Mike Wrona Front and Center

[WNYresident]

---

Quote:

Mikewrona
Why do you guys use the words like extort. Why don't you just say. I don't want to be part of a community. I don't want to be involved in anything but myself and my family. I don't care about anyone else and don't want to pay for anything that I and my family don't personally use.

Extort.. you don't pay they take your house.

An ignorant thing I hear is "if you can't afford it move". Just because you don't want to be screwed doesn't mean you can't afford it. It just depends on who you feel like supporting, someone else or your own family.

Lets see being a part of the community means.

You need to define what being a part of the community is.

Being forced to cover the never ending salary increases for government labor is considered supporting the community?

Being forced to pay for some rather lame brain ideas of a few in government is considered being a part of the community?

Being forced to pay for a school system that produces idiots in a lot of cases is being a part of the community?

Being force to pay for the support of people that just milk the system is supporting the community?

Being forced to pay for the infrastructure cost for a connected developer is a town is being a part of the community?

So this is the stuff you consider supporting the community?
__________________

[atotaltotalfan2001]

I understand Mike's point.

A lot of people whose kids have already graduated and left public education complain about the high cost of education.

I don't blame them. K-12 education here is so expensive it's almost obscene. And it's not like the system is producing intellectual giants -- not that I've seen. The kids who do well were going to do well no matter what. The rest just float along....and the teachers don't seem interested in helping them.

STILL, to demand that certain people be exempted from the cost of public education is just wrong. I agree they are being ripped off: But it is wrong of them to walk away and say, my kids are out. This is no longer my problem.

Meanwhile, parents complain about the amount of money spent on services for senior citizens.

Golfers complain about the money spent on the Pepsi Center, and parents and other who use the Pepsi Center complain about the money spent on golf courses.....

It seems to me we are all fighting over crumbs.

[mikewrona]

---

Quote:

Mikewrona
Why do you guys use the words like extort. Why don't you just say. I don't want to be part of a community. I don't want to be involved in anything but myself and my family. I don't care about anyone else and don't want to pay for anything that I and my family don't personally use.

Extort.. you don't pay they take your house.

An ignorant thing I hear is "if you can't afford it move". Just because you don't want to be screwed doesn't mean you can't afford it. It just depends on who you feel like supporting, someone else or your own family.

Lets see being a part of the community means.

You need to define what being a part of the community is.

Being forced to cover the never ending salary increases for government labor is considered supporting the community?

Being forced to pay for some rather lame brain ideas of a few in government is considered being a part of the community?

Being forced to pay for a school system that produces idiots in a lot of cases is being a part of the community?

Being force to pay for the support of people that just milk the system is supporting the community?

Being forced to pay for the infrastructure cost for a connected developer is a town is being a part of the community?

So this is the stuff you consider supporting the community?
__________________

Let's start with this. The property you own did not just come to you out of thin air. The Haudenosaunee owned it first. New York state came into control of it by war and treaty. The United States gained an interest when New York joined the union. Your property is guaranteed not by you, but by New York State. No New York State guarantee, no private property. It would be up for grabs to the strongest who could hold it.

Extortion by the state is a wonderful expression of libertarian rhetoric, because it slides in the accusation that taxation is extortion. You own the land but the U.S. and New York state have every right to govern their territory. And governing that territory costs money. Let's say it is your contractual payment to the state for it's services provided to you as guarantor of your property. You should understand the concept of limited property ownership as it is not unusual for property to change hands in a manner in which the purchaser does not receive complete proterty title because the mineral or water rights have been withheld.

Before you go into an argument that the State and Federal Government doesn't have a claim on you, your property and income because you are independent any government. You would need documentation to prove your claim. Which would be hard to do since, your birth certificate bears a government seal attesting to your birth date and location. You ae born into a community and officially dedclared so by a government agency.

Governance rights are the result of the nation's ownership rights to it's sovereign territory. You live here under the protection of that government. You are not forced to do anything. Our government can be changed. All you have to do is win control of the government to get what you want. You complaint is about bad government. Change it. I can guarantee that someone will say you run a bad government. We don't live in a perfect world. Why do you unrealistically expect a perfect government.

In addition to taxes you are limited by government rights restrict how your property is developed, who uses what waterways and how, on up through use of the air up above your head.

I read somewhere on the internet a question and answer that I thought whas interesting, It went something like this:

Can you imagine who rich I would be if I (we?) didn't have to pay taxes?

That is interesting. You are making $20.00 an hour now with $7 dollars going to income taxes and medicare/medicaide. What makes yo think that if yo dind't have to pay $7 in taxes that your employer eoluld let you have that 7 and not simply pay you $13 and hour. Elimination of taxes changes the economy of taxes.The problem is that if government did not exist, you would purchase suervices from someone else. The employer konws that you needed a $13 take home pay to begin with to work that job. He'll keep you at 13.

This one is for you. It was emailed to me without attribution. It's not mine, so I can't take credit for it even though I wolujld like to:

"I'm self-employed. My pay would absolutely, positively go up 15+% tomorrow if I wasn't paying FICA/Medicare." But only briefly. Standard microeconomic theory applies just as well to someone selling labor as to someone selling widgits. If FICA disappeared, your competitors in the market to sell labor would be attracted to the higher wages and would sell more labor. This increase in supply of labor would drive down your wage from the 15% increase. You'd earn more (per hour). But less than 15% more."

We are tied together as a community. As the saying goes we are only as strong as the weakest link. The roads, highways, ports, waterways, schools, universities, power grid, water supply were built through community resources.

If you think you can live without them fine, choose Vanauatu in the Pacific, Somalia in Africa, or Nepal in Asia. All your money would be yours.

[mikewrona]

I understand Mike's point.

A lot of people whose kids have already graduated and left public education complain about the high cost of education.

I don't blame them. K-12 education here is so expensive it's almost obscene. And it's not like the system is producing intellectual giants -- not that I've seen. The kids who do well were going to do well no matter what. The rest just float along....and the teachers don't seem interested in helping them.

STILL, to demand that certain people be exempted from the cost of public education is just wrong. I agree they are being ripped off: But it is wrong of them to walk away and say, my kids are out. This is no longer my problem.

Meanwhile, parents complain about the amount of money spent on services for senior citizens.


Golfers complain about the money spent on the Pepsi Center, and parents and other who use the Pepsi Center complain about the money spent on golf courses.....

It seems to me we are all fighting over crumbs.

You are too quick. You got in there before me.

[moonshine]

Mike, I'm sorry that you feel you cannot exist without a government to prove your being. I would pray for you if I wasn't an atheist.

Happy 4/20.

[mikewrona]

Mike, I'm sorry that you feel you cannot exist without a government to prove your being. I would pray for you if I wasn't an atheist.

Happy 4/20.

Hey, you're a stalker.

As an atheist that explains why you know nothing of Catholic education, rising costs, declining enrollment, and the closing of schools.

[DelawareDistrict]

mikewrona loves a "nanny" government.

[WNYresident]

Nanny governments makes weak communities. Nanny governments make it harder for the resourceful people who really do know what they are doing complete on a national/global level.

Nanny governments need a nanny for themselves.

[Curmudgeon]

We are tied together as a community. As the saying goes we are only as strong as the weakest link. The roads, highways, ports, waterways, schools, universities, power grid, water supply were built through community resources.

that's great. EVERY community is a COMMUNITY. My question is this: Why does THIS PARTICULAR community cost so much more than other communities in the USA?

WHY?

[mikewrona]

that's great. EVERY community is a COMMUNITY. My question is this: Why does THIS PARTICULAR community cost so much more than other communities in the USA?

WHY?

Well I certainly tell you what I think.

Buffalo has 32 sq. miles and 260,000 people when it once had 575,000. Buffalo's infrastructure didn't go away just the people did, and the infrastructure still needs to be maintained.

Amherst has 52 sq. miles and 118,000 people when it fairly recently had 36,000. Population is spread throughout the town. That makes police coverage expensive, along with trash pickup, sewer and streets maintenance.

The county sq. miles to be maintained remain the same while the population drops. Suburbs are growing not because of jobs and population increase, but, because of a desire to flee the city. City costs go up because the poor are left behind, and suburban costs go up because infrastructure must be built.

The city is left with huge vacant buildings in need of police and fire protection. The companies and people that left the buildings behind in Buffalo are now in the suburbs requiring police and fire protection.

All this has happened at a time when not only population is declining but also employee pay. Potential low paid WalMart and Bass Pro jobs have become coveted symbols of employment as the number of good paying manufacturing jobs disappear.

We may have become America's version of a third world community as a result.

[TheRightView]

that's great. EVERY community is a COMMUNITY. My question is this: Why does THIS PARTICULAR community cost so much more than other communities in the USA?

WHY?

Another way of looking at it is ... everybody wants to have everything that suits their needs and have it as cheaply as possible or free. This is an unreal expectation but nobody really seems to care unless it affects them directly then it's a serious problem that needs to be dealt with; then the attitude becomes "this needs to be fixed now and I want it for free or cheap but i want it to be perfect--I expect it to be pain-free financially(sp.) and if it isn't then there's going to be unrest and I'll make your life miserable because of it.

Unfortunately(sp.?) it's true and childish.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Well I certainly tell you what I think.

Buffalo has 32 sq. miles and 260,000 people when it once had 575,000. Buffalo's infrastructure didn't go away just the people did, and the infrastructure still needs to be maintained.

Amherst has 52 sq. miles and 118,000 people when it fairly recently had 36,000. Population is spread throughout the town. That makes police coverage expensive, along with trash pickup, sewer and streets maintenance.

The county sq. miles to be maintained remain the same while the population drops. Suburbs are growing not because of jobs and population increase, but, because of a desire to flee the city. City costs go up because the poor are left behind, and suburban costs go up because infrastructure must be built.

The city is left with huge vacant buildings in need of police and fire protection. The companies and people that left the buildings behind in Buffalo are now in the suburbs requiring police and fire protection.

All this has happened at a time when not only population is declining but also employee pay. Potential low paid WalMart and Bass Pro jobs have become coveted symbols of employment as the number of good paying manufacturing jobs disappear.

We may have become America's version of a third world community as a result.

Sprawl without real growth. We shuffle from city to burb or from old to new burb, adding the cost of new schools, roads, sewers etc. as we go and leaving the tax bases in our our old neighborhoods to shrink -- but not the expense of maintaining those communities.

Populations decrease; taxes increase. It never, ever fails.

[Curmudgeon]

Well I certainly tell you what I think.

I'll tell you what I think - that's the same old excuses I've heard over and over again. Infrastructure? Look at the budget pie charts and you'll see the big wedgies (by far) are personell-related expenses. I've got news for you - empty lots don't burn down.

Like I asked before, what special interest do you belong to that compells you to spew the party-line excuses we've all heard countless times???

[DelawareDistrict]

I'll tell you what I think - that's the same old excuses I've heard over and over again. Infrastructure? Look at the budget pie charts and you'll see the big wedgies (by far) are personell-related expenses. I've got news for you - empty lots don't burn down.

Like I asked before, what special interest do you belong to that compells you to spew the party-line excuses we've all heard countless times???

A voice of reason

You'll always get those excuses from individuals who have their lives invested in the government and rely on it. Politicians have no real interest in down-sizing to reflect the loss of population. They have no financial incentive to do so. That is the problem with government services, even when they are not needed, they keep on going. The only concern is how much money goes into their pockets.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

I'll tell you what I think - that's the same old excuses I've heard over and over again. Infrastructure? Look at the budget pie charts and you'll see the big wedgies (by far) are personell-related expenses. I've got news for you - empty lots don't burn down.

Like I asked before, what special interest do you belong to that compells you to spew the party-line excuses we've all heard countless times???

You're right: Personnel costs are always the biggest piece of the budget pie, but that is because it is the personnel who keep infrastructure and stuff maintained. Did that make sense?

I think town/city/village governments should shrink when the population does. Some services would change; some streets would be maintained less than in the past, for instance. But if your tax base is shrinking, it's shrinking. It's unfair to keep imposing the same level of services on the people still here.

Police services should be realigned too, maybe to include consolidation of some functions with other agencies (like SWAT teams. Why on earth suburbs need SWAT teams is still beyond me).

My point is that as long as governments keep raising taxes, we'll keep losing jobs and people. Which will, in turn, causes taxes to rise again on those left behind.

I hate the thought of any town employee losing his or her job, but for every one of those jobs saved, how many private sector jobs do we lose?