Is this going to Happen? Do we have someone working on making sure we do not have to collect sales tax on surveying services?
I would rather pay an additional half to one-half percent on goods than have to collect sales taxes.
What sAY YOU?
sales tax on surveying services?
-
dmi
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:42 pm
- Location: San Francisco
- Contact:
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
I'd prefer not to have to collect sales taxes, and would object if only a small subset of service businesses were so burdened. (Veterinarians are currently facing this situation.) However, if a considered decision is made to cover a portion of the state's budget shortfall by implementing sales taxes on all service businesses, I probably won't protest. Collecting, remitting and accounting for sales taxes wouldn't seem to require any more work than does the administration of payroll taxes. The latter takes me maybe a couple of hours per year, i.e. it's not a big deal.
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"We have enough taxes already."
I, too, would like to pay less of my income in taxes, and I'm sure there are plenty of places that the state could reduce costs without impacting services. However, I don't have the expertise, time or ability to identify and implement those cuts, so someone else will have to work on them. In the mean time, here's what I see: school funding has been dropping for years (my local district is looking at laying off the secretaries at all of the elementary schools as it tries to cope with a $2.5M projected cut in state funding); roads are deteriorating to the point of unusability (Yolo County is planning to revert some paved roads to gravel because it can't afford to maintain the pavement); and cities are slowly but steadily decreasing services in an effort to cope with deficits (in Davis, where I live, city parks are turning brown and street trees are dying from mistletoe infestations).
This trend has been developing for a long time -- my guess is that it started in 1978 with the passage of Proposition 13. For the first decade or so local agencies were able to substantially make up for the lost property tax revenue by deferring maintenance and raiding capital replacement accounts. In the mid-90s they started making service reductions in the less-noticeable places, and now they're cutting into muscle and bone. Reversing Prop 13, or at least going to a split-roll assessment, would be my first choice to deal with the budget mess. Barring that, I'm amenable to tax increases.
Efficiency increases would be great, but I don't think they're going to materialize at the level necessary to fund the desired services.
I, too, would like to pay less of my income in taxes, and I'm sure there are plenty of places that the state could reduce costs without impacting services. However, I don't have the expertise, time or ability to identify and implement those cuts, so someone else will have to work on them. In the mean time, here's what I see: school funding has been dropping for years (my local district is looking at laying off the secretaries at all of the elementary schools as it tries to cope with a $2.5M projected cut in state funding); roads are deteriorating to the point of unusability (Yolo County is planning to revert some paved roads to gravel because it can't afford to maintain the pavement); and cities are slowly but steadily decreasing services in an effort to cope with deficits (in Davis, where I live, city parks are turning brown and street trees are dying from mistletoe infestations).
This trend has been developing for a long time -- my guess is that it started in 1978 with the passage of Proposition 13. For the first decade or so local agencies were able to substantially make up for the lost property tax revenue by deferring maintenance and raiding capital replacement accounts. In the mid-90s they started making service reductions in the less-noticeable places, and now they're cutting into muscle and bone. Reversing Prop 13, or at least going to a split-roll assessment, would be my first choice to deal with the budget mess. Barring that, I'm amenable to tax increases.
Efficiency increases would be great, but I don't think they're going to materialize at the level necessary to fund the desired services.
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
We're back on the sales tax thing ??
Do we as consumers, currently pay sales tax on services like plumbing ? or HVAC, lawn care ? NOW I realize salable parts are taxed. Oven parts. . tires. . .etc. How the heck are we supposed to keep track of each and every da#& lath, nail, stake roll of flagging . . . you name it. Used rattlesnake kit ?
How do we charge or account for the broken lath, stakes, bent nails.
I supposed we keep a bucket, tossem in there, weigh them and/or send them off the the governent. We already pay taxes on materials. We pay employee taxes and taxes on all of our equipment.
We've been down this road just a few threads ago.
I wanna but a "don't tread on me" flag . . . but there is a tax on that too.
"Cup tax"
Do we as consumers, currently pay sales tax on services like plumbing ? or HVAC, lawn care ? NOW I realize salable parts are taxed. Oven parts. . tires. . .etc. How the heck are we supposed to keep track of each and every da#& lath, nail, stake roll of flagging . . . you name it. Used rattlesnake kit ?
How do we charge or account for the broken lath, stakes, bent nails.
I supposed we keep a bucket, tossem in there, weigh them and/or send them off the the governent. We already pay taxes on materials. We pay employee taxes and taxes on all of our equipment.
We've been down this road just a few threads ago.
I wanna but a "don't tread on me" flag . . . but there is a tax on that too.
"Cup tax"
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"How the heck are we supposed to keep track of each and every da#& lath, nail, stake roll of flagging . . ."
The same way you keep track of them now: they're booked as expenses, and would have no direct involvement in sales tax calculations. The sales tax would simply be a percentage of the charges billed to the client, and would be added to the bill.
The same way you keep track of them now: they're booked as expenses, and would have no direct involvement in sales tax calculations. The sales tax would simply be a percentage of the charges billed to the client, and would be added to the bill.
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
The extreme overtaxation in Mexico, has most people dealing in cash. This leads to additional shortages in taxed revenue, which leads to additional taxes to compensate.
Big legitimate businesses like motels, resorts etc, pay the bulk of taxes there.
Service businesses work on a cash basis and pay a "bribe" tax to keep the federales away.
Employee unions and statutes like the Davis-Bacon act (prevailing wage) simply don't exist because regular wages earners would be taxed out of their homes.
The governemnt can pass bills to raise taxes all they want, but if there are few wage earners, the resultant taxed income is less.
Most of the problems with lack of tax money is misappropriation of funds.
The Governator stated "lets open the books" maybe he did, maybe he didnt,
Gray Davis, stated "give more money to Schools " He couldnt and didnt.
Simply put. . . and as history shows, when we collect these taxes and pay them, they simply will not go to the promised place.
The only thing (marginally required service) taxation will accomplish, is a reduced request for the particular service.
When My chiropractor begins collecting taxes from me, I simply will not go as often or may quit altogether.
D Goodman
Big legitimate businesses like motels, resorts etc, pay the bulk of taxes there.
Service businesses work on a cash basis and pay a "bribe" tax to keep the federales away.
Employee unions and statutes like the Davis-Bacon act (prevailing wage) simply don't exist because regular wages earners would be taxed out of their homes.
The governemnt can pass bills to raise taxes all they want, but if there are few wage earners, the resultant taxed income is less.
Most of the problems with lack of tax money is misappropriation of funds.
The Governator stated "lets open the books" maybe he did, maybe he didnt,
Gray Davis, stated "give more money to Schools " He couldnt and didnt.
Simply put. . . and as history shows, when we collect these taxes and pay them, they simply will not go to the promised place.
The only thing (marginally required service) taxation will accomplish, is a reduced request for the particular service.
When My chiropractor begins collecting taxes from me, I simply will not go as often or may quit altogether.
D Goodman
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2141
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
I had my daughter in private school in the 1st and 2nd grades. The tuition was about $3500 per year. CA public schools pump somewhere around $11000 per kid into the system.
Unfortunately, I couldn't afford to keep up with that tuition while still paying toward the public education pot. Both kids are now in public school. My daughter is in the 4th grade and covering a lot of the same material she learned in the 2nd. Her reading and math skills have stagnated only because her mother and I work with her as much as we can, otherwise those skills would have deteriorated significantly. I expect (hope) that the latter half of 4th grade will take her beyond what was covered in 2nd grade at the private school. On the other hand, she's learned more California trivia and spent more time on art projects.
Just because schools are making visible cuts doesn't mean that they don't have enough money. A comparison to private schools in terms of cost and quality of education indicates that the public schools simply aren't allocating their funds properly. So much more could be done with what they already have. They don't need more.
The same goes for the rest of government.
Sorry Jim, but the logic of saying, as an individual taxpayer, that since I, as the taxpayer, don't have the expertise to decide what cuts need to be made so let's continue to throw more money at the problem, is a cop out from demanding accountability of those we pay to demonstrate that expertise.
I don't mind paying my fair share if there is a genuine effort by those making the spending decisions to make those decisions wisely and responsibly. But I don't think that anyone can make a credible argument that the waste in government spending is minimal and that there are not billions spent on unnecessary or unsuccesful programs.
As long as there is rampant waste and irresponsibility in the governmental spending, I oppose ANY increase in taxes.
Of course, those who think that taxes should be higher have always been free to forego the deductions that they are entitled to and to maximize their taxes. But how many do that? Anyone? Anyone? (I can hear crickets chirping)
Those who call for higher taxes need to lead by example before demanding more from those of us who require better use of what we already contribute.
What could be more fair?
Unfortunately, I couldn't afford to keep up with that tuition while still paying toward the public education pot. Both kids are now in public school. My daughter is in the 4th grade and covering a lot of the same material she learned in the 2nd. Her reading and math skills have stagnated only because her mother and I work with her as much as we can, otherwise those skills would have deteriorated significantly. I expect (hope) that the latter half of 4th grade will take her beyond what was covered in 2nd grade at the private school. On the other hand, she's learned more California trivia and spent more time on art projects.
Just because schools are making visible cuts doesn't mean that they don't have enough money. A comparison to private schools in terms of cost and quality of education indicates that the public schools simply aren't allocating their funds properly. So much more could be done with what they already have. They don't need more.
The same goes for the rest of government.
Sorry Jim, but the logic of saying, as an individual taxpayer, that since I, as the taxpayer, don't have the expertise to decide what cuts need to be made so let's continue to throw more money at the problem, is a cop out from demanding accountability of those we pay to demonstrate that expertise.
I don't mind paying my fair share if there is a genuine effort by those making the spending decisions to make those decisions wisely and responsibly. But I don't think that anyone can make a credible argument that the waste in government spending is minimal and that there are not billions spent on unnecessary or unsuccesful programs.
As long as there is rampant waste and irresponsibility in the governmental spending, I oppose ANY increase in taxes.
Of course, those who think that taxes should be higher have always been free to forego the deductions that they are entitled to and to maximize their taxes. But how many do that? Anyone? Anyone? (I can hear crickets chirping)
Those who call for higher taxes need to lead by example before demanding more from those of us who require better use of what we already contribute.
What could be more fair?
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"I had my daughter in private school in the 1st and 2nd grades. The tuition was about $3500 per year. CA public schools pump somewhere around $11000 per kid into the system."
I suspect that the public schools serve a much higher percentage of Title I and special needs kids than do private schools, and public schools tend to pay their teachers better. Both contribute to a higher cost-per-pupil.
"Those who call for higher taxes need to lead by example before demanding more from those of us who require better use of what we already contribute."
So far this year I've written checks totaling $950 -- in addition to taxes -- in support of my local school district. I guess I can start demanding more from you! :)
.
I suspect that the public schools serve a much higher percentage of Title I and special needs kids than do private schools, and public schools tend to pay their teachers better. Both contribute to a higher cost-per-pupil.
"Those who call for higher taxes need to lead by example before demanding more from those of us who require better use of what we already contribute."
So far this year I've written checks totaling $950 -- in addition to taxes -- in support of my local school district. I guess I can start demanding more from you! :)
.
-
RasterMaster
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:25 pm
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
Evan the Tzar !!
Well said Evan !!
Not to offend Jim Fra-me' (Im practicing that french you've taught me)
My ex wife is a teacher and my sister and brother in law are teachers. All of them complain about the tremendious waste at the top...admin, do-nothing assistants etc.
All cuts are from the bottom. I managed one semester teaching Jr hi in a private school (albeit a very long time ago) Even then, the administration staff (and subsequently) costs were held in check. no title kids of any kind.
[by the way, that was kinda mean to say Jim ? no ?]
Accountablilty is nil in this country, however, the reality is now upon us. EVEN so, , , big reckless monopolizing business's are asking Uncle SAM for welfare handouts.
The money went "somewhere" and now some people want to give "somewhere" more money ???
As crazy [like a fox] as George Lucas is, his script statement "there must be balance in the force" really rings true.
As lowly land surveyors, we are held accountable for each and every move we make ? every hole we dig must be filled (or lawsuit) every stake/ pipe/pin we set. every invoice we submit (accountability)
Heck, today, i discovered a spelling error on one of my maps from 2005. . .
certificate of correction !! (Accountability)
When government, big and reckless business, and monoplies, realize and eliminate their waste, then a request for taxes may be considered, however, it may not even be needed.
Now lets all get out there and survey for half price, we have a "Wall street" child to feed.
Bill Foldempty
Not to offend Jim Fra-me' (Im practicing that french you've taught me)
My ex wife is a teacher and my sister and brother in law are teachers. All of them complain about the tremendious waste at the top...admin, do-nothing assistants etc.
All cuts are from the bottom. I managed one semester teaching Jr hi in a private school (albeit a very long time ago) Even then, the administration staff (and subsequently) costs were held in check. no title kids of any kind.
[by the way, that was kinda mean to say Jim ? no ?]
Accountablilty is nil in this country, however, the reality is now upon us. EVEN so, , , big reckless monopolizing business's are asking Uncle SAM for welfare handouts.
The money went "somewhere" and now some people want to give "somewhere" more money ???
As crazy [like a fox] as George Lucas is, his script statement "there must be balance in the force" really rings true.
As lowly land surveyors, we are held accountable for each and every move we make ? every hole we dig must be filled (or lawsuit) every stake/ pipe/pin we set. every invoice we submit (accountability)
Heck, today, i discovered a spelling error on one of my maps from 2005. . .
certificate of correction !! (Accountability)
When government, big and reckless business, and monoplies, realize and eliminate their waste, then a request for taxes may be considered, however, it may not even be needed.
Now lets all get out there and survey for half price, we have a "Wall street" child to feed.
Bill Foldempty
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"no title kids of any kind.
[by the way, that was kinda mean to say Jim ? no ?] "
On the contrary, I was making the point that public schools are bound by law to accept just about everyone, regardless of ability or socioeconomic status -- you can't get much more egalitarian than that. However, meeting the needs of kids who don't fit the average profile adds cost to the process. Private schools, either by design or de facto, generally filter out the poor kids -- those most likely to need extra educational attention because they don't get academic support at home -- by means of tuition. And private schools aren't required to accept special needs kids. (I'm sure there are private schools that offer scholarships and/or accept special needs students, but that's very different from being legally required to take all comers eligible merely by virtue of residency.)
========================================================
"I think what you are saying you have donated additional money to the school? Are you going to write that off?"
You betcha!
.
[by the way, that was kinda mean to say Jim ? no ?] "
On the contrary, I was making the point that public schools are bound by law to accept just about everyone, regardless of ability or socioeconomic status -- you can't get much more egalitarian than that. However, meeting the needs of kids who don't fit the average profile adds cost to the process. Private schools, either by design or de facto, generally filter out the poor kids -- those most likely to need extra educational attention because they don't get academic support at home -- by means of tuition. And private schools aren't required to accept special needs kids. (I'm sure there are private schools that offer scholarships and/or accept special needs students, but that's very different from being legally required to take all comers eligible merely by virtue of residency.)
========================================================
"I think what you are saying you have donated additional money to the school? Are you going to write that off?"
You betcha!
.
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
OOPs !
I got a bit sensitive about that my appologies.
Donations Great !! proud of ya. (that's Palin for "very proud of you")
One of my very dear friends was "special needs" He lived his entire life fighting for his similars [sic] to be accepted and equal in our society.
In the end, I'm sure he was glad for every contribution ever made by anyone.
But He was accountable for every penny he recieved and saw to it that his students were taken care of first. Administration and most likely even his own health came second.
If you've been blessed, then I say share to your hearts content. and Bless you for doing so. We really don't need and can't afford another restricting law that cuts income, jobs and progress.
I'd really like to know what gives anybody the foolish notion that taxes paid really go to the proper fund.
example:
California clean water bill (1) set up a study committie
" (2) set up a scientific study
" (3) set up meager funds to "do something"
" (4) financed putting chlorine in the water.
Is that what we were voting for ?
so now we drink bottled water. (provided by the French?) he he he
Whet N. Wilde
I got a bit sensitive about that my appologies.
Donations Great !! proud of ya. (that's Palin for "very proud of you")
One of my very dear friends was "special needs" He lived his entire life fighting for his similars [sic] to be accepted and equal in our society.
In the end, I'm sure he was glad for every contribution ever made by anyone.
But He was accountable for every penny he recieved and saw to it that his students were taken care of first. Administration and most likely even his own health came second.
If you've been blessed, then I say share to your hearts content. and Bless you for doing so. We really don't need and can't afford another restricting law that cuts income, jobs and progress.
I'd really like to know what gives anybody the foolish notion that taxes paid really go to the proper fund.
example:
California clean water bill (1) set up a study committie
" (2) set up a scientific study
" (3) set up meager funds to "do something"
" (4) financed putting chlorine in the water.
Is that what we were voting for ?
so now we drink bottled water. (provided by the French?) he he he
Whet N. Wilde
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2141
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
Ahhh, Jim?
If you're going to write it off, then you aren't in a position to ask the rest of us to give more.
My charitable donations are quite high for my income level. Some of that goes toward school costs (buying supplies for the classroom, contributing for extra curricular activities, etc.), but much of it goes elsewhere.
When those who think that a boost in taxes is called for stop writing off their charitable donations, stop writing off their mortgage interest, stop writing off medical expenses... etc., then they have credible standing to ask the rest of us to pitch in more.
Ensuring that government has enough money to do the work that they are constitutionally mandated to do is a responsibility we all share. Funding the rampant waste and the non-essential programs of government is robbery if we are required to fund it. You're welcome to make it one of your chosen charities. Just don't demand that the rest of us do so as well.
If you're going to write it off, then you aren't in a position to ask the rest of us to give more.
My charitable donations are quite high for my income level. Some of that goes toward school costs (buying supplies for the classroom, contributing for extra curricular activities, etc.), but much of it goes elsewhere.
When those who think that a boost in taxes is called for stop writing off their charitable donations, stop writing off their mortgage interest, stop writing off medical expenses... etc., then they have credible standing to ask the rest of us to pitch in more.
Ensuring that government has enough money to do the work that they are constitutionally mandated to do is a responsibility we all share. Funding the rampant waste and the non-essential programs of government is robbery if we are required to fund it. You're welcome to make it one of your chosen charities. Just don't demand that the rest of us do so as well.
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2141
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
We're not that far afield, Ralph.
If by "accepted by most" you mean that it would not cause public revolt, I'm sure that you are right. If you mean that most will think it is a good idea, or at least not a bad idea, I disagree. Most would be ticked about having to pay it, but pay it anyway. It would be several years before most would just accept it as the sales tax on goods is now accepted.
That the cost of running government should rise, just like the cost of virtually everything else in life, is quite reasonable.
But how is it that so many are willing to accept that it should consistently rise faster than nearly everything else? Why should it consistently rise faster than the consumer price index? Why should it consistently rise faster than average incomes? It just doesn't make sense.
As incomes, consumer spending, and private profits rise, government automatically sees a rise in revenue as a product of the tax RATES. Why should government get a higher percentage on top of that, especially in a time when all of the constituents are having to do with less even before the politicians reach into their pockets to grab more?
Again, for those of you who think that the government needs more from it's constituents, be charitable, forego your legitimate deductions and give a little extra to help reduce the defecit.
NO NEW TAXES!
If by "accepted by most" you mean that it would not cause public revolt, I'm sure that you are right. If you mean that most will think it is a good idea, or at least not a bad idea, I disagree. Most would be ticked about having to pay it, but pay it anyway. It would be several years before most would just accept it as the sales tax on goods is now accepted.
That the cost of running government should rise, just like the cost of virtually everything else in life, is quite reasonable.
But how is it that so many are willing to accept that it should consistently rise faster than nearly everything else? Why should it consistently rise faster than the consumer price index? Why should it consistently rise faster than average incomes? It just doesn't make sense.
As incomes, consumer spending, and private profits rise, government automatically sees a rise in revenue as a product of the tax RATES. Why should government get a higher percentage on top of that, especially in a time when all of the constituents are having to do with less even before the politicians reach into their pockets to grab more?
Again, for those of you who think that the government needs more from it's constituents, be charitable, forego your legitimate deductions and give a little extra to help reduce the defecit.
NO NEW TAXES!
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
Ralph,
We're talking about LAnd surveyins services here, not commercial goods.
Agreed, every one of us pays tax on consumables (except certain food products) We use them, consume them and buy more.
My clients who request . . . say, a Record of survey, dont really NEED it. They don't consume their land. When surveying (already expensive) becomes like the $4.50/ gallon gas price. Land owners will simply STOP hiring us. In case yours and Jims clouds haven't cleared a bit, we are in a recession. Evans point is clear. Accountability for the tax recievers.
But like I said, if you can afford it, go ahead and donate some money to the cause. And in case you don't know this little secret, We (the business owners) pay taxes on the money we recieve AND those land owners have already paid taxes on that money they are paying to us.
How about a "leaving your house tax" a "put on your shoes tax" Its getting like that airlines commercial "gimme gimme gimme just give it all to me"
Obviously you guys havent traveled to europe or mexico.
go see what socialism is really all about. If you think the Euro is stronger than the dollar, go to europe and buy a car.
Dave Drescher Goodman
We're talking about LAnd surveyins services here, not commercial goods.
Agreed, every one of us pays tax on consumables (except certain food products) We use them, consume them and buy more.
My clients who request . . . say, a Record of survey, dont really NEED it. They don't consume their land. When surveying (already expensive) becomes like the $4.50/ gallon gas price. Land owners will simply STOP hiring us. In case yours and Jims clouds haven't cleared a bit, we are in a recession. Evans point is clear. Accountability for the tax recievers.
But like I said, if you can afford it, go ahead and donate some money to the cause. And in case you don't know this little secret, We (the business owners) pay taxes on the money we recieve AND those land owners have already paid taxes on that money they are paying to us.
How about a "leaving your house tax" a "put on your shoes tax" Its getting like that airlines commercial "gimme gimme gimme just give it all to me"
Obviously you guys havent traveled to europe or mexico.
go see what socialism is really all about. If you think the Euro is stronger than the dollar, go to europe and buy a car.
Dave Drescher Goodman
-
Jim Frame
- Posts: 1588
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:52 pm
- Location: Davis, CA
- Contact:
"Obviously you guys havent traveled to europe or mexico. "
I just returned from Mexico last week. Had a great time until the last day when our camera got stolen. One day I drove a German tourist who had stepped on a sea urchin to the hospital. Two hours of doctor & assistant time: 100 pesos (less than ten bucks). We both walked out of there (well, he sort of hobbled) shaking our heads in amazement.
"Why should [the cost of government] consistently rise faster than average incomes?"
One reason is that government must meet increasingly higher performance measures. Have you looked at water quality standards recently? The new treatment regs may produce a net gain in public health, but they cost a fortune to implement. Mexican water costs are probably much lower, but I wouldn't want to trade. (I drank bottled water the whole time I was there, though in fairness that's not strictly a matter of quality per se.)
"Again, for those of you who think that the government needs more from it's constituents, be charitable, forego your legitimate deductions and give a little extra to help reduce the defecit."
What, and dilute the impact of my contributions? Think of it as "targeted giving," if you will. By deducting my charitable contributions, I leverage my dollars by effectively redirecting a small portion of the public budget toward my own priorities. Why would I not want to do that?
P.S. to everyone: As I told Evan privately, I'm not arguing in anger, I'm just putting forth an alternative viewpoint. I don't like wasteful government (or wasteful anything else for that matter), but I seem to have a higher tolerance for inefficiency than some. Maybe I'm mellowing in my old age...
.
I just returned from Mexico last week. Had a great time until the last day when our camera got stolen. One day I drove a German tourist who had stepped on a sea urchin to the hospital. Two hours of doctor & assistant time: 100 pesos (less than ten bucks). We both walked out of there (well, he sort of hobbled) shaking our heads in amazement.
"Why should [the cost of government] consistently rise faster than average incomes?"
