If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
Jay Honeck wrote:
This is quite true. But I also lose everything if the government decides to fund another new hotel. (They've built two in the last two years...) I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
(They've built two in the last two
years...) I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
Jay Honeck wrote:
(They've built two in the last two years...) I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare. I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The people of the city as represented by the council or whoever is making the decision to build these hotels and lease them to private organizations. They are doing it because they are going to get something in return. Increased tourism, larger tax base, whatever. Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would that be welfare? |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... Jay Honeck wrote: (They've built two in the last two years...) I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare. I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The people of the city as represented by the council or whoever is making the decision to build these hotels and lease them to private organizations. They are doing it because they are going to get something in return. Increased tourism, larger tax base, whatever. Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would that be welfare? How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare? Have Americans become such whores? |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Public Financing (was: annual interruptus)
Jeez, Jay, if I had your face, I'd shave my ass and walk backwards.
{;-) On a more serious note, some of the part time faculty at the college feel the same way about applying for unemployment over the summer break. The other side of that coin says that if the college paid the premiums for unemployment insurance directly to the faculty, or offered the faculty a full year contract, or loaded up the schedule so that everybody could teach in the summer, then there wouldn't be the need for those $$ to fill a three month gap of no income. Hell, after 30 years at this gig I've got a $25K credit in my "account" with the State of Californicate that I'll never see. When I quit, it gets dumped into the general fund, lost and gone forever. "Welfare" is collecting money for doing nothing. Working your ass off in a structure that has been funded with public money for public purposes is not. Forget thee not that part of your sweat in that structure is going back into the public treasury, along with all the tax money that it generates. You might have scruples about part of your labor going into the public treasury, but don't call it welfare. Jim "Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com... I have to shave this face every morning |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... Jay Honeck wrote: (They've built two in the last two years...) I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare. I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The people of the city as represented by the council or whoever is making the decision to build these hotels and lease them to private organizations. They are doing it because they are going to get something in return. Increased tourism, larger tax base, whatever. Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would that be welfare? How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare? Have Americans become such whores? You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways. If a government entity decides that having more people stay in hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels. Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to compete. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... Matt Barrow wrote: Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would that be welfare? How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare? Have Americans become such whores? You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways. Yes. If a government entity decides that having more people stay in hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels. That's one form. Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to compete. So, your answer to my second question is "yes"? |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Public Financing (was: annual interruptus)
Jeez, Jay, if I had your face, I'd shave my ass and walk backwards.
{;-) You forgot the part about learning to walk on my hands... ;-) On a more serious note, some of the part time faculty at the college feel the same way about applying for unemployment over the summer break. The other side of that coin says that if the college paid the premiums for unemployment insurance directly to the faculty, or offered the faculty a full year contract, or loaded up the schedule so that everybody could teach in the summer, then there wouldn't be the need for those $$ to fill a three month gap of no income. Hell, after 30 years at this gig I've got a $25K credit in my "account" with the State of Californicate that I'll never see. When I quit, it gets dumped into the general fund, lost and gone forever. One point: You have no "account", and there are far more people sucking from the teat than are carressing it. Another point: Your employer has no choice but to pay into it -- they cannot, by law, give it to you instead. But you know that. /rant mode on/ In Iowa, unemployment compensation is a blending of two easily- corrupted groups -- the bureacrats who run the system, and the recipients of the money. Because of the way "Unemployment" is set up, these two groups -- which, in the interest of "checks and balances", should have as semi-adversarial role -- instead work together hand-in-glove to fleece the system. Bureacrats love new benefit recipients -- it keeps them busy, and diverts our elected officials' attention elsewhere when they're looking for places to cut the budget. More unemployment paid out justifies their existence, and provides an incentive to build their department -- two very compelling reasons for them to approve benefits. Recipients, of course, are more than happy to take the benefits. While I might admit, on a good day, that many recipients of "unemployment" are in need of the money, there are a signficant number of dastardly and nefarious scumbags who will always try to scam the system. Those people, combined with the bureaucrats, make for a system that is full of fluff and waste. Hapless employers are forced to pay into this corrupt system, and have virtually no input or control over where the money is spent. In our 10 years in business in Iowa, we have had precisely one (1) employee claim unemployment compensation. The claim was completely bogus, I was able to document it six ways to China, but, in the end, it didn't matter -- the guy (then living in a beach house in Florida) was able to get paid for six months of sitting on his butt. Now you might say "Good for him" -- except that because of this, my overall unemployment insurance rate (or "Workforce Development" rate, as the State of Iowa sickeningly coins it) went up 400%, and has stayed at that higher rate for five years. That extra money -- and we're talking many thousands of dollars -- was money that could have been used for any number of productive things, from remodeling the hotel, to giving my night manager a raise. Instead, it was sucked into the never-satisfied maw of Gummint, never to be seen again. Don't talk to me about EVER accepting government welfare money. The waste and fraud in our government, from Federal to State to Local, sickens me, and I would rather accept money from organized crime. /rant mode off/ -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Public Financing (was: annual interruptus)
One point: You have no "account", Yes I do, Jay, and for the times during the year when my teaching contract has run out and I have absolutely no assurance that it will be renegotiated for the coming semester (like during summer and winter breaks) I have an account with a known number of dollars in it that is printed on the unemployment forms that I get every semester. Right now it stands somewere in the vicinity of $25 grand. That account is debited for every dollar I draw from it, and when it goes to zero so does my unemployment check. and there are far more people sucking from the teat than are carressing it. That would be caressing, but let's not suck the tits from nits. I don't get your point. Another point: Your employer has no choice but to pay into it -- they cannot, by law, give it to you instead. But you know that. SUUURRRRE THEY CAN. You have heard of the initiative and referendum process, yes? Or is Iowa not yet on board with these 19th century innovations for power to the people? /rant mode on/ In Iowa, unemployment compensation is a blending of two easily- corrupted groups /rant^2 mode on/ Ya know, Jay, you seem to have this "poor helpless little me" syndrome that just drives me buggy. The people on your city council, on your state legislature, and on your state senate put their clothes on one piece at a time, just like you and I. You think they were BORN to the office? A lot of them are poor dirt farmers that had the intestinal fortitude (with a capital G) to stand up and say, "to hell with this system." And then do something about it. You keep saying how much money is required to run for office. I agree; it is one of the warts on our political system. However, if somebody runs, and if their message rings true with enough of the local factions, the money will flow. It is amazing ... just like sticking a pipe into a wall and turning on the spigot and watching the water flow. But you have to resonate with the people and organizations. But ya gotta do it. And you need to dedicate the time to do it. Or let Mary run. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. Hapless employers are forced to pay into this corrupt system, and have virtually no input or control over where the money is spent. In our 10 years in business in Iowa, we have had precisely one (1) employee claim unemployment compensation. The claim was completely bogus, I was able to document it six ways to China, but, in the end, it didn't matter -- the guy (then living in a beach house in Florida) was able to get paid for six months of sitting on his butt. And did you appeal it, as is your right (at least in Californicate) or did you let that ****ant little "administrative law judge" at the first hearing be the deciding judge? Those idiots are not really skilled in UI law; they are picked from a group of attorneys who hope someday to land the plush job of "real" judge. Don't talk to me about EVER accepting government welfare money. The waste and fraud in our government, from Federal to State to Local, sickens me, and I would rather accept money from organized crime. I'll talk to Bugsy, and if he okays the vigorish arrangement you can have as much as you want. Just watch out for your kneecaps {;-) /rant^2 mode off/ Jim /rant mode off/ -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
annual interruptus
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ... Matt Barrow wrote: Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would that be welfare? How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare? Have Americans become such whores? You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways. Yes. If a government entity decides that having more people stay in hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels. That's one form. Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to compete. So, your answer to my second question is "yes"? No it isn't. Welfare, at least in my mind, pay people or companies to do nothing or pays them more for something than it is worth. If a city spends $1,000,000 today in the hope of earning $10,000,000 in taxes and other income over the next 10 years that's not welfare that's investment. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Out of annual.... | A Lieberman | Owning | 7 | October 31st 05 02:47 AM |
After Annual ... | [email protected] | Piloting | 22 | August 18th 05 05:24 AM |
My Annual | Charles Talleyrand | Owning | 34 | July 28th 05 01:17 PM |
Off I go to help with my first annual on my C-150 | NW_PILOT | Owning | 22 | October 26th 04 11:39 PM |
In for Annual | Jim Weir | Piloting | 0 | August 5th 04 07:06 PM |