goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 05, 2014, 09:19:52 AM
-
So, so racist, you know what I mean? I mean, just look at these Tea Party candidates...
Tim Scott, the first ever black senator to be elected in a southern state by either party (what an "Uncle Tom" - amiright?)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F9%2F9e%2FTim_Scott%252C_official_portrait%252C_113th_Congress.jpg%2F220px-Tim_Scott%252C_official_portrait%252C_113th_Congress.jpg&hash=7bf962faf9306246a40791127af131aab02000ae)
Mia Love, the first black woman ever elected to the house by the GOP (but she's Haitian, so I guess that's not really "black", right?)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwp.production.patheos.com%2Fblogs%2Fdanpeterson%2Ffiles%2F2014%2F10%2F0322-mia-love.jpg&hash=92a0bbb411b8cb4ce0b904beb8cf6a457483423a)
Clearly, the Tea Party is opposing Obama 'cause racism.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Rhodes_Revels
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Rhodes_Revels
Rhodes was appointed by the legislature - not elected by popular vote.
-
I'm not racist, I have black friends.
-
2 black people in our party!!! :party:
-
this entire thread aside, i was pleased to see female and black republican candidates elected last night.
-
this entire thread aside, i was pleased to see female and black republican candidates elected last night.
Yeah, this thread is disgusting and very telling of the op tho
-
:facepalm:
please don't breed
-
:lol: So much butthurt. It is more than a little amusing that for a Tea Party accused of opposing Obama due to racism, two of its brightest stars are black.
-
So apparently K-S-U-Wildcats! believes that being fiscally conservative and being racist are not mutually exclusive. Why is it so hard for you to believe that black people can be fiscally conservative? Do you think we are all on food stamps?
-
So apparently K-S-U-Wildcats! believes that being fiscally conservative and being racist are not mutually exclusive. Why is it so hard for you to believe that black people can be fiscally conservative? Do you think we are all on food stamps?
:lol: keep it going MIR! The Tea Party is still a pack of racists - they just put that racism aside for fiscally conservative black people! You are a treasure.
-
So apparently K-S-U-Wildcats! believes that being fiscally conservative and being racist are not mutually exclusive. Why is it so hard for you to believe that black people can be fiscally conservative? Do you think we are all on food stamps?
:lol: keep it going MIR! The Tea Party is still a pack of racists - they just put that racism aside for fiscally conservative black people! You are a treasure.
So you are not going to answer why you and your party are parading these people around like they are rough ridin' mascots? I'm pretty sure that we know that black people can be fiscally conservative but this seems like a surprise to you.
-
So apparently K-S-U-Wildcats! believes that being fiscally conservative and being racist are not mutually exclusive. Why is it so hard for you to believe that black people can be fiscally conservative? Do you think we are all on food stamps?
:lol: keep it going MIR! The Tea Party is still a pack of racists - they just put that racism aside for fiscally conservative black people! You are a treasure.
So you are not going to answer why you and your party are parading these people around like they are rough ridin' mascots? I'm pretty sure that we know that black people can be fiscally conservative but this seems like a surprise to you.
Ahhh, so now it's racist to point out that several black people are rock stars of the tea party movement? That's a new twist! The tea party is racist - and if you try to disprove that, that proves that the tea party is racist!
-
So apparently K-S-U-Wildcats! believes that being fiscally conservative and being racist are not mutually exclusive. Why is it so hard for you to believe that black people can be fiscally conservative? Do you think we are all on food stamps?
:lol: keep it going MIR! The Tea Party is still a pack of racists - they just put that racism aside for fiscally conservative black people! You are a treasure.
So you are not going to answer why you and your party are parading these people around like they are rough ridin' mascots? I'm pretty sure that we know that black people can be fiscally conservative but this seems like a surprise to you.
Ahhh, so now it's racist to point out that several black people are rock stars of the tea party movement? That's a new twist! The tea party is racist - and if you try to disprove that, that proves that the tea party is racist!
lol, because that's what I said. I'll let your batshit crazy ass have the last word on this one
-
"I don't see color"
"Look at my cool new black friends!"
-
The Tea Party is still a thing?
-
The Tea Party is still a thing?
I thought this was a TBT but noticed it was Wednesday and was pretty confused as well
-
Good for them.
-
If the tea party were 100% black people, libtards would still call them racists. It's a very limited playbook they have.
-
they both had to be pretty racist against mexicans to get elected, but good for them.
-
they both had to be pretty racist against mexicans to get elected, but good for them.
:facepalm: :thumbs:
-
Racism has many colors, K-S-U
-
Feel bad for those Republican elects because the prog/lib smear and "sell out" campaign is going to be brutal for those two.
-
The race isn't quite over yet, but it looks like my new congressman is openly gay, and according to 99% of the opposing ads, a member of the tea party! Go Carl! :party:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTg0iORc.jpg&hash=bbc46ec772a32159c894951cdd58797f3f58e054)
-
self loather?
-
The party of inclusion
-
self loather?
I don't think he's really a tea party guy, the dem just had nothing else to fight with, like the rest of the dems across the country.
They also claimed he was a gay restroom predator. If he had been a democrat there would have been protests filling the streets claiming homophobic bigotry.
-
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/11/03/carl_demaio_sexual_harassment_second_former_staffer_makes_allegations.html
This does make him kind of come across as a weirdo.
-
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/11/03/carl_demaio_sexual_harassment_second_former_staffer_makes_allegations.html
This does make him kind of come across as a weirdo.
There's a much bigger back story to the allegations that make them likely to be untrue.
-
When I think of the new branch of the right, that is the extreme right, I think of tolerance and inclusion.
They are really figuring this stuff out. Gotta admit, it's going to be weird when he successfully limits his own rights.
-
Prog-Lib elite stealth racists are going to be mumbling hard over cocktails about those two "sell outs".
-
Feel bad for those Republican elects because the prog/lib smear and "sell out" campaign is going to be brutal for those two.
Prog-Lib elite stealth racists are going to be mumbling hard over cocktails about those two "sell outs".
lol
-
Pakked Dax :surprised:
-
The Tea Party is still a thing?
I thought this was a TBT but noticed it was Wednesday and was pretty confused as well
anybody that can win as the candidate of a dead movement has to be pretty good.
-
Gotta admit, it's going to be weird when he successfully limits his own rights.
I think you're confusing the tea party with democrats again.
-
Wut?
-
Sell outs!
-
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/11/06/scott-on-f-grade-from-naacp-its-because-i-believe-that-progress-has-to-be-made/ (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/11/06/scott-on-f-grade-from-naacp-its-because-i-believe-that-progress-has-to-be-made/)
The NAACP gives Tim Scott a grade of "UT". :cry:
-
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/11/06/scott-on-f-grade-from-naacp-its-because-i-believe-that-progress-has-to-be-made/ (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/11/06/scott-on-f-grade-from-naacp-its-because-i-believe-that-progress-has-to-be-made/)
The NAACP gives Tim Scott a grade of "UT". :cry:
Scott’s score from the NAACP was 11 percent for 2013, while his South Carolina colleague Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) got 25 percent. Lawmakers were scored on whether they voted with the official NAACP position.
Any politician who supports school vouchers should get a failing grade from the NAACP. School vouchers does the opposite of supporting struggling urban schools.
-
School vouchers does the opposite of supporting struggling urban schools.
That's true - but voucher proponents care about helping struggling urban students who would like a chance to succeed at a nicer school - not about helping the struggling urban schools. This is why former D.C. school super Michelle Rhee now supports vouchers. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html# (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html#)
But I don't expect a socialist such as yourself to understand the merit of that difference. Hard as it is to believe, many socialists, such as yourself, really believe that even if kids and their parents want a better opportunity, they must be sacrificed and remain caged in their horrible urban public schools because it would only further hurt the school to set them free.
-
School vouchers does the opposite of supporting struggling urban schools.
That's true - but voucher proponents care about helping struggling urban students who would like a chance to succeed at a nicer school - not about helping the struggling urban schools. This is why former D.C. school super Michelle Rhee now supports vouchers. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html# (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html#)
But I don't expect a socialist such as yourself to understand the merit of that difference. Hard as it is to believe, many socialists, such as yourself, really believe that even if kids and their parents want a better opportunity, they must be sacrificed and remain caged in their horrible urban public schools because it would only further hurt the school to set them free.
I think those parents and students already have plenty of opportunity and should just work harder. We don't need to spend tax dollars to make education worse for thousands of students so hundreds of students can go to a different school.
-
School vouchers does the opposite of supporting struggling urban schools.
That's true - but voucher proponents care about helping struggling urban students who would like a chance to succeed at a nicer school - not about helping the struggling urban schools. This is why former D.C. school super Michelle Rhee now supports vouchers. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html# (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html#)
But I don't expect a socialist such as yourself to understand the merit of that difference. Hard as it is to believe, many socialists, such as yourself, really believe that even if kids and their parents want a better opportunity, they must be sacrificed and remain caged in their horrible urban public schools because it would only further hurt the school to set them free.
Wanting kids to go to schools in their own neighborhoods instead of having up to a 90 minute commute to go to a good school is socialist. Interesting. I would have thought a socialists would want suburban and exurban kids to be shipped to schools in the city. Who knew :dunno:
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
Everything costs more in NY.
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
Everything costs more in NY.
That doesn't really mean anything.
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
Everything costs more in NY.
That doesn't really mean anything.
How much of that is facilities? then adjust salaries for location.
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
Everything costs more in NY.
That doesn't really mean anything.
Teachers and administrators have to be paid more. Property costs more. It means a lot, really.
-
Wow, state of NY spends nearly $20K per student, but they hover around the middle of the pack in the various state education rankings.
But the answer for "fixing" schools is always, "more money".
Everything costs more in NY.
That doesn't really mean anything.
It absolutely does, that $20,000 isn't adjusted for cost of living, everything is more expensive in New York. It was a poor example.
To your larger point, everyone believes that most states and districts with education issues could spend the money they have better.
-
No, not "Everyone" believes that MIR, not even close. The blanket statement by many when asked, is "more money". Not more efficency, not better administration, simply "more money".
NY is 43% above the national avg on spending per pupil, we're talking the entire state of NY, not just NYC.
Typical State Education Rank for NY around 20th.
-
School vouchers does the opposite of supporting struggling urban schools.
That's true - but voucher proponents care about helping struggling urban students who would like a chance to succeed at a nicer school - not about helping the struggling urban schools. This is why former D.C. school super Michelle Rhee now supports vouchers. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html# (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/04/michelle-rhee-my-break-with-the-democrats.html#)
But I don't expect a socialist such as yourself to understand the merit of that difference. Hard as it is to believe, many socialists, such as yourself, really believe that even if kids and their parents want a better opportunity, they must be sacrificed and remain caged in their horrible urban public schools because it would only further hurt the school to set them free.
Wanting kids to go to schools in their own neighborhoods instead of having up to a 90 minute commute to go to a good school is socialist. Interesting. I would have thought a socialists would want suburban and exurban kids to be shipped to schools in the city. Who knew :dunno:
No, the urban schools don't want the kids from the suburbs, just the money from the suburbs. And your "we're all in this together" philosophy of requring kids to attend shitty schools lest the shitty schools suffer more if the motivated students flee is absolutely socialist.
-
lol @ the GOP not being racist because they got their first black female congresswoman 46 years after democrats
-
Some charity should start having raffles for vouchers for poor students who are being failed by Kansas public schools. Let the gambling addicts pay for the vouchers.
-
Some charity should start having raffles for vouchers for poor students who are being failed by Kansas public schools. Let the gambling addicts pay for the vouchers.
MO did this with riverboat casinos. Promised something like $80 mill to schools. At the time my boss was a KCMO area school board pres. He noted that the casino money did indeed make it to the schools, and then the state pulled $80 million, originating from other rev sources, back out and kept the budget net equal. No one lied, they just did exactly what no one thought they were voting for. Bait and switch.
-
No, not "Everyone" believes that MIR, not even close. The blanket statement by many when asked, is "more money". Not more efficency, not better administration, simply "more money".
NY is 43% above the national avg on spending per pupil, we're talking the entire state of NY, not just NYC.
Typical State Education Rank for NY around 20th.
I'm going to go out on a pretty strong limb and say that I know significantly more educators and administrators in New York. Everyone that I know spends much of their time attempting to spend more efficiently instead of asking for more money. The all educators just want all of our cash boogeyman is right up there with the there are people committing election fraud boogeyman and the Obama is going to cause all of us to get Ebola boogeyman.
-
I'm 100% a socialist when it comes to education.
-
I'm 100% a socialist when it comes to education.
ummm
-
MIR how many educators and administrators do you know in NY? I know 14.
-
MIR how many educators and administrators do you know in NY? I know 14.
That's cute _33. I married into a family of NYS educators and and a couple of educational rights attorneys. Go make us a video.
-
I'm 100% a socialist when it comes to education.
ummm
I'm only in favor of consolidation when it's best for the kids.
