USVI-On-Line

I'm really enjoying the political bantor - keep it up! Quick question - I am a municipal attorney and earn a fraction of what I could earn in the private sector (totally my choice to work in public service).
I'm fortunate enough to live in a great neighborhood where my property taxes (ie. school taxes) cost me in excess of $10,000 per year. This is about 20% of my take-home income. I have no children. My next-door-neighboor has 5 children and also pays $10,000 a year in school taxes. Is this "socialism"?

Ummmm....no. As you clearly stated, you have choices. But perhaps I am not qualified to answer since I am not a republican simply a conservative. I find myself in the same basket here lately with insults and accusations being thrown my way because of my political beliefs.

DELETED

This is not redistribution of wealth? Lets put it in perspective. If I pay for my neighbor's childrens education it's OK but if I pay for their flu shots it's "socialism"?

DELETED

I defend the tax payers.

This is not socialism!!

We all contribute to educate all the kids. It's been this way for a long time. Single people with no kids need to remember that others in the same boat paid for their education.

It's unnerving that we appear to be headed towards McCarthyist like hysteria over "socialism".


The real question is how your $10,00 is being spent.

As I have watched these threads unfold, I have wondered the same thing. I am not a Republican either, but I have to ask a few questions.

We pay for many things through the various levels of government. How will we define socialism?

Although my wife and I are not and have not been unemployed we pay into the system that give benefits to those who are. Are they taking our redistributed wealth to survive their rough spot? Should they be paid by all of us or should they wait for the wealth to trickle down to them?

The public school tax is another good expample. This is something that my parents made me aware of when I was young and in public school. School tax increases were regularly turned down by voters. They had a choice now that their education was completed. Moving to another district is a false choice. I can't think of a place where there are no school taxes. The only choice the inital poster would have is to give up his/her job and move to some rural area where school taxes are lower.

Isn't commercial insurance a form of socialism? We all pay into a pool to pay for losses while someone who manages that pool take a fraction of that money as compensation for managing that pool and its associated risk. Do not say that we have choices there. Auto insurance is generally mandatory in the US. Are we being forced to redistribute our wealth to people who live in bad neigborhoods and have a problem with car theft? Are we supporting the young and old who are not very good at driving and run into other peoples' property? Why don't those people pay their own bills instead of looking toward us to take care of their problems?

In terms of health care we already have our care paid for by various forms of socialism. Tell the people that have hospital district tax bill every year that they have a choice about paying for indigent care. Isn't health insurance the same as the above reasoning on auto insurance? If I am not sick enough to get any claims paid for this year, haven't I paid for the rest of you to get well?

The point of all of this is that it depends on your point of view when evaluating the political and economic value of a program. JFK was asked about a Cuban navy vessel firing shots at an American fishing boat. The question was whether the shots should be considered a warning or an attack. The President responded with that signature grin and said, "Well, I suppose that depends on whether or not you are on the fishing boat."

When we are evaluating these taxes, laws, programs, or anything else we need to think about what it would be like if we were on their boat.

JIM

NYBB wrote:I'm really enjoying the political bantor - keep it up! Quick question - I am a municipal attorney and earn a fraction of what I could earn in the private sector (totally my choice to work in public service).
I'm fortunate enough to live in a great neighborhood where my property taxes (ie. school taxes) cost me in excess of $10,000 per year. This is about 20% of my take-home income. I have no children. My next-door-neighboor has 5 children and also pays $10,000 a year in school taxes. Is this "socialism"?

Actually, I would like to add one thing to your statement. While I pay those "school" taxes because I live in a residence, we have no kids in school, and 1/2 mile away, there ia a very large apartment complex with families full of school age children and they pay NO property (school) tax. I don't know if that is socialism, but I'd like to see those apartment dwellers at least share "some" of the tax burden.

-Bert

I live in a small town, with a public school system for grades k-12. My brother has two children, (they both just recently graduated high school) but they attended most of their schooling in another town.

He owns three houses (two are rental properties) and of course pays school taxes on all of them. He was griping about it the other day, saying that he gets P@$$%d off because he's paying for something his kids aren't even using. I reminded him that he is paying for children in his home town to get the best education the public's money can provide. He will never move away from here, and I had to remind him, the kids going to school here, are the ones who will be working in the Nursing Homes, working on his car, opening their law offices, practicing medicine, serving him his McDonald's breakfast every morning, and many more. He will use all of these services for the rest of his life. I don't understand how he can't see how he benefits from paying school taxes.

Anywhoo, just my thoughts on school taxes, since I just debated this with him a few days ago.

CariBert wrote:

NYBB wrote:I'm really enjoying the political bantor - keep it up! Quick question - I am a municipal attorney and earn a fraction of what I could earn in the private sector (totally my choice to work in public service).
I'm fortunate enough to live in a great neighborhood where my property taxes (ie. school taxes) cost me in excess of $10,000 per year. This is about 20% of my take-home income. I have no children. My next-door-neighboor has 5 children and also pays $10,000 a year in school taxes. Is this "socialism"?

Actually, I would like to add one thing to your statement. While I pay those "school" taxes because I live in a residence, we have no kids in school, and 1/2 mile away, there ia a very large apartment complex with families full of school age children and they pay NO property (school) tax. I don't know if that is socialism, but I'd like to see those apartment dwellers at least share "some" of the tax burden.

-Bert

But Bert, the property owner of that building is paying the school tax, and is surely passing the cost onto to the renters. The owners of the rental properties aren't excluding it from their monthly rental amounts. So they are helping to pay for it.

CariBert wrote:

NYBB wrote:I'm really enjoying the political bantor - keep it up! Quick question - I am a municipal attorney and earn a fraction of what I could earn in the private sector (totally my choice to work in public service).
I'm fortunate enough to live in a great neighborhood where my property taxes (ie. school taxes) cost me in excess of $10,000 per year. This is about 20% of my take-home income. I have no children. My next-door-neighboor has 5 children and also pays $10,000 a year in school taxes. Is this "socialism"?

Actually, I would like to add one thing to your statement. While I pay those "school" taxes because I live in a residence, we have no kids in school, and 1/2 mile away, there ia a very large apartment complex with families full of school age children and they pay NO property (school) tax. I don't know if that is socialism, but I'd like to see those apartment dwellers at least share "some" of the tax burden.

-Bert

Well the owner of the apartment building pays the school tax and passes it on to the tennats in the form of rent.

opps, i should really read to the end before posting, sorry for the redundancy

My parents paid property taxes and school taxes, and then paid thousands of dollars on top of that to send me and my brothers to parochial school. Yes, that is a choice they made, but I guess people could make the argument they paid to send other people's children to school. I pay property taxes now (my landlord/roommate adds half of the taxes into my rent too), and I have no children. In fact, no one in our whole development has children. I also make a monthly contribution to my church to support their school, where I also have no children. I just bought tons of fundraiser stuff from two little girls from our school selling it on the church steps last weekend. I just believe it's important to invest in our future.

jimg20 wrote:As I have watched these threads unfold, I have wondered the same thing. I am not a Republican either, but I have to ask a few questions.

We pay for many things through the various levels of government. How will we define socialism?

Although my wife and I are not and have not been unemployed we pay into the system that give benefits to those who are. Are they taking our redistributed wealth to survive their rough spot? Should they be paid by all of us or should they wait for the wealth to trickle down to them?

The public school tax is another good expample. This is something that my parents made me aware of when I was young and in public school. School tax increases were regularly turned down by voters. They had a choice now that their education was completed. Moving to another district is a false choice. I can't think of a place where there are no school taxes. The only choice the inital poster would have is to give up his/her job and move to some rural area where school taxes are lower.

Isn't commercial insurance a form of socialism? We all pay into a pool to pay for losses while someone who manages that pool take a fraction of that money as compensation for managing that pool and its associated risk. Do not say that we have choices there. Auto insurance is generally mandatory in the US. Are we being forced to redistribute our wealth to people who live in bad neigborhoods and have a problem with car theft? Are we supporting the young and old who are not very good at driving and run into other peoples' property? Why don't those people pay their own bills instead of looking toward us to take care of their problems?

In terms of health care we already have our care paid for by various forms of socialism. Tell the people that have hospital district tax bill every year that they have a choice about paying for indigent care. Isn't health insurance the same as the above reasoning on auto insurance? If I am not sick enough to get any claims paid for this year, haven't I paid for the rest of you to get well?

The point of all of this is that it depends on your point of view when evaluating the political and economic value of a program. JFK was asked about a Cuban navy vessel firing shots at an American fishing boat. The question was whether the shots should be considered a warning or an attack. The President responded with that signature grin and said, "Well, I suppose that depends on whether or not you are on the fishing boat."

When we are evaluating these taxes, laws, programs, or anything else we need to think about what it would be like if we were on their boat.

JIM

Here's a definition:

"From each according to their ability - to each according to their needs" - k. marx

Again, the OP has a choice of where to live. My in-laws move all the time, and the first question they ask is "what are the taxes?".

With universal healthcare, you will have no choice. Won't matter where you live.