Dear Editor,
In your editorial of Monday, January 29, 2018, two statements stood out: “the remedy is worse than the cure” and “delaying such even more does not serve the general interest.”
I am not interested whether the election is delayed or not because there should not have been any toppling of government in the first place, adding confusion and pain to the thousands of people who have been affected by the passing of Irma and Maria.
Did it really have to take a Holland, to show us how to jointly come to a consensus in time of calamity and explain to us that the remedy is worse than the cure? (I would say that the remedy is worse than the damage, but let me stick to what is written.) That is something the old people use to say.
My father, who always pressed on us to speak correctly, would use the term “in proportion to” and to explain it he would say, “You don’t kill a man because he stole a bread.”
This is again giving Holland ammunition to do what they want with us because we cannot even come together for what is one of the basic rules of thumb in governing a country, which is “to serve the general interest.” Yet we earn more than $140,000 per year, which is more than all the other members of government within the kingdom, to govern 16 square miles of land with about 60,000 inhabitants.
The president of the United States of America earns $400,000 a year to govern more that 350 million inhabitants. I maintain that their premise remains “what’s in it for me” and as long as there is nothing in there for me I cannot think logically. It becomes like second nature, so I believe this to be the case again, but this time it makes them look like dummies.
They opt to accept the lesser of two evils because the people will forget the dumb things they did, but this time they know it will be too obvious that they do not care about the people so they are not taking the chance to tell the people that they were wrong to throw down the government, in the middle of all the predicament.
This is more proof of why I maintain that all of them have to go. And we do not need any mentors for the incoming young politicians. Mentors are brainwashers. The young politicians need advisers. Mentors manipulate one into taking the decisions they would take, advisers explain what is the correct way and one makes a decision based on what one envisions for the people who afforded the opportunity to serve.
By the way, what makes those who are vying for a seat in Parliament (in my case a veteran) think that everyone is pleased to be called by phone any hour of the day or night, asking for their vote? Again more proof of unscrupulous behavior on their part.
Some people are not going to be pleased. As long it is a way to get me some votes I do not care about those who are not pleased. People who have elderly who are sick, and are getting these calls, do not know if it is an emergency or not, and are disorientated by these calls. They do not want phone calls at night, and for that matter not even during the day if they are not expecting a call.
Should they not be asking us or explaining to us what can be done to facilitate us in finding ways in how to cope with the incurring bills as a result of the passing of Irma and Maria?
The young ones are intelligent; the majority of them have good education; they are not in the claws of the business people; by now they are aware of the fact that not knowing what is written in the Constitution of Sint Maarten (and the Kingdom) is suicidal for any politician; they will have to learn the rules of order of parliament and I have confidence in the Council of Advice.
Out with all the old and in with the new.
Russell A. Simmons
