I apologize if you were looking forward to more 'commenting on this here article' blogs and less 'crazy pissed-off old lady rantings' but if it's any consolation, todays is neither.
Because I had an idea. One of those 'just popped into my head and seemed so brilliant I'd never forget it but typed a few hints into my phone...just in case' ideas.
So many ideological discussions go South (or worse)over 'things I'm willing to pay for'. Things I want MY tax dollars to be put towards. Those kinds of things. Some people don't want to pay for anyone else's health care, or schools or roads, or bombs to send overseas to screw with other people's health and schools and roads.
In general, we're told that we all pay taxes for all the stuff we all need and we can't pick and choose.
But why couldn't we?
It's not like the tax forms aren't already confusing enough- just add another section. Right up there at the top they already ask if we want to donate to the campaign fund or some such (I dunno- I just skim over that, giggling).
So here's what we need to do- we need a section on the regular old 1040 EZ tax form, right under where it says 'taxes you paid last year and taxes you still owe' that breaks it down so we can choose.
Please denote what percent of your taxes you'd like to go to each of the following-
Universal Healthcare for all Americans
Infrastructure repair (roads, bridges, etc.)
Your local public schools
Elderly services
Veterans' services
Alternative energy investments
Community and public colleges
Put towards the national debt
Military spending
NASA
School lunch programs
Homeless relief
National parks and wildlife areas
Corporate incentives and subsidies
Please be sure the total is 100. TOTAL AMOUNT MAY NOT BE ZERO.
See? It wouldn't be that difficult and then everyone could give according to their own consciences. Everyone who wrings their hands about the national debt can work to pay that off, everyone who wants us to bomb the shit out of all those 'backwards sand-filled places' can give to that, all us bleeding heart liberals can give to universal health care and national parks, and so on.
Wonder how much would be raised for 'corporate incentives and subsidies' considering Americans now pay an average of $36 towards the food stamp program and over $6,000 towards corporate subsidies. Per year. Every single one of us. See?
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/19844-food-stamps-are-affordable-corporate-welfare-is-not
Fine. I did end up bringing an article in here.
And all this time you thought the bad guys taking all YOUR hard earned dollars were those lazy-ass poor people. Oops.
The point is, WE should be deciding where our tax money goes. And obviously, our elected representatives just up and lose their damn minds once they hit the Beltway.
This could fix that. And my guess is that at the end of the day, the military and corporations would have a lot smaller budget than they do now- and what a shame THAT would be...
PS- Day before yesterday Alec and I ate lunch at a table outside What About Kabob's (a gyro place) and I had to take off my sweater because it was sunny and 71 in January. It was 21 last night. Fifty degree drop in 24 hours. The only saving grace is that it'll come up again just as quickly. Here in Texas winter lasts about a month or so...but just a few days at a time.
photo
photo by Sheri Dixon
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Thursday, January 8, 2015
Friday, April 13, 2012
Why the Flat Tax Falls Flat
I thought we'd be done having to deal with this once Herman 9-9-9 Cain dropped out of the race after it was found out that he was really referring to how many women he was messing around with, how many times, and what level of Dante's Hell he was aspiring to.
"The flat tax is the most fair of all- if you make $100 you pay 10%. If you make $1,000,000,000 you pay 10%. Across the board- fair. AND it would eliminate the IRS completely- think how much money THAT would save!"
*Cheers from the crowd*
Not so fast.
If all anyone had to worry about was income and being taxed, yes. A flat tax is fair. But it totally ignores the messy, chaotic stuff of what it takes to exist in this human world.
Things like...rent and food and wheels and utilities and clothing and whatnot.
The flat tax does not take into consideration that even if a poor person lives very frugally and a rich person very extravagantly, you will be hard-pressed to prove that the percentage of a person's income that they spend on living is the same for a poor person than a rich person. Very. Hard. Pressed.
Hey! It's first thing in the morning and I've got like 10 minutes to do this and I haven't had coffee- LETS DO MATH!!!
Lets use for fun a person making minimum wage- $15,600 per year at 40 hours a week if they don't take any time off. Gross. (by both definitions of the word), and a person making $500,000 per year. Both are taxed at 10% to be fair, and that leaves person MW (minimum wage) with $14,040 to live on and person HM (half a mil) with $450,000.
We'll use imaginary numbers here, assuming MW will live frugally and HM will be a little more extravagant.
monthly expense/ Minimum Wage/ Half a Mil
rent/ $500/ $5,000
food/ $400/ $4,000
wheels/ $200/ $2,000
entertainment/ $100/ $1,000
clothing/ $100/ $1,000
vacation/ $LOL/ $5,000
utilities/ $500/ $5,000
insurances/ $500/ $5,000
TOTALS PER MONTH/ $2,300/ $28,000
TOTALS PER YEAR/ $27,600/ $336,000
NET LEFT TO SAVE
FOR RETIREMENT/ -$13,560/ $114,000
See? Fair as the day is long.
And the above numbers don't even reflect the much higher interest rates MW will be paying IF he/she can even get financed at all.
If your core beliefs are that ANYONE ANYWHERE can work hard and get good grades and (get a big damn loan and) go to college and end up being HM instead of MW you are being very very simple-minded and unrealistic, probably one reason you love the Flat Tax and think it's fair in the first place.
Because life isn't fair.
But it's our duty as humans to make it at least less awful for those who ARE working hard and ARE doing their best and still end up in the financial crapper.
One thing us bleeding heart liberals are always being accused of is forging ahead without thinking about the real monetary cost of the "touchy feely soft-hearted things" we wanna provide for people- those pie in the sky luxuries like health care, and living wages, and food.
We're accused of not looking at the numbers and thinking clearly and rationally.
Well, look at the above numbers and tell me the Flat Tax is still fair.
*PS- adding in tax credits and exemptions for Minimum Wage sort of takes the wind out of both the "Flat" and the "Simple" sails, so don't even go there. That would mean you're actually NOT for a Flat Tax, after all.
"The flat tax is the most fair of all- if you make $100 you pay 10%. If you make $1,000,000,000 you pay 10%. Across the board- fair. AND it would eliminate the IRS completely- think how much money THAT would save!"
*Cheers from the crowd*
Not so fast.
If all anyone had to worry about was income and being taxed, yes. A flat tax is fair. But it totally ignores the messy, chaotic stuff of what it takes to exist in this human world.
Things like...rent and food and wheels and utilities and clothing and whatnot.
The flat tax does not take into consideration that even if a poor person lives very frugally and a rich person very extravagantly, you will be hard-pressed to prove that the percentage of a person's income that they spend on living is the same for a poor person than a rich person. Very. Hard. Pressed.
Hey! It's first thing in the morning and I've got like 10 minutes to do this and I haven't had coffee- LETS DO MATH!!!
Lets use for fun a person making minimum wage- $15,600 per year at 40 hours a week if they don't take any time off. Gross. (by both definitions of the word), and a person making $500,000 per year. Both are taxed at 10% to be fair, and that leaves person MW (minimum wage) with $14,040 to live on and person HM (half a mil) with $450,000.
We'll use imaginary numbers here, assuming MW will live frugally and HM will be a little more extravagant.
monthly expense/ Minimum Wage/ Half a Mil
rent/ $500/ $5,000
food/ $400/ $4,000
wheels/ $200/ $2,000
entertainment/ $100/ $1,000
clothing/ $100/ $1,000
vacation/ $LOL/ $5,000
utilities/ $500/ $5,000
insurances/ $500/ $5,000
TOTALS PER MONTH/ $2,300/ $28,000
TOTALS PER YEAR/ $27,600/ $336,000
NET LEFT TO SAVE
FOR RETIREMENT/ -$13,560/ $114,000
See? Fair as the day is long.
And the above numbers don't even reflect the much higher interest rates MW will be paying IF he/she can even get financed at all.
If your core beliefs are that ANYONE ANYWHERE can work hard and get good grades and (get a big damn loan and) go to college and end up being HM instead of MW you are being very very simple-minded and unrealistic, probably one reason you love the Flat Tax and think it's fair in the first place.
Because life isn't fair.
But it's our duty as humans to make it at least less awful for those who ARE working hard and ARE doing their best and still end up in the financial crapper.
One thing us bleeding heart liberals are always being accused of is forging ahead without thinking about the real monetary cost of the "touchy feely soft-hearted things" we wanna provide for people- those pie in the sky luxuries like health care, and living wages, and food.