-
Some things that need to be set straight here:
1. About half the state budget is spent on education and way more than half the state's income taxes come from Johnson County - JoCo does in fact fund other districts.
2. If the only criticisms of the voucher system are that it makes a terrible school worse and kids have to go further to get to school, then the voucher system must be pretty great. Forcing people to stay in bad situations because "neighborhood" is a pretty dumb reason.
3. NY costs more than Kansas, but not 5 times as much. Not even twice as much. So that doesn't even begin to explain the gap in spending per kid.
4. The synergies created by consolidation probably create de minimis cost savings. An inordinate and ever increasing amount of money is being spent on "special needs" children. This is caused in large part by a cottage industry of behavioral shrinks, paras, administrators, etc who have a vested interest in diagnosing every kid who ever misbehaves with some kind of disability. It's disgusting and they're bleeding the system dry, while stunting the growth of perfectly normal children. Even more disgusting are the doctors who give these children methamphetamine to correct their behavior.
5. Being a teacher is an inherently low skill job. You teach kids the most rudimentary concepts 8-9 months per year. That's why the job doesn't pay millions.
-
Preach Sugar, Preach!!!!!
-
While everything you say may be true, FSD, you really need to break it down into much smaller bites for your libtard audience.
-
Some things that need to be set straight here:
1. About half the state budget is spent on education and way more than half the state's income taxes come from Johnson County - JoCo does in fact fund other districts.
you think fact A and "fact" B produce that conclusion. :lol:
-
Some things that need to be set straight here:
1. About half the state budget is spent on education and way more than half the state's income taxes come from Johnson County - JoCo does in fact fund other districts.
2. If the only criticisms of the voucher system are that it makes a terrible school worse and kids have to go further to get to school, then the voucher system must be pretty great. Forcing people to stay in bad situations because "neighborhood" is a pretty dumb reason.
3. NY costs more than Kansas, but not 5 times as much. Not even twice as much. So that doesn't even begin to explain the gap in spending per kid.
4. The synergies created by consolidation probably create de minimis cost savings. An inordinate and ever increasing amount of money is being spent on "special needs" children. This is caused in large part by a cottage industry of behavioral shrinks, paras, administrators, etc who have a vested interest in diagnosing every kid who ever misbehaves with some kind of disability. It's disgusting and they're bleeding the system dry, while stunting the growth of perfectly normal children. Even more disgusting are the doctors who give these children methamphetamine to correct their behavior.
5. Being a teacher is an inherently low skill job. You teach kids the most rudimentary concepts 8-9 months per year. That's why the job doesn't pay millions.
1. Do you have a link to income tax revenues broken down by county? I doubt "way more than half" of them come from Johnson County, but even if that were true, less than half of the state's revenues come from income tax, anyway. Johnson county accounts for well under half of all sales tax revenues, which makes your statement that much less believable.
2. Who gets a voucher and who has to stay in the school you just made worse? A system that harms more people than it helps is a bad system.
3. NY doesn't spend twice as much per pupil as Kansas does. Kansas spends around $13,000.
4. I have no idea what you are talking about here.
5. I agree that teachers are mostly compensated fairly in Kansas. I would like to see year round school, with appropriate pay adjustments to compensate, though.
-
95% of New York is farms, ranches and dairies with Kansas type people.
-
Some things that need to be set straight here:
1. About half the state budget is spent on education and way more than half the state's income taxes come from Johnson County - JoCo does in fact fund other districts.
I assumed it was common knowledge that JoCo was about 20-25% of the state's population. Guess not.
you think fact A and "fact" B produce that conclusion. :lol:
-
2. Who gets a voucher and who has to stay in the school you just made worse? A system that harms more people than it helps is a bad system.
3. NY doesn't spend twice as much per pupil as Kansas does. Kansas spends around $13,000.
4. I have no idea what you are talking about here.
5. I agree that teachers are mostly compensated fairly in Kansas. I would like to see year round school, with appropriate pay adjustments to compensate, though.
2. Agreed, that was the point.
3. According to Paul Davis Kansas only spends 3950 per kid. Either way, the amount of money NY isn't entirely explained by col
4. Cool
5. I don't think the NEA, would go for that.
-
Some things that need to be set straight here:
1. About half the state budget is spent on education and way more than half the state's income taxes come from Johnson County - JoCo does in fact fund other districts.
