"I'm a pretty conservative person,
and I didn't like being treated like a
bleeding-heart liberal,"
Commissioner John Gillard of the Affordable Housing Commission was quoted in
the Loveland Reporter Herald 8/11/06
Why The Quote Is So Absurd

In 1991 50% of all housing in the former Soviet
Union was still in Government hands and managed by
the government housing authrority.  In order to
improve conditions and create a market driven
economy, reformers began slowly turning over
government owned housing to the private sector.

Just as the world's largest social, centrally controllled
economy was beginning to recognize the failure of
Marxisism, a group of Loveland residents were
planning to begin an endeavor that would make the
Loveland Housing Authority the single largest
property management firm in Loveland while slowly
increasing the share of public housing in Loveland.  
Boris Yeltsin wanted to end public housing in the
Soviet Union after he discovered working class
Americans live in better housing than any other
population in the world.

Commissioner John Gillard's quote is absurd because
he allowed himself to become involved in a vision
closer to those of Marx and Engels instead of Adam
Smith.  Today 4% of all housing in Loveland has been
socialized and private sector is feeling the pinch.  
Now the commission created to advise Council wants
a "bigger role" in the long-term housing market of
Loveland.

The McWhinneys, to their credit, rejected the local
government intervention and refused any subsidized
housing.  West Loveland is now left to struggle in the
long-term with higher crime, possible lower values
and maybe more government subsidized housing.  
See the report August 12, regarding the increasing
crime in and around Loveland government subsidized
housing.

Special Business Tax Proposed

Especially outrages has been the suggestion by the
Affordable Housing Commission that new businesses
in the community be taxed to pay for their growing
"role."  Taking the fruits of labor directly out of the
private sector to fund government subsidized housing
(as this proposes to do) is called "transfer of wealth."  
It is classic socialism and has failed in the Soviet
Union, Cuba, North Korea and to even in a modified
form in Western Europe where the average home size
is half that of the United States.

Read our special report tomorrow -
Suggested sculpture that could decorate
the entrance to the Loveland Housing
Authority (Marx and Engels)

Marx and Engels believed the private sector
was incapable of providing  adequate housing
for the masses.  Therefore, they advocated a
transfer of wealth and private property to the
public sector (government) that would than
decide which citizens were worthy of the
"public's housing."  The result was the tragedy
called the Soviet Union where multiple
families were forced to share terrible concrete
apartments due to the lack of housing.

John Gillard, you need to understand that to
propose taking more money from the private
sector to increase quasi-government
ownership of housing is not liberal but a
socialist concept.
A "conservative person" would instead be
looking for a way to return the property to
private hands and get the government out of
the business of competing with the private
landlords.