We're accused of not looking at the numbers and thinking clearly and rationally.
Well, look at the above numbers and tell me the Flat Tax is still fair.
*PS- adding in tax credits and exemptions for Minimum Wage sort of takes the wind out of both the "Flat" and the "Simple" sails, so don't even go there. That would mean you're actually NOT for a Flat Tax, after all.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Labels are for Clothing, Not People
OK. Labels are sometimes handy on food.
Also Christmas gifts, unless you're marginally clever like me and just use a different paper for each person's gifts. I say "marginally" because then I forgot who got what paper.
But I digress.
Yanno what pisses me off?
Fine. The list is fucking endless.
How about "Yanno what pisses me off TODAY?"
*Shorter list*
The word games. The political word games and labels- especially when it comes to describing how much money someone has.
I guess first we need to define "wealthy" or "rich" or "upper class" or to shape it to the current discussions where the labeling in question is rampant..."the 1%".
Because just like "average weight", we all believe with our whole hearts that we are in that category no matter how hysterically reality howls at that notion.
If you're reading this, you're not the 1%.
If you ever have to check your bank balance before making a purchase, you're not the 1%.
If you make $100,000 a year, sorry.
If you make $250,000 a year, no dice.
If you make $1,000,000 a year please step to the back of the line and let the rich people go first.
If the question, "I wonder if I'm in the 1%?" ever crosses your mind, you're not.
See? They're a tiny little sparkly star at the top of the Tree of America, and though you may sparkle and glitter and even be NEAR the tippy top, IT'S NOT YOU. IT'LL NEVER BE YOU UNLESS YOU END UP HOLDING A GIANT CHECK FROM THE LOTTO THAT READS MORE THAN A BILLION DOLLARS (and that's never gonna happen, either. Sorry.)
Now that we've got that out of the way, perhaps this labeling thing will become more obvious and nefarious.
Because here's how it goes, over and over again, ad nauseum-
"Why should the people who've worked hard for their money* have to pay more in taxes to support the lazy assholes** who just don't want to work and sit around eating steaks, drinking beer and watching their big screen tv's. I wish *I* had a big screen TV..."
*aka the maligned, overworked and innocent 1%
**aka the worthless, spoiled unwashed mob of the 99%
Seems right, seems fair and seems pretty cut and dried, don't it?
Except it's complete and utter bullshit.
This sentence, nay Clarion Call of the Conservative Right is wrong in so many directions it's like trying to figure out where the end of a ball of rubber bands is.
It presumes that ALL insanely rich people work for their money. Not inherited it, not sit in on board meetings to yawn while brokers report on gains, losses, loopholes and write-offs. It presumes that the very rich even WANT what Walmart sells as a "big screen TV".
I'm not saying that there aren't very nice people in the 1%- people who give huge sums of money to charities and good works. I'm not saying that the result is less wonderful because it's not a sacrifice for them to donate like it is for most of us.
But it's not a sacrifice. Because the money is just there...always there for them...and they are NOT getting up with the alarm to put in a 9-2-5 to collect a paycheck. They are not working 2 full time jobs because one barely covers the house payment and the car payment and the insurances and utilities and the other one pays for luxuries like...food and medicine.
It presumes that ALL people who are on some sort of government assistance are lazy and just need to "take a shower and get a job" (I think Newt said that- what's his job again? Being a rich bastard and failing to become President?)
So, what? I've got 5 people in my family and 4 receive government checks every month-
Edna gets social security because she's 92.
Joe gets social security and a VA check because he's 69 and a veteran.
Ward gets a disability check because cancer and heart disease have both eaten away at him viciously.
Alec gets a social security check because he's under 18 and Ward's son.
Which of the above are lazy unshowered assholes?
OH NO NO NO- we're not talking about THOSE people- the old, truly infirm, veterans, children...those people are A-OK and we're HAPPY to help them.
We're talking about, yanno- those welfare mamas and crackheads.
The evil word ***WELFARE***
Just as scary as that evil word ***OBAMACARE***
But there is no such thing as Obamacare. The big unwieldly law that was passed is the ACA. Affordable Care Act. How many people know that? How many people know that it's working, or that it not only isn't on a collision course to bankrupt the nation but will come in costing LESS than anticipated?
That's what I thought.
Well, guess what, Kids?
There's no such thing as Welfare.
There are multiple programs- from unemployment to aid for single parents to housing programs, to food stamps, to medicaid and included in with all of that is social security, medicare, disability, Veteran's Benefits.
But you can't saunter into a government office flashing yer gold teeth and trailing a dozen illegitimate kids and drawl, "I wanna sign me up for some of that sweet easy WELFARE and live off of the rich folks".
So here's the deal.
When you hear
"Why should the people who've worked hard for their money* have to pay more in taxes to support the lazy assholes** who just don't want to work and sit around eating steaks, drinking beer and watching their big screen tv's. I wish *I* had a big screen TV..."
now you know that it's not saying what you thought it does.
What it's really saying is
The 1% truly obscenely rich people who can afford to buy a herd of lawyers and accountants to cook their books till no taxes come out want more. They want more. And they only have 2 places to get it-
from the shrinking, worried, frustrated dregs of what used to be America's middle class (inserting that THAT is where most of us fall- THAT'S YOU AND ME AND ALMOST EVERYONE WE KNOW)by taxing them more and themselves even less.
They can do this by whimpering about how HIGH their tax rate is (while neglecting to mention that they don't ever PAY anything near their tax rate) and by promising that if we lower their rates even more, they can create more jobs.
This is bullshit. It's always been bullshit and it always will be. Trickle down has never, ever, ever, EVER worked.
The other place to squeeze money out of the system is to take it from the poor people- the women, children, sick people, veterans and old people. Set the middle class against those people and demand that they get LESS...that way there's more for THEM in the form of subsidies and stimuli and grants and stuff.
The main benefit, of course, is making the middle class (us, remember) think
a) someday we may be rich (because this is America) and we wouldn't want everyone else to be mean to us, either and
b) the poor people are after our shit.
Neither is, of course, true.
Synopsis of the rant-
Rich used in this context does not = anyone we know, anyone we've met or anyone we'll ever see in real life
We will never = rich by the above definition
But more importantly-
Rich does not automatically = HARD WORKING
Poor does not automatically = LAZY
Moral of the story is WE need to stop falling for the propaganda and the cliches and the catchy scary crap pounded into our heads till our knees jerk.
Do we as the middle class have a moral obligation to lend aid to those of a different class?
Of course we do.
We need to help the poor without judging, feed the hungry without hesitation, house the homeless without stipulation, offer good quality birth-death medical care for all citizens regardless of ability to pay- all that socialist commie tree-hugging crap a guy named Jesus recommended and that got him nailed to a cross by the 1% of his time.
Then we can band together, kick ass on the money changers, demand they actually render unto Caesar to keep this nation running smoothly FOR THE PEOPLE and carry on the way the forefathers intended it to go.
Happy Easter, ya'll.
Also Christmas gifts, unless you're marginally clever like me and just use a different paper for each person's gifts. I say "marginally" because then I forgot who got what paper.
But I digress.
Yanno what pisses me off?
Fine. The list is fucking endless.
How about "Yanno what pisses me off TODAY?"
*Shorter list*
The word games. The political word games and labels- especially when it comes to describing how much money someone has.
I guess first we need to define "wealthy" or "rich" or "upper class" or to shape it to the current discussions where the labeling in question is rampant..."the 1%".
Because just like "average weight", we all believe with our whole hearts that we are in that category no matter how hysterically reality howls at that notion.
If you're reading this, you're not the 1%.
If you ever have to check your bank balance before making a purchase, you're not the 1%.
If you make $100,000 a year, sorry.
If you make $250,000 a year, no dice.
If you make $1,000,000 a year please step to the back of the line and let the rich people go first.
If the question, "I wonder if I'm in the 1%?" ever crosses your mind, you're not.
See? They're a tiny little sparkly star at the top of the Tree of America, and though you may sparkle and glitter and even be NEAR the tippy top, IT'S NOT YOU. IT'LL NEVER BE YOU UNLESS YOU END UP HOLDING A GIANT CHECK FROM THE LOTTO THAT READS MORE THAN A BILLION DOLLARS (and that's never gonna happen, either. Sorry.)
Now that we've got that out of the way, perhaps this labeling thing will become more obvious and nefarious.
Because here's how it goes, over and over again, ad nauseum-
"Why should the people who've worked hard for their money* have to pay more in taxes to support the lazy assholes** who just don't want to work and sit around eating steaks, drinking beer and watching their big screen tv's. I wish *I* had a big screen TV..."
*aka the maligned, overworked and innocent 1%
**aka the worthless, spoiled unwashed mob of the 99%
Seems right, seems fair and seems pretty cut and dried, don't it?
Except it's complete and utter bullshit.
This sentence, nay Clarion Call of the Conservative Right is wrong in so many directions it's like trying to figure out where the end of a ball of rubber bands is.
It presumes that ALL insanely rich people work for their money. Not inherited it, not sit in on board meetings to yawn while brokers report on gains, losses, loopholes and write-offs. It presumes that the very rich even WANT what Walmart sells as a "big screen TV".
I'm not saying that there aren't very nice people in the 1%- people who give huge sums of money to charities and good works. I'm not saying that the result is less wonderful because it's not a sacrifice for them to donate like it is for most of us.
But it's not a sacrifice. Because the money is just there...always there for them...and they are NOT getting up with the alarm to put in a 9-2-5 to collect a paycheck. They are not working 2 full time jobs because one barely covers the house payment and the car payment and the insurances and utilities and the other one pays for luxuries like...food and medicine.
It presumes that ALL people who are on some sort of government assistance are lazy and just need to "take a shower and get a job" (I think Newt said that- what's his job again? Being a rich bastard and failing to become President?)
So, what? I've got 5 people in my family and 4 receive government checks every month-
Edna gets social security because she's 92.
Joe gets social security and a VA check because he's 69 and a veteran.
Ward gets a disability check because cancer and heart disease have both eaten away at him viciously.
Alec gets a social security check because he's under 18 and Ward's son.
Which of the above are lazy unshowered assholes?
OH NO NO NO- we're not talking about THOSE people- the old, truly infirm, veterans, children...those people are A-OK and we're HAPPY to help them.
We're talking about, yanno- those welfare mamas and crackheads.
The evil word ***WELFARE***
Just as scary as that evil word ***OBAMACARE***
But there is no such thing as Obamacare. The big unwieldly law that was passed is the ACA. Affordable Care Act. How many people know that? How many people know that it's working, or that it not only isn't on a collision course to bankrupt the nation but will come in costing LESS than anticipated?
That's what I thought.
Well, guess what, Kids?
There's no such thing as Welfare.
There are multiple programs- from unemployment to aid for single parents to housing programs, to food stamps, to medicaid and included in with all of that is social security, medicare, disability, Veteran's Benefits.
But you can't saunter into a government office flashing yer gold teeth and trailing a dozen illegitimate kids and drawl, "I wanna sign me up for some of that sweet easy WELFARE and live off of the rich folks".
So here's the deal.
When you hear
"Why should the people who've worked hard for their money* have to pay more in taxes to support the lazy assholes** who just don't want to work and sit around eating steaks, drinking beer and watching their big screen tv's. I wish *I* had a big screen TV..."
now you know that it's not saying what you thought it does.
What it's really saying is
The 1% truly obscenely rich people who can afford to buy a herd of lawyers and accountants to cook their books till no taxes come out want more. They want more. And they only have 2 places to get it-
from the shrinking, worried, frustrated dregs of what used to be America's middle class (inserting that THAT is where most of us fall- THAT'S YOU AND ME AND ALMOST EVERYONE WE KNOW)by taxing them more and themselves even less.
They can do this by whimpering about how HIGH their tax rate is (while neglecting to mention that they don't ever PAY anything near their tax rate) and by promising that if we lower their rates even more, they can create more jobs.
This is bullshit. It's always been bullshit and it always will be. Trickle down has never, ever, ever, EVER worked.
The other place to squeeze money out of the system is to take it from the poor people- the women, children, sick people, veterans and old people. Set the middle class against those people and demand that they get LESS...that way there's more for THEM in the form of subsidies and stimuli and grants and stuff.
The main benefit, of course, is making the middle class (us, remember) think
a) someday we may be rich (because this is America) and we wouldn't want everyone else to be mean to us, either and
b) the poor people are after our shit.
Neither is, of course, true.
Synopsis of the rant-
Rich used in this context does not = anyone we know, anyone we've met or anyone we'll ever see in real life
We will never = rich by the above definition
But more importantly-
Rich does not automatically = HARD WORKING
Poor does not automatically = LAZY
Moral of the story is WE need to stop falling for the propaganda and the cliches and the catchy scary crap pounded into our heads till our knees jerk.
Do we as the middle class have a moral obligation to lend aid to those of a different class?
Of course we do.
We need to help the poor without judging, feed the hungry without hesitation, house the homeless without stipulation, offer good quality birth-death medical care for all citizens regardless of ability to pay- all that socialist commie tree-hugging crap a guy named Jesus recommended and that got him nailed to a cross by the 1% of his time.
Then we can band together, kick ass on the money changers, demand they actually render unto Caesar to keep this nation running smoothly FOR THE PEOPLE and carry on the way the forefathers intended it to go.
Happy Easter, ya'll.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Don't Forget Your Milk Money
Today, bright and early, a whole lotta kids were poked and prodded out of bed, force fed cheerios or poptarts, swaddled in new and uncomfortable clothing and summarily delivered into the maws of the educational system.
We saw it coming from the frenzy at Walmart and Office Depot for pencils and paper and the right kinds of binders to Academy where pint sized quarterbacks (quarter-pints?) stood solidly and proudly while being fitted for all that plastic armor football players need to wear to keep from killing each other in the name of sportsmanship.
All this stuff costs a lot of money. Anyone with kids knows starting about July, the places that sell school supplies all have kiosks of lists- list after list of what parents need to buy to prepare their children for the school year.
So this morning I had another one of my (increasingly and disturbingly frequent) conversations with Ward that starts out "Remember when we were kids?"
"Remember when we were kids and there was the School Store? You lined up on the first day of school with the rest of the class and stood in line. The old lady (who was probably 30) served you from behind the dutch door. All your school supplies- pencils, erasers, crayons, ruler, notebooks- could be had for like $5.00 and we all got the same thing."
Once we got old enough for "gym suits" the gym teacher ordered them and they cost like $20.
None of this school supplies costing several hundred dollars crap.
Ya, I know that was a million years ago and considering the cost of living and all, that $25 my parents spent on school supplies...STILL doesn't = several hundred dollars so shut the hell up.
How hard is it for families to cough up that kind of money, especially in this economy?
This hard- the same day Ricky and his minions (about 30,000 of them) were having their big ol' hootinanny for god inside the air-conditioned Astrodome, the convention center about 10 minutes away was overrun by more than 100,000 people standing in line outside in the heat for...free school supplies, and they had to turn quite a few over that 100,000 mark away. By 10am.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/08/290973/prayer-rally-school-supplies/
Luckily, we don't have to worry about that. We home school.
Our son was still abed this morning when the school bus rumbled across the wooden bridges at the road. In fact, I'm pretty sure he's never even SEEN the school bus rumble across the wooden bridges at the road.
Sure we have to buy his curriculum and go on field trips and get him involved in sports and stuff, but we work our own hours, are free to vacation when we wish, and don't have to buy any school-appropriate clothing. We feel fortunate to get any clothing at all on the Feral Boy of Dedmon's Branch.
We also pay school taxes.
Happily.
Back when I was young (this won't be so bad- I promise) I'd hear my grandmother complain that they still had to pay school taxes even though there were no kids at home anymore. She said it wasn't fair to them and grandpa quietly but firmly interjected (the one and only time he ever did) that they had US- between my mom and my aunt there were 5 grandchildren. They were paying taxes for OUR schools. And she'd quit bitching about it. Till next time.
We don't have grandkids and all our nieces and nephews are out of the public school system, but we still pay our school tax. We have friends who say "You don't use the school system, doesn't it make you angry to pay the taxes for it?"
No. No it doesn't.
Because it matters. It matters that children whose parents can't (or don't want to) home school them have a safe place to be during the day. It matters that the schools are staffed with caring competent teachers who have enough supplies to do their jobs.
