tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-201185122024-03-05T19:10:37.901-05:00Maybe It's Just MeHarveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.comBlogger179125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-17566516124139394422015-05-07T06:42:00.000-04:002015-05-07T06:47:46.332-04:00What is a Constitution?<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
A constitution is a set of rules that govern the behavior of a state. The word “ought” expresses a duty or obligation but is not the same as a rule. The US Constitution does not have one occurrence of the word “ought” in it. </div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
But the word “ought” appears six times in the Rhode Island Constitution, Article 1. eg;</div>
<ul>
<li>“the burdens of the state ought to be fairly distributed among its citizens” </li>
<li>“Every person ought to obtain right and justice freely”. </li>
<li>“punishments ought to be proportioned to the offense”.</li>
</ul>
Our constitution should follow the US Constitution and state the rules clearly and positively with no ambiguity.<br />
<ul>
<li>“the burdens of the state shall be fairly distributed among its citizens” </li>
<li>“Every person shall obtain right and justice freely”. </li>
<li>“punishments shall to be proportioned to the offense”.</li>
</ul>
would be language befitting our constitution.<br />
<br />
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Maybe it's just me.</div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-36515106202742395722015-04-22T19:07:00.002-04:002015-04-22T19:07:43.683-04:00Who votes against good bills?When reporting on the votes on Bills to the General Assembly I would urge the reporter to list the names of those who voted for and against. Perhaps if legislators knew that the public would see in print who voted against popular bills such as Ethics Legislation they might think twice. We might get better legislation too.Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-21098463807254991102015-04-22T18:57:00.000-04:002015-04-22T18:57:44.684-04:00American Exceptionalism<br />
There was a letter to the editor in the Providence Journal on Friday, Apr 3, "Students right to defend their pride in America ", which said in part: "Moreover, if the fools to whom we entrust our posterity’s education can’t let go of their screwball ideological positions long enough to actually teach our kids the truth about who we are and what we stand for as a nation, then maybe it’s time to get some new teachers!".<br />
<br />
It reminded me of an incident which happened many decades ago when my children were small. My middle daughter came home crying because she told us that our next door neighbor's son fought with her and beat her up.<br />
<br />
I called the neighbor and told her that her boy beat up on my daughter and came home in tears. Her response was that she would always support her son, no matter what, right or wrong.<br />
<br />
Sounds like the letter writer believes the same thing about our country. The great truth about our country is that when we find something wrong we are willing to fix it. I don't believe that's a "screwball ideological position".<br />
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-82770814724487696772015-03-25T16:35:00.001-04:002015-04-01T09:54:15.748-04:00<div class="p1">
In some respects the property tax is the best tax. When a town sets a budget it knows exactly how much it will need from the citizens (the tax levy) and no other tax method can produce a specified amount as this can. But is the property tax fair to all property owners every year?</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
By valuing all property, a rate can be set to produce the tax levy. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Until 1998, revaluations were required once every 10 years. Back then some towns revalued even less often and some tax assessors were actually unable to tell me the date of their last revaluation. But towns still collected the required tax levy every year.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
During those early years property values remained fairly stable and most people saw their taxes change in step with the changes in the budget. But things changed dramatically in early 2000 and property values escalated. People were buying property at increasing values and being taxed on older assessments. Property owners rightly felt this was unfair.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The solution was to require triennial revaluations. New owners would now pay taxes based on fair market values.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
But what was the impact on the rest of the property owners? Were their property tax increases used for the tax levy or for something else?</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Let's imagine that one year, say 2007 which was a revaluation year, North Kingstown did not increase its tax levy. NO tax increase. The taxes would have looked like this:</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
For residential properties up to $100K the average tax would have increased 64.5%</div>
<div class="p1">
For residential properties from $100K to $200K the average tax would have increased 13.6%</div>
<div class="p1">
For residential properties from $200K to $500K the average tax would have decreased -0.4%</div>
<div class="p1">
For residential properties from $500K to $1M the average tax would have decreased -5.4%</div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<div class="p1">
For residential properties from $1M to $5M the average tax would have decreased -11.6%</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
In 2007 owners of the lower priced properties would have received large tax increases which did not go to the town but merely lowered the taxes of other tax payers, in this case the owners of more valuable properties.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
How can anyone call this fair? We can have a system that taxes both new and existing owners fairly every year. There is a solution. </div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
For more see <a href="http://righttax.org/" target="_blank">R.I.G.H.T</a>.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-41744408124354679282015-01-26T08:26:00.003-05:002015-01-26T08:26:55.230-05:00<br />
<div style="font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Verdana; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">In the Washington Post, November 26, 2014 Joann Weiner writes “The evidence is overwhelming. Diversity – gender, racial, ethnic, whatever – is good. Companies that put a priority on innovation are worth more when women hold top leadership positions. These companies are $44 million more valuable, on average, according to a multiyear academic study of Standard and Poor’s top 1,500 firms.” But is diversity the real reason?</span></div>
<div style="font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Verdana; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; min-height: 15px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Verdana; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">I believe when women get those leadership positions they must be more aggressive, more talented and more qualified than the men who had held those positions. This is still a man’s domain and I suggest that these women are just better in their jobs and that diversity alone has little to do with the success of those companies. They have better managers.</span></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-73449420926522060022014-09-20T10:29:00.003-04:002014-09-21T13:59:31.561-04:00Global warming, real or fake?<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There has been so much in the news about global warming and whether it is real or a hoax. My opinion won't change any minds but I'd like to suggest the following to help us make a sensible and beneficial choice.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />The argument swirls around which side is right, the climate deniers or the climate scientists. I suggest that we instead use a different approach: the consequences one side or the other being <u>wrong</u>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />If the believers get their way but are wrong, we will have spent multiple billions of dollars on non-polluting renewable energy sources at the cost of huge financial burdens on current energy suppliers. But we will have a higher quality of air and water and thus will our overall quality of life benefit. Oil imports will plummet reducing or eliminating the influence of mid east oil on our economy and foreign policies.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />On the other hand, if the deniers prevail but are wrong, we will have saved billions of dollars, but rising waters will devastate shorelines throughout the world, temperature extremes and severe weather will continue to increase, ocean temperatures will rise, marine and animal life will be significantly affected with major extinctions likely. Agriculture will be severely altered increasing the likelihood of mass starvations worldwide.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />Perhaps this simple thought exercise might help some to decide which is the better choice.</span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-64609230497614003962014-06-23T08:09:00.003-04:002014-06-23T08:12:04.400-04:00Exactly what's the problem?Here on the beach we have a wonderful facility for our citizens. <br />
<br />
To keep things clean we have a sign posted:<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQPTRP59k2Tg6voquoIITrAte6gFs47XlKzWsaePmnOFCtoopq2CdxhMpFMQOVxrwPZOof1OyWvDGphihnUFgp-MbKJtpDWLNzPODsS17idtELMqR_tAhJ7SqWAr6V1DOCQhzPWw/s1600/IMG_0434.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQPTRP59k2Tg6voquoIITrAte6gFs47XlKzWsaePmnOFCtoopq2CdxhMpFMQOVxrwPZOof1OyWvDGphihnUFgp-MbKJtpDWLNzPODsS17idtELMqR_tAhJ7SqWAr6V1DOCQhzPWw/s1600/IMG_0434.JPG" height="200" width="133" /></a><br />
<br />
This morning I was walking along the beach and came across this lovely sight.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikXrdjwYeDcuFWiIVIUHpS2irCMjnhWxJLjU7OwDf1k0IM2GnBkJ_ADIvbSFVUVYNgft487YUp6xQUhUULniIdYWUB-u4Clbwtq83Ul0_3bDypUKpiKiKZkBoWOkdBI4edxZPR6Q/s1600/IMG_0433.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikXrdjwYeDcuFWiIVIUHpS2irCMjnhWxJLjU7OwDf1k0IM2GnBkJ_ADIvbSFVUVYNgft487YUp6xQUhUULniIdYWUB-u4Clbwtq83Ul0_3bDypUKpiKiKZkBoWOkdBI4edxZPR6Q/s1600/IMG_0433.JPG" height="180" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><h2>
It wasn't dogs. Should we modify the sign?</h2>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-36934714067658447242014-03-24T08:15:00.002-04:002014-06-22T13:46:17.905-04:00How are we doing?<br />
In an article about Rep. Gordon Fox's resignation in the Providence Journal, March 24, Rep. Nicholas Mattiello was quoted as saying that his "biggest concern is uniting and unifying the House". Is that necessarily a worthy goal? In 2013 one party held 93% of the House seats and it's been this way for too many years. <br />
<br />
I'm an independent voter and it seems to me that such a dominance of one party over the other makes for a greater chance for poor government not better government, regardless of party.<br />
<br />
I'm reminded of Ed Koch, ex Mayor of NYC, who used to ask "How am I doing?" I too have to ask, "How are we doing"?Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-64234214740450459702014-03-14T08:10:00.002-04:002014-03-16T09:52:53.801-04:00Must be hard to be a lawyer.In the Journal today (March 14, 2014) was an article, "Mother of molested teen urges change in assault law". It seems there was a "loophole" that allowed her son's attacker to get off because there apparently was no "surprise" when he reached into the boy's shorts and touched his genitals as the boy was taking pictures on the East Bay Bike Path.<br />
<br />
The new law might now enable conviction if the state can prove one "engaged in a sexual act against a person's wishes through force or coercion or through surprise for the purpose of sexual gratification".<br />
<br />
Please forgive me for being so radical but isn't engaging in sex <b>against a person's wishes</b> enough? The perpetrator has to surprise the victim and be gratified too? Are we crazy?Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-69986679281368206452013-09-21T13:50:00.003-04:002013-09-21T13:50:53.355-04:00Pesky facts<br />
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Facts can be funny things.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
“Minimum-wage hike = minimum sense”, Jay Ambrose’s Providence Journal on December 6, 2013, got me thinking about how we react to what we are told are “facts”. Some “facts” in the article:</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<b>FACT</b>: ”... under 3% of the workforce get the minimum wage”. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
This implies that it really wouldn’t wouldn’t be such a big deal. I think it would be a pretty big deal to those 4.6 million people.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<b>FACT</b>:... “Hike the minimum wage and some people do get more, but others get fired or get fewer hours a week.” </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Maybe a fact but can’t we do better? Perhaps we could lower the exorbitant executive salary increases somewhat instead of firing the low end workers and moving business offshore.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<b>FACT</b>: “In the end, the minimum wage is a charade that interferes with rights of employers and employees to enter into contracts of their own choosing.”</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
This implies that both employers (Walmart) and employees (minimum-wage workers) can bargain on an equal footing. Does anyone really believe that?</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<b>FACT</b>: “During the same half century since the March on Washington, more than a score of major studies have verified that basic economic theory is right: The more businesses are forced to pay, the less likely they are to have as many jobs as they used to have.”</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Indeed. But they do manage to see that top executives’ pay has never been higher, and even if a CEO is fired he or she often leaves with astronomical benefits packages. Ah, that basic economic theory.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Facts can be funny things.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-581054582603119212013-09-17T15:32:00.001-04:002014-03-14T08:16:40.939-04:00Will we ever get smart?<br />
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Shortly after the horrendous Newtown massacre the head of the NRA suggested that the only answer to a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. It’s all too easy to take complex and serious problems and try to solve them will simple minded answers. Let’s look closely at this almost childish response which has become a mantra among the NRA supporters.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-history-fast-facts/" target="_blank">Since 1966 there have been 22 incidents of mass murders</a>. In no case did the perpetrator escape. In eleven cases the perpetrator committed suicide, in seven cases the perpetrator was killed, and four were either found mentally, incompetent or sentenced to death.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
In the seven cases where the “good guys with guns” killed the perpetrator, there were 103 innocents killed. Sounds like a terrible price to pay for the NRA’s solution of bad guys with guns. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The answer to bad guys with guns is <b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">bad guys with no guns.</span></b> Background checks, background checks, background checks. What's wrong with us?</div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-61047724955490080812013-05-24T09:57:00.000-04:002013-05-24T09:57:15.412-04:00Is it Any Wonder?<br />
<br />
There has been much in the paper about property taxes lately, mostly regarding the impact of revaluations on tax payers. There's a good reason, and it's not the size of the budgets alone.<br />
<br />
Take a moment and follow this scenario:<br />
<br />
Town A did NOT increase the tax levy one year.<br />
But it had it's required revaluation, resulting in:<br />
Property Owner Smith's taxes increasing $8,500<br />
Property Owner Jones's taxes decreasing $8,500<br />
The town did NOT receive more taxes.<br />
<br />
In effect, owner Smith paid $8,500 to lower Jones' tax bill by $8,500. Can you see that a revaluation creates tax increases (and decreases) for large numbers of tax payers that have nothing to do with budget needs? If you see nothing wrong with this, stop reading.<br />
<br />
Is it any wonder the thousands of property owners are upset with property taxes?<br />
<br />
Slashing budgets, cutting services, juggling tax rates among owner occupied properties, non owner occupied properties, small businesses, large businesses, using different formulas for revaluations, none of these gets the the root of the problem - the UNFAIR DISTRIBUTION of the tax levy burden.<br />
<br />
We do it this way because we have always done it this way. Is this really the best we can do?<br />
<br />
It's way past time to take a hard look at property taxes and to devise a better, less costly, more efficient system where all property owners pay only their fair share of the tax burden, whatever it is.<br />
<br />
<br />
Please visit the <a href="http://righttax.org/" target="_blank">Rhode Island Gets Honorable Taxation</a> website and let your voice be heard.<br />
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-16787085524041897212013-05-14T09:25:00.000-04:002013-05-14T10:45:29.894-04:00Guilty and Not guilty<br />
From today's Providence Journal:<br />
<br />
"Lawyers for Colorado theater shooting suspect James Holmes formally told a judge Monday that he wants to change his plea to not guilty by reason of insanity after outside experts diagnosed his mental illness."<br />
<br />
If everyone agrees that an act was committed (the definition of guilty) by someone does it make any sense to say that the act wasn't committed, yet isn't that what the above verdict says?<br />
