Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 7/11/2003 12:56:59 PM EDT
Howdy, y'all! I haven't been hangin out here much lately, I have been pursuing some of my other hobbies, but I wanted to test the waters here on this subject.
How do you guys feel about the stalemate in the gov't, the Governer's actions, the Supreme court's ruling, etc?
Link Posted: 7/11/2003 2:37:00 PM EDT
honestly, i had to agree with the courts action. Most since my family members are teachers. My mom, whos been teaching 33 year would have been out of a job in august because they did fund schools. I understand the idea about taxes, and not waiting them raised. But on the other hand, you get out of you community what you put into it.
Link Posted: 7/11/2003 4:45:25 PM EDT
I think it's pretty much Democratic BS. The Supreme Court's duty is supposed to interpret the law, not write it. They claimed that it was unconstitutional, yet I don't see how it could be. There is a provision for passing the budget that requires a majority vote, and another (that was an amendment that was voted on by the people of NV) that says the funding requires a 2/3 vote. I think this is appropriate because funding the budget might entail tax increases(which is the case now)and should not be able to pass with a simple majority. To me they are two very separate things. One says this is the amount of money that we need to run the state and the other says this is how we intend to pay for that.

This is very similar to what has been happening in CA with voter passed initiatives in the last couple of years. The voters will pass something (Ban on affirmative action, Definition of marriage) and the court will either overturn it or (in the case of marriage) the governor will go around it with a something like the partnership agreement. Never mind the fact that both of these in CA and the 2/3 majority in NV was supported by ~70% of the voters. Guinn = democrat registered as Republican.

Also, about this education BS. One thing that you don't hear a lot about in the media is that the Republicans wanted to re-open the budget and just pass the portion dealing with funding education, but the democrats said no, that it's pretty much all or nothing. So by doing this, the democrats were able to use the education against the Republicans.

OK let me get off the

Link Posted: 7/12/2003 12:11:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/12/2003 12:14:11 AM EDT by Bigedmond]

Originally Posted By serrada:
I think it's pretty much Democratic BS. The Supreme Court's duty is supposed to interpret the law, not write it. They claimed that it was unconstitutional, yet I don't see how it could be. There is a provision for passing the budget that requires a majority vote, and another (that was an amendment that was voted on by the people of NV) that says the funding requires a 2/3 vote. I think this is appropriate because funding the budget might entail tax increases(which is the case now)and should not be able to pass with a simple majority. To me they are two very separate things. One says this is the amount of money that we need to run the state and the other says this is how we intend to pay for that.

This is very similar to what has been happening in CA with voter passed initiatives in the last couple of years. The voters will pass something (Ban on affirmative action, Definition of marriage) and the court will either overturn it or (in the case of marriage) the governor will go around it with a something like the partnership agreement. Never mind the fact that both of these in CA and the 2/3 majority in NV was supported by ~70% of the voters. Guinn = democrat registered as Republican.

Also, about this education BS. One thing that you don't hear a lot about in the media is that the Republicans wanted to re-open the budget and just pass the portion dealing with funding education, but the democrats said no, that it's pretty much all or nothing. So by doing this, the democrats were able to use the education against the Republicans.

OK let me get off the hr


now the bold section, i can prove wrong. Being that i see the other side, and can tell you, that education was to be under funded. They were already planning on cutting more from the school budget because it is so under funded already.

The whole thing about the 2/3 i understand, but when it takes 51% to agree on a budget, it should take the same to get that budget funded. thats where the problem arose.

Also, the court just Quoted that the state law saying education has to be funded. Thats why they temporarly over turned the 2/3 ammendment.

Hay, in all honesty, i am a democrate. Im just one that beleives in guns, and the right to own them. I personaly dont have a problem with a business getting charged a 1% tax, since they pay none. The republicians proposed a payroll tax. Guess who pays that, the employees. The democrates proposed a gross receipts tax, which the businesses pay, not there employees. I dont know about you, but i like the idea of companies that cme to nevada, make millions and take it out of state should pay back some money to the people that support them.. but thats just me.

I know since i said im a democrate, im gonna get flamed. Well, flame away.

Serrada, i understand the idea of tax increases scare people. Hell, i dont like it, but who would you rather pay it, us or the people that pay no taxes as it is now??? If the businesses have to pay 1% gross receits tax, thats still less then any other state. We are 1 of the only states that dont tax businesses, and yet we still have no income tax. With this state growing at the rate it does, something has to be done.


By the way, i have fully read thru what parts of the budget that the republicans wanted to cut down on. Education was on there. Along with all funding to the state college, and cutting 3 million out of the 4 million dollar BOYD school of law budget. But to top it off, clark county was to receive 30% less then they needed. Those are plain fact that can be found.
Link Posted: 7/12/2003 1:50:39 AM EDT

Hay, in all honesty, i am a democrate. Im just one that beleives in guns, and the right to own them. I personaly dont have a problem with a business getting charged a 1% tax, since they pay none. The republicians proposed a payroll tax. Guess who pays that, the employees. The democrates proposed a gross receipts tax, which the businesses pay, not there employees. I dont know about you, but i like the idea of companies that cme to nevada, make millions and take it out of state should pay back some money to the people that support them.. but thats just me.



Now tell me, do you really believe that any business in their right mind would take this 1% out of their net income? I don't think so. This is a tax that will be passed on directly to the consumer, you.


With this state growing at the rate it does, something has to be done.


Yes it does. We need better planners and more fiscal spenders. We need fewer welfare recipients and even fewer illegals. We need a zero illegal tolerance in the school system. This alone would probably be enough to resolve the differences in the education budget.

Bottom line, if you don't have the money, don't spend it and sure as hell don't come asking me for it.
Link Posted: 7/12/2003 5:53:20 AM EDT
let's not forget how clever Guinn pulled the budget off. Every section of the budget was passed EXCEPT the school's budget. That had the net effect that we all see today--that the big bad GOP was hurting the children! the children!!

I would think that the proper way the Court should've decided was to strike the entire budget, and have them go through the hoops again, or if that doesn't work, refer back to the last, past budget. It was balanced, approved, and can work as a default if no NEW budget is agreed upon.

Why do we allow NV government employees to serve as legislators? hell, i would like to vote and have a say on my work conditions and pay scale.

This tax on business may prevent business from coming here, reaffirming that NV is a one industry state.

Link Posted: 7/12/2003 6:26:26 AM EDT


People like me want VALUE for their money nad the clark county schools does NOT provide value. They have not only FAILED but FaILED miserably.

People like me want VALUE for their money and the Clark county schools do NOT provide value. They have not only FAILED but FAILED miserably. The Clark county schools CLAIM a 93% school graduation rate, but that is an aggregate score not the number of high school seniors that actually graduated vs. the number that entered the 9th grade. The actual number is around 60-70%. The NEA, which is setting the education agenda, even in Clark County, has proved itself to have NO interest in whether the kids learn and are ready for either jobs or college. SO 13% could not pass the math part, so what’s the answer? Rather than having the kids learn what they should have learned. The liberals want the test to be DUMBED DOWN. They want to give then a PASS to Fail at any endeavor. Add to that we have Bi-lingual education that does not WORK. IT has been shown over and over again that throwing money at the problem does not make for better education. Teachers and schools need to make fundamental changes in teaching and the teachers UNION won’t allow that to happen. Teachers’ salaries are quoted over and over again. Teachers should not be making a lot of money, especially if they are failing to teach. WE do not need diversity in the classroom, that is BULLSHIT, just like the PEACE POLES that get erected at the schools is BULLHSHIT.

The college in Henderson is NOT needed, The LAW school does not need the extra money and the UNLV really does not need the extra funding, they just want money to just piss away.

Businesses DO pay a fair amount of taxes already. They pay a per quarter rate on their employees already, unemployment compensation, Workers Comp, Regulatory burdens, Sales taxes that they have to keep track of, local taxes. Any new business taxes will be figured into the prices and will be passed on to the people who utilize their services or products. Planning on buying a house, that tax will be going up, like a drink now and then, those taxes will be going up. YOU WILL PAY MORE IN TAXES. Did you want to go to goto dinner, well guess what's going up. By the way, looking that the new rifle, guess whats going up.

KingGuinn is Working from a WISH LIST of NEW programs and new spending to create whole new bureaucracies. That are not needed or wanted by anyone but Liberals to solve problems that do not exist, or that the liberal created. He is not going to fix the DMV.

This is not San Francisco that PAYS BUMS $400 a month to piss on the sidewalks.

This is not California; We do not prize government dependence or interference. Any that DO need to MOVE BACK TO CALIFORNIA. California takes the food off the table of working people and gives it to people who do nothing but get high and make babies. California is not only corrupt but highly corrupt and they act like it’s NORMAL. Greyout Davis has a cashier to get in to see him, do you want that here.

IF YOU WANT TO PAY MORE IN TAXES THEN GET OUT YOUR CHECKBOOK AND WRITE A CHECK FOR $2500 AND JUST SEND IT IN TO THE STATE OF NEVADA. THEN PACK YOUR HOUSE IN A VAN AND MOVE BACK TO CALIFORNIA.
.
People come here for 2 things. The weather, LOWER TAXES and LOWER government INTERFEREENCE. BY THE WAY GOVENOR GUINN IS A DEMOCRAT, NOT A REPUBLICAN. NOW I KNOW IT SAYS REPUBLICAN BUT HE ONLY SWITCHED AND MADE NOISES LIKE A REPUBLICAN TO GET ELECTED AND NOW IN A SECOND TERM HE IS ON HIS WAY OUT AND CANNOT GET RE-ELECTED.

Now if you bought the liberal (leftist) litany that taxes make the world go round because they don’t affect you, I suggest you do more reading and figure it out. Then add it up. You can start with your paycheck and take a good look at it. Those deductions are TAXES YOU PAY, want that money back? What could you do with an extra 20% in pay. Can the government spend YOUR money better than you can?

off
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 4:53:08 PM EDT
Thanks Longgun!!!! Very well put!
Enough state spending on pork, and waste!
Link Posted: 7/16/2003 1:57:58 PM EDT
I don't see how what the NV SC did was even within its boundaries to make a decision on. There is nothing unconstitutional about the people's requirement for a 2/3 vote for the budget in order for it to pass. That's the sole job of the SC, to determine if something is or is not constitutional. Otherwise, let them make recommendations, as the judicial branch has not authority for making laws.

