I'm not talking about weed which should be legal.
SOTU?
- Thread starter acesfull86
- Start date
I'm not talking about weed which should be legal.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
It doesn't really matter. It's consistently been proving that drug testing is cost prohibitive. Weed or other drugs, it's been found in several states not to matter.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Well locally our HS are a mess with kids there that have no intention of completing a class or doing the work, and it bogs the system down for the kids and teachers that do want to learn. I am not so sure this would be any different. It pulls down the education level of the many, because the few don't have the intention of doing anything, they just don't have anywhere to go or do.
I find it insulting that we are looking toward free community college route, when our High Schools are a joke on the national level. If you want to talk about a "level playing field" relieve me of that 14k annual per child cost of private school because the gov't run schools aren't worth a flip. I'll be paying out of my pocket for school for 20+ years for two kids.. so lets not act like thats "level"... when I get to pay for those terrible public schools as well in my tax bill also.
57Brave
Well-known member
No, I just think that all young people in our society deserve a closer to level playing field.
Anyone here ever get sucked into Downton Abbey ?
Basically the show is about the demise of the British Aristocratic class between 1910 and the late 1920's. Where those of the privileged class maintain their privilege and those that are not of privileged class are expected to stay out of privileged events, drawing rooms and (ahum) universities. Also the decisions of societal affairs are afforded these same people. In other words the privileged make the rules
What I see advocated here is a have and have not society ( based on to whom and the $$ status of birth ) where you are given a leg up and if not born of the manor you are expected to accept your lot (tech schools) don't make waves.
Then others get to talk about boot straps etc etc etc.
////
To AA's claims of accomplishment. Ted Williams and Bob Gibson were terrible coaches because they were expecting their level of skill from people that didn't have their advantage of birth. That is one school of thought .
Another is , dont fall over patting yourself on the back
You want life to be fair but on the other hand you feel like penalizing people who have 'to much'?
Is that fair? What would be fair is for everyone of us, regardless of how much you make, to pay the same percent.
Amazing to me how quickly the boot straps is dismissed. It's that mentality that causes these problems in the first place. The idea of if you work hard you won't get what you want. It's a joke and why the liberalism in this country is going to ruin our great country.
It won't stop at 250. Eventually 200 will be too much. Then all they way down to 100 just so the poor lazy people in this country can continue to be lazy.
57Brave
Well-known member
you are ok with your contribution of $20 and Donald Trump contribution of $20 into the communal pot -- you make me laugh. Or feel sorry for you one
Only Trumps contribution far exceeds what our contributions are.
57Brave
Well-known member
Gomez Addams had a theory. In the theory of sky diving one could use smaller and smaller parachutes until no parachute was necesary. Your notion is as unfounded
I said same % not a set fee.
57Brave
Well-known member
why?
Who set the bar at 250 and why? You can't see a scenario where the same people who determined 250 was too much could change it? That's rather naive fo you.
57, in every other facet of life whether it's to buy gas, buy groceries, go to a movie etc we all pay the same. That's fair
Why should taxes be any different? You preach and preach about wanting a level playing field but you also want to screw the rich which isn't the fair thing to do
Why should taxes be any different? You preach and preach about wanting a level playing field but you also want to screw the rich which isn't the fair thing to do
57Brave
Well-known member
even so.
For example
A person making $250K at 10% loses $25K leaving him/her with $225K
A person making $44K ( a teacher ? ) gives 10% leaves that person with $40K
I would say the person left with ( I would guess most on this board ) $40K has a little rougher sledding.
Raise 2 kids on $40K and $250K. Or in the case of this discussion -- send a kid to college
57Brave
Well-known member
I think the article I posted used the $250K mark
Again...why the arbitrary 250 mark? What's to stop that mark from changing?
The person making 40 will be eligible for scholarships and government grants that the person making 250 would not.
Yes life would be rougher making $40k but is that person living within their means? And why can't thier kid take out student loans to go to college?