I always find it humorous to read the comments on your various liberal sites about how "greedy" people who don't support school levies are when the thought of actually cutting a check for their schools seems as foreign as the aliens in Area 51.
There is no better example of this than that liberal dolt Eric of Plunderbong. A few years ago, Eric did such a post about supporting schools and I challenged him to send the schools a check if they are such a worthwhile cause.
Do you think he did? I'll let the readers decide.
But unlike Eric, I actually do support the schools with or without benefit of a tax levy.
Here is a copy of a cleared check that I sent the Lancaster Athletic Boosters for $100.00. For the record, I don't live in the Lancaster school district (although I have nieces and nephews who do). I just recently sent them another $100 that hasn't cleared yet.
So why do I send them money? Because of my experience with the Lancaster track and cross country teams, I was able to secure a scholarship to the University of Cincinnati. It was due to my relationship with all of my athletic coaches who helped me in so many ways that I feel an obligation to pay back. As soon as I fulfill my pledge to UC for a scholarship fund my intention is to reallocate those dollars to a public school athletic program.
The point of all this? I don't wait for a school district to pass a levy. I actually support my schools by sending them money! What a novel concept for a liberal.
With that said, I'll offer another wager with Eric and his Plunderdouche buddies. Who gives more to charity? I'll go up against each and every one of you for $500.00 to the charity of the winner's choice.
If you think that it's unfair because I make so much more than you, then we'll do it as a percentage of income. I know I would kick your ass then.
So what's it going to be big mouth? Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?
PS I'm still waiting for that dolt to accept my challenge from yesterday.
3 comments:
Bush gave 10%+ of his income to charity and Biden comes in around 0.5%
Using liberal logic, that would make Biden 20 times more evil.
I would feel differently about the levy guilt trip if governments would consider funding additional school needs from budget cuts from less essential budget lines. Then. propose a levi based on those lines' shortfalls.
It is never done that way though. Tax increases are always sold as "it's for the children" but revenues are rolled into a big bucket and spent on children last.
If education of the children really was the number one priority of government it would pump all needed funds into the schools and let the other funded areas fight it out for funding over what's left. It doesn't work out that way now does it?
The other areas, such as civil union retirement funding, environment consultants, street cars, get first dibs on tax revenues. And year after year "the children" are left with the dirty work of fighting for more tax dollars.
Think about it. How many hundreds of school levies have been up in the local area over the years. Then, how many tax levies have you seen for non-school items? School levies are at least 5 times the other.
Yet all areas of government have grown about the same over the years.
Should this be repoted to Obama as something "fishy"?
My point was not to criticize people who do or do not vote for school levies. People vote for levies based on the facts at hand.
My main point is that I don't need to wait for my neighbor to pass a tax levy for me to support a cause I believe is worthy.
That's how conservatives roll. Liberals only roll to the tune of "I'll only support it if everyone kicks in".
Post a Comment