Open Session, Thursday

December 8, 2010

Open Session, Thursday

Filed under: Open Session — mary @ 10:10 pm

There are many things to talk about.

What’s on your mind? Taxes?

Jobs? Christmas?

Comments (36)

36 Comments

I’m actually interested in the Tax package being considered by Congress right now. Did you know that the Estate Tax is proposed to increase to 35% for the next two years? The good part is that the taxable value of an Estate before taxes kick in goes from $1 million up to $5 million.

But the whole concept of Estate Taxes seems so unfair. We all pay taxes on our income during our lives and then, when we die, we don’t get to leave our earnings to our children without the government grabbing a bunch of it first?

Comment by mary — December 8, 2010 @ 10:56 pm
Mary, great point about the estate tax. I hope someday we can create a sensible tax system that doesn’t let the government get two, three, four bites at the apple like the one we have now. However, in the short term I hope that Congress’ priority is protecting small estates from the devastation that the estate tax can bring. Many family farms, small business, etc have been ruined by the estate tax.

Comment by KootenaiConservative — December 8, 2010 @ 11:27 pm
The Estate Tax only hits the mildly rich and stupid. There are ways around it, which is why you have trust funds created by the über rich. So, like any tax, it can be avoided if you’re clever and have enough money.

Taxes aren’t about revenue in this country. Taxes are about punishing political enemies. If the government merely wanted revenue, they’d enact a fractional transaction tax and eliminate all other taxes. Such a tax would raise a mint.

Comment by Dan — December 9, 2010 @ 7:39 am
Yesterday I saw a television interview with Anthony Weiner, the outrageous Democrat Congressman from New York City. The topic was the Estate tax. The interviewer asked him why it was fair for the government to take any, let alone a big chunk, of estates that have already been through the tax system as they were acquired. Weiner said the people who earned the money don’t have to pay taxes on it, they are dead. The people who inherit the estate didn’t earn it so they have to pay. Somehow this entitles the government a big part of the pie? What kind of logic is that? The government didn’t earn it and has no right to it!

Comment by mary — December 9, 2010 @ 8:42 am
With the recent events with Brannon, et al, I visited Chuckleberries on-line to read the commentary there. There were maybe 4 contributors on a series of threads (one being the K boy hisself). How pathetic. DFO had the local cybersphere at his command some years ago and now he has nothing. He earned it and he well deserves it. Worse yet was his self righteous religious avarice trying to infer some higher substance of integrity to his politically motivated manipulations. I wonder if he is even still allowed in confession or if they tired of his daily sins?

Comment by Wallypog — December 9, 2010 @ 11:59 am
[Two words deleted by Bill], Wallypog. Please tell me you did not just call Mike Kennedy “K __ boy.” We make seven-year-olds go to their rooms for that kind of thing.

Comment by KootenaiConservative — December 9, 2010 @ 12:05 pm
KootenaiConservative,

And my mother used to wash my mouth out with soap when I was a five-year old for using the two words profanely I deleted from your post. Don’t do it again.

Comment by Bill — December 9, 2010 @ 12:25 pm
Bill, I’m not Christian, and that’s not considered a profanity in my book, but I understand that many people do find that offensive and I apologize for not thinking about that in advance of my post.

I’d be interested in hearing your view on the appropriateness in calling Mr. Kennedy “K __ boy.”

Comment by KootenaiConservative — December 9, 2010 @ 12:31 pm
KootenaiConservative,

I assume, as you do, that he was talking about Mike Kennedy, but neither of us know that for sure. Nevertheless, namecalling is not appropriate. I do note, however, that the City’s own attorney Mike Haman made a much more derogatory remark about Kennedy in the court hearing this week and was not admonished by the Judge.

Comment by Bill — December 9, 2010 @ 12:38 pm
Bill,

I wasn’t at the trial. But from what I imagine, what was said was a friendly jest. There’s a big difference between a friendly jest and what Wallypog said about Kennedy. Whom it obviously was about.

Comment by KootenaiConservative — December 9, 2010 @ 12:42 pm
People should become very aware that, the possibility of mortgage interest being removed as a tax deduction, is great. There are two committes (one non partisan) who are pushing this atrocity. Unless one still has umpteen children at home, mortgage interest is probably the largest deduction most people have. Losing this could be the final blow for many working and retired people. While living trusts are an easy way around estate taxes, there is nothing to substitute for mortgage interest deductions.

Comment by rochereau — December 9, 2010 @ 12:48 pm
Ok, boys and girls, let’s use our grown-up words. Bill, I don’t know what you deleted but I also edited out the inappropriate reference to Mike Kennedy’s physique. I realize, Wallypog, that the city’s defense attorney spoke out publicly in court and brought attention to Mike’s weight problem, but that’s a personal issue and we don’t need to go there. There’s plenty to talk about with Mike’s outrageous behavior on the city council!

Comment by mary — December 9, 2010 @ 1:34 pm
Haman didn’t have to say squat about Kennedy. If he felt compelled, he could have merely said that Mike’s presence wasn’t required at the table or that Mr. Kennedy’s busy schedule prevented him from committing to a full-time position there. The excuse he came up with was obnoxious and unnecessary.

Comment by Dan — December 9, 2010 @ 2:17 pm
Ah, the PC police on duty. Be reminded that the physical attribute of ‘pudginess’ is often associated with graft as in “the fatted palm”. Should a glandular disorder be in play those too are treatable. How many political souls fit the medical definition of morbidly obese? Any fat politico is a public figure so their figure is public fodder for public commentary.

Comment by Wallypog — December 9, 2010 @ 2:47 pm
Wallypog: Until the complete list of legitimate, policy, and ethical reasons to criticize a pol is exhausted, going straight for the “fat and ugly” approach lacks substance and merit.

Comment by Dan — December 9, 2010 @ 2:57 pm
It is not intended for anything other than an accurate description as in how Arnold (another politico) perhaps is described as ‘sculpted’. It is no less fitting than calling the day cold or hot as the weather may deliver. If the man were not so, then I could not call him such. Since 100’s of thousands (if not millions) of our tax dollars are in play to apply this description is miniscule by any measure. One envisions the egregious consumption of caviar, creamy tortes and highest grade food stuffs when one witnesses the politically overfed. Think of Oliver when he begs for ‘more’ at the sumptuous feast of his keepers.

Comment by Wallypog — December 9, 2010 @ 3:34 pm
Wally, I have absolutely zero respect/regard for Kennedy. I think he is the most egregious political tool outside of Chicago or DC. He hops up and down as his handlers jerk his strings. Our language is chock full of descriptive phrases that cover this pathetic excuse for a man. So, I must agree that physical descriptions as pejoratives are un-necessary. Personally, I don’t care for gutter language as a descriptive or exclamatory tool either. Rather than descending, isn’t it better to rise above such phrases. Oh, poor Oliver wasn’t overfed. He was still hungry and politely requested more food from the evil Fagin.

Comment by rochereau — December 9, 2010 @ 3:48 pm
I know that gutter language is not the nice way to get a point across. However, I kind of understand where Wallypog is coming from. Short of pitchforks with several hundred people going into city hall to make a point – we passive CDA people are just not there yet. Oh yes, we are ticked off, thus we spew forth gutter language as a defense tactic. But, give us time, we will get there just like Bell, California did. Diplomacy and intelligence does not exist in Idaho government. It’s consists of a bunch of dumb people with lots of money who have lawyers – which makes them all the more dangerous.

Calling Mike Kennedy FAT makes some of us feel better because we are powerless in a cycle of political abuse that holds us hostage. We can smooze the situation by rising to a game of intellectual semantics that analogize why Mike Kennedy is fat by turning his BMI into greed, but some of us just want to get to the point and call the kettle black. Mike Kennedy reminds me of one those prize hogs at the local county fair that is worth some big bucks by the pound – and now, he is off to market and we are paying for it.

Comment by Stebbijo — December 9, 2010 @ 4:44 pm
Dan,you said:

“Until the complete list of legitimate, policy, and ethical reasons to criticize a pol is exhausted, going straight for the “fat and ugly” approach lacks substance and merit.”

So you think that’s why the Spokane blog goes straight to personal attacks when discussing us? That they have no legitimate opinions to counter our information, so they jump right to the insults?

That’s about their intelligence level; I would agree with that assessment.

Comment by mary — December 9, 2010 @ 6:09 pm
Mary: Why do you let them bother you so? As I tell my kids, “Be the big brother.”

Here’s a sign of the sad times to come:

http://www.kxly.com/news/26083658/detail.html

Comment by Dan — December 9, 2010 @ 6:53 pm
Good link Dan and this is local.
The second shoe is about to drop and the national commercial/industrial real estate market collapse will make the residential implosion look like child’s play. It will reverberate through every level in every industry in America especially the insurance companies that hold most of the commercial real estate investments, funded by pension plans.

Comment by Ancientemplar — December 9, 2010 @ 7:09 pm
Dan, please…I don’t care about their opinions because they are empty. As my Dad always said about critics: “Consider the source…” And I do.

Comment by mary — December 9, 2010 @ 8:30 pm
IMO, the downtown building slumlords WANT the downtown to become “blight” so they TOO can steal from the taxpayers through the LCDC to build bigger and better. They will acomplish this through raising rents in this economy and turn the downtown back into a ghosttown like in the 90’s. Then they will cry (boo hoo poor me) to the LCDC that they cannot do it on their own and since they are all in bed together ——–

Comment by concerned citizen — December 10, 2010 @ 6:50 am
The peoblem with personal pejoratives and gutter language is, it demeans the opinion of the user. You cannot make points in that manner because the intelligent reader dismisses all you have said. And as for those whom you aim your barbs, they use this type of post as ammunition against all on this site. By using this type of commentary, one does not score points, one simply plays right into the oppositions hands. And the infrastructure aims this ammunition right back at this site and all who oppose them. It is totally counter productive to diminish the objective of this site. It is counter productive to give (the infrastructure) the ability to mis-direct information. Is personal venting worth it?

Comment by rochereau — December 10, 2010 @ 9:30 am
Just a random thought. The city didn’t go out to bid to pick the Attorney’s for Kennedy, No RFP’s

Also , an interesting article in the NY Times today about public entities may be required to show the balance sheet effects of their pension funds just as was done to publicly held companies under Reagan. An interesting read. I think Cd’A will need the windfall from LCDC.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/business/10norris.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=business&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1291989637-5iCo+1HlWBF/AGd7eNvhVg

Comment by Ancientemplar — December 10, 2010 @ 10:31 am
I have a mega cold which apparently causes me to mispell and leave out words. Apologies to all. Apparently there is zero hope for this place. I NEVER do Huckleberries, but went to the Press site to read comments. No matter how many times the greater number of people are told that Kennedy wasn’t personally being sued, he didn’t need council, they persist in believing the opposite. Part of it is collective stupidity and the remainder, legal TV shows. These people vote. They splash their absurd opinions on (apparently) every site known to man. It is simply pointless. I am once again reminded that, “you can lead an ass to water, you cannot make him drink”. This place is what it is and obviously enough people either like it, benefit from it, or do not care.

Comment by rochereau — December 10, 2010 @ 3:14 pm
I know…counsel.

Comment by rochereau — December 10, 2010 @ 3:15 pm
Part of it – rochereau – is that many people do read HBO but lack the experience or insight to know how bad it is. I read it because I monitor it. If there is a glaring untruth or mistake, I will catch it. Some folks want to make points with HBO in hopes of being recognized and maybe get a hat tip or link to their own blog. It’s quid pro quo. No one who doesn’t play nice with DFO lasts on his site. It’s a major platform for opinion and folks love to read the bru ha ha that their tabloid editor can stir up. He is a very bad spin doctor. Unfortunately, he is considered a credible source and he operates as a platform for folks to manipulate the tone of opinion here. And, he has been around a long time. OpenCDA at times gets buried because of his slanderous remarks. It’s horrible. But, you know what? DFO doesn’t like to be picked on. He claims he has thick skin. But, he really doesn’t like to the the object of ridicule. He is human just like all of us who have real feelings. He just likes to dish it out. The S-R still has a real impact on people and the tone of HBO and their humiliating tactics are abusive – people side with abusers so they are not abused. He is like a bad case of the Stockholm Syndrome. DFO is a cyberbully. He has set local blog standards. But, you are right, we need to rise above his examples. I will think of your comments and critizism well taken – when I begin to digress. Get better!

Comment by Stebbijo — December 10, 2010 @ 9:26 pm
I don’t think Dave is a cyberbully. He’s just closed minded. He sees the corruption of Phil Hart, but not Sandi Bloem. He sees a problem with all Republicans in the State House, but no problem with the uniform headnodders in City Hall or NIC. So, like most people here, he viciously attacks his enemies but when his friends commit the same sins, he gives them a pass. That’s a reflection upon most people in this area, not just DFO.

Comment by Dan — December 11, 2010 @ 11:13 am
Dan, you are right, cyberbully is a bit harsh.

But, he comes pretty close when he allows his “minions” to make disparaging remarks about folks being bipolar, schizophrenic, needing hormones and some off their meds. There is a word out there somewhere for what he does. How about blogger bully – cyber propagandist – or cyberfruit? He’s not close minded, he just knows how to drive up his hits by picking on his favored targets and that keeps his favored audience in captivity so they can show up personally and spew forth from the other side. When Cindy Hval blogs in his place – it’s a breath of fresh air.

Comment by Stebbijo — December 11, 2010 @ 2:58 pm
IMO…Dave Oliveria is simply a bitter old man. What stebbijo describes is exactly what caused his demotion and removal from the SR masthead. When his behavior was brought to the attention of his employer, he was thusly reprimanded. Ironically, his pet, RSPA, ultimately turned on him and aimed his vituperative poison toward Oliveria. As for Bloem and the City Hall residents, Oliveria wants to be thought part of that “in crowd”. What we called in college, wannabe fringies. They use him but would never include him and on some level he probably knows this. Which adds to his bitterness. He is simply pathetic.

Comment by rochereau — December 12, 2010 @ 9:31 am
Oh, “holy diabetes Batman”, now St. Charlie the Nipp had been joined by St. Mike the Kennedy. If you read his self serving My Turn column today, you are likely to need insulin. Now I will endeavor to uncross my eyes and stop shaking my head.

Comment by rochereau — December 12, 2010 @ 9:35 am
The Business section of today’s Press headlines, “The most for the money.” I forsee a push to include East Sherman as an addition to the urban renewal district. East Sherman road and sidewalk improvements are fairly recent. The property owners opted for basic, no frills, improvements. It was their LID. I guess the $100,000 sculpture wasn’t enough to spiff things up. As I see it, this issue involves more than simple aesthetic improvements.

Comment by Susie Snedaker — December 12, 2010 @ 11:59 am
With declining property values, it’s conceivable that the LCDC may rush to create a new district on East Sherman. I doubt it would be a move to provide jobs.

Comment by Dan — December 12, 2010 @ 1:07 pm
So I guess the question is, are they going to create a new or shoestring so that they extend the downtown yet again?

Comment by concerned citizen — December 12, 2010 @ 1:15 pm
Mike Kennedy’s column today is so typical. He spends the first big section telling everyone about himself. His feelings. His frustrations at the perceived injustices of the election challenge that he was going to write about but changed his mind. The last big section of his column tells everyone about himself too. How he’ll answer any question about the election challenge and how he intends to work hard in the future.

The middle, much smaller piece, is a short list of bullet points he plans to work on. Funny that “job creation” is the first item. The constantly increasing taxes that Mike and the other council members and mayor have approved, have seriously hurt local businesses and have contributed to the LOSS of jobs locally. But Mike has never met a tax he didn’t love.

Nowhere does he mention cutting back, lowering taxes or doing any belt tightening. (I could make a joke here but I won’t)

It was a totally self-serving column. Consider the source.

Comment by mary — December 12, 2010 @ 2:13 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.