Editor:

Huge, insane, disparity in wealth causes a fusion of government run by elites and money/job dependent politicians. (“Post capitalism”)

But good capitalism depends on economies of scale (bulk buying), competing sellers to keep the price down (unless public sources are cheaper and better like police, school lunches, and mortgage assistance programs), and sufficient regulation to ensure a fair playing field.

The progressive Democrats are consistently laser focused on affordability. They propose using basic economic tools to right the ship.

Being liberal because you want to help regular people is better than being conservative because you help the rich who run a deep state holding onto power.

I think we have to keep an open mind and decide if some of the progressives may be the best capitalists to come along in a long time. In these economically aberrant times it bears watching.

P.S. Why are President-related forces are using the primaries to see where votes and machines are stored? We already have excellent state monitors for this. Do we need monitors for the administration’s new monitors? Hmm.

Conrad F. Cropsey

Albion

Editor:

Last month, I traveled to Washington, D.C., with Citizens’ Climate Lobby to join hundreds of Americans from across the country in meetings with members of Congress and their staff.

During CCL’s Conference and Lobby Day on Capitol Hill, I met with the office of Congresswoman Claudia Tenney and other members of Congress around the state to discuss policies that can strengthen America’s energy future while addressing the challenges of climate change.

As a lifelong Republican who lives on a farm in a rural farming community, I understand how closely our livelihoods are tied to the natural world. Farmers know that stewardship is a responsibility and that taking care of our land, water, and air is something that should unite us, not divide us.

I encouraged Congress to support permitting reform that makes it easier to build the infrastructure our country needs for cleaner, more efficient and affordable domestic energy. Efficient permitting processes can help unlock investment, create jobs, and improve our energy security. I also support market-based policies that ensure American businesses can compete fairly while encouraging innovation and cleaner production.

As a Republican and a member of Citizens’ Climate Lobby, I believe in the Republican conservation tradition championed by Theodore Roosevelt and Richard Nixon. Conservation, innovation, and free enterprise are not competing ideas—they are complementary strengths that can help America build a stronger economy while protecting the resources that sustain us. That’s the message I was proud to bring to Capitol Hill.

Rob Johnson

Medina

Editor:

It was encouraging to interact with so many people who “get it” at the Orleans County 4-H Fair recently. While serving at the Orleans Bluebird Society booth, I encountered many folks who had stories to tell about orioles, pileated woodpeckers, bluebirds, native sparrows, rose-breasted grosbeaks, cedar waxwings and numerous others.

People from as far away as Dallas and Houston had stories to tell about the reality of climate change. One guy told me it was over 102 degrees and 98 percent humidity in Houston as we spoke.

The Orleans County Federation of outdoor sports clubs had the conservation cabin all decked out. And that black bear was something to see—and be seen with.

Thanks to folks such as Mike Elam for another job well done. And kudos to his wife Krys for being so supportive of his efforts.

Sincerely,

Gary Kent

Albion

Editor:

I appreciate Mr. Lauricella taking the time to respond, and I want to clarify, I am not dismissing concerns about public safety. I am dismissing concerns about public safety that are built on anecdote while ignoring the data in front of us. Those are not the same thing.

Any honest debate about safety in our communities requires a careful blend of data and lived experience, not one at the expense of the other. Mr. Lauricella has been a vocal advocate for fiscal responsibility, so I’ll ask directly: is it responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars to fund programs, initiatives, and legislation based on how some people feel, particularly when those feelings run contrary to what the data actually shows?

Mr. Lauricella points to a rise in unpunished “quality-of-life” offenses, and here is where we clearly part ways. So-called victimless crimes and quality-of-life offenses are precisely the category where we’d be better served addressing root causes rather than reflexively reaching for punishment. The prevailing instinct among hardline conservatives on this issue is a punitive one, which conveniently keeps the prison-industrial complex well fed. Perhaps that’s no accident, given how central the prison system is to the economic “health” of our region.

From what I’ve observed, public criticism of bail reform in New York tends to lump every offense together — petty theft and manslaughter treated as though they sit on the same shelf. That criticism conveniently ignores both the facts and the actual intent of the legislation, which is to reduce recidivism rates for low-level offenses. This is exactly where data matters, because one person’s lived experience, however real to them, isn’t a stand-in for the experience of an entire population. I don’t think Mr. Lauricella is actually disputing the validity of the research. I think he’d simply prefer that “observing reality” mean whatever aligns with his existing opinion.

I’ll skip the broad brushstrokes this time and instead leave Mr. Lauricella with a question. He argues that academia and statistical models shouldn’t “supersede the firsthand experience of local business owners, residents and crime victims.” Is that a standard you’re prepared to apply consistently? Take, for instance, the firsthand experience of parents, teachers, school administrators, and survivors of school shootings — should their testimony be what drives legislation restricting access to firearms? Or take the firsthand experience of survivors of rape, incest, or molestation — are conservatives equally willing to let those lived experiences shape how we legislate abortion? Or is the anecdote-over-evidence approach reserved for the topics where it happens to be politically convenient?

Much of this latest letter reads as an argument for governance by the loudest minority rather than the majority informed by evidence. It would help if Mr. Lauricella defined, in concrete terms, what qualifies as a “genuine community concern,” listed the actual problems facing Orleans County, and identified their real causes. Absent that, this amounts to little more than an appeal to emotion.

Matthew Ballard

LeRoy

Editor:

 How exciting for movie fans everywhere! Santa Claudia supports using millions of dollars of your public funds to renovate and upgrade private commercial movie theaters all across Orleans and Genesee counties! Who says socialism isn’t alive and well within the republican party?

Problem is, the joke’s on you taxpayers – there are no qualifying movie theaters in either Orleans or Genesee counties.

Keep in mind voters, business & corporate taxes become public money.  Tax “credits” equal less taxes owed, which in turn, means less public money for your schools, police protection, fire safety, water, street repairs, parks, public services and so forth.

Not only do you receive no benefit whatsoever from Claudia Tenney’s “timely and important” SCREEN Act legislation, your public resources are subsidizing these private business projects in other towns and cities! Finally, adding insult to injury, she then leaves it up to you to make up the difference in your own communities!  What a gal!

How patently unfortunate. Just think of all that missed growth if only Albion had a newly renovated Main Street movie theater directly across from the real Santa Claus! Heck, even with Sneezy’s and The Olde Coach long gone, a colossal attraction of that magnitude would likely have drawn scores of people from as far away as Kent, Fancher or maybe even Millville! It sure makes me nostalgic for the old Rialto lost to the ages so long, long ago.

Oh well, no sense mourning what might have been. Perhaps Claudia can live up to her name and “claw back” enough of your corporate welfare, hard-earned tax dollars to at least re-open the Sunset Drive-In in Middleport.  Which, by the way, was better than any movie theater around!  Although it’s technically in Niagara County, it’s still way more than what you’re getting from this dud of a deal – nothing.

That reminds me Claudia, didn’t you catch Ms. Mager’s letter to The Hub a little while back?  Here in New York State, we’re already terrified to walk our dogs in broad daylight let alone venture into the unknown just to see a movie. Perhaps a change in priorities is in order?

As for me, living on a fixed income makes it a challenge just to buy a small bag of popcorn and still feed my three-legged cats. Perhaps, if I could afford to turn the lights on, I could then find my car keys, roll up all my loose change, get to a gas station and buy a half-gallon of gasoline. Only then might I risk murder and mayhem for a trip to the closest movie theater. That being said, it’s already been six months since my brakes didn’t pass inspection. My how time flies when you’re winning under Donald Trump.

Rochester, Buffalo and their surrounding areas already have some of the finest movie theaters anywhere.  The hard reality is that unless the “SCREEN ACT” has provisions to stop the rude jerk from talking in the row behind me, the oblivious idiot down in front lighting up the place with their cellphone, or reeling in the cost of a small Coca-Cola below $5.00 – neither I, nor most people, will be enticed any time soon to return to the cinema in spite of their tax-payer subsidized seating, sound systems and HVAC.

In other words, great give-a-way Claudia!

Voters, come this November, make a quick note to yourselves: “CLCL” in remembrance of Clueless Claudia and her “SCREEN ACT” which, in communities across America like Orleans and Genesee counties, will go over like passing gas in church.

Before I close, any guesses why all my cats have three legs?

Fact is, under the Tenney/Trump economy – it’s the only way we all can afford to eat!

In short, it’s not just for immigrants anymore.

Tom Graham,

Rochester

Editor:

Why is it that when a Democrat in Congress is accused to sexual misconduct he is pressured into resigning while Republicans refer their own to get lost in the Ethics Committee process?

Why is it that Congress – constitutionally the branch of government that declares war – is silent while we have won the present Iran war weekly since February –  and more money yet it being requested for it?

Why is it that the total cumulative debt in 1986 before tax cuts was $2.125 trillion but now that is $37.64 trillion  In 1986 the middle class share of Federal revenues – 40% to 50 % on  spending that helps them – has decreased from 39% of revenues to 25%.

Why did the Republican in charge of protecting elections from foreign and electronic interference in 2020 give that election a clean bill of health while we now are told that undisclosed assessment show the machines were hacked. Didn’t Fox News already pay the firms providing our machines over a billion dollars for claiming that? (Same for illegals’ voting and voting by mail.)

Why is it that Republican campaign coffers are overflowing with huge contributions to anonymous PACs while the DNC is having to mortgage their building to raise funds for the fall?

Why do we need an Arch De Triumph type structure over the M Street Bridge or a Ball Room to hold more of the rich and famous in addition to officials needed to attend State Dinners.  (I happened to like the former East Wing that no one ever complained about.)  (And I detest all the solid gold ending up on everything including While House toilets.)

The answers are simple if you want do not want your grocery bill or gas prices to keep spiraling upwards.

So, married women be sure to have your birth certificates and marriage licenses handy in case those proposals are imposed by executive order. Naturalized Canadians and others have those papers with you. Blacks, in former black districts, look for the officials at the state and federal level who will give you back your rightful voting power.

And anyone who is not in the top 1,000 monied elite, who now help rung Washington, vote your pocket book – but remember that will mean shedding old ideas and bad math which is cherry picked just to convince get your vote helping someone else. All turn out!

Conrad F. Cropsey

Albion

Editor:

In his recent letter (“The ‘Right’ ignore statistics, common sense when it doesn’t align with views”), Matthew Ballard takes a victory lap on behalf of academic studies and government statistics, dismissing anyone concerned about public safety as operating purely on “fear and anecdote.” It’s a clever piece of satire, but clever rhetoric doesn’t make a neighborhood safer.

Mr. Ballard mocks for questioning “ivory-tower research” on bail reform. But the frustration with bail reform in Upstate New York isn’t about being “anti-education”—it’s about the disconnect between official data and lived experience.

When shoplifting spikes, small business owners stop reporting every incident because they know repeat offenders are processed and released before the paperwork is finished. When police departments report lower numbers, it often reflects fewer arrests being made under new legal restrictions, not fewer crimes occurring.

Pointing out that “crime is down on paper” rings hollow to a community watching local quality-of-life offenses go unpunished. That isn’t “ignoring common sense”—it’s observing reality.

Furthermore, Mr. Ballard criticizes for objecting to partisan labels, yet his own letter relies heavily on broad brushstrokes and personal jabs like “orange demagogue.” If we are going to debate policies like criminal justice reform or regional economic health, we should be able to do so without treating every local citizen who voices concern as an uneducated partisan.

Academia and statistical models have their place, but they shouldn’t supersede the firsthand experience of local business owners, residents and crime victims. Dismissing genuine community concern as mere “fear-mongering” does nothing to address the actual problems facing Orleans County.

Paul Lauricella

Yates

Editor:

President Trump has usurped the Constitutional authority of Congress by declaring emergencies where none exist. These actions align with Nazi theorist Carl Schmitt who argued that the power in a democracy can be exploited by using emergencies to create exceptions to the rule-based Constitutional order.

Republicans, including Congresswoman Claudia Tenney and Congressman Nick Langworthy, have not only acquiesced, but have enthusiastically encouraged this behavior.

Mr. Trump has declared emergencies, where none exist, to deploy troops to American cities. Declaring an emergency, again where none exist, to levy tariffs. Tariffs are taxes, we the people pay, bypassing our representation.

Mr. Trump has declared that there was an imminent threat from Iran to justify military action, despite U.S. intelligence assessments that indicated Iran had not started a nuclear weapons program, contradicting any imminent threat claims.

Mr. Schmitt also wrote that self-determination should be erased. That the individuals should be one with the state. This explains why any criticisms of Mr. Trump or his administration is seen as criticism of the state; as Mr. Trump says, “the free press is the enemy of the people.”

It is interesting that Vice President J.D. Vance cited Carl Schmitt in an interview with Ross Douthat. This explains the recent court documents where government lawyers told the judge that this administration has withheld millions of Congressional approved funds from states for purely political reasons. States that didn’t vote for Mr. Trump need to be punished by withholding moneys for disaster relief, healthcare and education.