<br />
I've always thought that instead of Not guilty..., the plea should be "Guilty by reason of insanity", but I'm no legal expert.Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-26716322435286851162013-04-03T12:24:00.002-04:002013-05-22T12:02:34.820-04:00The Master Lever<br />
Just a couple of comments about the Providence Journal front page article, "Senate panel holds master-lever bill." Aug 3, Page A1 where lawmakers said it <i>needs more study</i>.<br />
<br />
1. Let's be honest. How often are bills actually studied after being dumped into the "further study" bucket? It's just a euphemism for "RIP".<br />
<br />
2. If it's really too hard for a person to vote for each candidate on the ballot then maybe that person isn't qualified to vote. In fact it might even be a better qualification test than just having a picture ID or an electric bill to be allowed to vote. <br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-55559846546861934612013-03-23T15:22:00.002-04:002013-03-23T15:22:23.155-04:00Language can be trickyWill people ever understand that supporting something is not the same as allowing something to happen? I doubt that Catholics "support" Judaism or that Jews "support" Catholicism but is there any doubt that each wants the other to have the right to practice their beliefs?Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-1742105002534214302013-02-19T10:36:00.004-05:002013-02-19T10:36:54.420-05:00Revalue Revaluation<br />
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
Many problems facing Rhode Island taxpayers appear to be self inflicted. For example, the huge deficits in union pension funds. City officials, taxpayers and union leaders ignored obvious funding deficiencies for many years creating crushing deficits that now threaten to bankrupt local communities. Everyone loses yet we continue to do it.</blockquote>
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
One would expect that pocketbook issues producing increasing tax burdens would inspire taxpayers to act in their own best interest, but it doesn't seem to happen. Why?</blockquote>
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
Revaluation might be partly to blame. Revaluation to market values is considered a necessary part of the Property Tax because it is expected that it will distribute taxes fairly. Revaluation does ensure that a new owner will pay a fair tax on the property just purchased but is it also fair for the majority of taxpayers? Perhaps not.</blockquote>
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
With every revaluation there are many taxpayers who will receive tax increases but also many who will not. Think about it; this means that just some, not all, taxpayers shoulder the full burden of any tax increase. And they aren't necessarily the owners of the more expensive homes or the wealthiest in the community. Those increases are just as likely to fall on the backs of owners of lower priced homes. That's just how real estate markets work.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
Looking more closely at the data we find that the total increase paid by all these taxpayers <i>exceeds</i> the total tax levy increase, often by millions of dollars! Thus, not only are these taxpayers paying the entire tax increase for their community but they are also paying for the lower taxes enjoyed by the other property owners! And tax roll data show that those with lower bills are just as likely to be owners of the most expensive properties. That's just how real estate markets work. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: Times;"> </span></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In fact, revaluation<i> <u>disconnects our tax bills from the tax levies</u></i> they are supposed to support. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Despite increased local expenses, many thousands of taxpayers get lower bills, and when people don't feel the financial pain, they simply don't care!</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
This presents a dilemma for local government: how to combine the fair tax a new owner receives after a revaluation with a fair tax for everyone else that's in harmony with the needs of the community, the tax levy. See one idea to address this problem at <a href="http://righttax.org/" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">http://righttax.org</a>.</blockquote>
<blockquote style="border-collapse: collapse; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
And if we can involve all taxpayers fairly and reasonably it might even lead to better government overall.</blockquote>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-74017985681055697592012-12-26T09:49:00.000-05:002012-12-26T09:49:15.523-05:00What's a majority anyway?<br />
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Regarding “When a majority is not a majority” Commentary in the Providence Journal, December 26, Dan K. Thomasson wrote about the effect of Senate rules, especially the filibuster, on the Senate's performance He feels, correctly I believe, that they make a mockery of the principle of majority rule.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The issue goes deeper than Senate rules however. The problem lies within the party system itself. Our founders had serious concerns about the political party system.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="font: 13.0px Geneva;"> “</span>There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”</div>
<div style="font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Arial; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: right;">
JOHN ADAMS Oct. 2, 1789<span style="font: 13.0px Geneva;"> </span></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="font: 13.0px Geneva;"> “</span>Much indeed to be regretted, party disputes are now carried to such a length, and truth is so enveloped in mist and false representation, that it is extremely difficult to know through what channel to seek it. This difficulty to one, who is of no party, and whose sole wish is to pursue with undeviating steps a path which would lead this country to respectability, wealth, and happiness, is exceedingly to be lamented. But such, for wise purposes, it is presumed, is the turbulence of human passions in party disputes, when victory more than <i>truth</i> is the palm contended for.’</div>
