Slashdot Mirror
Pittsburgh To Tax Students
societyofrobots writes "Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl has proposed taxing college and professional students for the privilege of receiving an education in the city. The proposed tax will charge students in the city at a rate of 1% of their yearly tuition — which, at Carnegie Mellon, would mean roughly a $400 tax (PDF) on most students. As the tax proposal hit local media outlets this week, the mayor repeatedly emphasized the burden that college students have placed on city services, and the need for students to pay their 'fair share.'"
That's a way to dumb down the city.
... now back to the bit mines.
While it's true that the students don't pay regular taxes like other residents, what about the fact that they bring a huge amount of disposable income and spend it in the city? The money goes to the local businesses, who in turn pay taxes on their revenue. Seems fair enough to me.
Students bring tons of money into an area. This fool is going to drive the students to another city. Heh....I wonder if he talked it over with the Universities before he did it?
...wouldn't just raising the booze tax accomplish the same thing?
They already do shithead Mayor. Students pay:
- property tax (included in the school's tuition and the dorm room rental fees)
- sales tax (by buying local products)
- gas tax or road tolls (when they drive around)
This story reminds me of Baltimore City Council, which keeps trying to tax neighboring counties on the theory that suburban folks work in the city, or visit the Raven stadium, but don't pay taxes. (Except that they do - via state income tax and sales tax and providing income to stadium/restaurant/other inner city workers.) Same stupid first-order level of thinking. These politicians need to dig deeper.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
We are going to tax you because.. "blah blah blah blah". No one believes them because they will then turn around and "waste" money the next time. We fought the British off and then turned around and just did it to ourselves. If they are short of money, maybe they should get some higher education "smart" people from MIT to look at "innovative" ways to cut costs or do things "smarter" and "cheaper". Any corporation worth its salt has this approach and sells it to their employees as well as a corporate standard. Better faster cheaper. Instead we have the politicians (who are not living in a dingy one bedroom trying to get an education, maybe raising a kid or working 3 jobs) who keep the status quo the same year after year and show no innovation toward bettering the lives of the people. They stifle innovation and change just by their very existence.. Another example of government? The blinking yellow lights where you have to drop to 20 miles and hour during school hours. I drive a 30 minute commute and on that road, there are 3-4 areas like this. The problem though.. no kids! In the 3 years I've taken this route, I've yet to see any kids crossing the road at these locations. Yet every day, huge numbers of cars have to slow down, causing traffic congestion, wasting time, because some politician said "protect the kids, blah blah blah, do it for the kids". I'm not impressed.. we always go for bigger organizations instead of smaller ones that can do a better job in a localized area..
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
As opposed to the countryside students who have to pay for the right to study?
You know it makes sense, a little reminder from jointm1k.
1. Get $2 bills and dollar coins and use them for all their purchases for two weeks.
2. Then spend a week or two not spending a dime - ideally until they've saved the $400 tax.
3. Publicize it. Write articles in the student paper and letters to the editor.
4. Sit back and watch the results. Lather, rinse and repeat.
5. Profit?
Seriously, students need to show their economic impact on the local community. Using money not normally used will help make that point.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
As a former student used to getting shit on by the city and cops I have these points to make:
1. Pay to much rent to live in a campus apartment.
2. Pay to much to eat on campus.
3. Pay to much to buy liquor on campus.
4. Pay for professors and related expenses.
5. Support a lot of local business.
6. Do volunteer work and (they may not like this) get politically active.
7. Work for next to nothing.
8. Support sports programs - big money on my campus.
9. Pay big fines when the cops bust us for anything.
With all of the goods and services that we consume, how is it that students don't pay their fair share?
Universities often times are the single largest economic drivers in their cities precisely because of students.
Does this apply to 2 year schools where often times the poorest oldest students go?
The notion of trying to tax people trying to improve their lives simply because they are trying to improve their lives is sick.
Why not tax some rich assholes paying only 15% on their dividend income - raise property taxes in nice neighborhoods.
Tell that to my HOA.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Ah, yes..this is EXACTLY what they need to improve their education!
Really, though, I hope the idea doesn't spread...I see the potential for it to. People already have enough problems paying for their education...I can't imagine this encouraging anyone to want to get a good one.
