West Bend Council Passes Tax Increase on 6-2 Vote

There you go, Benders. Enjoy the higher taxes. Alders Randy Koehler and Meghann Kennedy were the only two who voted against the tax increase budget. Alders John Butschlick, Mark Allen, Brett Bergquist, Jed Dolnick, Steve Hoogester, and Justice Madl all voted to increase taxes in a year when citizens were losing their jobs and businesses in the face of a global pandemic.

You get the government you vote for.

Will you do anything about it?

Mark Allen and Steve Hoogester are up for election in April (assuming they run).

13 Responses to West Bend Council Passes Tax Increase on 6-2 Vote

  1. Avatar penquin says:

    “You get the government you vote for.”

    You also get the society you pay for.

    If you’re not happy with the services & community that the City helps provide for, perhaps you should look into living in a more rural area.

  2. Owen Owen says:

    Interesting that you think that society is a result of government spending. I disagree.

  3. Avatar Jason says:

    penguin also thinks the following…

    >It doesn’t look like these workers are getting a raise in the new budget – so even tho the % of the premium they pay goes down by a percent, they are still gonna be bringing home less money every month. Sounds like there are no winners here at all…

    >Average pay/benefits gets you average workers

    So there you go. I’m still reserved.

  4. Avatar Mar says:

    So, in penquin’s mind, only money is the way to get better workers.
    I really hope he is not in charge of a human resources department.
    Let me ask you penquin, when you were in the military, did you join just for the money? You think most people who join, join because of the money?

  5. Avatar penquin says:

    Interesting that you think that society is a result of government spending

    It isn’t the only contributor, but I do beleive a good society doesn’t happen by accident.

    How many societies & civilizations have bloomed & thrived under anarchism?

  6. Avatar penquin says:

    in penquin’s mind, only money is the way to get better workers

    “only” money? Nope….whoever told you I beleive as such is lying to you, and should not be considered a credible source.

  7. Avatar Mar says:

    Well, penquin, according to you, money and benefits that are paid for, like health insurance, attracts the best employees.
    That’s you talking, no one else.

  8. Avatar penquin says:

    penquin, according to you, money and benefits that are paid for, like health insurance, attracts the best employees

    Pretty sure that’s not quite how I worded it either…but overall I do beleive good pay/benefits gets you good applicants & good workers. It is not the “only” thing, nor does it mean you automatically get the “best” but it for sure is a major factor.

    Why do you beleive that is such a radical concept?

  9. Avatar Mar says:

    “Why do you beleive that is such a radical concept?”
    Just maybe, because that is what you said?

  10. Avatar Jason says:

    >How many societies & civilizations have bloomed & thrived under anarchism?

    Quite the non-sequitur spin of a question.

  11. Avatar penquin says:

    Just maybe, because that is what you said?

    But I didn’t say what you keep saying I said – no “maybe” about it. Even tho you keep changing it up, you still get it wrong.

    My original statement was “a good benefits package helps attract good applicants“. Nothing about it being the “only” way to get better workers nor any of the other strawmen you keep trying to drag into this convo. 

    I stand by my original statement, and  still don’t understand why you beleive it to be such a radical concept.

    Quite the non-sequitur spin of a question

    It was implied that society isn’t affected via gov’t spending. So with that in mind, I would like to see examples of societies that have no gov’t spending whatsoever.

    Do you have any such examples? Or you just gonna bark all day?

  12. Avatar Jason says:

    >It was implied that society isn’t affected via gov’t spending.

    No it wasn’t.

  13. Avatar Tuerqas says:

    It was implied that society isn’t affected via gov’t spending. So with that in mind, I would like to see examples of societies that have no gov’t spending whatsoever.

    No, you are being disingenuous or obtuse penguin.  You made the implication that society quality is based on the money you pay Government.  The response from Owen was that it was not simply based upon the money paid to Government.  This does not imply anarchy or that no money still inspires good governance.  It implies that a good society doesn’t need to be coerced into ever higher spending to result in a better society.

    For example, in 2018 1.7 trillion was collected in taxes, while 410 billion dollars were given to charity and an estimated 900 billion was given in goods and services by American donors and volunteers.  I would agree with Owen that more money in Government has actually decreased its value and level of ‘society’.

    I would consider it almost axiomatic that if we still spent 3 trillion a year on our ‘society’ the level of society would get better or worse based on the percentage of the 3 trillion that was charity.  I.e. if we had 1.7 trillion in charity and only 1.3 trillion collected involuntarily, we would have a commensurately better society.  Conversely, if we collect 2 trillion in taxes and 1 trillion on charity, our society would be commensurately worse than it is now.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.