I noticed that Wikipedia’s featured article today was Daylight saving time. Enjoy.
Property taxes
So, how much of the furor over increased property taxes I’ve seen in the Indiana blogosphere has to do with Marion County’s failure to plan ahead?
For the furor, see:
here
here
here
here
here
here
However, as Advance Indiana notes, among other things, Marion County apparently failed to pass a County Option Income Tax to offset the elimination of the inventory tax. That’s a pretty big deal, meaning that all of the revenue that used to come from inventory tax payers has now devolved onto other property tax payers in Marion County (and similarly situated counties). It makes me wonder how much of the pain in Marion County could have been avoided with some advance planning. It also makes me wonder how bad things are outside of Marion County. Unless this is a problem counties around Indiana generally have found themselves incapable of dealing with, I’d suggest that Indianapolis Mayor Peterson’s requests for a special session of the General Assembly be declined. That property taxes were going to increase substantially was no mystery during the regular session. The General Assembly took action, albeit well less than perfect action. Now, I figure they’re obligated to let the dust settle and revisit the issue next January.
Abdul says: “You know it would be nice if someone would put out a news release saying “we’re going to spend less money so Hoosiers can pay less in taxes!” That would be news.”
That’s easy to say. But, I’d like to first know how much spending has actually increased relative to inflation. My sense is that it’s not much of an increase. I’d also like to know which government services should no longer be provided.
The primary reasons for the high increases in property taxes recently are: 1) Elimination of the inventory tax – former inventory tax payers are paying less, so other property tax payers, including residential homeowners have to pay more. Counties were given the ability to implement a County Option Income Tax to offset the inventory tax reduction; basically you replace the revenue with income taxes instead of property taxes; 2) Reduction of the homestead credit and property tax relief credit – state subsidies that took the burden off of property taxes. These credits were provided out of a recognition that the state imposed large burdens on local taxes and also imposed significant restrictions on local taxing powers. These subsidies were reduced in an effort to balance the state budget and, effectively shifted the problem to local government and property tax payers; and 3) Changes in assessment rules – years ago, taxpayers brought a lawsuit arguing that the assessment rules unfairly and artificially underassessed some properties and overassessed others. The Supreme Court agreed and required something resembling market values be used for assessments. As a result the relative tax burdens shifted, with the underassessed property owners having to pay more and the overassessed paying less.
So, generally speaking, the dramatic rise we see in property taxes is less a matter of local government spending gone amok, and more a matter of shifting tax burdens. (You can expect those whose tax burdens went down to keep relatively quiet). Also, in some cases – such as, apparently, Marion County, this already difficult situation was made worse by failure to use available tools, such as the County Option Income Tax.
Bats Left Throws Right has a much more entertaining explanation of much the same thing.
[tags]taxation[/tags]
Turning signals green while riding a bicycle
I’ve had some trouble at a few intersections getting the light to turn green. I think the intersections are “demand actuated” signals — i.e. you have to be detected before the signal will change. In case any of you folks have had similar problems, here is a link to a page entitled Detection of Bicycles at Demand-Actuated Traffic Signals. Seems that a lot of these devices are essentially metal detectors.
China executes corrupt government official
George W. Bush said that serving any jail time at all would be “too harsh” a punishment for Scooter Libby’s conviction of obstructing justice and committing perjury with respect to an investigation into the burning of a covert CIA Agent’s identity.
Meanwhile, our trading partners in the far east are taking a more aggressive approach to government accountability, at least in one case. Joseph Kahn, writing for the International Herald Tribune, has an article entitled China executes the former head of its food and drug agency.
China executed its former top food and drug regulator on Tuesday for taking bribes to approve untested medicine, as the Beijing leadership scrambled to show that it was serious about improving the safety of Chinese products. . . . China executed its former top food and drug regulator on Tuesday for taking bribes to approve untested medicine, as the Beijing leadership scrambled to show that it was serious about improving the safety of Chinese products.
The story goes on to note that, even by Chinese standards, the punishment was unusually harsh and unusually swift. Recent international publicity concerning unsafe Chinese products probably influenced the process. Recent incidents include tainted dog food, deaths in Panama from tainted cough syrup, and lead paint in Thomas the Tank Engine toys.
Paying but not getting
Victoria Colliver, writing a column for the San Francisco Chronicle has an article entitled We spend far more, but our health care is falling behind : Australia, Canada, Germany, Britain, New Zealand spend less, serve better. The column is critical of Michael Moore’s new movie, “Sicko” but essentially concedes that the central point is not in doubt. Which, as far as I’m concerned, is fine. Moore is an advocate, not a documentarian. Where he is wrong, advocates for other positions are free to point out the errors. More commonly, where he is incomplete, advocates for other positions are free to fill in the blanks.
But, Moore’s movie brings to mind an anecdote I’ve heard attributed to LBJ, telling his campaign manager to call his opponent a pig fucker. The campaign manager says, “you know that’s not true.” To which LBJ said, “yeah, I just want to make him deny it.” The problem with opponents of Sicko, or more accurately, proponents of the current health care system, there seems to be more than a hint of bestiality with the way things are running right now. The U.S. ranks 37th out of 190 nations in health care services. That puts us ahead of Slovenia but behind Costa Rica. We made our way to the vaunted 37th spot by spending a higher percentage of our gross domestic product on health than any other country. We spend an average of $6,102 per person in public and private funds compared with France, the leader in providing health care to its citizens, which spends only $3,159 per capita. Like I’ve said before, we’re paying for universal health care, we’re just not getting it.
