Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A person pays $300 a ticket for a sporting event in the club seating Level, another pays $50 for the bleacher section, should the person in the bleacher section get the same view, same seats, same amenities of the club? a person pays $50k for a BMW another pays $20k for a Kia. The kia should have the same ride, performance, comfort and resale value as the BMW?
A person moves to an area and pays $500k for a home, that area has a community pool, great shopping within it, great security, a nice park, and other amenities provided by tax money. now you may be able to find a home for 200k in that area, but it wont be nice and probably need a ton of work. So ya, If I buy a $200k home in a different area, I wont expect the same things as the person with the $500k home. Simple as that. They pay more taxes that I do. They pay more, they get more. I dont understand why this is a hard concept....
I'm as capitalist Republican as they come, and while there's a lot of truth in your first 2 examples, you're missing the point in a VAST difference of structure down here.
We don't have tiny little boroughs/towns with individual school systems and municipal services. We also don't pay municipal income taxes (town or county).
Your borough = our subdivision. Yes, the houses within a subdivision will all be within a general price range of +/- 20%. But when you get into older areas (downtown Raleigh, for example) we don't have well-defined subdivision boundaries. And not only can the price of housing vary widely, but there's no clear boundary from one to the other. All Raleigh homes pay the same RATE of property taxes. All Wake County homes pay the same RATE. The actual ddollar depends on the value iof your home. And indeed, it is pretty "communal" in your definition - I pay a lot more than the average but only receive a roughly-equivalent amount of service.
The most recent comments about race, in my perception, are directed at the idea of the South being so racist, when in fact the boroughs you speak of are much more segregated than we are now.
I'm as capitalist Republican as they come, and while there's a lot of truth in your first 2 examples, you're missing the point in a VAST difference of structure down here.
We don't have tiny little boroughs/towns with individual school systems and municipal services. We also don't pay municipal income taxes (town or county).
Your borough = our subdivision. Yes, the houses within a subdivision will all be within a general price range of +/- 20%. But when you get into older areas (downtown Raleigh, for example) we don't have well-defined subdivision boundaries. And not only can the price of housing vary widely, but there's no clear boundary from one to the other. All Raleigh homes pay the same RATE of property taxes. All Wake County homes pay the same RATE. The actual dollar depends on the value of your home. And indeed, it is pretty "communal" in your definition - I pay a lot more than the average but only receive a roughly-equivalent amount of service.
The most recent comments about race, in my perception, are directed at the idea of the South being so racist, when in fact the boroughs you speak of are much more segregated than we are now.
Yes, I understand there is a vast difference. I know that everyone has the same tax in an entire county (except in Raleigh you pay city and county taxes). People were not understanding where I was coming from in how things work up here as to down there. I tried to explain it, and all of the sudden it came off as being racist, when in fact it wasnt.
Then whole thing about home dollar values and schools came up. Yes you are correct, most home values in a certain "district/borough" will roughly be the same withing a 20% difference. Each of these have there own individual local tax, and different property taxes. The districts that have higher taxes, usually have higher priced homes, thus higher home value and higher tax, means more money for that district, which in turn means the school is nicer, can pay its teachers more, with have more programs, newer text books, more sports offerings. This also means the area in general will be nicer. The roads will get fixed faster (roads up here are horrible), there will often be a park, and yes there will be faster police and firefighter responses (Dont shoot the messenger, I've actually seen this in action, in a nice place cops are there in 2 mins no matter what, in a not so nice place, depending on the type of call, can take up to an hour). Also, more businesses will come to you area, yes a lot of the time the buildings are subsidized through the borough and work with the buyer, who then rents them out. The borough helps because it brings more tax money, more people, and now gives the area a better appeal.
These are just some reason as to why the whole "communal" approach doesnt make sense to me.
