Pucker up

Status
Not open for further replies.
charles sullivan said:
Do you think state wages are too high? Is that what you are trying to say?
Click to expand...
I don't think that. But I do think there are far more state employees and government employees than we need. But when you're rewarded with more budget money for redundancy and inefficiency you get an ever expanding bureaucracy that treats taxpayer money like it is endless. How do we pay ultra high gas taxes yet bridge and other critical infrastructure is neglected? It's not a lack of bodies it's a lack of accountability and purity.
 
Oregon does have OReGO in place for those with the urge for “mileage pay” programs.

As prices go up, my urge to drive and spend goes down…

At least I get to watch the economic death spiral for entertainment. 😉
 
charles sullivan said:
I understand all 3 items above. I don't see how doing #3 necessarily even helps with 1 and 2. In fact, I would say that 3 is a poor answer to the issues that 1 and 2 represent.

I think the issue is that I don't really know who the "they" that you speak of is. If "they" are the representatives in Olympia, then I can see your point, however, cutting the pay of Rep's won't make a dent in the budget. If "they" is state employees then I think that would be a poor tactic and probably cost a lot more in the long run. It's not like the average state employee is making big bucks. Balancing the budget on the backs of your employees salaries is generally quite short sighted in my opinion.

I think that you should do all that you can to be an active participant in our state and lobby for the state government that you want. If that is a government that provides fewer things or with different priorities, you should get involved as best as you can.
Click to expand...
Lobbying for fiscal responsibility successfully is not possible in one party rule situations. And yes I apply that to both parties when they have unchecked control.
 
krusty said:
No...it just makes people not want to be around grumpy old farts (maybe that's the desired result).

The constant bitchin' about cost just makes me glad to not be around a great many of my age cohorts.
Click to expand...
Stereotyping eh? OMJ was loved by all. You just trying to find anything to disagree with me about? Your monitor suggests you are a card carrying member of the TGOM club. Definitive response dude.
 
Dustin Chromers said:
I don't think that. But I do think there are far more state employees and government employees than we need. But when you're rewarded with more budget money for redundancy and inefficiency you get an ever expanding bureaucracy that treats taxpayer money like it is endless. How do we pay ultra high gas taxes yet bridge and other critical infrastructure is neglected? It's not a lack of bodies it's a lack of accountability and purity.
Click to expand...
As a citizen you should push for whatever it is that you think can improve how money is spent.

I honestly wanted to understand what Rob was trying to say. I'm still a bit unsure.
 
Canuck from Kansas said:
While the sticker shock may be real, for me, I put these things in perspective; $200 for tags does not outrage me quite as much as the price of groceries. The price of a tin of coffee is currently $18.00; a tin lasts us just about 2 weeks. That's 2 tins a month or 24 a year = $432 for the year of coffee - fortunately, we stocked up bigly when we could buy it for 9 or $10 a tin (last year), but that is still around $200 per year for coffee, and I hate to admit, but coffee probably doesn't get me as far as my vehicle does.

On another note, mileage you put on your vehicle is irrelevant, unless you want the price of tags prorated to mileage, which would require monitoring 😱, which I suspect the OP would be vehemently against.
Click to expand...
Well yeah! 200$ more a month could be a problem. The weight loss has been good for us though
 
Tax policy and tax structure is a complicated and multifaceted issue, with a lot of values related perspectives that different people use when assessing fairness and efficiency of tax related spending.

As I've mentioned before on a different thread...

Myself, I prefer bumper sticker length statements that contain no facts, perspective, or historical context, but yet fit my personal prejudices and fuel my grievances

😁
 
charles sullivan said:
As a citizen you should push for whatever it is that you think can improve how money is spent.

I honestly wanted to understand what Rob was trying to say. I'm still a bit unsure.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I'm a bit outnumbered with a few obstacles. One, my own affairs to survive in Taxington. Two, government employees are union which makes cutting the fat neatly impossible and competence optional. Three, we both know it will do zero good. Did I mention I was outnumbered.
 
Dustin Chromers said:
Lobbying for fiscal responsibility successfully is not possible in one party rule situations. And yes I apply that to both parties when they have unchecked control.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree. I think that one party control is detrimental to more than just fiscal responsibility but certainly fiscal responsibility is high on the list of the problems it creates. On the state level we have one party control presently and the same is true on the federal level.