Bigedmond, I feel no pitty for the risk of the stability of your family's jobs; welcome to the world the rest of us live in where we may get laid-off at almost any given time. Just because you have familiar relations with people that risk loosing their jobs does not make the SC's decision any less wrong.

A 1% gross receipts tax can damage a lot of small businesses. A sole proprietorship that does manufacturing can easily see gross receipts in excess of $500,000. Problem is, that because of material costs and other expenses, many such business owners may only see a $50,000/year income. Take a 1% gross receipts tax off that and he is down to $45,000/year income.

As for the whole idea that companies come into NV and do business and pay nothing back to the state, well, people making that argument are pretty much idiots crying foul just for the sake of having their lips flap. When a company sets up business in NV it needs employees. Those employees are going to buy houses and pay property taxes (or indirectly pay them if in a rental). In addition, those people pay sales taxes. Since more consumers are being brought into the state, more sales taxes and property taxes are generated.

I guess the schools will just have to get by without things like new computers, or shiny new text books. Is there even a need for computers in lower grade levels? How about teaching kids to spell correctly and divide fractions instead of teaching them how to access the web. So what if the text books are a few years old? Do the multiplication tables change every few years? Is water no longer fundamentally compsed of hydrogen and oxygen? If the text books are damaged then the schools need to do what was done when I was a kid: Send a bill to the parents for damage to said text. Otherwise a 5 year old text book is of no less use than a brand new edition.



Link Posted: 7/16/2003 11:45:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/17/2003 12:44:54 AM EDT by Bigedmond]

Originally Posted By BroncoGlenn:
I don't see how what the NV SC did was even within its boundaries to make a decision on. There is nothing unconstitutional about the people's requirement for a 2/3 vote for the budget in order for it to pass. That's the sole job of the SC, to determine if something is or is not constitutional. Otherwise, let them make recommendations, as the judicial branch has not authority for making laws.

Bigedmond, I feel no pitty for the risk of the stability of your family's jobs; welcome to the world the rest of us live in where we may get laid-off at almost any given time. Just because you have familiar relations with people that risk loosing their jobs does not make the SC's decision any less wrong.

A 1% gross receipts tax can damage a lot of small businesses. A sole proprietorship that does manufacturing can easily see gross receipts in excess of $500,000. Problem is, that because of material costs and other expenses, many such business owners may only see a $50,000/year income. Take a 1% gross receipts tax off that and he is down to $45,000/year income.

As for the whole idea that companies come into NV and do business and pay nothing back to the state, well, people making that argument are pretty much idiots crying foul just for the sake of having their lips flap. When a company sets up business in NV it needs employees. Those employees are going to buy houses and pay property taxes (or indirectly pay them if in a rental). In addition, those people pay sales taxes. Since more consumers are being brought into the state, more sales taxes and property taxes are generated.

I guess the schools will just have to get by without things like new computers, or shiny new text books. Is there even a need for computers in lower grade levels? How about teaching kids to spell correctly and divide fractions instead of teaching them how to access the web. So what if the text books are a few years old? Do the multiplication tables change every few years? Is water no longer fundamentally compsed of hydrogen and oxygen? If the text books are damaged then the schools need to do what was done when I was a kid: Send a bill to the parents for damage to said text. Otherwise a 5 year old text book is of no less use than a brand new edition.




You know what. I was gonna let this die. But, since you brought me back in, fine.

So, no big deal my family loses everything??? Well fuck you. How about the other 30,000 people working for the school district here in clark county??? Unfortenatly, these people raise your kids. They are the ones teaching your kids right and wrong. Not you. The district sold a few schools to be under the control of a company, and they are still failing to get the job done. Because the kids parents dont give a shit if they fail or succeed.

What kind of people have we become when our kids are no longer important? How civilized are we when business profits outway people having a place to live, and food to put on the table. I am disgraced to be a member of this country when AT&T stocks are more important then taking care of American families. Excuse me for not being rich. Excuse me for caring about our people more then my portfoio. You claim lets use the 5 year old books. Ok, fine, get some 5 year old books, and most teachers would be happy. My moms Physics books are 10 to 12 years old, and some book s are 20 years old. And thats if there are enough book to give to students. There are more students then books. That makes it so the teachers can not give homework because not all students will have a book to do the homework from. Guess what. Things have changed. History & Biology change everyday.

Aren't the republicans the same people that wanted the Fed out of the STATE???? YES. They wanted to take control away from the fed so that the state had more control. Right??? Yea. So what do they do. They rush running and crying to bring the fed into the states business. You know if the Fed tells our supreme court they have no right to do what they did, the state looses all power inside itself. And thats not just for Nevada. Thats nation wide. Those ammendments we all love, will soon be gone. Why, because the fed can change them at will, and the states no longer have rights.

broncoglenn, People with your attitude are the reason that this is going on. This kind of attitude is the reason for homelessness. Yea, some might not want help, but T gaurantee you, there are people that need help, and never did anything wrong. Why should a teacher of 33 years, national award winner, be asked to work without pay, while they lose their house, their car, everything???? Why, because 35% of the voice of nevada doesnt want to pay taxes. Well, a government for the people, by the people should be 50-50. 1 Vote - 1 result. That is what this country was founded on. So that a minority could not rule the majority.

Oh, stated that the SC was beyond "its boundaries" when it temporarily over turned the 2/3 ammendment. This is based upon the law that education MUST be funded. Thats a law that the legislature failed to do. But that law must not matter. That law has only been on the books since the start of nevada. So it doesnt matter.

Someone stated, a gross reciepts taxes would still be felt by the consumers. Probably. But the ability to pay that tax is still better then 30,000+ people on not making money, not spending money, and not able to collect unemployment because technically, they still have a job. They just cant be paid. Why dont you go to work for a month, and take no pay. I dare you. But, you wont do it. Why, because you are a hypocrite.

Now, on to the stuff you say the small businesses wont be able to handle a gross receipts tax. BULL SHIT.. if you read the proposal, you would see, the first $500,000 thousand is exempt. Which mean, those companies that make more then that would pay, not the small businesses. Whoops, did i just throw the preverbal wrench in the machine for your bases up. I think I did.

as you can see, im pretty heated over this, but I let it go. I stopped posting because i know this is a no wins war. You wont win, i wont win. The state of Nevada and the people have already lost. WE have made ourself look like idiots all over the U.S. Leave it at that. But next time before you start making it personal, look at it in someone elses shoes ass hole. Like this one. A couple, married for 25 year. both work for CCSD. Both will be without money if this doesnt get passed in 14 days. They have a decneet house that they are still making payments on. (We all know teachers get the worst pay.) 1 car is paid off, the other is not. They have 2 kids, 10 and 14. When they stop getting paid, first goes the power. Then goes the car, and the house. The father owns a gun, and see his kids starving. What are you gonna do. Me, I would do what ever it takes to feed them. Come hell or high water, they will eat. You, I think you would let them die. But you will say this will never happen. Who thought this would have gone this far. Why beleive it wont go further???? If the Federal Gov't can tell our SC how they must interpret our state constitution, there are no States. There is No United States of America. It becomes A dictatorship. Our voices will no longer be heard. And that is the reason the 2nd amendment was writen.

So since you made it personal, and attacked me and my family, I do what it takes to defend myself. So if you want to take this further, let me know.
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 2:25:00 PM EDT
Ok Bigedmond, you need to stop playing like an Ostrich and pull your head out of--the sand.

First off, the republican camp came up with a perfectly good budget with a very good educational funding program. The democrat's camp decided they will flat out refuse it because it doesn't include tax structure along the lines of the gross receipts tax.


Now, on to the stuff you say the small businesses wont be able to handle a gross receipts tax. BULL SHIT.. if you read the proposal, you would see, the first $500,000 thousand is exempt. Which mean, those companies that make more then that would pay, not the small businesses. Whoops, did i just throw the preverbal wrench in the machine for your bases up. I think I did.


Actually, no. But nice try. There are a number of different tax structures the democrats have been going after. There are different plans with different exemptions. Some are $350,000. Some are $250,000. I think another is $100k range. In the example I gave, I listed $500,000, based on a single owner without employees. $500,000 can actually be quite low for a manufacturing company. And if you start adding in employees and other expenses, it is not unreasonable to see a man own a business selling $1,000,000 a year, but after deducting all the costs and federal taxes, he still is bringing home a $50,000 check every year. In addition, some of the plans also tax on employees instead of or in combination with receipts. This flat out screws companies like a small restraunt with 10 employees compared to a literal mom & pop business with no employees on payroll or a company that spends a lot of money on capital expenditures such as technology, but not on payroll.

On to another point:

Why, because 35% of the voice of nevada doesnt want to pay taxes. Well, a government for the people, by the people should be 50-50. 1 Vote - 1 result. That is what this country was founded on. So that a minority could not rule the majority.


Your argument is self defeating. The voters themselves, by a majority vote, created the requirement requiring a 2/3rd vote for the budget. So you can blame at least 51% of the entire population of Nevada, not 35% as you incorrectly believe. Actually, to go by Serrada's statment: "the 2/3 majority in NV was supported by ~70% of the voters" you can blame 70% of the state of NV.


You know if the Fed tells our supreme court they have no right to do what they did, the state looses all power inside itself

Wake up and smell the cholla! the Fed isn't the one raising hell against the NV SC for what they did, it is the people!

And another point of yours:

Someone stated, a gross reciepts taxes would still be felt by the consumers. Probably. But the ability to pay that tax is still better then 30,000+ people on not making money, not spending money, and not able to collect unemployment because technically, they still have a job. They just cant be paid. Why dont you go to work for a month, and take no pay. I dare you. But, you wont do it. Why, because you are a hypocrite.


I've been out of work. Laid off, severenced, fired, whatever you want to call it. But I didn't wait around like a ghetto rat crying poor me, the system screwed me. No, I took responsibility and went and got another job. It can happen to anybody. Just because somebody is a teacher, a trashman, or a CEO doesn't mean they are or should be exempt from ever being fired.


They have 2 kids, 10 and 14. When they stop getting paid, first goes the power. Then goes the car, and the house. The father owns a gun, and see his kids starving.

This seems like the kind of statement made by someone who is 14. And is pretty much substantiated when you follow with:

I would do what ever it takes to feed them. Come hell or high water, they will eat.
Are you trying to imply that you would perform an armed robbery of the nearest 7/11 or would you get off your lazy ass and in line for food stamps until you secure a new job? If you choose the former, please ensure a CCW holder is in the vicinity at the time. This would save the state the trouble and further expenditure to hold you up at Indian Springs.


broncoglenn, People with your attitude are the reason that this is going on. This kind of attitude is the reason for homelessness.

No people's laziness is the reason for homelessness. How about this: Get off your ass and get another job! People with my kind of attitude are what cause weak minded individuals to sit around and say how the system is keeping them down. Bullshit. It's their own lazy ass that is keeping them down.

Link Posted: 7/18/2003 4:15:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BroncoGlenn:

First off, the republican camp came up with a perfectly good budget with a very good educational funding program. The democrat's camp decided they will flat out refuse it because it doesn't include tax structure along the lines of the gross receipts tax.


The democrat’s we are backed by the casinos want other companies to take some of the burden for this state. They don’t want Banks, car dealerships, etc. coming to this state making millions and not paying taxes other then business tax. I know you will claim they pay a lot, but remember, the tax that Guinn proposed would be on all Profits, after there employees would be paid.



Actually, no. But nice try. There are a number of different tax structures the democrats have been going after. There are different plans with different exemptions. Some are $350,000. Some are $250,000. I think another is $100k range. In the example I gave, I listed $500,000, based on a single owner without employees. $500,000 can actually be quite low for a manufacturing company. And if you start adding in employees and other expenses, it is not unreasonable to see a man own a business selling $1,000,000 a year, but after deducting all the costs and federal taxes, he still is bringing home a $50,000 check every year. In addition, some of the plans also tax on employees instead of or in combination with receipts. This flat out screws companies like a small restaraunt with 10 employees compared to a literal mom & pop business with no employees on payroll or a company that spends a lot of money on capital expenditures such as technology, but not on payroll.


hum, Ii think I was Quoting Guinn's Proposal. Not the democrat’s. The reason the democrat’s have so many different plans is because they are trying to find a mid point that the cow county republicans would agree with. But they Claim they had 150 million dollars they wanted cut from the very budget they proposed. It was passed by 71%. that’s more then the 2/3 that are required to pass the tax. That means 1 person is willing to vote yes on the budget, but not on the tax. That is hypocritical is it not?



Your argument is self defeating. The voters themselves, by a majority vote, created the requirement requiring a 2/3rd vote for the budget. So you can blame at least 51% of the entire population of Nevada, not 35% as you incorrectly believe. Actually, to go by Serrada's statment: "the 2/3 majority in NV was supported by ~70% of the voters" you can blame 70% of the state of NV.


How is my argument self defeating when the amendment breaks the national constitution. The 2/3 rule may have been voted on, but the case in hand is a special situation that none had the presight to see. Even the republican party admits that this situation was never imagined when this amendment was passed.


Wake up and smell the cholla! the Fed isn't the one raising hell against the NV SC for what they did, it is the people!


Your right, the Fed just told the 15 republicans it has no right in the states business. But I did say it was the republicans bring the Fed into the states business. that’s what I said.



I've been out of work. Laid off, severenced, fired, whatever you want to call it. But I didn't wait around like a ghetto rat crying poor me, the system screwed me. No, I took responsibility and went and got another job. It can happen to anybody. Just because somebody is a teacher, a trashman, or a CEO doesn't mean they are or should be exempt from ever being fired.

Well, a lot of people have been laid off since Sept 11th. I just got laid of for the 4th time since September 11th. But I don’t qualify for unemployment because I am a college student. Also, I have taken and had to refuse around 10 jobs because they wanted me to quit school. The other 20 or so job interviews I have had, I was denied because "My Background is too extensive." mean companies don’t want to pay for the top people. They want to pay the people less for the same job. Is it my fault I can do things with computers that amaze people. Is it my fault that I have special skills? Must be, because Even the fast food chains have turned me down for jobs. Also, you failed to respond to my dare. Where I dared you to go to work, do you job for Nothing? Taking no pay.




Are you trying to imply that you would perform an armed robbery of the nearest 7/11 or would you get off your lazy ass and in line for food stamps until you secure a new job? If you choose the former, please ensure a CCW holder is in the vicinity at the time. This would save the state the trouble and further expenditure to hold you up at Indian Springs.

The implication is that, if it was required to steal food from Albertsons to feed my family, I think any good parent would if driven to that point. I don’t know a lot about food stamps, but I believe you need a place of residence to receive them. I was just saying, under those circumstances, any good parent will make sure they can feed there family. But with unemployment as high as it is in this city, it’s hard to get a job.



No people's laziness is the reason for homelessness. How about this: Get off your ass and get another job! People with my kind of attitude are what cause weak minded individuals to sit around and say how the system is keeping them down. Bullshit. It's their own lazy ass that is keeping them down.

So you’re saying those people that are homeless, and mentally handicapped are lazy????? Where is you compassion??? Where is your soul???? Are you proud to say that you are so much better then everyone?????? I know people that have been forced to poverty. They can’t work because of accidents. My uncle alone has had his back broken twice by car accidents. Neither or which were his fault. He has lost everything due to doctor’s bills. He lives out of his mobile home. By, because an insurance company trying to blame him for there client that ran a red light. The second accident he was thrown from the vehicle when the seat belt broke on a brand new truck. He can’t work. His wife can’t work because he requires 24 care. it would cost the state government more to hire a full time nurse then to have her stay home and care for him.

Link Posted: 7/18/2003 4:16:03 PM EDT
continued from above.



Now, since this seems to be such and anti tax group, how many would favor no taxes at all. What you make, you keep. I’m sure almost all people would say yes without even thinking about the ramifications. That’s because taxes don’t make the world go around. so let’s look at how things would be if there were no taxes!!!!

1st. no taxes, no public schools. big deal right, the public school system is not a value. Why do people want the lowest value for there kids???

2nd. no taxes, no police, no firefighters.

3rd. with no police, there are no courts. Why have courts when there are no police to arrest the criminals.

4th. no courts, no LAWS!!!!!!!!!!!! this is called anarchy.

5th. No laws no government. Government is based upon laws.

6th. With no taxes, there is no US ARMY, US NAVY, US AIR FORCE, and US MARINES. So now we have no laws, no government and no way to protect our self from other countries invading us, and putting us under there laws. That would create a whole other problem.

7th. With the situation above, The movie THE POSTMAN becomes true. The biggest group of people that can cause fear in other groups leads. They enact there own rule. The rule by fear, by killing those that stand against them for fun, and as a means to show there power.

Basically said, those of you that want no taxes, are no better then Bin Laden. You are a terrorist. By not having taxes, the way of life as you know it would not exist, and we would be ruled by those that scare us the most. By saying the rules that America is based on IE taxes, you are disgracing our fallen warriors, our veterans, our soldiers. They put there life on the live for you, the least you can do burden yourself with taxes so that there is a country to defend.
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 5:55:36 PM EDT
and there we have it, the kalifornia type influence that is destroying Nevada.


My wifes family and herself are native Nevadans, and have had to put up with this liberal agenda crap. Too bad you can't shoot the liberals.

Sorry Bigedmond, your family members are part of the problem. The liberals in Nevada only have control of LV/Clark Co. and the schools. And they push for tax increases every year. The teachers use the kids to badger their parents about funding.

I am moving back to Nevada tomorrow, and will spend my free time fighting tax increases, the teachers union and the liberals.

How do your family members explain the increase from $4000 per student to $7000 per student, yet the students test lower.......

BTW I do have a solution for the budget crunch.

1) tell the FED's we will drop all opposition to Yucca mountain in exchange for a $20 Billion payment up front and $5 Billion a year, plus they cover all costs of the facility and operating expenses.

2) get the oil companies to build 3-5 oil refineries in rural Nevada

there are ways to raise cash without raising taxes. But you have to put forth some effort and use some logic.
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 6:24:47 PM EDT
Wow!! Let me see if I can understand what is going on here. I think the biggest problem is that Bigedmond and the majority of us have two very distinct philosophies about the extent to which we're dependent on government. Bigedmond believes that the government is solely responsible for the welfare of the people under it. Responsible for education, welfare, protection, pretty much everything. This is called Socialism. The rest of us feel for the most part, we are responsible for ourselves. If we lose a job, we get another one. If there weren't any schools, we would teach the kids ourselves. Who would want the government totally responsible for your kids education anyway? We don't believe in the current welfare system at all. We don't believe that just because you don't have enough money for a proposed budget, that you should raise taxes. We feel that these beurocrats should learn about fiscal responsibility. We don't believe that the government should be able to limit you in how much money you make. This is called republicanism and capitalism. For those who don't know, our form of government is not a democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic.

To address Bigedmond's last post. No one said that there should be no taxes. But, there should only be enough taxes taken to minimally run a government. Not take more so that we can implement X new program just because we can. And there should NEVER be a surplus. This means that the government took more money than they needed. This, to me, equates to stealing.

As for Bigedmond's parents, I have a lot of respect for teachers. But, no one forced them to choose that line of work. They get paid very good for the amount of time that they work. Who else gets an average salary and has three months vacation a year?
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 8:49:54 PM EDT
Lemme give y'all my take on schools. Bear in mind that my wife has an application in with the school district for a part time yard duty position and is currently unemployed (by choice, to help take care of our children).
My wife and I both volunteer at my 10 year old daughter's school, and on any given day you will find 10 to 50 parental volunteers there. Any place that can't get by with the kind of budget they already have and people who donate their time for free (my wife volunteers in the school library because my daughter's teacher has plenty of help daily) deserves to be shut down and revamped.Anybody who tells you taht the kids are not properly funded needs to get F#*KING real. I will teach my kids at home and all those overpaid teachers can get out into the real world and get a job. My kids go to school as much for the social interaction as for the education. The tax package includes a lot of things aimed square at places like my restaraunt/bar. BANG the restricted gaming licensees, BANG gross receipts, BANG liqour and Cigarette and Live Entertainment taxes. I garantee we will pass the damage right on to YOU the consumer and you will look around and say "$9.00 for a F@*KING hamburger and $3.50 for a G*DD@%M Pepsi!!!" and I'll say "Well, at least our kids are taken care of."
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 9:09:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By serrada:
Wow!! Let me see if I can understand what is going on here. I think the biggest problem is that Bigedmond and the majority of us have two very distinct philosophies about the extent to which we're dependent on government. Bigedmond believes that the government is solely responsible for the welfare of the people under it. Responsible for education, welfare, protection, pretty much everything. This is called Socialism. The rest of us feel for the most part, we are responsible for ourselves. If we lose a job, we get another one. If there weren't any schools, we would teach the kids ourselves. Who would want the government totally responsible for your kids education anyway? We don't believe in the current welfare system at all. We don't believe that just because you don't have enough money for a proposed budget, that you should raise taxes. We feel that these beurocrats should learn about fiscal responsibility. We don't believe that the government should be able to limit you in how much money you make. This is called republicanism and capitalism. For those who don't know, our form of government is not a democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic.

To address Bigedmond's last post. No one said that there should be no taxes. But, there should only be enough taxes taken to minimally run a government. Not take more so that we can implement X new program just because we can. And there should NEVER be a surplus. This means that the government took more money than they needed. This, to me, equates to stealing.

As for Bigedmond's parents, I have a lot of respect for teachers. But, no one forced them to choose that line of work. They get paid very good for the amount of time that they work. Who else gets an average salary and has three months vacation a year?



Man, well i guess i am the only one that cares for others. Oh well right. But i never said its the resposbility of government to take care of the public. But i think we should take care of our own. I mean, is it fun to know other people are commiting suicide because they have nothing to live for.

If you dislike our public school so much, then teach your kids yourself. When they want to go to college, watch when they say no, because they dont have a diploma. In Nevada, home schooling will not get your kid a diploma. Or send you kids to private school. Then, you still have to pay 4000 a year, but they will get a good education. The reason why, is because there isnt 40+ kids in each class like there are in public schools.

Ok, so you agree taxes are needed. So what taxes do we get stop paying. Remember, for every dollar you keep, something has to go in government. With less money, you cant hire more police, or firefighter.
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 9:29:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By thedave1164:
and there we have it, the kalifornia type influence that is destroying Nevada.


My wifes family and herself are native Nevadans, and have had to put up with this liberal agenda crap. Too bad you can't shoot the liberals.

Sorry Bigedmond, your family members are part of the problem. The liberals in Nevada only have control of LV/Clark Co. and the schools. And they push for tax increases every year. The teachers use the kids to badger their parents about funding.

I am moving back to Nevada tomorrow, and will spend my free time fighting tax increases, the teachers union and the liberals.

How do your family members explain the increase from $4000 per student to $7000 per student, yet the students test lower.......

BTW I do have a solution for the budget crunch.

1) tell the FED's we will drop all opposition to Yucca mountain in exchange for a $20 Billion payment up front and $5 Billion a year, plus they cover all costs of the facility and operating expenses.

2) get the oil companies to build 3-5 oil refineries in rural Nevada

there are ways to raise cash without raising taxes. But you have to put forth some effort and use some logic.



So, you say i have california influence in me. Thank, but so you know, i was born and raised here. Thats why i want our sttte to do so much better. I beleive, we only get what you put into your state.

So, if we spend 7000 dollars per student per year to teach them, thats bad. I understand the fact that the media makes it look like all high school seniors are falling the tests. But, there are reasons why mroe and more students are failing. Its because there is no law that requires a student to pass each grade. If a student got all f's in 3rd grade, then next year they will be in 4th. Because we cant hold them back. CCSD is being sued because they are trying to do that with high school students. So, a 9th grader comes in, failed all there classes in previous grades, why is it the teachers fault that they drop out, or dont grade. They can only work with what they are given. Oh, did you know that nevada is 47th on the list for Average money spent per student??? That means if we are spending 7000 per student, there are 46 other states that are spending more. But you must be proud to know that this state is almost the worst in the country.

You people think teachers make so much money. Did you know, right out of college, in clark county, a 1st year teacher makes 22,000 a year. You can almost make that much in fast food. With a pay scale like that, why would any decent teacher want to come here to teach. they can make 34,000 in cali with the same expereince. would you take 12,000 more your first year out of college????

Well will stop posting now on this topic, because no matter what i say, or how many facts i provide against you, it doesnt matter. To you, i am some liberal pig that you want to shoot. I am ridiculed by you because i want our childern to have a future other then pan handling. I dont like taxes, but i thik all taxes should be paid by all, not just some.

Oh, 35% of 100% is not a majority. its called a minority. So sue away. spend more taxes dollars that we dont have. put the state more in debt. This state has never had a surplus. Yea, the nation has had a surplus, but then again we have a 5 TRILLION dollar debt. and that debt is going up everyday because the country and states are spending more then we are bringing in.

Im done, my fingers and mind are tired of trying to explain to thick skulled, brain washed republicans that something needs to be done. I will agree to keep everything the same as it was.
Link Posted: 7/18/2003 9:49:52 PM EDT
I too care about others. But as a nurse, have learned that if you care more than the people you are trying to help care, then you are doomed to failure and you will have an anchor for the rest of their life or until they find a juicier place to go.

You can only show the way and THEY MUST do the work. There can be no other way. If they choose not to do the work, then you think I will support them?

The liberals figure that it can all be done or should be done by government, or some government program, and help those poor unfortunate “unlucky” people who can’t do it for them selves. Some of those programs are useful when applied correctly. Unfortunately they most often are NOT being applied correctly and the results are dismal. People who actually need the help get denied because they are the wrong color or sex and are working.

Unfortunately the people who actually work are too busy to keep an eye on everything.

Couples living and working in this valley are considered rich by liberal standards and, deserved to be taxed to remove more of the money they have earned to put the food on the table and the roof over their head.

Bigedmond said:
Man, well i guess i am the only one that cares for others. Oh well right. But i never said its the resposbility of government to take care of the public. But i think we should take care of our own. I mean, is it fun to know other people are commiting suicide because they have nothing to live for.


A sicker statement was never said. What you have fun knowing others are committing suicide? Take care of our own – own WHAT?

Now for a couple of quick facts. In the northeast corridor, taxes and the loss of civil liberties has been the greatest and charitable contributions have been lowest. While in the southwest the taxes are lower and the freedoms have not been eroded as much and charitable contributions are much higher. I think there is a pattern there. That if you really care for others you don’t let the government do it. You let private people and organizations do it.

YOU want a case in point look no further than Kaliforniasatn, the state is buckling under its own socialistic weight. There is not enough money in the state to keep it afloat. They can tax until the cows come home and it will do no good. IT WILL GO UNDER. It’s just a matter of time.
________________________________________________________________________________
Bigedmond said:
Basically said, those of you that want no taxes, are no better then Bin Laden. You are a terrorist. By not having taxes, the way of life as you know it would not exist, and we would be ruled by those that scare us the most. By saying the rules that America is based on IE taxes, you are disgracing our fallen warriors, our veterans, our soldiers. They put there life on the live for you, the least you can do burden yourself with taxes so that there is a country to defend.

A larger pile of crap was never spoken. You want to retract that statement?
You still have time.
Link Posted: 7/19/2003 10:45:54 AM EDT
Bigedmond writes:


Well, a lot of people have been laid off since Sept 11th. I just got laid of for the 4th time since September 11th. But I don’t qualify for unemployment because I am a college student. Also, I have taken and had to refuse around 10 jobs because they wanted me to quit school. The other 20 or so job interviews I have had, I was denied because "My Background is too extensive." mean companies don’t want to pay for the top people. They want to pay the people less for the same job. Is it my fault I can do things with computers that amaze people. Is it my fault that I have special skills? Must be, because Even the fast food chains have turned me down for jobs. Also, you failed to respond to my dare. Where I dared you to go to work, do you job for Nothing? Taking no pay.



And what would giving up my paycheck prove? I've made plenty of sacrifices in my life. I dropped out of college to take on a full time job. The reason why employers aren't taking you on because of over-qualification is because they don't want to take the time to hire you and train you, only to see you get bored in a few months and pursue other opportunities. We've all made sacrafices here. We have to balance out what we want, what we need, and what needs to be done to obtain those objectives.

Those 10 jobs you turned down were your own decisions. You could have accepted the job and have been making a paycheck. So don't expect any sympathy from any one else on your own upturned glass of milk.

I will, however, extend some sympathy if you bought into the ads about the vast demand for IT professionals and other such non-sense. The IT field is one of the worst fields to be in if you are concerned about job security. It's the field I am currently in.

Bigedmond also writes:

So, you say i have california influence in me. Thank, but so you know, i was born and raised here. Thats why i want our sttte to do so much better.


Then leave things as they are. The state has been doing fine for a number of years now. And while the liberals run around saying that because of increased immigration to NV the schools are failing. Well, this isn't so as NV has had a large number of people immigrating to the state for quite some time. So why is it that all of a sudden it is a problem? It wasn't until people wanted the state to "do better." Do better how? We enjoy so many freedoms in this state that citizens/subjects of other states don't have. Here's where the age-old saying comes in to play: "If it aint broke, don't fix it."

Bigedmond makes another non-sequitur statement:

You people think teachers make so much money. Did you know, right out of college, in clark county, a 1st year teacher makes 22,000 a year. You can almost make that much in fast food. With a pay scale like that, why would any decent teacher want to come here to teach. they can make 34,000 in cali with the same expereince. would you take 12,000 more your first year out of college????



What's wrong with $22,000 for a first year teacher? Sure $34,000 for the same work in CA is tempting, but do you also realize that the median price for housing in CA is about twice that of NV? Due to a higher cost of living in CA, taking the extra $12,000 would actually result in a pay cut.

Here's something else to chew on: A starting 1st year assistant manager at a major stip hotel/casino here in town works 6 days a week and 10 hours a day, mandatory. No three month a year vacation. And they start out at about $22-$26,000/year on salary, no overtime. So all these teachers and their unions saying they are under-paid need to grab a nice hot cup of shut the f#$k up.

Face facts, very few people are going to make a large income as a first year anything. I'd be curious to see what the teacher's pay scale is for longevity within the district.

Furthermore, I want to see the breakdown of how the $7000 dollars a year, or whatever it is, that is spent by student is actually derived. I'm thinking that is a based on things from salary's of teachers and administrative staff and the cost of building schools. As such it is no surprise to see that NV "pays" very little per student. The cost of living here is lower than a number of other states so salaries need not be as high. In addition, land costs are lower, so the cost to build a new school is considerably less than states with elevated property values.

Finally, Bigedmond writes:

But I don’t qualify for unemployment because I am a college student


I think this is the cause of a lot of your misconceptions. I'd be very interrested to see your line of thinking in 10 years after you have gotten married, picked up a mortgage, and fought your way up the ranks. And I'd like to see your subsequent response when some kid who is still wet behind the ears comes along and says you should give up even more of your income to add extra funding xyz program that has failed only because of it's own bureaucracy.


Top Top