You dumb MFers

[MakeItRain]

I told all of you that this amendment proposal to cap boat taxes was a bad idea.  You dummies said that the proposal would increase boat tax revenue because more people in border communities would register their boats in Kansas.  Well...
http://www.kansas.com/2013/01/15/2636900/kansas-boat-taxes-would-be-gradually.html#emlnl=Afternoon_Headlines_Newsletter

slightly dated link but who cares. Kansas is already broke and the morons in the state are actually removing revenue sources. I hope all of you who voted for the amendment and don't or won't own boats are going to be happy with making up these phased out boat taxes with your increased property taxes.

[OK_Cat]

[CNS]

Prop taxes are about to get really bad for other reason.  When Brownback was running, there was an exchange about prop taxes making up for underfunding of schools.  He basically said that he has no controls over prop taxes and then when on to talk about the schools learning how to function with less funding.  Now the KS Supreme court has ruled the current funding level unconstitutional and said that the state wide amount would need to be increased by what equates to approximately $400M.  A day or two later, Brownback announces another income tax cut. 

Guess where the money will prob end up coming from?

[06wildcat]

Prop taxes are about to get really bad for other reason.  When Brownback was running, there was an exchange about prop taxes making up for underfunding of schools.  He basically said that he has no controls over prop taxes and then when on to talk about the schools learning how to function with less funding.  Now the KS Supreme court has ruled the current funding level unconstitutional and said that the state wide amount would need to be increased by what equates to approximately $400M.  A day or two later, Brownback announces another income tax cut. 

Guess where the money will prob end up coming from?

He also wants to remove the cap on the local option budgets (currently 27 percent of the state aid amount a district receives) to hide the fact he wants to destroy funding for k-12 education.

Also this session: the selection of judges will be changed from a largely non-partisan panel to the ultra-conservative legislature and the state's constitution will be changed so the legislature can determine suitable school funding to be $1 plus a hearty eff you for the kids.

[Dr Rick Daris]

brownback is a complete rough ridin' idiot. source-two people who work in the state budget office.

[kim carnes]

brownback is a complete rough ridin' idiot. source-two people who work in the state budget office.

nice source

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

You dumbfucks look pretty rough ridin' stupid saying you'd rather pay 6% of your income in taxes than another fraction of a percent on your house.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Also, LOL at the notion that the state is broke or that some cherry picked district court is able to tell the legislature the increase in school funding is insufficient.

Agreed, Brownback is kind of a dumbfuck.  But the stuff your bitching about makes him 1/100 the dumbfuck Obama is.

[Kat Kid]

Also, LOL at the notion that the state is broke or that some cherry picked district court is able to tell the legislature the increase in school funding is insufficient.

Agreed, Brownback is kind of a dumbfuck.  But the stuff your bitching about makes him 1/100 the dumbfuck Obama is.

Brownback is absolutely a dumbfuck.  I don't think anything in this thread proves it.  In fact this thread kind of works against that notion as he seems to be getting his policies passed.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

It always dumbfounds me that anyone would be upset about paying less money to the government. We all complain about how inefficient and stupid our government is, but some people want to give them more money to waste. If you are truly concerned about the poor, go find some and help them out. Government sucks at it.

[CNS]

Giving govt money to waste and adequately funding education and not cowardly passing the responsibility on to other measures that equate to us funding ed and other political policies that were cut at one level only to be force funded at another are basically the same thing.  Brownback is cuting in one area to save others but we will have to fund those cut through prop taxes thus not accomplishing his initial intent.  So what is he saving us?   What good are his cuts if they will simply be funded by the same ppl, just at s diff category of tax.

[06wildcat]

It always dumbfounds me that anyone would be upset about paying less money to the government. We all complain about how inefficient and stupid our government is, but some people want to give them more money to waste. If you are truly concerned about the poor, go find some and help them out. Government sucks at it.

Nice strawman.

[jmlynch1]

This thread has been a treat to read.

[ednksu]

wow.  I love it when people expose Fake like this.  Fantastic work.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The problem with your argument (as best as I can tell what it is) is that its based on a false premise. You think the education budget is being reduced when in reality its being increased.

When Sebelius was governor the state had a $500m deficit, smaller education budget and less revenue. None of you nitwits thought the state was broke then and there wasn't some leftist judge ordering the state to spend more money.  Brownback comes in and consolidates a bunch of government offices doing duplicative or little work, shrinking admin overhead without effecting the "benefit" and you throw a fit.  Then you make allusions to services lost and picking up the tab locally with your best example being some article on boat taxes. 

Sorry if you great aunt lost her 13 hr a week $36,0000 a year job in Topeka, but the state shouldn't have to pay for that.  Notice I use "state" in the context of its citizens not its government.  I encourage all of you to start thinking that way.

[Kat Kid]

The problem with your argument (as best as I can tell what it is) is that its based on a false premise. You think the education budget is being reduced when in reality its being increased.

When Sebelius was governor the state had a $500m deficit, smaller education budget and less revenue. None of you nitwits thought the state was broke then and there wasn't some leftist judge ordering the state to spend more money.  Brownback comes in and consolidates a bunch of government offices doing duplicative or little work, shrinking admin overhead without effecting the "benefit" and you throw a fit.  Then you make allusions to services lost and picking up the tab locally with your best example being some article on boat taxes. 

Sorry if you great aunt lost her 13 hr a week $36,0000 a year job in Topeka, but the state shouldn't have to pay for that.  Notice I use "state" in the context of its citizens not its government.  I encourage all of you to start thinking that way.

not 100% sure you understand education budgeting.

[steve dave]

dumbasses

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The problem with your argument (as best as I can tell what it is) is that its based on a false premise. You think the education budget is being reduced when in reality its being increased.

When Sebelius was governor the state had a $500m deficit, smaller education budget and less revenue. None of you nitwits thought the state was broke then and there wasn't some leftist judge ordering the state to spend more money.  Brownback comes in and consolidates a bunch of government offices doing duplicative or little work, shrinking admin overhead without effecting the "benefit" and you throw a fit.  Then you make allusions to services lost and picking up the tab locally with your best example being some article on boat taxes. 

Sorry if you great aunt lost her 13 hr a week $36,0000 a year job in Topeka, but the state shouldn't have to pay for that.  Notice I use "state" in the context of its citizens not its government.  I encourage all of you to start thinking that way.

not 100% sure you understand education budgeting.

Why? Because I'm not taking cover from the falling sky based on some unfounded vague speculation?

The #butthurt argument (again, as best as I can tell) is that reduced state spending will force local govt to pick up the bill. That's a false premise in the education context.  Not sure what other "services" are affected, other than a bunch govt salaried wastoids will have to get a real job.  There were some allusions to other programs being brought under the education umbrella, of course nothing was specified.

Educate me you snarky bad person.  Or is this just another exercise in bitching about nothing because ya'll ain't got nuttin to bitch about.

[michigancat]

FSD is like 1/100,000 the dumbfuck kk is.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

FSD is like 1/100,000 the dumbfuck kk is.

 

[kim carnes]

Brownback is a stud

[Kat Kid]

FSD is like 1/100,000 the dumbfuck kk is.

 

damn.

 

[michigancat]

Ha ha, just joshin.

[felix rex]

I wouldn't read many boat tax rants, but I will ALWAYS read a MIR boat tax rant.

[06wildcat]

To save everyone not Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (ENR for short) from FSD here's how the conversation would go:

ENR: Base state aid (the money actually distributed to districts) has been cut

FSD: Doesn't matter, overall state spending has increased

ENR: Yes, it's increased for things like health care/pension costs, the latter of which is still underfunded by $8 billion

FSD: Unions are dumb, only dumbasses join unions

ENR: