Screenshots of Wisdom

 

Keep It Simple, Stupid

Visit Milwaukee is claiming the Bucks Championship Had $58 Million Economic Impact.

That's possible. Anything is possible. But claims of such an impact are dubious at best. 

As Roy Cordato's article noted:

Economic impact studies are everywhere.

Whether it’s to support a new highway project, special tax breaks for solar energy, the building of a civic center or sports complex, or to promote subsidies for Hollywood film producers, you can find an economic impact study, often touting how great the project will be for the state or local economy.

The formula is simple, predictable, and effective. A special interest group that stands to benefit from the project funds an economic impact study that purports to provide hard numbers on the number of jobs, the increase in wages, and the additional output that will be generated by the project or subsidy, and it will do this on an industry-by-industry basis. It makes grandiose claims about how much overall economic growth will be enhanced for the state or region generally. Once the report is completed, the special interest group that paid for the study will tout these results in press releases that will be picked up by the largely uncritical media establishment, ensuring that the political decision makers and others who determine the fate of the project receive political cover.

These studies all have several things in common. First, they typically use proprietary, off-the-shelf models with acronym names like IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planning), CUM (Capacity Utilization Model), or REMI (Regional Economic Model, Inc.). Rights to use the models are purchased by professional consulting firms who are hired by the interest groups to do the studies. Furthermore, seldom do those who actually perform the studies have formal training in economics. Instead their expertise is in using one or more of the aforementioned proprietary models. And finally, all of these studies ignore basic principles of economics and, as a result, do not meaningfully measure what they claim to be measuring—the economic impact of the public policies and projects that they are assessing.

One big problem with economic impact studies is the idea of substitution. If money that would have been spent elsewhere was simply spent on the Bucks, growth did not occur. Spending that would have occurred in one spot was merely spent in a different spot. The project (the development, the event, etc.) hasn't catalyzed growth. They haven't made an economic impact. They've merely realigned spending.

Now, this isn't to say all projects are unable to spur growth. But unless the impact study accounts for concepts like substitution and opportunity cost, it's mostly measuring the rewards that will go to primarily absentee owners.

Milwaukee Magazine had their own questions regarding the local economic impact of the Bucks championship run.

The sparkling, shiny, loud things (sports and entertainment events) often get attention, articles and praise. Yet, as far as being supposed economic catalysts, all too often, the economic benefits and impact are ephemeral to non-existent.

Maybe it's time we stop deluding ourselves in the belief that all activities and projects can be or need to be fun and exciting. Clean water, smooth roads, public transportation, quality schools, affordable housing and health care, and maintained infrastructure provide a better return on investment and generate much more growth than any stadium or convention center could ever hope to. 

Screenshots of Wisdom

The National Debt

Weekend Reading

The Quest to Tell Science from Pseudoscience

Listen, Progressive People!

Not a Housing Bubble

America’s Corporate Welfare Queens

Who Helps Pay Amazon’s Low-Wage Workers? You Do

Pastor’s wife planned husband’s killing with man they had sex with, Oklahoma cops say

Evers vetoes bill to give Legislature control of federal COVID relief funds

With ambitious new infrastructure plan, Biden isn't fooling around

GOP Legislators Want Pandemic Aid for Tax Rebate

Public Work Should Be Done By The Public Sector

A recent article - Waukesha's Zignego Co. lowest bidder at $87M for Highway 50 road project - made me again think of the delusional efficient private sector viewpoint. 

Conservatives and wannabe-economists have, for years, pounded the private sector efficiency drumbeat. Sadly, this perspective is as misguided today as it's ever been.

For the majority of private sector actors, the modus operandi has been to cut corners, pay workers less and/or to simply not do certain tasks altogether. 

