and....

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/24/03 at 8:27pm

Mr Roxy wrote: "Living in NYC, # 1 city on the terrorists hit parade, I want whatever needs to be done to happen...."

And you will happily pay for this how? Will you pay for this directly into some fund or will the current tax levels cover this? And should people who don't even live in the top 2000 on this terrorist hit list that you imagine exists be expected to pay, all socialist-like, at the same levels that we who choose to live in a top ten city on the hit list pay? Protection from terrorism and the expense attached to it is not a right, is it?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/24/03 at 9:20pm

I loathe every politician in New York using 9/11 as a whipping boy for their failed policies. I cringe when our mayor, Mad Mike, goes hat in hand asking Washington for more $$ alledgedly to pay for extra security. He is trying to get as much money as he can to cover billion dollar budget deficits which have nothing to do with terrorism.. Both our city & state government spend like drunken sailors with no care in the world as to where the $$ is coming from. Mad Mike feels if he can use 9/11 to get $$ for the city to cover deficits caused by years of overspending, he will shamelessly do it. All NYC should get is their fair share & not a penny more.

If you do not think that terrorists want to hit NY again, read your newspapers about the guy they arrested who was an Al Queda sleeper who met with Bin Laden & was to try & bring down the Brooklyn Bridge ( 1 1/2 years after 9/11). If you think there is no terrorist hit/wish list you are naive. I do not mean to be harsh but these are the facts.

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/24/03 at 10:12pm

I do not doubt your hit parade tho I imagine that the nation's capital is neck-in-neck for the top spot. My question was more in response to this part of your statement:

"...I want whatever needs to be done to happen...."

My question is how? Given there are no time machines to go back and get some of that drunken sailor money back. How do you think whatever needs to be done will happen exactly? On a volunteer basis?

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/25/03 at 10:26pm

I notice you have responded to and started other threads tonight but you have opted not to answer my question, Mr. Roxy. Is there any particular reason for that?

Remember, you said: "I & thousands walked across the Queensboro bridge on 9/11. We saw the smoke from the WTC wreckage & wondered if the bridge we were walking on would be bombed next. Once you live through that, you want your government to do whatever is needed to insure it does not happen again. Unless you have actually experienced this, you cannot imagine the feelings you experience."

Again, how do you expect your government to pay for this when all through other threads you take a VERY STRONG stance against your government paying for things and that people shouldn't expect or feel entitled to have things paid for by the government. Is there some missing part of this discrepancy I am missing, Mr. Roxy, I am very curious?
Updated On: 6/25/03 at 10:26 PM

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/27/03 at 6:41pm

The thread is here in case you lost track of it, Mr. Roxy.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/27/03 at 7:19pm

I just did a lengthy post clicked it to send & it went into space& vanished.

In a nutshell, what I said is government should cut waste ( which they will not) & take $ 1 per week from everyones check to go specifically for the fight on terrorism. Do not allow politicians to get their greedy little hands on it. Use it to upgrade port security, increase airport security & do whatever needs to be done. If this did not answer your question let me know what I still need to answer.

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/28/03 at 10:52am

Oh, I see. You would like to create yet another new tax. It looks as if you would like to use the "theater restoration fee" model. "Minus One Dollar of Every Pay Check for Security Restoration." It sounds simple, but of course is very complicated.

Should people who live and work in remote places that are not ever going to be the victims of terrorism be expected to contribute the exact same amount of money to save the butts of the elites who choose to live in places that are more likely to suffer attacks? And is it up to those of us who walked over bridges on 9/11/2001 to tell them we need even more of their paychecks, because we are part of the select group who witnessed the terror first hand and that they couldn't possibly understand what that was like if they weren't there (a sentiment that is itself a kind of elitism)?

What about stay at home moms and dads who don't get paychecks? Do they get a free ride? What about part time workers? Should a high school student who makes 75 dollars a week before taxes working a few nights at a concession stand at a movie theater pay that one dollar flat fee out of every paycheck at the same time an upper management person in a big corporation who takes home, say, 2000 dollars a week also pays that, for him or her but not really for the high school kid, low one dollar fee?

Does another level of taxation actually need to be created? I find this an intriguing question because the current President campaigned on making government smaller and during his tenure he has created the largest new beauracracy in the history of government beauracracies. Ironically, it was created to shore up the incredibly weak national security at airports and such that was deficient for one reason alone: the strong conservative belief that privatization of industries such as airport security would help the bottom line of corporations that would exploit cheap and relatively untrained labor and, you guessed it, lower taxes and help diminish beauracracy.

Meanwhile, in 2001, about 25 of every 100 of your tax dollars went to military and related spending. And by related I mean nuclear weapons development in the Dept of Energy, payment to foreign military aid, sales, training, and military retirement and national security. That same year, 2001, saw about another 17 of every 100 of your tax dollars going to spending due to past military activities, which is veterans benefits and services and the interest on public debt accumulated due to past military spending. So that grand total is almost 50 of every 100 of your tax dollars going to the defense related spending... and that's BEFORE they creation of the Department of Homeland Security -- and you know those ready.gov commercials and websites and terror warning color code systems didn't get created or administered for free! (These military spending numbers are a matter of public record but I used to American Friends Committee analysis of tax spending as a resource.)

Is that extra bonus "one dollar from every check" really going to help? More importantly, is it really necessary? And, Mr. R., given your propensity for feeling oppressed by the current level of taxes, how do you square your desire to create yet another one?

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 6/28/03 at 10:53am

COULD U PLEASE SEND PM's TO EACH OTHER!!!!!!

[Butch2]

Posted: 6/28/03 at 11:04am

Yes we COULD. But will we?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/28/03 at 4:27pm

To Butch 2: The answer is yes & I just did