That wonderful but elusive “Radiant Future”

Ever since the Glorious October Revolution, the Liberals, Socialists, Communists, Progressives one and all have made promises of a future where everyone is equal, wise, well fed and comfortable. Of course in practice, it is only the elite that are living that life style.

Witness Uncle Bernie, the Savior of Vermont, who owns four houses and lives of the largess of the taxpayers. His wife managed to drive two colleges into fiscal turmoil one ending in bankruptcy and eventually dragging her into court on fraud charges. Some Radiant Future for those students. They received bupkis. But this Communist has grand visions for you and the Country, not just Vermont.

Uncle Bernie wants to have the grand SPHC, which Vermont Progressives already rejected as so expensive, the Progressives said they couldn’t afford it. California rejected it because they couldn’t afford it; they are a mental box of rocks when it comes to finances. He wants to lay it on Medicare/Medicaid so that the taxpayers get crushed.
Sen. Sanders cares not that Venezuela is trying the same crap that the Soviet Union and Cuba tried with the same results.

If you can’t get it to work in a Century, do you think it will work by trying for another 100 years?
Socialists have an enormous case of the STUPIDS.


Biased Agendas

Comrades! We have the best of everything for your children at heart when it comes to their education. The best buildings, desks, teachers… We worked to get the best course of study.
In Vermont, the State makes sure everything is equal for all children. What about your State?

Lindberg: Elected officials choose private schools for their kids, public schools for others

In the 2011 book “Upheaval,” Lou Dobbs states that “90 percent of funding for public education comes from local property taxes and state taxes. Yet, 90 percent of decision making about how that money is spent and how our children are educated comes from the federal government via the U.S. Department of Education.” In fact, the U.S. Department of Education will expropriate $77 billion dollars from the U.S. taxpayer this year.

It is also a fact that many of our federally elected officials refuse to send their own children to public schools. Some 41 percent of the members of the U.S. House and 46 percent of U.S. senators send their children to private schools. 56 percent of U.S. Senate Education and Labor Committee members send their children to private schools. Just as disturbing is the fact that 22 percent of public school teachers send their children to private schools. This is twice the national average for the general public.

Arne Duncan, former secretary of the U.S. Department of Education, enthusiastically promoted the Common Core curriculum as the great panacea for all things wrong with public education. Yet, as reported in the media, “Mr. Duncan chooses to send his children to the University of Chicago Lab School, arguably the most elite private school in Chicago — and certainly the most expensive.” Duncan’s children are not subjected to the Common Core curriculum that he so aggressively promotes for our children.

In Vermont, many of our elected state representatives and senators also choose to send their children to private schools. Ironically, they also vote to deny school choice to their taxpaying constituents. (emphasis added)

A full view of this hypocrisy as demonstrated by one Vermont legislator can be found in this YouTube video: (runs 1:29 minutes)


Climate Foibles

The first rule for getting out of a hole is to “STOP DIGGING!”
In Vermont, this logic is verboten. The Progressive Eco-nazis are hell bent on creating what they assume to be Gaia’s Utopia in the Northeast.

Vermont’s greenhouse gas mandate is costly

Vermont, along with 19 other states, has a long-term greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction mandate. The original mandate, signed into law in 2006, called for a 75 percent reduction below 1990 emissions levels by 2050. In 2011, then Gov. Peter Shumlin raised the goal to a 90 percent reduction by 2050, something which the 2016 State Comprehensive Energy Plan (CEP) discusses in detail.

Too bad the numbers don’t add up. Vermont’s mandate is much more than a requirement to supply consumers with electricity from renewable resources like wind and solar power. It will require virtually complete electrification of the Vermont economy to eliminate almost all fossil fuel consumption. Cars and trucks, oil- and gas-fired furnaces, industrial processes, virtually everything that now uses fossil fuels will need to be replaced with its electric counterpart. [snip]

Meeting the 90 percent GHG reduction goal will require replacing virtually all fossil fuel use in the state with electricity, and ensuring that there is enough electricity to do that…

How much electricity will Vermont need? Suppose Vermont could reduce total end-use energy consumption to just 100 TBTUs by 2050. That’s 30 TWh of electricity, five times the amount consumed in 2015. Currently, Vermont gets 2 TWh of electricity each year from hydropower and another 1 TWh from burning wood. That leaves 27 TWh from wind and solar power.

Last November’s election appears to have confirmed that Vermonters don’t want thousands of giant wind turbines dotting the landscape… And despite cost decreases, solar power is still much more costly than power purchased on the wholesale market. Thus Vermonters would pay even higher electricity prices… .

Replacing all of the fossil-fuel-using equipment in the state and adding electric vehicle charging stations would cost billions of dollars more.

Curiously, nowhere does the 2016 CEP discuss the benefits of reducing the state’s GHG emissions… . No measurable climate impacts mean zero climate benefits.

Ambitious, math-challenged legislators can always vote to impose costly and foolish mandates like Vermont’s with little pushback from voters. But Vermont’s mandate, like the mandates in other states, will impose additional costs on residents and businesses with zero offsetting benefits. Vermont’s is just another economically damaging exercise in symbolic environmentalism and political grandstanding.

Power outages in Vermont during winter are not an uncommon event. In the more rural areas, the power lines don’t follow roadways, but traverse the shortest routes which will cut over rifgelines and undeveloped land. Vermont winters, despite the Warmist believers’ fantasies, get a hell of a lot of snow in the northern part of the state and the southern part, ice.
Getting to some of these power lines can be extremely difficult. In 1998, an ice storm took out power in Chittenden, LaMoille and Addison Counties for close to a week. If everything is electric power including the repair vehicles, how do the repairs get made.

For the unbelievers, I made this photo one morning at my place.

