| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Bret Schundler: "Do Away With Property Taxes All Together" |
| 2004-12-21 |
| Posted by:Radio Guy |
| #9 Mrs D! Well said. Mind if I steal that? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-21 8:38:00 PM |
| #8 Given the number of fat crap kids running around the parents decisions about what a lot of these kids eat seems to be pretty poor. I hope that they would do better with the education decision. Kidding aside, Mrs D is right. Vouchers make sense. Public education is a defact local monopoly. Monopolies deliver terrible service and deteriorating results over time. Only real competition will shake the education system adequately to fore real change. |
| Posted by: Remoteman 2004-12-21 8:16:10 PM |
| #7 BA I tried to make that point in comment 9 of the thread. Almost every problem with education goes away with the adoption of vouchers. Actually the problem, whatever it is, doesn't go away; responsibility for its resolution is simply transferred from the government to the parents. And it's amazing how much more concerned parents are about their children's education than is the government. Don't forget, we let these parents choose what the children eat. Which is more important to the survival of the child, its diet or its education? |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-21 7:58:36 PM |
| #6 I agree, 2b! Well said, Mrs. D! Maybe this resolves our dispute over the CAIR article on the kid's T-shirt, eh? |
| Posted by: BA 2004-12-21 1:28:17 PM |
| #5 It is amazing how many problems disappear when the state goes from producing education to purchasing it. well said. |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-12-21 1:07:54 PM |
| #4 Lex, more and more states are implementing the same court decision that crippled California Schools reuqiring that per pupil expenditure in every district within the state be equal. The difficulty is that this is a hard conclusion not to reach since most state constitutions guarantee a right to an education. This effectively separates the link between property tax burden and local school quality. I don't know in how many states this is now court imposed law, but it's coming son if it's not there yet. But this problem, too, goes away with vouchers. It is amazing how many problems disappear when the state goes from producing education to purchasing it. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-21 12:51:17 PM |
| #3 not so fast. As someone who is not paying local property taxes, I was quick to consider voting for all kinds of goodies that I wouldn't have been willing to pay for myself. In high density areas, where most properties are rentals, the majority population will always vote "yes" (and why not) on those useless goodies that overburnden the average homeowner, who is forced to pay for the whims of those who do not have to pay. And, no, the average homeowner, who lives in his home, can not just "increase the rent". |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-12-21 12:48:57 PM |
| #2 Perhaps I'm missing something but I thought that most property tax revenues go not to the state but to the locality. Starve the localities of this revenue and you'll get shitty schools and California-style absurdities in public finance and property values. Not to mention declining school quality, as Calif has also shown... |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-21 12:41:57 PM |
| #1 IMHO, neither practical nor conservative: The right to vote was once restricted to landowners because they DID pay taxes. I think this would cut the relationship between those with the biggest stake in good, stable government and those who are elected to run that government. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2004-12-21 12:37:15 PM |