Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dukeman
From the article: Laws limiting taxes have a disproportionate impact on cities, which rely on local levies to pay for basic social and human services like domestic-violence programs, low-income housing, and tenant advocacy. If you're wondering why the city is suffering draconian budget cuts--$24 million this year, $20 million in 2005--you can thank rural voters who seem unable to grasp a basic Christian tenet; greed is bad, sharing is good.

How the heck is it "sharing" when my tax money is taken from me essentially under threat of legal action? Now, I think it's necessary that government levy some taxes, it couldn't function on donations alone. But don't call it sharing. By the way the article's a lot easier to swallow if you read it as a satire rather than a serious piece (if this guy's serious he needs meds, stat.) I can't believe how he complains about some states actually spending federal transportation money on building roads -- the horror! Darned metrosexuals.

24 posted on 11/19/2004 10:38:46 AM PST by patricktschetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: patricktschetter

Muggers believe in "sharing" too.


28 posted on 11/19/2004 10:42:39 AM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson