HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: The World
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 23:19:57 GMT


Bulger also seems to be working quickly towards establishing state
support for religious schools.

Oddly (or cleverly) one of his major forays into this has been trying
to get overturned a (1970's) bill which mandates that the state
provide equivalent textbooks to such private schools.

That seems innocent on the surface and even at odds with the goals
claimed above, but somehow this stands in the way of his ultimate
goal. I was reading the reasoning in the glob but don't remember it
off-hand, perhaps someone here can reconstruct it. But Bulger's
mission in all this is no secret.

Meanwhile, Flynn is pushing for a city sales tax for Boston, not that
I find that the worst idea in the world.

(I know I know, it'll drive business out, it hits the poor the
hardest, etc etc etc, I dunno, NYC has had a city sales tax for around
30 years and I don't remember it driving them to rack and ruin. Cities
are expensive to run, if you want to live in the suburbs you know
where to find them, and then bitch about how all your state tax money
is going towards paying for things in the city...ugh. P.S. I live in
Boston proper.)

(Getting them to spend the money honestly is the real problem, maybe
someone should tell Flynn he can have his sales tax when he manages to
get rid of Bulger...he can do it, don't kid yourself, but he certainly
doesn't want to, thick as thieves.)

(Why are these last three pp's in parenthesis?)

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bulger (what has he got to do with the UN?)
Date: 12 Jan 93 09:33:49 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <BZS.93Jan11185131@world.std.com>, bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
> From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) [responding to me]
>>Should have left the UN on the Pacific Coast. Where not the first
>>meetings held in SF?
> 
> Perhaps. My recollection is that they were housed for a short time on
> the old World's Fair Grounds (well, in a builiding on...) in Flushing
> Meadows, Queens and then moved for several years to the current site
> of Sperry Gyroscope in Nassau County, NY (specifically the town of
> Lake Success), and then moved to their current location in Manhattan.

True. And the Charter of the United Nations was signed on 26 June 1945, 
in San Francisco, at the conclusion of the United Nations Conference 
on International Organization. That I know for certain. What I'm fuzzy on 
is that the actual site in SF may have also been a former World's Fair Grounds.

> The Sperry plant still (or did as of a few years ago) maintains
> gardens planted with plants from around the world during the UN stay
> there. The plant was the place a lot of the navigational electronics
> and other components of the Trident submarines were built ...

Ironic, isn't it, but perhaps all in keeping with the charter of the UN, 
which starts out with "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,
which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind"

Quiz: What currently exists at the SF UN site?

-gjc
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: The World
	<BZS.93Jan7190718@world.std.com> <1993Jan8.131051.342@miki.pictel.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 06:30:33 GMT


From: boba@miki.pictel.com (Bob Alexander)
>People who visit Boston pay exorbitant parking fees.  The businesses they
>work at and the shops they buy at pay property taxes at a higher rate than
>residents.  All of this has been justified, at least in part, by the fact
>that businesses attract out-of-towners.
>
>How much more should out-of-towners be taxed before we consider it "fair?"

Who ever said anything about "fair"?

When the streets are paved with gold and residents ride in trolleys
that would make a Rothschild blush. Then it shall be fair. What are
they going to do, raise the parking rates in Ashford to get back?

Cities are expensive, cities are centers of culture, no one is holding
a gun to your head, stick with MTV and mowing the lawn you won't have
to pay any city taxes.

Besides, what do parking lot rates have to do with taxes? It's a dear
resource, a libertarian should understand that, they charge the going
rate. Me? I can hop the green line right outside my office door and be
downtown in under 15 minutes. Suburbs. Feh. I was in a suburb once, it
was dark and lonely and there was fertilizer everywhere, yuck.


-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: The World
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 04:32:02 GMT


>or if he decides to retire. But don't expect that to be any relief. He has 7 or
>8 children and most of them are already involved in either politics or some
>form of state or city government.

yeah, and i bet they have checks to prove it...

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bulger
Date: 8 Jan 93 13:40:48 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <SPIKE.93Jan7171155@world.std.com>, spike@world.std.com (Joe Ilacqua) writes:
> In article <4387@mitech.com> gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) writes:
> <Fewer citizens, fewer Police, fewer Fireman, fewer children in
>>the school system. What the heck is costing all the money? 
> 
> 	No, that's "Less Crime, fewer Police." and "Fewer buildings,
> fewer Fireman."  Fewer citizens doesn't necessarily mean ether.  

Maybe thats fewer police => more crime. 

There -are- substantially fewer police in Boston today than there
were decades ago. That is fact. Of course I am not saying
that Fewer Citizens implies less crime!