It makes no sense to me why when budgets need to be slashed it's always the students who get it first. In California, students just had their tuitions hiked 32% per semester.
It's insane and incredibly backward-looking. CA has a $20+ billion budget shortfall, and an insane political process that requires a supermajority vote to pass a tax increase-- or any budget at all.
As a result, anyone can block anything that even hints at revenue collection, and it's a total clusterfuck.
And students are the first in line to feel the pain.
(don't tell me how cutting taxes stimulates the economy and raises money and the laffer curve and supply side and fleeing jobs and all that... CA's economy has been "stimulated" in this manner for a generation, and it's still fucked.)
Something is really wrong when you tax a student while just having given massive tax cuts to the very rich in the last 7 years.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
As a CMU student (sort of), this doesn't surprise me, and I invite Luke Ravenstahl to kiss my poor ass. Considering this guy prioritizes money in the most bogo-riffic ways (e.g. spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on fancy trash cans sporting his name) it seems clear he is not and has not been fit to run the city.
Pittsburgh's new economy is fueled by the universities*. Everybody knows this. Taxing the students---those people least able to pay---is akin to cannibalism.
Of course, what will happen is students will just borrow a bit more and stack on a little more debt. So maybe Luke's idea is to get students to hedge their futures on his present financial problems.
* And the Steelers
Lifeblood sucking students who contribute nothing to society and ruthlessly download music and movies must pay their toll just like all the rest of us hard working people with income. We all had spare change during school to throw at the municipal government. Why can't they?
And while we're at it, we need to tax other non-contributing members of society who place a burden on social services. I'm all for a tax on K-12 students, a tax on pre-schoolers, a tax on the disabled, senior citizens tax, and a tax on people who have crimes committed against them.
After all, with all the student financing available, they'll just pay it with loans right? So it's like we're actually taxing their future income!
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
It would appear that Mayor Ravenstahl isn't familiar with the concept students (like tourists) bring money to his city and you really don't want them to leave. Cities fight to get tourist attractions to come to their city. Of course moving a university is harder than moving an amusement park so I guess it's safe to go after the university students. But if he makes it hard enough on the local universities and their students I'm sure they will find a way to express their displeasure and get rid of him.
The Mayor of Providence has proposed a similar tax in providence, although it would "only" be $150/student as opposed to $400. The arguments being made in both cities seem to be exactly the same: Students need to pay their "fair share". I'm kind of curious how we don't already pay our fair share, though, given that anyone who lives off campus pays property taxes and we bring millions into the local economy. (And in Providence, we're all the local economy has left)
Now I'm not one to go shouting about the Government and taxes, but student taxes are very clearly a form of regressive taxation. It just doesn't make sense to be trying to take money from a group of people who don't have all that much of it in the first place. But that seems to be the trend of taxation lately, more and more regressive so rich people can keep all of their "hard earned" money.
Yet, we're still not taxing churches...
In our university town there are already taxes in place which are aimed at students without directly naming them as the objects of the laws. Restaurant taxes, Alcohol taxes, Property taxes on rental units, Parking law enforcement strategically biased to certain areas, etc. The Mayor in question really isn't too bright if he's being so direct.
terrible towels? A 5-10% excise tax on terrible towels would probably bring in millions.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
All college students should leave Pittsburgh! Then the mayor can observe the consequences and decide whether college students have been paying their fair share all along. Sales taxes, jobs created, and willingness of companies to be located in Pittsburgh all relate to colleges being present. The real truth is that Pittsburgh ought to pay students for being willing to put up with that dump of a city.
I have always lived under the assumption that our young people need to be
able study and when they are finished they start earning their share in society (so then they start paying taxes).
So, if that is not true, then i think we should re-institute child-labor so children can pay taxes too!
A 4 year old can make great sweaters!
Why not a politician tax, somewhere around 1% of their annual income, for the privilege of being a politician?
If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Hey, at least they're calling it a tax. In California they call it "raising fees." Either way, it seems like politicians are never willing to tax the rich, but are happy to jack up taxes on the young.
Yeah! I'm with you...who needs those little niceties taxes get us, like roads and such?
An important change for education.
Sounds like your attitude is part of the problem.. You would make a fine "politician"
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
and frankly, I don't see much reason for the city to exist currently (in an economic sense) except for the presence of its universities. Generally, in that situation, the approach to take is to offer every incentive you can to get businesses and industries INTO the city. And one thing those businesses will need, especially in a modern economy, is well educated students. Pittsburgh seems to have suffered something of a "brain drain" effect in that (naturally enough) folks who would be the foundation and building blocks of economic activity have fled elsewhere for better opportunity. Investment capital appears to have done much the same. The ONE strong asset left to the city is high quality education which brings smart people into geographic proximity with Pittsburgh, and heaping burdens on it strikes me as exactly the wrong approach (ESPECIALLY the students.) Students in higher education ARE a special category - they are the ONLY realistic chance for economic success for both Pittsburgh and the US as a whole in a world economy. They are a limited resource both locally and globally. Education follows good teachers and researchers, just as academic reputation does - make things bad enough and even universities can lose their edge. More to the point, Pittsburgh needs a complete economic overhaul. It might be hard to kill CMU's reputation as long as good people come to the school for the reputation, but if Pittsburgh wants them to STAY and actually start to recreate a new economy from the ruins left by the steel industry they have to make people WANT to stay.
Pittsburgh is in a tough situation, and I understand resentment of any "special" status of students, but they have to realize that a student tax isn't even addressing their larger problems and will do exactly nothing to effect the turnaround Pittsburgh really needs if it is to revitalize itself. Pittsburgh needs to try and KEEP those students, not give them one less reason to be there, because young educated people are the one irreplaceable necessity in any serious drive to build competitive industries.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
The problem is, in Pittsburgh the two major enterprises/employers are colleges and hospital systems. Both non-profit and both tax exempt. They own a tremendous amount of land (tax-free) employ the most people (tax free) and use up a tremendous amount of city services (such as police, ambulance, fire, water, sewage, etc, all tax free). The city has been trying for years to get the universities and hospitals to pay something, ANYTHING to help the city with its budget situation. In other cities where non-profits make up a large percentage of the area, the non-profits usually contribute something in terms of "voluntary payments", such as in Boston. What the mayor is doing, is trying to pressure the universities to come to the negotiating table to help support the city in its time of financial need, using other major cities with major university systems as a model. So far, the universities and hospital systems have refused. (Keep in mind, our major hospital system is UPMC (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center). Luke cares little for this tax and doesn't want it to pass. He want to use it to cause a big firestorm (which obviously it has) and force concessions. We'll see if it works. PA State Reps are already proposing laws to prevent the City of Pittsburgh from being able to tax students directly.
Sugapablo
send us your real name and we'll make sure there is no help for you when you get into some catastrophic situation...
What about older people that are trying to get degrees? Why should a long term resident be charged a tax for going to a private school. I'm not saying that I agree with the tax for the migratory college population, just that nobody has mentioned this subset of the 'revenue stream' yet.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
The mayor is being a dipshit, but you'll need better arguments if you plan on stopping him.
Conservation of dipshits?
All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Dilbert RSS feed
Former student because you flunked???
Pay TOO much...
cops bust us for anything...ILLEGAL.
In a time such as ours. Where so many people are loosing their jobs. And most of the people who lose their jobs have no education. Why then would your want to tax people trying to get an education when you know how much more tax a person with an education is going to pay than a person without an eduction.
In Norway for instance education is free. Yes FREE. We have excellent universities. For instance, Oslo University ranks at 101 at topuniversities.com. Not only though is it free to study, but the government pays you around 15000 NOK for every semester you complete (for full time students) (2 semesters a year). And not only that, but they give your a further 30000 NOK in loans (per semester) that are interest free until 1 year after you complete your studies.
The way the US treats it's people still puzzles me. Surely putting a strain on people who already have little money to live for just sounds like greed to me.
Say NO to unpaid Internships!
(don't tell me how cutting taxes stimulates the economy and raises money and the laffer curve and supply side and fleeing jobs and all that... CA's economy has been "stimulated" in this manner for a generation, and it's still fucked.)
