Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Teachers strike
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="chadh2o" data-source="post: 3092812" data-attributes="member: 40131"><p>In a way I was trying to be a smart a $$, but mostly confused.</p><p>Since your seem to be in the know, can you answer some questions that would help shed some light.</p><p></p><p>Background for my ire.</p><p>The other night I was watching the news (which I religiously never do) and the NEA President said that they were proposing a production tax of 7-8%. Then later in the broadcast another person interviewed said raise the income tax by .5%-1%. This was the basis for my earlier comments.</p><p></p><p>Now for the questions...</p><p>1) How many teachers are there in Oklahoma?</p><p>2) Of the xxx teachers, which group will be receiving a "raise"? (All, certified, alternative certified, temporary, substitute)</p><p>3) If the district already pays above the base teacher rate, will this group also receive the dictated raise or the difference or TBD?</p><p>4) Are there any exemptions for any teachers who might get a raise, but will or should not?</p><p>5) After the above are answered, then we can figure how much $$$ are necessary to provide for the increase.</p><p></p><p>My thought of revenue generation (not what I want but what they may do) for this...</p><p>1) Production tax increase</p><p>2) Tobacco tax increase (sin tax)</p><p>3) Capital gain tax increase (stock, bond, property/business sale profits)</p><p>4) Income tax increase</p><p>(#3&4 will be a very hard sell. These are already higher than some bordering states and could hurt new business relocation, which hurt growing the overall economy and may turn off some of the newly announced moves. #1 will hurt the oil and gas production industry that is already not doing well (Chesapeake, Devon and Sandridge are a few that have recently laid off hundreds. An increase in the production tax may lay off hundreds more and close some businesses (hence my comment earlier about Wishire street in OKC being mostly for rent). Others with marginal profit wells will turn off the spigot.). #2 is the easiest, but a $50 pack of smokes will literally put a lot of poor people in the street that seems to becoming more populated judging by the street corners in OKC.</p><p></p><p>If you can't tell, I'm a numbers cruncher in a past life. 1+1=2 not 3,4,5 as the .gov seems to advance. When the tobacco tax was passed last time, the revenue numbers they were expecting did not add. I went to the state site and referenced all the numbers, figured the new tax based on current tax generation, packs sold, at that time, and calculated they were off by more than half. But it was sold to the public, even though basic arithmetic could see the folly. If the teachers want a sustainable pay increase, the increase should be based on a substantiated outcome of tax generation. Otherwise it's a fart in the wind, back in a few years for another wiff.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="chadh2o, post: 3092812, member: 40131"] In a way I was trying to be a smart a $$, but mostly confused. Since your seem to be in the know, can you answer some questions that would help shed some light. Background for my ire. The other night I was watching the news (which I religiously never do) and the NEA President said that they were proposing a production tax of 7-8%. Then later in the broadcast another person interviewed said raise the income tax by .5%-1%. This was the basis for my earlier comments. Now for the questions... 1) How many teachers are there in Oklahoma? 2) Of the xxx teachers, which group will be receiving a "raise"? (All, certified, alternative certified, temporary, substitute) 3) If the district already pays above the base teacher rate, will this group also receive the dictated raise or the difference or TBD? 4) Are there any exemptions for any teachers who might get a raise, but will or should not? 5) After the above are answered, then we can figure how much $$$ are necessary to provide for the increase. My thought of revenue generation (not what I want but what they may do) for this... 1) Production tax increase 2) Tobacco tax increase (sin tax) 3) Capital gain tax increase (stock, bond, property/business sale profits) 4) Income tax increase (#3&4 will be a very hard sell. These are already higher than some bordering states and could hurt new business relocation, which hurt growing the overall economy and may turn off some of the newly announced moves. #1 will hurt the oil and gas production industry that is already not doing well (Chesapeake, Devon and Sandridge are a few that have recently laid off hundreds. An increase in the production tax may lay off hundreds more and close some businesses (hence my comment earlier about Wishire street in OKC being mostly for rent). Others with marginal profit wells will turn off the spigot.). #2 is the easiest, but a $50 pack of smokes will literally put a lot of poor people in the street that seems to becoming more populated judging by the street corners in OKC. If you can't tell, I'm a numbers cruncher in a past life. 1+1=2 not 3,4,5 as the .gov seems to advance. When the tobacco tax was passed last time, the revenue numbers they were expecting did not add. I went to the state site and referenced all the numbers, figured the new tax based on current tax generation, packs sold, at that time, and calculated they were off by more than half. But it was sold to the public, even though basic arithmetic could see the folly. If the teachers want a sustainable pay increase, the increase should be based on a substantiated outcome of tax generation. Otherwise it's a fart in the wind, back in a few years for another wiff. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Teachers strike
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom