posted by queencitybuckeyeGood thing they could afford a six-figure sum to send "students" to D.C. for the gun-grabber rally.
LOL forgot about that. Yea, look who is in charge of these cities/ school boards.
posted by queencitybuckeyeGood thing they could afford a six-figure sum to send "students" to D.C. for the gun-grabber rally.
Completely forgot about that. Good call.
posted by iclfan2... who is in charge ...
The fundamental problem with levels of public authority. It's what Plato so wrestled with in The Republic.
No matter the style, the question always comes back: "Who will watch the watchers? And who will watch the watchers of the watchers?"
posted by O-Trap
No matter the style, the question always comes back: "Who will watch the watchers? And who will watch the watchers of the watchers?"
But oddly (not really), in certain cities the same type of people (politically not racially, but kind of) continue to be elected, regardless of how shitty they do.
posted by iclfan2But oddly (not really), in certain cities the same type of people (politically not racially, but kind of) continue to be elected, regardless of how shitty they do.
I'm not sure it matters. The flaw of a hierarchy applies no matter the ideology in office.
posted by O-TrapI've got several current and former business partners who have expatriated because of taxes. One of them just made mention of it on Facebook, and the guy was actually shamed for it.
"Very sad that you would rather move away from your home, community, and extended family, and also to stop contributing to public services from which everyone benefits just to make an extra few percent on your paycheque."
Are you kidding me?
lol, fuck that guy.
posted by iclfan2That is pretty damn shitty. Have a friend of my wife that lives there (I would never). Kids that go to her school have to wake themselves up, take a train/ bus AND walk to get to it, just to go to school. I don't know how much of a part the teachers play, but can we all start agreeing that the parents play the largest part?
They easily play the largest part. Just look at the data when it comes to kids growing up in two parent households vs one/none. An uncomfortable truth most want to acknowledge. Instead everyone proposes everything else that consists of throwing away more $$$.
posted by BoatShoesRe-read what I wrote. I said a tax on the unimproved value of land is just as no one created unimproved land.
So what? That's still no justification for taxing land. I already expained why it's taxed - you're coming up with bullshit theoretical justifications when the reality is simply based on what's practical.
And, like I said, if I wasn't maintaining the land then the community incurs A COST to maintain it. By your theory, I should be PAID rather than taxed for maintaining that land.
I filed my city tax late. 100% my fault for doing it, and I was to get a return of $32.98. Since it was late, they gave me an arbitrary $25 late fee, and are withholding the extra $7.98 until next year.
My fault for filing late, but love how they just said "Nah, no money for you."
Don't let them keep your money. I guarantee that if you owed them fitty cent that they would spend 10 bucks on postage to collect it.
posted by gutSo what? That's still no justification for taxing land. I already expained why it's taxed - you're coming up with bullshit theoretical justifications when the reality is simply based on what's practical.
And, like I said, if I wasn't maintaining the land then the community incurs A COST to maintain it. By your theory, I should be PAID rather than taxed for maintaining that land.
The Justification in taxing land from which the title must come from the state is that it is the price in exchange for the exclusive license to use the land through the title to the land. The only reason you get the opportunity to maintain the land is because commonwealth issued title to the land in the first place.
It is morally no different than the owner of a copyright charging a royalty fee for the right to use the copyright. But according to your reasoning you think Taylor Swift would be paying people who promote or use her music failing to see that in reality everyone wants to use her music just like everyone wants to use the commonwealth's land. The commonwealth isn't hurting for people to exclusively use its land and Taylor Swift isn't hurting to find people to use her music - hence the Commonwealth and Taylor Swift charge the price.
In the same way, just like IP holders can take back exclusive licenses when the licensees fail to make use of the IP, etc. the same would apply in the case of a title holder to land who lets land go to waste or fails to pay the price what the title (i.e. property taxes).
And while it's desireable to tax land because it can't move, this was the reasoning behind feudal lords and vassals charging duties on land use under the common law.
posted by Devils AdvocateDon't let them keep your money. I guarantee that if you owed them fitty cent that they would spend 10 bucks on postage to collect it.
They said the do not offer "refunds" less that $10, rather they credit your next year's return. How can I make them pay me?
posted by ernest_t_bassThey said the do not offer "refunds" less that $10, rather they credit your next year's return. How can I make them pay me?
You can't. That's how authority works. They can hold you to a standard that you, in turn, cannot hold them to.
posted by ernest_t_bassThey said the do not offer "refunds" less that $10, rather they credit your next year's return. How can I make them pay me?
take them to small claims court. it would be worth 30 bucks for the lulz.
posted by ernest_t_bassThey said the do not offer "refunds" less that $10, rather they credit your next year's return. How can I make them pay me?
I forget which state....I once got a "correction" notice and a refund for like $0.98.
Not only does not refunding you seem unusual, but I thought you actually only had to file on time if you owed money (otherwise I think you have until October, without even filing an extension, at least for Federal).