Friday, June 18, 2010

Smoke & Mirrors on the Rental Industry


I was able to get the list that Mayor Ireton put up on the City Website of Property Owners who refused or did not respond to request for inspections. I have it attached at the bottom of this post.

So they were unable to perform 143 inspections. It appears to me that over half of them they were unable to get a response from for one reason or another.

The other issue is that Mayor Ireton makes it seem that all of these property owners are Members of SAPOA [Salisbury Area Property Owners Association]. My understanding, from having discussions with members of SAPOA, is they do police their own. They are also known for helping out other members when needed. Unfortunately not all Rental Property Owners are members of this group; it is difficult for SAPOA to police those who are not members.

The major issue I have with Mayor Ireton over this, is his Slum Property of the Week feature on the City Website. I do not feel this provides a healthy service and it diminishes the image of the city.

I also feel his singling out of Stu Leer on a particular property was unfair. Mayor Ireton claims the property is drain on City resources based on Code Violations and calls for service. The code violations happened before Mr. Leer purchased the properties. The other point that Mayor Ireton misses is that Stu Leer purchased that property because it was a problem and it was his intention to bring it up to code because it was devaluing neighboring properties.

I keep hitting home that point about Mr. Leer as an example because Mayor Ireton's fixation on this issue is borderline unhealthy and he is creating an atmosphere of deception to drive home his political agenda. Certainly we all would like to see more people own homes. We also have to face reality and the situation of our city.

We are a blessed to have a growing university. With that naturally comes a demand for temporary housing. We also have to understand that every city has a need for people to rent based on economic situations. Not everybody has the ability or desire to own a home. That needs to be understood as well and unfortunately I believe Mayor Ireton cannot see the forest for the trees.
















Socialism is Selfish

by Mike Calpino


One of the most often repeated arguments against free market capitalism is that is makes selfish, greedy monsters out of all of us. That a system based on one’s self-interest instead of the interests of the "collective" is evil on its very face. It is almost accepted as a fact that if it wasn’t for government enforcing our charity through the social safety net, poor people would starve, old people would die penniless in the streets, the infirm would be on the street corners begging for spare change and children wouldn’t be educated while a few rich individuals would spend their time rolling around in their money like Scrooge McDuck.

In fact, history has demonstrated the exact opposite. The more the government exercises control over the economy and the people that make it up, the less freedom the people have and the poorer they are. In the 1920’s millions of people were dying of starvation in Communist Russia while America, experiencing a resurgence of freedom after the tyranny of Woodrow Wilson, was prospering like no other place on earth. Before we allowed the government to control the economy through the Federal Reserve and New Deal programs, we never had a recession that lasted more than a few years. Up until the Roosevelt era, the history of the United States was one of prosperity, innovation and upward mobility. Only in America could a bobbin changer or desk clerk amass some of the largest fortunes on earth within their lifetimes. It was these men, acting in their self-interest, attempting to satisfy the self-interest of consumers free from government direction, regulation, taxes and control that created the standard of living we enjoy, a standard of living that is still the envy of the world.

That being the case, why is socialism selfish while a system based in individual self interest is not? The reason is that a system of socialism removes all meaningful interaction and responsibility among individuals within the society. The primary relationship in an individual’s life is with the state, not his or her neighbor or even his or her family. The government takes care of our children. With pre-K and Head Start, we place them in the care of unionized government employees from the time they are three until they are eighteen. The government is now also responsible for their higher education as well. If they choose not to try to make anything of themselves, we are not responsible for them then either. The government confiscates our money through taxes to pay for the basic sustenance of those who are either too lazy to work or have made bad choices that have placed them in poverty. When our neighbor or family member gets sick, the government will now determine their care. Once our parents get old, the government takes care of their needs and medical care until they die. Then the government confiscates their remaining wealth and sticks us with the bill for burying them.

Before government stepped in, people relied on their families and neighbors for all these things. If the government is going to take care of us, what do we need family for? We have seen this play out in Europe. The socialist countries of Europe have extremely low birth rates. Why? Who needs children? They are a pain when they are young and they don’t need them when they are old so why not just remain an eternal adolescent, enjoying whatever the government lets them keep on their extended vacations and abundant weekly leisure time. Not considering the next generation, getting the goodies even at the expense of the future, living only for yourself with no regard for the needs of others is the most selfish lifestyle possible.

Pure capitalism, on the other hand, encourages us to be considerate of others. In a truly free, capitalist society where government stays completely out of the economic and social spheres, confining itself to the role of protector of rights, selfishness results is very negative consequences. If one tried to live as an ‘island’, giving no thought for the needs or wishes of others, you would quickly be reduced to living in a hovel as a hunter gatherer. Why? Because you would not be able to get a job. Employment in such a society requires that your labor meet the needs of an employer who is, in turn, trying to meet the needs of his customers. If you did not care about the needs of the employer you would not have a job very long. Compare the products of communist countries with those of free ones. Workers under communism cannot be fired for lack of efficiency or quality, in free countries they can be. Continuing, if you didn’t care about your neighbors and you fell on hard times, charity would be hard to come by. If you don’t make yourself valuable to others, they find it hard to put any value on you. Consider the value free counties place on individual life as opposed to counties based on the "collective". In a free country, any life lost is a tragedy. In a communist country, twenty million lives lost is a footnote. In a "collective", it is the group that matters and those at the top decide what is best for the group, the individual life is only worth something if it serves the needs of the collective. In a free county, every individual is valued as an individual, every individual has rights simply because they exist as a man or woman and government's only role is to ensure that each individual’s rights are respected by all the other individuals in a society. Finally, if you do not have children or choose to be a bad parent, there will be no one to take care of you when you’re old. The point of all these examples is to show that in a free, capitalist society it is in everyone's self interest to be considerate of the self interest of everyone else. In a socialist society, the opposite is true. As long as the individual maintains good relations with the state, other relationships are superfluous and have little value. This does not apply simply to economics but to our societal relationships as well.

For the last hundred years America has been turning its back on all the things that made us great, embracing the very philosophies that have not only demonstrated their utter failure everywhere they are tried but are the complete antithesis of the system we were founded upon. Today, with our government taking a greater role in controlling our lives and the economic and social systems we inhabit, the family is disintegrating, we have created a permanent and growing underclass, we have seen the devaluation of individual life at both ends, and a stifled economy and for all our efforts we have stuck our great-grandchildren with a bill even they will not be able to pay. So who’s selfish now?



Mike Calpino

Candidate for Wicomico County Council

Thursday, June 17, 2010

The Local Scene, Tea Party, AFP, and You Know Who....

For a variety of reasons I had stayed away from the local Tea Party scene, one of them was a concern that establishment Republicans and others were attempting to "hijack" what this movement was all about.  The past couple of weeks the results have shown that the establishment's attempts were rejected and this has caused me to reconsider my position on the local Tea Party movement.

AFP Member, Tea Party Activist and Libertarian Mike Calpino filed to run as a Candidate for Wicomico County Council District 2 against Incumbent Republican and Establishment representative Stevie Prettyman.  I offered to Mike to be his treasurer and help in any way I can with his campaign and he accepted.  I truly believe Mike would make a great County Councilman and represent the people in his District with dignity, honor and an open ear for the citizens in District 2.  Mike gave me a better insight of those in the Tea Party movement.

Then the Julie Brewington issue came to the forefront.  Many have been the target of his [Albero's] ire, Julie being the current one.  After the County Council meeting the other day, I talked with Julie for a few minutes - the first time I have met Julie.  Everyone knows the reason that she is Joe's current target and it is mainly her opposition to Councilwoman Stevie Pretyyman's stance on several issues.  Joe being an ally of Mrs. Prettyman decides to defend her the only way he knows how - attack, threaten, and blog you.  Frankly, nobody really cares and this will probably be the last post I make about him because there are more important things to worry about.

This brings to the forefront what I have been saying for long time about local politics.  People simply cannot disagree on an issue anymore, many see the need to destroy people with a scorched earth policy.  This is why good people refuse to get into politics and "We the People" lose out on quality candidates to choose from.

I also believe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.  With Tea Party Activist Mike Brewington stepping up to run for the Wicomico County Council At-Large as a Jeffersonian-Democrat, I am optimistic.  Julie Brewington also captures what I believe is the real deal behind the local Tea Party movement.  I truly hope it stays independent and makes some real change that can jingle in our pockets.

Salisbury Mayor Jim Ireton declines conflict resolution with SAPOA

Salisbury, MD:  The following statement was issued from Salisbury Mayor Jim Ireton concerning an invitation from Salisbury University's Center for Conflict Resolution on behalf of the Salisbury Area Property Owners Association [SAPOA].  Read the Article here....

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Daily Times features Mike Calpino's run for County Council

Libertarian runs for Wicomico council seat

Mike Calpino to take on councilwoman Stevie Prettyman

By Greg Latshaw • Staff Writer • June 15, 2010 

SALISBURY -- Mike Calpino, a Nanticoke resident who says government needs a philosophical makeover, will run against Stevie Prettyman for her Wicomico County Council seat.

"We need to change the way we do government. Trying to be all things for all people is too expensive," Calpino says.


The 42-year-old has filed with the Maryland State Board of Elections as a Libertarian candidate. Calpino said the county government has grown too large under the executive form of leadership and supports keeping the revenue cap in place, switching to elected school boards and holding evening council meetings.

"If we were still spending what we were in 2006, we wouldn't be in this position," Calpino said of Wicomico's spending habits.

 

Monday, June 14, 2010

O'Malley's big spending hurts Wicomico

By Marc Kilmer • June 12, 2010

In 2007, Gov. Martin O'Malley led the effort to expand our state's Medicaid program. But instead of finding the money to fully fund the cost of Medicaid in this year's state budget, the governor counted on the federal government increasing its funding for the program. Congress had not appropriated the money yet, but the governor and legislators assumed it would and pronounced the state's budget "balanced."

It is now looking likely that Congress will not give states a Medicaid bailout. If Maryland doesn't get this money, the state would resort to another budget trick: taking money away from local governments. O'Malley would once again tap the local income tax reserve fund to help cover the budget shortfall.

This is the fund into which our local income taxes are paid and then distributed to county governments.One of the reasons Wicomico County is having trouble balancing its budget this year is because the state is holding back money properly belonging to counties. For instance, the gas tax collected in Wicomico County is supposed to be given to our local governments to spend on roads. In this fiscal year the state only gave us 10 percent of our allocation and used the rest to cover its high spending.

Read the rest....

Stu Leer demands an apology from Mayor Jim Ireton

Stu Leer demands an apology from Mayor Jim Ireton