As a former Colorado Springs resident - I went to high school (Coronado), college (CC), and worked there for a few years (as a "computer programmer/analyst... remember those?) until I moved to NYC in 1981, so long ago... I miss what CS used to be. Back in the day, the "clean industry" was mostly electronics research and development. It felt kind of like the "Route 128 of the west." But even while I was still there, it started to shift. Ultra-conservatives like Will Perkins were starting to strut their stuff in the political-social arena (shoulda stuck to selling cars!), even while Richard Skorman was continuing to grow his haven for the thinking class downtown. Slowly, inevitably, those electronics makers started to be replaced by religious right organizations, lobbyists, non-profits, etc., of all kinds. It was sad to see happen, in what was otherwise such an encouraging place to live. The dramatic vistas, outdoor lifestyle, biking, hiking, camping, and skiing opportunities would, for me, start to be tarnished by the feeling that this state (and city) didn't love everyone equally. I left at the beginning of that shift, but have watched it from afar. Maybe I'm wrong about how it feels there now. I haven't been back in many years, though I'll likely visit soon. I hope there's at least a part of the feeling I once had there! It was a great life then!
I think as time goes by and they see that it's a benign substance the attitude will change for the positive. Alcohol is far worse than Society deals with the consequences of that so I think a little tolerance is in order
Where does the Indy find these rejects?
"As a Christson?" BHow about "as a human being?"
Many definitions of being a hipster! I think "beards" are common for a hipster. Its just that beards also make a fashion statement. Maintaining beards will allow a man to look classy and more stylish if managed well. Beard grooming tactics and techniques are available to enrich and ensure facial hair growth.
More Americans have been killed by Right-Wing Christian terrorists than by Muslim Terrorists in this country, yet we never hear about them. We cannot try and keep out one religious group without going against the Constitution.
There are three Abrahamic religions. Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All three have barbaric descriptions and instructions in their scriptures. All three have had people who used those scriptures to justify atrocities. All three have the capacity to foment violent extremism. The issue is scriptural literalism. The number people within a religion or group that read its scripture as infallible and hold its adherents to a single interpretation of its text correlates directly with the likelihood for religiously motivated violence from its members.
they are no different than Christians of 1000 yrs ago.
My core points are below, but it should be said that a person gives up certain rights when they choose to live in a communal setting. Rent a place away from people if you plan to have loud parties often, or if you're in a band/listen to loud music/have to practice/etc. It's common courtesy to think of others. Smoking, on the other hand, is less "overwhelming to the senses" and can be blown out of a window or circulated through vents. Instead of forcing the already poor into changing their lifestyle, why not require the owners of multiple-family dwellings to provide adequate ventilation for each unit? The temperature in a neighboring apartment should not interfere with my desired temperature, so why should the air we breath be so communal? I'd be more worried about the spread of disease, such as the flu and pneumonia!!
Subsidization (commonly "Section 8 housing") is usually provided to the owner of the building in the form of a monthly check. He/She must have applied to accept the money from the government, first of all. The goal is to lower the cost of rent for the tenant while simultaneously increasing the income to the owner of the property for taking on a high-risk/low-income resident. All this effectively does is raise the cost of rent across the board. Subsidized housing MUST be cheaper than standard rentals, right? There are basically two types of subsidized housing: "the projects" - apartment complexes/areas designed solely for section 8 housing, and then there's the situation where random houses throughout the city accept HUD payments. Memphis, TN is a great example of a city where "the projects" were demolished to deter crime in the downtown area, and the payments were given to the citizens (like food stamps) to pay whomever they could for rent. The crime DID slow rapidly downtown, but it spread across the city at an alarming rate. This made certain areas VASTLY more expensive to rent from, in order to deter crime, and then discrimination cries caused HUD payments to increase - forever perpetuating the cycle of price increases. So, in general, HUD housing sounds like something beneficial for those in need, but there are many seen and unseen consequences to its existence. For one, your neighbor could have a higher monthly cost of rent than you, yet winds up paying several hundred less. This is beginning to look like a war against those who pay taxes.
beefcake- So when the guy next door lights up a bowl of his 'medicinal' MJ, I can call the smoke police and shut him down, too. Right?
I'm going to start charging the Indy a commission for all the new posters that sign up just to call me names. That's like a dozen just in the past month. I'm singlehandedly doubling their circulation.
Packsafoilhat right on time with yet another comment outing himself as a complete moron.
What is the big bad government taking? Do you really think people that can't afford to own their own home deserve the right to destroy their landlord's property? And also to expose their neighbors to carcinogens? Much like your skull, the floors and walls on shared units are not airtight. Piss off back to the Fox News comments, it seems that village is missing one of its many idiots.
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have.
I agree with the earlier commentator about the definition in the article. This is a difficult situation because smoking is damaging to both wellness and property. However, banning people from smoking in their homes in public housing may also cause harm.
There is a strong, studied correlation between low-income status and smoking. There is similar prevalence in smoking as a coping mechanism in the presence of certain mental illnesses. Mobility to leave a place of residence to smoke in various environmental conditions may also be a challenge and limitation. As we know, smoking is very addictive and there is less access to diverse treatments for people with lower income. While public housing serves a diverse population, people with these identities are definitely among those served. Penalties and eviction might further marginalize members of already vulnerable populations as well as potentially add to the city's homelessness crisis.
I am no fan of tobacco and its effects and, as I have said, cannot come to my own solution on this subject. But I do think the above concerns need to be taken into account before a decision is made. (Apologies for the essay!)
I would love a definition of "public housing", as used in this context.
I wish people would stop writing about Medicare as it was FREE - it is not and costs for premiums may shift slightly lower but if you are on maintenance drugs your cost goes way up from when you were on employer provided insurance. Lord help you if you are anything other than on lowest tier generic medicine. Growing old in this country is not for the faint of heart.
Excuuuuse meee, Col. Hughes. You HATE socialism? Lessee, army retired, SOCIAL SECURITY recipient, Tricare for Life. Medicare? Evans army hospital access. VA disability benefits? Which of these do you readily accept into your personal portfolio, and which of these is NOT a form of socialism?
I support all of these programs for those who have earned them. But call them what they are: Socialism benefits.
I love to hear all these triple dippers bark about socialism: "KEEP YOUR GUBMINT HANDS OFF MY SOCIAL SECURITY!"
Too bad it can't be blocked off. Everyone can park outside of town and walk Manitou...it's not that big. Keep the shuttles but ban the cars and take out the meters? I still love week days and after the kids go back to school. Locals have more opportunities to interact without so many tourist.
I don't think people who complain about a lack of parking understand that adding parking destroys the fabric of what makes Manitou a great PLACE.
No one wants to walk past a large parking lot(s) or garage(s), they want to walk past shops and restaurants..interesting things to look at or do. Space for car storage takes away from places for people (not to mention higher ROI land uses like shops and restaurants.)
If there's a parking problem, charge the appropriate price for parking! It's clearly a scarce resource. Why do people feel that it should be provided to them, in front of their destination, for little or no cost? Manitou should look to performance parking programs. It some places it might cost more than it does now, in others it may be less, depending on demand. It may mean charging for parking even in more residential neighborhoods, while implementing a system for residents to park their cars at low or no rates. The key is to try and keep 1 or 2 spaces per block open so that drivers don't have to continuously search for a space. People will walk if the walk is interesting, safe and fun...oh hey, that's exactly what Manitou is!
Complaints about parking always remind me of a good quote from Yogi Berra: "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."
A parking challenge is a good thing to have. There are solutions without adding more of it. Look to optimize the space first.
Manitou Springs has deliberately used parking tickets to boost their revenue to "sponsor " their solutions.... now the patrons will not return.....the city of Manitou Springs is selfish. THE SUFFERING TO BUSINESSES IS BECAUSE OF NEGATIVE ACTIONS BY THEIR OWN CITY.....
All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation