On 04/25/2015 07:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:



Typically some people do wind up paying more taxes
because all properties don't always appreciate proportionally.
Here at the shore people with waterfront properties have
been complaining because when revaluation was done, there
properties went up substantially more than other inland
properties in other neighborhoods. But that isn't the govt's
fault, it just reflects the economic reality. So, they
wind up paying more, some other folks wind up paying less.
For everyone to be paying higher, it would require that
your local govt decided to jump their total spending up.
Again, that would be the local govt, not Walker.




Without complaining, the situation eventually rectified itself.
The free market system though perhaps not perfect is the best we have.

I've found through experience that any time I've ever complained about
anything the situation only got worse.



The one exception is that I can say anything I like on Usenet and
absolutely nothing happens.

In article , philo
wrote:


However, when over $100 million is going to be cut, I don't predict that
the quality of education is going to get better as a result.

Since it is established that the bureaucracy associated with colleges
has grown at a faster rate than either the increase in students or the
increase in faculty, I am not as sure as you are.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On 4/25/2015 8:04 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Stormin Mormon wrote:


Is there any evidence that funding causes better
education? I don't, but my gut sense is that the
kids in a one room school house on the prarie got
better learning than a highly funded school now
days. Especially since socialism and common core
are presently being taught.
-

There are a bunch of studies showing an inverse relationship, at least
up to a point. For example some of the Western states (Idaho is one)
that have low cost/student support for education yet have very high
graduation rates, post secondary rates, and average SAT?ACT scores.

I would think that strong families and hard work
mean more than dollars per student. As such, the
scream about Scott Walker cutting funding isn't
really relevant to the children.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 9:03:13 AM UTC-4, philo wrote:
On 04/25/2015 07:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:



Typically some people do wind up paying more taxes
because all properties don't always appreciate proportionally.
Here at the shore people with waterfront properties have
been complaining because when revaluation was done, there
properties went up substantially more than other inland
properties in other neighborhoods. But that isn't the govt's
fault, it just reflects the economic reality. So, they
wind up paying more, some other folks wind up paying less.
For everyone to be paying higher, it would require that
your local govt decided to jump their total spending up.
Again, that would be the local govt, not Walker.




Without complaining, the situation eventually rectified itself.
The free market system though perhaps not perfect is the best we have.

I've found through experience that any time I've ever complained about
anything the situation only got worse.



That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.

On 04/25/2015 08:34 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , philo
wrote:


However, when over $100 million is going to be cut, I don't predict that
the quality of education is going to get better as a result.

Since it is established that the bureaucracy associated with colleges
has grown at a faster rate than either the increase in students or the
increase in faculty, I am not as sure as you are.




I am. I graduated from UWM in 1974 and still keep in close touch as to
what it happening. They are gutting the place, I assure you.

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 17:19:27 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

Robert Green posted for all of us...


From:

http://www.google.com/search?q=deals...+for+taxpayers


I think there is too much emphasis on sports. It is almost cult-like or a
religion. Too late now. Look at sports pages vs honor rolls in newspapers.
Kid scores a point big ta-do but kid that wins a science fair is on page 5
and proceeds to get mocked.


How un-American of you! Remember, the football players are usually
well educated college graduates and really deserve $15million a year
for all the good they do for the world.

I have not bought a pro sports ticket in the past 50 years. Even if
you gave me tickets, I don't care to attend though I have a few times
many years ago.

On 04/25/2015 09:11 AM, trader_4 wrote:



Without complaining, the situation eventually rectified itself.
The free market system though perhaps not perfect is the best we have.

I've found through experience that any time I've ever complained about
anything the situation only got worse.



That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.




If I complain about taxes going up when the Gov. said he's be working to
cut them, that's because I'm a Democrat.

It's nice to know that Republicans don't complain about such things.




Like I said before , my wife and I do not vote 100% Democratically. It's
that we have more of a tendency to do so.

On Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 10:19:01 AM UTC-4, philo wrote:
On 04/25/2015 09:11 AM, trader_4 wrote:



Without complaining, the situation eventually rectified itself.
The free market system though perhaps not perfect is the best we have.

I've found through experience that any time I've ever complained about
anything the situation only got worse.



That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.




If I complain about taxes going up when the Gov. said he's be working to
cut them, that's because I'm a Democrat.

It's nice to know that Republicans don't complain about such things.




Like I said before , my wife and I do not vote 100% Democratically. It's
that we have more of a tendency to do so.

The fact that the best example of bipartisanship you gave us
was that your wife voted for Reagan once, the first time he
was elected, kind of defines where you are on the spectrum....

On 04/25/2015 09:18 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
d.


How un-American of you! Remember, the football players are usually
well educated college graduates and really deserve $15million a year
for all the good they do for the world.

I have not bought a pro sports ticket in the past 50 years. Even if
you gave me tickets, I don't care to attend though I have a few times
many years ago.




I grew up in Green Bay back in the 1950's

As soon as Vince Lombardi comes back I'll be going to football games

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 16:02:32 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/24/2015 02:56 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 13:07:10 -0500, philo wrote:

I can find dozens of similar links but was unable to find any stating
that his cuts to education are a good thing.

You have to check another source. Right?

Is it cheaper to pay a teacher that can teach? Pay money to teachers
for being affirmative action puppets? The "man" owes me. Which is
best in your idea.




Like I said, Walker is gutting the educational system. period


The _only_ thing Walker is doing is moving money around. You now have
a surplus.

It's bad enough as it is and if he was doing something to fix it...that
would be great...even if heads need to roll.


I might be seeing your "feelings". Sounds like Walker doesn't do
things as fast as you wish, he dances to his own drummer.


What he's doing however is just plain gutting it. Basically saying:


"We don't need no education."


Anyway he cannot fool the idiots too much longer and is not going to
become our next president. Even the Koch brothers have jettisoned him.

An "idiot" here often claims the TEA party is dead, too.

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 07:11:27 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:


That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are
ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so." Ronald Reagan
--
Liberals are like Chameleons. They keep changing colors. -- © Oren

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 04:58:57 -0500, philo wrote:

Let me know how that turns out. I like Walker but the gubbermint has an
insatiable appetite for money.




If you actually lived in Wis you'd think differently about him...

his popularity has dropped quite a bit.

If you didn't live in WI, you might see his rise in national name
recognition.

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 13:07:10 -0500, philo wrote:

I'm very sorry that you are a Democrat. Sad to hear that. This could
turn serious really fast.


My wife and I are both Democrats but that does not mean we 100% vote
that way...I said that because we /mostly/ vote that way. She did vote
to Reagen the first time.


You mean Reagan - never saw a Reagen in the ballot.

Democracy is two dogs fighting over each end of a bone.

Also: I do not consider myself a liberal either, I think too many people
hearing that I am a Democrat automatically assume me to be a liberal...I
am not.

No? Then vote for a government of the people, an elected official that
represents the people and not their own personal agenda.

On 04/25/2015 10:28 AM, trader_4 wrote:



If I complain about taxes going up when the Gov. said he's be working to
cut them, that's because I'm a Democrat.

It's nice to know that Republicans don't complain about such things.




Like I said before , my wife and I do not vote 100% Democratically. It's
that we have more of a tendency to do so.

The fact that the best example of bipartisanship you gave us
was that your wife voted for Reagan once, the first time he
was elected, kind of defines where you are on the spectrum....



He was pretty bad and she never made that mistake again.

On 04/25/2015 12:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 07:11:27 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:


That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are
ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so." Ronald Reagan





He was not a particularly bright president, he just borrowed a lot of money.

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 16:29:59 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/25/2015 12:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 07:11:27 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:


That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are
ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so." Ronald Reagan


He was not a particularly bright president, he just borrowed a lot of money.

Well, the good news is that Reagan moved from Democrat to Republican.
He had an epiphany. Abe Lincoln did the same and changed parties. They
'got their minds right'.

The GOP is the party of the Emancipation Proclamation!

Reagan wasn't bright? Hornswoggle!

On 04/25/2015 04:42 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 16:29:59 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/25/2015 12:36 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 07:11:27 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:


That's probably because you're a Democrat and the solutions
that you want for the things you're complaining about are
all wrong.