I can't imagine being a King County tax payer. You get back less than 60 cents for every dollar sent to Olympia. At the same time you live in a state that is one of 13 states that send more money to the federal government than it recieves.
 
Mossback said:
Tax policy and tax structure is a complicated and multifaceted issue, with a lot of values related perspectives that different people use when assessing fairness and efficiency of tax related spending.

As I've mentioned before on a different thread...

Myself, I prefer bumper sticker length statements that contain no facts, perspective, or historical context, but yet fit my personal prejudices and fuel my grievances

😁
Click to expand...
Here's one......."A flat tax is flat simple"

That's right instead of forming an IRS at the state level inside the department of revenue we could keep it simple and have a flat tax rate for all levels of income. We could reduce the IRS on a grand scale and take the headache out of tax preparing with a flat federal tax rate. We could keep it simple and flatten bullshit but that might make too many folks irrelevant. I would honestly feel bad for accountants as they would only be employed by the Uber wealthy to hide money and income as some other class of capital. But wouldn't it be worth it to make shit simple? I think it would be. The only reason it's complicated now is because the middle class has no time to fight back nor assets and deductions to offset tax burdens to the level of the rich. Filing taxes is simply far more complicated than it needs to be.
 
charles sullivan said:
I 100% agree. I think that one party control is detrimental to more than just fiscal responsibility but certainly fiscal responsibility is high on the list of the problems it creates. On the state level we have one party control presently and the same is true on the federal level.

I can't imagine being a King County tax payer. You get back less than 60 cents for every dollar sent to Olympia. At the same time you live in a state that is one of 13 states that send more money to the federal government than it recieves.
Click to expand...
Can't argue with any of that. Could it be common ground? I think so.

Side note. I think 80 percent of Americans are essentially in agreement on the big issues. They may not agree with the road plan to solve them but they want the same result. It's a travesty we have lost the moderates in governance. The were the people who could actually move the needle of getting things done.
 
krusty said:
What cheese goes best with whine?
Click to expand...
Goat…. Back in ‘68 I was in high school working the graveyard shift in a gas station. 26 cents a gallon. Hardest part was staying awake around 10:00 in class…
 
Last edited:
Dustin Chromers said:
Can't argue with any of that. Could it be common ground? I think so.

Side note. I think 80 percent of Americans are essentially in agreement on the big issues. They may not agree with the road plan to solve them but they want the same result. It's a travesty we have lost the moderates in governance. The were the people who could actually move the needle of getting things done.
Click to expand...
If moderates equal the independents, then let’s hope they voice their opinions loudly come May and again in November here is Oregon.

A big “Hell No…Not on my Back!!”, would do the state of the economy and of Oregon a whole lotta good.

(In Oregon, independents out number the democrats who outnumber the republicans.)
 
Mossback said:
Tax policy and tax structure is a complicated and multifaceted issue, with a lot of values related perspectives that different people use when assessing fairness and efficiency of tax related spending.

As I've mentioned before on a different thread...

Myself, I prefer bumper sticker length statements that contain no facts, perspective, or historical context, but yet fit my personal prejudices and fuel my grievances

😁
Click to expand...
IMG_8994.jpeg
 
Rob Allen said:
I drive it less than 1000 miles per year... I think your registration cost should be relative to how much the roads in your county cost to maintain including new construction.
Click to expand...
my understanding, is for instance, the roads in rural oregon need $ from the state to both complete building and maintaining. generally, from my just driving around, it appears that the roads in eastern wa, and or, are in pretty good shape.
 
FinLuver said:
If moderates equal the independents, then let’s hope they voice their opinions loudly come May and again in November here is Oregon.

A big “Hell No…Not on my Back!!”, would do the state of the economy and of Oregon a whole lotta good.

(In Oregon, independents out number the democrats who outnumber the republicans.)
Click to expand...
Those are a big part of them. I'm independent. I now see in cspan there are a growing number of US politicians identifying as independents. I also see it more in my local voters pamphlets. I think there are plenty of people disgusted with the direction of each of the 2 big tent parties. First, getting those people to vote is job one. Getting those people's votes to count in a meaningful way is the next job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top