Posted: 11/3/2014 2:48:59 PM EDT
| What are they? I know one is to amend the state constitution to allow office holders to serve in NG and other NG and reserve components of the .mil. What are the others? |
|
Quoted:
What are they? I know one is to amend the state constitution to allow office holders to serve in NG and other NG and reserve components of the .mil. What are the others? It was my understanding they already can Mike Thompson who is DPS commissioner and the Secretary of Safety and Security is a Col. In the OKARNG. |
| I voted no on all the questions. The way I see it, there's no way you can both be present here and fulfill the duties of your office, and be fulfill military duties should you be called to do so. Pick one. The other questions are about giving special treatment to veterans and spouses. Personally I'm a fan of equal treatment under the law and having the same tax codes apply to everybody, so I voted no on that too. |
|
Quoted:
What are they? I know one is to amend the state constitution to allow office holders to serve in NG and other NG and reserve components of the .mil. What are the others? 769 lets those in the guard or reserves hold office. 770 This measure amends Section 8E of Article X of the Oklahoma Constitution. This measure would provide an ad valorem exemption for the full fair cash value of a homestead for the un-remarried surviving spouse of a member of the Armed Forces determined to have died while in the line of duty. it would allow surviving spouse who acquires a new homestead property to obtain specified exemption in the same year during which an exemption was claimed for previous homestead property 771 extends the homestead exemption to surviving spouse of a veteran. All these are ways to tell the vets that we realize that they were willing to put their lives on the line for those staying at home. |
|
Quoted:
I voted no on all the questions. The way I see it, there's no way you can both be present here and fulfill the duties of your office, and be fulfill military duties should you be called to do so. Pick one. The other questions are about giving special treatment to veterans and spouses. Personally I'm a fan of equal treatment under the law and having the same tax codes apply to everybody, so I voted no on that too. To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. |
|
Quoted:
To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted no on all the questions. The way I see it, there's no way you can both be present here and fulfill the duties of your office, and be fulfill military duties should you be called to do so. Pick one. The other questions are about giving special treatment to veterans and spouses. Personally I'm a fan of equal treatment under the law and having the same tax codes apply to everybody, so I voted no on that too. To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. What he is saying there are others that may be just as deserving as those who serve in the military but don't receive the benefits they do. It is not a personal dislike for those who wear uniforms (I think!) Do not mistake everyone who does not worship our military as being anti-military. An example I can give is a USAF widow I know draws her dead husband's military retirement while she has had a common law husband for the last twenty years. You think she should be given tax exemption on her home that her dead husband never saw? Killed in combat while serving, yes, in my opinion. Committing suicide because his wife made him a head case? I'm not so strong on that idea. |
|
Quoted:
To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted no on all the questions. The way I see it, there's no way you can both be present here and fulfill the duties of your office, and be fulfill military duties should you be called to do so. Pick one. The other questions are about giving special treatment to veterans and spouses. Personally I'm a fan of equal treatment under the law and having the same tax codes apply to everybody, so I voted no on that too. To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. Yes I do. They were tax exemptions for disabled vets and spouses of deceased vets. I have a much better idea. Let's assume we all agree that our enlisted military are not paid well enough and deserve better. I think that's probably the case, and assume most here do as well. So, let's just pay them better for the job they do. You would never hear somebody say, wow plumbers do hard work and don't make enough lets give them a special tax break on their property taxes. No, you just pay them what they're worth. Soldiers do a job, soldiers in combat roles do a very risky job. Reward them with money. I don't believe that catering laws to them is necessary or even a good thing. I don't believe vets deserve more rights than me or a different set of laws. And I don't think that we need to add ever more exemptions and complications to an overly complicated system of taxes. |
|
Quoted:
Yes I do. They were tax exemptions for disabled vets and spouses of deceased vets. I have a much better idea. Let's assume we all agree that our enlisted military are not paid well enough and deserve better. I think that's probably the case, and assume most here do as well. So, let's just pay them better for the job they do. You would never hear somebody say, wow plumbers do hard work and don't make enough lets give them a special tax break on their property taxes. No, you just pay them what they're worth. Soldiers do a job, soldiers in combat roles do a very risky job. Reward them with money. I don't believe that catering laws to them is necessary or even a good thing. I don't believe vets deserve more rights than me or a different set of laws. And I don't think that we need to add ever more exemptions and complications to an overly complicated system of taxes. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I voted no on all the questions. The way I see it, there's no way you can both be present here and fulfill the duties of your office, and be fulfill military duties should you be called to do so. Pick one. The other questions are about giving special treatment to veterans and spouses. Personally I'm a fan of equal treatment under the law and having the same tax codes apply to everybody, so I voted no on that too. To refrain from posting what I wanted to reply with, I will just ask if you understood what those two questions were asking. Yes I do. They were tax exemptions for disabled vets and spouses of deceased vets. I have a much better idea. Let's assume we all agree that our enlisted military are not paid well enough and deserve better. I think that's probably the case, and assume most here do as well. So, let's just pay them better for the job they do. You would never hear somebody say, wow plumbers do hard work and don't make enough lets give them a special tax break on their property taxes. No, you just pay them what they're worth. Soldiers do a job, soldiers in combat roles do a very risky job. Reward them with money. I don't believe that catering laws to them is necessary or even a good thing. I don't believe vets deserve more rights than me or a different set of laws. And I don't think that we need to add ever more exemptions and complications to an overly complicated system of taxes. So with this homestead exemption Im gonna go on a limb and guess that the tax exemption that is afforded to a disabled veteran who is missing a limb or two should not exist because you don't get that exemption? Because they are physically unable to work they should pay the same tax that an able bodied worker does? I get that there are people out there that may have similar disabilities and haven't served, but these people have given more than enough for this country... In the form of body parts. What about a veteran who who has TBI to the point he can't function normally? Never mind. Im about to let emotions get the better of me and that won't allow for civilized debate. I need to back out before that happens. |
|
That's all well and good but in the meantime the current laws have forced the spouses and families of soldiers who were killed or disabled to lose their homes....which makes sense to these families today, a law that helps them stay in their homes now or the chance of increasing pay to soldiers at some time in the future that won't even affect the tens of thousands of soldiers who have just come home disabled and the families of those who didn't come home to them at all?
|