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are
ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so." Ronald Reagan


He was not a particularly bright president, he just borrowed a lot of money.

Well, the good news is that Reagan moved from Democrat to Republican.
He had an epiphany. Abe Lincoln did the same and changed parties. They
'got their minds right'.

The GOP is the party of the Emancipation Proclamation!

Reagan wasn't bright? Hornswoggle!




He was not bright but he was a good speaker...
I could not bring myself to dislike him even after Iran-Contra.

Had Nixon done the same thing I would have hated them.


Had Clinton been in office, he probably just would have had the
Ayatollah blow him.

On 04/25/2015 01:32 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 04:58:57 -0500, philo wrote:

Let me know how that turns out. I like Walker but the gubbermint has an
insatiable appetite for money.




If you actually lived in Wis you'd think differently about him...

his popularity has dropped quite a bit.

If you didn't live in WI, you might see his rise in national name
recognition.



I follow the national news and he's getting his 15 minute of fame, yep
indeed.

On 04/25/2015 01:48 PM, Oren wrote:
t.

No? Then vote for a government of the people, an elected official that
represents the people and not their own personal agenda.




I don't think any such person existed since Eisenhower.

On 04/25/2015 11:41 AM, Oren wrote:

I might be seeing your "feelings". Sounds like Walker doesn't do
things as fast as you wish, he dances to his own drummer.


What he's doing however is just plain gutting it. Basically saying:


"We don't need no education."


Anyway he cannot fool the idiots too much longer and is not going to
become our next president. Even the Koch brothers have jettisoned him.

An "idiot" here often claims the TEA party is dead, too.




I ****in' hate tea.

It's coffee for me.

On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 12:39:58 PM UTC-4, philo wrote:
Just got a letter from the city of Milwaukee and I see that the property
taxes on my house are going up yet again. Looks like about 5%.

The Gov. Walker certainly did not keep his campaign promise of lower
taxes...the increase is no better/ no worse than under Democratic
governors. Were the increase going to help maintain the educational
systems within the state I could deal with it.


The news is telling me that funding is being /cut/ for education and a
BILLION dollar sports arena is in the works.


Nothing against sports of course, but the sports arena is to replace one
that was built in 1988 and had a projected life span of 50 years.

The US government needs to be exterminated

On 4/25/2015 8:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:


Rising assessments should not affect the amount of taxes you
pay. If a town needs X dollars to fund it's budget, then
they apply whatever tax rate it takes to get that from the
total assessed value of all the properties. If the value of
the properties is higher, then the tax rate just gets set
lower, so that they raise the same amount. What raises
taxes is uncontrolled spending.

The problem is that most people really don't understand that. I've
heard it so many times, "the properties are being reassessed so my taxes
will go up" People expect it so the politicians accommodate them.

In 49 years of home ownership, taxes have never gone down, but one year
they did not change.

On 4/25/2015 2:48 PM, Oren wrote:


No? Then vote for a government of the people, an elected official that
represents the people and not their own personal agenda.


How do we do that today? Seems like they all have an agenda of their own.

On 04/25/2015 06:25 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 4/25/2015 8:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:


Rising assessments should not affect the amount of taxes you
pay. If a town needs X dollars to fund it's budget, then
they apply whatever tax rate it takes to get that from the
total assessed value of all the properties. If the value of
the properties is higher, then the tax rate just gets set
lower, so that they raise the same amount. What raises
taxes is uncontrolled spending.

The problem is that most people really don't understand that. I've
heard it so many times, "the properties are being reassessed so my taxes
will go up" People expect it so the politicians accommodate them.

In 49 years of home ownership, taxes have never gone down, but one year
they did not change.




Amazingly my taxes actually have gone down after they had been
unrealistically raised. It happened well before Walker came into office
though.

On 04/26/2015 10:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
From stagflation to the longest peace time expansion in history

300K - 400K a month job creation

Unemployment cut in half

Inflation went from double digits, to cut in half

Long term interest rates, mortgage rates, cut in half

Short term interest rates, business borrowing rates, cut more than half

America's standing/respect in the world restored

America's military might restored and respected again

Soviet Union defeated and collapsing, without ever firing a shot

Largest nuclear arms deal in history, elimination of an entire
class of nukes, medium range missles, that substantially reduced
the nuclear arsenals. (And it was done on Reagan's terms, not Russia's)

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

On 04/26/2015 10:04 AM, Oliver Douglas wrote:
On 04/26/2015 10:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
From stagflation to the longest peace time expansion in history

300K -


snip

Soviet Union defeated and collapsing, without ever firing a shot

Largest nuclear arms deal in history, elimination of an entire
class of nukes, medium range missles, that substantially reduced
the nuclear arsenals. (And it was done on Reagan's terms, not Russia's)

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)



In plain language he was "fair".

On 4/25/2015 5:08 PM, philo wrote:

Amazingly my taxes actually have gone down after they had been
unrealistically raised. It happened well before Walker came into office
though.

During the Bush housing bust, those that experienced a drastic reduction
in home value over what they paid, did get property tax reductions if
they applied for a re-assessment. I know my sister-in-law who purchased
a duplex which fell in value by $200K got a reduction. But now the
"value" is up by about $600K so it is reassessed again and the 2%
increase limit (California prop 13) applies from the original assessed
value, not from the reduced assessed value.

The property tax rate in California is actually pretty low in percentage
terms, but the property values are so ridiculously high that the dollar
amounts are very high. A 1786 sq ft, 3/2, 1960's, tract home, that was
about $20K new, sold on my street in 2013 for $1.395 million and will
have property taxes of over $17,500 per year. It needed about $100K in
renovation before the owners could move in and that was better than the
sellers renovating it and raising the price because at least the
renovations did not trigger a reassessment. Today it would sell for
about $1.75 million.

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 19:41:50 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 4/25/2015 2:48 PM, Oren wrote:


No? Then vote for a government of the people, an elected official that
represents the people and not their own personal agenda.


How do we do that today? Seems like they all have an agenda of their own.

Might be a few ways. Only let congress critters meet for four (4)
months bi-annually, lock 'em in chambers and tell them to fight it
out.

Take money out of the big picture and use term limits?
--
....our great nation is under attack by termites...attacking the foundation - Louisiana Senator Elbert Guillory

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 07:14:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Philo is a curious fellow. He claims he's not a dyed in the
wool Democrat, yet he claims Reagan was "pretty bad". I'd like
to know exactly what was so bad?

The only thing I can come up with is that he took away my credit card
interest that was / used to be deductible on federal taxes. Spit :-|

I think the interest under Carter was 28%?
--
"No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up."
-- Lily Tomlin

On 04/26/2015 12:20 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 07:14:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Philo is a curious fellow. He claims he's not a dyed in the
wool Democrat, yet he claims Reagan was "pretty bad". I'd like
to know exactly what was so bad?

The only thing I can come up with is that he took away my credit card
interest that was / used to be deductible on federal taxes. Spit :-|

I think the interest under Carter was 28%?



Under Carter, the interest was the highest I've ever seen. Fortunately
for me I had a GI loan for my house so was paying 10% less than my
co-workers (who were paying 17%)


My current credit card interest is 22% but that's irrelevant as I only
buy thing I can afford and have never paid one cent of interest.


I did buy stock in my credit card company (Visa) and am actually making
more than I spend.


It's a great system and the only ones suffering are those who think they
need to have all the latest and greatest gadgets.

Ross perot warned you idiots but you voted for those other two clowns.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 11:04:53 AM UTC-4, Oliver Douglas wrote:
On 04/26/2015 10:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
From stagflation to the longest peace time expansion in history

300K - 400K a month job creation

Unemployment cut in half

Inflation went from double digits, to cut in half

Long term interest rates, mortgage rates, cut in half

Short term interest rates, business borrowing rates, cut more than half

America's standing/respect in the world restored

America's military might restored and respected again

Soviet Union defeated and collapsing, without ever firing a shot

Largest nuclear arms deal in history, elimination of an entire
class of nukes, medium range missles, that substantially reduced
the nuclear arsenals. (And it was done on Reagan's terms, not Russia's)

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

Yes, you're right, under Reagan the misery index was cut
in half. Which was reflected in what I posted. I did forget
to add cutting taxes to the list. Funny, Philo is complaining
about taxes, yet he didn't like Reagan, who cut taxes for most
Americans. I guess you just can't please some folks.

