sorry for the typos. must be too early<quoted text>
i will agree, and have written it a number of times since this fiasco finally came to a head, that voter / citizen apathy is probably the large factor in how why the government continues to grow and spend like ther's no tomorrow. most vote based on signage, tv and radio ads, newspaper ads, if you're an incumbent, and finally PARTY. it's not who is the best candidate, it's who gets their NAME recognized. so, i think we fully agree on this point.
as for the other, i do think it's a cop out because you're giving those that are apathetic a "reason" to go for the name recognition, "he's been there 20 years, i can't read all that".
think abouot this, if a new guy were elected, the absoluted most you'd have is 3 years to check on. to check on a new guy in his first year isn't the best thing to do. reasons, he's "finding is way in the system", "he's trying to find out who he can work with", "he may be a little intimidated by the situation", etc.)i can assure you that sitting on the audience side of the table doesn't ensure you know what yo're doing on the voting side.) so, we're effectively, you're down to two years worth of votes that you could review to determine what and how this guy thinks. if you pick any 12 month period during that time you'll get a good idea of where he's at, ethicly, morally, and how he well represents his constituents. there are enough votes to in any 12 month period to determine these things (they may not make the papers, tv or radio but, the votes are there).
so, in conclusion, i believe, and would trust, a review of his votes over a 12 month period would give me enough background to determine this guys worth as an elected representative of the people.
as to your re-buttal on historical perspective, i do think that it is best that some incumbents make it through to a second term. not because they "just should" but, because they are the type of representative we need (they've shown good character as a representative of the people). i wouldn't vote for a guy simply because he's there. he may not be the best but, his opponent may be worse. in his second term, he may find a different mindset on the governing body and really come on strong due to his intimate knowledge of the system they're in, he may be a good tutor for the new guys, he may let them know who to stay away from and who provides un-biased information. there are a lot of reason to keep an incumbent but i'll clearly state, him being an incumbent isn't one of them.
as for Julia and others like her, they should be gone! the system of government that we have wasn't meant for career politicians. they obviously lose perspective and touch in their constituency. a couple of terms and they should go (by choice or force). this would include Lugar, Kennedy, etc...
#83 Jul 29, 2007
#84 Jul 29, 2007
The problem is the unions. Teachers union, state employee unions, local employee unions - all get pay raises every year and benefits that those of us who are not in unions can't even hope for. WE NEED A PROPERTY OWNERS UNION - and no one who works for any type of government can belong to it. That union has to be powerful enough to reduce pensions of government employees, increase the amount that government employees pay into health care costs and yes, reduce salaries when needed, etc. The government has shot itself in the foot with the property tax all across this nation. Maybe its time for a new type of government. They seem to have forgotten "a government OF the people" and replaced it with a government of "the government employees".
#85 Jul 31, 2007
With the lack of real ownership of private property in this country perhaps we should change the name from U.S.A. to U.S.S.A. United Socialist States of America. Fitting?
December 16, 1773 the people were so upset with taxes that they revolted in what is known today as the Boston Tea Party. This may have helped kick off the revolution. Today we sit at our computers and bitch. I think the thieves (government) may have won this round.
And here I like a movie where the bad guy occasionally wins. lol. Go figure.
#86 Jul 31, 2007
For the ones who think you can go out of state and purchase to advoid sales tax on large items like a vehicle. It still has to be license in Indiana and you pay difference in the sales tax. Sure some will go out to beat it and may do so but in the long run sales tax on gas and tires brake shoes etc. will offset the ones who do. It the only fair tax I can think of that allows citizens to control when and what amount they want to pay. Some say it will hurt the lower income families, and it may, but again it could be given as write off on federal taxes but they would need to show proof. Or earned income credit could be given. No tax is fair but one that allows citizens to control is better than we have now.
#87 Jul 31, 2007
The sales tax would need to be doubled to start to make up the property taxes lost, if they were abolished. Care to venture what kind of new revolt that would bring?
#88 Aug 1, 2007
Sale taxes would go up and yes many would complain but we all could do something we cannot do now. Decide what we want to pay. No purchase no tax. Sure we all will need to buy some items that is a given. People will also shop carefully to find the lowest price so tax is not as high, this means pressure on sellers to lower prices which they should be albe to do if not paying property taxes, inventory taxes etc. No tax is good but sales tax at least we know what it is and doubt if it is enacted it will ever jump as high as property taxes have lately. I post a lot and work because I choose too, having retired. I would like to die knowing I was able to own real estate in my adopted state. If not I can move someplace else and purchase land. Many do not have that option.
I attempt to stay abrest of things but even the ones passing the laws do not understand them. We the People must protec the Repudlic if it is to survive for the next generation.
#89 Aug 1, 2007
You are of course correct, you are free to move anywhere you like. Please let me know which of the states in the U.S. you would be able to move to, and not pay property taxes?
While a few states have unique circumstances. FL = huge influx of tourists that pay large sums of sales tax/hotel taxes/etc. Nevada=Las Vegas, and a few others, for the most part, you are going to pay property taxes. And in quite a few states, you will pay property taxes, along with a higher state income tax AND a higher sales tax. Why? Because government services are required. Government services include police, fire, schools, local/state government, libraries, county parks, etc. Each taxpayer has their favorites that they feel should be protected. That is in part, why things are spread out among all taxpayers. Also, with decent local/county services come increased home values. None of this, "doesn't matter because all the houses in my city will be taken over for lack of paying property taxes" junk either.
There are going to be hard choices which need to be made. Winners and losers. Unfortunately, a supposed loser usually ends up a whiner, until they feel they are a winner.
The idiocy that is being shown by adults is almost comical.
#90 Aug 1, 2007
Never said we would be tax free, just that property taxes are unfair. True taxes are needed and they are for services provided. However ownership is good, builds communities etc. Sales taxes no matter how high are in the open and easy to collect and give some control to citizens. Now until it hits the way it has property taxes are out of sight and out of mind. The citizens need to see and watch taxes sales tax also prevents anyone from not paying taxes who use services from any state or country. No one said taxes were to be done away with just changed to allow everyone to pay and be fair.$5000 a year in property taxes would be 10 per cent of $50.000 in sales taxes.Also if property is sold and true value known sales taxes could be charged.
Add your comments below
|CELBERTY: Justin Beiber (Oct '12)||Jan 20||Phonics||3|
|Woman sentenced for sexual misconduct with teens (Jul '07)||Jan 5||anonymous||75|
|Tyler martin (Oct '12)||Dec '14||Smooth Criminal||6|
|Grove: Morgan, Roselee, Michael G||Nov '14||Rhonda54||1|
|male/female snapchat sexting buddy||Oct '14||wesleymcgee1234||1|
|Scholarship Fund for Shanda Sharer (Dec '08)||Sep '14||JustJenna||5|
|Ridgeville man accused of battery (Mar '14)||Aug '14||Mossy||2|
Find what you want!
Search Redkey Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC