Proposed Cold Storage Facility
by Jay Jones
December 17, 2004
Mr Duckett's letter of Dec 15th seems to be long on conjecture,
viewpoints, opinion but noticeably short on facts. The conclusion
he seems to come to is that if a business venture is too risky
for private enterprise to engage in that it is a legitimate function
of state and local governments to act. It seems somewhat ironic
that while he acknowledges that local citizens may be "burned"
by past mistakes of these local entities he encourages the same
citizens to endorse more of the same. He offers no proof that
certain ventures would not have formed because of the risk involved.
He obviously believes that it is a legitimate function of local
government to subsidize risky ventures inspite of the past failures
that have cost taxpayers millions. The balance sheet is in the
red. He then seems to advocate that another function of local
government is to protect private businessmen from adverse effects
of this venture. Who, Mr. Duckett, is going to protect taxpayers
from the adverse effects of said venture? If I were to draw conclusions
without fact like he does in his long on eloquence, short on
facts letter I might conclude that he, as a board member of a
non-existent cold storage facility, stands to benefit personally
from the risk of yet more taxpayers money.
Ketchikan, AK - USA
Proposed Ketchikan Cold Storage Facility by Kenneth Duckett - Ketchikan, AK
Note: Comments published
on Viewpoints are the opinions of the writer
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.
Write a Letter -------Read Letters
E-mail the Editor
Stories In The News