On 4/26/2015 11:04 AM, Oliver Douglas wrote:
On 04/26/2015 10:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

Don't worry. Only 30 million unemployed and quit looking
for work. Lets see. 30 mil out of 300 mil..... that's
about ten percent, if I figure?
(article edited for length)
..


by Jim Clifton

Share on LinkedIn
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

Here's something that many Americans don't know:
The official unemployment rate, as reported by
the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely mis-
leading.

White House and Wall Street about how unemployment
is "down" to 5.6%. White House wants to score
political points and Wall Street would like you
to stay in the market.

None of them will tell you this: If you ... given up
on finding a job the Department of Labor doesn't
count you as unemployed. That's right. you are not
counted in the figure we see in the news -- currently
5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are
either out of work or severely underemployed.

Say you're an out-of-work engineer or healthcare
worker: If you perform a minimum of one hour of
work in a week and are paid at least $20 -- maybe
someone pays you to mow their lawn -- you're not
officially counted as unemployed.

If you are working 10 hours part time because
it is all you can find -- in other words, you
are severely underemployed -- the government
doesn't count you in the 5.6%.

The official unemployment rate, amounts to a Big Lie.

A good job is an individual's primary identity, their
very self-worth, their dignity -- it establishes the
relationship they have with their friends, community
and country. When we fail to deliver a good job that
fits a citizen's talents, training and experience, we
are failing the great American dream.

Right now, the US is delivering at a staggeringly
low rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time
jobs as a percent of the adult population. We need
that to be 50% and a bare minimum of 10 million
new, good jobs to replenish America's middle class.


Jim Clifton is Chairman and CEO at Gallup.

On 04/26/2015 02:38 PM, trader_4 wrote:
O
Largest nuclear arms deal in history, elimination of an entire
class of nukes, medium range missles, that substantially reduced
the nuclear arsenals. (And it was done on Reagan's terms, not Russia's)

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

Yes, you're right, under Reagan the misery index was cut
in half. Which was reflected in what I posted. I did forget
to add cutting taxes to the list. Funny, Philo is complaining
about taxes, yet he didn't like Reagan, who cut taxes for most
Americans. I guess you just can't please some folks.




No.


Walker said he's work to cut taxes but he did not cut taxes

Nothing to do with the dead pres.

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:23:29 -0400, Paul wrote:

Ross perot warned you idiots

We saw his ears coming down the road, looking like a taxi with both
back doors wide open.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 5:05:25 PM UTC-4, philo wrote:
On 04/26/2015 02:38 PM, trader_4 wrote:
O
Largest nuclear arms deal in history, elimination of an entire
class of nukes, medium range missles, that substantially reduced
the nuclear arsenals. (And it was done on Reagan's terms, not Russia's)

So, now we wait for our fair minded Democrat friend to explain
what exactly was so bad......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_...28economics%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

Yes, you're right, under Reagan the misery index was cut
in half. Which was reflected in what I posted. I did forget
to add cutting taxes to the list. Funny, Philo is complaining
about taxes, yet he didn't like Reagan, who cut taxes for most
Americans. I guess you just can't please some folks.




No.


Walker said he's work to cut taxes but he did not cut taxes

Nothing to do with the dead pres.

Again:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/...ding/22816803/

Walker's budget cuts property taxes, UW funding

MADISON -- Gov. Scott Walker proposed a state budget plan Tuesday that would slightly lower property taxes over the next two years and keep funding flat for public schools, greatly expand Wisconsin's private school voucher program and use a variety of cuts, both small and large, to plug a shortfall."

He's apparently fulfilling his promise to "work" to cut
taxes. He can't help it if you libs elected enough lib
Democrats to the legistlature to stand in his way, sue
him at every opportunity, or if your local officials
raise taxes anyhow. Hell if your neighbors think like
you do, I'm not surprised your taxes aren't through the roof.

