Talk:Ballerup
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To the anonymous user at 80.77.66.126. Please explain how "His failed tax and spend policies, along with several prestige projects and an art fetish have led to severe cuts in services, especially in vital areas such as education and senior care" qualifies as NPOV.
You are completely entitled to your opinions, of course, but if you want this to be part of a Wikipedia article, it should be presented in an ubiased way with the views of both sides presented.
And, no, I have never in my life voted for the Social Democrats.
--Oz1cz 06:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Failed policies reference in Ballerup article
Despite having one of the highest tax rates in the entire country the commune has been cut services and reduced budgets for education and elder care among others. This is a failure of political leadership and policy.
You made reference to the transfer of tax receipts from Ballerup to other communes but this is a sad effort to point the finger at the national government. The real reason is the mayor's spending of tax monies on worthless and money wasting projects. All of which are meant to add to his perceived prestige and support his self-importance. If the mayor could keep his hands out of the taxpayer's pocket and limit spending to services which citizens need instead of art works of questionable artistic merit, repaving of perfectly serviceable roads, subsidies to fairs and festivals of dubious cultural value, then tax rates could be reduced. If we collected less tax then we wouldn't be subject to revenue transfers.
The mayor is a definitive example of an old style political boss. His time has come and gone. He should retire and the communal council enact srtict term limits on mayoral electees.
I would also suggest that as you don't live in Ballerup that you refrain from participating in the debate. I'm sure Kongens Lyngby has plenty of topics for you.
- Well, yes, that is one point of view. The fact is that some people have a different view of the situation. This means that your sentences are not NPOV as mandated by Wikipedia standards. Rather than going into an edit war, would it not be better to remove the problem entirely by presenting both sides of the argument in the article? Edit wars are so unproductive. --Oz1cz 11:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)