LETTERS: Taxpayers tapped out on education

To the editor:

Columnist Steve Sebelius again was crying over the margins tax not passing in the Nov. 4 election (“Divisions, diversions complicate Nevada tax talk,” Nov. 19 Review-Journal). Yes, education reform is needed, but holy cow, how can anyone believe that dumping more money into the corrupt Clark County School District will do any good?

The administrators just got a raise, and it was twice as big, percentage-wise, as the teachers got. Why aren’t the teachers up in arms? The administrators have been siphoning off funds from the education of our children for decades, and yet the teachers only try to get more money from the taxpayers. There is no more money to be had, not from the taxpayers, and they are who support the businesses that the progressives want to take money from. When are these folks going to learn that businesses only collect taxes from their customers?

If the state is serious about education, which I seriously doubt, it would stop all government collective bargaining. It would cut the administration budgets for education in half. It would stop furnishing cars, offices and credit cards to all administrative staff. The savings could then be paid to outstanding teachers and used to upgrade current schools and build new ones. Of course, that would require common sense on the part of not only the Legislature and the governor, but the school boards, as well. Anyone who has paid attention knows that the school boards are all complicit in the fleecing of the taxpayers, with no positive results.

Another thing dragging down the whole system is the cost of teaching English to non-English-speaking children. I am all for education being available to these children, but the extra costs should be shouldered by their parents, not me.

I have had five children go through the schools around here and have two more still attending. Why do we allow the federal government to dictate to us how we educate our children? Nevada has a low population and most of our citizens are employed in the gaming industry. These jobs do not pay enough to pay for the education that the progressives envision for our children. How about just going back to teaching math and English, with some American history and some pertinent science? Take all this other social stuff and make that available to those who can afford it, and let them pay for it. I cannot afford it, and I am betting a lot more folks can’t either.

Nevada needs education reform. The funds that we give in taxes are finite and at their limit. As the population swells and revenues go up, educational needs should be met. When the economy goes down, governments and school districts need to tighten their belts like we taxpayers are forced to do.

A lot of people lost a lot due to the recession, and yet government employees did not miss a beat. It is time for the progressives to listen to the voters for a change and honor what we want.



Uber must play fair

To the editor:

It was with great skepticism that I read the commentary by Uber general manager William Barnes, asking that the Nevada Legislature change state law to make it easier for Uber to skirt existing regulations (“Uber a safe, innovative, job-creating alternative,” Nov. 17 Review-Journal). Uber claims that it is a technology company, not a transportation company, so current regulations on cars for hire should not apply to them.’

But I would ask: Who says that it is an either/or proposition? It is possible to be both a technology company and a transportation company, and that is exactly what Uber is: a transportation company masquerading as a technology company, in order to avoid the regulations other transportation companies are required to follow.

Uber advertises transportation service, recruits drivers, sets the fare, receives the payment and pays the drivers. I say that if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it’s a duck. Uber is a car-for-hire company, and it should follow the same laws and pay the same fees and taxes as other car-for-hire companies. That’s only fair.



Sealing the border

To the editor:

The simplest and most cost-effective way to seal our borders would be to take down the bird feeder. In other words, no more free medical care, free housing, free schooling, food stamps, welfare and all the other benefits that liberals feel undocumented immigrants are entitled to — and we taxpayers have to pay for. You would see an immediate stop to immigrants entering our country.

As for emergency medical care, the simple solution, and again the most cost-effective, is to advise every foreign embassy in this country that if one of their citizens who is here illegally shows up at one of our emergency rooms, they will be immediately transported to the respective embassy for treatment.

As someone once said, “If politicians were so smart, big business would have hired them.”



News Headlines
Local Spotlight
Add Event
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like