Hitler gave his views a great deal of thought, so did bin laden....doesn't mean their decisions should be respected....I am NOT equating calder to those evildoers just pointing out great deal of thought doesnt mean the decision was a good 1
In some respects I would agree that GP is like Hitler or bin laden, only difference is that nobody follows or cares what GP thinks.
as for the law suit, Parisi looks more and more desperate and angry. maybe he should switch to the dems.
kevin not sure where you got your history lesson but where I got mine they said we were a nation of laws not of men. This means none of it should be personal...
Anything that restricts a person's rights IS personal.
Hitler gave his views a great deal of thought, so did bin laden....doesn't mean their decisions should be respected....I am NOT equating calder to those evildoers just pointing out great deal of thought doesnt mean the decision was a good 1
You obviously wanted to make some connection between a good and decent man .. and these two vile, despicable evil-doers or you would not have even mentioned their names in regards to this issue. Therefore, your decision-making skills are questionable and thus your opinion means nothing to me.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
DVR... No I was calling into question your lack of logic in saying that because one thinks, their opinions should be respected. I'd throw McGoofy in that category too...he has "thought" about the BPA ban and "thinks" it is bad...I don't respect his opinion, because it's junk science and it's not rational thought....Is that comparison more to your liking? I have no idea what thought Mr. Calder has put into the issue...but if he spent 200 hours thinking illogically without rationality, then I'd equate that to not thinking at all.
Kevin here is the problem with the NNTP types they think this is all personal...it IS NOT!!!!! Personal is what the king did when he issued writs of assistance that effectively allowed the king's henchman do whatever they wanted whether it meant letting the chosen few do what they wanted or making the perceived "enemy to the crown" face the most heinous acts of violence and threat to financial security. THAT WAS PERSONAL! Our government does not act personally and our government is prohibited from acting in a way to specifically benefit one person...but nice try hot shot... Don't cite to me the few exceptions either those are not applicable here.....
Kevin here is the problem with the NNTP types they think this is all personal...it IS NOT!!!!! Personal is what the king did when he issued writs of assistance that effectively allowed the king's henchman do whatever they wanted whether it meant letting the chosen few do what they wanted or making the perceived "enemy to the crown" face the most heinous acts of violence and threat to financial security. THAT WAS PERSONAL! Our government does not act personally and our government is prohibited from acting in a way to specifically benefit one person...but nice try hot shot... Don't cite to me the few exceptions either those are not applicable here.....
I disagree. Personal would be if the king stated to go to John Smith's house and bring him back because he did something he disagreed with. Passing laws that benefit the few is bringing all the others in front of the king, requesting a higher payment because favoritism is given to the few. Don't believe it if you don't want to, but ignorance doesn't change things (and I know, I'm the one that's ignorant, and refusing to listen to the truth).
Well,bhow about the property tax relief for those that have an in-law apartment, especially when they maynot have "in-laws" living there? How is that to be confirmed and kept up on? As for many of the zone changes that have gone through over the past few years, all going against the plans that have been previously laid out. It appears that at this time, you can just go tot town hall and request a zone change, and it will be approved (at the speed of government, or a little faster if you're owed a favor).
With you in-law apartments, I'll tell you what, in having them live with you, you're already getting a tax break of sorts. You're not paying taxes on 2 separate properties in one of the highest taxed counties in America.
Your last sentence I don't follow to the rest I say there is a huge difference between a property tax break and zone changes that aren't compliant with the comprehensive plan the first = legit the second = not legit.
Is your issue you don't think this benefit should exist or is it you are afraid of fraud? If the former I'd like to know how you think that break compares to the costs to the taxpayers of that individual being in a nursing home. Yeah perfect world the option would be home without taxpayer help or nursing home without taxpayer help....that is until your a$$ is immoble and you need someone to take care of you and have no money....Here in the real world the option is someone take care of you or you end up in a nursing home a taxpayer expense....so if the tax break is sufficient to incentivize holding off going to a nursing home I'd say it's great...Is it the best case? nope! But its a hell of a lot better than what the other options are!
If your issue is fraud id imagine there are enough people that would see a bunch of 20 yr olds in an inlaw apaprtment and they would do something about it...and if they wouldnt, obviously they arent too concerned about the affect its having on them.
Well, actually, it's both, and concerning your regard on the first instance, I fully agree. The fact of the matter is, however, that if the money wasn't being taken from the public at this time to pay for a place that is not working appropriately, then maybe the public would be in better financial straits when it comes time for them to be at that point, and they could pay their own way. If it went private and saved people the money, then there would be that many less people that would actually GET to the point of needing the handout.
