To The Editor,
Jonathan Swift in his A Modest Proposal suggests in a very rational well-phrased tone that we cannibalize our children. Deliberately ludicrous, of course, but I suppose that would cut down on the school-age population and make a local school unnecessary in Reading. The approach of tearing down all affordable housing will ultimately accomplish the same thing. Affordable defined as housing where families can live who cannot afford anything better. Not that they don’t want better, but that they can’t afford better.
Will closing the school lower taxes? Does a billionaire need to have his taxes lowered? Do people who can afford fancy houses and horses and lots of land really need lower taxes? Or do they just want more money to spend for bigger houses, more horses and more land. Are they concerned about our children or their pocketbooks? They say that our children are deprived of social and sports activities. Our children will not be accepted socially by their peers who live in the wealthier town proposed as the “right” place to send our children. Our children won’t get “to play in the game” of all of those wonderful sports activities. They will be the ones who sit on the “bench.”
The thing that holds this town together is the local fire department and their families, but if there is no elementary school in Reading will they go somewhere else where they can be nearer to where their children go to school. Do we want that? Will we choose to cast aside that valuable asset, the cement that holds the town together to please the upper echelon?
Oh dear, I surely hope not.
Hazel H. King
(Editor’s note: This letter did not run in the Feb. 28 edition to due space reasons.)