Letters to the editor
I have traveled to Vail and surrounding resorts for over 25 years. This past weekend I brought my family with me to enjoy the beautiful mountains, golf courses, shopping and restaurants. We had a wonderful time and dropped over $4,000 into the Vail economy.
My last day in the area I read an article by your editorialist BIFF AMERICA. I tried to imagine he and his MATE huddled in a corner holding one another and wiping the tears from one another’s eyes after hearing the disastrous news that the mountains of Colorado were going to be turned into SAND HILLS by the year 2050. His only relief from the thought was that he surely would be dead by then. While on vacation, my sons and I had had a conversation about why wacko liberals like BIFF are given so much FACE TIME by corporations like Vail when they attach the corporation that feeds them at every turn. I explained to my sons that it is not politically correct to challenge BIFF because liberal issues like GLOBAL WARMING are political realities even if they are not scientific realities.
Perhaps BIFF would have preferred that my family and I not used our fossil fuel allowance to make the trip. Perhaps Biff would have preferred that we spend our weekend riding our bike in the park in Denver or that we had stopped at LOVELAND and saved half of our fossil fuel allowance. I use the word “perhaps” because I don’t believe that BIFF or his MATE want us to stop coming. If we stop, BIFF and his MATE will be out of a job.
The truth is that thousands of scientist believe that MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING does not exist. It may exist as a natural cycle that heats and warms the Earth. We have been in a warming cycle for approximately 10,000 years. No corporation existed 10,000 years ago to begin to end the ICE AGE. BIFF and his MATE want the planet in its NATURAL, PRISTINE state. The problem is that there is no pristine state of the Earth. It is constantly changing so slowly that we cannot feel it.
I-80 in Wyoming was once a grassland and UTAH was under water and glaciers covered all of Canada. This changed without the burning of fossil fuels.
POLITICAL GLOBAL WARMING exists because children are programmed to its existence from the first day they start school and in half of the children’s programs that they watch. By the time they become voters, no politician in the world nor any corporation would dare call poor BIFF or his MATE by their proper name (fools or propagandists).
Just think of this. Thousands of pages of laws, rules and regulations have been enacted over the past 30 years by the EPA. Our cars have had thousands of dollars of increased costs added to them to stop this dreadful GLOBAL WARMING. Equal amounts of regulations have been enacted to control every industry in America yet there has been no reduction in the rate of this MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING. According to BIFF and others like him, it just keeps getting worse.
I have been traveling the 11 Western states states for over a quarter of a century. The sky is the same beautiful color it was in 1970. The rivers are the same as in 1970 and the trees are the same beautiful green as in all of my trips. You would think that with all this regulation I should be able to see some changes for the better or according to BIFF and his MATE some changes for the worse. Southern California sits under a maze of dust nearly every morning and no amount of regulation has been able to stop it.
You would think that when nothing changes, the wackos would look elsewhere for the cause. No way. They are not about to give up on the POLITICAL issue that they have to control every activity of every person in this country and around the world. BIFF is not about to not try to make me feel guilty for coming to Vail and enjoying all of its beauty. BIFF and his MATE need a job doing that so that they can continue to live in Vail and share in the “destruction” of this beautiful place.
Much is said by liberals about the alternative fuels that are out there that are held off the market by evil politicians on the conservative side. What I cannot understand is if they are there and liberal politicians have controlled the Senate and the House for 85 percent of the last 50 years and Clinton/Gore were there for 80 percent of the last decade, why did the alternative fuels not get implemented? The answer is that the alternative fuels do not work. What works for the liberal is the political issue of global warming.
Don’t cry, BIFF, go for a ride in your car or on your bike. Breathe the air, bath in a river or hit a golf ball. Winter will come and snow will fall and all will be fine. You live in a great time in human history. You may even get a brain transplant before too long. The second half of your life might be better.
How that tax
I’d like to thank Butch Mazzuca for reprinting that tax analogy in Thursday’s Daily. When they were first printed months ago, I became so infuriated that someone could think they made any logical sense to begin with.
Firstly, any good analogy should be analogous to the comparison it’s trying to make. That is, a similar system to the one it is trying to represent. Secondly, there shouldn’t be glaring misrepresentation of the facts to make that system work.
Thirdly, everyone should take a moment and type “logical fallacies” into an Internet search engine (especially Mike Cacioppo) and learn them like a mantra.
The tax break George W. Bush is talking about applies to income tax. Taxes you pay from money earned from employers, from investments, from stocks. Not from money spent for recreation, goods or services. This tax analogy talks about men having dinner and their bill coming to $100.
The second glaring manipulation of this analogy comes when the restaurant owners “throws a curve ball” by reducing the price of dinner by $20. It sounds like a reasonable assumption if it were not a fallacy of inductive reasoning. An example of inductive reasoning fallacies:
a) Most cool cats are domestic house cats.
b) George Dubbya is a cool cat.
c) George Dubbya is a domestic house cat.
This is the fallacy our tax analogy wants you to make:
a) Most of our percentages of sums of money are tax breaks.
b) This analogy is about percentages of sums of money.
c) This analogy is about tax breaks.
I would have very much liked to hear Butch Mazzuca’s reprisal of this scenario. However, in goading the D.R. to respond, please allow me.
Suppose every day 10 men and women work at a restaurant where the typical bill comes to $100 and after tax $120.
If they got paid the way we currently pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men and women wouldn’t make a thing (that’s not so far off for waiters and waitresses who work for tips). The fifth would make $1 (bartender); the sixth $3 (dishwasher); the seventh $7 (busser); the eighth $12 (doorman); the ninth $18 (manager); and the tenth $59 (owner). For the sake of argument, the owner gives one third of his money toward overhead (still making twice what the manager does).
That is what they decided to do. The 10 men and women served dinner every day and seemed happy with the arrangement until one day George Dubbya threw them a curve.
“I’ll cut your taxes by $20,” he said, “and you can distribute that surplus back to the working class.”
Seizing his opportunity to raise prices, the owner continued to charge $120 without tax and none of their patrons complained because they didn’t notice a thing.
How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone got their “fair share?”
So the restaurant owner suggested that they increase each man and woman’s salary by roughly the same percentage and worked out the amounts each should make.
And so the first four continued to get paid the industry standard which amounted to tips. The fifth got $2; the sixth $4; the seventh $9; the eighth $15; the ninth $18; and the tenth (the owner) $66 instead of $59.
Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to work for tips. But once outside, the wait staff said, “Hey, this stinks. I can barely get by on tips because the economy is down, terrorism has hurt the tourism industry, and some nights I don’t make a dime.”
So the first four quit their jobs before realizing that Dubbya made the unemployment rate higher then it has been in two decades. The owner didn’t find it hard at all to replace them with people who didn’t know better.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how the tax system works if you are too simple-minded to look into it yourself.
Probably the most abused fallacy of logic is an appeal to authority. That you should listen to me because I’m more versed or know more than you do. Many people in power abuse that power, usually because we let them. Question authority.
Why do that?
If possible, would you be kind enough to obtain from Mr. Hoy a clear, quotable explanation as to why he arrested Mr. Byant without consulting the district attorney? This is a question I am sure that is on the minds of many of your readers.
Because without an explanation, one can only wonder if Mr. Hoy did this because he doubted the district attorney would bring charges.
And if in fact that is the case, that raises more troubling questions. One such question is will the district attorney feel compelled to bring a weak case because he has been challenged by the sheriff?