Quote:
Originally Posted by Wifi-1
I understand what you are saying, and don't disagree. What I do find problems with is the argument is that Mboro somehow has to catch up to the tax rate of other more out of control towns. Its like the towns fostering slab cities (trailer parks, with loads of school aid children) complaining they need money from other towns. They made their bed, so they should sleep in it. Just like I don't want M'boro to follow the over spending trends of others, so if the economy turns down, who will be holding the bag ? (the locals and the banks, lol)
|
I agree that spending should always be monitored.
And believe me, I have major problems with the school system, not just here but across the nation. It has been polluted with school administration bureaucracy that never quite seems to improve the education of our children no matter how much money is poured into it.
Yet, Moultonborough, for better or worse, is a land wealthy town. If you were at a job paying $40,000 a year and you completed college and a dream job at $80,000 a year was offered to you, don't you think you might upgrade your lifestyle? You would be OK to upgrade the schools for your kids? Better house and cars? An uptick in the clothes you wear? Going out to a really nice, and expensive restaurant now and then? A snazzy vacation?
So I think it is reasonable for Moultonborough's goals to perhaps reach a little higher than the average town and, with careful consideration, accept the burden of paying for it.
There will always be people eager to spend other people's money on any nifty idea that comes into their heads. Those spendthrifts must be resisted. And of course it must be recognized that while the town is wealthy, not everyone in it is and due consideration should be given to the impact on them of any additional spending.