Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SmithL
Well, as long as it's only a "fee" and not a "tax", I guess it's alright.

Actually, it is a fee for services rendered. I'm OK with this. The locals are paying this fee for services as well, they just don't know it. There's nothing wrong with making sure that visitors also pay that same fee when they use the services. In other words, if his Obammyness comes to town and paramedics are called because he choked on a piece of Wagyu beef, I don't want to foot the bill. I want him to pay for it. (It's bad enough that I'm already paying for the Wagyu beef!)

11 posted on 03/06/2009 8:50:30 AM PST by Redcloak ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Redcloak

amer_wagyu_porterhouse_bg.jpg, 61 kB

14 posted on 03/06/2009 10:11:21 AM PST by Foolsgold ("We live in the greatest country in the world and I am going to change it" Barry O'boomarang 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Redcloak
There's nothing wrong with making sure that visitors also pay that same fee when they use the services.

I'll go along with that as long as the local agencies refuse to accept any state or federal dollars and that 100% or their operating budget comes from local sources. In that case, it would be OK to bill outsiders for the services. But if the outsiders are paying state and federal taxes, they are also paying a portion of the operating costs of those agencies that accept state and federal money.

15 posted on 03/06/2009 10:49:18 AM PST by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Redcloak
-- The locals are paying this fee for services as well, they just don't know it. --

The locals are paying for "insurance" of a sort, or "protection." A more equitable approach would be to bill local and out of towner alike for the variable cost, retain the tax burden to pay for most of the fixed overhead, and charge the out of towner his share of the fixed burden if he should have the misfortune of being put into an accident by one of the locals.

16 posted on 03/06/2009 10:59:56 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Redcloak
Actually, it is a fee for services rendered. I'm OK with this. The locals are paying this fee for services as well, they just don't know it. There's nothing wrong with making sure that visitors also pay that same fee when they use the services.

Trouble is, what this does is put huge incentives for local revenuers (called Police in other areas) to call out fire and EMS for every little fender bender whether it is needed or not.

19 posted on 03/06/2009 11:30:37 AM PST by zeugma (Will it be nukes or aliens? Time will tell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson