'See Me' fixation
While watching a financial news program I was struck by how many new products and services are targeted at the "Me Generation" - new ways to tweet, twit, chirp and chat about, what else, "me".
However, I believe the moniker Me Generation falls short for that group, as defined by behavior as well as age.
The typical Me Generation member comes out of the womb with a trophy in hand and expecting another with every burp.
A problem soon arises due to the fact that all others of that generation also come so equipped and with similar expectations.
The answer is to get the obvious special nature of your existence and experience to everyone's attention ASAP via Facebook, Twitter, selfies, chirps and burps ad nauseam. It naturally follows that the me generation has become the "See Me Generation."
I would suggest "Narcissists Supremo," but not including a "me" may be harder for the self-important to remember.
Night Heron Drive
Close it down
Oh, how we tend to lose our way. It is so disappointing to see the Charleston School of Law about to go down the drain because the founders decided to pull the profit-drain plug.
And who would have imagined that there was that much profit in the big tub - $25 million, and I bet that's not their first drink from its vast supplies.
Also sad is that the profit was accumulated over time on the backs of students driving up personal debt.
The founders could have reduced tuition once they were on their feet.
It is time to walk away and let it die.
Do not allow out-of-state interests to start the feeding frenzy on our young people all over again.
And may the founders hold their heads in shame walking to and from their banks.
George F. Warren
The May 29 article titled "Some beach residents might get tax break" with a subtitle, "Lawmakers want to help people who rent out homes to afford insurance," referred to bill S 0437, which appears close to being passed.
Maybe 10 or 12 years ago, with the aid of the S.C. insurance commissioner, insurance pools were created to spread insurance costs to a broader population to help coastal homeowners get affordable insurance.
In North Charleston, this caused my insurance rates to skyrocket to help those who can already afford to live closer to the coast.
Another legislative accommodation was the method of appraising home values to help, among others, alleged "older people" afford these expensive tax rates, often for multimillion-dollar houses. Articles focused on people living in high-value homes (examples given were south of Broad Street and the coast). By the way, I'm in that "older people" category, and these measures didn't help me.
These types of tax relief aren't free. When a group gets special consideration everyone else pays the price.
In this case, The Post and Courier indicated there would be more than a million dollars in local revenue lost. Who loses? In addition to all other taxpayers, the school system, municipal governments and more.
It is indeed ironic that many (not all) well-heeled persons living close to coastal waters and downtown Charleston have stereotypical views of less affluent communities: not as good a place to live, occupied by people who need to try harder and get a good education, etc.
However, the truth is that these very persons who look to less affluent communities with disdain are not "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps." Many affluent persons are conservative and, often, anti-tax. Shame on these "special" people who know how to gain favor solely for their own desires. The interesting thing this time is that the benefitting group will even cost affluent communities more; and beyond that, the proposed law will cost non-renting homeowners on the beaches.
What are our legislators thinking?
I am tired of seeing articles in the paper saying Medicare, as well as Social Security, is an entitlement.
I worked 45 years and had taxes withheld from my paychecks for both, as well as my employer paying taxes of an equal amount.
Furthermore, I am having monies withheld for Medicare from my Social Security "benefits." So, call it what it is - a benefit, not an entitlement as though I never worked a day in my life.
No name change
Do not vote for the 50 senators who think the Washington Redskins' name is offensive to them. I think their salaries are offensive, and who do they think pays them?
I hope that owner Dan Snyder will stand his ground. I am certain the fans of this team are behind him. Being politically correct is getting ridiculous, especially when Indian tribes have approved the name over and over.
It is time to stop having our rights taken away by 50 men who think they can make the team owner change the name just because they want him to.
This is supposed to be a free country, not a dictatorship. I, for one, am sick of being jerked around.
Leaders? Don't make me laugh. They have nothing better to do, with all that is going on in the world today, but to complain about a name being offensive to them?
Come on, Redskins fans, back Mr. Snyder and stop this nonsense right now.
New school needed
In his May 23 column, Brian Hicks refers to a statement made by Charleston County School Board member Chris Collins that Lincoln High in McClellanville should get a new high school before Mount Pleasant. Collins says it doesn't matter that Lincoln serves fewer than 200 students. All kids deserve the same facilities.
While I agree that all students deserve up-to-date facilities, the answer for Lincoln High is not a new building, and certainly not at the expense of severe overcrowding in Mount Pleasant.
The 200 or so students at Lincoln? Last time I checked, only about 130 of them are high school students; the rest are seventh and eighth graders.
When you have a high school that only has 130 students, the course selection available to those students is extremely limited, and a new building won't change that.
What Lincoln students need and deserve are not shiny new classrooms, but the opportunity to enroll in the same variety of classes available to Wando students. They need classes such as medical terminology, landscape technology, aerospace engineering and theatre.
So how about this instead: Let's build that new high school in Mount Pleasant, move 1,500-2,000 Wando students to it and get rid of the dozens and dozens of trailers littering the Wando campus. Voila!
Wando is no longer a sardine can. Then, since there's no economic efficiency in operating a school of 130-200 students, and since the Lincoln High building is ancient, let's close it once and for all and move those 9th-12th graders to the newly uncrowded Wando, where they would have a huge selection of academic, vocational and arts classes.
Finally, expand St. James-Santee into a K-8 school so that Lincoln 7th and 8th graders can continue to attend school in McClellanville but in a newer building, which due to increased student population, will run more efficiently than it does now. Seems like a win-win-win situation to me.
Palmetto Hall Boulevard
Share the power
In a May 23 editorial your paper stunningly endorsed the status quo executive branch ethics system where one person (the governor) hand picks all nine members to judge ethics complaints against her or him as being just fine and not in need of reform.
How in the world The Post and Courier can argue with a straight face that one person hand-picking all nine members who might ultimately pass judgment over her or him as a better system than my proposal of having all of our statewide elected officials share jointly in those appointments is beyond me.
I noticed you decided not to mention the relative wrist slaps the last two governors have received from their hand-picked ethics boards in your editorial decrying the House of Representatives' wise adoption of my reform of the broken state ethics commission.
The current governor forced her ethics board to judge complaints against her while a large number of the appointed members terms had expired, meaning they were basically serving at will or at her mercy while deliberating on her violations. Not surprisingly, she received only small fines paid out of her campaign account, meaning they cost her not a dime.
You also failed to mention that despite a record number of violations, including the intentional misuse of taxpayer dollars for personal benefits, the hand-picked ethics board of our previous governor failed to pursue a criminal investigation against him and their civil fines cost him not one single penny out of his pocket when again the fines were simply paid from campaign funds.
It is simple common sense that one person controlling the entire ethics commission creates an environment ripe for undue influence, abuse or corruption.
There is no doubt that all of our state's ethics laws are in need of reform, including for legislators like me. I have been calling for these reforms for years now, and we are as close as we have been in decades to change.
The Post and Courier would do well to reconsider its misguided position and instead be alert to the dangers of consolidating absolute power in one individual.
After all, this country was founded largely in opposition to such power and instead on a system of separation of powers, and checks and balances.
Rep. Leon E. Stavrinakis
Cool Blow Street
Raise the BAR
I concur with the concerns about the BAR expressed in a June 1 letter to the editor. I empathize with them and what their neighborhoods are being subjected to.
A block from our house in Harleston Village, three, three-story townhouses are being permitted on Gadsden Street. They are totally out of context in style and scale from the rest of the neighborhood.
The really sad thing is that Historic Charleston and Preservation Society staff supported the construction. The BAR approved it, despite multiple objections by neighbors (both in writing and in person), with some minor "tweaks" to the design. The design is still inappropriate.
The saying is, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."
We are disappointed with all three of these entities for not respecting the character of this historic neighborhood and for the utter disregard of the people who live there. Shame on all of them.