Writer: Downtowns are obsolete
What is the city government thinking with that ridiculous 2040 plan for downtown?
Lynchburg has real problems that need fixing now, not grandiose, liberal plans of some nonsense vision for 2040.
Many things can happen in the next 22 years that will require big changes to that plan. Even a five-year plan would be a stretch.
Downtowns are obsolete. Trying to make them a hub of anything is a futile and wasteful idea that only liberals and government workers could like.
A better idea is to plan to slowly move everything that is downtown to the outer edges of the city, not pack more stuff into the center core.
While fixing the parking mess would be nice, most people just do not want to go downtown to eat nor for recreation or shopping.
Even if you add gateways this idea still is just a “Boonavista”-style boondoggle (recall the Buena Vista golf course fiasco) waiting to bankrupt Lynchburg (like “Boonavista” did to themselves with that golf course nonsense idea).
Lynchburg has assumed that some magic downtown fix will make everything better. Show us the proof before wasting our tax money like Buena Vista did.
Businesses do not want to go downtown, even with better parking, and the customers are in the ’burbs at the malls.
Attempting the 2040 plan will not achieve anything except piling up debt.
Lynchburg needs to totally rethink this nonsense idea if it wishes to survive as a city.
Letter filled with stereotypes
It might just be that the July 21 letter to the editor will win the record for the most outrageous letter ever written of this type. Doug Thom III, in a letter headlined “The Court, Catholicism and kids,” has laid out the case that anyone who can type can have a letter published in The News & Advance.
It would take up too much space to discredit all the outrageous, despicable and offensive conclusions made in the letter. But I will state just a few. He was well into his waste of printer’s ink by the time he said, “When I was young, I knew several Catholic families with eight or more children.” Some sentences later, after saying that he would “leave abortion out of the discussion,” he stated that “given that there are only nine children among the six Catholic justices [on the Supreme Court] that more than a few of those Justices (and their wives) have had abortions, legal or otherwise.” What an absurd conclusion to make! After all, he said that “if this were 1968 and six members of the court were Catholic, is it not safe to say that there would have been 20 or 40 children sired [his word] and/or brought to term by the Justices.”
His anti-Catholic sentiments, his bizarre conclusions and statements that only justices who are familiar with such things as “diapers and formula,” those who know “what it means to lose a husband (and father) because of fighting and anxiety triggered by the mere act of having a raising children,” should be on the court. But unfortunately, he would suggest it cannot happen “in a place where it is easier to be single, non-heterosexual, childless and addicted to heroin, than it is to be young, married, straight and struggling to make ends meet every third week.” Tell that to the heroin addict. And why would that couple struggle every “third” week?
Enough said. It is sufficient to say that the kinds of folks who would write, or express these opinions are still in our midst.
Why not pay down the debt?
Two bills in Congress — Senate Bill 2497 and H.R. 5141 — are set to give Israel $38 billion over the next 10 years, approximately $23,000 per Jewish Israeli family of four.
The United States is approximately $20 trillion in debt. If the House of Representatives and the Senate approve this expenditure of your tax dollars, AIPAC (the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) will work hard to ensure they are re-elected. Shouldn’t your representatives be working to get your children out of debt, instead of for AIPAC?
Let your congressional representatives know how you feel about these bills.
WILLIAM A. MILLER