> 	For fewer students you need to look at the demographics.  Are
> you losing poor families with many children or "middle class" families
> with few children?  I'd guess the latter.

I did look at the demographics. And the demographics are that you have 
MORE UNITS OF HOUSING PER PERSON today in Boston than you had 30 years ago. 

OK. Why the housing crisis?

Smaller families today... Might one say "less efficient families?"

"Middle class" ok. But "working class" would be more descriptive.

> 
> 	Even if there are less children you have to loose a number of
> students per in the same neighborhood to lay off one teacher (say
> 30+).  And how many does it from the same neighborhood take to close a
> school?  Hundreds?

There *are* fewer children. (No need to qualify that with "even if there")

And there is tons of busing of children
going on, so the concept of "neighborhood" school has already been
blow away. Schools -are- closing of course, and teachers are being
layed off.

However, the ratio of non-teaching persons to teachers has gone up a lot
in the last 20 years. So it seems that every time you lay off a teacher
you hire an administrator, and every time you close a school you need
more office space.

-gjc
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: richb@jti.com (Richard Braun)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: Jupiter Technology Inc. / Waltham, MA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:04:59 GMT

pstodd@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Paul Stoddard x5559) writes:
>The last republican to run against him was Dr. John DeJong, a back bay
>veterinarian who holds a seat on the Boston Finance Commission. His vote tally
>was embarassing.

In my one foray into paid political consulting, I wrote up a campaign
plan for the de Jong campaign in '90.  (He ignored the plan and shorted
me 15% on the agreed-upon bill...  no surprise he came out with 38% of
the vote!  But my guess is that most campaign plans are summarily ignored
anyway, remember Dukakis?)

The vote tally actually wasn't all that embarrassing; he got about 5% more
than the anti-Bulger vote, without running much of a campaign.  What _was_
embarrassing was this:

A few weeks before the election, the wife of his campaign manager got
into her head that the way to show how corrupt Bulger is would be to
prove how easily one can obtain a fraudulent voter registration in
Southie.  So she went to City Hall and entered a false registration.
Then she went to the newspapers and said "See how easy that was!
Thousands of people must be doing that all the time down there in
South Boston!"  Well, you can imagine the rest of the story.  (I think
she didn't actually have to serve any jail time...)

-rich
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: boba@miki.pictel.com (Bob Alexander)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: PictureTel Corporation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 13:40:08 GMT

Barry Shein writes:
>>How much more should out-of-towners be taxed before we consider it "fair?"
>
>Who ever said anything about "fair"?

I believe *you* said something about "fair."  Yhe note I was responding to
said:

>Another factor is not how many people live in Boston but how many
>people use Boston. ...
>                                                             One
>way to assure collecting on that kind of activity fairly would be a
>city sales tax.                                   ^^^^^^

If I have mis-attributed someone else's quote to you, Barry, I apologize.
But I'm pretty sure I got it right.

So, do you advocate taxing fairly, or unfairly?  And if you strive for
fairness, would you care to answer the question "How much more should
out-of-towners be taxed before we consider it 'fair?'"

     Bob Alexander                                     boba@pictel.com
       The more the government does, the better libertarianism looks
     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     Organizations don't have opinions; people do.  The above opinions
     do not reflect those of the directors, stockholders, managers, or
     other employees of PictureTel.
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bulger
Date: 11 Jan 93 10:13:12 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <BZS.93Jan9013033@world.std.com>, bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
> From: boba@miki.pictel.com (Bob Alexander)
>>People who visit Boston pay exorbitant parking fees.  The businesses they
>>work at and the shops they buy at pay property taxes at a higher rate than
>>residents.  All of this has been justified, at least in part, by the fact
>>that businesses attract out-of-towners.
>>
>>How much more should out-of-towners be taxed before we consider it "fair?"
> 
> Who ever said anything about "fair"?

Let's call a spade a spade here. Out-of-towners don't vote in Boston.

> Besides, what do parking lot rates have to do with taxes? 

The value of the property goes up as the income generated goes up.
When the value goes up the taxes go up!

Get real Barry, you know this stuff cold!

Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: The World
	<1993Jan10.230224.13553@athena.mit.edu> <58527@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 04:28:15 GMT


Actually, NYC is sort of an interesting place. One of their chronic
sources of economic problems is what many might consider several very
unfair situations.

NYC has the largest and busiest harbor in the world (or just about),
yet much of the income other than via wages (e.g. harbor fees) are
federal monies. They incur significant costs, including police,
infrastructure (roads, sewers, etc.) from this activity.

