XPost: phl.media   
   From: nospam@nomail.com   
      
   On 8 Dec 2004 05:43:28 -0800, darth_sidious70@yahoo.com wrote:   
      
   >12/8/2004 - Peoples Republic of Tax-a-delphia Daily News.   
      
   So nothing has changed after getting the bailout from the Legislature   
   in 1991, giving you the local 1% sales tax.   
      
   Pittsburgh is in the same position and is teetering on the edge of   
   bankruptcy due to all of the mentioned problems you cited below and   
   more.  That's despite receiving a similar sales tax two years later.   
      
   The answer: raise taxes, again and again.  Our Occupational Privilege   
   Tax just increased 400%.   
      
   An interesting note regarding the Pittsburgh plight is the population   
   decline and the size of City Council.  In 1950, the city population   
   was 675,000 and had 9 City Council Members.  In 2004, the city   
   population dropped to 320,000 and still has 9 City Council Members.   
      
   Corruptness will never change and elected officials will continue to   
   be re-elected year after year.   
      
   Regards,   
      
   Gary J. English   
      
   >IT'S A SHAME that a self-proclaimed champion of the poor like City   
   >Councilman David Cohen is so reluctant to move on legislation that   
   >would bring economic relief to all of us, but especially to those who   
   >need it most.   
   >   
   >No, we're not talking about a jobs bill, or tax relief, but ethics   
   >reform.   
   >   
   >What connection does ethics reform have to economics? And what business   
   >is it of ours, as taxpayers?   
   >   
   >First, a corrupt government costs more than an ethical one. And   
   >government is our business, since our taxes pay for it.   
   >   
   >But Cohen, who chairs the committee that is sitting on two competing   
   >packages of ethics bills, continues to stall, saying that more   
   >discussion is needed on these complicated issues. He still hasn't   
   >gotten around to figuring out when this will happen. And so we all   
   >continue to pay the price.   
   >   
   >After all, it costs money when elected officials give jobs to people   
   >based on relationships rather than qualifications. And when your staff   
   >is taxpayer supported, that's our business.   
   >   
   >It costs money when city deals get done using the same law firms or   
   >professional services over and over, without competitive bidding and   
   >without accountability or transparency. When those inflated law or   
   >accounting bills get paid by taxpayers, that makes it our business.   
   >   
   >When a city employee gets wooed by gifts and free lunches in return for   
   >big contracts awarded to expensive or unqualified firms, we pay for   
   >that.   
   >   
   >And when competition is so stifled, that good firms don't bother to bid   
   >in the city, or when good people don't bother to run for office because   
   >they lack the huge war chests of opponents and the connections to get   
   >them, we pay for that, too.   
   >   
   >Anyone crying over recent layoffs or service cuts in the city should   
   >not blame the economy, or tax reform. Blame the high cost of a   
   >government run under the rule of "anything goes" without clear ethics   
   >laws or policies.   
   >   
   >And blame City Council, which seems happy to have us continue to pay   
   >the cost, making us all a little poorer in the process.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)