Discuss: Webcam Spying

February 19, 2010 at 10:35:15
Specs: Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium, 1.9 GHz / 2812 MB
Hi all,

This week's poll question is about the news that some schools are using webcams to spy on their students. Discuss here if you think this violates the student's rights, and, if you like, the poll results themselves.

Thanks!
Justin


See More: Discuss: Webcam Spying

Report •

#1
February 19, 2010 at 14:40:07
1st and foremost, students don't have rights.

When this concept started about twenty years ago, I knew it was nothing but trouble.

Most students are under the age of majority and they may have certain rights like safety, access to health care at school and a decent education.

But "rights?" in the way they try to present them today? No, absolutely not. No way.You don't get to wear your slacks down around your ass or six different colors in your hair. You're there to learn. Period.

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

#2
February 19, 2010 at 14:40:47
Yikes. That's so darn creepy, I'm going to put some masking tape over mine ASAP. Who knew that principal W. Seymour Skinner was watching all these years? Doh!

In all seriousness, when I heard about this, I just couldn't believe the sheer stupidity of those school officials. What numbnut said, "Gee, I've got a bright idea, let's monitor and spy on our students in the privacy of their own homes"?

Uh, I think the violation goes beyond just the students, but also everyone in the student's families and anyone else that was being broadcast from the computer in any venue.

I predict a class-action lawsuit to be forthcoming shortly from one of those annoying suits who likes having his or her face on national TV.


Report •

#3
February 19, 2010 at 16:43:47
I didn't hear about the home thing. Anyone have a link?

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
February 19, 2010 at 17:54:24
The link below has the latest info surrounding the case of the Pennsylvania school district. Now the FBI is into it.

http://www.physorg.com/news18582601...

i_Xp/Vista/W7User


Report •

#5
February 19, 2010 at 18:25:42
They arrest peeping toms don't they? There's no difference in this case. What the hell is this, Russia? I don't think anyone has the right to spy on you, period. Unfortunately, this is what happens when people give too much authority to the government and other so called institutions. If they prove they spied on the kids, especially in there own homes, the should be arrested and spend time in the cell with Bubba Big Bannana. Then they would get to know first hand what violation is. Be careful, Big Brother is gaining on you.

Report •

#6
February 19, 2010 at 19:42:54
I figure if you have an active web-cam, consider yourself "compromised" from the get-go. If your web-cam setup is stupid enough to not be encrypted, then you prob'ly get what you are asking for. There's no such thing as privacy regardless, it is a myth from the past. electronics (and not just web-based) have seen to that.

Report •

#7
February 19, 2010 at 20:03:28
Students and all members of a student's family DO have rights in their own home.
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?s...

Report •

#8
February 19, 2010 at 22:24:13
it's a nice thought, but no. "Rights" are also a myth.
The only rights we have are the ones we are willing to die for, (vs going to the courthouse and whining). People, especially Americans, goaded by the media they so eagerly consume, seem quite ready to trade "rights" for "security", but then they bitch about "loss of privacy". Then when a bomb goes off or their child gets molested, they bitch about "loss of security". Then when they are scrutininzed by cams or detectors, or child advocate busts into their home, they will bitch about "loss of privacy" and loss of "rights". Especially in this culture and time, people should not be so naieve as to think that they are only "on screen" when they yell "roll'em", and off when they yell "cut!". I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it just is, and it IS because that's the way "we" (NOT me) want it.

Report •

#9
February 20, 2010 at 08:41:33
I just read the article. Those in charge of school should be fired and sent to prison. That is abhorrent. Besides being totally invasive, it borders on 1984 and beyond.

I have always said that even though you can do something doesn't give the right to do it.

Besides, there are programs like Laptop LoJack and others that find lost or stolen laptops without the invasion of privacy.

I hope they nail those administrators asses to the wall.

Literally.

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

#10
February 20, 2010 at 14:56:07
We are all being watched virtually all the time, everywhere we go. There are cameras in parking lots, gas stations, stores, banks, ATMs, airports, bus stations, train stations (not to mention on planes, buses & trains), street corners, traffic lights, highways, etc. Add to that the internet, cellphones, GPS tracking, credit card use, store discount cards, etc. Like it or not, the majority of us are wired in somewhere in some way. And that's before taking into account real spying by the CIA, FBI, law enforcement, private detectives, plus the occasional freak who sets up video/audio equipment for his or her own personal jollies. It's a wonder anyone can get away anything these days.

