race for leading cause.

I wonder if this issue sheds some light on the legalizing drugs issue.

Here's my logic:

Jefferson County has a lot of violent crime stemming from illegal drug use. A lot of users killing dealers and dealers killing users. Orange county users are dieing just as fast, but usually from overdoses. A big difference MAY be that in Orange, many users are getting their fix somewhat legally from drug clinics. I wonder if this loosely indicates that legalizing narcotics would keep the death rate the same, but eliminate some of the violence? Perhaps it would make the death rate skyrocket? Who knows?

As many times as I have had co-workers ask me why I live in Orange... as many times as I have had them say “there's nothing in Orange!”...I guess I have to agree. We have less murder... we have fewer aggravated assaults...I guess we are missing the boat. Lets import some drug dealers to Orange and perhaps the prescription drug clinics can go out of business!

TV ENTERTAINMENT

My kids have been watching the new “imposer” show on TV. I'm not sure of the actual name of the show, but it's another sort of reality competition show that seems to be the theme of the networks these days.

One of the “impostors” that is competing is a George Bush impersonator. I noticed a lot of folks booing when he takes the stage. The reason this catches my attention is I hold my Republican and Democrat friends to their own words. Mr. Clinton had his share of impostors showing up on variety shows back when he was in office. I remember one getting booed and hearing a co-worker respond by saying how disrespectful that was to the real president. Ah yes, the world viewed through the eyes of a partisan.

Beer, Religion and those Silly City Folks

It looks like the Lumberton booze issue has made the left swing right!

It is not unusual for cities to take the side of businesses and what is good for business owners over the individual rights of citizens. This is a fact that becomes very clear when cities talk about annexation. Who cares if the people who are being annexed don't want to be part of the city. As long as city leaders feel it is good for economic growth, the city will annex homeowners... like it or not!

Usually my left-winged friends are NOT in favor of the city imposing its will over the will of the majority of citizens. But this mindset is making an about face in Hardin County.

A Lumberton man behind a petition drive hopes to let the voters decide if booze should be sold in the city. The business community wants beer and wine sales because it's good for the bottom line. Most business owners want those profits from beer and wine. Who can blame them? It's good money.

Here's the kicker. My left wing friends are siding with the businesses who would put profit over any effect beer and wine sales would have on the citizens. My right wing friends are taking the side of the people over profit. Funny how a pinch of religion can make even the right and left wing flip sides. It's enough to make me need a stiff drink!

Lets examine the real argument going on among the far right and the far left. It has little to do with liquor. It's the same argument that pops up every December when the fundamentalists want freedom to say “merry Christmas” and the lefties want that type of speech silenced.

The booze issue is one that is favored by the religious right and the secular left wants it stopped because they fear it may be an example of a religious belief forced on the rest of the community.
Has any of those who are getting their undies in a twist over this thing noticed that the guy wanting to outlaw booze sales is seeking to put this on the ballot and let the voters decide? His opposition (those seeking to put a pro-liquor initiative on the ballot) are trying to have his petition thrown out on a technicality. This means the pro-liquor side wants their way even if it means silencing voters who support the anti-liquor initiative.

Look, I live in Orange County and can buy all the beer my heart desires, so I don't have a dog in this race. Personally, I don't want someone telling me what to do. This is why I live in the county and not within the city limits. As for Lumberton, let the voters decide what they want for their community.

This potential ordinance is no different from others I have seen in southeast Texas. Orange has an ordinance for some historic neighborhoods that prevent homeowners from painting unless the city approves the color. Most cities tell churches where they may or may not build. This potential liquor ordinance is no different than the previous examples except for one sticking point. It is controversial because drinking is something that some religious folks will examine their faith before casting their vote, and this scares some on the left who fear it's crosses the line of “separation of church and state.”