GREENDALE FORUM by GreendaleLife.com

Our Garden Community's Cyber Town Square
It is currently Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:14 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: GOP: MASSIVE TAX CUT FOR WEALTHY
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:52 am 
Offline
Active User
Active User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:21 pm
Posts: 323
Location: Greendale D-section
Smith,

Is there waste in the Detroit Government? Hard to say. One man's waste is another man's treasure. Besides, dead people don't vote (except in Chicago :)) AND dead people don't pay taxes. SO the government officials are probably pleasing a larger part of their constituency (i.e. the people who scream the loudest) by neglecting the dead.

I am struggling to see where a fee-for-service structure such as you suggested earlier would work for cases like this? Care to suggest something specific? Or is all that belly-aching about "people should pay for the services they use" just more eyewash?

I heard a very interesting show on PBS last week. They were talking about the Puritans in New England. If you remember, they kicked out Roger Smith, because he was griping about how oppressive the government was, and he left to found the Rhode Island colony. The Massachusetts Bay Colony governor actually liked Roger, and helped him escape the agents sent to deport him to England (by warning him so he could leave town) and they continued to correspond for several years as Roger Smith established and began to govern Rhode Island. Roger found the change from carping about government actions to designing and implementing government policy to be a difficult one. It must be nice for you to know you will never be in Roger Smith's position....

Wait.
Look at the names. :!:
Coincidence?
I think not!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: GOP: MASSIVE TAX CUT FOR WEALTHY
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:18 am 
Offline
Active User
Active User

Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Posts: 302
firefly wrote:
Smith,

Just out of curiosity, what is a "private park?"


That would be a privately owned park. (Not government owned.)

firefly wrote:
Are you thinking about stuff like the bumper boats at the Dells, or something like private campgrounds?


I guess those are probably privately owned, but I don't know for certain. Do you suppose that it would be appropriate for a government body to own and operate such "enterprises" as those? Actually I tend to think of Whitnall Park when I think of park(s).

firefly wrote:
I'm wracking my brains


Main Entry: 3 wrack
Function: transitive verb
Date: 1562
: to utterly ruin : wreck
BE CAREFUL. Ha ha.


firefly wrote:
to try to come up with something in the private sector that is comparable in both features and accessibility to something like the Bong reserve, or Kohler-Andrae, which preserves natural terrain, and is open to the public. My observation re: private development of choice natural locations like that is that they are developed [PAID FOR] for the benefit of the few, as either private, high-priced membership resorts, or as private residences.


As opposed to public parks developed (PAID FOR) for- or at least "preserved" for- a very very very few who make use of it, paid for by the many? Would you be one of those people who enjoy the fact that few can benefit so well at the expense of the many? How much does it cost to "maintain" Bong every year? How many people use it? You might not believe this but, as I know of no Constitutional tenet that precludes (non Federal-) government maintenance/ownership of entities such as Bong, my thought regarding the propriety of such isn't one-hundred percent against. This is why I attempt to work the numbers; how many pay how much for the benefit of how many. Should Bong be maintained for one person? Two? How many? Money directed at Bong isn’t doing other good, you know. So we must determine how best to allocate our dollars.

Maybe, since there is no waste in Detroit government we could invest there? Or at least loan them some money?

You're not one of those envious types who are so jealous of people who can afford private, high-priced membership resorts or private residences, that you would speak ill of them and/or attempt to deprive them of that which they own are you? I know of people who are like that. They think that if they take rich people down a notch that, somehow, other people will benefit. Please tell me you're not one of those. I have no problem with wealth made honorably, even great wealth. How about you?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group