Find a better way
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, June 25, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
What a good letter by Gaylene Quinn-Massart (“Slap in teachers' faces,” June 16). She hit the nail on the head when it comes to educators.
I don't have a problem funding our schools and paying our educators. The problem is having to pay for their big pensions and health care. Taxpayers should not have to bear this burden, just like we should not have to pay for state employees' pensions and health care. This is why we have one of the highest state and local and property tax rates in the country.
There should not be a “baby tax,” as has been suggested, but if I have to pay property taxes, then renters should also pay some kind of tax to fund education. Or what about a sin tax on smoking, drinking, gambling, lottery, etc.? There are other ways to fund this heavy baggage, and property owners, especially seniors, should not have to carry all the bags.
Teachers deserve what they make, but there needs to be a better way. I still think a flat tax is the best solution. It's definitely the fair way.
Didn't Pennsylvania lawmakers say years ago, “Give us gambling in this state and we will eliminate property taxes”? It's just another broken promise by our elected politicians.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Bloomberg & coal
- Knives vs. guns II
- Knives vs. guns I
- Resurrection? Yes, really
- The Obama Doctrine I wonder …
- Consequences in space
- Valley musical superb
- In tragedy’s wake II
- Resurrection? Really?