As far as I'm concerned, as long as the students are made aware that they're under surveillance, I have no problem with it. And if it deters someone from doing something stupid or from committing a crime, or it is used to help catch someone that actually did something stupid or committed a crime, it's a good thing.


Report •

#11
February 20, 2010 at 17:03:00
The kid was disciplined at school for something supposedly "inappropriate" he did in his own bedroom. I'm still trying to get past that. What right does anyone at that school have to discipline a student for something he/she does at home?

AND, to add one more thought, how "normal" is it for an adult (other than a parent) to be "spying" on a child? Regardless of whether the mehod used is a webcam, binoculars, telescope, etc. Seems dangerously close to Pedophilia.

LIR


Report •

#12
February 20, 2010 at 22:23:45
Geez, I can't believe we've got 40 yeses.

Turbocharged 939 | Dual-core Opteron 185 @ 3.2GHz | 2x 8800GTS in SLI | 4GB PC3200 @ CL2 | A8N32-SLI Deluxe |1TB | PCI-E X-Fi Titanium Pro | Swan D1080MKII + Dayton 10" 125w sub | W7 Ultimate


Report •

#13
February 21, 2010 at 08:16:58
That could partly be due to the way in which the question was phrased. For example, if it had read: "Should schools be allowed to spy on students and other members of a student's family in the privacy of their own home with webcams?", then maybe there would have been less yeses.

Report •

#14
February 21, 2010 at 09:44:52
Whoever is writing these questions needs to learn how to phrase a poll question so that it doesn't influence the out come.

This is not the first time this has happened.

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

#15
February 21, 2010 at 11:28:01
I think the question was pretty clear and don't see how the question in any way influenced the responses.

LIR


Report •

#16
February 21, 2010 at 14:52:13
The question was pretty clear, but any poll question will influence the responses, depending on how it is phrased or what the possible answers are. For example, suppose one thinks that it's OK to spy on students with webcams in certain cases and/or in certain places(such as school). Do you answer yes or no ? More options would allow for a better idea of what someone thinks on this.

Report •

#17
February 21, 2010 at 16:32:39
"Whoever is writing these questions needs to learn how to phrase a poll question so that it doesn't influence the out come."

I agree with seawatch1's above observation.

The survey question was more or less framed as a push poll. Constructing poll questions without obvious bias is the best way to ensure that one is not asking a leading question.

Respondents to the above question (IMHO) are likely going to be primed to react somewhat unfavorably to the word "spy" when used in conjunction with students & webcams.

A fair question should include the reason behind the surveillance policy. I'm sure the outcome would be different if respondents were told that the policy has to do with enforcing loss prevention & equipment recovery & only triggered in event of such incidents.

A good example of why this "spy" poll is flawed is apparent when the question is applied to something like OnStar:

Should GM automakers be allowed to spy on car owners with tracking/listening devices?

Windows 7 News!


Report •

#18
February 21, 2010 at 19:15:40
Slip-slidin away,
Slip-slidin awayaaaa,
you know the nearer your destination.
the more you're slip-sliding away.

NO, NOT, NEVER this is America, not Gerore Orwell's 1984, unless we want it that way.

In that case, God, Allah, Jehova, Jesus, Confucious, Budah, SOMEONE, "HELP US" we're --cked!!!!!

Do unto others as you would have them do unto YOU!

Jail is too good forthe perps. Can you say, Breach of Trust?

There is nothing to learn from someone who already agrees with you.


Report •

#19
February 22, 2010 at 04:42:46
At Home: Soooo Wrong! What the hell does it matter what your doing at home, even if your smoking pot, lighting fireworks and drinking huge amounts of alcohol. As long as your abiding by the rules at school it is absolutely none of their concern.

When I was a high school there were cameras in almost every part of the school, in all computer rooms, Halls, all walkways and areas outside and in locker rooms. I had no problem with that at all. In a large public school with several thousand students it is a good thing, is an excellent deterant and helps when serious incedents occur. Spying is a very different thing to monitoring, at my school all the cameras were obvious and no attempt to conceal them was made, once you start to do it without the knowledge of the students or deliberately try to hide it it crosses the line.

Mattwizz3
Gigabyte P35-DS3R
4GB DDR2 800
9800GT
E4500


Report •

#20
February 22, 2010 at 07:41:22
We are all being watched virtually all the time, everywhere we go. There are cameras in parking lots, gas stations, stores, banks, ATMs, airports, bus stations, train stations (not to mention on planes, buses & trains), street corners, traffic lights, highways, etc.

It's worse in the UK where in big cities like London they have camera's everywhere watching everyone on the street and utilize "face recognition software" to look for potential criminals and terrorists.

It's not as bad in North America but it's coming thanks to the world we live in where certain religious groups feel that they have "holy mission" to force others to worship as they do or destroy them if they can't be converted.

Luckily, I live in a small northern community where there are camera's at the ATM's but that's about it. I can walk down the street without some bobby running my face through a criminal record check.

I don't want to live in a world like that and it's just one more reason I'll continue to avoid the big crowded cities.

As to the question at hand. If I were a parent of one of these children the laptop would have been returned to the school and I would NEVER allow my child to accept any electronic device from the school again, nor allow any in my home. AND, I would file civil suits against every staff member involved individually as well as the school and/or school board as a whole and do my best to sue their asses off!

This is a criminal act as far as I'm concerned and NOBODY has a right to spy on me, my family or my child.....period, full stop!

For those of you who answered yes, you are now one step closer to the police no longer needing to get a warrant to walk into your home and do whatever they want. You're one step closer to allowing your privacy to be invaded for any reason and having no means of stopping it. You're one step closer to George Orwells 1984 and if you find your head in a bird cage with starving rats about to be let loose in the cage you'll have nobody to blame but yourselves.

I for one will not live in a world where I am allowed no privacy. I will fight to the death to remain free as my forefathers before me have fought for those very things.

Those of you who answered yes shame every soldier who's given their life that you can be free right from the revolutionary war on down to the people serving in Afghanistan today.


Report •

#21
February 22, 2010 at 10:36:54
re: "As far as I'm concerned, as long as the students are made aware that they're under surveillance, I have no problem with it."

If you are talking in the generic sense, then perhaps you are right. Of course they would not only need to be made aware of the surveillance, but also agree to it.

In some cases, the student's legal guardian would have to agree to it if the student was under that state's age of majority.

However, in this case, the "made aware" part doesn't seem to have been present.

Stolen without permission from:

http://www.physorg.com/news18582601...

"Families were not informed of the possibility the webcams might be activated in their homes without their permission in the paperwork students sign when they get the computers, district spokesman Doug Young said."

"not informed" = "not made aware"

That said, I find this paragraph even more interesting:

"The suit does not say if his laptop had been reported stolen, and Young said the litigation prevents him from disclosing that fact. He said the district never violated its policy of only using the remote-activation software to find missing laptops. "Infer what you want," Young said."

...the district never violated its policy...

Is he saying that any policy that the district dreams up is OK?

Does it matter to him that the policy they "never violated" may not have been legal in the first place?

I guess we should give them credit for following their own procedures, even if those procedures border on felonious.


Report •

#22
February 22, 2010 at 12:10:03
Quoting from DerbyDad03's quote:

"He said the district never violated its policy of only using the remote-activation software to find missing laptops."

I'm sorry but, how is a freaking camera supposed to tell anybody where the stolen laptop is?

What seawatch1 said, at least gives an option for locating the laptop:

Besides, there are programs like Laptop LoJack and others that find lost or stolen laptops without the invasion of privacy.

Software that at least can utilize GPS to pinpoint the location of a stolen laptop makes sense. Using a web cam to what........describe the person looking at the laptop.....or maybe even better yet, describe the room the laptop is in.........makes no sense because it simply can NOT tell anybody the location of the laptop.

I'm sorry, no matter which way you slice it this was an invasion of privacy plain and simple. A school has a right to pry into a students activities at school but most definitely do NOT have that right ANYWHERE off of school property.

That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard and it's so obviously BS that I can't imagine anybody with a half a brain is fooled by it. What I am surprised at is that the police have not stepped in and arrested every one of the staff involved.


Report •

#23
February 22, 2010 at 12:45:42
One thing that really bothers me is how seemingly unrepentant the school staff seems to be.

In this day and age, you'd think that people would have better sense.

Do they never learn?

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

#24
February 22, 2010 at 13:47:21
I'm wondering what the root cause of this is and how to prevent in the future? How much of this is an example of what you get when you underfund the public education system? Everyone knows that public school teachers are woefully underpaid and under-valued. I'm assuming that school administrators are likewise underpaid, but I'm not sure about that. Regardless, the facts are that there are people with very, very poor judgement are charge of educating children, one of the most important jobs in society. This scenario is just a case in point. I'm just thinking that it's obvious that a halfwit came up with the idea of spying on children. That kind of daft person wouldn't last very long in the private sector where there's often competitive pay for performance. If the renumeration in public education and administration was more competitive, would that attract a higher calibre employee that would make better decisions?