Our Constitution gives the power of the purse, and right to declare war to the people through their Congressional representatives. As a result of Ms. Tenney’s and Mr. Langworthy’s actions their constituents have higher gas prices, higher grocery prices, increased unemployment, weakening GDP, inflation and above all pervasive corruption throughout the government.

Ms. Tenney and Mr. Langworthy are surrendering their responsibility and our Constitutional democracy to give Mr. Trump the authorities of a king.

William Fine

Brockport

Editor:

It is important to put the proposed data center at the STAMP site in Genesee County into the  broader context of artificial intelligence (AI).

AI technology in the US is experiencing a huge economic bubble, with investments far out of line with likely future profits. That financial bubble is likely to pop, thereby devastating the current AI landscape and dramatically reducing the need for new data centers. This vulnerability of AI has been overlooked in the irrational rush to invest in the technology.

AI depends on data centers. They hold the expensive, power-guzzling hardware on which the AI software runs. They are the physical brains of AI.

Very legitimate arguments against data centers like the one proposed at STAMP cite inefficient land use, excessive power use, large tax breaks for the ultra-rich, few jobs created, noise, infrasound, heat, air and water pollution, risk to wildlife, and quality of life effects on local residents.

Decent arguments all. However, to these we must add another: Data centers and the companies that build them are part of a looming AI crisis that could leave locals with a huge mess to clean up. We need to consider the economics of AI.

Consider the two “rock star” AI companies, OpenAI and Anthropic. Both are developing cutting edge LLM’s (large language models), both are privately held and lavishly financed, both want to go public via IPO’s, and both predict that an overwhelming demand for AI computations will ultimately flow through their systems.

Both put out incredible hype about the capabilities of their systems, how they will fundamentally change the world. Both downplay the obvious and well-documented risks of their systems (hallucinations, urging users to commit suicide, the recent major security breach, and many others). They also downplay the fact that for the foreseeable future, they are unlikely to generate any profits at all.

Right now they are losing large amounts of money by selling  computations  (or “compute”) for far less than their actual cost (Estimates: $13 of compute sold for $1 to $3). Customers have chafed at attempts to raise prices. Moreover, AI, unlike so many modern technologies, does not “scale.”  Making it bigger does not mean that the cost per customer will go down.

 When OpenAI and Anthropic go public the stockholders will demand profitable operations.  There is no evidence that either company can deliver the promised value to their customers and still make a profit for their shareholders. This could pop the AI bubble, send the country into a recession, and leave the skeletons of half-built data centers across the USA.

So when you go over the list of reasons why the proposed STAMP data center doesn’t make sense, don’t forget to add the uncertainty of the future of AI, and how it may affect data center construction. The AI industry appears to be far less robust than its leaders would have us believe. Don’t be taken in by their hype.

Dave Giacherio

Kent

Editor:

I have to ask: what has education ever done to Paul Lauricella that he treats it like a personal enemy? At some point one has to wonder if he skipped the units on self-awareness, because he seems remarkably unable to hear himself.

He bemoans Mr. Fine for “throwing around labels” and attacking people who raise “valid, common-sense concerns,” a sentence so rich in irony I nearly needed a moment to compose myself.

I’m confident that if the Orleans Hub search bar were a bit more forgiving, we’d unearth a small library of Mr. Lauricella’s past letters, glowing with admiration for his favorite orange demagogue and his “America First” agenda. Funny how so many on the Right adore a man who “tells it like it is” right up until the truth doesn’t flatter them, then suddenly it’s someone else who’s being “divisive.” A moral high ground claimed several years and several letters too late.

And remind me again; who’s the snowflake?

As for bail reform: multiple studies – yes, those dreaded “ivory-tower” studies – show it hasn’t driven crime rates up. Crime statistics, reported not by professors but by local law enforcement agencies across Upstate New York, show crime rates are down. So, are we to conclude our own police departments are cooking the books? My mistake, I forgot that research only counts as legitimate when it happens to agree with the populist talking point of the week.

But who needs facts when feelings will do? It’s certainly easier to build an argument on vibes, and plenty of Right-wing policy proudly stands on a sturdy foundation of fear, anecdote, and the ever-reliable “many people say…”

Credit where it’s due, though: not once did Mr. Lauricella reach for “Communist,” “Marxist,” or “Socialist.”

Matthew Ballard

LeRoy, NY