The problems that California have is the result of spending more that it earns. It's as simple as that. The economy was booming and tax revenues went through the roof because of it. Their tax policy, as far as income was concerned, wasn't too bad. Unfortunately, on April 15th in past years, the California legislature sees that huge pile of cash come in and they spent it thinking that California's boom will last forever. The Legislature, especially the liberal Democrats, have no clue about saving for the future or any clue that times do change and there are downturns in an economy.
Every time someone had some sort of project and regardless of its merits, they put money into it. Look now, when they want to cut spending, regardless of where, some special interest protests saying that they are important and the legislature needs to cut somewhere else.
If they had a responsible fiscal plan instead of spending every penny that came in they wouldn't be in this situation.
Laffer said that reducing taxes stimulates the economy as long as government reduces spending to match inflows. The California legislature was too stupid to realize that and they were too beholden to the special interests that always have their hands out for government money.
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
Anyway, it's a fairly strange idea. Paying for "the privilege to get an education in the city" may just make you decide it is a privilege you don't need. And seeing the vast amount of students running around town, people not taking this privilege would be a severe cut into city's finances...
>>>We are going to tax you because.. "blah blah blah blah". No one believes them because they will then turn around and "waste" money the next time.
+1. Here is your typical Pittsburgh (or Philadelphia) politician in action: Timestamp 1:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS4rRl5B7NI
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Really? Taking care of roads is okay but taking care of people is not? How is it that a government by the people, for the people, and of the people has no responsibility to the people? I think most people who object to universal health care do so because it's not the way things have always been done, and not because it's illogical or inconsistent with our values. If we could take universal health care for granted because it had been around since 1780, nobody would question its value. Can you provide a reasoned explanation for why this is bad? I haven't seen a good objection, by which I mean one that doesn't rely on an appeal to emotion, scare tactics, or making the issue completely personal.
Your sarcasm meter is working perfectly.
Sufficiently advanced parody is indistinguishable from sufficiently retarded fundamentalism. I believe this applies here.
When Arizona State called asking for money I told them to tell Michael Crow I hope he's happy with his tuition hikes because he's never getting another dime from me. The way I see it, he already stole about $6000 dollars from me (they violated the state constitution to make those increases). I'm not going to voluntarily give more and my daughter will most likely not attend ASU. We're putting away money so she can go anywhere.
Students get a higher eduction, get better jobs, make more money, and pay more taxes which gets put back into the schools.
If we want to focus on "fair" then homeowners with children who don't go to public school need to be except from public school related taxes.
If the government wants their money "now" they better be prepared to lose money later.
Work Safe Porn
Is it time to go back to that "no taxation without representation" idea and a big way? I mean as in really... *no taxation without representation* - if they do not let you vote, they can't tax you.
And forget all the justifications what will be raised as to why you *just have to tax* those who can't vote.
all the best,
drew
FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
It would be more sensible if Pittsburg just got rid of all of its colleges and banned all college students from the city. Obviously, that would save them the most money. After all, students are burdening the system and not paying their fair share.
That's the question. Universities bring technology and new companies to the city. There are a lot of public projects in the city that are a reality only because of CMU and University of Pittsburgh. The Universities drive the evolution of the city. I guess the mayor is too blind to see that the wealth of the city is the universities.
The mayor of Pittsburgh wants to limit the consumption of education by taxing it! I suspect that the Pennsylvania legislature will not share his vision of the future.
You know why the government would never actually offer that "opt out" option? Because the majority of people would take it.
"We're broke like everybody else and are trying to make money any way we can. Sucks to be you, college students."
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
What about the 40 year old guy who works full time and goes to classes in the evening? Is he not paying his fair share by being an otherwise typical citizen of Pittsburgh? I see quite a few people that fit the scenario where I go, which has only increased due to the economy. So the county sheriff that wants a justice degree to get a pay raise has to pay the city an extra $400 to do so? What about the single mom that barely has time to go to school between raising a kid and working two jobs? She's now paying her fair share? This is social inequality in action.
"the mayor repeatedly emphasized ... the need for students to pay their 'fair share.'"
The students repeatedly emphasized the need for profligate politicians to control their spending.
We fought the British off (partly) over the issue of taxation without representation, but that isn't the problem here - as we have elected the people who are currently taxing us. (And in most cases continue to re-elect them.)