Report •

#25
February 22, 2010 at 14:20:05
I could take the poorest person in any country and if they had integrity, things like this would not be an issue.

I'm assuming that Radix is not equating morals with dollars.

Just because you're poor does not mean you get to act like an .

We were the unwilling, led by the unqualified, to do the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.

VietNam War Poster


Report •

#26
February 23, 2010 at 11:24:49
Does anyone know if there was any audio associated with this?

Report •

#27
February 23, 2010 at 15:44:35
Let's see

1) My child has a right to a free education

2) That school has the right to maintain control by almost any means that safety of it's students.

3) I have the right to shoot and kill anyone who enters my home without my permission.

Likely


I want to go like my grandfather did. Peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming at the top of my lungs like the passengers in his car.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Report •

#28
February 23, 2010 at 20:31:04
# 2 reads as if you didn't take advantage of # 1.

;-)


Report •

#29
February 24, 2010 at 07:16:23
I'm still waiting for someone to say, "If you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

Report •

#30
February 24, 2010 at 08:08:36
Razor2.3

I'm still waiting for someone to say, "If you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

I doubt you'll hear that because anybody with half a brain should know it's not about whether or not you have something to hide. It's about invasion of privacy.

Personally, I hope someone does say that. If they firmly believe it, I'm going to request they allow me to put a few camera's in their house. Then, I'll start a website linked to the camera's so we can watch them in the privacy of their home.

Something tells me the answer to that would be a resounding NO.........even though they have nothing to hide....

likelystory

1) My child has a right to a free education

I don't know about the US but it isn't "free" here in Canada. We pay "school" taxes locally in the town/city we live in as part of our "property taxes". This applies even if you don't have kids, you contribute. I'd be surprised if it wasn't the same in the US.

2) That school has the right to maintain control by almost any means that safety of it's students.

You mean "while they're on school property" don't you?

I have no issue with that. In fact, I'd have a serious issue with the school not ensuring my child's safety while on school property. As long as they're not putting webcam's in the toilet stalls, they can keep watch however they choose.

My issue is this idea that some clown in a school (teacher, principal....whoever it doesn't matter) thinks they have the right to invade my home, my privacy, to spy on my kid. And mister, that ain't gonna happen in my lifetime!

I might consider an exchange. By that I mean, I'd let them spy on my kid providing they let me put a camera or two in their house. But again, I doubt they'd go for that idea as I suspect they'd scream "Invasion of my privacy".

I still say the so-called adults involved should be criminally charged as well as fired from their present positions and NEVER allowed to hold a job that allows them to interact with children again!



Report •

#31
February 24, 2010 at 15:11:48
Yes I do mean while on school property. If my child is acting out, causing trouble, or threatening another person on school grounds and I find that a school official corrected them by physical punishment then the child will get more of the same when they get home. I send them to learn, not to prove to friends that they can make an ass out of themselves. Now if that same official attempted to correct what my child is doing away from school I would most likely take it as an assault on my child and act in a very violent manor.

One thing I am curious about. These were school issued laptops right? Were the children told that they would be watched otherwise they could not use the laptops? And were permission slips signed by the parents?

Personally I wouldn't care if they put cameras in every inch of the schools including bathrooms and lockerrooms. I know that seems a bit out there but I remember in high school these are the places attacks took place because the attackers knew there would be no cameras there. No I didn't go to silverspoons schools. I went to 3 different high schools alone. During those years at those schools 17 people were killed mostly in bathrooms at those schools. 2 of them were teachers if I remember right, it has been awhile.

I am all for all sorts of crack down by the school system. Viollence by a child shall be met by violence and the child shall be removed from the school system for good. They gave up their rights when they committed the act. Cell phones! Mommy or daddy can come and pick up the pieces when they come to get the child being suspended from school for 2 weeks. Children selling drugs in school have given up the right to be educated and can finish the rest of the time alotted for school in jail. I am sorry but in my opinion if that 12 or 13 year old did not honestly know that selling drugs was wrong that is a product of bad parenting not society. I knew long before then and I am not the brightest bulb in the box by any means.

