Adopt 'fail-safe' incentives to rejuvenate Youngstown
Adopt 'fail-safe' incentivesto rejuvenate Youngstown
I am glad to see the city of Youngstown is working hard to clean up its rotten core. The shrinking population has taken its toll. There is no doubt this is a monumental task. It's too bad so many tax dollars may be needed to tear down the buildings. Many of the properties will be worth less than the cost of demolition.
Youngstown is in the perfect position to host new industry as well as expansion of successful enterprises. The best way to create value in Youngstown is to give tax breaks. For example designated properties would be declared "fail safe." A "fail-safe" property would be one scheduled for demolition or otherwise considered nonviable. Someone buying the said property would agree to do whatever necessary to rejuvenate the property. In return, the city would keep the purchase price as the tax valuation for the next 10 to 15 years. This would be an excellent incentive for many projects.
With so many potential sites, Youngstown would have a distinct advantage over other municipalities. The city could then use the money earmarked for demolition to rebuild the city's decaying infrastructure. A wasteful city which cannot produce cannot survive.
ROBERT G. MOSSMAN
To achieve peace, Israelmust talk with its neighbors
In her column printed in The Vindicator on Aug. 16, Georgie Anne Geyer makes some interesting statements about the state of Israel and her Arab neighbors. She says, "Israel again has dealt with the symptoms of the Middle East crisis, the offshoot of Israel's invasion and occupation of Lebanon. It's the manner they use to deal with the symptoms of the Palestinians' anti-Israelism -- by killing and dehumanizing more Palestinians."
Why can't the Israelis find a way to live in peace with her Arab neighbors? It has seemed from the very beginning the state of Israel has been fighting one counter-insurgency after another. It seems easier to start a war than to talk -- talk with your enemies. The Oslo peace process was in reality one-sided as intended from the Israeli point of view. All during the process, Israel was building illegal settlements on Palestinian land to the point where not much was left to negotiate, and Yasser Arafat couldn't stomach it. Being left with three or four small areas surrounded by settlements, roads for Jews only, soldier encampments to protect settlers, stealth of water resources, what was left to form a so-called "viable state?"
Hamas was not a party to the Oslo process. Perhaps they could see where it was leading. They have made statements about accepting the legitimacy of the state of Israel if at least some of the many resolutions passed by the United Nations, especially those involving boundaries, are accepted by Israel. After all, the Likud Party was an outgrowth of the Irgun terrorist group.
I end with another quote from Georgie Anne Geyer. "So the United States of America now finds itself in an extraordinary position. We have put ourselves square in the middle of a war that will go on in the Middle East forever; that means we have given up our real position of power, which allows us to come in from the outside and negotiate and decide..."