Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1exp 11/4/83; site ihuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert
From: seifert@ihuxl.UUCP (D.A. Seifert)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Private school tax deduction vs NEA
Message-ID: <750@ihuxl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-Nov-83 09:32:03 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxl.750
Posted: Thu Nov 17 09:32:03 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Nov-83 00:54:08 EST
References: <433@ihuxb.UUCP> <238@houxu.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, Il
Lines: 33

[this line intensionally left non-blank]

>					... , or why not give
> people who never fly a tax break on airports, or why not give
> people who don't have children a tax break for not sending
> children to school in the first place and so forth and so on.
>
>				Larry Welsch
>				houxu!welsch

RIGHT! Why *should* people that don't use airports have to
help pay for them? This merely allows artificially low
prices for airplane rides. Modern jets use a *tremendous*
amount of fuel. Driving a car is much more efficent, even
a gas-hog at over-55. And yes, the roads should be paid for
with vehicle/fuel taxes, not out of the general fund. (but
spare me from those stupid toll booths every half a mile)

Why *should* people who are concerned about overpopulation
be forced to pay for kids of people who don't give a &%^#$ ?
This is not intended to be an attack on those who limit their
families to 1-2 kids, and are willing and able to take financial
responsibility for them. It is meant to be an attack only on those
who favor Gov't subsidy of unlimited numbers of children.

)
(
 )		from the mildly opinionated keyboard of		
_)__________________	
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|		Dave Seifert
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|		ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
|------------------|