More on Taxes & Idaho

[boisefan88]

Originally Posted by Sandpointian

Boise: Your truism is a cousin to NIMBYism. While I agree that such thinking is prevalent, it makes it that much imperative to keep debates alive and information flowing.

As for California vs. Idaho public ed, what options are we talking about? The answer really depends on how one sees the role of the public schools. Like many things in California, the schooling dimension of public schooling in California has grown to a socialization movement within which to redress past wrongs and perceived wrongs of the future. While much reflects a classical liberalism that I appreciate, significant chunks have more to do with social reprogramming and is creepy.

1. The professor who says this is a leading policy professor in the state. I think his point is that people like to complain about the government and government spending - as they're easy targets - but when it comes down to deciding what to cut, no one wants their policies and programs cut.

2. I don't see how that isn't the case in any system of education. Education is necessarily social programming - you can only work with a given set of texts and narratives, and such narratives usually tend to be exclusionary.

People have this odd misconception that certain subjects and texts are bias free, and quite simply, they're not. Everything is political.

I suppose this would certainly support the argument for choice in schooling for our children - to be able to send our kids to schools with a curriculum that we as parents philosophically agree with.

I don't mind a progressive curriculum that, as you say, attempts to redress past and future wrongs, so long as a) it places a priority on free speech and teaches open and critical thinking, and b) it doesn't exclude or marginalize any groups, stories, texts, histories, or individuals.

[elousv]

I would say that "2+2=4" is certainly bias free, unless we are talking about how the first 2 feels about the other 2 and that the 4 is somehow better.

[boisefan88]

Originally Posted by elousv

I would say that "2+2=4" is certainly bias free, unless we are talking about how the first 2 feels about the other 2 and that the 4 is somehow better.

You get into high level theoretical mathematics and that might be questionable (on a few levels).

[jja100]

Originally Posted by Sandpointian

California raised its top state income tax bracket to 10.55%
NY to 8.97% plus 12.32% NY City Tax

Just incredible.

My friend has a sweet 1 BR condo in Soho. But the maintenance is $1000/month. This plus effectively a 21% state income tax on top of federal? Are you kidding me?

Idahoans, this is make or break time. We are at a Crossroads. Do we become New Hampshire of the West (lean and mean) or do we become Rhode Island (over taxed and run down)?

Let's keep our taxes low. Every $ spent should be scrutinized as an investment, where we can get definite bang for the $.

Cut out the pork.

When I saw the CA and NY taxes I nearly upchucked. These on top of all fees and taxes being jacked up.

While I agree that CA and NY have extremely high taxes (And I hate all tax) I am surprised that Idaho has an extremely high income tax at a very low income level (especially since it is considered a red state). Idahoans are effectively paying 6.5 % flat. What irks me the most about state income taxes is that most people don't realise that it is a form of double taxation since you cannot deduct the federal income tax from your AGI BEFORE you are taxed at the state level. This is why I like states with no income tax and a higher property tax since you can deduct the full amount of the property tax from your income.

To break it down even further, the federal and state governments have it completely figured out so they may be able to tax the entirety of the population.

Income tax = tax on the affluent

Property tax = tax on the middle class

Sales tax = tax on the poor

As an upper middle class individual I would love to see the day where property tax is completely abolished since it is a "direct" tax and completely unconstitutional. Our founding fathers stipulated that direct taxation is tyrannical and the only form of taxation should be indirect taxation i.e. income/excise/sales.