NYC has Wall St, the largest stock market in the world, with all its
concomitant costs, but they are severely limited in their ability to
charge against that activity to reflect the costs they incur (similar,
police, infrastructure, public transport, etc, what else does a city
pay for?) Again, this is not to protect the stockbrokers, it is
because the fed considers anything the market can bear to be their tax
money.

NYC has the UN, and yup, about the same situation. You know what it
costs to deal with the huge diplomatic community there? Not to mention
that they don't pay parking tickets etc, and probably don't pay income
taxes (almost certainly don't.) What an honor, they should have left
it in Nassau County...

The capital of NY is Albany (that's that town up where the thruway
turns left.) So chalk up another pork barrel that might have helped
NYC, they gave it away to some town that wouldn't have even existed
w/o it. Feh. Albany's only other claim to fame is the only 50 lane
bowling alley in all of, er, Albany.

Anyhow, it's a constant political battle, every bunch of years someone
starts a movement to turn NYC into the 51st state, the numbers always
bear out that if they could just get the rest of the state (mostly out
of work sheep herders) off their back they'd have no financial
problems, or at any rate they'd be much, much better off. Half the
population of the state is in NYC, half in the rest of the state.
Where do you guess the bulk of the money is? Syracuse? Troy? Hah!

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: State Socialism (last one, for sure)
Date: 4 Jan 93 14:36:22 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <58185@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
> I'm completely unable to figure out what your point is here. It seems
> that you are arguing that it is somehow less wrong to be a slaver who
> makes a profit from slaving than to be a jailer who just earns a salary
> from running a labor camp. 

That is not what I'm arguing -toward- but I'll agree with your observation
of what follows from my argument.

> Do you mean to argue that slavers treated their
> human property relatively better because they were of market value? 

Yes.

> is someone who is condemend to a life of chattel
> slavery and to have her children used as commodities better off than someone
> who is sent to labor and starve in a Gulag? 

Yes, they certainly were better off. The children of children of
children of children of US slaves even more so. 

And personally I'd take the treatment described in Uncle Toms Cabin 
any day over the treatment described in the Gulag Archipeligo 
(and I read all 3 volumes of the latter, and years after having been
hardened by having read Uncle Tom).

Millions of people just flat out disappeared into the Gulag never to be
seen again, a great sucking black hole of death. 

-gjc
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: lmh@world.std.com (Larry M Headlund)
Subject: Re: Bulger
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:48:30 GMT

In article <BZS.93Jan6181957@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>
	(deleted)
>
>(Getting them to spend the money honestly is the real problem, maybe
>someone should tell Flynn he can have his sales tax when he manages to
>get rid of Bulger...he can do it, don't kid yourself, but he certainly
>doesn't want to, thick as thieves.)
>
	My impression has been that there is no love lost between Bulger
and Flynn.  They've been rivals for 20 years.  Fylnn has to get with 
Bulger but I don't think he enjoys it.
	Just like Gov. Weld and Bulger cooperated against the common 
enemy...Joe Malone.
-- 
Larry Headlund  lmh@world.std.com    Eikonal Systems (617) 482-3345
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bulger
Date: 7 Jan 93 11:44:23 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <BZS.93Jan6181957@world.std.com>, bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
> Meanwhile, Flynn is pushing for a city sales tax for Boston, not that
> I find that the worst idea in the world.
> 
> Cities are expensive to run...

XXX => The City of Boston has *lost* a significant amount of its population
       in the last 20 years...

Fewer citizens, fewer Police, fewer Fireman, fewer children in
the school system. What the heck is costing all the money? 

> (Getting them to spend the money honestly is the real problem, maybe
> someone should tell Flynn he can have his sales tax when he manages to ...

How about, Boston can have its sales tax (or worse, income tax)
when it gets rid of rent control.

Hmm. But maybe if Boston got rid of rent control, then property values would
rise and more income would be available from the property tax,
and there would be more residential property development
and upgrading of the city and then maybe (see XXX above)
some income-producing and property-tax-paying -population- would
return to the city and then the sales tax wouldn't be needed, etc...

-gjc

Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: richb@jti.com (Richard Braun)
Subject: Bulger
Organization: Jupiter Technology Inc. / Waltham, MA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:49:14 GMT

So how do you like Bulger's latest autocratic BS?  Geez.  He pulls this
stunt right after the election every two years, sure in the knowledge
that half his supporters vote for him *because* he exercises his power
this way and that the other half will have forgotten by the next time
around.

Maybe this time he's stepped over the edge.  Maybe there'll be a good
strong candidate running against him.  Maybe Southie will come to its
senses.

