|
|
| Portal Bridge was down this morning (1469781) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1469789) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Lord Vader on Fri Mar 16 13:57:22 2018, in response to Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by andy on Fri Mar 16 12:20:18 2018. Need a new bridge for Portal like ASAP. Heard they wanted a high level fixed bridge but I dont see that happening. A new three track bascule or lift bridge will do the job. Been too long and you figured they get the point by now.Vader |
|
|
| (1469806) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Mar 16 15:43:59 2018, in response to Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by andy on Fri Mar 16 12:20:18 2018. Just build the new tunnels and bridge, the heck with the fed.ROAR |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1469811) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Mar 16 16:08:57 2018, in response to Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by andy on Fri Mar 16 12:20:18 2018. Portal bridge is Amtrak's responsibility and should be replaced at (mostly) federal cost. It should also not be connected with any Penn Station expansion project. Just replace the damn thing already. |
|
|
| (1469829) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 16 18:47:39 2018, in response to Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Mar 16 16:08:57 2018. It just isn't that cut and dry. Regardless of who owns it, 90% of the passengers that cross it are NJT passengers. Of course Amtrak is 2/3rd of the air-rail market between NYC and DC, and it supports the northeast's economy.Politically, OMB Director Mulvaney declared it a "local" project, Secretary Chao is a robot, and Trump is working a grudge against Schumer. It does not matter that automobile dominated cities like Atlanta function on federally supported so called "Interstate" highways that get 90% federal funding for their commuters, and that New York and New Jersey are net donor states. |
|
|
| (1469937) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Sun Mar 18 16:29:22 2018, in response to Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by Joe V on Fri Mar 16 18:47:39 2018. So your neighbor has been siphoning gas from your car and you've been siphoning from his but he's gotten ahead of you. Is the smart solution for you to siphon more gas or is it for you to campaign for the police to stop the cross siphoning and have everyone pay for their own gasoline?That's the flaw in using the highway budget argument for rail transit. If want to advocate the cause pitch for ways to reduce the flaws. Bill |
|
|
| (1469941) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 18 17:16:06 2018, in response to Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by Bill West on Sun Mar 18 16:29:22 2018. the flaw is a national policy of support for auto usage to the near exclusion of all else. As Jarrett Walker ofWhen badly managed automobile manufacturers got in trouble billions in public money were spent to revive/salvage them; when transit car builders got in trouble, not a dime was spent to aid them. I am allforfixing the flaw,but it is staill very much like trying to cut waste at DOD--the corporations who benefit have long ago purchased the elected/appointed officials who dispense the revenues. |
|
|
| (1469942) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 18 17:17:05 2018, in response to Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by Bill West on Sun Mar 18 16:29:22 2018. the flaw is a national policy of support for auto usage to the near exclusion of all else. As Jarrett Walker of humantransit.org points out the geometry of single driver cars forces huge highways and parking lots. Even with the most comprehensive transit in the US Manhattan still attracts too many cars for the space available.When badly managed automobile manufacturers got in trouble billions in public money were spent to revive/salvage them; when transit car builders got in trouble, not a dime was spent to aid them. I am allforfixing the flaw,but it is staill very much like trying to cut waste at DOD--the corporations who benefit have long ago purchased the elected/appointed officials who dispense the revenues. |
|
|
| (1469947) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Sun Mar 18 19:20:32 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 18 17:17:05 2018. Sorry I didn't get that last line. Was it: the riders who benefit have long ago voted for the elected/appointed officials who perpetuate the rider's side of the siphoning? See the NY Times today:"Twenty cents. That was the subway fare in 1968, and politicians from New York City to Albany knew that the surest way to get voted out of office was to be seen as responsible for raising it." Holding down the fare can hardly be viewed as favoring the highway advocates. None of this exchange is to do my original observation. I'll go back to my original closing line, if you want to advocate the cause pitch for ways to reduce the flaws. Bill |
|
|
| (1469948) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 18 20:00:19 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Bill West on Sun Mar 18 19:20:32 2018. I remember when the fare went up from15 to 20cents. One analysis of the shift from the city owning NYCTA to thestate MTA was relieving the Mayor or responsibility for fare increases.last line; I was trying to say that the bribing classes have such control over both the legislative and executive branches (state and national) that decreasing THEIR cut of public expenditures is the most difficult. As to riders "siphoning" by not paying more than a nominal fee to use transit, I think we both know that farebox recovery barely covers the cost of fare collection across most US transit operations, and is computed only as a percentage of day to day wages, fuel/electricity minor maintenance. Capital expenditures--new lines, new cars, outside vendor GOH programs, all are separately accounted and usually funded by separate bond issues or grants from FTA. I believe the US is operated as an oligarchic kleptocracy by the major bribers who twist revenue collection and expenditures to continue their positions as super rich. |
|
|
| (1469968) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Mar 19 01:46:03 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Mar 18 20:00:19 2018. Try this, Google the number of billionaires in the US to get their combined net worth, get the stock market average return on investment and get the national population. Figure out how much per week that return is over the average family size of 2.6.Bill |
|
|
| (1469993) | |
Re: Portal Bridge was down this morning |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Mar 19 11:10:03 2018, in response to Portal Bridge was down this morning, posted by andy on Fri Mar 16 12:20:18 2018. Another reason to build Gateway ASAPSure, so it can connect to a bridge that NJT overused since the 1990s? Nobody ever thinks of building an alternate terminal/station to NYP though. The money they want for "Gateway" is more than enough to do that. And another reason to hope that the Commandant-in-Chief lasts only one term Politics are for OTChat. Not to mention the term CIC refers to his leadership of the military, not everything else. Want to talk about the predecessor's lies about "funding" passenger railroads? Nothing was in any of that "stimulus" legislation, and I mean nothingit all went to highways, just like the left has loved and promoted for half a decade. It's not the federal government's job to run railroads, no matter what Woodrow Wilson did, or highways, no matter what Ike did. |
|
|
| (1470003) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Mar 19 14:00:57 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Bill West on Mon Mar 19 01:46:03 2018. The research has been done many times. The 1% OWN most of the wealth in the country. We know that capital gains are taxed at lower general rates and totally not subject to Soc Sec taxes. Study after study has shown the US to have one of the greatest disparities between rich and poor, yet the Kochs and their many allies are working hard to acquire more. |
|
|
| (1470009) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 19 16:05:24 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Mar 19 14:00:57 2018. So What?Taxing the rich will not improve the poor. The rich can AVOID most of your taxes because they do not HAVE to work. Why not an incremented SALES TAX. Sales for food and under $100.00 is a 5-8% tax depending on locality. Sales for items between $100 and $1000 might be 10% Sales between $1000 and $30,000 might be 15% Sales over $30,000 might be 18 or 20%. ROAR |
|
|
| (1470023) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Mar 19 17:20:01 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 19 16:05:24 2018. Then you get the dodge of micro billing in order to miss the targets. The bottom line is the need IMHO to pauperize the overly rich in favor of a more economically egalitarian polity--not very different from the ravings of a guy a couple millenia ago who was crucified for his POV. |
|
|
| (1470034) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Mar 19 17:57:54 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Mar 19 16:05:24 2018. Why not dump the vast majority of taxes and return passenger rail to the private sector? The only reason the government took it over is because it wanted to control it.Portal Bridge was built by the private sector. |
|
|
| (1470037) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Mar 19 18:22:09 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Mar 19 17:57:54 2018. The PRR was private sector w/huge government muscle behind it.The B&O was put together by the city fathers with a permanent tax exemption as long as the HQ remained in and the company name included Baltimore. So much for private sector. |
|
|
| (1470040) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Mon Mar 19 19:41:43 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Mar 19 17:57:54 2018. Sure, the railroads never had any government subsidies, haha. And why would the government care to control railroads, anyway? They don't care to control any other private corporations. The real reason is that the private companies failed miserably in making a profit on passenger rail, and ran it into the ground. |
