Have you ever asked yourself why homeowners in The Villages have to pay school taxes? This tax has no tangible value to seniors, especially those living on a fixed income, so why do we have to pay it? Most likely if you owned a home in another location, had school age children the paying of school tax was ingrained in your mind as having a benefit for you, but paying the school tax now as a senior has no benefit than I can see other than taking money out of my pocket.

I understand The Villages has a great school system, however in all honesty I don't care simply because paying for other peoples children's education is metaphorically taking "food off my table". As a senior who no longer has the ability to increase my income I feel this is a fair way of protecting my lifestyle in light of constant increases is goods and services.

I'd be interested in hearing some feedback on this topic.

But there are tangible benefits.
TV schools are predominantly for the children of those who work in TV
Doctors
Lawyers
Hair dresser
Plumber
Restaurant owners & staff
Store owners & staff
Etc
Etc

Many of all of our favorite goods and services and service providers may well not be here if the schools did not exist.

You can't pick and chose, which government programs you want to pay for, and the ones that you don't. When we had children, someone else that didn't have kids, paid for a portion of our children's education. Turn about is fair play.

The taxes that you should worry about are a flat tax with no deductions, and a national sales tax. A flat tax with no deductions is about a regressive tax as you can get. Therefore, it will never happen.

I don't remember the exact number but I think that 16+% of seniors don't pay income tax. A national sales tax would increase the taxes for all of those seniors. We paid income taxes all of our lives, and now they are going to change the rules. Just fix the federal income tax taking away the rules that help people at the top avoid playing taxes.

If you want to call this socialism, go right ahead. What do you call the top income earners buying their Congressman or woman? Good use of their money!

Originally Posted by Guest

You can't pick and chose, which government programs you want to pay for, and the ones that you don't. When we had children, someone else that didn't have kids, paid for a portion of our children's education. Turn about is fair play.

The taxes that you should worry about are a flat tax with no deductions, and a national sales tax. A flat tax with no deductions is about a regressive tax as you can get. Therefore, it will never happen.

I don't remember the exact number but I think that 16+% of seniors don't pay income tax. A national sales tax would increase the taxes for all of those seniors. We paid income taxes all of our lives, and now they are going to change the rules. Just fix the federal income tax taking away the rules that help people at the top avoid playing taxes.

If you want to call this socialism, go right ahead. What do you call the top income earners buying their Congressman or woman? Good use of their money!

If everyone pays a portion of their income, then they have an investment in the game. Bush messed up with the tax breaks he gave to the lower income folks, in that they no longer have an investment in the game and do not care HOW that money is being utilized.
In my opinion, taxing anyone more than another is not treating everyone equally and is unconstitutional.

Unfortunately we have never had children but have had to pay property taxes all our lives to put children thru school. It is amazing how much money is going to schools. I'd be more concerned about what we are getting for our money. What is the U.S. position in education in regard to math, science, ect. with the rest of the world. What are those countries paying per student compared to us. What percent of each dollar goes toward salary? The questions go on and on.

Are you talking about eliminating every social program that helps low income folks? Are you talking about getting rid the earned income credit? The low income do have an investment in the game. It is called putting food on the table.

You could soften the blow on low income people by getting rid of social security, and Medicare taxes. You treat them like any other item in the budget funded by income taxes. You just reduced the national debt by 5.1 trillion dollars. There would be no need for the Social Security Trust Fund. You just increased the tax on people making over the social security maximum by 6.2%.

A flat tax based upon gross income would destroy the housing market. How many people bought their house with the assumption that property tax, and mortgage interest were deductible on their income taxes? Take away these deductions they can't pay their mortgage. The housing market would be flooded. Housing prices drop, and you have a banking crises to equal or worse then the 2008 great recession.

Simple solution to a complex problem never works.

Originally Posted by Guest

Unfortunately we have never had children but have had to pay property taxes all our lives to put children thru school. It is amazing how much money is going to schools. I'd be more concerned about what we are getting for our money. What is the U.S. position in education in regard to math, science, ect. with the rest of the world. What are those countries paying per student compared to us. What percent of each dollar goes toward salary? The questions go on and on.

Public information.

Look it up

Originally Posted by Guest

Unfortunately we have never had children but have had to pay property taxes all our lives to put children thru school. It is amazing how much money is going to schools. I'd be more concerned about what we are getting for our money. What is the U.S. position in education in regard to math, science, ect. with the rest of the world. What are those countries paying per student compared to us. What percent of each dollar goes toward salary? The questions go on and on.

At the age most of us are now....iF you haven't decided to find out up until now. Then don't worry about.
On the plus side you could view you are almost done paying!

Originally Posted by Guest

Are you talking about eliminating every social program that helps low income folks? Are you talking about getting rid the earned income credit? The low income do have an investment in the game. It is called putting food on the table.

You could soften the blow on low income people by getting rid of social security, and Medicare taxes. You treat them like any other item in the budget funded by income taxes. You just reduced the national debt by 5.1 trillion dollars. There would be no need for the Social Security Trust Fund. You just increased the tax on people making over the social security maximum by 6.2%.

A flat tax based upon gross income would destroy the housing market. How many people bought their house with the assumption that property tax, and mortgage interest were deductible on their income taxes? Take away these deductions they can't pay their mortgage. The housing market would be flooded. Housing prices drop, and you have a banking crises to equal or worse then the 2008 great recession.

Simple solution to a complex problem never works.

Sure, get rid of the earned income credit. Why not? Why should someone be given money they never paid into the system?
As far as SS and Medicare, if you wish to get rid of it, fine. Give me all that I paid in plus the interest I WOULD have accumulated if it had been invested. As far as Medicare is concerned, I don't use it. I have full coverage under BC/BS. Medicare is a ripoff unless you are willing to pay extra for Medicare part B,C and D. The medicare that you pay for all your life before retirement only pays for hospitalization. If you don't believe me, look it up.
As for those getting some sort of breaks or they can't afford to pay their mortgage, oh well. You shouldn't borrow money you can't afford to pay back out of your budget. Just because the gov gets away with it, doesn't make it right. Tough love, baby.
And bailing out the banks was not my idea. Did they bail you out when your stock portfolio took a dive? No!
Sounds to me like you are living off the gov teat and don't understand the concept of being weaned off of it. A mature healthy adult doesn't need someone else to pay their way.
Your comment about low income people being invested in the game by providing food for the table, is ludicrous. That's not investment, that's dependence. Depending on someone else to provide for them, the gov. You don't seem to understand at all.
We had the mortgage crisis for other reasons than folks getting tax breaks and then being able to pay their mortgages. TO simplify it, those that gave up on paying their mortgages did so because they had adjustable rate mortgages that they couldn't pay after five years because the interest rate went up. They should never have been given those loans to begin with. Many of them thought they were going to make a million bucks over night when their home value went up. It had been for several years before the buble finally burst. They walked away without paying their obligation.

But, this has nothing to do with school taxes. The answer to that question is, yes you should pay for it, just as everyone else participates in it. As long as the gov intends to provide eduction for our children, then yes we should pay taxes for it. If you don't drive, do you believe that you should pay taxes to pay for maintaining the highways and bridges? Same thing.

No one enjoys paying taxes. What we really hate is when that money the gov takes from us is used frivolously.

A better question to ask is why is the amount of tax you pay into the school system tied to the assessed value of your house (property tax). Also, in Sumter County, which has the highest average age of any county in the US, you would expect the property tax to be very low since the number of households with school age kids should be relatively small.

Originally Posted by Guest

Have you ever asked yourself why homeowners in The Villages have to pay school taxes? This tax has no tangible value to seniors, especially those living on a fixed income, so why do we have to pay it? Most likely if you owned a home in another location, had school age children the paying of school tax was ingrained in your mind as having a benefit for you, but paying the school tax now as a senior has no benefit than I can see other than taking money out of my pocket.

I understand The Villages has a great school system, however in all honesty I don't care simply because paying for other peoples children's education is metaphorically taking "food off my table". As a senior who no longer has the ability to increase my income I feel this is a fair way of protecting my lifestyle in light of constant increases is goods and services.

I'd be interested in hearing some feedback on this topic.

Originally Posted by Guest

Public information.

Look it up

Get a grip, his questions were rhetorical.

You know what your problem is you don't know how to read. You are so interested in starting an argument that your flush common sense, if you had any, down the drain. You just want to argue for argument sake.

We have gone over Social Security, and Medicare before. We paid for the people that were collecting at the time. Money wasn't put aside for us. The government could stop these programs, and we would get a dime. My post said we should get rid of the TAX, and not SS, and Medicare. THE TAX, and treat it like all other government programs.

The people could and did make their mortgage payments until the government changed the rules of the road. If you don't think that would create a fire storm with these people, you live in another world.

My stock portfolio didn't take a dive in 2008 quite the opposite. I moved my money into the money market portion of our retirement plan before the dive. When the market started to recover, I returned it to stock market. I doubled my money. Thank you "W".