I do believe the child has a right to a free education (yes every year I pay more in taxes to cover it) but I also believe If they are going to prove that they are not there to be educated then they are waiving that right. The scool system is not broken, the court system is. There was a case here not long ago where a 15 year old fired a gun in school injuring another student. This was a child that had already been arrested several times. The school ofcourse expelled the child. After the child did his time, just over 90 days he attempted to return to the school. He was not allowed to return to class so mommy sued on the basis his civil rights had been violated and won. Keep this trash out of the school and teach the ones that are there to learn. Teaching them however does not include spying on them at home or anywhere away from school.

Likely


I want to go like my grandfather did. Peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming at the top of my lungs like the passengers in his car.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Report •

#32
February 24, 2010 at 16:55:28
Curt R: I doubt you'll hear that because anybody with half a brain should know it's not about whether or not you have something to hide. It's about invasion of privacy.
It's a shame, 'cause I was going to answer, "My Pee Pee," while the 6-year-old in me giggled.

On that note, does anyone know if the inevitable child porn investigation started yet?


Report •

#33
February 24, 2010 at 18:56:41
re: I don't know about the US but it isn't "free" here in Canada.

Scroll down to Article 26.


Report •

#34
February 25, 2010 at 07:58:53
likelystory

LOL!

If my child is acting out, causing trouble, or threatening another person on school grounds and I find that a school official corrected them by physical punishment then the child will get more of the same when they get home

That was my dad's philosophy too.......and I got it a few times over the years......hahahaha

I'm happy to say I only ever had to spank my son's butt once due to activities at school. He learned faster than I did I guess!


Razor2.3

It's a shame, 'cause I was going to answer, "My Pee Pee," while the 6-year-old in me giggled.

LOL - that made my 6 year old inner child giggle too!

On that note, does anyone know if the inevitable child porn investigation started yet?

Funny you should mention that. This is actually one of the reasons this upsets me as much as it does.....the possibility of it being used by some deviant to look at children undress etc.

The reason it upsets me so is simple. We moved to our present location 5 years ago. There was this highschool counselor at the school my son attended. Turns out, the dude lived down the street from us at his sister's house. One day my son and I were at odds and he wasn't happy with something I said so he ran down the street to talk to this counselor (hoping to get him on his side I suspect). It ended up with said counselor coming to my house to talk to me. Basically I told the guy to mind his own business and sent him packing. Both my wife and I immediately disliked this fellow. Neither of us could put a finger on why, but the feeling was there. I learned a long time ago to trust feelings like that.

The year after my son graduated (2008) this same counselor was arrested and charged with child porn. Turns out he had managed to talk a teen couple into having sex while he recorded it. There were other charges too, but that was the main one.

Anyhow, when this crap first popped up on the news, all I could think about was it was the perfect way for a pedophile to feed his/her deviant sex needs and the excuse for doing it was so lame I thought up front that that had to be what it was about.

DerbyDad03

Scroll down to Article 26.

I did....very interesting! I know my sister-in-law, who lives on top of a mountain in North Idaho (no jokes please.....lol) home schooled all her children because she didn't like the public schools. We can do that here too if we want, I just never knew your schooling was "free"

But face facts, free is a relative term right. Those teachers don't work for free so their pay has to come from somewhere. I suspect tax money is involved somewhere down the line.

While neither you folks in the US or us up here in Canada get yearly bills for our childs schooling, I know for a fact we pay 'school taxes' as part of our property taxes.

I'd be interested to know how your public schools are funded. Do you know offhand?


Report •

#35
February 25, 2010 at 12:19:53
The financing is achieved through a hotch-potch of investments: It's constitutionally the responsibility of the independent states to fund their local K–12 education from the state & local government's coffers, but the federal gov't pitches in to help out. At the state & local level, the funding is generated, of course, primarily from taxes...income; sales; property; etc. Some states do supplement this with things like lottery & special taxes too.

Windows 7 News!


Report •

#36
February 25, 2010 at 13:51:25
Thanks Saberetooth.

I expected as much to be completely honest. The "TANSAAFL" rule applies (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch) to most things so I fully expected it to apply to the US school systems too.

At first when I found out I still had to pay school taxes even though my kids no longer in school I was a little miffed. But the more I thought about it the more I thought that schooling is something that has to be made available to everyone regardless of whether or not they choose to take advantage of it.

So I no longer begrudge, or complain about, paying school taxes. Heck, it's schooling that got me out of backbreaking labor type jobs and into working with my brain and making more money than I could have without an education.


Report •

#37
February 25, 2010 at 14:52:06
er: While neither you folks in the US or us up here in Canada get yearly bills for our childs schooling, I know for a fact we pay 'school taxes' as part of our property taxes.

As do I.

I was merely supporting Likely's statement:

"1) My child has a right to a free education"

So I guess we're not paying for the free education, we're paying for the right to have it. ;-)



Report •

#38
February 26, 2010 at 09:51:40
So I guess we're not paying for the free education, we're paying for the right to have it. ;-)

LOL



Report •

#39
February 26, 2010 at 15:52:44
Here are a letter and an editorial comment from the Philadelphia Inquirer. I think they make some good points.
See "Resolve disputes without the lawyers" at http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opin... and
"How not to protect your laptop computer" at
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opin...

Report •

#40
February 28, 2010 at 01:05:50
When we lived in Pa. we payed school taxes along with property taxes. Here in Fl. the school money comes from several different tax missadventures. Our property taxes are less than an eighth of what they were in Pa as well. We also do not have a state tax or a local tax. A portion comes from sales taxes on certain items. I know here a few years back there was a debate about adding a 1 cent gass tax to pay some of the states school budget. A portion comes from the taxes paid when register or renew your registration on your automobile.

@ Curt R The only real issue I had to deal with with my 4 in school was a cell phone issue. The school didn't really care about it but I went through the roof when I found out she was texting her friends in class and the phone went in the trash. One of the girls did gget sent home once the school claimed her skirt was way to short. I didn't get it. The rule was the skirt could not be more than 2 inches above the knee. I could barely see her knees and not really see the top of them. I guess from working with a tape measure all those years my Idea of 2 inches and theirs are 2 different things. I have had other issues but they were not at all related to the children missbehaving but the school screwing up.

Likely


I want to go like my grandfather did. Peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming at the top of my lungs like the passengers in his car.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Report •

#41
February 28, 2010 at 03:48:17
re: In fl...Our property taxes are less than an eighth of what they were in Pa

I've always wondered how it works in states like yours.

Services aren't free, so the money has to come from some place.

To keep the math simple, let's say my town, county and school taxes taxes total $4000. If someone pays no school tax and 1/8 in property taxes, there would be a "shortage" of $2750, not even including the fact that there is no State tax.

re: (portion of) taxes paid when register or renew your registration on your automobile

I realize that you're not paying $2750 to register your car, so what is everyone paying substantially more for to make up the short fall?

Bottom line: Are overall "taxes" less in these types of states or are they just buried in a wide variety of fees so that in the end you're still paying that same $4000?


Report •

#42
March 1, 2010 at 03:35:38
Not sure. I know sales taxes are lower in some states than they are here but the tax on gasoline, well last time I really looked at it in 2001 was like 78 cents a gallon in Pittsburgh Pa and only 29 cents a gallon here. For an example of property tax difference. My father in laws place in Pa in 2003 was appraised at $79,000 his property tax and school tax combined was 1,306 per quarter. My folks place here appraised at $104,000 the tax was $329 for the year. Now here we have a homestead excemption of $25,000 after living in the state for five years. This is the reason I no longer live in Pa. When we moved here my pay was cut by more than half but I took home more per week. A lot of people in Pa called me a fool for moving, " Florida is a right to work state" they said. Ok I am a fool for working the same job for a smaller hourly wage and no union support, boy there is an oxymoron. Well my bills are paid, it wasn't always that way while working with the union. I have money in the bank, that never happened in Pa under the union. Oh yeah I am not paying dues to a bum that claims he is taking care of me as he is pulling away in his new Cadilac.

Another note, I am not sure how much this offsets things but a first year teacher working for the city of Pittsburgh was getting over $32,000 a year while here they started at around $18,000. Also I got slapped with a, I think it was called a Privilage work tax, I had to pay for the prvilage of working in each township up there.

Through my life I have lived in many different states but only really had to pay attention to things like taxes in a few of them, so I may be out in left field here but I am betting that millions of these tax dollars needed for the schools are only needed because the people that are in charge of taxing us seem to need a new car every year and at least a $250,000 home. I know some of the tax money up there was deverted to pay for 2 new stadiums for the Pirates and the Steelers while at the time the city still owed over $35 million on Three Rivers stadium that is now a big parking lot. It is safe to say I am rather jaded when it comes to someone saying we need more taxes to pay for necessities like education. I believe in education, I don't however believe that we need more than a dozen people called "superintendants in charge of cariculum" making $90,000 a year in a county of only 150,000. Isn't the carriculum the pricipals job?

Likely


I want to go like my grandfather did. Peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming at the top of my lungs like the passengers in his car.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Report •

Ask Question