Posted by I (heart) SBCC 2 on May 26, 2008, 12:55 pm, in reply to "Re: Measure V - Vote Yes!"
70.177.16.178
Let's reframe the argument. Picture a sliding scale. One end is no new taxes and the other is pass every new tax ever presented. Picture a point somewhere inbetween those two extremes.
What would move you slightly off your end of no new taxes but way short of approving every additional tax increase?
Do you think I support every new tax that comes down the pike? I don't, but I do support Measure V. I have chosen to move the marker somewhere between the two extremes: (1) no taxes vs (2) approve all new taxes.
You claim the SBCC bond issue should not be passed because they are lying and misrepresenting itself. You have said they are lying about the $8.50 per $100,000 assessed valuation and they are saying no new buildings, yet they are using money to support the new SOMA building.
Therefore, it might be a good tax except for that according to you it is badly presented. Does this fairly represent your position?
What would have been a better way, in your opinion, to have presented this bond issue?
If your response is no bond is good and no tax is good then there is no where for this argument to go.
Except realistically explore other significant funding mechanisms, with facts and figures to show where they would come from and how they would provide the equivalent results. Wishful thinking is not an adequate response.
But if you could accept some taxes might be worth supporting, then we can keep this going. Under what circumstances would you accept a movement of the sliding scale away from the extreme of no new taxes?
110
Message Thread:
« Back to thread