When the minimum wage doesn't give people a living wage, that is corporate welfare. We have gone over this before. Corporations relying on welfare is dependence also. That flies both ways. Corporations are people as ruled by the Supreme Court. Therefore, they should be taxed on sales. Why should they be able to deduct their expenses, when the ordinary citizens can't?

I am collecting social security, and you are also. I am sucking off the government teat, but you aren't! When you try to insult someone make sure you aren't receiving the same thing that they are. Since you continue to act like a kid, I am going to treat you like a kid. Here is the old saying, "I am rubber. You are glue. Everything that you say about me bounces off me and sticks to you."

It wasn't the people that took adjustable loans, and couldn't afford to make payments, when their rate went up. Some of these people couldn't make the first loan payment. The people that gave them the loans didn't care. The package garbage loans together, and sold them to retirement plans as A+ rating mortgages. I know this is totally out of character for you, but think before you post.

Do you have a Supplemental insurance plan through BCBS? Then more then likely, the money that is being deducted from your social security check is sent to BCBS,. This reduces your premium.

Originally Posted by Guest

You know what your problem is you don't know how to read. You are so interested in starting an argument that your flush common sense, if you had any, down the drain. You just want to argue for argument sake.

We have gone over Social Security, and Medicare before. We paid for the people that were collecting at the time. Money wasn't put aside for us. The government could stop these programs, and we would get a dime. My post said we should get rid of the TAX, and not SS, and Medicare. THE TAX, and treat it like all other government programs.

The people could and did make their mortgage payments until the government changed the rules of the road. If you don't think that would create a fire storm with these people, you live in another world.

My stock portfolio didn't take a dive in 2008 quite the opposite. I moved my money into the money market portion of our retirement plan before the dive. When the market started to recover, I returned it to stock market. I doubled my money. Thank you "W".

When the minimum wage doesn't give people a living wage, that is corporate welfare. We have gone over this before. Corporations relying on welfare is dependence also. That flies both ways. Corporations are people as ruled by the Supreme Court. Therefore, they should be taxed on sales. Why should they be able to deduct their expenses, when the ordinary citizens can't?

I am collecting social security, and you are also. I am sucking off the government teat, but you aren't! When you try to insult someone make sure you aren't receiving the same thing that they are. Since you continue to act like a kid, I am going to treat you like a kid. Here is the old saying, "I am rubber. You are glue. Everything that you say about me bounces off me and sticks to you."

It wasn't the people that took adjustable loans, and couldn't afford to make payments, when their rate went up. Some of these people couldn't make the first loan payment. The people that gave them the loans didn't care. The package garbage loans together, and sold them to retirement plans as A+ rating mortgages. I know this is totally out of character for you, but think before you post.

Do you have a Supplemental insurance plan through BCBS? Then more then likely, the money that is being deducted from your social security check is sent to BCBS,. This reduces your premium.

You start off you comment by attacking and then accuse others? Funny.

Whatever you are talking about regarding SS and Medicare...whatever...whatever makes you feel good. They are bother mishandled.'

I have no idea what you mean by "they couldn't make the first loan payment." Sounds like they were irresponsible like the post that you are referencing. I find it interesting that you blame the banks for giving them the loans that they couldn't afford....kind of like they were children that didn't know any better and the big mean banks took advantage of them. For what reason? I guess so they could go bankrupt? You didn't mention Fanny or Freddy or how congress hosed that up. Too bad Bush couldn't get through to them when he tried more than once or twice. He tried to get them audited, but Barney Frank put a kibosh on that idea.

I am so glad that you were smart enough to not lose any money during the stock market crash. I am glad you were so much smarter than the rest of those losers.

Too bad you are wrong about my BC/BS. It's not a supplement and no, I do not have ANY deductions from my SS. I opted out of Medicare B so I have no deduction for that. I have full coverage BC/BS and thankfully so. Medicare sucks, as far as what we paid all our working life for.

Too bad you thought I was attempting to insult you. I don't know you well enough to care, and it's obvious that you have a high enough opinion of yourself without my encouragement. Maybe you consider yourself as taking the gov teat, but I don't consider my investment in SS as partaking of the gov teat. Any money I get from SS, I earned. If they want to discontinue it, I am also fine with it. I'll take my money, invest it as it should have been, and go my merry way. If it had been handled properly, I could have been living a grand old lifestyle.

I'm not going to address your interpretation of corporate welfare, because we just disagree, period. I don't believe the gov should be involved in minimum wages. I believe that wages are driven by demand and profit. I don't even believe that unions are relevant any more. They had their use in the past, but now they are a hindrance. We have federal laws protecting the worker now. Too many, in my opinion.

