home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!psuvax1!rutgers!flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU!leela.CS.ORST.EDU!atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU!youngqd
- From: youngqd@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (Dean Youngquist)
- Newsgroups: rec.boats
- Subject: Re: Coast Guard user fee repealed!
- Message-ID: <1hda8nINNgsl@leela.CS.ORST.EDU>
- Date: 24 Dec 92 21:32:07 GMT
- References: <1h5esvINNe1j@leela.CS.ORST.EDU> <Bzp3I7.B7L@idm.com>
- Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
- Lines: 28
- NNTP-Posting-Host: atlantis.cs.orst.edu
-
- In article <Bzp3I7.B7L@idm.com> tmb@idm.com (Thomas M Buccelli) writes:
-
- >The US Taxpayers should pay for this the same way that the US taxpayers, or
- >taxpayers in general pay for things they will never use. I pay for taxes that
- >go towards public schools, transportation, etc that I will never use, but the
- >money goes there anyway. Same difference.
- >
- > Tom
- I disagree.
- I understand why we all want to pay for schools so we can live in a country
- of educated people, less crime, unemployment, etc. Transportation ? may be,
- I'm not sure. But I pretty sure I don't that recreational boating is not
- in the same catergory as schools.
-
- What would you say about the ski patrol ?
- Do you think ski patrol should be federally funded ? Right now its paid
- by my lift ticket. Isn't Skiing / ski-patrol analogous to boating / coast
- guard saftey & rescue operations ?
-
- There are 4 funding options here:
- 1) Charge each boater each time he is rescued.
- 2) Charge all boaters is case of needed rescue.
- 3) Charge all US citizens in case boater (or skier) needs rescuing.
- 4) Charge all people in the world for the recreatinal saftey of some US citizens
-
- Number 2 seems to be the most workable and fair tax base.
-
- Dean
-