Are you as tired of this statement “We’re Spending it because we reserved it” as I am?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to say, We reserved it, because we thought we’d need it, but since it still works, we’re not going to spend it?
Who cares if it still works; we still better spend it, because that would mean we either have to give it back…or…pay income tax on it.”
Let’s face facts…if the dough is not there, you can’t spend it.
Here’s a novel approach.
How about giving them less dough to spend now, and get more if and when we need it? That way they’d have to tell all of us what they’re spending it on…and actually allowing us to decide if we want it spent.
We’re potentially putting two increases in property taxes on our ballot next week and we’re asking for approval before anything happens.
How would you feel if that decision was made by only 4 of 7 people?
Or let’s put this in prospective.
Your house is getting older; the refrigerator is now aging…but it still works.
Just how many of you out there would say….”Well, it might not work tomorrow, so let’s go out an replace it today because we set up a fund a few years ago believing it would break now.”
I’ll tell you who would….people who look at a bank account they believe can easily be filled by the flick of a vote of only 4 of 7 people, instead of saying:
” We have too much, so let’s give it back instead, and charge when you need it.”
I want to know WHO would do this?
1. Drop $500,000 on an air conditioning system if the one you had, already worked?
2. Drop $500,000 in renovations, pay all repairs for a tenant, provide him all the equipment he needs to operate a business, pay additional property taxes for him to operate, give him free advertising, and buy $3,000 worth of dinners for “selected” individuals, yet send you the bill?
And…if he still can’t cut it, departs in the darkness one day…because you never received a financial guarantee ?
It’s obvious that we have seven “rockets scientists” who would, and I also know someone who calls himself a journalist who brags about having been right 100% of the time in electing all of them.
Gotta keep that record intact, don’t we ?
I wonder who the next “chosen” ones will be to continue this “successful” tradition?
Time has proven this recruiting technique has determined their “electability” and perhaps the best reason “never to look back.”