No power and these temps aren’t pleasant.

Biased Agendas

You will never get an honest answer from a Leftist group. Their agenda isn’t to present anything factual; it’s to contort and/or distort whatever the issue is to be presented. No counterpoint will be tolerated.

Gun control moms group advertises public meeting, then shuts out Vermonters

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America visited the capital and held what was advertised as a public meeting, only to turn away about a dozen pro-gun rights guests at the door.

They even called the police on people who arrived to attend the Tuesday night meeting.

Montpelier police officer Kevin Moulton told True North that when he went in to the meeting to address the situation, he was told the space was rented out, meaning organizers were “within their legal right” to make it private even after advertising it as public.

The meeting was originally scheduled at the Unitarian Church in Montpelier, but instead it took place at an office building about a half mile away on Barre Street.

That was not the only change of plans.

“Well I RSVP’d online as I was requested,” Richard Ley from Clarendon told True North. “I have received emails from them, and I drove an hour and a half to be at the meeting here tonight to find that the venue we arrived at was closed, with no address to attend the meeting which they held at a different location.

“I’m very disappointed in the fact that they would do that to me,” he said.

Ley said he simply wanted to attend the meeting since it was touted as a community conversation. “Instead I was turned away at the door,” he said.

Moms Demand Action has connections with former New York City Mayor and prominent anti-gun activist Michael Bloomberg, according to the New York Times. [snip]

Eddie Cutler, president of Gun Owners of Vermont, said the group may have been within its rights but handled the situation in a way that stokes suspicions about gun control agendas.

“They are within their rights. We just want to know what they have to hide,” he said.

One spurned Vermonter said the group’s actions inadvertently illustrated the need for guns.

“I thought it was quite ironic that they called the police with guns to defend their meeting,” Blaire Scaglione from Warren said.

Isn’t the openness of the anti-gun crowd wonderful? So willing to share their agenda with the public and converse with others who have differing ideas.

This is America today.

Historical happenings

7/7/1777 ~ American Revolutionary War: Battle of Hubbardton

7/7/1802 ~ 1st comic book “The Wasp” is published

7/7/1898 ~ US President McKinley signs the Organic Act to annex Hawaii

Dead broke Watermelons

With all this changing climate, one would believe we would need all the wool we could get for cold weather gear, what with the arctic ice growing and Greenland being not so green.

Instead we’re being fleeced badly and left on the outside of the cozy Watermelon Redistribution Clubhouse of the Climate Change Socio-Marxist Group. Now badly are we taken? This badly:

With President forgoing our loitering in that idiot Paris Accord, we just folded our money and put it back in our pocket. Let those other freeloaders front the loot if they’re so worries about the Planet.
As the President says:

Big Spenders

Vermont’s Progressives, as broke as they are, have eyes bigger than their bank accounts. Nothing new here, move along. You’ve seen wrecks like this before., move along.

Editor’s note: This is Part 2 of the Vermont Affordable Housing Series.





Former state auditor questions $35 million housing program

Former State Auditor Randy Brock may have distanced himself from Vermont’s political scene since his unsuccessful 2016 run for lieutenant governor, but that doesn’t mean he’s not following what’s going on financially under Montpelier’s Golden Dome.

Brock has been studying fellow Republican Gov. Phil Scott’s proposed $35 million bond for affordable housing, and he has concerns about how state officials will be able to sustain the funding.

Earlier this year, the governor, along with officials at the Agency of Commerce and Community Development, began trumpeting S.100 as a neat way to employ 1,000 workers, build 500 additional housing units, house 1,000 residents and create $100 million in new construction and renovation projects statewide. Scott champions the plan since it helps meet his first-term agenda goals: create jobs, grow the economy and protect the state’s vulnerable citizens.

In addition, many Vermont mayors, town managers and community leaders are on board with the plan. In a letter sent to Scott and House and Senate leaders last month, a coalition of seven mayors gave their full-throated endorsement. [snip]

All well and good so far. But Brock cautions that there’s a red flag that few Vermont legislators and those in the affordable housing sector care to mention. This red flag is hidden within the state’s financial statements, according to the former state auditor.

“These housing loans can be made at low or no interest,” he said. “Often they are set up to have a balloon payment at the end of the period, say 10 years, 20 years, whatever.

“So, just to use a simple example to illustrate, you have payments being made of $100,000 in 2017, $150,000 in 2018, $100,000 in 2019, $200,000 in 2020 and then $200 million in the years following! So, next to nothing is being paid on an ongoing basis, and then repayments are being pushed out into the future.”

Brock said that when a loan maturity occurs, the conservation board extends it for another 10 or 20 years.

“The money is never going to be paid back — that’s the red flag,” Brock said. [snip]

“The 2011 report concluded an ‘extraordinary record of achievement’ and we should leave well enough alone,” Brock said. “The housing agencies even defended this practice that repayment wasn’t required, and that you make it more affordable when people don’t have to repay their mortgages.”

Scott’s $35 million approach this year has a fundamental difference from the past, however: it includes a funding source. The money lent by the state will be repaid through tax revenues.

“That’s an important difference, but a concern remains: what about the underlying mortgages? Will the bond get paid?” Brock asks with more than a hint of doubt. [snip]

“If you want a truly sustainable program, you have to put out mortgages that actually get repaid, and then you use the repayments to fund more affordable housing. But when it isn’t being repaid you have to go out and do (another) $35 million housing bond to build more stuff.”

In a Progressive milieu such as Vermont, no thought to paying back such programs is ever considered. If one thinks this statement is in error, please explain the debacle of Vermont’s heath care program, the State’s under and unfunded programs and the various pensions.
All of which are FEEL GOOD, are we not so sensitive to the proles needs and so caring.