Aren't cities in the US overwhelmingly progressive? Isn't that where white flight destroyed the tax base? Isn't anyone else worried about that, especially now that the redistricting/bussing process has begun?

Exactly.

And if they were as successful as MoCo, they'd be just as Progressive, and they'd be advocating that local contributions need to be raised to have a more equitable distribution of resources to underserved residents.


But they're not as successful as we are. So they cling to trump-esque values like obsessions with low tax rates, maintaining income disparities and classism, and an antiquated patriarchal system of local govt.

A bunch a wanna-be's and those who strive to perpetuate it.

Anonymous wrote:

Being a Progressive means you stand for certain things. One of which is an understanding that people with more resources need to be willing to contribute more of those resources than others with less, so that they may help out those who need it. This isn't a revolutionary concept, ok? Until such time as we have a fully equitable society where literally everyone has the same standard of living and there is no classism, there needs to be a mechanism where the government can even out the distribution of financial resources.

Being a Progressive doesn't mean that you enjoy throwing money out a window though. MoCo and MCPS in particular has made too many serious mistakes and poor choices with the money they have been given by tax payers. If MCPS wasn't in the toilet, most wealthy people in MoCo wouldn't mind paying more taxes. Many of us are strong supporters of the wrap around programs in schools, health and human services, aggressive support for the homeless and other important social services. What we don't support is government without any oversight and declining schools.

Fix MCPS and there would be far more support within the county. At the rate MCPS is going though the wealthy in the west will just move to other counties/states which has already been steadily happening. When the prices drop in the west, the UMC/MC whites in the east will simply move in and leave the east with only poverty. The policies in play now are basically taking MoCo down 20 years while the surrounding areas like DC, VA, Howard and Frederick thrive.

Yep, a bunch of wannabes

Being a Progressive means you stand for certain things. One of which is an understanding that people with more resources need to be willing to contribute more of those resources than others with less, so that they may help out those who need it. This isn't a revolutionary concept, ok? Until such time as we have a fully equitable society where literally everyone has the same standard of living and there is no classism, there needs to be a mechanism where the government can even out the distribution of financial resources.

Being a Progressive doesn't mean that you enjoy throwing money out a window though. MoCo and MCPS in particular has made too many serious mistakes and poor choices with the money they have been given by tax payers. If MCPS wasn't in the toilet, most wealthy people in MoCo wouldn't mind paying more taxes. Many of us are strong supporters of the wrap around programs in schools, health and human services, aggressive support for the homeless and other important social services. What we don't support is government without any oversight and declining schools.

Fix MCPS and there would be far more support within the county. At the rate MCPS is going though the wealthy in the west will just move to other counties/states which has already been steadily happening. When the prices drop in the west, the UMC/MC whites in the east will simply move in and leave the east with only poverty. The policies in play now are basically taking MoCo down 20 years while the surrounding areas like DC, VA, Howard and Frederick thrive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's fine, plenty more want to live here than leave here.

Bye Felicia.

That's the problem. The ones that want to live here don't make as much as the ones that leave, so it's just a steady decline.

You really don't understand the internet

Anonymous wrote:That's fine, plenty more want to live here than leave here.

Bye Felicia.

That's the problem. The ones that want to live here don't make as much as the ones that leave, so it's just a steady decline.

That's fine, plenty more want to live here than leave here.

Bye Felicia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is going to be moving out of a county funded as well as Montgomery has the potential of being.

If anything, they'll have to limit people moving IN.

This logic is what got Moco into the mess it's currently in. You end up attracting people who are interested in partaking in the social service amenities because it's possible to partake more than you put in. This unsustainability is unattractive to many people who have the means to contribute a significant portion of funding for the social services. You can't assume the majority of UMC families like subsidizing so much. It doesn't work if you have a low tax jurisdiction across the river people can easily move to and still be in the area. This is absolutely the opposite direction and the current climate is the product of this. There needs to be a balance between amenities and taxes...too far in one direction and you will get a net movement of people out.

Yep

If the county were filled with republicans, yes, perhaps the scenario you describe might happen.

But it ISN'T filled with republicans, so your doom and gloom prognostications will fall flat. Progressives and democrats don't mind making greater contributions, as long as we know there's a positive outcome to it. And having a better, more equitable community where the strong understand their social responsibility to support the less-able is just such a positive outcome. I'm not a wealthy person. But if I were, I would expect to be called upon to do more, because I have more.

I think you're giving the wealthy too much credit, even progressive ones. I'm a progressive Democrat with a HHI of about 300K. While I certainly expect to pay more in taxes than a family with a HHI of 100K, I absolutely have a tipping point, and, at a minimum, I better be happy with my kids' public school. Right now my kids' elementary school is so run down it's appalling. I honestly dont know how the kids are expected to learn. Plus, the curriculum is terrible and the kids aren't being challenged. They're overcrowded and teaching to the lowest common denominator.

On top of that, my DH has to commute to NOVA because that's where all of the (high-paying) tech jobs are. So, yes, there is certainly a point at which we would go, taking our progressive values with us. The one thing I won't gamble with is my kids' future.

Very well said. That tipping point seems to be getting closer and closer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me.... I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT not a Progressive.

You're just a Rotary Club republican LARP'ing as a Democrat.

Why don't you stop lying to yourself and accept what you are. Or change your mindset.

