mkelover: Taxes are necessary for government to work. Unfortunately you don’t see any value in them. Without them we would be living in a system of tribalism and even then you would need to pay tribute to the Chieftain.

Christopher Thomas: I always find it interesting that when Republicans are attacking Democrats they scare people by pointing out the entire amount of a tax, or own unsubstantiated inflated numbers for a tax rather than what the real impact will be on a per household basis. You’ve not disappointed me by sticking to the GOP rhetoric stereotype. I also find it interesting that you’re talking about a referendum being real representation(it’s not) yet you’re silent on why Scott Walker has opposed the sales tax referendum.

Lori Lowling-Kwiat: You commented that we shouldn’t be bailing out people who cannot pay their subprime loans. I actually agree with you but if the choice is to have the government bail out the lenders or the borrowers, I choose neither. If I’m forced to choose one, I’ll have to choose the borrowers. The lenders know better.

I apologize I can’t respond to all of the comments but I balance the blog with having a life. Contrary to popular belief, I don’t moderate the comments on a regular basis.

First of all, anyone who reads this site knows I think very-highly of myself as an educator. Ask Lori.

At my school we know how to work with a budget. Yes, costs for some things have gone up, but the most essential element of a successful classroom is a well trained and enthusiastic teachers supported by parents who care. Textbooks are a help too. The difference between you and I is that I’d want to know what the money would be used for and decide if the cost was worth the spending before calling for more taxes. The people of my district are not well-off, like your rich lazy professors. And they are lazy too. I know plenty of them and never has one of them complained of being over-worked. And yes, many are hard working and great assets to the university, but lets not kid ourselves here. The fact in their case is the that the board of regents simply increases tuition anyway.

Trying to get too much out at once can really hurt!

So, taking inflation into account, your school has less money then last year and you’re happy about that? You must be a horrible teacher to want your students to get less and less funding. I pray that you don’t teach economics or public policy or social studies. You must think very little of yourself as an educator to be so pleased with a Republican plan to underfund high-schools, and you must think very little of higher education to so brashly laugh at the prospect of UW-Madison professors getting downsized. I happen to be proud of living in the same state as as UW-Madison, which is one of the best universities in the country for sociology, and I wish it would receive enough funding to INCREASE its number of professorships.

The solution to society’s problems is NOT more government intervention nor is it higher taxes.

I live paycheck to paycheck but I also save 10% of my pre-tax income in a 401k and stocks. Should I get some sort of bailout because I live paycheck to paycheck? Hell no. It’s not the government’s fault that I live paycheck to paycheck, it’s MY fault. Not yours or your neighbors.

I am not banking on the fact that I’ll have a pension or that I’ll have any social security when I retire. I am watching out for my needs and the needs of my family. I’m sorry, it’s quite tough to, additionally, take on the needs of everyone else who is not as responsible as I am.

Read that piece of rubbish by Kroll. What a load of bunk. I work at a high-school, and we are able to plan because we know that we have the same number of dollars as last year. As far as some brain drain in Madison–please. Those guys raise tuition well in excess of the rate of inflation. Don’t tell me we might lose a professor–what a tragedy.

As far as being selfish goes, you describe it as if it was some sort of character flaw when people look at their financial situation and realize that they want to keep more of their money to take care of the needs of their own families. Further, like all leftys you somehow think you’re superior because you identify a need but then declare that everyone should pay for it–that somehow those of us who don’t have a lot to spare must attend to “more people all clamoring for “their” share of the stuff.” You also assume that we should share the portion of our meoney we wish to share in the way you (and your lefty buddies) think we should. That’s mind-blowing arrogance on your part. If you want to provide services to the poor, start a 501(c)(3), I’ll address my charitable responsibilities the way I see fit. Go peddle your false morality somewhere else.

And as far as the Republicans go, I pray they stand firm. The democrat budget will have a crushing effect on my finances, but since you democrats are the wealthy it won’t hurt you as much.

Hermes– messenger of the gods. You sure do think highly of yourself.

Lori:

You’re right about the representation issue here. I imagine deomcrats and republicans could find common ground on many budget lines, but the notion of birthing a tens-of-billions new government debacle is something that should be done separately, and slowly. Let us vote on it. We the people.

Who in the world could have predicted 20 and 30 years ago that we should have been saving for thousands and thousands of dollars worth of possible medical deductibles and premiums. When my folks worked, they had coverage and even into retirement they were covered. To sit there and say that they should have saved more is a slap in the face to anyone who has been promised a retirement only to have it removed from under them in the name of profits for shareholders. You might argue that neither you nor any company has any obligation to its workers. Then when in the hell are we all supposed to save all of this money when people are living paycheck to paycheck just to make ends meet? Not all of the folks out here are making the kinds of dollars that allow for 10 to 20% of their pre or post tax dollars to go into a fund or a stock or HAS. This reality is right outside your window should you care to look as you drive through town. My guess is though that you would rather stare straight ahead…that way you can continue to fool yourself into thinking that everything is a-ok with the world

Depending on who (or what type) is in charge, there will be a bunch of people who do not want to pay the taxes. During times when people don’t feel represented, they’d rather safely apply the money to their own backyard and write the check on their own?

Also, please consider known government corruption and siphoning of funds at every level as a valid reason …

You recognize that other people exist, right? And that there is a limited amount of stuff in the world? And that there are constantly more and more people all clamoring for “their” share of the stuff?

that’s what I call Budget Balderdash:
http://www.wauwatosanow.com/blog/?blogid=414

I think people that lost their homes in Katrina (still NOT rebuilt – STILL waiting for funds.) deserve to be addressed before the sub-prime consumers. The majority of the help they’ve received has been directly from loving neighbors, communities and strangers.

I think it’s counter-productive to be name-calling and categorizing people assuming that they are aware of your point-of-view as well. We all come from different backgrounds and as we are completely oblivious to others lifestyles and value systems, as they are completely oblivious to our as well. That they haven’t walked in your shoes does not alone make them evil, unkind or “inherently unhappy, miserable cretins”.

You just wrote something to the note of working together Jim, and you wrote this, what gives?

Why should it be the republican duty to compromise? If the Dems are so sure about the merits of a public health plan, why don’t they remove it from the budget and offer a refferendum? That’s representation.

Finally, I’d rather keep my money. ITs my money. I earned it. Why doesn’t the government learn to pay its bills like I have to pay mine!

and as far as mortgage bailouts go. That is the most sickening idea ever. Who signs a note they can’t pay? Don’t even bother with some sob story.

Anyway, at the risk of soundind like a parasite, I’d like to point out that the sheer scope of Doyle tax increases is sickening. Some estimates put the cost at over five hundred dollars per household, per month. Poor Ven’s grandma won’t even be able to afford cat-food on that; neither will my own elderly aunt. As a parasite I’d also like to point out how much of it falls on the poor more that anyone else–the gas tax, smoking, the list goes on.