For Further Reading:

The Lean Efficiency (And Persistence) Of Private Sector Lies

Privatization, Increased Costs And Income Inequality

Fizzle for the buck

Why public–private partnerships or other ‘innovative’ financing of infrastructure will not save taxpayers money

And The Winner Is....The Public Sector

Myth: The Private Sector is More Efficient Than the Public Sector

Why taxpayers are getting a bargain from public-sector workers

A Recovery Squandered

A Recovery Squandered

Despite a decade of steady economic growth since the Great Recession, America has done remarkably little to address underlying structural weaknesses in the country’s economy and society. The nation has squandered the recovery.

Negotiations 101

Obama says that Americans are seeking “improvement” not “revolutionary” change

In general, this is true.  We don't need to blow everything up and start over.  But, as a good negotiating tactic, you start with everything and the kitchen sink and work your way back from there.  You don't start small because then you usually end up with nothing ... which seems to be the Democrats' plan for the last few decades.

Donald Trump pretended he was going to bring back coal mining jobs.  Republicans keep selling that tax cuts will trickle down.  These were all lies.  But voters believed them and voted for them.

So why shouldn't Democrats forcefully advocate for health care, clean water, a higher minimum wage, green jobs, etc.?  These are policies that will help the majority of citizens and actually create jobs.  These are the policies citizens want.  This isn't revolutionary change, this is the historical platform of the Democratic Party.

Democrats - enough with the baby steps.  Get a spine and fight for policies that will help the American people.  Voters are sick of the double-speak and goose-stepping.  They don't want the calm, practical status quo.  They want someone with principles to get shit done.  Enough of the middle-of-the-road, mealy-mouthed politicking.  Take a stand and get something done.   

It's Time For Real Change

Nancy Pelosi Is Worried 2020 Candidates Are on Wrong Track

Those liberal ideas that fire up the party’s base are a big loser when it comes to beating President Donald Trump.

Pelosi believes most American don't want or don't support: improved health care (Medicare For All), improved infrastructure, public elections, taxing corporations and the rich, green (environmentally friendly) policies, getting rid of the electoral college, a higher minimum wage, and improved labor policies.  Just to name a few of the Sanders/Warren policy prescriptions.

Pelosi claims these are fringe, liberal, San Francisco, pipe-dream policies.  "What works in San Francisco does not necessarily work in Michigan,” Pelosi said.

Being a Midwesterner, I have to inform Pelosi she is way off.  In what has been referred to as the Rust Belt, deindustrialization has decimated many good paying jobs, left workers with less and less of a voice, and left many without decent health care or the hope of a stable retirement.

Most Midwesterners would be happy to see the playing field tilted in favor of workers rather than corporations and the rich.

As the article stated, "The speaker’s concerns reflect those of many Democratic leaders and donors who believe that left-wing policies will alienate swing voters and lead to defeat."

Translation - big moneyed donors like their power and wealth and they don't want to give any of either up.

Pelosi and the current Democratic leadership need to 'grow a pair' or get out the way.  We can't keep pushing climate change policies down the road; we can't keep taking from workers and giving to the already wealthy; all citizens deserve good health care; all citizens should be able to retire with dignity; we should all expect clear air and drinking water; our elections should be free, fair and representative.  If you don't have the spine or passion to fight for real change for the majority of Americans, you don't belong in politics.

Pelosi, Bill Clinton and the triangulation-gang got us to this point.  Always capitulating and cutting deals, slowly moving the Democratic party more and more to the right.  So much so, that the difference between the parties became almost indistinguishable.  Many former Democrats started voting for the Republicans - "Heck, they're not so different and the Republicans will cut taxes, so I might as well vote for them."

These triangulators made the Democratic party the Republican-light party.  Yet, we're supposed to let them keep driving the car?  These Pelosi Democrats are the ones who've been in power as wages have stagnated, unions have been destroyed, elections have been stolen and the standard of living for most working Americans has stagnated.  They have betrayed their Democratic base and the liberal policies that made this country great in the first place.

It's time for real change.  A new generation of Democratic leaders needs to take the wheel.

Reject The Status Quo

Billionaires shouldn't exist.  You might be bright, make good financial moves, or even invent magnificent stuff.  You shouldn't be able to hoard generational wealth at the expense of the country that allowed you to do such.

Big tech, and other mega-companies, should be made to pay their fair share and not be allowed to dodge taxes.

Our elections should be fair and free from private money influence.  Citizens United needs to be overturned.

Climate change should be a priority.

American infrastructure needs immediate attention.  From clean water, to clean energy, we need a massive rebuilding of our country's infrastructure to remain relevant and competitive.

These are some of the things Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been campaigning for during this election cycle.

If the majority of citizens actually want change that benefits the majority of citizens, these are the two candidates that will fight for and deliver such change.  None of the other candidates have shown such consistent, principled and passionate convictions regarding these issues.

Anything less, the status quo will carry on.

Weekend Reading

Republicans Have Rigged The Maps And Manipulated Elections - Why Won't Democrats Talk About It?
Gerrymandering Is Built On Lies
100-Year Bonds Can Fund Big Infrastructure Projects
No, You Don't Get To Keep 100 Billion Dollars For Yourself
The Green New Deal Is Cheaper Than Climate Change
Vape Safety Requires Legalizing Marijuana
Our Food Is Killing Too Many Of Us
The Looser A State's Gun Laws, The More Mass Shootings It Has
"Unions For All": The New Plan To Save The American Labor Movement
How A Trump Tax Break To Help Poor Communities Became A Windfall For The Rich
The Real Reason General Motors Workers Are On Strike Nationwide
The Future Of U.S. Jobs Look Bleak. Unions Are The Answer.
Trump Just Asked The Supreme Court To Let Him Fire The CFPB's Head. The Implications Are Enormous.
Why Rigged Capitalism Is Damaging Liberal Democracy

Weekend Reading

From Gentrification To Decline: How Neighborhoods Really Change
The California Economy Isn't Just A U.S. Powerhouse
The US Government Is The World's Largest Purchaser Of Consumer Goods. Amazon Wants A Piece
Stephen Moore Wants People To Pay More Attention To His Economic Policies. Challenge Accepted.
Rich Guys Are Most Likely To Have No Idea What They're Talking About
Chinese Billionaire Jack Ma Says The US Wasted Billions On Warfare Instead Of Investing In Infrastructure
'I'm Fucked,' And Other Damning Revelations From The Mueller Report
Sanctioned Russian Oligarch's Company To Invest Millions In New Aluminum Plant In Mitch McConnell's State

Wisconsin Reading

Taxpayers Make Bucks, Brewers Rich
Gov. Tony Evers Wants To Renegotiate Foxconn Deal
Wisconsin Republicans Are Yucking It Up About AOC's Green New Deal While Trade Wars Crush Dairy Farmers
7 Numbers That Explain The Election
Committee Questions Grand Avenue Deal
Canadian National Investing $120 Million In Wisconsin Rail Infrastructure
True Colors Show In State Capitol

Bucking Convention

Sorry to rain on the parade.

Milwaukee should be leery, careful and realistic with their assumptions and expectations regarding hosting the Democratic National Convention.

In general, events like this are a boom for some and a bust for others. And, if you're lucky, you'll break even. Yet, hosting these events is far from a no-brainer, win-win for everyone.

As U.S News reported:

According to economists Robert Baade, Robert Baumann and Victor Matheson – who looked at the effect of every national political convention between 1970 and 2005 – such events "have a negligible impact on local economies." They found that "neither the presence of the Republican nor the Democratic National Convention has a discernable impact on employment, personal income, or personal income per capita in the cities where the events were held."

As another researcher put it:

By focusing on the 'bright, shiny object' of a political convention, we might be losing focus on the real economic fundamentals that could bring long-term prosperity.

Milwaukee has already been transforming itself and the region - without an expanded convention center, without a political convention, etc.  The Democratic National Convention might be fun and lucrative for some, but don't expect long-term gains from this political circus.  At best, Milwaukeans should hope for infrastructure improvements coinciding with the convention - roads, rail, water, electric, etc. - that will also benefit the city as a whole.

For Further Reading:
Rejecting “Conventional” Wisdom: Estimating the Economic Impact of National Political Conventions 

Economic impact studies: Should journalists rely on them?

American Cities and the Politics of Party Conventions

Breaking with Convention

Weekend Reading

The Tax-The-Rich Movement Keeps Growing
The Hypocrisy Of Trump's Job Claims
California High-Speed Rail And The American Infrastructure Tragedy, Explained
The Global Con Hidden In Trump's Tax Reform Law, Revealed
Lots Of Presidential Candidates Talk A Good Talk. Look At Their Records Instead.
Bill And Melinda Gates And The Problem Of The "Good Billionaire"
How Republicans Bought Their Own Tax Cut Snake Oil
Trump's War On California
The CIA's Masterful Use Of Fake News

Good Riddance, Scott Walker

It was a good night for Democrats. Not a great night, but a good one.

Sad so many in Wisconsin (and around the country) are still voting Republican after all we know and at this point in time. Those of you clinging to your sexism, racism, parochialism, or whatever other pet cause makes you still vote Republican, you truly are the worst of us.

For those of you (that normally vote Republican) that put country before party to help elect Democrats, kudos to you. Well done.

Remember, though, this is just the start. Keep talking, keep campaigning, keep pushing Democratic policies. We need to carry this momentum into the 2020 election.

Even though this was a record-breaking turnout for Wisconsin, it was still only 60 percent of the voting-age population. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "Based on state population estimates from earlier this year, turnout was equal to almost 60 percent of the voting-age population, though that number is likely to change when the official count is complete."

It's just ridiculous to think that 40 percent of the voting-age population is just sitting on the sidelines. If Democrats could get these people to the polls, Republicans would never win another election.

Good riddance, Scott Walker. Now you can lick the boots of your paymasters full-time. Burn in hell, you selfish and corrupt tool.

Walker Looking To Buy Your Vote

Scott Walker offers 50 percent increase to counties to fix their roads

When your policies are horrible, when all you've done is cut taxes for and give handouts to the rich, and your administration has been a complete failure, you've got no choice but to try to buy-off voters.

Suddenly Scott Walker wants to make investments in Wisconsin infrastructure. Now he wants to fix the roads, an idea which he has previously delayed or abandoned. Yes, now he's promising the world to all the Wisconsinites he's screwed over during his time in office. He's now promising to fix all of the things that he has screwed up.

Wisconsin, do the right thing in November. Get rid of Scott Walker.  

Not In My Backyard

Bay View is in a tizzy over a recent outbreak of burglaries and vandalism.

Smashed windows, stolen goods, and on and on. None of that is fun or fair. But life's not fair. Being born into and living in poverty isn't fair. (Yes, I know, this isn't all impoverished youths. Some of it is, no doubt, dirtbags being dirtbags for entirely different reasons.)

The answer to increased crime isn't "we must cut everything except for the police." Yet most of what passes for discussion on this matter is - "more police!"

The police and fire departments in the City of Milwaukee already garner nearly 90% of the entire City budget!

Milwaukee also has twice as many police officers as similar sized cities.

The answer isn't more money for police and more police.

Why don't we try policies that benefit education, health care, infrastructure and those most in need? Rather than giving millions and billions to the Brewers, the Bucks, Foxconn, Harley Davidson, Mercury Marine, etc. How about the ridiculously rich of the community help to teach the under-educated, provide transportation options to available jobs and arrange gainful employment? Having such a privileged place in society, how about helping to be part of the solution, rather than just pointing fingers, screaming about the problem and only seeing "lock 'em up!" as the solution.

