Do your local governments steal from you?
 

There was a time when government services where there to aid the needs of the population. Now their goal, at least in Seattle, is to hire folks time and again to do work no one asks for and justify their efforts by saying their efforts creates jobs and benefits the populace. While there is an element of truth to this, the tax payer always gets the unwanted and often expressly not approved bills for this approach. The question, is does this happen everywhere?

Our little community if full of very apathetic voters (last referendum vote was a near no-show).

So it's no surprise that we pay some of the highest property taxes in the area and have sales taxes that exceed downtown NY!

In the meantime, the local board has approved (thanks in part to the lack of voter participation) another tax hike to support street maintenance, which should be covered under basic municipal funds! :mad:

Yeah, but you Texans don't pay state income tax, either. My sympathy well is dry.

We aren't the only state with no state income tax...and the other states seem to be able to do this without such concessions!

I remember one city that had a "rain tax", there was an equation that calculated the amount of quarterly rainfall and the square footage of improved property including parking. Needless to say it didn't make it far in court.

Our local govt. is pretty lean. In fact, it's so lean that the Feds have decided that we don't need money to operate. Minnesota gets $0.78 for every federal tax dollar paid. Every southern state except for Texas and Florida had a positive return on their federal tax dollars. Florida broke even, Texas lost $0.04. New Mexico did the best, making a whopping $2.34 for each dollar invested in the federal government. It's gotta be the UFO's.

OIC, we're paying reparations! ;)

Q: What's better than being deep in the heart of Texas?
A: Six inches into Virginia. :D :D

...ya'll might want to take a look at how much/little some of your local corporate institutions pay in taxes relative to the good private citizens of your local municipality. I think you'll find that the many are living on the 'dole', receiving massive amounts of corporate welfare, and leaving ya'll to foot the bill. Who is stealing from whom?

Local governments quite often are the first and last lines of defense that keep your communities liveable and worthwhile places to invest. Just because you personally don't perceive the value of the services provided by government, doesn't mean those services aren't of intrinsic value to your community.

...I take the Libertarian line on Corporate welfare. Let private commercial entities sink or swim based on the merits of their products, services and general business acumen.
I used to be the co-owner of my own little corporation, and I didn't experience this either...that's part of the point I'm trying to make. Larger corporations get all sorts of perks and special wink-wink-nudge-nudge deals that the little guys, and average citizens don't.
...there are literally thousands of examples of this--in the Seattle area, Boeing is currently extorting the state of Washington and King County in order to get massive tax breaks and other corporate welfare schemes.

I don't remember the details, but the State of Alabama offered MB millions in corporate welfare benefits so that they'd locate their plant down there. I seem to remember that the deal amounted to something like $200,000 per job...do mom n' pop outfits get that kind of treatment? Walmart gets all sorts of land use and tax welfare benefits so they can move in and displace local businesses--I could go on...

G-Benz, Does your local gov start projects even though the voters say no?

Botnst: why does lack of state income tax alter your respect of the will of the people?

300SDLLLL: it sounds as if Houston follows a similar path of Seattle: here, as is commonly the case the (fill in the blank) gov branch will pass a bill and start collecting taxes, often without a public vote and well ahead of the time it takes for the courts to decide the legality of the gov branch’s actions. As often as not the court finds the actions illegal but even that doesn’t necessarily stop the tax collection. Or necessarily start a refund.

MedMech: in Seattle we have a surface water tax that’s supposed to pay for the costs of removing water. Naturally the city wont deal with this problem in residential areas unless forced.

Z: your comment that the gov also steals by offering incentives to bigger employers than it does to small business is interesting. I’ve thought the volume discount the gov offered to big employers was more than a fair trade for pumping potentially 10s of millions in wages into the economy, as does boeing, but you point out it only changes by degrees the nature of theft – corporate welfare.

BTW, is what Boeing doing really extortion or merely the effects of open competition?

They have every right to complain. Every taxpayer does. But Texas has just about the most benign state government.

I wish my state (and national gov) would follow that lead.

...uh, are you suggesting Texas as a national model Botnst? Hasn't the national gu'mnt been Tex-ified enough already?

I ain't 'messin with Texas' (I've lived there), but I don't think it should be a national model...hell, my home state (Washington) would be a mighty poor national model--especially cuz we don't have an income tax. We have THE most regressive tax structure in the nation.

While I know naught about texas taxas, are you suggesting it's okay for the gov to do whatever they will, as long as at least someone thinks it's in the best interest of the public? Seems a thin and convenient justificaton for theft..... Hey, gime $500 to channel water off *my* property

For example, Osceola county has the poorest school district in Florida because that giant theme park with the mouse doesn't pay any local property taxes.

Well, the local municipal water treatment agency in my hometown (Olympia, WA) recently went through a very contentious wrangling with the Miller Brewing Co. over sewer rates. Miller purchased the old Olympia Brewery and the grandfathered 50% rates for sewage dumped into the system. Those grandfathered rates expired in 2000, and thus were up for re-negotiation. It only seems fair that the largest producer of waste in the community pay at least the same rates as others--right? Wrong! Miller threatened to close down the plant if the community didn't rollover and re-up those sweetheart rates.

Long story short--they eventually co-opted the city council and got their extorted 50% sewer rates on a 5-4 vote. Oh, ya, they also got between $8-12 million in back debt owed to the community wiped clean in the process.

They closed down the plant earlier this year....

Do businesses exist to serve the community, or is it the other way around?

You don't wanna get me started!! :mad:

Yep, its called the 2% HotelMotelRestaurant tax. You pay 10.375% total to eat out in Fayettenam, Arkansas.

Denver is proposing that it pay Walmart $12.5 million to build a store on the site of a strip mall that is currently occupied by about 7 or 8 small local independent businesses. WalMart for God's sake!!

Businesses exist to make money for the owners. Everything else is lagniappe.

Its okay to parasitize a little but you don't want to debilitate the host.

Could the plant have stayed in business had the rates been lower? How many employees would be working if the plant had been profitable?

On the other hand, Miller sucks. Maybe local micros benefitted.

...funny you should mention it. Olympia has a very nice microbrewery here called Fish Brewing Co. (I'm drinking a Wild Salmon Pale Ale right now), but they're still too small to benefit one way or another. A bunch of local commie pinko types are currently putting together a plan for the community to buy up the plant, redistribute the water rights, and then develop the 180 acre site for all sorts of commercial and public benefit ventures.

The idea is developing some traction so we'll see...

Capitalist businesses sole purpose is the pursuit of profit, but they better damn well prove to be a relatively benign parasite.

Miller was bought out by the Anglo/South African conglomerate SAB. They're busy globalizing their way into more profitable communities to squeeze.

250-340--only 40% were permanent Union guys, the rest temps.
Why should the local non-profit Hospital employing 2300 workers pay full pop while, those corporate scheisters sleaze their way into a 50% rate? Scumbags...I worked with several local political organizations to fight that deal, and it still smarts.

Atlanta property taxes have been steadily rising for years, while we remain the #49 state in the performance of our public schools that these rising taxes are supposed to be improving. Not to mention the state lottery money.... I don't even know what they're wasting that on, because it's obviously not being used to improve state schools.

Now our water/sewage rates are about to skyrocket to 2-3 times what they have been, thanks to YEARS of procrastination by our Democratic city government in making upgrades and repairs to the city's public works. Now the problem is acute, and it's going to cost 2-3 billion to fix, by current estimates (which we all know are always low). In the meantime we've been pi$$ing away more taxpayer money, for several years, by paying millions in fines to the EPA for the related environmental violations, instead of addressing the problem!

:mad:

Mike

Big taxes? How about this. Here in UK, there is VAT (sales tax?) of 17.5% on almost everything. Income tax (on your salary) is 20%, plus something else (National Insurance) about another 10%. Higher earners get 40% tax, plus the national insurance. SO, I earn 100 $, I see maybe 70 $ in my wage packet, I buy something costing 70 $, they take another 12.25 in tax. So my 100 $ has bought 57.75 $ in goods.

Another one: I'm currently in the market for a new house. I get taxed 3% of the purchase price for a 400 K dollar house (not much these days), whammo.

Not to mention all the g0ddamn lawyers/real-estate guys with their hands in my pocket during the process (apologies to all you g0ddamn lawyers).

Why should there be a non-profit hospital?

...cuz profiting from human misery is immoral?

All the doctors, nurses, surgeons, chiropractors, dentists, orthodontists, gynecologists, assistants, researchers, pharmacists, massage therapists, specialists, urologists, EMTs, acupuncturists...

So they are all immoral because they get paid to relieve human suffering?

:rolleyes:

Z, your recurring pinkness never ceases to amaze me.

Mike

Aw, come on. Were that true, Marx would have never been published.....the crusades would have never happened, the medical industry would still be using little other than leeches and incense....

...huh?

...uh, no.

Here we go yet again:
The mission of many non-profits is to provide services--period.
The mission of any for-profit enterprise is to provide a profit to the shareholders--period.

It's profitable to restrict services, cut corners, and withhold access to the uninsured. That's immoral.

To those list members from outside the U.S.--yes, in the 21st century, America has tens of millions without access to healthcare--crazy huh? Our healthcare 'system' is populated by parasitic profit-seeking middlemen who tack on administrative fees and burdens that boost overall healthcare expenditures to approximately 14% of the nation's GDP. All this expense, and approximately 75 million Americans are still either uninsured or under-insured. That's immoral.

France spends approximately 8% of their GDP AND provides universal coverage--oh those superbly moral Frenchman.

People who want medical coverage should pay for it.

...so those with more money may receive more healthcare, and those with no money should receive no healthcare. I love it.

Works great, just like our 'justice' system...I'm lovin the 'free' market the more I think about it. It really 'frees' a fella up from worrying about anyone else doesn't it?

Quite liberating...a social conscience is such a burdensome thing.

What is a social conscience?

My conscience tells me not to squander resources given in trust. I don't mind paying taxes for things that benefit me indirectly--national defense, regulating trade, ensuring safety and security at home. If people need charity, that's cool too. But charity is not interminable else its slavery--I work for the benefit of a parasite.

...is it remotely conceivable that you may directly or 'indirectly' benefit from being surrounded by a healthy, stable, well educated population? What's that worth? A pay-to-play system will NEVER provide this. Your system requires bloated military and prison industrial complexes in order to maintain function --What do these costs subtract from your personal 'bottom-line'.

Wealth and social inequality have burdensome costs. I'm personally not interested in bearing those costs -- they infringe on my personal 'freedom'.

Interesting argument.

There is a balance to be struck between infringing on my rights and liberty and the needs of society. They are necessarily in conflict. I pay indirectly for every injustice, perceived or real. In this case I deny its necessarily a real injustice.

For example, somebody whom circumstance has left them without the means of helping themselves, I have no problem helping. That is a real injustice. In contrast, a meth'd-out freak with failing health is a perceived injustice.

Why should I be forced to pay for that portion which is a perceived, not real, injustice? That is not justice for me. That is involuntary servitude.

...it could be argued that there is potentially a long list of contributing factors lthat led to your friend's condition as a 'meth'd-out freak', chief among them a society that maintains high levels of social/wealth inequality.

Even though Mr. Freak may have come from a fairly well-to-do family, he could very easily start running into an economically desperate crowd after experiencing abuse in the home and running away as a teenager. This downward spiral happens all the time (I've observed that very scenario far too many times myself), and the register of 'indirect' costs start piling up. You pay, I pay, we all pay...and pay and pay and pay. Shutting off the public tap only compounds this problem. Meanwhile these folks have kids too...it's a god#$ned vicious cycle that won't be stopped by resorting to more and more punitive measures. All of our available buildable space will end up being devoted to 'adult daycare' facilities, and who's gonna pay for that?

It boils down to: "Do you want to pay now or pay later?" Either way you'll end up paying, but chances are paying later will be exponentially more costly.

Not offering solutions here, just my assessment.

Ol' Meth-head made his own choices. Let him live and die by them. Rather not pay at all. But if I must, I'd rather it not be to subsidize his mistakes but to incarerate him when he does damage. If he never does, fine, let him meth-around all he wants.....

Indifference--the last refuge of the scoundrel. I envy you.

Sorry Zeitgeist, but I must agree with Botnst here. I have a junkie brother as well. He made the choice to ruin his life. I have no pity for him, nor should I be forced to "pay" for his lifestyle choice. Quite frankly, I'm glad that this country doesn't have universal health care. I don't want to pay for the healthcare of either the ultra rich, nor for those who chose to live lives that left them short of being able to support themselves. According to your location, you live in the Pacific Northwest. As you've alluded to, there are plenty of choices of places that provide for you, that which you should be capable of supplying for yourself. If this is to be your chosen lifestyle, more power to you. However, do NOT force me into your idea of a "utopian" life. Please take your pick of any one of the countries that already supply this for you, and set your roots there.