Best case as far as the in-law apartments is no tax reduction for those that have them, and close the county nursing home, or better yet, solve it and let it be run privately. I heard that happens every once in a while. There's one right in Schenectady, The Avenue, on Altamont Avenue.
As far as people seeing a bunch of 20 yr olds in an inlaw apartment, you can't always tell who is going directly into a house and who is going into an in-law apartment. I specifically know at least 2 homes in Rotterdam where someone who has an in-law apartment in their home. In one case, I know that for a period of time, they had an elderly relative living there. I don't know if they still do, or if they have rented it out since the passing of the elderly relative. The other, I KNOW for a FACT has been rented out for probably the past 20 years. How are you going to decide who we have to pay for in order for them to have an apartment in their homes? Will we be sending the code enforcement periodically asking who is living in the in-law apartment? Will you send out a survey asking everyone who they have living there? Will someone be following up to make sure people aren't lying on this?
Also, if the house that an in-law apartment is attached to already has 20-somethings living in it, who is to say that the people that are living in the in-law apartment aren't just "friends" who happen to stay in the apartment 365 days a year and leave a check for the owner "friends?"
And the last sentance of my last statement, actually, I thought was the easiest to understand, but I can explain it even easier for you, if you wish. If you have your elderly parents living with you, you most likely already sold the house that they own in the town also, therefore, you are only paying outrageous taxes on one property in this town / county, therefore giving you a heck of a savings (50% off your taxes). You own however much property you own, you pay taxes on that.
Are you defending Mr. Viscusi's proposal for property owners who have in-law apartments in their homes to receive a property tax reduction?
If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that providing the tax reduction is more fiscally responsible than funding seniors in nursing homes. Your argument is flawed and misleading in the following ways:
First, under Viscusi's proposal must the in-laws who reside in the apartments be unable to care for themselves as patients who are cared for by nursing homes? Or, will Viscusi and others who have in-law apartments receive special treatment even if their parents are physically well and able to live on their own? Must the property owners who are (presumably) family provide entirely for the medical needs of the parents (in-laws) or will the services of visiting nurses and other health care providers also be expected and provided?
Second, are you suggesting that the care that is provided for all those who live in nursing homes is paid for by tax dollars? That is certainly not the case.
I agree with others on this board who believe that most in politics serve their own selfish interests. If my parents or in-laws were no longer able to care for themselves, my siblings and I would provide for their care. I am of modest means, but would find a way to provide for their compaasionate care and comfort as long as they didn't require medical attention that I could not provide. Mr. Viscusi should not have to be paid to care for those who raised him, particularly not with taxpayer dollars.
How about looking for ways to support seniors remaining in their home? I believe that most would prefer that scenario.
Zero...how much you wanna bet your "source who knows the truth" is dead wrong (as usual). Im willing to make a wager on wether state employees got sigs for the NNTP...care to put your money where your BIG mouth is? LOL. Come on show everyone how much you know and make a friendly wager for all to see....................................... lets go big boy.
The above was a week ago......
Oh Zero....Where r u????? Im waiting for you to back up your big mouth.... your very quick with your anonymous statements on here....not so quick when called out to back it up tho!!!!
DID AMEDORES EMPLOYEES SIGN NNTP PETITIONS LAST YEAR OR NOT?????
Dont want to admit Amedore tanked his own republican party, eh?
How about looking for ways to support seniors remaining in their home? I believe that most would prefer that scenario.
There already are programs in place to assist seniors who are still at home. Along with the government programs, there are churches that take care of their senior shut-ins.
And this isn't always an ooey-gooey kind of decision. There are adult kids out there with older parents who have paid off homes and much $$$$ in the bank. These kids WANT that $$$$. So they sell the parent's/in-law's house, move them on in and control their $$$$. Happens ALL the time!!
And now MV proposes a tax break??? I'm tellin' ya.........he'd be opening up a can of worms, cause 'information' would be coming out of the woodwork!!!
Again.........perhaps this is 'personally motivated'.........perhaps?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Does anyone realize how much money would be SAVED by encouraging people to keep their parents out of a nursing home!! BILLIONS!!!! If you so-called conservatives were really conservative you would support such a proposal 100%. But you are pretend conservatives as is shown over and over again on this site.
YEs a miniscule tax break (conservative) to save BILLIONS more in taxes (conservative). Your just mad Amedore cant come up with any good proposals!! Ha Ha
Logged