How can we ask working-poor and working-class people to pay taxes for Foxconn billionaires and then lose our shit when some poor kid steals or ruins something nice? Can we devalue life any more? Oh, such a lovely, caring Christian country. Give to the rich, take from the poor and then get all bent out of shape when the poor person decides they'd like a piece of the pie, too. If you think this is making American great again, you're a fucking idiot!

The other sad part of this drama (as it plays out on neighborhood groups on Facebook among the victims of robbery or vandalism) is how the same people decrying the increase in crime, didn't give a shit when it was happening in other parts of town. Then, it was somebody else's problem.

But now that their shit is getting stolen, we all need to pitch-in to buy more police to protect their shit...no matter the cost. Suddenly these bastions of conservatism, low-taxation and a hands-off government, now they're full-blown socialists dependent on the government to protect their property. Costs no longer matter. Spend whatever it takes!

Are we under some delusion that we can hire a police officer - without any increase in taxes - for every street, every alley, every block and that, somehow, we're going to eliminate all bad things?

Too much of my taxes already go toward the Pentagon and the local police presence. More men (88% of officers are men) walking and driving around carrying guns doesn't solve any of these problems. It just squeezes budgets with increased police costs.

If you don't solve why people aren't working, why the jobs aren't there, we're just continuing a cycle of crime and incarceration. If you don't give a person something to live for, a reason, something to have some sense of self about, what do you expect from that person? How do expect that person to function in society?

All we ever hear about is how high taxes are. Taxes must be cut. They are such a burden. Politicians get elected promising to cut taxes.

Yet, somehow more money needs to appear so we can police our way out of the problem. How much are you willing to have your taxes raised?

Those of you that feel more police are the answer, start sending those checks to the City. The tax return you're about to get - send it to the City. The next raise you get at work - fork that amount over to the City. You get the point - put your money where your mouth is. Services (like the police...especially the police) cost money.

We already pay too much and have too many police. If you'd like to double-down on this always-more-police experiment, you know where to send the money.

Streetcars, Safety and Hucksters

Constituents of City of Milwaukee Alderman Tony Zielinski may want to read his recent bloviating regarding the Mayor’s 2018 City of Milwaukee Budget.

He’s wholeheartedly opposed to the City’s streetcar project. Yet, and this shows his desperation to develop a coherent rebuttal, Zielinski is presenting this as a choice between either funding the streetcar project or eliminating some police and fire fighter positions.

Because that’s the only two choices we have as a City – streetcars or safety? More appropriately, it’s a safe political road to getting Zielinski some attention – playing off the misplaced fears of citizens to continually funnel more and more money to police and militaristic options. 

For some context, Wisconsin has spent over a billion dollars on new stadiums for the Brewers, Bucks and Packers in the last decade. Private sport structures whose benefits go to their private owners. The State and the City has also doled out millions in subsidies to businesses for years and years.

But here comes Zielinski with numerous press releases condemning the Mayor and the streetcar.

Where were all of Zielinksi’s press releases condemning the millions of dollars in giveaways to stadiums, developers and other corporate interests?

Milwaukee is spending $128 million on a streetcar to be used by residents, tourists and businesses.

How is this a waste?

Every other major city has some sort of streetcar, light rail or similar. So, it seems more like Milwaukee is behind the curve as far as what businesses and workers want in amenities and infrastructure. Local infrastructure is what creates jobs and draws businesses, residents and tourists.

As an alderman supposedly so concerned with constituents’ tax dollars being spent efficiently, how much of the entire Milwaukee budget does Mr. Zielinksi want going to police and fire?

As Bruce Murphy highlighted in a recent article, “In 2004, when Barrett started as mayor, the police and fire budget represented 62.7 percent of the city’s combined shared revenue and property tax levy; by 2017 the police and fire budget accounted for 87.7 percent. Increasingly, it’s become difficult for the city to pay for anything but police and fire services…Today, police and fire workers account for 77 percent of all taxpayer contributions to city employee pensions.”