|
|
| (1470078) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Tue Mar 20 04:38:28 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by italianstallion on Mon Mar 19 19:41:43 2018. General-the outcome for redistributing the wealth of all the billionaires is a mere $37 per week per family. That would take them once a week to a restaurant that was just enough up from MacDonald's that it had a license so the adults could have a beer. In the meantime our industries would be in disarray. Jackson, Broadway -we're a bit off course here but just to acknowledge your posts: -have you allowed for the fact that non salary income has already been subjected to tax at the corporate level? As Social Security has a maximum payout of $xx is there a reason for collecting contributions on more than that? Looking beyond the surface for such details is part of factual advocacy. Neither the businesses nor the "rich" can evade anything here that the government hasn't provided for them to do, the IRS has accountants just as skilled at reading between the lines as the businesses. Taking the offered exemptions is no different than the "poor" taking all of their exceptions and deviations from base rates. -if you want to consider alternate schemes how about this: rich or poor, pay for what you actually take, no more no less -period. None of this "other people" dictating that you should subsidize someone else. After all this is what we already do for the three most important material things to life: food, clothing and shelter. Going to user pay for transit would remove any valid basis for non-users to obstruct any transit schemes. Olag -is this on course?: -half of the talk here is "new ideas" that rely on cross siphoning money to work, so I don't think suggesting ways for the advocates to improve their arguments is off topic. Bill |
|
|
| (1470096) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Tue Mar 20 07:40:02 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Bill West on Tue Mar 20 04:38:28 2018. "-the outcome for redistributing the wealth of all the billionaires is a mere $37 per week per family"Sure, but think of the savory flavor of spite and revenge. A lil' Romanov Sauce makes everything most satisfying, and without the future Carnegie, Gates, Jobs, Bezos and the like, the Common Man will be free to create even greater "As Social Security has a maximum payout of $xx is there a reason for collecting contributions on more than that?" No reason needed to collect tax. All your base needs belong to Us "Taking the offered exemptions is no different than the "poor" taking all of their exceptions and deviations from base rates." The poor in the USA can get money paid to them at tax time via EIC if they can claim dependents. If you're a citizen, your dependents need Social Security numbers and the IRS will find out if your dependent is a goldfish, but you're not from heah it gets interesting. There are "charities" that will advise you on how to add children you have in Mexico to multiply your EIC payout, and informal networks set up to loan such children (papers attesting to their existence) at tax time. " Going to user pay for transit would remove any valid basis for non-users to obstruct any transit schemes." As a practical matter, ultra-dense areas like NYC and a few highway corridors nearby can't function without mass transit. Subsidizing the capital costs of mass transit **in such places** is a necessity. That same high density, plus no tolls, no taxes and preferential electric rates means there's so much ridership that operating subsidies shouldn't be needed. A train with 500 people on it has collected over $1000 in fare, and it probably gets at least one turnover per run (1000 distinct passengers), that's $2000. |
|
|
| (1470114) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Mar 20 11:12:11 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Mar 19 17:20:01 2018. You cannot create equality by lowering the rich.You must RAISE the poor. ROAR |
|
|
| (1470121) | |
Re: Portal ... take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Tue Mar 20 11:48:46 2018, in response to Re: Portal ... take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Mar 20 11:12:11 2018. Sure you can. Pol Pot.hmmmm. OK, Pot & his gang became rich, so u r correct. |
|
|
| (1470130) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Mar 20 14:53:24 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Bill West on Tue Mar 20 04:38:28 2018. in no order,about Social Security tax, Robert Reich has several times recommended raising the cap on income subject to that tax a a method of bolstering the fund; I merely add eliminating the cap.The claim that non salary income has already been taxed at the corporation is irrelevant; it is money received every bit as much as W-2 wages. Yes tax avoidance is like espionage (both industrial and national security) it is aconstant arms race between the taxing authorities and the taxpayers. Why else are H& R, Jackson & Hewitt plus all of the independents out there. As to the simplitic "pay for what you actually take, no more no less -period" ,sounds nice, has no relation to the real world. We recently had major fires here in CA, and after the fires mudslides in areaswhere the vegetation holding the soil in place was gone. As a citizen, I contribute to CalFire though I live 100 miles from theSanta Rosa fire area. The mudslides were several hundred miles from my house, yet I and ALL California residents expect to see state tax revenues allocated for repair and mitigation of damage to our commons. If you don't adhere to that basic view of citizenship,we have very little point in further dialogue. |