I assumed it was common knowledge that JoCo was about 20-25% of the state's population. Guess not.
you think fact A and "fact" B produce that conclusion. :lol:
And you drop in another irrelevant fact in a quote fail. :lol:
-
Over simplification is always a dangerous proposition in the Pit, but also necessary to explain things to the unwashed masses. Such a conundrum.
Let's try again, If JoCo represents 22% of the population and 23% of the state's general fund comes from taxes on JoCo peeps and bus., then JoCo is subsidizing other counties' education. Does anyone actually doubt that JoCo residents and businesses fund a larger percentage of the state's general fund than its percent of the state’s population? If so, derp derp away
-
Over simplification is always a dangerous proposition in the Pit, but also necessary to explain things to the unwashed masses. Such a conundrum.
Let's try again, If JoCo represents 22% of the population and 23% of the state's general fund comes from taxes on JoCo peeps and bus., then JoCo is subsidizing other counties' education. Does anyone actually doubt that JoCo residents and businesses fund a larger percentage of the state's general fund than its percent of the state’s population? If so, derp derp away
You are also assuming that less than 23% of the state's general fund gets spent in Johnson County.
-
:lol:
-
Over simplification is always a dangerous proposition in the Pit, but also necessary to explain things to the unwashed masses. Such a conundrum.
Let's try again, If JoCo represents 22% of the population and 23% of the state's general fund comes from taxes on JoCo peeps and bus., then JoCo is subsidizing other counties' education. Does anyone actually doubt that JoCo residents and businesses fund a larger percentage of the state's general fund than its percent of the state’s population? If so, derp derp away
You are also assuming that less than 23% of the state's general fund gets spent in Johnson County.
Just the part allocated to education spending. JFC is math not a thing anymore? How can you people be so obtuse? This is extremely simple.
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
I'm not even arguing with you, just laughing at your horrible attempt at logic. :lol:
-
Pffft.... Pwn3d
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
About half the budget is spent on education.
Sales taxes and income taxes are different.
If they pay more into the general fund than is returned, then they are subsidizing education, because math. 50 cents of every tax dollar is allocated for education and that pro rata portion is not spent in joco.
these are such simple concepts
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
I'm not even arguing with you, just laughing at your horrible attempt at logic. :lol:
Stop being such a douche and explain your position.
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
About half the budget is spent on education.
Sales taxes and income taxes are different.
If they pay more into the general fund than is returned, then they are subsidizing education, because math. 50 cents of every tax dollar is allocated for education and that pro rata portion is not spent in joco.
these are such simple concepts
Counties don't pay income tax, though. Individuals do. A wealthy Johnson County resident is not subsidizing education in Cherokee County any more than a similarly wealthy Finney County resident is. Also, by not looking at the other half of the budget and where those funds go, your whole argument is completely meaningless. I'm sure Johnson County gets a bigger slice of the transportation budget than most other counties, for instance.
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
I bet at least a quarter of that sales tax is from non residents
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
About half the budget is spent on education.
Sales taxes and income taxes are different.
If they pay more into the general fund than is returned, then they are subsidizing education, because math. 50 cents of every tax dollar is allocated for education and that pro rata portion is not spent in joco.
these are such simple concepts
Counties don't pay income tax, though. Individuals do. A wealthy Johnson County resident is not subsidizing education in Cherokee County any more than a similarly wealthy Finney County resident is. Also, by not looking at the other half of the budget and where those funds go, your whole argument is completely meaningless. I'm sure Johnson County gets a bigger slice of the transportation budget than most other counties, for instance.
Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? I'm talking about the people of JoCo, not the rough ridin' political subdivision. Of course the county, fabricated by individuals out of points in space, does not pay taxes. It doesn't exist but for the people who live in and govern it. The people of Johnson County derive direct benefit from its school districts, they obtain no direct benefit from the Cherokee county school districts.
JFC
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
I bet at least a quarter of that sales tax is from non residents
How much do you want to bet?
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
About half the budget is spent on education.
Sales taxes and income taxes are different.
If they pay more into the general fund than is returned, then they are subsidizing education, because math. 50 cents of every tax dollar is allocated for education and that pro rata portion is not spent in joco.
these are such simple concepts
Counties don't pay income tax, though. Individuals do. A wealthy Johnson County resident is not subsidizing education in Cherokee County any more than a similarly wealthy Finney County resident is. Also, by not looking at the other half of the budget and where those funds go, your whole argument is completely meaningless. I'm sure Johnson County gets a bigger slice of the transportation budget than most other counties, for instance.
Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? I'm talking about the people of JoCo, not the rough ridin' political subdivision. Of course the county, fabricated by individuals out of points in space, does not pay taxes. It doesn't exist but for the people who live in and govern it. The people of Johnson County derive direct benefit from its school districts, they obtain no direct benefit from the Cherokee county school districts.
JFC
They don't pay more or receive less than the people of any other county on an individual basis.
-
Is anybody still seriously arguing that the JoCo tax base isn't helping to prop up counties in western Kansas, be it schools, infrastructure, or otherwise? Or are you guys just rough ridin' around with FSD?
-
According to KDR, approximately 30% of sales tax revenue was derived from JOCO and it's munis in FY2014. Per the census 19% of the state's population lives there. Is it that hard to believe income taxes aren't collected at a similar or greater level (KDR doesn't have count by county data I could find) for the most affluent county in the state?
Are actually disputing that education isn't funded out of the general fund? Do you believe that JOCO receives the proportionate amount back paid in?
I assume you're just trying to provide cover for your own stupidity, but the pitsters aren't even that dumb.
Half the budget is not education, though. 30% is not way more than half of the state's tax revenue. It is way less than half. I have little doubt that Johnson county pays more in taxes than it receives, but that doesn't mean that the citizens of Johnson County are subsidizing education for the rest of the state. Every county has its rich and poor.
About half the budget is spent on education.
Sales taxes and income taxes are different.
If they pay more into the general fund than is returned, then they are subsidizing education, because math. 50 cents of every tax dollar is allocated for education and that pro rata portion is not spent in joco.
these are such simple concepts
Counties don't pay income tax, though. Individuals do. A wealthy Johnson County resident is not subsidizing education in Cherokee County any more than a similarly wealthy Finney County resident is. Also, by not looking at the other half of the budget and where those funds go, your whole argument is completely meaningless. I'm sure Johnson County gets a bigger slice of the transportation budget than most other counties, for instance.
Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? I'm talking about the people of JoCo, not the rough ridin' political subdivision. Of course the county, fabricated by individuals out of points in space, does not pay taxes. It doesn't exist but for the people who live in and govern it. The people of Johnson County derive direct benefit from its school districts, they obtain no direct benefit from the Cherokee county school districts.
JFC
They don't pay more or receive less than the people of any other county on an individual basis.
This is untrue on a county-wide and individual basis, as repeatedly demonstrated above.
-
Is anybody still seriously arguing that the JoCo tax base isn't helping to prop up counties in western Kansas, be it schools, infrastructure, or otherwise? Or are you guys just rough ridin' around with FSD?
Very similar to how blue States prop up the taker red states
-
If a JoCo resident and a FiCo resident each pay $1 of taxes into the general fund, and the general fund allocates a disproportionately higher amount of that fund to Finney County than JoCo, then JoCo is subsidizing Finney. Simple math
-
If a JoCo resident and a FiCo resident each pay $1 of taxes into the general fund, and the general fund allocates a disproportionately higher amount of that fund to Finney County than JoCo, then JoCo is subsidizing Finney. Simple math
Do you have a link to tax distributions? I wouldn't be so sure that Finney gets a disproportionate amount of funding. Brownback has made it so that farmers can create an LLC and not pay taxes, so revenues aren't going to be as high as they were before him, but Finney and Ford counties create a pretty large amount of revenue per capita.
-
If a JoCo resident and a FiCo resident each pay $1 of taxes into the general fund, and the general fund allocates a disproportionately higher amount of that fund to Finney County than JoCo, then JoCo is subsidizing Finney. Simple math
Sedgwick pays a significant share of sales taxes that go to help other parts of the state but I don't get bent out of shape about it.
-
im so sick of subsidizing ottawa county
-
it literally makes me ill
-
I got my dog in ottawa (maybe?)
-
I got my dog in ottawa (maybe?)
county or city? i need to know who funded your obamadog
-
I dunno, wats that place south of Lawrence? It was like 5 miles south of that
-
I dunno, wats that place south of Lawrence? It was like 5 miles south of that
oh, that's an fsd pup for sure
-
:love:
-
Baldwin Dog is all over the states assistance ledger. I bet its super lazy and smokes pot a bunch with Wacky's old neighbor.
-
Well this is adorbs-pathetic