3 ms·
It seems you really don't object to Philadelphia's "exorbitantly high" taxes at all. What you object to is that these high taxes haven't turned Philadelphia's
by cagey 16y ago
It seems you really don't object to Philadelphia's "exorbitantly high" taxes at all. What you object to is that these high taxes haven't turned Philadelphia's government into an effective deliverer of all the services that you wish it would provide, which if delivered would result in the city becoming an ideal place. Maybe (since you really don't object to paying "exorbitantly high" taxes) you'd back a proposal to raise taxes to allow achievement of this goal?
- dogas 16y agoId agree with that proposal if Philly taxes were lower than or on par with the national average, but the fact is philadelphians already shoulder one of the highest tax burdons in the US.
- anamax 16y ago> Maybe (since you really don't object to paying "exorbitantly high" taxes) you'd back a proposal to raise taxes to allow achievement of this goal? Why the assumption that raising taxes would result in better services? The experience in Philadelphia suggests otherwise, at least as far as Philadephia is concerned.
- JunkDNA 16y agoI most certainly do object to Philly's high taxes. I was merely making the point that you can't even point to decent city services as a positive for enduring high taxes (something you most definitely can do in some other high-tax areas).
- cagey 16y agoI wasn't replying to your post. My post summarized the post I was replying to (by dogas), highlighting the apparent contradiction contained therein: Philly's taxes are "exorbitantly high" yet dogas would be _happy_ to pay them _if only_ ... And I added the absurd/tongue-in-cheek suggestion that maybe dogas would be interested in trying to see if _higher_ taxes would achieve dogas' ideal. I think I would have avoided the downmodding by annotating with <tic> to make this clear.