Brother Rmoney should run in his home state of Massachusetts, but then by that
reasoning Mr. Hatch should have run in Pennsylvania. What was I thinking.
Yes Christoph-Brigham City, UT.Many easterners think "out
west" is somewhere around west Pennsylvania. Many Utahns
don't realize how good they have it.
Romney is a graduate of BYU, so he has roots here since the 1960's,
(although he endured a year at Stanford in 1965, before a mission to France.)
Red states are doing miracles, and it is time national media finds out. And it
will with Mr. Romney. Brigham Young was genius to move west, and the brilliant
migration continues in the 21st century. East coast is old news. Ivy league
needs to charge $100 per class because that is what their value is worth.
Colorado, Idaho, Arizona, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, and many other red states- this
area is the capitol of the world, because of personal responsibility,
accountability, family and community.
There is some scuttle but about Hillary an Mrs. Romney. He .might think twice.
Romney's faith is in common with a large percentage of the Utah
population.It is an abiding, legitimate connection. But that is not enough
reason to vote for him. His family, his progenators, have deep roots in Utah.
Over Stanford, he chose to school in Utah. He has the successful Olympic
connection. Romney has been living in Utah and he appears to have the support
of and is highly respected by a large percentage of the Utah population. He
apparently loves Utah and shares many values with Utahns. According to Hatch,
Romeny was recently recruited, he didn't come to Utah to run for office. In
serving Utah, Romney would be far from a carpetbagger.
Is it just me or are others bothered by Romney only being a Utah resident for a
couple years? I know he and his wife have a condo/home at Deer Valley but I
suspect they have a home back east where they are actually from. It feels alot
like when Hillary became a senator in New York having only lived there a couple
years in an apartment. This is called "carpetbagging" I believe is the
term. Romney knew there was no way he makes the senate from the east so he buys
a ski condo in Utah and suddenly he is a Utah favorite son? I don't think
so. Romney is "using" his faith to fast track himself in the senate.
That is very troubling.
Surely a low point (so far) has got to be the resignation of Rep. Jon Stanard.
Re: Florwood - American Fork, UTFeb. 11, 2018 10:20 a.m."Mr Webb, I think though the effect in raw dollars might seem small, you
are wrong on whether an elimination of the food tax would have an effect on
low-income people. From what I have read, the lowest 20% income households spend
10% of their income on at-home food, while the middle spends about 7%, and the
upper 20% spend 6%. Reducing at home food spending would particularly help
low-income families. It's time to give them this break."Denying the government's conduit of tax incentive won't happened
because of greed among politicians. A certain party in Utah claim that it's
for less government and yet they are always looking for ways to make the
government grow by taxing the people.
@Webb " With a new international airport, a potential global trade port,
new infrastructure associated with the new state prison and enormous trucking
and freight rail operations close by, the northwest quadrant has unlimited
potential for manufacturing, distribution and intermodal activities."I am an economist who lives on two levels. The limbic neoclassical me
sees this as great. It also offers survival and prosperity to the lone survivor
of Utah's interurban rail past - the Salt Lake Garfield and Western Ry.
But the higher level Marxist me sees this as just our local instance of
capitalism's need to grow or die. This is growth for growth's sake
and puts off dealing with the consequences of growth, e.g. climate change.
Mr. Webb, I think though the effect in raw dollars might seem small, you are
wrong on whether an elimination of the food tax would have an effect on low
income people. From what I have read, the lowest 20% income households spend 10%
of their income on at-home food, while the middle spends about 7%, and the upper
20% spend 6%. Reducing at home food spending would particularly help low income
families. It's time to give them this break.