So, Mr. Zielinski, how much more of the City of Milwaukee budget should go to just police officers and fire fighters?

How much more do we need to spend on public safety Mr. Zielinksi? How many police officers does Milwaukee need? Let’s see the numbers. Let’s see your analysis. How are you arriving at your conclusions?

Milwaukee has 42 police employees for every 10,000 people in the City of Milwaukee. Ranking Milwaukee 14th in the U.S. The average in the U.S. for cities with a population over 500,000 is 24 police employees for every 10,000 people. The population of the City of Milwaukee ranks 30th among the 100 largest cities in America.

Milwaukee already has almost twice as many police employees as other similar-sized cities.

To pretend to be concerned about the budget or to present this as acting fiscally responsible is deceitful. Just like when federal politicians complain about the federal budget while simultaneously pumping more money into the Pentagon. For Zielinski to talk of City budget woes, yet he wants to throw more money at the two most heavily-funded departments, he cannot be taken seriously.

Maybe if we focused more on infrastructure to attract businesses we could create more jobs, alleviating some of the poverty and inequality in Milwaukee and, thus, reducing the need to spend a majority of the City of Milwaukee budget on police officers.

As City of Milwaukee resident who voted for Zielinski as my representative, I am extremely disappointed by his position. It is incredibly short-sighted.

Maybe Tony should do some reading about urban infrastructure, transit, connectivity and smart growth. Does Mr. Zielinksi not realize that his Bay View neighborhood benefits from the growth in downtown Milwaukee? Does he not understand that the construction, new restaurants and positive developments occurring in Bay View are related to the boom that is taking place in downtown Milwaukee? It’s partially because of the FIRE industries located in the downtown, where many Bay View residents work, that Bay View residents have the disposable income to spend on bars, restaurants and other attractions. (Not to mention all the workers involved in the construction and/or renovation of these projects.) To hamper the streetcar, and thus the potential and attractiveness of the downtown, is to hamper Bay View. The investment in the streetcar is an investment in all of Milwaukee, including Bay View.

To start, the streetcar will connect the downtown – its employment centers, the lakefront and the major attractions (Summerfest, Art Museum, the Bucks arena, etc.). Hopefully, if Milwaukee can be as forward thinking as every other city its size, we will expand the system…connecting to Miller Park, UWM, Marquette and Mitchell airport, to name a few.

Zielinski’s latest press release - October 2, 2017 - proposed eliminating $208,000 for two streetcar management positions and instead moving that money to police officer positions. Since police officers average around $65,000 per year, this would equate to roughly three police officer positions. Which, of course, makes no sense. Are these just political ploys to introduce Zielinski to a wider audience within the City for a possible mayoral run? Plus, eliminating management from the streetcar only burdens its potential. Citizens, businesses and tourists will benefit from a well-run streetcar.

The City of Milwaukee has made repeated cuts to other departments and vital community services while, up to this point, leaving untouched the fire and police department. This cannot continue. Should the Mayor continue to allow the police and fire departments to strong-arm the City of Milwaukee budget? Why should every other department, worker, and/or project continue to accept less, while the police officers and fire fighters continue to get more and more?

The Mayor is functioning with less and less. And, in the face of such adversity, his budget seems practical and reasonable.

Where were Zielinski's press releases when other vital departments’ budgets were being cut and their employees were getting furloughs, laid-off, not getting raises, paying more for health care and contributing more to retirement? Was he bashing the Mayor then for not funding those departments? Other departments’ budgets haven't seen increases in years, many have seen cuts, yet the police and fire fighters keep getting theirs. They always do. And that’s why they take up 88% of the entire budget!

Zielinski's comments and position on the streetcar should definitely be in the forefront of his constituents' minds during his next re-election campaign. His short-sighted outlook will have negative long-term consequences for Bay View, Milwaukee and the citizens.

For Further Reading:
Infrastructure Financing Options for Transit-Oriented Development
Measuring Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development
Impact of Transit Cuts On Access To Jobs In Metropolitan Milwaukee
Light Rail In Milwaukee: An Analysis Of The Potential Impact On Economic Development
Strategic Value Creation In Infrastructure Projects
Why America's Public Transportation Is Crumbling

Aside:
Alderman Zielinski has just released yet another press release.

A driver ran a red light the other day and killed a woman and her daughter. The accident is terribly saddening (any avoidable accident such as this always is).

Zielinski is now demanding city-wide installation of red-light cameras.

Here, again, we have a situation that will cost the taxpayers money. The red-light cameras will need to be purchased, installed, monitored, repaired and occasionally upgraded.

I'm not against such technology. I'm just saying, this, too, costs money.

For Zielinski, the money spent on cameras would be fine. But spending on a streetcar, which would also benefit local citizens, is too much. Even though a streetcar would mean less people having to drive and, thus, less people possibly blowing through red lights.

It should also be noted that red-light cameras will not prevent accidents. They don't stop cars that have gone through red lights. If you're not noticing the red light and blowing through it, you're also not going to notice the camera.

Streetcar Or Safety

Looks like Milwaukee Alderman Tony Zielinkski might be setting himself up as a challenger in a run to be the Mayor of Milwaukee.

Current Mayor Tom Barrett recently announced he might have to eliminate some safety-worker positions (police officers, firefighters,nurses, code inspectors) due to budgetary constraints.

Zielinkski immediately ridiculed the Mayor, saying even mentioning the possibility of cutting positions as "reckless" and "unreasonable".

Zielinkski framed the discussion as being between keeping the positions and building the streetcar. Because those are the only two budgetary choices that can be made - keep safety positions or build a streetcar?

And, just for some context, Wisconsin has spent over a billion dollars on new stadiums for the Brewers, Bucks and Packers in the last decade. Private sport structures whose benefits go to their private owners. But Milwaukee spending $128 million on a streetcar to be used by residents, tourists and businesses is a waste?

Barrett, himself, even stated that cutting those positions is not what he wants. But sometimes, as Mayor, you have to make choices that won't please everyone.

I get that the streetcar is a bit of a lightning rod and certain persons with access to the media love to pile on about what a waste the streetcar is. Although every other major city has some sort of streetcar, light rail or similar. So, it seems more like, as usual, Milwaukee is behind the curve as far as what businesses and workers want in amenities and infrastructure. Local infrastructure is what creates jobs and draws businesses, residents and tourists.

In our current police-state era, funding for defense/police/safety can never be diminished. More officers and more guns, always. In 2013, 59% of the City of Milwaukee budget went to just the police (41%) and fire (18%) departments.

We've been doing this for decades now, it hasn't worked. To keep funding this imaginary, more-cops-is-the-answer paradigm, is simply throwing away money. Why, when it comes to defense or safety, is there no limit on the amount of people needed or the amount of money that should be spent? At the local, state and federal level, America's defense/safety budgets dwarf those of other nations. Yet, we're no safer. What is all this money being spent on? Seems like there is obviously a lot of efficiency that can be made.

The Police Association's President Michael Crivello stated, "We're going to do everything to keep this community safe, but we won't be as effective as we otherwise would be should we be properly staffed."  How is this quantified? What does "properly staffed" mean? What metrics is the Association using to determine safety, effectiveness, staffing, etc.?

Maybe we do need to keep the positions. But using fear and emotion to guide a decision is definitely not how policy should be made.

We should start by making a more scientific basis for these discussions and decisions. Platitudes and bumper-sticker slogans sound great, but they typically don't have the nuance and depth required for good public policy.

We could remove some exemptions, raise the local sales tax, add fees for certain services, collect more taxes, provide less incentives to private developers and businesses, and on and on. There are numerous ways fund the many services we all count on from our local government.

The saddest thing is that this is being pitted as a streetcar versus safety debate. It shouldn't be. These are not the only choices.