Here, you hit the nail on the head. Most people live in a reality distortion field where governments do nothing but raise taxes and 'waste' the money. Under the influence of this field, they believe the government can indefinitely raise the level of services provided without raising income while (seemingly) being free of the influences of inflation and rising prices that the rest of us are. There's always 'waste' to be cut and money to be saved without ever cutting services.
Any we've seen the results of this in corporate America... Jobs going offshore, ever shoddier products, ever lower quality.
Here, the same reality distortion field as above is at work - people have this odd belief that they can spend less while getting the same quality and without the people on the production lines having to work harder for less. At the same time, they insist the stocks in their 401(k), IRA, or other pension plan, go up in value indefinitely.
Seriously... what the heck? There's a reason there are two commonly found discounts out there... for seniors and students. This is because... duh... neither group is expected to be earning money! What's next, a tax on the unemployed and the homeless because they are not pitching in their share? How about cats and dogs, the freeloaders!
In other news, the mayor left for the weekend, and the average IQ of the city increased.
You know how it is - every vilage has its' idiot, and Pittsburgh wants to be able to say "We're #1" about something.
New slogan: Pittsburgh - it really IS the pits!
Or maybe they heard that the economy is changing, with more part-time, menial, mindless jobs, and they want to make sure their future workforce isn't over-qualified.
Or they want to make sure the supply of dumb voters increases.
Or they heard about "higher" education, and "don't want none of that people getting high on shit on school grounds - if they got money for weed, tax 'em".
Or the real explanation - they're broke, and figure that they can't tax the people who live there, because that means getting tossed out at the next election - so why not tax students who don't live there, can't vote, and are locked into a 4-year program?
The only arguments which will stop him are on the line of "Continue with this proposal and it will cost you my $$$$$ to your campaign fund".
Students should retaliate by organizing to spend as little money as possible within city limits, group orders from amazon for supplies, students with cars taking carpool trips out to the suburbs to buy groceries, everything.
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
"Eating the seed corn" is a folksy expression that means staving off hunger now by eating the seeds you need for next year's planting. I know it's a tired metaphor, but nothing in the English language comes close to describing how tragic it is when governments squeeze students. Education is what will bring us prosperity in the future. It should be the last think to be cut, after the military, police, fire department, road maintenance, research grants, foreign aide and pensions. When we cut education, we forgo a possibility of hardship today for the guarantee of irrelevance is decay tomorrow.
Educate your population, and you'd be amazed at how many other problems you solve along the way.
Pitt students would be getting their tuition upped 70$ a semester, which isn't the same thing as 32%.
Quit overreacting. We're fine here in Pittsburgh.
Anyone else starting to get the impression that politicians across the country (especially federal ones) LIKE playing Russian Roulette with their careers lately?
I say vote them out... if you don't represent ME and MY FELLOW constituents, then you have no business holding your office. To such politicians I say, "Consider yourself fired."
</venting>
This country is sounding more and more like every period history class. The rich increasingly refuse to pay any taxes. In response, the government, powerless against said rich people, turn on the poor even more.
Cities love taxes that fall primarily on people who aren't permanent residents of the city, because they can hike them up whenve they need extra cash without facing any consequences in the next election. This is why we should get rid of the 'one man one vote' idea where you can only vote where you're a permanent resident. You should be allowed to vote in any jurisdiction you pay taxes in. If Pittsburgh wants to tax students, then all those students should be allowed to vote in Pittsburgh municipal elections. If DC wants to charge a commuter tax on all the people from MD and Virginia who work there, they should all be allowed to vote in DC municipal elections.
In Arizona, for example, where I'm currently going to school, the government repeatedly made tax cuts to "help the economy" and is now going bankrupt in a huge shocker. This state is loaded with wealthy people, yet it's somehow on the brink of not being able to pay for basic social services. The public school system here is basically going down the tubes so the rich can keep from paying too much taxes and become even more disparately wealthy.
so some kid cannot afford the tax and drops out. All future taxes they would have gotten from that person when they graduated and got a great job will never happen. Brilliant!
I've got a Carnegie Mellon science degree (actually Carnegie Tech) from 1964. I'm retiring next year. And the degree was never used except to get me into a grad school that I dropped out from to work in computers.
Maybe I should auction it off on Ebay?
Good points. I'd add that both the Pitt medical researchers and the CMU professors have a choice of what city to set up their start-up companies in. If the city wants to get a reputation of playing rough, no problem...another strike against setting up a business in one of the least business-friendly places around. And, professors have a choice of where to do research. CMU and Pitt medical are always battling to get the best, and Ravenstahl's attitude will be noticed by job candidates (and current CMU/Pitt researchers) immediately. One point that has not been discussed much: $15 million of the $16 million the tax is expected to raise is earmarked by the mayor for the city pension plan (that according to the local paper this morning has been "questionably managed" - that is putting it mildly). Translation: tax the students and alienate the job-creating researchers to pay the bloated pensions of the cops who loved beating the students last month.
The majority of the VERY rich, have said that they should NOT have gotten those tax breaks. As warren buffet pointed out, he got a much higher precentage back than did his secretary. Oddly, the majority of the top 100 richest ppl said that W/neo-cons should NOT have given that up, and instead should have worried about balancing the budget. And that was in 2001-2002 when all this was being debated. I guess that their (and ppl like me) being worried about monster deficits SHOULD have been listened to, then to listen to the ACs that ignore the fact that America has some of the lowest personal taxes. In fact, that is more true for the very rich.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
... Pittsburgh has a high percentage of it's economy that comes from non-profit entities such as universities ...
Pittsburgh does it to themselves sometimes. Case in point, the Syria Mosque in Oakland wanted to expand their building or parking lot, I can't remember what exactly. They tried to get the appropriate permits from the city, and guess what? They were turned down. So they sold their property to Pitt, taking it off the tax roles as Pitt is a not-for profit, and they moved out of the city to Cheswick. I have the feeling Cheswick appreciates having the Syria Mosque there and all the taxes they pay while the city of Pittsburgh did not.
I wonder if CMU will relocate, or just fade away?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
You're absolutely correct.
I think the solution is to replace the current political culture with like-mined persons who are brave enough to stand up to the leaches (that in particular includes the small to very large companies that depend on government spending) and start cutting - cutting spending, favors, and anything else that is superfluous to maintaining order and other basic government services.
It's going to have to be persons willing to die for that goal.
Yes, because the many socialist democracies of Europe are well known for taxing students.
Oh, wait, I got that backwards, they're well known for paying students while they're in school and charging them nothing for tuition.
Someone should compute how much student's contribute to total sales tax revenues. I am certain that students bring in more money to the city and average residents. These are people who get money from OUTSIDE PGH, and bring it INSIDE PGH. Students are little money importers. I am sure people say "oh its just $400", for most students with a part-time job, that could be 2 mos pay. Plus, it unfairly discriminates against students with higher academic achievement who go to more expensive universities. Linking it to tuition seems retarded. It seems to imply that students who pay more tuition use more city resources? So a full time student at Pitt uses more than one at CMU?
The "fair share" argument is a wash. Those students have been attending CMU and Pittsburgh University for decades, and only now they thought of taxing them?
Plus, Pittsburgh has not learned the stern lessons of history. Raising taxes during an economic downturn is always a bad thing to do.
I suppose Pittsburgh overran its budget with the "goon squad" it hired to mistreat the students during G20, and now it needs to find a way to pay for it. Gas'em, Mace'em, Tax'em. The Pittsburgh Way.
Besides, if the students are buying goods and services in the city, they are already paying their "fair share" in taxes. This is just plain stupid.
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
The majority of people support public health care according to every public poll that doesn't mention the mythical death panels, so you're wrong
I know not wither to turn this a way or that a way, alas I must throw mine self upon the winds of porn!
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
Unfortunately, I'm not being represented here. Perhaps my district is.. but the whole concept of taxation vs paying for your services rendered defeats the original purpose of freedom. I'm sure many will argue "what else would we do?". I'm afraid we will not find out due to our government system and tax system. It's stagnant and is at purposes of "we the people". I see your point about corporate america. Corporations too can stagnate..
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
http://trueslant.com/laurieessig/2009/11/22/lessons-from-the-uc-student-protests/
open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/