Poor or Rich people dont "deserve" anything. You get what you work for. I grew up in a not so stellar neighborhood. My dad working a steel mill job he hated and came home miserable every night. We didnt have fancy cars, hell we only had 1 car. He worked and finally got to be a manager of a whole division of USX steel. We moved to a better area and my sister and I had way better lives. I worked ever since I was 16, everyday after school. I bought my own first car, got a partial scholarship to play hockey in college, then had to pay for that too. I graduated in 09 from college, there were no jobs, I had to work construction for 2 years. Now I have a great job and a good degree. Why, because I worked for it, saved up, made good decisions.
This whole "deserve" thing is just stupid. Should everyone have equal education, yes, I do, I sincerely do. However, thats not how it works. School, like everything else is paid for. Sorry to offend, but lets be real. If Im paying considerably more for something, it should be better than those paying considerably less.
Sorry, but you do realize that -- while you did work hard and did make good decisions -- you are just a couple of sentences before acknowledging how much of the success you had came because of others in your life:
- Your father's willingness to work hard
- An employer that made a good job available
- A scholarship funded by others that paid for some of your education
This is to say nothing of the accident of good fortune that you were born in the US; a man of your talents who was born in Chad or Paraguay would not have had the same life you did.
What you are seeing in those of us ex-Northerners chiming in here (10 years in Boston, myself) should be a sign that this area is growing because people are coming here seeking a better life and a better place to live, and systems don't work here the way they did back where you're from. For most of us, that's a good thing.
Very bizarre. I have truly never heard anyone suggest such a thing. And as you pointed out, government services aren't remotely the same as private sporting events. Anyone who can't see the difference is..., well I guess I can't be that direct on a moderated site. So I'll just say...interesting.
Government services arent tied to private purchases, c-mon now. It was simply an example of commerce. Your tax money is commerce. You are paying for something and in return you get something. Your tax money pays for your roads, police, teachers, schools, parks, water facilities, waste facilities, grabage, county employees, building, ect. The list can go on an on. In return you get those benefits of what your tax money buys. The comparison is easy to see.
AS stated, Im not rich, I have a good life up here because the cost of living is low, I got my house for a steal in a good area. I pay roughly $3000 a year in property tax on a $117k home (purchase price, but valued at $160 after renovations). The neighborhood right next to me is pretty much the best the south hills of Pittsburgh has to offer. A $225k home there the taxes were about 6k a year. Now imagine if you have a $500k home there. Naturally, its a very well kept place, lots of businesses, roads are great, very secure, school is the best in the south hills. I dont live there, I dont pay those taxes, hence I dont expect my districts school to be as good, I dont expect my neighborhood to be as nice, I dont expect the same amenities, heck their garbage could be picked up everyday for all I care. All I am saying that is if you pay more in a certain area, you should deserve more than those who do not.
...when people start to talk negatively and generalize "the North" and the state I live in as racist, without ever living here, the conversation needs to come to a close.
As a native of Pennsylvania myself, I get tired of that stupid **** too. It gets perpetuated by New England snobs, Southern alpha males, self-loathing Pennsylvanians, and ex-Pennsylvanians who think that absolutely nothing has changed there since they left. Meanwhile, there were 2,020,374 non-white people in Pennsylvania in 2013, plus 243,574 people of multiple races, which are 365,747 and 101,350 more than there were in 2000, respectively. And there were 753,701 Hispanics in Pennsylvania in 2013 despite its distance from Latin America, which is 359,613 more than there were in 2000. The Hispanic population there nearly doubled in 13 years. Looks like all those "three idiots and a case of beer" hate groups that supposedly thrive up there aren't lynching the coloreds and the miscegenists fast enough, huh?
Government services arent tied to private purchases, c-mon now. It was simply an example of commerce. Your tax money is commerce. You are paying for something and in return you get something. Your tax money pays for your roads, police, teachers, schools, parks, water facilities, waste facilities, grabage, county employees, building, ect. The list can go on an on. In return you get those benefits of what your tax money buys. The comparison is easy to see.
Except that the comparison is based on a false premise. The goals and objectives of the private sector and government are necessarily different. The private sector is designed to maximize value for the owners of the company by increasing revenue and profit. That means, by implication, that private sector companies need to attend to the INDIVIDUAL needs and concerns of customers. Each customer has value, so retaining them is critical.
Government is completely different. It's role is to maximize the welfare of ALL citizens as a collective group. To do that, government has extensive policies and procedures in place -- checks and balances, that are in place to ensure that people are treated equally and beneficially under the law.
I'm really surprised this is apparently a new concept to you.
As a native of Pennsylvania myself, I get tired of that stupid **** too. It gets perpetuated by New England snobs, Southern alpha males, self-loathing Pennsylvanians, and ex-Pennsylvanians who think that absolutely nothing has changed there since they left. Meanwhile, there were 2,020,374 non-white people in Pennsylvania in 2013, plus 243,574 people of multiple races, which are 365,747 and 101,350 more than there were in 2000, respectively. And there were 753,701 Hispanics in Pennsylvania in 2013 despite its distance from Latin America, which is 359,613 more than there were in 2000. The Hispanic population there nearly doubled in 13 years. Looks like all those "three idiots and a case of beer" hate groups that supposedly thrive up there aren't lynching the coloreds and the miscegenists fast enough, huh?
Yeah, and the "South" never gets generalized and negatively stereotyped, huh?
Except that the comparison is based on a false premise. The goals and objectives of the private sector and government are necessarily different. The private sector is designed to maximize value for the owners of the company by increasing revenue and profit. That means, by implication, that private sector companies need to attend to the INDIVIDUAL needs and concerns of customers. Each customer has value, so retaining them is critical.
Government is completely different. It's role is to maximize the welfare of ALL citizens as a collective group. To do that, government has extensive policies and procedures in place -- checks and balances, that are in place to ensure that people are treated equally and beneficially under the law.
I'm really surprised this is apparently a new concept to you.
Yikes, it scares me how faith you put into government and how "equal" you think things are. You dont think local governments try to maximize value for themselves and increase revenue and profit? View a neighborhood, or even a certain street as an "individual" and that will help you think through this.
You really think that governments "role" or "want" is maximize welfare for all citizens? Thanks funny. Its about money man, c-mon. You sound educated Please tell me you have some good common sense as well.
Local Governemnts, boroughs, communities, ect try to "retain" a certain type of person. Hence the price of the homes and the values. If someone goes there, doesnt keep up their home, is a disturbance, the community will get rid of them because it will soon bring down home values, which in turn bring down taxes, which in turn brings down everything else.
I'm pretty sure everyone got the comparison. My tax money is paying for certain conveniences and amenities in a certain community. Just like a $300 ticket is paying to have a better view, better seats and better access to amenities. Those living in different area paying different taxes, should have a different community (AKA the person paying $50 for a ticket).
You dont think local governments try to maximize value for themselves and increase revenue and profit? View a neighborhood, or even a certain street as an "individual" and that will help you think through this.
Example please. I really don't understand what you're talking about, unless this has something to do with government corruption, which I think is very rare, at least in my direct experience. Governments don't make a "profit". How can it be maximized?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbucci24
You really think that governments "role" or "want" is maximize welfare for all citizens? Thanks funny. Its about money man, c-mon. You sound educated Please tell me you have some good common sense as well.
Yes, I do. Again, unless you're implying that all local government is corrupt, then I don't understand what your point is.
It points out how there is no such thing as "common sense".
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbucci24
Local Governemnts, boroughs, communities, ect try to "retain" a certain type of person. Hence the price of the homes and the values. If someone goes there, doesnt keep up their home, is a disturbance, the community will get rid of them because it will soon bring down home values, which in turn bring down taxes, which in turn brings down everything else.
Third time, don't know what you're saying. What do you mean by "a certain type of person"? And I can't figure out what that has to do with someone who "doesn't keep up their home, is a disturbance". Someone who obeys the law?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
