Posted by Jack
Open letter. . .
-
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
- Art (88)
- Behavior and Psychology (20)
- Business, Industry and Finance (63)
- Constitution and Law (370)
- Consumer Affairs (4)
- Culture (17)
- Deep State (5)
- Economy (3)
- Education (238)
- Environment (74)
- Fraud Alert (8)
- Global Issues (1)
- Health and Medicine (149)
- History (8)
- Humour (94)
- Military (115)
- Morals and Ethics (149)
- News Media (11)
- Police, Crime, Security (215)
- Politics and Government (144)
- Religion (91)
- Science and Technology (19)
- Veterans' Issues (13)
- World (12)
Recent Comments
- ClayPidgeon on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Michael Davis on Life In Chico and Other Places Infected by Bums
- Patricia Lieder on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Dawn on Thaddeus Kerns Boy Aviator
- scott sproat on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
Recent NorCal Blogs Posts
You’re not going to be able to stop the naysayers until you come up with some facts about how this is going to work.
So far, all we ever hear is what a drag it is to be attached to the populous end of the state. We need to hear how the unpopulous end of the state is going to survive on its own.
Until then, people are just going to keep beatin’ on ya with a little common financial sense: the fewer people in living in a state, the higher the taxes will be.
Comments pulled.
Editor: Dewey, now you are accusing the SoJ people as being biggoted? Okay, that’s enough! You’re suspended until you refrain from casting extreme insults at people and using this site to spew your disinformation, hate and extremist politics. In particular you used at an insulting term to describe members of the Tea Party. That vile sexual reference has you suspended until Jan. 10th.
When you decide you can voice an opinion not laced with invectives we will give you one more chance, but not until. Now sit it out and calm down.
Now, is that fair? Course, I haven’t read Dewey’s post, so neither I nor anybody else can tell, but I do know that I intimated, not too long ago, that your motives in hankering after the State of Jefferson were less than egalitarian. You’ll have to ban us all, you know … and readership will fall off.
Libby, how many years have you known me and exchanged thoughts? And in all those years have I ever once casually banned a commenter without cause?
Have you forgot Quentin Colgan already?
In 8 years I’ve only had to ban 2 people for violations of the E-R’s editorial policy, Quentin and now Dewey. There’s times when I should have banned some people, but we try to err on the side very liberal free speech.
That’s why it’s so simple to write almost anything you want here! However, you just can’t use this site to spew profanity, threaten people or use minority slurs… no matter who they’re directed at.
Dewey violated the paper’s policy (not mine). He had been warned about hate speech before, but he crossed the line when he used an ugly slur concerning one’s sexual orientation. We can’t have that here. We’ve never tolerated that sort of thing.
Yes, this is a free speech podium. And as such, we respect everyone’s opinion without regard to race, religion or sexual orientation. All we ask is that people that comment try to write without using hate speech and profanity. We want people to feel this is a friendly site for sharing ideas and exchanging opinions. We do not tolerate vile slurs of any kind, especially when directed at a minority!
Libby write: “Now, is that fair? Course, I haven’t read Dewey’s post”……… Well Libby, then maybe you should refrain from making general statements on which you have no facts or knowledge of why!.
Libby also posts: You’ll have to ban us all you know … and readership will fall off…… My response to Libby on that commentary, Like that would happen:), maybe in your Liberal dreamworld.
Libby: ” We need to hear how the unpopulous end of the state is going to survive on its own.”
Spoken like a true progressive. Would you feel better if the committees said, “Mother may I?”
“…the fewer people in living in a state, the higher the taxes will be.”
Where did you come by this law of finances?
USA Today:
In case you wondered Wyoming’s population is a little over 576,000.
South Dakota might represent a better example to illustrate how small states can “survive”:
South Dakota’s population is a little over 833,000.
“You’ll have to ban us all, you know … and readership will fall off.”
We’ve never banned you and you don’t even live in the North State. It’s a world wide web…remember?
Besides Jack took the steps he must take as editor because of an infraction of the blog standards not as a means of furthering the cause for the state of Jefferson. I’m sure he would prefer that our contributors would remember to be respectful and civil.
You’re right Libby, we do need to have some “facts about how this is going to work”. So, thankyou Tina for great real life examples right here in the lower 48. I’m convince that we can govern every bit as well and even better than the examples you mentioned. After all, we can benefit from their examples, experience and mistakes.
Thanks Mike. The example set by South Dakota is one to take not of in a positive way. The tax structure seems to lean heavily on consumption taxes. I’m in favor of these taxes because people buy what they can afford and are “exempted” from a heavy tax burden when they are strapped financially.
I suspect their property tax is a bit higher but when you aren’t obligated to pay income tax this isn’t a big problem.
The sales tax rate is 4.0% with some municipalities as high as 6.0%.
“Wyoming has the best business tax climate in the country ….”
And the citizens of Wyoming, per capita, got their noses REAL deep into the federal trough, because there are not enough of them to maintain their own infrasture. Deny it all you like … it’s still the truth.
The Wyoming State Deparment of Forestry has 48 employees. Big, bad fire? The feds deal with it.
Libby: ” Big, bad fire? The feds deal with it.”
Well that would be because the federal government owns or controls most of the forest.
They also have control over (own) the federal highways that go through the state…just like every state…so they maintain those too!
Wyoming’s citizens noses are not any more deeply into the federal trough than citizens of other states.
Wyoming, Montana and other small population states have volunteer fire department. My high school buddy is one in Montana and he fights fires in other states too.
You’re right Tina, federal land fires are fought by the federal Forestry who may pay for additional support from states, metro and city fire departments.
My neighbor is a Forestry chief and my son is a metro fireman who spent two weeks at the Rim fire.
The more I hear about the advantages from having smaller states the more I like it.
The imbalance of representation in Congress for the west coast compared to the east coast based on population must be corrected.