The most memorable local eateries along the highways and back roads of America
Sign In | Register for Free!
Restaurants Recipes Forums EatingTours Merchandise FAQ Maps Insider

 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless

Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 31 to 52 of 52
Author Message
WVHillbilly

  • Total Posts: 406
  • Joined: 4/15/2006
  • Location: Given, WV
RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 10:57 AM (permalink)
quote:
Originally posted by Copperhedzkettle


Cooling it,


Copper[/size=3][/purple]


Cop, I find your anger quite entertaining. Actually, I thought you were more hyper than angry. I hope you don't cool it too much.
Regards,
SHb
 
#31
    Scorereader

    • Total Posts: 5546
    • Joined: 8/4/2005
    • Location: Crofton, MD
    RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 11:20 AM (permalink)
    quote:
    Originally posted by WVHillbilly

    quote:
    Originally posted by NebGuy
    Nor does it include any state or local taxes, or any other Federal taxes which is the point I think Scorereader is trying to make that Mr. Hastert was talking specifically about Federal income tax and nothing eles when he made the quoted comment.


    Well, you did a good job of proving Mr. Hassert wrong and out of touch.
    Thanks


    So, how much of that 4.635% of federal income tax should the family of 4 get back?

    Hassert was simply saying that you don't get a tax break when the amount you pay in income tax is negligable. You don't get a tax return on social security investments or unemployment. The federal government also does not set state income tax rates.

    Shows how out of touch you are with tax asssessment.


     
    #32
      Copperhedzkettle

      • Total Posts: 293
      • Joined: 8/16/2005
      • Location: Hogansville, GA
      RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 1:05 PM (permalink)
      Cop, I find your anger quite entertaining. Actually, I thought you were more hyper than angry. I hope you don't cool it too much.
      Regards,
      SHb


      Thanks SHb!
      You are certainly correct about my hyperactivity, unless I have overdone it and my back and feet are killing me, you won't see me on Roadfood.com. I'm hauling manure, loving baby animals, planting a garden, working towards opening Copperhedzkettle, or cussing a GD well pump!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Its extremely hard for me to sit still unless I am physically exhausted.

      But I can still talk my fingers off here, and don't worry .......I'm just learning the lines I can/can't cross with certain folkes. I haven't been around that much lately and have forgotten who can/can't take a joke. But I admit I can be "out there", and the Mods are most courteous and timely in reeling me back in.

      As for "Hastert" (the topic).
      Folks have lots of opportunity to to slam the Speaker (and others) in various ways.......quotes out of context, mere opinions (editorials, hell WHO aint got one?), Half truths, freaking RHETORIC (both sides) Blah blah blah. Its hard to find an original idea out there, just garbage as far as I'm concerned unless you Watch it all. Then you know who is reporting what, and who is relying on misinformation or simply talking out their Ying-Yang. The more you watch the easier it is to differentiate.

      Scorereader is right on the mark about many observations on this thread and forum as a whole. Plus anyone who watches CPSAN is tops in my book. My favorite is Washinton Journal. 7:00am-10:am est, iffen you wanna hear NEWS and not gossip. IMHO.

      "Scorereader"
      definition: One who knows the score

      Good luck with the hay harvest SHb!

      Copper
       
      #33
        Tedbear

        • Total Posts: 1832
        • Joined: 1/26/2004
        • Location: Somerset, NJ
        RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 1:12 PM (permalink)
        Of course the Federal government does not set State income tax rates. However, the actions of the Federal government DO influence state taxes significantly. During the Reagan years, Revenue Sharing (the process of sending large amounts of Federal tax dollars back to the states) was cut back significantly. And, this policy has been continued under every succeeding President.

        The net effect of this drastic cutback in Revenue Sharing is that state taxes (whether income taxes, sales taxes, or the insidious "user fees") and also local property taxes have climbed by a large percentage during the last 20+ years. And, in most cases, the types of "writeoffs" and deductions that are available on your Federal tax return are not available on state income tax returns.

        For instance, while I can offset Capital Gains on my Federal Return by deducting Capital Losses, this is not an option on my state tax return. The result is that in many tax years, I have owed no Federal tax on for the Capital Gains that I received, while I have owed a significant amount of money to my state government on those gains. I also can't deduct my charitable contributions on my state tax return. And, of course, with property taxes, you are automatically liable for the full amount in most states (some states may have a veteran's or senior citizen's reduction in the tax rate).

        The net effect of all of this is that many Americans now have a higher total tax burden than they used to, and only the balance of which entity to whom they owe the money shifted from federal to state/local governments in many cases.

        Taxes are taxes (isn't that profound?), and I don't think that most people care which goverment entity collects the taxes from them, but they are concerned when their total tax burden increases--as it has over the past 20+ years. The federal government may look good as a result of the reduced tax rates on our federal income taxes, but in the process they have simply passed the burden down to a lower level of government where the necessity to provide vital services has not gone away and these services must be paid for. The bottom line is a higher total tax burden than previously, which comes across as just so much "smoke and mirrors" to those who have analyzed the situation.
         
        #34
          Scorereader

          • Total Posts: 5546
          • Joined: 8/4/2005
          • Location: Crofton, MD
          RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 2:05 PM (permalink)
          quote:
          Originally posted by Tedbear


          Taxes are taxes (isn't that profound?), and I don't think that most people care which goverment entity collects the taxes from them,


          But a Federal Congressman can't comment on state tax rate when addressing the Federal Budget. If he did, he'd be seen as pretty obtuse.





           
          #35
            WVHillbilly

            • Total Posts: 406
            • Joined: 4/15/2006
            • Location: Given, WV
            RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 2:45 PM (permalink)
            quote:
            Originally posted by Scorereader

            So, how much of that 4.635% of federal income tax should the family of 4 get back?

            Shows how out of touch you are with tax asssessment.



            I dunno, what percent of their taxbill will the top 1% get back? Perhaps that percent of the 4.635% would be appropriate.

            I'll decline comment on your other less than cordial remark except to say I am very deficient of knowledge on the rules, regulations and procedures of tax assessment, but I do have a fairly decent amount of common sense and reasoning capability. I can usually tell when somebody's getting ripped off.
             
            #36
              Scorereader

              • Total Posts: 5546
              • Joined: 8/4/2005
              • Location: Crofton, MD
              RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 3:49 PM (permalink)
              quote:
              Originally posted by WVHillbilly

              quote:
              Originally posted by Scorereader

              So, how much of that 4.635% of federal income tax should the family of 4 get back?

              Shows how out of touch you are with tax asssessment.



              I dunno, what percent of their taxbill will the top 1% get back? Perhaps that percent of the 4.635% would be appropriate.

              I'll decline comment on your other less than cordial remark except to say I am very deficient of knowledge on the rules, regulations and procedures of tax assessment, but I do have a fairly decent amount of common sense and reasoning capability. I can usually tell when somebody's getting ripped off.


              I'm not sure what was less than cordial. I never said of you that you didn't say of others.

              Why would a person get tax money back if they pay 4.635% taxes? He should get tax money back because the person paying 40% is getting a 4% tax break?
              That's ludicrous.









               
              #37
                Tedbear

                • Total Posts: 1832
                • Joined: 1/26/2004
                • Location: Somerset, NJ
                RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 3:53 PM (permalink)
                quote:
                Originally posted by Scorereader

                quote:
                Originally posted by Tedbear


                Taxes are taxes (isn't that profound?), and I don't think that most people care which goverment entity collects the taxes from them,


                But a Federal Congressman can't comment on state tax rate when addressing the Federal Budget. If he did, he'd be seen as pretty obtuse.









                Nor would I expect him to comment on state tax rates. This was my reflection on the fact that it is very superficial for people in this forum (or any other forum) to talk about the relatively low income tax rate paid by people in the aforementioned circumstances (40k, family, etc.).

                For those who believe that this hypothetical family is getting away "cheaply", I was trying to point out that there is much more to the issue than the federal taxes that they may pay. In truth, this hypothetical family may well be paying a higher TOTAL tax bill than they would have paid years ago, prior to the substantial reduction in revenue sharing.
                 
                #38
                  Scorereader

                  • Total Posts: 5546
                  • Joined: 8/4/2005
                  • Location: Crofton, MD
                  RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 4:05 PM (permalink)
                  Well, taxes have definately increased. And they are a burden. I, for one, though, would love to see a low low federal tax rate and allow services to be provided for by state and local municipalities. The money raised through state and local taxes rather than federal funds. IMO, the money would be better spent by the local gov't who knows where the specific needs are rather than by a Federal governing body making sweeping decisions that may help some, while hurting others.

                   
                  #39
                    Tedbear

                    • Total Posts: 1832
                    • Joined: 1/26/2004
                    • Location: Somerset, NJ
                    RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 4:28 PM (permalink)
                    quote:
                    Originally posted by Scorereader

                    Well, taxes have definately increased. And they are a burden. I, for one, though, would love to see a low low federal tax rate and allow services to be provided for by state and local municipalities. The money raised through state and local taxes rather than federal funds. IMO, the money would be better spent by the local gov't who knows where the specific needs are rather than by a Federal governing body making sweeping decisions that may help some, while hurting others.





                    I agree that in theory that might be a good idea. However, some states have a history of policies that run counter to true principles of Americanism.

                    Let's not forget about things like segregated schools, segregated mass transit, poll taxes, literacy tests that were applied to only some citizens, failure to prosecute lynch mobs, etc. etc. These states were dragged kicking and screaming into the concept of equality for all.

                    Somehow, I don't think that a Lester Maddox or a George Wallace could have been counted on to make wise decisions where equitable distribution of tax dollars and public services were concerned. One of the favorite arguments of these people was that the federal government should stay out of the affairs of the states, and allow the states to run everything themselves. Without federal oversight and intervention, troglodites like that would still hold sway.

                    Yes, those incidents are, hopefully, behind us, but unfortunately, records like this make it difficult for many people to put trust in state governments to make judicious decisions. Like I said, your suggestion is great in theory, but history should make us cautious about this idea.
                     
                    #40
                      Scorereader

                      • Total Posts: 5546
                      • Joined: 8/4/2005
                      • Location: Crofton, MD
                      RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 5:04 PM (permalink)
                      quote:
                      Originally posted by Tedbear

                      quote:
                      Originally posted by Scorereader

                      Well, taxes have definately increased. And they are a burden. I, for one, though, would love to see a low low federal tax rate and allow services to be provided for by state and local municipalities. The money raised through state and local taxes rather than federal funds. IMO, the money would be better spent by the local gov't who knows where the specific needs are rather than by a Federal governing body making sweeping decisions that may help some, while hurting others.





                      I agree that in theory that might be a good idea. However, some states have a history of policies that run counter to true principles of Americanism.

                      Let's not forget about things like segregated schools, segregated mass transit, poll taxes, literacy tests that were applied to only some citizens, failure to prosecute lynch mobs, etc. etc. These states were dragged kicking and screaming into the concept of equality for all.

                      Somehow, I don't think that a Lester Maddox or a George Wallace could have been counted on to make wise decisions where equitable distribution of tax dollars and public services were concerned. One of the favorite arguments of these people was that the federal government should stay out of the affairs of the states, and allow the states to run everything themselves. Without federal oversight and intervention, troglodites like that would still hold sway.

                      Yes, those incidents are, hopefully, behind us, but unfortunately, records like this make it difficult for many people to put trust in state governments to make judicious decisions. Like I said, your suggestion is great in theory, but history should make us cautious about this idea.


                      I'm sorry Tedbear, I didn't realize that State governments were made up of only Governors and void of state congressmen and senators. I was unaware that local municipalities, counties, towns and villages were lacking in mayors, councilmen, executives, and a host of other local elected officials and representatives and school boards. And I was unaware these government bodies have no effect on the people they represent. Because, according to you, it is only a great theory that these agencies can best handle the needs of the people.

                      Lester Maddox....ha! How about the Federal government which supported slavery and Jim Crow Laws, the internment of Japanese-Americans, Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, and more. The Federal government led the way for people like Lester Maddox and George Wallace.




                       
                      #41
                        Copperhedzkettle

                        • Total Posts: 293
                        • Joined: 8/16/2005
                        • Location: Hogansville, GA
                        RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 5:23 PM (permalink)


                        scorereader
                        Lester Maddox....ha! How about the Federal government which supported slavery and Jim Crow Laws, the internment of Japanese-Americans, Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, and more. The Federal government led the way for people like Lester Maddox and George Wallace.

                        Bwa-hahahahhahahhahahahahha

                        Super Snicker.
                        Go SR.

                        Copper
                         
                        #42
                          The Travelin Man

                          • Total Posts: 3699
                          • Joined: 3/25/2003
                          • Location: Central FL
                          RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 6:19 PM (permalink)
                          quote:
                          Originally posted by Scorereader

                          Why would a person get tax money back if they pay 4.635% taxes? He should get tax money back because the person paying 40% is getting a 4% tax break?


                          If you are referring to the original post, then it is a 10% tax cut. $40,000 off of a previous $400,000 bill is 10%. If what you mean is that the effective tax rate will be cut 4% (from 40% to 36%), then that is still a 10% tax cut.

                          The bigger picture here, and the point that I think Tedbear and others are trying to make is that the only people being taken care of by the current administration are the wealthy. There is a growing gap between the richest and the poorest Americans -- and taxes are only one aspect of the much bigger picture. Folks want to blame it on the war, immigration, global warming, steroids, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and who knows what else -- the French? I am pretty sure that Hitler came to power in the same way -- his foil being the Jews, foreigners, and almost anyone that wasn't 100% German origin with blonde hair and blue eyes.

                          Personally, I wish the government would create a few more incentives for lower income folks to save money. Capital gains taxes are great for those who have capital gains, but the bulk of Americans just don't -- they can't -- they don't have discretionary money to buy stocks. Still, the IRS offers a tax break to individuals who invest in a 401k (or similar) investment, and have an AGI of less than $25k/yr. $25,000??? That's the threshold? Is the idea to set it so low that people could not possibly take advantage of this? Why wouldn't they offer that to folks who make up to $50k? $75k? I guess it is because the algorithms that they use to determine how much it will cost say that there would be an exponential increase in those who would particpate in such a plan as the threshold figure grows. Of course, the cost would likely be about the same as cutting taxes to the richest 1% of Americans -- you know those $1MM guys paying $400k - but, I guess the guys who pay $400k in taxes are probably also the guys who make political contributions.

                          Or, I could just be cynical....
                           
                          #43
                            Tedbear

                            • Total Posts: 1832
                            • Joined: 1/26/2004
                            • Location: Somerset, NJ
                            RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 6:22 PM (permalink)
                            quote:
                            Originally posted by Scorereader

                            quote:
                            Originally posted by Tedbear

                            quote:
                            Originally posted by Scorereader

                            Well, taxes have definately increased. And they are a burden. I, for one, though, would love to see a low low federal tax rate and allow services to be provided for by state and local municipalities. The money raised through state and local taxes rather than federal funds. IMO, the money would be better spent by the local gov't who knows where the specific needs are rather than by a Federal governing body making sweeping decisions that may help some, while hurting others.





                            I agree that in theory that might be a good idea. However, some states have a history of policies that run counter to true principles of Americanism.

                            Let's not forget about things like segregated schools, segregated mass transit, poll taxes, literacy tests that were applied to only some citizens, failure to prosecute lynch mobs, etc. etc. These states were dragged kicking and screaming into the concept of equality for all.

                            Somehow, I don't think that a Lester Maddox or a George Wallace could have been counted on to make wise decisions where equitable distribution of tax dollars and public services were concerned. One of the favorite arguments of these people was that the federal government should stay out of the affairs of the states, and allow the states to run everything themselves. Without federal oversight and intervention, troglodites like that would still hold sway.

                            Yes, those incidents are, hopefully, behind us, but unfortunately, records like this make it difficult for many people to put trust in state governments to make judicious decisions. Like I said, your suggestion is great in theory, but history should make us cautious about this idea.


                            I'm sorry Tedbear, I didn't realize that State governments were made up of only Governors and void of state congressmen and senators. I was unaware that local municipalities, counties, towns and villages were lacking in mayors, councilmen, executives, and a host of other local elected officials and representatives and school boards. And I was unaware these government bodies have no effect on the people they represent. Because, according to you, it is only a great theory that these agencies can best handle the needs of the people.

                            Lester Maddox....ha! How about the Federal government which supported slavery and Jim Crow Laws, the internment of Japanese-Americans, Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, and more. The Federal government led the way for people like Lester Maddox and George Wallace.








                            Well, Scorereader, perhaps you can supply the names of the State Senators and Assemblymen who supported the policies of Governors like those whom I named. I cannot supply their names, but clearly, the policies that thrived in many states for many generations could not have existed without the support of those same Senators and Assemblymen. If I knew their identities, I would supply them, but the fact remains that these nameless people were partners with the aforementioned Governors in their policies, as the actions of these Governors could not have been unilateral. The regressive policies to which I referred were created and perpetuated by a cadre of people on the state level, whose identities I am not privy to.

                            In an earlier era, fear of losing the South led the federal government to placate that region, and, shamefully, caused it to allow slavery to exist, and later, for Jim Crow Laws to be put into place. That does not mean that the federal government promoted these concepts, but merely that weak individuals on the federal level failed to take a stand. And, of course, there were bigoted people who were elected to federal office or appointed to high posts--a good example being Chief Justice Roger B. Taney who authored the Dred Scott Decision, thereby legitimizing slavery. A careful reading of U.S. History will verify what I have said.

                            As to municipalities, counties, etc. let's not forget the voting fraud that was created/supported/hidden by the mayors, councilmen, etc. who allowed votes to be cast in the names of legions of dead people (the most glaring examples that I know of are Chicago under Richard Daly, New York City under Boss Tweed, and Jersey City under Frank Hague, but there are scores and scores of lesser examples). Those same people squandered the taxpayers' money on contracts that contained rich kickbacks for themselves and their cronies.

                            Regarding the internment of Japanese-Americans during WW II, you should be aware that this idea originated with the Governor of California, Earl Warren. He got FDR and members of Congress so riled-up in an irrational fashion, that his concept was approved on the federal level. But, the idea did originate on the state level with the person who many people later considered to be dangerously liberal--Earl Warren.

                            Regarding the Tuskeegee Experiment, this was not something that was legislated by Congress or approved by any US President. Some misguided souls in the US Public Health Service came up with this racist medical experiment, but it was not a policy that was formulated by any of the elected members of the US government. Can you say the same thing about the policies of the Southern states for so many years? Obviously what went on in the "slave states", both before the Civil War and after was largely a result of legislation, executive orders, and policies promulgated by those state governments, which clearly includes State Senators, Assemblymen, and Governors.

                            I sense that you and some others are bristling about the realities of some of our history, but it is our history and it was largely the result of legislation that was approved by a majority of those states' elected representatives and approved by those states' Governors--and that is where the shameful past events from our federal government's history largely differs from that of some of our states.

                            As to school boards, a phenomenon that has taken place over the last decade or so is for "stealth" candidates of the religious right to run for school board posts, and only after their elections are their real agendas known to the general public. When school boards mandate the teaching of religiously-driven curriculum (such as Creationism), rather than science, then I think it is wise to be careful about endorsing these governmental bodies as the ones best able to make decisions in the best interests of all.

                            I did not claim that the Federal government (and its officials) is without fault. In fact, that was the original theme of this thread, if you recall the editorial about Mr. Hastert.

                            In fact, we need a Balance of Powers between the states and the federal government--as the U.S. Constitution enacted. We also need a System of Checks and Balances among the three branches of the federal government--again, as the U.S. Constitution enacted.

                            No one branch of government is omniscient. Citizens need to remain vigilant to excesses and bad policies on the part of government at all levels. Unfortunately, as the years pass, fewer and fewer of our citizens read newspapers or tune in to broadcast news media that present a balanced view of events.

                            Once again, you have misinterpreted my statements, but at least I do appreciate your helping me to illustrate my point! Thank you for your assistance.
                             
                            #44
                              The Travelin Man

                              • Total Posts: 3699
                              • Joined: 3/25/2003
                              • Location: Central FL
                              RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 6:34 PM (permalink)
                              quote:
                              Originally posted by Tedbear

                              As to municipalities, counties, etc. let's not forget the voting fraud that was created/supported/hidden by the mayors, councilmen, etc. who allowed votes to be cast in the names of legions of dead people (the most glaring examples that I know of are Chicago under Richard Daly, New York City under Boss Tweed, and Jersey City under Frank Hague, but there are scores and scores of lesser examples). Those same people squandered the taxpayers' money on contracts that contained rich kickbacks for themselves and their cronies.


                              And let's not forget all of the corruption that has surrounded the whole city of New Orleans. Katrina just created the latest round of problems for that city.

                              quote:
                              Originally posted by Tedbear

                              As to school boards, a phenomenon that has taken place over the last decade or so is for "stealth" candidates of the religious right to run for school board posts, and only after their elections are their real agendas known to the general public. When school boards mandate the teaching of religiously-driven curriculum (such as Creationism), rather than science, then I think it is wise to be careful about endorsing these governmental bodies as the ones best able to make decisions in the best interests of all.


                              Anyone who thinks that these types of things don't happen -- on both sides of the political fence hasn't been following what's been going on in Lawrence, a rather wealthy Long Island suburb.

                              http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lilawr0518,0,4794668.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines
                               
                              #45
                                Tedbear

                                • Total Posts: 1832
                                • Joined: 1/26/2004
                                • Location: Somerset, NJ
                                RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 6:58 PM (permalink)
                                quote:
                                Originally posted by stevekoe

                                quote:
                                Originally posted by Tedbear

                                As to municipalities, counties, etc. let's not forget the voting fraud that was created/supported/hidden by the mayors, councilmen, etc. who allowed votes to be cast in the names of legions of dead people (the most glaring examples that I know of are Chicago under Richard Daly, New York City under Boss Tweed, and Jersey City under Frank Hague, but there are scores and scores of lesser examples). Those same people squandered the taxpayers' money on contracts that contained rich kickbacks for themselves and their cronies.


                                And let's not forget all of the corruption that has surrounded the whole city of New Orleans. Katrina just created the latest round of problems for that city.

                                quote:
                                Originally posted by Tedbear

                                As to school boards, a phenomenon that has taken place over the last decade or so is for "stealth" candidates of the religious right to run for school board posts, and only after their elections are their real agendas known to the general public. When school boards mandate the teaching of religiously-driven curriculum (such as Creationism), rather than science, then I think it is wise to be careful about endorsing these governmental bodies as the ones best able to make decisions in the best interests of all.


                                Anyone who thinks that these types of things don't happen -- on both sides of the political fence hasn't been following what's been going on in Lawrence, a rather wealthy Long Island suburb.

                                http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lilawr0518,0,4794668.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines


                                Steve--That was a very interesting article, but in truth, it is not "the other side of the political fence". Religious fundamentalists can be from any religion, and the Orthodox Jewish people who have packed the local school board in Lawrence probably have a somewhat similar agenda to the Christian groups who we usually think of as "the religious right" (e.g.--promoting biblically-driven views in the curriculum and diverting public funding to religiously oriented schools).

                                Just as the Taliban was so destructive to the culture, the government, and the rights of non-Muslims in Afghanistan, a fundamentalist group of Christians or Jews have the potential to be quite dismissive of the rights and the feelings of other groups. I think the message for us all is that extremism of ANY type is bad for the overall society. Throughout history, whenever one group (whether it is an ethnic group, a race, a religion, a social class, or...) has been allowed unchecked power, they have been likely to push their own agenda with no thought for the rights of others.

                                So, despite the reality that the usual interpretation of "religious right" is that the term refers to Christians, in truth, it can apply to any fundamentalist religious group that is so caught up in their own religious fervor that they believe that they can ignore the rights of others. These Orthodox Jewish school board members can not be trusted to spend the local residents' tax money in an equitable fashion in the schools, just as fundamentalists of other religions could not be trusted to be equitable.
                                 
                                #46
                                  The Travelin Man

                                  • Total Posts: 3699
                                  • Joined: 3/25/2003
                                  • Location: Central FL
                                  RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 7:20 PM (permalink)
                                  I didn't necessarily mean that the Orthodox Jews don't have a similar agenda to the "religious right." I meant that most view both Jews and those from Long Island as more liberal than conservative. My understanding is that they are less interested in diverting public funds to parochial schools than they are in simply reducing the property taxes -- under the argument that they aren't using the public facilities to which the funding is going. It is similar to the kinds of fights we see here in Florida -- the elderly, who reject any kind of tax increase on sheer principle, but most ardently oppose any kind of increase in funding to the public school system.

                                  I was really agreeing with your assessment that school board elections are very dangerous in this country. When you further consider that most people who vote in school board elections (especially in off-year elections) are the zealots who care the most about who wins these elections. These formulated strategies (of when it is most advantageous, politically, to make a run at government seats or get a state constitution amendment passed) are very well planned events. Look back to the last presidential election and see how many "swing" states had ballot initiatives to thwart gay marriage (or similar issues). These were well-designed to get out the conservative vote -- and nothing else, really.
                                   
                                  #47
                                    Tedbear

                                    • Total Posts: 1832
                                    • Joined: 1/26/2004
                                    • Location: Somerset, NJ
                                    RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Thu, 05/25/06 9:10 PM (permalink)

                                    Steve--While most Jewish people in the U.S. could usually be considered to be more liberal than conservative, those who are staunchly Orthodox frequently have views that are surprising similar to many Christian conservative groups. For instance, staunchly Orthodox Jews are frequently just as opposed to a woman's right to choose as Christian conservative groups are. Also similar are their attitudes toward gay rights.

                                    Several years ago, I was shocked to learn that in one of the Brooklyn neighborhoods that is heavily populated with Hasidic Jews, that group was successful in getting one of the local public schools to establish classrooms that were segregated according to gender. Although I am Jewish by birth, I was offended by that use of public funds, and I consider that action to have been a gross misuse of tax revenues.

                                    I am glad to hear that you were actually agreeing with me, but I did want to clarify this bit of information about this other fundamentalist religious group.
                                     
                                    #48
                                      prisonchef

                                      • Total Posts: 296
                                      • Joined: 2/13/2006
                                      • Location: st augustine, FL
                                      RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Sun, 05/28/06 11:26 AM (permalink)
                                      just a thought.
                                      living in florida as i do can someone please explain what a state income tax is?
                                      thanks
                                       
                                      #49
                                        Poverty Pete

                                        • Total Posts: 2266
                                        • Joined: 8/16/2003
                                        • Location: Nashville, TN
                                        RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Sun, 05/28/06 12:55 PM (permalink)
                                        Repugs, Dimocrats, I say throw them all out and start with a clean slate. Regardless of party, there isn't one member of the Senate who represents my interests.
                                         
                                        #50
                                          BT

                                          • Total Posts: 3589
                                          • Joined: 7/3/2004
                                          • Location: San Francisco, CA
                                          RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Sun, 05/28/06 1:20 PM (permalink)
                                          quote:
                                          Originally posted by Tedbear

                                          As to school boards, a phenomenon that has taken place over the last decade or so is for "stealth" candidates of the religious right to run for school board posts, and only after their elections are their real agendas known to the general public. When school boards mandate the teaching of religiously-driven curriculum (such as Creationism), rather than science, then I think it is wise to be careful about endorsing these governmental bodies as the ones best able to make decisions in the best interests of all.