And before you respond, if you respond try to remember that folks have conversations on here, sometimes debates. It's not personal. No need to get angry. Suffice it to say that sometimes we don't agree. That's America, where we still have that option....for now.

Have a great day.

You start off you comment by attacking and then accuse others? Funny.

You know what is funny, You do it all the time, and don't even realize it. When someone responds in kind, they are the problem. Anyone that gets mad because of something that is said here should seek immediate mental help.

The banks, and mortgage brokers were handing out mortgages like popcorn, because they were at no risk. They would group them immediately, and pass them off as A+ rated investments. The originating bank or mortgage companies were never at risk of going bankrupt. Sarcasm isn't your strong suit.

Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd didn't realize what the Mortgage companies, and bankers were doing concerning making home ownership available to everyone. No one did. If "W" was aware of what they were doing, why didn't he make it known to everyone? Why wait until the whole thing exploded?

Frank, and Dodd did try to correct the situation through legislation, and a government oversight committee that was to be headed by Elizabeth Warren. The Republicans blocked her approval. That worked out well for them, didn't it? Nobody is walking away with clean hands in the 2008 great recession.

Too bad you thought I was attempting to insult you. I don't know you well enough to care, and it's obvious that you have a high enough opinion of yourself without my encouragement. Maybe you consider yourself as taking the gov teat, but I don't consider my investment in SS as partaking of the gov teat. Any money I get from SS, I earned. If they want to discontinue it, I am also fine with it. I'll take my money, invest it as it should have been, and go my merry way. If it had been handled properly, I could have been living a grand old lifestyle.

This paragraph speaks volumes about you. You continue to think that the money you put into SS will be returned to you, if they discontinue the program despite all evidence to the contrary. You can't even recall what you said. You made the assumption that I was under the age of 65, and collecting welfare. I think that you were also the person that said I was living in my mother's basement. Somehow you don't consider these insults. That's sad. You will do this over, and over, and think the other person is the problem.

Originally Posted by Guest

You start off you comment by attacking and then accuse others? Funny.

You know what is funny, You do it all the time, and don't even realize it. When someone responds in kind, they are the problem. Anyone that gets mad because of something that is said here should seek immediate mental help.

The banks, and mortgage brokers were handing out mortgages like popcorn, because they were at no risk. They would group them immediately, and pass them off as A+ rated investments. The originating bank or mortgage companies were never at risk of going bankrupt. Sarcasm isn't your strong suit.

Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd didn't realize what the Mortgage companies, and bankers were doing concerning making home ownership available to everyone. No one did. If "W" was aware of what they were doing, why didn't he make it known to everyone? Why wait until the whole thing exploded?

Frank, and Dodd did try to correct the situation through legislation, and a government oversight committee that was to be headed by Elizabeth Warren. The Republicans blocked her approval. That worked out well for them, didn't it? Nobody is walking away with clean hands in the 2008 great recession.

Too bad you thought I was attempting to insult you. I don't know you well enough to care, and it's obvious that you have a high enough opinion of yourself without my encouragement. Maybe you consider yourself as taking the gov teat, but I don't consider my investment in SS as partaking of the gov teat. Any money I get from SS, I earned. If they want to discontinue it, I am also fine with it. I'll take my money, invest it as it should have been, and go my merry way. If it had been handled properly, I could have been living a grand old lifestyle.

This paragraph speaks volumes about you. You continue to think that the money you put into SS will be returned to you, if they discontinue the program despite all evidence to the contrary. You can't even recall what you said. You made the assumption that I was under the age of 65, and collecting welfare. I think that you were also the person that said I was living in my mother's basement. Somehow you don't consider these insults. That's sad. You will do this over, and over, and think the other person is the problem.

You are very confused. I get it. You attack and then assure everyone that you are the victim. I don't know what you mean by "always" regarding anything I say. I haven't been on this forum until about a week ago. As far as accusing you of living in your mom's basement, I have no idea where you got that, but there are no basements around here. Perhaps just a bit of paranoia?
I am not going to address your rhetoric because you have a warped outlook on the issues. I made my point and I consider your perspective flawed. I am not saying you are uninformed, just that you look at your information in a skewed and liberal manner. Suffice it to say, we don't agree.
The topic was school taxes. I have no problem with being taxed for the school system. I do believe that the fed should stay out of education and leave it to the individual states. Most of what the feds do is over reach and redundant. Their primary charter is national security and defense. Just about everything else is redundant.