Many of the letters we found (and a couple of the Editorials) shared the same theme. It was a public economic policy death match between The Enlightened vs.The Aginners. Vision vs. Venom. Nuance vs. Naysaying.

The letter above was a classic example. Referring to the two previous elections when the local citizenry voted down proposals to create an ED Sales Tax, this author unflinchingly lays at the feet of the "Naysayers" the loss of 3,500 local jobs. Please note that this letter also beats the "The Oil Is Running Out! We Must Act Now!" drum. To which I respond, "Welcome, Apache!"

The more I read these letters, the more I come to realize that the fear-mongering that the proponents of the ED Sales Tax employed to get this thing passed almost exactly mirrors the tactics of the Global Warming crowd. Indeed, passing this tax was outright deemed a good and proper response to the attacks of September 11, just two months earlier.

Opponents couldn't possibly have any principled opposition to the tax. They could only be "Naysayers", "Aginners", "Haters of Midland", cheap skinflints, or perhaps just mentally ill. My personal favorite was "the usual suspects". But the arguments used by many of the "Aginners" should have at least sounded familiar to the proponents. They are the exact same arguments that so many of the ED Sales Tax proponents voice when talking about governmental involvement in the marketplace. At least when it takes place on the other side of the Midland County line, anyway.

This letter goes on to school the non-believers and lack-of-visioners with a bulleted list:

• Implementing a well-conceived action plan is always preferable to doing nothing.
  
  Really? What's your point? Okay, that is too easy. Ten years after the passing of the ED Sales Tax all talk of well-conceived action plans still has them residing in the future somewhere. The landscape is littered with the corpses of what were evidently ill-conceived action plans. Dean Baldwin Painting. Countrywide Mortgage. Entrada Building A. So as snarky as it sounds, at this point and with ten years of empirical data to look at, we really are able to ask, "What's your point?"


• 25 cents per $100 is an insignificant investment to insure [sic] a positive economic future for Midland.
  
  Yes, this looks so much better than, say, "Paying out almost a million dollars per year in administrative overhead in order to bank $25 millon dollars is the way to ensure a positive economic future for Midland."
  


• Midland must diversify its economy if it is going to survive the future.
  
  And by "Midland" we mean six political appointees getting together and spending public funds to try and move the local economy in a direction they think is desirable by distributing money to out-of-town rent-seekers and local friends of the Chamber.


• Economic diversification doesn't just happen without competitive advantages.
  
  This is one of the most maddening arguments offered up by self-professed "fiscal conservatives". Please explain to me when it was that a lower tax rate became a competitive disadvantage. The difference seems to hinge solely on who it is that gets to spend the money. Again, again, and again....those "Other People" tax and spend, "We" invest! Dr. FrankenChamber is able (and certainly willing) to re-animate the dead hand of government. But it only works when "we" do it, you see. I guess it's that "vision" thing. Or maybe nuance. Or something.
  


• For Midland to continue to be a vibrant community it must keep and attract its young people.
  
  I agree. Midland needs more attractive young people and if I thought an ED Slush Fund could do that, I might vote for it myself.
  


• The only way to attract young people is to create good paying jobs and economic opportunities.
  
  Beating a dead horse here, but how is it that these "fiscal conservatives" so easily allow themselves the idea that the most direct and streamlined route to a vibrant economy and job creation is...wait for it...the creation of a tax-sucking bureaucracy. But of course!
  


• If you lose your job next week, where will you move to find a good paying job?
  
  Gee, I don't know. Maybe I'll ask one of those 3,500 people that I helped usher out of town by voting against the ED Sales tax the first two times where it is they went. Pathetic.

The letter closes with the question, "If we fail to act again on November 6, where will Midland be in the next 10 years?"

Well, it is 10 years later. Yes, where would Midland be today without this tax?

---

RELATED:

• Part I: If we don't pass this tax, then the Terrorists will have won!
• Part II: This economic development stuff is easy!
• Part III: We will use this money to diversify the economy. Except when we don't.
• Part IV: Government bailouts? No problem!
• Part V: Naysayers! They have no vision!"
• Part VI: That Free Market thing? That's like sooooo Reagan. We're smarter than that now.