<div style="font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Arial; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: right;">
GEORGE WASHINGTON, Jul. 27, 1795</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
They would be horrified to know how much worse it is than they feared. Our elected “leaders” appear not to have the courage to do anything that might risk party disapproval. When we see a party leader on TV before a microphone surrounded by party members, one really sees faceless people playing follow the leader. Rarely does a party member have the guts to stray from the party line.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
That being the case we could save an enormous amount of money if instead of people, we choose numbers according to party. Each voter in electing senators would simply have two votes - two Democrats, two Republicans, one of each, one or none; not people, just numbers. That seems to be what we essentially have in the Senate anyway.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The use of the filibuster, to prevent the majority party from essentially riding roughshod over the minority, is laudable and in keeping with the very idea of the Senate, to give each state equal representation by providing two votes per state regardless of size. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
But it has been perverted in its application and simply must be corrected, now. Today, just threatening a filibuster effectively changes the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">meaning</span> of the word majority from 51 votes to 60 votes of 100 member senate. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">H.L. Menken was right: </span>"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right."</span></span></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-63285605137876917852012-12-22T08:08:00.001-05:002012-12-22T08:08:14.341-05:00How clever we are, let's have teachers carry guns. NOT<br />
It is more than understandable that there has been so much written about guns since the terribly sad events in Newtown, CT. last week. We all want answers. Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the NRA suggested that the only answer to " a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". In the Providence Journal on Saturday, Dec. 22, a writer agrees, "Good guys with guns are the solution to bad guys with guns."<br />
<br />
I suggest that you consider a better solution to "bad guys with guns" - "bad guys with NO guns".<br />
<br />
And if we really are serious, arm the teachers with more and better mental health resources for students.<br />
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-86355973016164614612012-11-06T09:21:00.000-05:002012-11-06T09:21:01.457-05:00Tyranny of the Labels<br />
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
There was a piece on the editorial page of the Providence Journal on Friday, November 2, 2012, “<a href="http://blogs.providencejournal.com/ri-talks/this-new-england/2012/11/joann-fitzpatrick-another-scary-oversight-collapse.html" target="_blank">Another scary oversight failure</a>” by JoAnne Fitzpatrick which caught my attention. It dealt with the failure of quality control at a state run (Mass.) pharmaceutical monitoring lab, similar to the failure at Framingham, MA company, New England Compounding Center, (NCCC) resulting in up to 28 deaths throughout the United States from 328 fungal infections. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
When the problem was discovered <a href="http://bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2012/11/01/mass-pharmacy-board-approves-tougher-rules-for-compounding-pharmacies/eM9BzmGuuT1U6sd96tY2kM/story.html" target="_blank">new rules</a> were swiftly put in place. At first read, the story appears to be a discussion of too much regulation vs not enough regulation.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
But I see a “Tyranny of the Labels”.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
To illustrate, let’s call Label 1 “Big Government / More Regulations”. People with this label ordinarily respond to problems by creating new laws and/or more regulations, distrusting business to do what’s in the best interest of most or all the people. Business’ #1 priority is profit, everything else is secondary. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Label 2 can be identified as “Small Government / Less Regulation”. Those with Label “2” believe that government regulations generally stifle innovation and entrepreneurship, that less government regulation is always better and that free markets, independent of government interference, will always provide the best and most economical solutions to problems.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Marketers have been paid many millions to convince legislators and the public that only one label is right and the other is pure evil. And it seems that millions of us have accepted it. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
In the above story, clearly there were laws in place before the contaminations were discovered. Do we really need more laws and more regulation to address the failures, or do we need better people to administer the laws already in place? While new laws can give the appearance that legislators are doing their jobs, is it more of a “feel good” exercise that merely makes it harder for business to function and survive? </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
On the other hand, by letting the marketplace decide what’s right, are we saying that we will tolerate some deaths and disease until the market can weed out the offending businesses and that we accept these tragedies simply as a cost of doing business? </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
