Reconsidering the wisdom of home ownership

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Clev

Not quite. According to the FCC:

So, basically, Verizon is passing along part of the cost of their network and making it look like a tax. The FCC mandates the maximum amount that they're allowed to hide this way, hence "FCC Line Charge."

If you put that $6.38 charge in the bill where it belongs, you're paying $6.68 in taxes on a bill of $25.06, or 27%.

You are very good at being an apologist for the grubberment. (In this case, those nice guys at the FCC.)

Gee, I feel SO much better now with a tax of ONLY 27%.

Wow, what a relief that is.

No matter what you call it, it's still government mandated. And it's still a substantial amount of money down the drain, for very little in return.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by Clev

That meaning has nothing to do with it. The "Merkin" as you used it comes from our previous president, who couldn't pronounce "American" properly in his speeches. (See also: "nukular")

Are you taking this in a political direction?

Nothing like blaming the previous administration and hoping that no one notices the deficiencies of the current one.

At least Bush didn't refer to our troops as "corps men".

If you don't make this political, I won't either.

Meanwhile, tit for tat...

[user removed]

Lets also ignore the per capita US debt accumulated which now exceeds the national net worth. Care to toss a percentage at that one Sentra? Say 77 trillion divided by 330 million. Have you paid your portion? We spent it on crap for the last century.

Thats 3k per capita per trillion times 77. You ready to write your check for $231,000 today as well as every other member of your family. Oh yes, it ain't deductible.

When the whole ponzi scheme collapses and your paper is worth Weimar bucks, the going is going to get very rough, unless you can provide everything for yourself.

regards
Mech

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

You are very good at being an apologist for the grubberment. (In this case, those nice guys at the FCC.)

Gee, I feel SO much better now with a tax of ONLY 27%.

Wow, what a relief that is.

No matter what you call it, it's still government mandated. And it's still a substantial amount of money down the drain, for very little in return.

Ah, yes. The "libertarian." You know, you can always move out of New York and into a state without all of those terrible state taxes, like Montana. Better yet, you can leave all of the taxes behind and find you a nice libertarian paradise. I hear Somalia is really nice this time of year, and the "grubberment" won't charge you a dime.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

Are you taking this in a political direction?

Nothing like blaming the previous administration and hoping that no one notices the deficiencies of the current one.

At least Bush didn't refer to our troops as "corps men".

If you don't make this political, I won't either.

Meanwhile, tit for tat...

Are you kidding? He's the perfect Republican. Subsidies for big oil and auto manufacturers, tax cuts for people making more than $250,000, relaxation of smog standards. You should love him.

[Frank Lee]

Depends on the state, though. I pay a couple of thousand, on a place that was valued at about $500K at the top of the market.

MN bills a couple thousand for a place worth $50K.

Private schools routinely educate kids at substantially less cost per student, with better teacher/kid ratios, and produce kids that routinely score better than pub-ed kids on any standardized test you care to mention

I've read that a big part of that- if it's true- is because of the high costs of special needs students, which private schools are free to turn away. Agree with the rest of the post, especially the parts about being penalized for trying to live debt-free and that "temporary" taxes and tax hikes rarely- if ever- go away. The exception that proves that rule is a phone tax that was instituted for some old war decades ago and it only recently went away after a group started rattling some cages about it.

Old Mech's 7/12 and Thymeclock's 100% tax burdens jump out as gross exaggerations when the real tax burden is 28% per the Wiki Tax Freedom Day link.

As one who has gone through my expenses with a fine toothed comb, I can assure you it is one helluva lot more than 28%!

Participation, in one form or another (and I'm not claiming the current participation is anywhere near optimal) was forced on the US by a long series of unprovoked attacks.

BWWAHAHAHAHA!!! And that's all I'm gonna say about that.

...and apologies to Frank about what may have been understood by my use of that word.

No worries; I knew what you meant.

DoD is 18.74%

No, the elephant in the room is our mandatory social spending.

Um, at about one of every five dollars, that one looks pretty elephanty to me. At least with some of that "social" spending one can argue that's what we've been paying for all our working lives, so it's there when we need it.

[solarguy]

"I've read that a big part of that- if it's true- is because of the high costs of special needs students, which private schools are free to turn away. "

Having supported Christian education in one way or another for a long time, I can tell you from "boots on the ground" experience, that it's just not true. Sure, you could find some isolated instances where a certain special needs kid, cannot be properly supported at a certain small private school.

In our experience, the private christian school got a disproportionate share of special needs and "problem" kids BECAUSE it wasn't working at the public school.

Finest regards,

troy

[NachtRitter]

one can argue that's what we've been paying for all our working lives, so it's there when we need it.

Sadly, that is the same argument used by those that support excessive defense spending...

[dcb]

So if the private schools can turn away whomever they want and are only attended by the well to do, and have a religious agenda that isn't a viable alternative to public education.

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by Clev

That meaning has nothing to do with it. The "Merkin" as you used it comes from our previous president, who couldn't pronounce "American" properly in his speeches. (See also: "nukular")

This is OT and my last post on this thread - but you may well be correct - I'm annoyed I upset people with an insensitive word - however I used it previously here which didn't cause any problems, including with someone who has raised it on this thread.

Anyway, my apology stands, checking out again