View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5181
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jpbassking wrote: | Mr G, I am referring to the two in mo's cartoon. You might recognize another infamous iW poster in the background. |
Bien sūr, je comprends maintenant........."sasa mimi kuelewa" for those who want to casually slip a little Swahili into a conversation! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NickB
Joined: 30 Jun 2009 Posts: 510 Location: Alameda, CA
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mac, thank you. for the explanation and helping kids. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NickB
Joined: 30 Jun 2009 Posts: 510 Location: Alameda, CA
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For those interested, an excerpt from NBC Class Action 2/28. The full show will be posted on nbcclassaction.com shortly:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/station/shows/San_Francisco_Superintendent_All_Fired_Up_Bay_Area.html
... about the adequacy of lawsuit against the state to force California to properly fund education. Also school districts seeking local emergency help. For example, our district is hoping for a positive vote on a hefty parcel tax in June... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mogunn
Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 1307 Location: SF Bay
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
from ballotpedia.org...
Quote: |
A San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District parcel tax, Measure A ballot proposition was on the February 23, 2010 ballot for voters in the San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District in San Mateo County, where it was approved
Yes: 14,689 (67%)
No: 7,238 (33%)
A two-thirds supermajority vote was required for approval, so the margin of victory was thin.
The San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District already had a parcel tax in place. This ballot question asked voters to:
*Extend the existing parcel tax for seven more years.
*Increase the tax by $96/year, for a total parcel tax of about $180.
The school district has had a parcel tax since 1991. Voters most recently renewed the tax in June 2003, with an expiration date of 2010. The tax approved in 2003 was for $75/year with a built-in increase for inflation. The built-in increase for inflation led to the tax being set at $87 in early 2010.
The district's parcel tax, before Measure A passed, brought in about $2 million/year. Another $3 million will flow to the district from this special tax, for a total of about $5/million a year from the parcel tax. |
I live here.
I voted.
I put my money where my mouth (pen) is.
Our future is our children. _________________ mo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9136 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Prop 13 is a disaster. I saw Meg Whitman last Summer talk to about 300 people at my company. She said she was in favor of reforming prop 13, because it shifts the Education budget from the local districts to Sacramento, and that is wrong. NOW that she is running and littering the airwaves with countless ads, she is in full support of Prop 13. She did a little focus group with some dirtbag political types, and found out that if she touched Prop 13 she would lose a big piece of senior votes, and big real estate developer $$$. I thought she was a principled libertarian type when I saw her, now I think she is no different than any other politician.
Boggsman |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jp5
Joined: 19 May 1998 Posts: 3394 Location: OnUr6
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
That was kind of my gut impression of her boggs. She sure is spending a lot of money on TV commercials! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9136 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
jpbassking wrote: | That was kind of my gut impression of her boggs. She sure is spending a lot of money on TV commercials! |
Speaking of guts, I really need the wind to start blowing up here! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17774 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And here's why we won't fund schools. From David cay Johnston, "Since 1992, the bottom 90 percent of Americans have seen their incomes rise by 13 percent in 2009 dollars, compared with an increase of 399 percent for the top 400."
And where are the middle class jobs that these tax cuts were supposed to produce? The rising tide that will lift all boats? According to the IRS records, the average adjusted income of the 400 highest earners rose by 31 percent from 2006 to 2007, while their tax rates dropped to 16.6 percent. It had been 30 percent in 1995. Returning to those rates is socialism? Pardon me, the upper class has been stealing from the rest of us for the last ten years. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|