We have been conditioned by slick marketing firms to make choices according to the label that makes us more comfortable instead thinking deeper and deciding who or what is the best choice in each situation, thus avoiding the “Tyranny of the Labels”. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
A depressing instance of labelling is the “Straight Party Ticket” choice on our ballot which suggests that the individual means little, that the label is far more important. It's a shameful practice and should be abolished now. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
I recently attended a local candidate forum and was so disappointed to hear some good candidates suggest that the audience vote for the members of their party - a suggestion that it was the most important consideration. Ironically that party has been the victim of the “Party Ticket” choice at the state level for years.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
This is not a simple issue. Until we choose the best individuals, regardless of labels, we will suffer from Tyranny of the Labels, and the United States will continue to lose respect even among its own people. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Arial; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-10687026186285273022012-10-15T10:05:00.003-04:002012-10-15T10:05:29.862-04:00Hard earned moneyIs anyone else tired of hearing about how tax hikes will hurt "hard working" Americans and take your "hard earned" money? Guess what. There are lots of people who don't work hard for their money. Donald Trump inherited a fortune from daddy; hard earned money? I don't think so.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Taxes take money from everyone, hard working and the not so hard working. The most important thing is to know whether taxes are used for the benefit of the public or for the benefit of a chosen few who often aren't very hard working at all. </div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-80313933216788243802012-10-13T10:18:00.000-04:002012-10-13T10:23:23.301-04:00Treat the disease not just the symptoms<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
When we experience symptoms such as pain, dizziness or shortness of breath, we seek medical help. We want relief from our symptoms but we also expect the doctor to diagnose the underlying illness and treat it.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Our state and communities have lots of serious issues; high unemployment, crumbling roads and bridges, high taxes, unfunded pensions, population loss and political corruption to name a few. Are they diseases or are they symptoms of underlying illnesses?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Like the doctor whose waiting room is filled with patients needing attention, legislators scramble to put out a myriad of fires all at once. Despite their efforts, (in some cases, because of them) the underlying illnesses are often never fully diagnosed or treated.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<b>~ ~ ~</b></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<b><u>PENSION REFORM</u>'s $2 billion unfunded liability</b>. A symptom or disease? If we miraculously received $2 billion, the immediate problem would be relieved, but have we achieved a cure or just alleviated the symptom?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Governments and unions, when crafting pension contracts, MUST work together for the benefit of everyone instead of their own constituencies and narrow interests as they have often done in the past.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
A start might be to publish the names of those people who craft all employee contracts so that the public always knows who was actually responsible for them.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Perhaps if people knew that their prior actions would not fade with time, they might think more carefully about their legacy and future reputation.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<b><u>JOB CREATION</u></b> GOP director Patrick Sweeney said, “The ... issues I believe that are most pressing.... addressing the business climate in this state which means helping out small business to help create jobs”. I would respectfully disagree with this assessment. Businesses don't create jobs. They create services and/or products and if the public wants them and can afford them, businesses will hire more workers. In other words PEOPLE create jobs.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Any business that hires workers it doesn't really need because of a tax break will let them go when the tax break ceases or they'll soon be out of business. Yet another example of treating a symptom and not the disease.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<b><u>EDUCATION</u>:</b> Rhode Island per pupil spending is higher than 45 other states but student performance is just in the middle of the nation. Symptom or disease?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
“If we focused on waste, we could provide more resources to our children in the classroom” says one party spokesperson.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
But we're already spending much more than most every other state but with only mediocre results.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
“We need to stop treating corporate education like it is special and we need to stop giving corporate CEOs tax breaks. Reversing these two trends will be key to revitalizing Rhode Island” says an NEA director.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span">Nearly every conversation about education focuses on money and taxes. These are extremely important but the </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black;">crucial element in a child's <a href="http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Final_Parent_Involvement_Fact_Sheet_14732_7.pdf" target="_blank"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: black; color: #cccccc;">academic success</span></a> is the attitude of parents and family</span>. Until and unless this is addressed, financial "solutions" alone will fail to achieve the desired results. When our children grow up in a home environment that values education, nothing will hold them back.</div>
<div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span"><b>~ ~ ~</b></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span"><b><br /></b></span></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span"></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
Changing our habit of treating symptoms instead of diseases isn't going to be easy and all sides need to listen to one another. We have to take the best ideas, regardless of whose they are, and working together, use them to do the right thing for all of the people.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span"><br />These are only one person's ideas after hearing the same tune played over and over. I'm hoping we </span>at least change the station. They did it in Tahrir Square. I hope we can do it here.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span"><br />Continuing to take only aspirin for that chest pain symptom could be a killer.<br /><br />Maybe it's just me.</span></div>
</div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-54437290493183140442012-10-09T19:51:00.001-04:002012-10-09T19:51:37.010-04:00Underwater mortgages<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #1a1414; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"></span><br />
<div class="pluck-comm-single-comment-top pluck-comm-isOdd pluck-user-isLoggedIn pluck-user-isMe pluck-user-isStandardTier pluck-comm-isVisible pluck-comm-hasReplies pluck-comm-first" style="background-color: white; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative;">
<div class="pluck-comm-single-comment-main pluck-png" commentid="CommentKey:12e0c6d3-6eea-41f1-ac06-6523143201d7" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: url(http://res.providencejournal.com/resources/img/pluck-comm-background.png) !important; background-origin: initial; background-position: 100% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat repeat; border-top-color: rgb(166, 166, 165); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif !important; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-top: 0px; max-width: 2400px; min-height: 121px; min-width: 250px; overflow-x: visible; overflow-y: visible; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; width: auto;" threadpath="/8CF742322233088680">
<div class="pluck-comm-comment-content" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 60px; margin-right: 95px !important; margin-top: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px !important; width: auto;">
<div class="pluck-comm-body" style="color: #1a1414; font-family: Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 0.9em; font-weight: normal; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;">
I'm confused. A person borrows money to buy something (if it's a house it's called a mortgage). If the value of the purchase drops, <a href="http://news.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/2012/10/former-bank-ri-president-principal-forgiveness-only-way-to-end-mortgage-cri.html" target="_blank">the lender is being asked to decrease or forgive the amount borrowed ("principal forgiveness").</a><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />But what if the value of the purchase were to <i>increase</i> instead of decrease, as it often did in the recent past? By the above logic, a lender should be entitled to get more than the amount that was borrowed. <br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />What does the change in the market price of the purchase have to do with the amount of money that was borrowed? It's a loan and needs to be paid back.<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Now, if a buyer borrowed more than he or she could afford to repay in the hope that the value of the home would rise and be sold for a profit, that's gambling. Why should the lender be on the hook for the buyer's speculation?<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />On the other hand, if the lender deceived the buyer in some way, in order to make a sale or get a fee for refinancing a mortgage, the lender should be prosecuted.<br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Sensible, fair, regulation of banking (among other things), administered by honest and competent people is the only real solution to the problem that got us to where we are. <br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" />Unfettered free markets as touted by the far right Tea Party and libertarian ideologues might eventually self regulate but not before destroying a lot of people in the process.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-47209478423052109292012-10-09T19:47:00.002-04:002012-11-28T07:52:10.768-05:00The right thing for the wrong reason<br />
On Sunday, Dec 9, Pg B7 of the Providence Journal there was an article, "Ending death penalty on ballot". California's Proposition 34 would change the death penalty to life without parole even for those those who are already on death row.<br />
<br />
The reason stated is "the entire process is far too costly, and that scrapping the death penalty could save millions of dollars." Excuse me, but that's a terrible reason to justify not putting a convicted murderer to death. Using such logic, why not save even more money by limiting the trials for accused murderers to two days? Now that would really save tons of money.<br />
<br />
I have no emotional or ethical problem with the death penalty for someone who has demonstrated he or she is unfit to live among civilized people. <br />
<br />
However there is a far more compelling reason to eliminate the death penalty and it has nothing to do with compassion or sympathy. Juries are people and one undeniable characteristic of each one us is that we can make mistakes. Even judges can make mistakes. Believe it or not even lawyers can make mistakes.<br />
<br />
Until we the people become infallible, putting someone to death is simply wrong because courts can make mistakes. And saving a few bucks wouldn't hurt either.Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-43189390986758272372012-07-28T09:19:00.002-04:002012-07-28T09:19:44.045-04:00The Real Problem, Look in the Mirror<br />
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The editorial in Saturday's, July 28th Providence Journal, while concerned primarily with the merits or lack thereof of Blue Cross Blue Shield's actions regarding Landmark Medical Center, it presents an opportunity to examine a much larger issue - the tug of war between two competing philosophies; leave business decisions to the marketplace and all will be well, or allow government to become involved with private business and industry and the people will be better for it.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 15.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="font: 12.0px Verdana;"><i>"</i></span><i>Certainly, Lifespan, which operates Rhode Island and Miriam hospitals and works closely with Blue Cross, has a financial interest in ending competition with Landmark, particularly for lucrative, simpler operations.</i><span style="font: 12.0px Verdana;"><i>"</i> This suggests that concern for the bottom line trumps concern for the public's health.</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
If the health and well being of the Rhode Island population is the goal then there would appear to be a conflict of interest, as you clearly state:</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 15.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="font: 12.0px Verdana;"><i>"</i></span><i>We do not know whether Blue Cross has concluded that driving Landmark out of business is its most profitable course, but surely it has a duty to serve the health interests of the people of Rhode Island. As the state’s people and their representatives see it, saving Landmark is greatly in the public interest.</i><span style="font: 12.0px Verdana;"><i>"</i> </span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
While it is easy to see that business will always act in its own self interest and thus might hurt the public in the process, it is more difficult to accept the reality that our elected officials do not always act in the best interest of the people either, often favoring one favored group over another.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
It makes a very strong case for term limits and for much more public involvement and thought during election season. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Verdana; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
I'll bet the Olympics captured far more attention than this dry, boring topic. </div>Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20118512.post-6394881741519539262012-05-05T19:43:00.002-04:002012-05-06T05:51:12.294-04:00My Property Taxes Did What??<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"></span><br />
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The use of property values to pay for the tax levy has one fundamental quality that differentiates it from all other forms of taxation: it always produces the requested revenue. Regardless of the total value of a community or the amount of the tax levy, there is a tax rate that will generate the determined amount, always. Income taxes or sales taxes can never generate a specified amount of revenue by their vary nature.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
There is very little disagreement about what property taxes should be used for; public schools, fire protection, police protection, road maintenance, libraries, parks etc. However, there is a subtle effect of a tax on property which is rarely considered, most likely because this tax has been in use for so long that it is assumed it must be the right thing to do. But is it? </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Consider; after every revaluation, in any city, thousands of property owners will actually pay a significant portion of their tax increase <u>solely</u> <u>to</u> <u>lower</u> <u>the</u> <u>taxes</u> <u>of</u> <u>other</u> <u>property</u> <u>owners</u>. Is this also a legitimate purpose for one’s property tax dollars, to lower taxes for other property owners, often as not, owners of the more expensive properties? </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The best way to appreciate this phenomenon is to observe what happens when a community does not increase its tax levy and has a revaluation in the same year. The following example uses Barrington tax data for the revaluation year 2009 (but similar results can be seen with any town data). Taxes were recalculated after reducing the 2009 tax levy to the 2008 level.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Despite no tax levy increase, 33% of property owners would have received tax bills with an average increase of 41%! The extra $2,900,927 paid by these unlucky people would have in essence, been paid to the 67% of property owners whose taxes fell due to the revaluation. Nearly $3,000,000 paid by one group to another with no benefit to the community which neither requested nor received additional funds. Can this be called a fair tax distribution? </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
However, if towns don’t revalue, a new owner can buy a property and be taxed on an old, most often lower assessment - that too is clearly unfair yet it happened year after year. Revaluations correct this unfairness, but in the process create their own injustice for all existing owners, as the above example demonstrates. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
This is a dilemma that can’t be corrected with more accurate assessments or lower budgets, both of which are important in their own right. </div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
The challenge is to acknowledge this defect and to devise a tax system that addresses it. The proposed “Property Owners Tax” (1) provides the needed revenue, (2) taxes new owners fairly every year, not every third year, and (3) taxes existing owners fairly and rationally every year.</div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 13.0px Geneva; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
It can be done. Please visit <a href="http://righttax.org/">righttax.org</a> to learn more.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12607255278028046166noreply@blogger.com0