|
|
| (1470164) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Wed Mar 21 03:17:59 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Mar 20 14:53:24 2018. Jackson:-re Robert Reich. Aren't the flaw free points in an advocate's argument more important than his name? -re W2 wages. An advocate's argument has to look sound when looked at from other directions. Putting that into your example, he would have to explain that wages that have tax paid on them and are then brought home and passed to a late teen child or even a spouse, each without incurring a second tax, are somehow so different from passing tax paid corporate earnings on to their final user. -how is "pay for what you actually take" any different than what we already do for the three most basic material things needed in life; food, clothing and shelter? 95% of that functions without government cross siphoning. -re Cal Fire. I think they are more exactly the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and are responsible for protecting state owned forest lands. So, sorry it seems normal that their costs are borne by the statewide owners. Yes they aid counties but that is just service contracts or mutual aid pacts. Steamdriven: -I'm not sure density is a "practical matter", who said those areas had to become ultra-dense? Wasn't the original idea of planning departments to defend the initial "contract" between the neighbors about how the property was to be used? If the earliest density agreements weren't run over there wouldn't be a transportation problem. Maybe your jests have brought us to the real issue; crowded transportation is just the consequence of a lack of enforcement of the original planning. Advocating respect of what the original neighbors bought into could stop density growth and maybe erode it down to the point where transportation would not be a problem. Goodness knows there is lots of lower density land available in the Northeast let alone in the rest of the country. We just need to quit using transportation expansion to facilitate people congesting together. Bill |
|
|
| (1470205) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Mar 21 15:31:40 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Bill West on Wed Mar 21 03:17:59 2018. I cite Reich only because he has some standing in economics as a professor. I have no "letters" trailing my name.I fail to understand the "double tax" concept. If I as an act of investment rent money to a bank (savings deposit) my income is taxable, if I rent money to a RR, my dividends (stock) interest payments (bonds) are taxable. The bank or RR used those funds to earn profits, and paid me a small percentage of those profits as rent on my money. No different from earning money by working for hourly wages, flat salary, etc--I have received payment, IRS emands income tax. The fantasy that because the bank or RR pays taxes as a business enterprise should turn their payments to me for using my money into non taxable income while salary for tasks performed is simply ludicrous. As to paying for what you take, virtually all agricultural production in the US is subsidized via various USDA and other agencies, housing is distorted by zoning,redlining, rent control, redevelopment schemes whereby land is virtually given to builders, etc. Clothing costs in the US are a function of which slave wage countries the labels arrange for the production in. "It doesn't say Hanes..." is now spoken in Vietnamese. We do not have a "free market" economy--we have an economy mostly managed by the oligarchs. You are correct that Cal Fire is a state agency; they participate in suppression of most large fires--whether in forests or cities. My point is that I gladly participate in funding them because they serve all Californians. |
|
|
| (1470209) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Mar 21 16:19:41 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Mar 21 15:31:40 2018. Yes, the concept of double-taxation of dividends is a scam. The argument is that the money being paid out as dividends by a company has already been taxed as part of their profits. And therefore . . .? I mean, they're two separate transactions. First, the company earns money from sales - that is taxed as income to them. Then, some time later, they pay some of that money out to shareholders - new transaction! And that creates income to the shareholders.If the company used that profit money to purchase some equipment instead, would the argument be that the income that produces to the seller of the equipment be not taxable because those funds were already taxed to the company? I don't think so. |
|
|
