I am writing in opposition to the increasingly entitlement-minded views espoused by certain city government officials and Hoboken residents. Like others, I am perplexed that Hoboken is having financial difficulties, given the high number of young professionals like me that live here. We pay more than our fair share of taxes and receive little in return. In essence, we subsidize those who have been anointed by the city government as deserving of special preferences.
For example, this debate about saving the so-called artists in the Neumann Leather Building strikes me as inappropriate government intrusion into transactions that should be governed by market forces. Clearly, artists play an important role in our society and their work should be encouraged. But the marketplace - not city government - should reward talented artists. Mediocre artists who would otherwise be pushed out of business are the real beneficiaries of this welfare policy.
This debate reminds me of recent stories in this paper related to storeowners who were forced to move due to escalating rents on Washington Street. Does anybody (other than the storeowners) think that the Hoboken government should subsidize them? Furthermore, I and other young professionals arguably provide services at least as valuable as the artists in the Neumann Leather Building, but justifiably, nobody thinks our rents should be subsidized by tax dollars.
The city is having financial difficulties, and I surmise that this is directly related to the number of narrow social programs that benefit a small minority of the city's residents. Artists are an important part of the community but so are the doctors who care for our sick and teachers who educate our youth, just to name a few. We work hard, pay taxes and take little in return. It is a small price to pay to live in a city as wonderful as Hoboken. I encourage the city government to level the playing field for all residents, and let market forces determine the outcome of the Neumann Leather Building.