City can’t afford to pay for Fibrant

After reading a couple letters in support of Fibrant I am not sure if the writers really understand the financial issues with Fibrant.

If Fibrant was profitable there would not be an issue. It has never been profitable, and with the heavy debt and limited service area it will never be profitable.

The losses are substantial, between $8,000 and $10,000 per day.

That equates to up to a $3 million loss per year. Those losses have accumulated year after year since the launch of Fibrant.

This is in a city that has many needs for those funds. We have a police department with a severe shortage of officers. Think of what those kinds of funds could do for our police.

The bottom line is we can’t afford Fibrant. I am not interested in subsidizing anyone’s cable and phone service with my tax dollars. I can assure you that I am not the only one that feels this way.

Our City Council, for whatever reason, is not addressing this issue. It is never local government’s role to compete with private business.

That is a lot of tax money to waste on something we didn’t need in the first place.

— J.R. Montgomery

Salisbury

ACA repeal raises fears

As an oncologist, I do my best to treat, comfort and reassure my patients. But I can offer little reassurance to those anxious about the U.S. Senate’s haste to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The ACA is not perfect, but it provides significant protections for patients like mine with pre-existing conditions or the inability to otherwise afford health insurance. My patients are courageous yet vulnerable individuals. As they face cancer, they also face uncertainty and fear. The U.S. Senate’s marathon session on Wednesday night through Thursday morning compounds the uncertainty and fear in many of my patients’ lives.

As I look into the eyes of patients asking me how these votes will affect them, I have little to offer. And so I write this letter on their behalf, challenging the assumption that repeal is necessary to improve upon the ACA.

— Sarah Squire, M.D.

Winston-Salem

More S.O.Y. awards

Jimmie Porter pointed out Charlene Crofford, along with Amy Smith and Don Bringle, for not moving in 2016. Now I would like to make Charlene a recipient of a S.O.Y. (Shame on You) award. But Jimmie misspelled her name. It’s Carleen Crawford. Amy and Don have already been dishonored and disgraced with the prize. Jimmie must have forgotten about Bob Pendergrass. He was also “soyed” because his hands were tied and he couldn’t M.O.V.E.

I’ve also met with another leader (one of those in their sphere of influence) at Dan Nicholas Park. He is the C.O.B. (chairman of bored) for Rowan County. I’ve met with him at three different places and all three meetings earned him a S.O.Y. award, but it is the one at the park that I’m bringing to the table at this time. See if you can reach out and get your arms around this!

After touring the park with the C.O.B. and pointing out all the different and very confusing signs, I asked the C.O.B. about the most confusing one. Which states — No pets or smoking in the playground for the safety and health of our children.

My question was, “Why is the children’s safety and health a concern in the playground and not in the entire park?”

His answer was, “I don’t know.”

Shame on you, Greg.

If Rowan County ain’t careful, they’ll soon have more S.O.Y. winners than Long Leaf Pines.

— Whitey Harwood

Rowan County