One reason is that government must meet increasingly higher performance measures. Have you looked at water quality standards recently? The new treatment regs may produce a net gain in public health, but they cost a fortune to implement. Mexican water costs are probably much lower, but I wouldn't want to trade. (I drank bottled water the whole time I was there, though in fairness that's not strictly a matter of quality per se.)
"Again, for those of you who think that the government needs more from it's constituents, be charitable, forego your legitimate deductions and give a little extra to help reduce the defecit."
What, and dilute the impact of my contributions? Think of it as "targeted giving," if you will. By deducting my charitable contributions, I leverage my dollars by effectively redirecting a small portion of the public budget toward my own priorities. Why would I not want to do that?
P.S. to everyone: As I told Evan privately, I'm not arguing in anger, I'm just putting forth an alternative viewpoint. I don't like wasteful government (or wasteful anything else for that matter), but I seem to have a higher tolerance for inefficiency than some. Maybe I'm mellowing in my old age...
.
-
E_Page
- Posts: 2141
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:49 am
- Location: El Dorado County
Meet higher performance measures?
Who creates the standards in the first place? And how much does that cost?
Is the water we get out of the tap today so much better than that of 40 years ago? We all drank tap water 40 years ago and didn't grow extra eyes or digits, and didn't even get disentary from it.
Things like the efforts that go into creating such standards is one of the areas that I think of when I think of waste. The govt would likely spend $1M on such a study where a properly run study might reasonably cost less than $200000.
I think of things like having to get several cost quotes and several approvals to buy a $50 calculator, bringing the true purchase cost to over $300.
I think of things like a 4 person Caltrans survey crew where each crew member drives a Caltrans truck to the job site. There may be, for reasons of safety or perhaps efficiency, a need for 4 people on the crew, but not for 4 trucks. They should all be able to load into one or two.
That doesn't even get into the programs that exist as someone's political pet project and bring little, if any benefit to the general public. I have a feeling that, at the state level, there are dozens, and perhaps hundreds of these.
Those are the types of things that really add unnecessarily to the cost of government.
Who creates the standards in the first place? And how much does that cost?
Is the water we get out of the tap today so much better than that of 40 years ago? We all drank tap water 40 years ago and didn't grow extra eyes or digits, and didn't even get disentary from it.
Things like the efforts that go into creating such standards is one of the areas that I think of when I think of waste. The govt would likely spend $1M on such a study where a properly run study might reasonably cost less than $200000.
I think of things like having to get several cost quotes and several approvals to buy a $50 calculator, bringing the true purchase cost to over $300.
I think of things like a 4 person Caltrans survey crew where each crew member drives a Caltrans truck to the job site. There may be, for reasons of safety or perhaps efficiency, a need for 4 people on the crew, but not for 4 trucks. They should all be able to load into one or two.
That doesn't even get into the programs that exist as someone's political pet project and bring little, if any benefit to the general public. I have a feeling that, at the state level, there are dozens, and perhaps hundreds of these.
Those are the types of things that really add unnecessarily to the cost of government.
Evan Page, PLS
A Visiting Forum Essayist
A Visiting Forum Essayist
-
goodgps
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
- Location: Modesto, Ca
A little off subject,
But the Mexico I was speaking of is deep in the heartland.
My wifes Parents have a house near San Juan De Rio or Leon.
But not in a metro area.
Huachapan area.
I'm glad you had a good time. sorry about the camera.
keep arguing. . . we need someone to pick on.
And keep using those "green" appliances.
Speaking of Water regulations. . . >:-| just tax us more . . in order to sell us more chlorine and Flouride to dump into the water table. pretty soon all of the good bacteria underground will die off and then we will have some great fun.
"Good"
^
Q
But the Mexico I was speaking of is deep in the heartland.
My wifes Parents have a house near San Juan De Rio or Leon.
But not in a metro area.
Huachapan area.
I'm glad you had a good time. sorry about the camera.
keep arguing. . . we need someone to pick on.
And keep using those "green" appliances.
Speaking of Water regulations. . . >:-| just tax us more . . in order to sell us more chlorine and Flouride to dump into the water table. pretty soon all of the good bacteria underground will die off and then we will have some great fun.
"Good"
^
Q