It matters very much that Rick Perry says there should be no such thing as public schools regulated nationally. That he's cut billions of dollars for schools and teachers in an apparent attempt to wrest the Trophy of Absolute Ignorance from Mississippi once and for all and proudly display it in his cabinet right next to the ones for "Most Teen Pregnancies" and "Highest number of minimum wage jobs" and right under the spotlight glowing on "Largest percentage of citizens without health insurance".
See, just like a health care tax would supply free care to everyone in the country via Universal Single Payer coverage- there would be no need for individual insurance with its accompanying premiums, but you could certainly buy it if you wanted to (like in Canada).
Paying school tax so all children can go to school is the right thing to do. Making truly good health care available FREE to citizens is the right thing to do.
At least I think so. Guess I'm just a terrible American.
We saw it coming from the frenzy at Walmart and Office Depot for pencils and paper and the right kinds of binders to Academy where pint sized quarterbacks (quarter-pints?) stood solidly and proudly while being fitted for all that plastic armor football players need to wear to keep from killing each other in the name of sportsmanship.
All this stuff costs a lot of money. Anyone with kids knows starting about July, the places that sell school supplies all have kiosks of lists- list after list of what parents need to buy to prepare their children for the school year.
So this morning I had another one of my (increasingly and disturbingly frequent) conversations with Ward that starts out "Remember when we were kids?"
"Remember when we were kids and there was the School Store? You lined up on the first day of school with the rest of the class and stood in line. The old lady (who was probably 30) served you from behind the dutch door. All your school supplies- pencils, erasers, crayons, ruler, notebooks- could be had for like $5.00 and we all got the same thing."
Once we got old enough for "gym suits" the gym teacher ordered them and they cost like $20.
None of this school supplies costing several hundred dollars crap.
Ya, I know that was a million years ago and considering the cost of living and all, that $25 my parents spent on school supplies...STILL doesn't = several hundred dollars so shut the hell up.
How hard is it for families to cough up that kind of money, especially in this economy?
This hard- the same day Ricky and his minions (about 30,000 of them) were having their big ol' hootinanny for god inside the air-conditioned Astrodome, the convention center about 10 minutes away was overrun by more than 100,000 people standing in line outside in the heat for...free school supplies, and they had to turn quite a few over that 100,000 mark away. By 10am.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/08/290973/prayer-rally-school-supplies/
Luckily, we don't have to worry about that. We home school.
Our son was still abed this morning when the school bus rumbled across the wooden bridges at the road. In fact, I'm pretty sure he's never even SEEN the school bus rumble across the wooden bridges at the road.
Sure we have to buy his curriculum and go on field trips and get him involved in sports and stuff, but we work our own hours, are free to vacation when we wish, and don't have to buy any school-appropriate clothing. We feel fortunate to get any clothing at all on the Feral Boy of Dedmon's Branch.
We also pay school taxes.
Happily.
Back when I was young (this won't be so bad- I promise) I'd hear my grandmother complain that they still had to pay school taxes even though there were no kids at home anymore. She said it wasn't fair to them and grandpa quietly but firmly interjected (the one and only time he ever did) that they had US- between my mom and my aunt there were 5 grandchildren. They were paying taxes for OUR schools. And she'd quit bitching about it. Till next time.
We don't have grandkids and all our nieces and nephews are out of the public school system, but we still pay our school tax. We have friends who say "You don't use the school system, doesn't it make you angry to pay the taxes for it?"
No. No it doesn't.
Because it matters. It matters that children whose parents can't (or don't want to) home school them have a safe place to be during the day. It matters that the schools are staffed with caring competent teachers who have enough supplies to do their jobs.
It matters very much that Rick Perry says there should be no such thing as public schools regulated nationally. That he's cut billions of dollars for schools and teachers in an apparent attempt to wrest the Trophy of Absolute Ignorance from Mississippi once and for all and proudly display it in his cabinet right next to the ones for "Most Teen Pregnancies" and "Highest number of minimum wage jobs" and right under the spotlight glowing on "Largest percentage of citizens without health insurance".
See, just like a health care tax would supply free care to everyone in the country via Universal Single Payer coverage- there would be no need for individual insurance with its accompanying premiums, but you could certainly buy it if you wanted to (like in Canada).
Paying school tax so all children can go to school is the right thing to do. Making truly good health care available FREE to citizens is the right thing to do.
At least I think so. Guess I'm just a terrible American.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)