We need to follow the money to see where our dollars are getting wasted. I suspect a large percentage goes to paying for insurance company bureaucracies where the profit motive has created an incentive to take in premium dollars and avoid paying out on claims.
So, folks should feel free to point out Michael Moore’s errors, but they should be prepared to explain why it’s a good idea for us to keep spending twice as much as France on health care and not get nearly the return on our investment.
[tags]health care[/tags]
Zach Wendling is a genius
Zach Wendling at, In the Agora, has a post entitled Why, Again. Mr. Wendling has found a way to explain the inexplicable. Why does the Bush administration do what it does?
They are a highly dedicated and creative troupe of improvisational Surrealist performance artists*. Rather than following some ideological agenda, every aspect of this White House seeks to top the previously held conceptions with ever more outlandish behaviour and policy decisions.
Let’s imagine how this works. The premise: a highly-unpopular President with no political capital is looking for a way to rescue some sort of legacy for his administration. There are many pedestrian themes one could play on to bring this scenario to resolution, but Team Bush came up with the most unexpected: go after the remaining 28% of his supporters and try his best to alienate them. Brilliant!
Bravo, Mr. Wendling. Bravo!
Bush against government health insurance for kids
George Bush is opposed to government assistance with insuring kids, reports the New York Times. Specifically, he is working to block expansion of the States Child Health Insurance Program.
Administration officials have denounced the Democratic proposal as a step toward government-run health care for all. They said it would speed the erosion of private insurance coverage. And they oppose two of the main ideas contemplated by Democrats to finance expanded coverage for children: an increase in the federal tobacco tax and cuts in Medicare payments to private insurance companies caring for the elderly.
Indiana and Governor Daniels get a mention:
To return the children’s insurance program to what he calls “its original intent,†Mr. Bush has asked Congress to reduce federal payments to the states for coverage of children in families with incomes of more than twice the poverty level. (A family of four is considered poor if its annual income is less than $20,650.) At least 18 states cover children with family incomes more than twice the poverty level.
In Indiana, Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican who was Mr. Bush’s first budget director, recently signed a bill into law that raised the ceiling to 300 percent of the poverty level, from 200 percent.
[tags]health care[/tags]
Charter schools are a mixed bag
The Louisville Courier Press has an article reporting that, 5 years after creation of the program, publicly funded charter schools in Indiana are mixed in their performance. “Charter schools receive public funding but operate outside the rules of traditional public schools, and they are independent of local school boards.”
The surprise to me is not that some Charter schools are doing well, some are average, and some are poor. To me, the surprise is that there doesn’t seem to have been much of a plan to measure their performance. They were sold as being superior to regular schools. I would’ve thought some way of telling whether we’re getting what we’re paying for would have been put in place.
I certainly think charter schools have their place. Some kids just aren’t wired to be good little cogs in the public school machinery. With greater flexibility, charters have the potential to help these kids.
[tags]education[/tags]
Cycling
I think I mentioned getting a new bike a few weeks back. This weekend, it occurred to me that I had a Camelbak sitting up in the attic. That really made riding pleasant. 50 oz of water on my back along with a granola bar and a map of the local roads made me feel like I was on an expedition. Of course, I wasn’t. I managed about 18 miles today and about 13 miles yesterday. Any real riders would probably be chuckling at the idea of that kind of gear for such short rides. Still, my thighs are burning today, but I didn’t feel put out during the rides from the heat — even though I think it was about 90 degrees today. I think my range will mostly be limited by the amount of time I have for riding. I can’t see justifying more than about 2 hours of free time in a given day away from work and family responsibilities on riding my bike around the countryside. In any case, good exercise, and I don’t feel like I’m tearing up my knees.
Riding in the bed of a pickup truck
Fort Wayne Observed brings us a story from the Evansville Courier Press regarding an opinion from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute on whether law enforcement can ticket occupants of the bed of a pickup truck for failing to use a seat belt.
The opinion is an interpretation of IC 9-19-10 as amended by HEA 1237-2007 (caution, the online Indiana Code cite has not been amended to reflect the new legislation as of the date I type this.) I don’t think much of the opinion’s reliance on past legislation or past incarnations of the bill or the newly created exceptions as a reason to think pickup bed passengers are exempt from the seat belt law. However, if you read the text of the legislation itself (a novel idea) there is reason for concern. It says:
Each occupant of a motor vehicle equipped with a safety belt that meets the standards stated in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Number 208 (49 CFR 571.208); and is standard equipment installed by the manufacturer; shall have a safety belt properly fastened about the occupant’s body at all times when the vehicle is in forward motion.
(internal subdivisions omitted).
The jist of this is that if your vehicle has seat belts installed when you get it, you have to use them or risk a ticket. Truck beds don’t generally have seat belts installed. So, if you’re riding back there, I don’t think you have to use a seat belt. You deserve a head injury for being that stupid, but not a ticket.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 460
- 461
- 462
- 463
- 464
- …
- 689
- Next Page »