LOL. So the only wealthy people who can be progressive are those willing to pay any amount of taxes, no questions asked? Good luck with that.

Being a Progressive means you stand for certain things. One of which is an understanding that people with more resources need to be willing to contribute more of those resources than others with less, so that they may help out those who need it. This isn't a revolutionary concept, ok? Until such time as we have a fully equitable society where literally everyone has the same standard of living and there is no classism, there needs to be a mechanism where the government can even out the distribution of financial resources.

If you can't understand why this is important.... well, you're not a Communist.

Fixed that for you

It's almost midnight. Don't you have a cross burning somewhere to be at?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me.... I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT not a Progressive.

You're just a Rotary Club republican LARP'ing as a Democrat.

Why don't you stop lying to yourself and accept what you are. Or change your mindset.

LOL. So the only wealthy people who can be progressive are those willing to pay any amount of taxes, no questions asked? Good luck with that.

Being a Progressive means you stand for certain things. One of which is an understanding that people with more resources need to be willing to contribute more of those resources than others with less, so that they may help out those who need it. This isn't a revolutionary concept, ok? Until such time as we have a fully equitable society where literally everyone has the same standard of living and there is no classism, there needs to be a mechanism where the government can even out the distribution of financial resources.

If you can't understand why this is important.... well, you're not a Communist.

Fixed that for you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me.... I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT not a Progressive.

You're just a Rotary Club republican LARP'ing as a Democrat.

Why don't you stop lying to yourself and accept what you are. Or change your mindset.

LOL. So the only wealthy people who can be progressive are those willing to pay any amount of taxes, no questions asked? Good luck with that.

Being a Progressive means you stand for certain things. One of which is an understanding that people with more resources need to be willing to contribute more of those resources than others with less, so that they may help out those who need it. This isn't a revolutionary concept, ok? Until such time as we have a fully equitable society where literally everyone has the same standard of living and there is no classism, there needs to be a mechanism where the government can even out the distribution of financial resources.

If you can't understand why this is important.... well, you're a republican.

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me.... I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT not a Progressive.

You're just a Rotary Club republican LARP'ing as a Democrat.

Why don't you stop lying to yourself and accept what you are. Or change your mindset.

LOL. So the only wealthy people who can be progressive are those willing to pay any amount of taxes, no questions asked? Good luck with that.

Excuse me.... I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT not a Progressive.

You're just a Rotary Club republican LARP'ing as a Democrat.

Why don't you stop lying to yourself and accept what you are. Or change your mindset.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is going to be moving out of a county funded as well as Montgomery has the potential of being.

If anything, they'll have to limit people moving IN.

This logic is what got Moco into the mess it's currently in. You end up attracting people who are interested in partaking in the social service amenities because it's possible to partake more than you put in. This unsustainability is unattractive to many people who have the means to contribute a significant portion of funding for the social services. You can't assume the majority of UMC families like subsidizing so much. It doesn't work if you have a low tax jurisdiction across the river people can easily move to and still be in the area. This is absolutely the opposite direction and the current climate is the product of this. There needs to be a balance between amenities and taxes...too far in one direction and you will get a net movement of people out.

Yep

If the county were filled with republicans, yes, perhaps the scenario you describe might happen.

But it ISN'T filled with republicans, so your doom and gloom prognostications will fall flat. Progressives and democrats don't mind making greater contributions, as long as we know there's a positive outcome to it. And having a better, more equitable community where the strong understand their social responsibility to support the less-able is just such a positive outcome. I'm not a wealthy person. But if I were, I would expect to be called upon to do more, because I have more.

I think you're giving the wealthy too much credit, even progressive ones. I'm a progressive Democrat with a HHI of about 300K. While I certainly expect to pay more in taxes than a family with a HHI of 100K, I absolutely have a tipping point, and, at a minimum, I better be happy with my kids' public school. Right now my kids' elementary school is so run down it's appalling. I honestly dont know how the kids are expected to learn. Plus, the curriculum is terrible and the kids aren't being challenged. They're overcrowded and teaching to the lowest common denominator.

On top of that, my DH has to commute to NOVA because that's where all of the (high-paying) tech jobs are. So, yes, there is certainly a point at which we would go, taking our progressive values with us. The one thing I won't gamble with is my kids' future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is going to be moving out of a county funded as well as Montgomery has the potential of being.

If anything, they'll have to limit people moving IN.

This logic is what got Moco into the mess it's currently in. You end up attracting people who are interested in partaking in the social service amenities because it's possible to partake more than you put in. This unsustainability is unattractive to many people who have the means to contribute a significant portion of funding for the social services. You can't assume the majority of UMC families like subsidizing so much. It doesn't work if you have a low tax jurisdiction across the river people can easily move to and still be in the area. This is absolutely the opposite direction and the current climate is the product of this. There needs to be a balance between amenities and taxes...too far in one direction and you will get a net movement of people out.

Yep

If the county were filled with republicans, yes, perhaps the scenario you describe might happen.

But it ISN'T filled with republicans, so your doom and gloom prognostications will fall flat. Progressives and democrats don't mind making greater contributions, as long as we know there's a positive outcome to it. And having a better, more equitable community where the strong understand their social responsibility to support the less-able is just such a positive outcome. I'm not a wealthy person. But if I were, I would expect to be called upon to do more, because I have more.