In economics, scarcity forces us to make decisions between at least two alternatives. For example, I've $2 with which to purchase an apple or an orange, and each costs $2. I must therefore choose one of the alternatives before me, which means I must value one over the other.
Our town council isn't deciding between apples and oranges, rather they're deciding between things like our water system, town parks and recreational facilities, and an ABC store. While our water system is important, I'm going to focus on parks and recreation as an opportunity cost of things like an ABC store or a multi-million-dollar town hall.
Throughout my childhood I played recreational sports here in Stokesdale. I enjoyed my experiences so much I decided to begin coaching basketball when I turned 15. Until I left for college, I proudly participated in our recreational community in every way I could. So, one can imagine how dismayed I am to hear from colleagues, parents and friends alike about how fragmented and chaotic our leagues have become.
I'm curious to know why we're constantly having a conversation about the creation of a store which sells products that specialize in erasing memories and destroying families before we even mention the great needs of our parks and recreational leagues which have consistently created memories and strengthened families in our community.
I'd like to know why previous town council members thought it prudent to build a $1.2 million town hall as opposed to a new gymnasium to replace our current relic, or new turf grass for our barren ball fields.
How are meetings held in the town hall more valuable to our community than the thousands of meetings which occur yearly in recreational leagues? It's a question which no one seems to have asked, yet everyone seems to have thought at one point or another.
Well, now I'm asking.
Camron Watlington, STOKESDALE
'Say Yes' not for everyone
It appears that the "Say Yes" program is not what was originally sold. During the initial fundraising phase the campaign stated that all students in Guilford County would benefit from the initiative. There was little emphasis, if any, that the program would only benefit lower-income families and the campaign certainly did not communicate how funding would be allocated by different income levels.
While I believe lower-income families should receive support, I am disappointed leaders of the campaign short-sold the truth.