...well golly, this is a right hospitable place we got here.

You're the third forum member who's suggested I kindly remove myself from the country of my birth. One of them offered to pay my way--are you willing to pitch in too?

Yes, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to find a way for the government to use taxpayer money to get you a first-class ride to whatever social-welfare paradise you'd like to fly to.

:rolleyes:

I've said this a hundred times, and I'm sure many here, even those who agree, are sick of it, but here goes:

Failure is a choice. Unless you are mentally or physically handicapped in a way that cannot be overcome or compensated for, then you are where you are in life as a result of your choices. And if your choices led you to become a homeless meth-head, then NO, I do not feel sorry for you, and NO, you do not deserve one cent of my hard-earned cash. They made their bed in the gutter, they can lie in it. Call me unsympathetic. Please...I love it. :p

Charity that is coerced by a government is NOT charity.

Mike

...I feel like I know you so much better now, thanks for sharing dude. That attitude will have society's casualties piling up like cordwood on your doorstep. Like I said, you can 'choose' to pay now, or you can 'choose' to pay later--we all pay at some point along the way.

Ignoring domestic problems doesn't make them disappear--hey wait, you've used that line on me before.

Someone must've turned on the rhetoric recycler...

Why do we want non-profit hospitals? Did you read the thread in the diesel discussion about whether your car should be serviced at Jiffy Lube? The same principle applies. Why would you want to take your body to the medical equivalent of Jiffy Lube?

Cost containment is already terrible when insurance helps pay, imagine how much it would cost in taxes if access were free.

Non-profit will do for medicine what it has done for the Postal Service.

...who said anything about free? Nothing is free. Your vaunted 'economic freedom' ain't free. There are costs associated with everything--actual costs and opportunity costs.

Publicly operated universal healthcare systems operate with huge economies of scale. That's in part why Canadians pay less for their drugs. Bulk pricing works--saves money and serves more. Your visceral dislike for the public sector really gets in the way of objectively recognizing a smart approach to fixing a nasty drag on our economy. Hell, even Fox News' Bill O'Reilly recognizes this, and he's on your side.

Profit motivates. Competition breeds excellence. If a hospital-for-profit is not offering the best service at a reasonable price, they will lose out to the one that does. Why do you wealthy-must-pay, poor-never-pay socialists hate that so much?

Mike

Glad you feel closer to me now. :rolleyes:

Why not have them pile up on YOUR doorstep, since you're so excited about paying for everybody else's "misfortunes".

Mike

Where could I begin with my O'Reilly problem? ..... why bother. I rarely listen to him, just enough to find him unpleasant. His finest broadcast virtues are that he's well-organized and adept at controlling the direction of conversation.

I ind him somewhat less obnoxious than that drunken lout comedian, whatsisname. Their not much different once you get pastthe drunk differential.

Canadians pay a lower price by legislating the market. Guess who provides the profit margin and research overhead, in effect subsidizing Canadian welfare?

Botnst

...well, the O'Reilly thing was my feeble attempt to make a point--I'm actually glad you don't like him since I find his kind of bully polemics to be repugnant. And no, I don't like Franken either.

Anyhoo, economies of scale are what they are. If bulk buying works for WalMart, Costco, and the other mega-titans of the corporate world, it'll work for public sector drug purchases as well.
Sorry dude, the world don't operate like that...we all suffer.
...healthcare ain't a commodity. That's why HMO's have failed so miserably at trying to introduce profit-driven market mechanisms into a the Hippocratic system--bad fit--immoral outcomes. The thought of hospitals 'competing' for patients is downright creepy.

Well, I don't appreciate that my government forces me to "operate" a forced charity system either. Because when my government steals my money to give to someone else, I suffer, my daughter suffers, my family suffers...and I do not appreciate it.

EVERYTHING is a commodity. There is no such thing as a truly unselfish act. If folks like you would just use that to your own everyone's ADVANTAGE instead of trying to repress it all the time, we'd all be a lot better off.

Mike

Canadians pay a lower price by legislating the market. Guess who provides the profit margin and research overhead, in effect subsidizing Canadian welfare?

Botnst

PICK ME, PICK ME, I know! PICK ME!!!! (waving arm frantically in the air...)

:)
Mike