Regarding Reagan, it has nothing to do with Walker, but
everthing to do with you claiming that while a Democrat
you don't vote the party line. You cited your wife
voting for Reagan just once, when he was first elected.
And you stated that Reagan was "pretty bad". I'd say that
pretty much proves you're in the partisan Dem tank up
to your eyeballs. The inability to recognize what your
your WI papers say about what Walker is trying to do,
continuing to bitch about him even as he submits budgets
to reduce taxes, proves you're a party loyalist,
the facts be damned.

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 05:25:50 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/24/2015 04:09 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:



snip




I don't think I've ever seen property taxes go down more then a very
tiny percent when some bond ended. Even when the bubble burst and
real values took a nosedive the taxes stay high because it takes
several years for the book value on the tax rolls to drop and in the
meantime they keep raising the rates to make up for it. Virtually
every year my taxes go up anywhere from 4 to 20% cuz these weasels in
gvt just never seem to have enough money to squander.




During the so called "housing bubble" the city started assessing the
value of houses /above/ actual market value making the assumption the
value was going to keep rising.


That's when my taxes got so high I considered moving.

The city informed us that even though our bills were higher, they had
actually lowered the tax rate. So I have...in a way...seen taxes go
down...even though they went up.

Great Orwellian double-speak.

Yes, the "rate" game. They do it here too. The only thing you can
trust a politician to do is lie.

On 04/26/2015 04:26 PM, trader_4 wrote:



Walker said he's work to cut taxes but he did not cut taxes

Nothing to do with the dead pres.

Again:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/...ding/22816803/

Walker's budget cuts property taxes, UW funding

MADISON -- Gov. Scott Walker proposed a state budget plan Tuesday that would slightly lower property taxes over the next two years and keep funding flat for public schools, greatly expand Wisconsin's private school voucher program and use a variety of cuts, both small and large, to plug a shortfall."

He's apparently fulfilling his promise to "work" to cut
taxes. He can't help it if you libs elected enough lib
Democrats to the legistlature to stand in his way, sue
him at every opportunity, or if your local officials
raise taxes anyhow. Hell if your neighbors think like
you do, I'm not surprised your taxes aren't through the roof.

Regarding Reagan, it has nothing to do with Walker, but
everthing to do with you claiming that while a Democrat
you don't vote the party line. You cited your wife
voting for Reagan just once, when he was first elected.
And you stated that Reagan was "pretty bad". I'd say that
pretty much proves you're in the partisan Dem tank up
to your eyeballs. The inability to recognize what your
your WI papers say about what Walker is trying to do,
continuing to bitch about him even as he submits budgets
to reduce taxes, proves you're a party loyalist,
the facts be damned.





More to the point:


Taxes are just something most people (me included) like to gripe about,
my comments don't have much real meaning.


However when the conversation got around to gutting the school system
then I got pretty upset at what Walker is trying to do.

On 04/26/2015 04:54 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 05:25:50 -0500, philo wrote:

On 04/24/2015 04:09 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:



snip




I don't think I've ever seen property taxes go down more then a very
tiny percent when some bond ended. Even when the bubble burst and
real values took a nosedive the taxes stay high because it takes
several years for the book value on the tax rolls to drop and in the
meantime they keep raising the rates to make up for it. Virtually
every year my taxes go up anywhere from 4 to 20% cuz these weasels in
gvt just never seem to have enough money to squander.




During the so called "housing bubble" the city started assessing the
value of houses /above/ actual market value making the assumption the
value was going to keep rising.


That's when my taxes got so high I considered moving.

The city informed us that even though our bills were higher, they had
actually lowered the tax rate. So I have...in a way...seen taxes go
down...even though they went up.

Great Orwellian double-speak.

Yes, the "rate" game. They do it here too. The only thing you can
trust a politician to do is lie.




+1

In article ,
Oren wrote:

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:23:29 -0400, Paul wrote:

Ross perot warned you idiots

We saw his ears coming down the road, looking like a taxi with both
back doors wide open.

Donald Trump: The Ross Perot of the 21st Century... (Handgrenade with a
bad haircut.)
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein