Let’s Reinvent the Wheel

I believe it was Confucius who said “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Well, where’s the fun in that? Wouldn’t it make more sense to tear everything down and try to rebuild it as good as it was? Common sense may tell you otherwise, but what does common sense have to do with the cityhood scam anyway?

The promoters say, correctly I might add, “East Cobb is the ideal place to live, work, raise a family, and retire. Let’s keep it that way.” Well, who wouldn’t agree with that? But since when does “let’s keep it that way” mean destroy what we’ve already got and start over? Someone ain’t thinkin’ this stuff through.

“East Cobb is the ideal place to live.” And what does “ideal” mean? It’s the standard against which all else is measured, otherwise known as “perfection.” Personally, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to think anyone can improve on perfection. But the hucksters would have you believe otherwise. Logic would tell you improving on perfection is a fool’s errand. But when you’re being played for a fool anything goes.

Apparently, the best way to keep things the same is to start from scratch. So much for “leave well enough alone.” After all, what sense does it make to continue under the structure that brought us such an ideal community when you can bring in a bunch of rookies with zero experience in running a government?

When you need heart surgery do you choose the doctor who’s never done a procedure? Or a lawyer who’s never tried a case? So what rational person would put any faith, much less the future or our community, in the hands of a secretive clique of special interest newbies each looking to cash in with your money?

What’s perplexing is that there is no hard data that shows things will be any better under the proposed regime. Putting aside that we’ve already determined that things are “ideal,” what guarantee do we have that the proposed city is going to run any better? Or that the city is going to run at all? The promoters say “trust us,” but how can you trust a group of insiders who have been so cagy with their identities?

They point to a flimsy “feasibility study” that says, theoretically, that the proposed city could potentially keep its head above water. Well, just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. And there are so many deficiencies in the feasibility study that it’s ultimately unclear if the proposed city could make a go of it – without raising taxes and fees, that is. And that’s what we want, right? Higher taxes and fees!

If the best we can hope for at the end of the trail is to keep things the way they are, wouldn’t it make more sense to keep things the way they are?