citizen13's Blog

I know that this is the year 2008.  I don’t know if I’m the only one that still watches TV over a set of rabbit ears.  For some of you younger folks that may not know, what I refer to as  “rabbit ears” is a TV antenna that receives television signals out of thin air.  It’s a miracle.  There are no cable or satellite bills to pay each month.  Yes there are limited channels but it is free. 

 

Is there is anyone else out there that doesn’t need 50 – 250 channels?  I understand that there is a lot of television programming out there that is “must see” TV.  I personally don’t have a lot of time to watch TV.  It is hard for me to justify $50 - $100 of my budget every month just to watch a few programs on the weekends if I have the time.  I do good to watch the Fox 13 news and weather before I leave for work in the mornings.

 

Anyhow, if you are like me and watch broadcast television, there is a deadline coming next February.  As of February 2009 my TV will no longer be able to receive broadcast television.  I will have to buy a converter box if I still want my rabbit ears to work.  If you are like me you should begin thinking about purchasing a set-top converter box before the deadline arrives.  To help consumers cover the cost of the converter box, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, is issuing up to two converter box coupons valued at $40 each to households.  Information about the coupon program is available at www.ntia.doc.gov .

 

I plan to get my coupons as soon as possible.  It’s not often that I actually qualify for any sort of government program.  If it will save me $40 -$80, then I want my piece of the pie.  I want to do it now so that availability will not be a problem.

 

First let me say that Lee had the power to overturn any MLGW policies that were in place before his tenure. Then I must say that just because Ford has now paid off his past balance doesn't make things all better. In my opinion both have done the wrong thing. The only reason that things seem to be right at this point is because both were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. If they hadn't been caught, then this would probably still be going on.

Let's say that you owned a pizza place, and that Lee was the manager. Let's say that Ford would come in month after month and receive pizza from Lee without paying for it. Let's say that this went on for a year or two. Let's say that you, as the owner, finally realized what was going on. Does Ford finally paying for his pizza make everything okay? Does Ford paying for his pizza mean that Lee didn't do anything wrong? If Ford was poor and hungry it might have been understandable, but Ford is neither. It's a matter of principle. It's a matter of morals. Trying to make things seem right doesn't mean that the wrong thing wasn't done in the first place.

The "On Track" program was meant for people with limited incomes to pay off their "home" utility charges over time. The charges in question are for Ford's "business" not his home. On page 17 of the indictment, it states that before June 2004, when Lee was appointed President and CEO of MLGW,  that the utilities at Ford's mortuary had been cut off several times for non-payment, and that Ford had complained about it at City Council meetings.

Lee became the head of MLGW in June  2004. By the end of 2004, Ford's unpaid account balance was $1000 without being cutoff for non-payment. There seems to be a clear dividing line between when Ford's mortuary would have it's utilities cutoff, and when his account balances began to soar out of control.

In September of 2004, within months of Lee's appointment, Ford opened another account for services on which NO payment was made for over two years. By the end of 2006 the balance on that account was over $10,000. Again this is not for home services but for business service. How can this possibly qualify for the "On Track" program which is for people with limited incomes to pay off their "home" utility charges over time.

This is a matter of principles and morals. It the people of Memphis allow this kind of behavior, what message does that send to not only our leaders, but also to our citizens, and children? It would seem to say that whatever you can get by with is okay as long as you don't get caught.

 

I spent 26 years working in manufacturing for two different companies. I was bought out of the first job because production was moved to Mexico. I left the second job because I could see that the job was destined to end for basically the same reason. 

The second company already had a manufacturing unit in Mexico. Slowly but surely more and more of our production was moving to Mexico.  That is the reason that I left that company. I now work at the casinos. I wanted a job that was not likely to be moved elsewhere.

I still keep in touch with folks at my old job. It has been almost a year since I left, and it appears that my fears are coming true. It seems that in less than another year that plant will stop production. This is nothing new, manufacturing jobs have been moving to Mexico ever since NAFTA became law. The twist in the story is that the company has now built a production facility in China.  The word is that in two years the company will close their facility in Mexico. China is now the place for manufacturing companies to move. Many large companies now have manufacturing facilities in China.

The purpose of this blog is to point out that when the jobs begin to leave Mexico, that America will most likely see an increase in immigration from Mexico. While I have no problem with legal immigration, it is the illegal immigration that makes things tough. These illegal immigrants will do the same job for less money. It is still more than they could ever make where they come from.  This will drive down wages for more American jobs than ever before. It won't just be manufacturing and construction jobs. Wages are driven down, but the cost of living continues to increase. The government will not help because it is driven by business. Business wants low wage workers. I don't see a change in the trend until the CEOs start losing their jobs and the huge buyouts that go with them. In the meantime, we "working people" will continue to lose ground.

Paris Hilton does 3 days in jail. She was released for undisclosed medical reasons. Don't worry, it's nothing physical. They say that her condition is purely psychological, and that she is in peril of having a nervous breakdown. She will be confined to her home for 40 days. I'm guessing that there are a lot of people in jail that are on the verge of a nervous breakdown. They would all like to be under house arrest where they could order pizza, drink cold beer, and not have to work for the remainder of their sentence.

I guess that they don't have a good enough "rehab" facility in the jail. Here is another case of the rich getting preferential treatment. I would bet that if I got sentenced to 45 days, that I would have to serve all of them. I would also bet that this won't be the last time that she will have trouble with the law. The justice system fails again.

Is it comforting to know that things like this happen in places other than Memphis? I don't think so.

 

Last week there were complaints lodged about the billboards on US 61 advertising a strip club in Memphis.  It was a trio of signs that said, "Got Beer?",  "Got Boobs?", "We've Got Both." 

It was reported that the most offensive sign, "Got Boobs", was to come down last Thursday.  It was still there last Friday.

Today as I drove by, the billboard had pictures of 2 baseballs covering up the word Boobs.

Now the way I read the trio of billboards they say, "Got Beer?", "Got Balls?" although it doesn't actually say balls, and "We've Got Both." I don't know who has more balls, the strip club, or the ad agency.

I just wanted to hear some opinions on whether this is actually any better.

Did anyone see the fireball falling from the sky this morning? I call it a fireball because it was much larger than any shooting star that I have ever seen.

I work at the casinos and have to be at work at 6 AM. This morning at 5:32 AM, I was just turning off of US 61 heading towards the Grand Casino. Immediately I saw a fairly large, very bright object headed towards the ground in the western sky.  I don't know if it was a meteorite, or a piece of space junk falling to Earth, but it was quite a show. As large and bright as it was I would think that anyone headed in a westerly direction at that time with a clear view of the horizon would have seen it.

As I read through some of the other blogs here at foxmemphis, it would seem that there is a common thread that I see. The people seem to be unhappy with Herenton.

This year there is an opportunity to vote Herenton out of office. The question that comes to mind is who would be a viable candidate to run against him?

A.C. Wharton is an obvious choice, but I think that he is totally happy with the job that he has. I have seen Carol Chumney's name thrown around and obviously she has plans to make a run at the office of mayor. I am curious as to who else my fellow bloggers might see as an electable candidate.

I don't know if Herenton has thought about the fact that every time he annexes a part of the county, that he is annexing a group of unhappy voters.

Something that we as voters must realize is that unless a good, strong, well known candidate comes forward, then Herenton will win almost by default.

Let's hear some names, and opinions.

Our mayor has a new proposal for the City of Memphis in the works. The plan is to build a new stadium. I have consulted my crystal ball and it has given me a vision of the new stadium.

The stadium will be built somewhere downtown on property that investors already own. It will be close to Beale St., Autozone Park, and the Fed Ex forum. This will not only give us a new stadium, but will revitalize a part of the downtown area that hasn't yet been revitalized. This will supposedly be the mayor's answer to urban blight, as property near the new stadium will be transformed from abandoned warehouses into high dollar condominiums.

The question is what is the price. The price tag that I have heard is $50 to $300 million. That is a pretty wide margin of price. My crystal ball predicts a much higher price tag.

Another question is what will become of the old stadium? Will it become another empty deteriorating landmark in Memphis just like it's predecessors such as the Coliseum, and the Pyramid? If we build a domed stadium, maybe we could add Autozone Park to the list of venues that are obsolete. Why play baseball outdoors when you have a domed stadium?

Maybe we could sell Pro Bass Shops on the idea of a package deal to buy all of our obsolete venues. The Fed Ex Forum has a "No Compete" clause for a percentage of all of the events in Memphis. Will events in the new stadium have to pay The Forum for the right to have an event in Memphis? I will be curious to see how well my crystal ball has predicted the future.

We all are bombarded on a regular basis of problems with the Memphis and Shelby County school systems. We are regularly threatened with property tax increases to pay for the costs of educating our children. I have no problem with paying my fair share of educating our children. I have raised three children of my own and reaped the benefits of our school system.

One of the problems, as I see it, is that people want to live near, and work in Memphis, yet actually living within the city limits is not exactly desirable. Those of us within the city limits basically pay twice the taxes of those who live in the county. As a result there is a high demand for housing outside the city limits. You can afford a better house if your money isn't all spent on taxes. Naturally this causes a flight from the city, where crime is definitely a problem, to the safety of the suburbs. I find no fault with the desire of safety and a better home.

It only makes sense that housing will be built were there is a demand, and where builders can get a better price for their product. I find no fault with builders making sound business decisions.

The problem comes when housing is built with little or no thought given to the impact on the school system of the community. Where will the children in the new housing go to school. It would seem that for every new home or apartment built, either a fee should be paid to the local government to cover the cost of building a school for the projected amount of children that will be brought into the area, or the builders should actually have to build the schools themselves. The latter option would seem to be the most cost effective, eliminating the bureaucracy. If local government didn't have to deal with where to put the children, then maybe they could concentrate on educating them, and our taxes wouldn't have to go up so consistently. The idea is simple, if you build homes, you must also build schools.