*sigh*

-rich
From: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Laurie Mann)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Wall Street Journal Condemns State Legislature (was sort of Bulger)
Date: 8 Jan 1993 14:05:12 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ansible.pubs.stratus.com

In an editorial in today's WSJ (1/8/93), the state legislature in general and  
Billy Bulger in particular were rapped as being against democracy for Bulger's
parliamentary games to avoid bringing term limits to a vote.  Given the  
behavior of Bulger over the years, I'd call the editorial right on target.
When is Southie going to wake up and vote the joker out of office?

*  In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak *
*  because I wasn't a Communist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I *
*  didn't speak because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade *
* unionists, and I didn't speak because I wasn't a trade unionist... *
*Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up.*
*  Rev. Martin Niemoeller     [Why to March on Washington in April]  *
From: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Laurie Mann)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Wall Street Journal Condemns State Legislature (was sort of Bulger)
Date: 9 Jan 93 17:14:02 GMT
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: ansible.pubs.stratus.com

Larry M Headlund writes
>	The question is why does he get re-elected?  The answer is that as
>an old-style consituent service politician he serves his constituent and his
>powerful position is used to "bring home the bacon" to Southie (and Boston
>in general).  You may not like him,  I may not like him,  but why should a
>resident of Southie who is one of his constituents trade him in?
>	A correct answer to the above guarantees you a successful career in
>politics.  

It's why I'm one of the world's worst politicians.

The idea is to represent an area in a legislature and not be
overly concerned where the pork goes.  In fact, a good legistlator
should fight pork, but it just doesn't happen.

I've lived in Joe Early's district, on and off, since he was first
elected in 1974.  I opposed him strongly then, but I was too young
to vote against him.  I had the feeling he was going to be the sort
of politician he became---a career pol who fixed his friends and brought
money to the district.  While I wasn't overjoyed to be voting for Peter
Blute, at least Blute represents some change.  Time will tell.

*  In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak *
*  because I wasn't a Communist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I *
*  didn't speak because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade *
* unionists, and I didn't speak because I wasn't a trade unionist... *
*Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up.*
*  Rev. Martin Niemoeller     [Why to March on Washington in April]  *
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Bulger
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:07:06 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <73125@cup.portal.com>, James_J_Kowalczyk@cup.portal.com writes:
> Boston does not have rent control.  As far as I know, only Cambridge and
> Brookline still have rent control.

(1) Cambridge has the most strict rent control, including
    a law the makes it a CRIMINAL act to live in your own condominium.
(2) Boston is less strict, with market price exposure allowed
    when (IF) a tenant vacates. But price controls go back on
    with a new tenant.
(3) It was Brookline that recently -voted- to get rid of rent control,
    except when a tenant makes a special application on the basis
    of need. 

So you score correct on 1 out of 3.

By the way, the main reason behind the Brookline vote was
because of REVENUE problems in the city. Currently Boston is
also claiming problems raising revenue.

-gjc
From: gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: State Socialism
Date: 4 Jan 93 14:17:11 GMT
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA

In article <58169@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes: 
> In article <4271@mitech.com> gjc@mitech.com (George J. Carrette) writes:
>>At least with african slavery in the US you could find that human life
>>actually had -some- value! Was it ever government policy to kill
>>millions of slaves? No. To "use them up?" No. Certainly not. Slaves were
>>always in high demand. And once the slaves who had built the south ... 
>>were free ...
> 
> What's the point here? How did it benefit human beings who were treated
> like beasts of burden to have a "value" assigned to them by the slave
> market? What does "at least" mean in this context? 

The benefit was that the slaves lived. And their children lived, and so
on until the time when their descendants were no longer slaves.

Slaves in the U.S. had two values which were easy to measure.
(1) economic value of labor.
(2) being counted via a 3/8'th weighting in census population for
    congressional representation.

Ironic or not, both these measures tended strongly to preserve the lives
of slaves. Futhermore there was no RIGHT-OF-PRIVACY concept in those
days that would have allowed a slave owner to secretly destroy a
slave just because his economic value went negative.

> human beings as beasts of burden ...

That minimizes the contributions and importance of US slaves. They were much
more than beasts of burden. Slaves took care of children, acted as foreman,
ran households. If slaves had been better educated and able to communicate
with each other they could have shut down the south at any time.

And that subject brings us back to the false notion that the Capitolists
"cut off" the USSR. It is absurd to think that you can have substantial
economic exchance between nations and only have high-level carefully
controlled personal contacts between peoples. It was Lenin
would decided in the "short run" that a cut-off from the west was needed,
and Stalin who made that a way of life. 

-gjc
Newsgroups: ne.politics