i would rather see empty and/or deteriorating commercial businesses than deteriorating neighborhood homes caused by taxing the crap out of homeowners to benefit the wealthiest people in the city.
Of course it's exactly the opposite of your masturbatory interpretation of progress; whereby keeping the wealthiest corporations rich, justifies crippling the homeowners.
DV is so incredibly envious of people who are normal adults, independent, self sufficient, and owning homes - something he is not now and wil NEVER be -- that he wants to see the homeowners in the city be taxed so high that they lose their homes. And in order to tax them so high, he totally supports making the homeowners pay the taxes of the millionaire political cronies of his beloved McThief, Gardner, Jasenski, Buffardi, NONE who would EVER give 2nd thought to giving him a a high paid, no skill, do-nothing, no-show job
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Once again, name-calling and feeble attempts at mockery. WHY are rotting neighborhoods of once-beautiful homes preferable to empty storefronts, not even empty ones? There has been no net gain downtown. I state that, and I will soon have a sock puppet come on here to call me names. "She" isn't joking. I have stated my reasons, backed up with facts, for the opinions I hold, repeatedly. Let someone come on here and refute my opinions with real,hard facts. I won't mind being corrected.
there is NEVER a tax reduction.....I've yet to find that on research.....Alaskan's get a 'rebate' because of the oil pipeline
Quoted Text
The Permanent Fund Dividend is a dividend paid to Alaska residents that have lived within the state for a full calendar year (January 1 – December 31), and intend to remain an Alaska resident indefinitely.[11] This means if residency is taken on January 2, the "calendar year" wouldn't start until next January 1.
However, an individual is not eligible for a permanent fund dividend for a dividend year when:
(1) during the qualifying year, the individual was sentenced as a result of conviction in this state of a felony; (2) during all or part of the qualifying year, the individual was incarcerated as a result of the conviction in this state of a (A) felony; or (B) misdemeanor if the individual has been convicted of (i) a prior felony as defined in AS 11.81.900 ; or (ii) two or more prior misdemeanors as defined in AS 11.81.900 The amount of each payment is based upon a five-year average of the Permanent Fund's performance and varies widely depending on the stock market and many other factors. The Permanent Fund Dividend is calculated by the following steps:[12]
Add Fund Statutory Net Income from the current plus the previous four fiscal years. Multiply by 21% Divide by 2 Subtract prior year obligations, expenses and PFD program operations Divide by the number of eligible applicants The lowest individual dividend payout was $331.29 in 1984 and the highest was $2,069 in 2008.[13] However, in 2008 Governor Sarah Palin signed Senate Bill 4002[14] that used revenues generated from the state’s natural resources and provided a one-time special payment of $1,200 to every Alaskan eligible for the Permanent Fund dividend.[15]
I wonder if a casino fund should be set up??????
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Although the principal or corpus of the Fund is constitutionally protected, income earned by the Fund, like nearly all State income, is constitutionally defined as general fund money (subject to legislative appropriation for any purpose ... but, in practical political terms, the public tolerates spending Fund income mostly only for 'inflation-proofing' and for paying dividends).
The first dividend plan would have paid Alaskans $50 for each year of residency up to 20 years, but the U.S. Supreme Court in Zobel v. Williams disapproved the $50 per year formula as an invidious distinction burdening interstate travel. As a result, each qualified resident now receives the same annual amount, regardless of age or years of residency.
One mathematical effect an equal-amount dividend is that the dividend contributes a greater percentage of added income for people of lower incomes. Conversely, any cut, limit, cap, or end of the equal-amount PFD would mean low-income Alaskans would experience the greatest percentage loss of income. The PFD payout, which comes in or near October of each year, is acknowledged to have a substantial effect on Alaska's economy, both in total and especially in rural Alaska where unemployment can reach 60% and where cash is scarce.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Anyone buying the Mayor's claim of a 10% tax reduction in 3 years? Early campaigning?
The county budget alone is $300 million annually. You tell me how $4.1 million in additional revenue equals a 3.3% reduction of property taxes each year for the next 3.
Will there be any new/increased fees to make up for the deficit caused by this tax reduction? Will wages/new hires/pensions/medical benefits be reduced accordingly by this tax % figure? Many of City expenses are locked in so this lost revenue will have to be made up somewhere one can assume.
Logged
