25 September 2012

A "Taxing" Tuesday...
And it looks to be a bit on the DAMP side today, with some showers headed to the Summit City (and most points surrounding it).
Highs will reach 70 and partial cloud covers continue until tonight when the forecast will be DARK...continued dark with partly scattered light by Wednesday morning.
So without any further ado, let's get hopping...
*** If you read all of Friday's post, I mentioned about our mayor (the renown King Henry the first) pursuing his want of needed revenues for the city's coffers in the name of PROPERTY TAX INCREASES.
(feel free to re-read that story)
This increase was to be in the neighborhood of 5.7% (equating to something like another $25 per year per $100,000 assessed house value).
And, if you've been a LONG time reader here (and who hasn't, hmm?), you'd recall my stating that there are about THIRTY (or so) entities that can LEVY PROPERTY TAX INCREASES.
Well, say hello to the NEXT "playa" to come your way...the FWCS.
THEY also want to raise your PROPERTY TAXES, and here's their tale to tell:
FWCS is proposing a 3.2% hike...(and that's on top of the 5.7% His Majesty requires to manitain city services).
Naturally, FWCS arrived at the increase thanks to a voter referendum that approved $119 million for building repairs throughout the district.
What I cannot figure out (and I consider myself a damn fine mathematician when it comes to BASIC math) is that the CITY is floating that 5.7% INCREASE (which will raise property taxes $25 a year based on a house worth $100,000), and FWCS wants a 3.2% INCREASE (which will raise property taxes $33 on a house worth $100,000). SO how come a LOWER tax increase nets a HIGHER dollar amount anyway, hmm???
That is one of the damnedest oddities I've ever come across, mathematically-speaking.
(must be that frigging "new" math - funny, that OLD math was a helluva lot more ACCURATE)
I can't wait to see WHO will be the "next contestant" to play "How Can We Raise Your Property Tax Further?"
My bet would be the AIRPORT, but we still have 20-some others to choose from.
Personally, this isn't going to affect US at "The Fortress", as property has been DE-valued beyond belief (thanks, HUD), so a 100% INCREASE to us would only take us to less than $300 per year...LOL.
(bet there's a lot of people wishing they could pay THAT little where THEY moved to).
The solution to THAT would be to move back DOWN here, buy up ALL the hovels, renovate them, (chasing out the human flotsam in the process) and raise THE HOUSING values once again...and you'd STILL be paying LESS PER YEAR in property taxes than in those fancy-schmancy new developments!
Meanwhile, back at the mot and bailey...
*** Did you know that the FWPD is authorized (budgeted) to have 440 officers in it's ranks?
And did you also know that currently we are TWENTY ONE OFFICERS BELOW THAT LEVEL?
(according to Chief York - HIS words, not mine)
Well, that would explain the lack of manpower on the streets during any given shift, wouldn't it?
And the lack of officers available for special duty like gang units, vice and narcotics, and the like.
Given that close to 25% of the manpower is dedicated to driving a desk or pushing some paper somewhere, that certainly doesn't leave that many officers to cover the city in a manner that would be as effective as it SHOULD be, right?
The FWFD hasn't the funding to replace SIX fire engines it needed to (some with more than 100K miles on them).
Neither the FWPD or the FWFD can afford to begin an academy class at this point.
Technically, budget levels weren't this bad since just BEFORE THE ABOITE ANNEXATION (ruh, roh, Reorge...lol)
Could ANOTHER annexation be on the foreseeable horizon? Don't count that possibility OUT, people.
Cities LOVE to do that whenever their tax base is going bye-bye and large parts of the population are on the gov't teat.
*** NO new developments on the RiverGreenWay attacker.
Here's the latest:
The article is good from the standpoint that it offers tips to avoid becoming a victim in such situations.
I you've been a regular reader HERE, you'd ALREADY know about such tips, because I offer them for less than the cost OF a newspaper.
An INFORMED public is an AWARE public, in my opinion.
And you can never be too much of EITHER.
One person interviewed on TV said he's "packing" when he goes running...GOOD FOR HIM!
Considering the weight of most compact forearms these days (many under 30 ounces, fully-loaded), it makes GOOD sense and does not provide an encumbrance to running, jogging or biking along the trails.
Hell, a woman can carry a 5-shot titanium frame snub nose .38 in a fanny pack and barely notice it's there...and she can purchase it in LAVENDER to boot (talk about accessorizing)!
When all else fails, you can always rely on your OWN ability and wits, and that means being able to turn ANYTHING on you into a weapon...like your HOUSE/CAR KEYS (between your fingers to jab an attacker - very effective).
There are a myriad of ways to incapacitate an attacker with your two hands (and we''re talking dislocating joints and breaking bones here).
A knee can be popped out with only EIGHT pounds of pressure (in the right location)...about the same for the elbow joint, too.
Boning up on personal defense is NEVER a bad idea, and provides levels of exercise that will only help to serve you well if the possibility of a bad situation ever arises.
The MAIN thing to remember in any scenario like that is that YOU have to be ready to pursue one of two paths:
1) You can give in and hope for the best.
2) You can counter with a higher level of V.O.A. (violence of action).
Strike hard, strike fast, and strike continuously, until the threat is neutralized...THAT is the best alternative.
And if an attacker winds up on the DEAD end of the stick, remember that it's ALWAYS "better to be judged by 12, than to be carried by 6".
*** Lastly today, I keep harping about how the world of TODAY is not as much "fun" as the world of yesteryear...and there are too many examples to cite my reasoning on this.
But, I believe I'm correct in my assessment.
While we DO have more gadgets, gimmicks, and devices to "improve" our lives, we find them more complicated than ever.
I don't feel such things IMPROVE our lives, but rather, make specific portions of it more "expedient"...most times.
Everything else gets mired in a bog of technological mumbo-jumbo.
I like things to do ONE thing...that for which they were originally purposed.
A PHONE should be that...a phone. if I want a computer, I GET a computer.
Ditto for a car...I want a CAR, and not a rolling audio system or computer complex.
I want a TV, and not some Lucas-esque, Spielbergian uber-sized theater-plex monitor with a dolby whatever.0 system that can shake the woods in the neighboring county.
I'm not entertaining several HUNDRED people...just the family.
It's easier to work with simple things...we take them (like people) one at a time, and that works well...ALL the time.
I'd much rather have all those THINGS become EASIER, because LIFE and the PEOPLE within it are complex enough as it is, and require more of our attention, which is the way it should be.
Be well, make a difference to someone, and...
Stay SAFE out there, America.


CWMartin said...

You neo-luddite, you. lol

Bob G. said...

While I have always enjoyed the stories of Jonathan Swift, I don't know if I could be classified in a luddite category, per se.

My gripe is that whenever any technology comes out, it's soon found to be:
a) deficient
b) defective
c) able to be circumvented
d) obsolete by next week
e) causes us to be MORE distracted
f) often wastes our time and money
And that's the short list.

It's like the whole "change for CHANGE sake"...never a good idea.

There needs to be PURPOSE..REAZSON...and IMPROVEMENT along the way.
Otherwise, it's not up to what it's being touted as.
Hell, I'd LOVE to have a hover car, or a jetpack...LOL.

(but I wouldn't want that jetpack to have an iPod or iPhone aboard)

Perhaps I'm more a "part-time quasi-luddite" with a touch of cynicism?

Hey, thanks for rocking on by today and commenting.

Stay safe up there.

John D. said...

"An INFORMED public is an AWARE public, in my opinion."

I guess that explains the faltering public school system and the biased media. Can't have the public knowing too much, they might not make the "right" decisions.

Bob G. said...

John D.:

That phrase is just aomething I've come to believe as I've been stumbling through life.
And yes, it does explain a LOT.

Keep the public DISTRACTED in some manner, and you (whoever is in charge) can do damn near anything TO them, instead of FOR them.

Then, they can led by the nose...like obedient cattle.
(One only look to Germany in the 1930s to figure it out).

God bless 'ya, JD...you "get it".

Thanks for rolling on up today and commenting.
You stay safe out there.