Hey, there! Log in / Register

Herald supports letting actual thugs work with Mel Gibson!

David Wedge picks himself up off the floor from the shock of learning that people who get out of jail aren't simply shot in the head and then dumped into the ocean and so sometimes actually manage to get jobs doing what they did before their convictions - such as working as truck drivers in the local movie business.

In any case, Adam Reilly wonders why Wedge didn't note that the tax breaks that began bringing moviemakers here en masse were first signed into law by Mitt Romney, not Deval Patrick. And no doubt Wedge was very anxious to tell his readers how vociferously the Herald supported those tax breaks - if only the Herald hadn't shrunk its pages a few weeks back:

In short: if you're incensed that ex-con Teamsters are making big bucks on "taxpayer-subsidized movie sets" (to use Wedge's phrase), there's plenty of blame to go around.

Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Supporting one thing doesn't mean you can't complain about another. If all reporters had to tout their employers' line, there'd be no news out there.

BTW, he is right to call it a taxpayer "subsidy"; for every $1 spent by a production company, it gets $.25 in cash, rebated, bringing down their salary costs by 25%. Again, not a rebate on taxes paid, just on money spent.

Merry Christmas Kate Hudson, where ever you are! (Estimated payroll checks sent to Ms Hudson during past three years, courtesy Mass taxpayers: $1 million.)

up
Voting closed 0

We take all these ex-cons who are currently earning a good living on the movie lot and fire them.

Then, we find out where the David Wedge lives, and post them on street corners around his neighborhood. They are just doing security detail, unpaid. Yeah, that's it.

If this guy is so keen on people who (likely) did time for drugs being put out of jobs such that they wind up not having better things to do, then they can go not have better things to do in his neighborhood, preferably around the time his kids get home from school.

up
Voting closed 0

you're saying that we pay them so they don't hurt us? I think I recall a name for that......

up
Voting closed 0

the same. We're paying them so that they don't have a reason to hurt us as opposed to paying them to not hurt us. The fact that they have jobs at all is a testament enough to the company that hired them. It's hard enough trying to get a job as a convict.

up
Voting closed 0

You can either pay them to do a job they know how to do and be productive members of society with plenty of incentive to work on their issues and stay on the straight and narrow ... or you can have a bunch of cons around with too much time on their hands.

I like the employment idea.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't you have people to take to school in the morning?

up
Voting closed 0