Comments on: This Weekend’s Unanswered Questions (111905)

By: dave

dave — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:17:48 +0000

Given the layoffs, the Ford restructuring plan should be renamed “Way Forward Without You”

By: Kevin Irwin

Kevin Irwin — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:49:53 +0000

I think the Turnpike Authority is footing the rest of the bill, so it’s in-state money.

By: TBlumer

TBlumer — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:40:25 +0000

#8, I was in MA earlier this year–Isn’t the correct description “are still paying” instead of “paid”?

By: Kevin Irwin

Kevin Irwin — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:34:02 +0000

I have no problem with the Big Dig. Our disproportionate tax receipts paid for it.

By: TBlumer

TBlumer — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:27:37 +0000

#6, see, there’s an example of a restricted gift: “I’ll pay more, but all funds have to be earmarked for people or projects in my state.”–”I want my own Bridge to Nowhere, Big Dig, etc.” :–>

By: Kevin Irwin

Kevin Irwin — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:20:13 +0000

Yeah, just a little frustrated when traditionally Democrat donor states like mine will fund Republican recipient states like AK, MS, etc. who then will complain about taxes.

By: TBlumer

TBlumer — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:08:50 +0000

#4, I like the third idea. Make all “gifts” to the government conditional for specific purpose, just as a lot of people are suggesting donors to colleges do with their big gifts.

I’d love to see if that could pass legal muster.

What, you have a problem with a $231 million bridge that serves 5,000 people? :–>

By: Kevin Irwin

Kevin Irwin — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:54:54 +0000

As long as they come out way ahead when they cash out, present homeowners could care less about the next generation.

Car manufacturers make most of their money through their lending arms. When they offered the zero-interest loans, profits were still paltry.

Let's let those who want to donate more to the government do just that, but let's make sure that it goes towards some real utilitarian service, not another Ketchikan AK earmark.

By: TBlumer

TBlumer — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:46:01 +0000

#1, That was actually in the NRO column, but I was running long already. Very good point.

#2Q1--even existing homeowners know that if their values go up 10+% year after year that the next generation won't be able to afford to own homes, or homes as we know them.

#2Q2--good point-they prematurely filled up the pipeline. What they should do is consider settling existing 0% loans for less than face value, which they adamantly refuse to do, if you come in and buy another venicle. It's another band-aid in a sense, but it buys them time.

#2Q3--Of course it's a gift. Undertaxed liberals should be willing to give it if they think the government is so underfunded.

By: Kevin Irwin

Kevin Irwin — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:19:07 +0000

Question 1: Homeowners think that double-digit growth in their home equity is a good thing.

Question 2: The big three are suffering because of their zero-percent interest loans from a couple years ago. Remember the tremendous increase in new car purchases between 2001-2003? Well no one needs new cars. They *especially* don't need/want new cars that consume copious amounts of gas. But I'm sure that trial lawyers are somehow at fault for this.

Question 3: The HOT is not a tax. It's a gift. Taxes are levied to collect revenue for services provided by the government to the public. A gift (a la Webster's) is something bestowed voluntarily and without compensation.

By: LargeBill

LargeBill — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:18:04 +0000

If I remember right John Kerry is from Massachusetts and declined to pay higher state taxes when given the chance.