                                          I actually think this phenomena, when it happens, often turns out to be counterproductive to the far right (if also destructive of the school system). But it seems to me that quite often the middle-of-the-road or moderate-right voters who vote these people into office feel duped afterward when they discover the real agenda and, on the next election, vote them out again decisively. And once that happens, the prospect of their getting back in in the foreseeable future is dim.
                                           
                                          #51
                                            BT

                                            • Total Posts: 3589
                                            • Joined: 7/3/2004
                                            • Location: San Francisco, CA
                                            RE: 2nd in the line of succession, yet clueless Sun, 05/28/06 1:35 PM (permalink)
                                            quote:
                                            Originally posted by prisonchef

                                            just a thought.
                                            living in florida as i do can someone please explain what a state income tax is?
                                            thanks


                                            Its a thing that makes this sort of thing unnecessary:

                                            quote:
                                            From the Wall Street Journal (May 22)

                                            In late March, hundreds of Florida homeowners jammed the chambers of county commissioners in Fort Pierce, Fla., to protest rising property taxes. Ed McIntosh, a 75-year-old retiree, showed up with a foot-tall stack of complaints from homeowners, 623 letters in all.

                                            He read a batch of them aloud, one tale after another of seasonal residents juggling rising insurance costs, hurricane-repair bills and escalating property taxes, which have more than doubled in five years in parts of the state.

                                            Such protests have become commonplace in Florida as the state's snowbirds -- winter residents, who are mostly retirees from the Northeast, Midwest and Canada -- fight back against a tax system they believe is unfair and onerous. Mr. McIntosh, a retired Ford Motor Co. finance manager who lives in Beulah, Mich., spends four months a year along the Atlantic coast in Jensen Beach. He complains that seasonal residents are "being discriminated against...We're carrying the state on our backs."

                                            All across the country, homeowners are complaining about runaway property taxes. In many places, sharp increases in home values are to blame. But Florida's snowbirds are angry about something else -- an unusual dual-bracket tax system. Florida allows municipalities to set the taxable value of properties at different levels for permanent and seasonal residents. There have been cases of snowbirds paying property taxes 10 times as high as those of permanent residents living nearby.

                                            Records of the St. Lucie County Property Appraiser show, for example, that one permanent resident of Jensen Beach pays $271 a year in property taxes on a 408-square-foot mobile home built in 1984. Four houses away, a seasonal resident from Pennsylvania pays $3,007 for a 420-square-foot mobile home built in 1987 (note: this is about what I pay for a downtown San Francisco 2 bedroom condo and 4-5 times what I pay for my 2 BR, 2 bath vacation home in AZ), the records show. The two lots are nearly the same size, according to the records


                                            It also eliminates the need for an "intangible property tax" and it provides funding for decent roads, schools and even health care for the poor.

                                            I'm not arguing that Florida should have one. I appreciated the fact that it didn't for all the years I lived there stashing money that might otherwise go to the state away for retirement. And my relatives who still live there would hate me if I supported an income tax for Florida.

                                            And there's one more reason--IMHO a very good one--not to put one in now: Illegal immigrants, of which FL has a growing number, by and large don't pay income tax (or intangible tax) but they do pay sales and property tax (if they own property). So states that don't have an income tax but do have high sales and property taxes like Florida do much better at soaking illegals which helps pay for the services they require (ER visits, school and so on).

                                            PS--Just keep repeating over and over, "Don't tax you, don't tax me; tax that guy behind the tree!"
                                             
                                            #52
                                              Online Bookmarks Sharing: Share/Bookmark
                                              Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 31 to 52 of 52

                                              Jump to:

                                              Current active users

                                              There are 0 members and 1 guests.

                                              Icon Legend and Permission

                                              • New Messages
                                              • No New Messages
                                              • Hot Topic w/ New Messages
                                              • Hot Topic w/o New Messages
                                              • Locked w/ New Messages
                                              • Locked w/o New Messages
                                              • Read Message
                                              • Post New Thread
                                              • Reply to message
                                              • Post New Poll
                                              • Submit Vote
                                              • Post reward post
                                              • Delete my own posts
                                              • Delete my own threads
                                              • Rate post

                                              2000-2014 ASPPlayground.NET Forum Version 3.9
                                              What is Roadfood?  |   Privacy Policy  |   Contact Roadfood.com   Copyright 2011 - Roadfood.com