Butts for Books: Philly's $2 tax hike to save 1,000 teaching jobs

I suppose they could always choose not to smoke and gamble?

 

How about proposing a progressive tax of any kind, and making the argument that its a worthy investment to spend the money raised to pay the salaries and benefits of teachers and administrators?

Wouldn't that be a better, more open way of doing business?

Fuck. I think some people here would support a poll tax if the money raised was spent on teachers.

 

Keep in mind this was signed by a Governor - a limped-dicked asshole of a Governor - who pledged no new taxes when he took office in 2010. And he also raised the gasoline tax this year. Guess he meant no new taxes on people who matter to HIM...like his precious shale industry.

 

Yeah, who cares about the 2 to 3 million people employed in the tobacco industry?

And, who cares about the many tens of millions of other people who benefit from tobacco taxes?

 

Want to try that sentence again? I get what you were trying to say, but you didn't say it.

It is not just a tax on the poor. That is misleading on your part. I'd also like to hear you explain how it would be a bad thing if the poor, or any segment of the population, smoked less. I don't mean bad for business. I mean bad for the individuals.

As to your other argument, those government folks actually thinking teachers should be paid to educate our children. Why do you hate teachers so much, YF?

 

I hate this form of justification for the legalization of casino gambling. Why should my ability to indulge in a harmless form of entertainment be conditional on the size of the state's cut?

 

Actually though, when you think of it, it's not out of control.

I saw an internet meme in which the complaint was that teachers were glorified babysitters. But the meme calculated how much they should be getting paid.

So say an elementary teacher has 25 kids in the class. Since babysitters get paid, figure $4 an hour,per kid. Which may be on the low end of a rate, since they don't deserve more. And figure they work 6 hours a day, since, after all, that's all they do. So that's $100 an hour, for six hours, which is $600 a day. For five days, that's $3,000 a week. Multiply that by 40 weeks, and it's $120,000 per year in compensation that they deserve.

But hey, they earn far more than the public they serve.

 

Trying to reality on a meme.

 

You know, if you stick a book under your girl's fanny, you can give her an extra inch.

 

One day the public will catch on that they are the ones underpaid, not the other way around.

 

Yeah. If it's such a terrific and harmless form of entertainment, then I'm not sure why the government limits the number of licenses, and demands such a large cut for themselves.

Why shouldn't every shit town be able to prosper from casino gambling?

The Times had a recent article about the rundown towns in New York State that are begging for casinos:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/15/nyregion/in-pursuit-of-casinos-its-worst-foot-forward.html

They're all arguing that they're the worst off, and as such, deserve the economic boon that comes with casino gambling.

And, all of these downtrodden towns are worried about a town closer to NYC getting a license, which would mean nobody would come to their craptastic casino development.

 

I can assure you that the reason states limit the number of licenses is not to protect gamblers from themselves.