| (1470234) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Wed Mar 21 20:36:44 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by italianstallion on Wed Mar 21 16:19:41 2018. "Yes, the concept of double-taxation of dividends is a scam."I fail to see any aspect of scam about it. Point of disagreement, but no one's hiding anything. Let's take the simplest case I can think of, a company you and x others own entirely. Case 1: Not incorporated. All profits are considered as income to you and your partners, so as a group you're taxed on the net profit of the operation. Case 2: You incorporate and issue shares (m'kay, may simple example may not meet the actual requirements of a stock-owned company in the USA, but you get the idea). The same group now owns all of the shares, and declares an annual dividend. Now the corporation, which didn't exist before, pays tax on any profits. But each member of the group also pays tax on the same profits, now called dividends, when the corp hands them to the owners. Same company, same products/services, same real transactions, but now there is more tax and more time and effort wasted in tax planning rather than building the business. "New transaction!" Yes, finding new ways to collect tax means you can potentially collect more tax. It does not mean it's the best way to insure the greatest output of goods and services. You could, for example, place a sales tax on every transfer of goods before retail sale. Want a beer? Tax the sale from brewer to wholesaler, then wholesaler to retailer, then retail to customer. They're all new transactions, so why not tax 'em? So maybe beer is now $10 each, who needs more than 1 beer per week, anyway, eh? You Instead, the State recognizes that there's really one end-user in this chain, the person who drinks the beer. The tax is applied once, at the point when you're about to consume the thing being taxed. The alternative is to look for the maximum number of ways to tax those wicked beer drinkers and find "perfectly reasonable" points to do so. We don't do that ... yet. Now, one might note that people who own lots of stock have most of the wealth, while the rest of us have more-or-less none. That's an old and probably intractable problem. Bleeding the machines that make stuff to give it to a bigger machine that takes stuff (government) may feel good, but it won't fix the disparity nor make the non-owning people better off. |
|
|
| (1470236) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Mar 21 20:53:05 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Steamdriven on Wed Mar 21 20:36:44 2018. Most people making the argument do hide something -- that there are 2 transactions involved so it's not the same money being taxed twice for no apparent reason.I agree there is a disparity in the tax treatment of profit distributions between partnerships and corporations. But this is part of the tradeoff for the benefits of incorporation -- especially gaining limited liability for the shareholders. Despite "onerous double taxation," most businesses incorporate as they grow. Funny that you say "You could, for example, place a sales tax on every transfer of goods before retail sale." Yes, and that is done in many countries around the world and is called a value-added tax. It works for them and in fact many conservative economists here have suggested we adopt it as well in lieu of increasing income taxes. |
|
|
| (1470260) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Thu Mar 22 06:17:23 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by italianstallion on Wed Mar 21 20:53:05 2018. I don't think there's an absolute right or wrong answer to the "double taxation of dividends" question. As you point out, it can be justified by the benefits of incorporation, or it can be considered a distortion because the corp has an incentive to pay lower or no dividends. Personally, I think that if we want to tax high incomes more, then just tax high incomes more. My 2c is that a corporation isn't an end user, it's a pass-through and taxing dividends just means dividends are usually not paid.To tax wealth, do as the Founders wrote and have an estate tax (we have, but somehow it's become unpopular). Private foundations should probably be considered estates, they're incorporated so they never undergo a natural death, and pass forever to managers who are bureaucrats, not builders. There are other problems with incorporation of course; "fiduciary duty" requires them to maximize profit, period. The management can't decide "hey, we can afford to keep xyz key functions inside the USA instead of offshoring, we'd still be safely in the black" but that's actually illegal. Of course even if it were legal to do "the right thing", the shareholders would have to agree. Costco's CEO gets flack for paying retail store employees, even the guy stocking shelves, over $40K/year. That CEO is also the company founder and owns a good chunk of it, but he still has to argue his case with the board and investors, who can fire him if they wish. There were good reasons for writing fiduciary duty into law, otherwise management would treat the company as a personal ATM. There is no law or system that can force people to make moral choices. |
|
|
| (1470268) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Mar 22 09:56:03 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by italianstallion on Wed Mar 21 16:19:41 2018. Your income is always taxable, it does not matter where the money was before you got it.Every time money changes hands there is a tax on it. Simple eonugh. My thoughts of a graduated sales tax hits the high spenders vs the rich who can just sit on their money. As long as they don't stir it up, there is no tax on it. But then if they SPEND it, we can tax them ROAR |
|
|
| (1470279) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Mar 22 11:54:57 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Steamdriven on Thu Mar 22 06:17:23 2018. I'm glad to see you support an estate tax. The right has basically eviscerated that lately.Re fiduciary duty, there are theorists who believe corporations should be allowed to take ALL their constituencies into account when making decisions -- not only shareholders, but "stakeholders" like employees, communities, suppliers, customers. (This happens in other countries.) But the law would probably have to be changed. I partly disagree with your last sentence. Maybe no law can force something, but it often serves as a pretty strong disincentive to doing bad stuff. |
|
|
| (1470284) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Mar 22 12:09:25 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Mar 22 09:56:03 2018. For once, I agree with you. |
|
|
| (1470285) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Thu Mar 22 12:32:50 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by italianstallion on Thu Mar 22 11:54:57 2018. "I partly disagree with your last sentence. Maybe no law can force something, but it often serves as a pretty strong disincentive to doing bad stuff."I agree, though I think it's best not to expect good intentions to necessarily have good results. Changing the fiduciary law to include a patriotic element ("all constituencies", in new-speak) would at least be a symbolic step, one which would change expectations. Random thoughts: Other countries are not the USA; those based on national unity will readily unite for a common purpose, while those featuring multiple cultures tend to end up with various groups competing against each other regardless of damage to the nation, because nobody identifies with the nation. To get a business to work for something beyond the bottom line, you need people who identify with the whole country and not only "my people". e.g., China, which is totally controlled and almost totally populated by the Han vs Yugoslavia. One has lasted 5000+ years, the other blew up in less than 50. Eisenhower tried to move us toward national unity. Later people and forces, the opposite. |
|
|
| (1470368) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Mar 23 10:55:44 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Mar 22 09:56:03 2018. How come property taxes come about, then? That's money that is sat on.And rich people do not avoid taxes by merely sitting on their money either. The 16th Amendment has no purpose other than to empower the federal government beyond what it was intended to do. |
|
|
| (1470406) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Mar 23 18:41:23 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Mar 23 10:55:44 2018. Property taxes are LOCAL not Federal.They are of the most fair taxes of all, but unfortunately do not bring in as much revenue as they could. after all the are LOCAL takex and the locals do not want to tax themselfs to deaf. ROAR |
|
|
| (1470415) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Mar 23 19:45:06 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Mar 23 18:41:23 2018. Property taxes are the least fair taxes of all. Theyre also a form of socialism: why are people paying rent to the government for property they own? |
|
|
| (1470419) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Mar 23 20:13:46 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Mar 23 19:45:06 2018. perhaps you would prefer to present your credit cards when the cops show up,the fire trucks arrive, and the children go to school, or you go to 'county hospital'? Real estate taxespayforthe public library, the sidewalksetc. And in some specific cases real estate taxes are directly passed throughto transit agencies. You got a problem with that? |
|
|
| (1470422) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Fri Mar 23 21:04:55 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Mar 23 19:45:06 2018. The amount collected also depends on the county. For San Diego County in CA, the annual collected (based on 1 per sent assessed value per Prop 13) is now over $5 billion (yes with a 'b') annually. I know because I worked the IT side of that for 30+ years (until August 2017 when I said f*ck this). |
|
|
| (1470449) | |
Re: Portal take two w/link |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Mar 24 07:45:00 2018, in response to Re: Portal take two w/link, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Fri Mar 23 21:04:55 2018. Government has to pay for the services that you want. Gotta get the money from you, there is no other source of money for a government. |
|
|
