Letters to the editor - Jan. 18, 2013

Published: Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 9:47 p.m.

Those who cause growth should pay

I found that your article "Do the Math" was interesting and I agree that we need to build new schools, but it makes me question the entire process. We need to spend more money on water, sewer, drainage, streets, etc. because of our increased population.

The increased population is due to homes being built in our county as well as attracting tourism. In the 30-plus years that I have lived in the county, there have been numerous bond votes for schools, parks, sewer, etc.

My question is that why are we expected to pay the cost, rather than the groups that benefit? We should be charging impact fees to offset the real costs of them. The Home Builders Association and Realtors call this "progress" and strongly oppose impact fees, citing they are increasing the tax base and creating jobs. If that were really true, we would not need to request all of these bond issues.

Consider for a moment that contractors have no problem charging a profit margin over their actual costs; commercial brokers and residential real estate agents e_SLps they take their money and walk away, leaving us to deal with the consequences of the development.

Look at the average selling prices and do your own math. Why don't we consider the real impact and charge accordingly? The data are there. …

Bill Jones, Wilmington

Red states lead

The failure of the federal government to reduce spending, by an intransigent President Obama and a reluctant Democrat-dominated Senate to pass a budget in four years, is unleashing a dynamics whereby Red States are taking the initiative to reduce taxes and find ways to reduce the costs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid ("McCrory: Unleash state's dynamism," Jan. 13).

Republican presidential candidate Gov. Rick Perry of Texas said, "States are in a competition with all the other states. It shouldn't come as any surprise if you have two locations, A and B, if you raise taxes in A and lower them in B, producers, manufacturers and people are going to move from A to B. The exact case in point is Texas and California. … Texas has kept a solid, rational tax code that has been very pro- growth. Look at what's happened to the unemployment rates in the two states, look at what's happened with job growth – Texas is clearly the winner."

The failure of the federal government to wisely govern our nation has forced many Red States to solve the nation's economic problems at the state level as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment. North Carolina is on the vanguard of such a struggle led by the state's first Republican governor in 20 years.

Moorad Alexanian, Wilmington


▲ Return to Top