Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Friday, August 31, 2012

I Sometimes Wonder If They Bother to Read Their Own Editorials

Posted by on Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:54 AM

Before the August primary, the Seattle Times urged voters to reject the $123 million 7-year library levy exactly because the library is such an essential service:

Special property-tax levies should be requested mainly for big one-time expenses. An example on the Aug. 7 ballot is the King County levy for juvenile courtrooms and jail. An example on the Nov. 6 ballot in Seattle is a levy to rebuild a critical seawall holding up Seattle's waterfront. Another example was Seattle's libraries levy of a decade ago. It was for buildings.

I disagreed with the editors (as did 64 percent of Seattle voters), but at least they made a coherent argument.

Yet today the editors urge voters to renew the $120 million 6-year Automated Fingerprint Identification System levy—also not a big one-time expense—because... you know... it is such an essential service.

I'm so confused!

 

Comments (8) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
damn goldy.

you should start your own newspaper and show them how to do it.
Posted by what a joke you are. on August 31, 2012 at 6:56 AM · Report this
2
They have an "automated fingerprint identification system" at 24 Hour Fitness. I tap in my phone number and stick my index finger on what looks like a supermarket scanner. Then it flashes green and they give me a towel.

I can hardly believe it costs $123 million dollars.
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://_ on August 31, 2012 at 7:06 AM · Report this
Pope Peabrain 3
Because they think reading is for stupid people. Especially those reading their rag.
Posted by Pope Peabrain on August 31, 2012 at 8:03 AM · Report this
Lew Siffer 4
It seems really fucking off to me that in this day and age of tech and server farms that this item is an ongoing cost. It isn't done?

Second, if it so goddam important should it be in LEO budget?
Posted by Lew Siffer on August 31, 2012 at 8:09 AM · Report this
Goldy 5
@2 As much as I hate to agree with you, I too have a hard time believing that this costs $123 million.
Posted by Goldy on August 31, 2012 at 8:38 AM · Report this
Cascadian 6
I can see an ongoing cost in terms of software upgrades and maintenance and the personnel to do that, but that shouldn't require rebuilding the entire system from scratch. This is off by one or two orders of magnitude at least.
Posted by Cascadian on August 31, 2012 at 10:24 AM · Report this
MarkyMark 7
Why does ANYONE bother to read their editorials???
Posted by MarkyMark on August 31, 2012 at 10:28 AM · Report this
8
Here is the difference, Goldy:

Rich people, when they want a book (or a CD or a DVD) order it from Amazon and get it delivered. They don't go to the library - it would take them into public space and force them to interact with the 99%. The library serves poor people and people of ordinary means. So the Seattle Times says let 'em dangle.

The AFIS is a police tool. The police serve the rich by protecting their person and (especially) their property. The police also enforce the status quo with violence. That's good. While the private security guys can do patrols and such, the rich folks want to socialize the cost of big ticket items like AFIS. Therefore the Seattle Times, the voice of the 1%, says that we absolutely must have it.

Once you view the Seattle Times editorial through the lens of the 1% it all makes sense.
Posted by Charlie Mas on August 31, 2012 at 1:20 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy