Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 12:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

They are happy enough to take it from taxpayers.

Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 12:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The Democrat protested very loudly when the aldermen raised their salaries sometime back. However, I thought the Democrat was strangely silent about the issue throughout the recent elections. Why raise the issue now?

Did anyone REALLY think that Jake was going to win the Mayor's election, suddenly grow a backbone and start standing up to Arceneaux-Mathis?

Posted by natchez1 (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 1:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The only reason to waive part of the fee would be on a speculative project where to get funding all permits and planning permission were in place in order to get the financing. Having to pay thousands for permits that you may never use (if funding could not be found) could stop a potential development. A difference of $15,000 could make a difference. The aldermen actually were right to pass this. Although the $ 40 million threshold to get the exemption seems rather high! Not many projects in the City Limits will cost that much. I assume the new casino asked for the break. it is better to take a small cut and get the project underway than to risk losing a potential cash cow for the city. It is a small price to pay. The revenues for a major employer will soon make up the difference.

Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 2:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It is time for the Alder-people to receive a pay CUT. They are way over paid, especially since the income is supplementary. What is wrong with minimum wage for them? Many folks around here have to try and live off of that as their main source of income.

Posted by justeinberg (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It appears that natchez1 has a much better handle on economic development than the 'experts' at the ND. Incentives like these are common in attracting new businesses to build/expand in cities all across the country. If you think this small incentive is too much, you should read clearly the incentives given to the developers/owners of the convention center hotel. The goal is to create jobs and grow the tax base and fuel our economy with money that does not exist in it currently. The $15,000 (or whatever amount you'd prefer to use) for permit fees pale in comparison to the future taxes generated (income, sales, payroll, property, etc...) that should buy much more than 1/2 of a new police car. I don't know if the new casino asked for the breaks or not, but if they didn't, shame on them. I am certain that if you check the documents for what the convention center hotel paid, you'd find a whopping total of $0 for permit fees. I would hope that the ND would have a longer term view of the impact of incentives like these in future articles.

Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have got to ask this...What does the Convention Center do for Natchez? Do they have enough convention's there to pay for it?

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with justeinberg, it is common practice to offer incentives for the purpose of economic development.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 3:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

natchez1, justeinberg, happybunny- it is good to see fascism alive and well in Natchez.

Everybody else, please take a look at just some of the incentives available to businesses locating in our region (you pay for all this, so take the time to look):

http://www.mississippi.org/content.aspx?...

Posted by justine (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The hotel got a $23,000 waiver on their permit fee. They got a $3million property tax break over the next 15yrs. Did the other hotels (Hampton Inn, that eyesore by the bridge...) get anything? I'd like to know.
If Lane is asking for this then we are idiots! Lane and any other casino needs to come in here asking what they can do for us. After all, they will be sucking the life-blood out of this community while the locals loose their money to the slots when they should/could be supporting existing local businesses. And for what? a few million? The big money all goes down the road to Atlanta, the coast, corporate headquarters. Here's to highwater!

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 3:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fascism? Not quite sure what the tie is.

I would like to see Natchez grow economically. It was great when IP was here. People had jobs, the public schools were safe to go to, the hospital wasn't drained with uninsured patients that do not pay their bills...etc. We need it very badly. Gone is the town that I grew up in.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fascism is when government sells itself to business bunny. I wouldn't expect you to understand that. This will not be jobs with payscales like IP or Armstrong. The Mississippi Department of Education and Phillip West are responsible for the decay of the public school system, with some help from the US Dept. of Education.

I hear there is a sale at the mall. Hurry and you can catch it maybe.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's entertaining to see you all (you in particular) that do nothing but make negative comments about everything.

My opinion differes from yours, does that make me less intelligent? I am a highly educated executive, a far to the right Republican, and I believe in economic development. Now you know a little more about me and can make a more educated opinion concerning my intelligence.

Apparently you are seated in front of your crystal ball and KNOW what type of business may be coming. I wish I had one, do they sell them at the mall?

Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Happy Bunny - to be highly educated your grammar and spelling could use some work. Where did you go to school - Trinity and then Ole Miss?

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Vidalia then LSU, then Florida State. Oh the fallout from spell check!

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I've read the Mississippi Development Plan. I know what is coming.

The fact that you are a far to the right Republican, which I could see in my crystal ball, does increase my estimation of your intelligence; I do believe you are intelligent but very misinformed and very uneducated about the connection of the Republican Party and the fascist movement in Germany during WW II. Look up the Business Plot of 1934 and Union Banking Corporation.

The policies you advocate in your desire for economic development, which the US Department of Commerce now describes as public/private partnerships is the very model of fascist Germany.

I can show you page after page of proof of my assertions.,

Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

HB: Can you spell Ell Ess You?

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are correct, I am not well versed on WW II but I was heavily involved in the economic development arm of the Southshore Alliance in Florida. It was a marriage of three local chambers in the suburbs of Tampa. We worked as a group to attract industry to our area. I am by no means an expert but I do have some knowledge of the process. I do believe that incentives are an important way to attract business. I agree with you, we do not need a lot of low paying jobs that would only deepen the poverty problem we have in Natchez but the right type of industry would be a blessing for us.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sure...LSU :)

Posted by hossfly (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Good job HB. I am pulling for your Tigers. Hopefully Tigers vs DAWGS in the CWS finals.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Go TIGERS!!

Posted by justeinberg (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 7:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

EKK, I have read (and agreed with some) of your posts on this site. However, in this case I would be very interested to hear not only criticism of the politicians, business investors and other posters on this site, but also recommended solutions or alternative incentives to attract businesses into our region of SW MS. If you study at all the incentives and breaks given Toyota for locating near Tupelo MS, I would imagine that you'd be of the opinion that facism is thriving in the northeastern part of our state. Attracting new industry (and I'm not talking smokestacks here) has become such a competition among communities and states that it would not surprise me to see it become an offering in our institutions of higher learning as successful negotiators are in great demand right now. I have been very close to one such negotiation in Illinois, and there is almost nothing that surprises me anymore when reading of such incentives listed in this article.

I hope you will offer some recommendations as a rebuttle.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 19, 2008 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First of all justeinberg, I don't think this competition to attract business is a good thing because I don't think economies can or should be planned. What we are seeing is another attempt at building a planned economy all throughout what is called the Delta Region.

The allure of economic development is far less alluring to those who understand that economic development in reality means the establishment of public/private partnerships; with at most a few hours of thought and reading those who understand public/private partnerships soon understand that public/private partnerships are in reality government using taxpayer capital to attract and fund in part business. Government is using citizens as capital assets. This implies that government sees itself as owner of the citizens.

Government ownership of citizens is more than implied to those who visit Commerce and Treasury Dept. websites and discover the Departments of Human Capital contained within. If you care to read even more, you will discover that a birth certificate contains the same information a warehouse receipt contains on a delivery; birth certificates are sent to the Department of Commerce. Each new person is in effect put into the inventory of the US Department of Commerce under which the Economic Development Administration operates.

This economy is not being operated for the good of the citizens but for the good of the owners of the Federal Reserve System and their friends and accomplices in government and industry.

My solution is to go back to an unplanned economy, to sound money and free/fair marketing.

Why do people offer themselves up as property to the government? Mainly because they don't realize they are doing it.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I guess I don't understand what you are proposing. Can you explain how we would acheive an unplanned economy?

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

An unplanned economy is one that responds to market desires instead of one that attempts to create market desires bunny. Such economies have been successful for thousands of years.

Planned economies are attempts by government to manage the marketplace; in order to do that government must also manage the people.

As a far right wing Republican you should be an advocate of market economy. An example of a market economy would be the US until about 1913. Examples of planned economies are the Soviet Union, fascist Germany, the Wiemar Republic, China, the member nations of the EU, and the current US economy.

Unknown to you, far right wing Republicans call themselves neo-cons. In the seventies these same people called themselves neo-liberals, but before then they were known as Trotskyites, followers of the style of Marxism Leon Trotsky promoted which was based on continual revolution, or continual warfare to bring about social change to a planned, collectivist world economy.

Achieving market economy is simple. Use commodity based money and as far as possible have government not intervene in private contracts. Destroy central banking and severely restrict fractional reserve banking; make usury and all other banking crimes capital crimes and publicly enforce execution of the law.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 1:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You must be an economist. I always found economics fascinating, I just don't read as much about it as I should. How would we function without a central banking system?

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If we had no central bank but had commodity money each person would be an individual bank bunny, and as before groups of individuals could combine to form banks.

This is where the problem always starts though, in the forming of banks. Banks form to "make" money. Banks make money by loaning out more money than they actually have and charging interest, or ususry, on that money. If a bank has 100 dollars in reserve, it can loan out up to 1000 dollars according to the reserve rate current at the time.
The loaning out of this non-existent money makes the 100 dollars in reserve worth less, so additional usury is introduced into the system.

The way to combat this is with state banks that loan commodity money at no interest. There should be fifty state banks all dealing in gold and silver coins whose value has already been set by the Constitution. One dollar is 371.25 grains of pure silver; a grain is one plump kernel of wheat. This is the way our system was originally set up, and states were forbidden to make anything but gold and silver coins legal tender.

Under the current system what is really being loaned out as credit is a ledger entry backed by the Federal Reserve's ability to persuade the Treasury Dept. to tax the wages of citizens. When you borrow money from a bank you are borrowing something that already belongs to you and you are charged interest plus fees for that privilege. The local bank and the Fed and people serving in Congress benefit, and you are harmed.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand the banking system very well because I am a banker. I see your point but don't think we'll ever see anything changes like that in our lifetime. At least the commercial banks are paying into the tax system unlike the credit unions who continue to enjoy their tax free status and have long ago outlived their original purpose. Now they are lobbying to exceed their footprint and move into the commercial arena.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

As a Republican, do you feel the Constitution should be followed, or followed only when it doesn't stand in the way of hidden wealth transfer?

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Here, please read this, I think you will find it fascinating as it explains some concepts we are discussing, and I would like to hear what you think of this:

http://www.6towns.com/driving/Credit%20R...

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I feel that it should be followed to protect our basic freedoms.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That's very interesting. Was that the only case brought against the banking system. I am surprised this didn't cause the government to rethink what they were doing.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Our most basic freedom is the right to the labor of our bodies. The Federal Reserve System and current banking laws under UCC deny us that right.

When George Bush says it is our duty to export democracy he is a touch off base. First, it is not our duty to involve ourselves in the affairs of other countries, and secondly we are not a democratic nation but a republic.

Then, GW says the fundamentalist Islamics want to destroy our freedoms when in fact what attracted Muslims to this country was the similarity of the Bill of Rights to teachings of the Koran. Fundamental Islamic banking law does not allow usury or fiat money and follows the same philosophy Alan Greenspan outlined in 'Gold and Economic Freedom'.

Under the Constitution three kinds of law were allowed for judgement: common law, equity, and maritime law. One of the main reasons for the Revolution was the British enforcement of maritime law on land. Maritime Law is also known as Law Merchant, or banking law. Due to redefinitions of money under UCC codes maritime law is once again widely enforced on land in the United States.

Under common law and equity contracts such as those entered into by commercial banks today could not be enforced because the bank offers no exchange of real value. Common law and Equty demand all contracts be settled by exchange of values determined to be satisfactorily equal. UCC law allows exchange of value for negative value. All commerce today is conducted in debt instead of in payment.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Other cases have been brought, but winning one requires a jury that understands the Constitution and those are hard to come by today.

There was a successful tax case last summer won by a company that was paying its employees in silver coins and thus allowing them to pay a drastically reduced income tax rate.

In another tax case last summer, I will try to find it for you, the federal judge told the defendant "I do not allow the Constitution in my court room". Although a lot of people were astonished at this, the judge was likely correct because in all truth the jurisdiction being heard was not one covered by any article of the constitution.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 2:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So prior to the central banking system being implemented, people could go to their state banks and borrow money interest free?
By the way, there is a bank in the midwest somewhere that has a substantial muslim population and they specialize in creative lending to the muslims. They "lease" to own the property or use certain types of trusts to get around their religion. The contracts have to be submitted to the leaders for approval. I was not aware their religion restricted the payment of interest until I read the article but I thought it was fascinating.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The most prosperous period of America cam just before the Revolution when the colonies were operating their own banks. They were using script, a type of fiat money, but they realized that it would work as long as the amount of it issued did not exceed 5% of what could be produced in a year. The money was loaned either at no interest, or very low interest in exchange for collateral on land or crops or product of a business. This worked because what is necessary for a good economy is people to sell, people to buy, and enough currency for exchange to take place.

When Franklin went to England he was asked what accounted for the prosperity of the colonies because at that time in England there was high unemployment, high crime rates, high taxes on the nobility, and general discord and economic malaise. When Franklin explained the system being used the Bank of England persuaded the King to ban the colonies from using their own money and force them to use the King's gold, which the King supplied in such short quantity that within a year the economy of the colonies was wrecked. This is why the Revolution happened, at least this is the primary reason given by Benjamin Franklin. The Bank of England controlled England then and now, and the Bank of England was instrumental in setting up the Federal Reserve in the US, and the backers of the Bank of England were the backers of the Federal Reserve. The same families still exercise majority control today.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 3:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That is fascinating, I don't remember ever being taught that in school, of course that was a while back. Thank you for sharing this information.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 3:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Here is why Muslims, Jews, and Christians are not supposed to take part in interest, either paying or charging:

Commerce is a natural part of life, considered to be ordained by God through scriptures of all "People of the Book". A man and a woman, engaging in commerce, will produce in due time a capital gain of one chiid. The earth tilled and sown with seeds will in time yield fruit and grain in greater quantity than the seed sown. Gain is a function of living things.

Interest, on the other hand, is trading in the medium of exchange and so is not real commerce. Two pieces of gold can never become three; put two pieces of gold side by side and leave them forever and they will never be three.

The reasons Christians and Muslims disliked Jews for so many centuries is that followers of the Talmud, though forbidden to charge interest to each other, were allowed to charge it to gentiles as gentiles were not seen as real people in the Talmud. This is the reason behind the holocaust. The German people felt that the Jews in Germany wanted only to engage in trade and not real productive work. That is the simple truth of the whole matter.

Interest allows the accumulation of large amounts of unearned capital which can be used to dominate others, either through economic, social, or military controls. For all these reasons interest was traditionally seen as ungodly.

Posted by happybunny (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Enjoyed chatting with you the last few days, I am headed home and likely will not be on the computer this weekend. My swimming pool calls. Have a nice weekend.

Posted by EnKiKur (anonymous) on June 20, 2008 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You too bunny. Enjoy the pool.

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on June 27, 2008 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I appreciate your opinion ND staff.

this was a good article

I voted against Middleton, but to no avail.

Now we're saddled with his giveaway mentality (typical ploy of liberal Democrats to buy votes, how pathetic to offer free water to buy peoples votes, and how pathetic of our citizenry to fall for such nonsense).

WAKE UP NATCHEZ FOOLS!!!!!! A city must be run like a business, and put money (if there is any extra) away for that rainy day. With the price of gas going up, I'm sure tourism, our last mainstay, will diminish. Then what will we have? I hope our Republican and more conservative Democrat Aldermen can dominate and not allow Middleton to cast any vote on a tiebreaker and cause bad policies to ruin our city.

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on June 27, 2008 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NatchzMom55, I like your thinking process. Actually we should go back to the NONPAID political system. It should be an HONOR to serve. Then we wouldn't have to worry about these career politicians that seem to be able to hang on forever. I cannot understand why anyone would want to serve as a politician for longer than a term or two anyway. Something must be wrong with anyone that would continue in public elected office for over 10 years. There is more to life than being power hungry and to continue to foul up our city.

Posted by Krogers (anonymous) on June 27, 2008 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Enkikur- you are certainly a vast resource of information, and I do appreciate your willingness to educate anyone willing to read at such great length,

my understanding of the Fed though leads me to disagree with you on it's history as I do not see that it is controlled by the same families over the decades, but that it's members are appointed to serve terms and that those members have changed over time, not to be within the same family.

Although I do agree that the banking system is not to the distinct advantage of the overall citizenry and that banks do profit at our labor.