Here's an idea: Let's Tax College Tuition!

chanel

Silver Member
Jun 8, 2009
12,098
3,202
98
People's Republic of NJ
In case you thought college tuition bills were getting far too affordable for the average family, the Pittsburgh government has a solution. Let's spread the wealth! THE FAIR SHARE TAX!

The mayor of Pittsburgh calls it the “Fair Share Tax.” But to officials at the city’s 10 colleges and universities and many of their 100,000 students, it is anything but. Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said the universities rejected his request to pay $5 million a year to the city, and that he had no other option.

On Wednesday, the City Council is expected to give preliminary approval to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl’s proposal for a 1 percent tuition tax on students attending college in Pittsburgh, which he says will raise $16.2 million in annual revenue that is needed to pay pensions for retired city employees. Final Council action will be on Monday.

The tax would be the first of its kind in the nation, and other cities are watching closely as they try to find ways to close their own budget gaps.

The New York Times > Log In

I wonder who will pay the tax for the kids who pay nothing.
 
In case you thought college tuition bills were getting far too affordable for the average family, the Pittsburgh government has a solution. Let's spread the wealth! THE FAIR SHARE TAX!

The mayor of Pittsburgh calls it the “Fair Share Tax.” But to officials at the city’s 10 colleges and universities and many of their 100,000 students, it is anything but. Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said the universities rejected his request to pay $5 million a year to the city, and that he had no other option.

On Wednesday, the City Council is expected to give preliminary approval to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl’s proposal for a 1 percent tuition tax on students attending college in Pittsburgh, which he says will raise $16.2 million in annual revenue that is needed to pay pensions for retired city employees. Final Council action will be on Monday.

The tax would be the first of its kind in the nation, and other cities are watching closely as they try to find ways to close their own budget gaps.

The New York Times > Log In

I wonder who will pay the tax for the kids who pay nothing.

I am surprised that NJ didn't think of this first, they seem to be at the forefront of taxation and shaking the money out of every pocket in the state.
"Fair Share Tax" , guess their taking the redistribution of wealth on step further to include redistribution of whatever the hell you have left.
 
That's fuckin' bullshit crap!

Yup, and hopefully people are tired of these A'Holes screwing the poor working person into the ground and people start really exercising their power to control their own lives and start tossing these 'Idjuts' out of office.
 
That's fuckin' bullshit crap!

Yup, and hopefully people are tired of these A'Holes screwing the poor working person into the ground and people start really exercising their power to control their own lives and start tossing these 'Idjuts' out of office.

Most college Students are not local residents so have absolutely no say in local politics at all. I would suggest that any college being taxed have their students register to vote in that city and vote those fools out of office.
 
What's going to happen is that enrollment in Pittsburgh colleges is going to decline.

Are there any colleges in Pittsburgh that are SO enticing that a prospective student would want to pay an extra $400 per year more than for a college elsewhere?
 
What's going to happen is that enrollment in Pittsburgh colleges is going to decline.

Are there any colleges in Pittsburgh that are SO enticing that a prospective student would want to pay an extra $400 per year more than for a college elsewhere?

I cannot get over how these 'leaders', council or otherwise, seem to 'attack' those who can least afford it, in most cases, the students are struggling to earn and learn while the 'system' see them as 'prey', well I guess we are all 'prey' when it comes down to it, worldwide. Just depends on how much further we can all be pushed.
 
That's fuckin' bullshit crap!

Yup, and hopefully people are tired of these A'Holes screwing the poor working person into the ground and people start really exercising their power to control their own lives and start tossing these 'Idjuts' out of office.

Most college Students are not local residents so have absolutely no say in local politics at all. I would suggest that any college being taxed have their students register to vote in that city and vote those fools out of office.

Don't think that would work. If they register to vote locally they would technically be residents and have lower tuition anyway. Besides, these students today think they're entitled to a college education and certainly won't bite the hand that feeds them "freebies." The money would be better spent on lower school education so that the kids are educated enough to get into college in the first place.

Lower education is a right - a must - but higher education should be a privilege that students aspire to achieve.
 
Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said the universities rejected his request to pay $5 million a year to the city, and that he had no other option.

Why not cut city public services to the University System to reduce costs by $5 million?

:eusa_whistle:


I'm certain that U of Pittsburg students would be happy to walk through unlighted, unpoliced, unplowed streets to get to school rather than pay an extra 1% City Tax. No doubt that intelligent and socially conscious university students would soon organize themselves into carpools, snow-removal work gangs, and security patrols.
 
Last edited:
Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said the universities rejected his request to pay $5 million a year to the city, and that he had no other option.

Why not cut city public services to the University System to reduce costs by $5 million?

:eusa_whistle:


I'm certain that U of Pittsburg students would be happy to walk through unlighted, unpoliced, unplowed streets to get to school rather than pay an extra 1% City Tax. No doubt that intelligent and socially conscious university students would soon organize themselves into carpools, snow-removal work gangs, and security patrols.

Electricity is a commodity; the schools pay for it.
Have you ever heard of "Campus Police"?
If it is a public street the maintenance is already covered by property tax and university property is generally high end (unless they get a property tax exemption)- unless it is completely on university land, then the university pays for construction and maintenance.
 
What's going to happen is that enrollment in Pittsburgh colleges is going to decline.

Are there any colleges in Pittsburgh that are SO enticing that a prospective student would want to pay an extra $400 per year more than for a college elsewhere?

Carnegie Mellon.

I am confused, are the students socking up this cost? I would think the federal government would object, since most students are on federal loans anyways.
 
Mayor Luke Ravenstahl said the universities rejected his request to pay $5 million a year to the city, and that he had no other option.

Why not cut city public services to the University System to reduce costs by $5 million?

:eusa_whistle:


I'm certain that U of Pittsburg students would be happy to walk through unlighted, unpoliced, unplowed streets to get to school rather than pay an extra 1% City Tax. No doubt that intelligent and socially conscious university students would soon organize themselves into carpools, snow-removal work gangs, and security patrols.

Electricity is a commodity; the schools pay for it.
Have you ever heard of "Campus Police"?
If it is a public street the maintenance is already covered by property tax and university property is generally high end (unless they get a property tax exemption)- unless it is completely on university land, then the university pays for construction and maintenance.

So, you're saying that NO city services in Pittsburg support the University of Pittsburg?
:eusa_eh:
Certainly you're not so opaque.

While the campus has its own police force, and pays for its own electricity and plows its own streets, the CITY pays for all these services in the area surrounding the campus.

Unless all the students live on campus, they utilize city services to get to and from the campus: Busses, streets, street lights, maintainance, police, etc.
 
Why not cut city public services to the University System to reduce costs by $5 million?

:eusa_whistle:


I'm certain that U of Pittsburg students would be happy to walk through unlighted, unpoliced, unplowed streets to get to school rather than pay an extra 1% City Tax. No doubt that intelligent and socially conscious university students would soon organize themselves into carpools, snow-removal work gangs, and security patrols.

Electricity is a commodity; the schools pay for it.
Have you ever heard of "Campus Police"?
If it is a public street the maintenance is already covered by property tax and university property is generally high end (unless they get a property tax exemption)- unless it is completely on university land, then the university pays for construction and maintenance.

So, you're saying that NO city services in Pittsburg support the University of Pittsburg?
:eusa_eh:
Certainly you're not so opaque.

While the campus has its own police force, and pays for its own electricity and plows its own streets, the CITY pays for all these services in the area surrounding the campus.

Unless all the students live on campus, they utilize city services to get to and from the campus: Busses, streets, street lights, maintainance, police, etc.

Of so the city should stop doing their jobs around the campus cause the campus won't knuckle to threats and blackmail? Why exactly should the people paying those taxes in those neighborhoods continue to pay taxes if the city stops services?
 
We already pay income tax on tuition money anyway don't we?

Not that I am defending this city tuition tax. The college should move it's administrative offices outside the city.
 
Electricity is a commodity; the schools pay for it.
Have you ever heard of "Campus Police"?
If it is a public street the maintenance is already covered by property tax and university property is generally high end (unless they get a property tax exemption)- unless it is completely on university land, then the university pays for construction and maintenance.

So, you're saying that NO city services in Pittsburg support the University of Pittsburg?
:eusa_eh:
Certainly you're not so opaque.

While the campus has its own police force, and pays for its own electricity and plows its own streets, the CITY pays for all these services in the area surrounding the campus.

Unless all the students live on campus, they utilize city services to get to and from the campus: Busses, streets, street lights, maintainance, police, etc.

Of so the city should stop doing their jobs around the campus cause the campus won't knuckle to threats and blackmail? Why exactly should the people paying those taxes in those neighborhoods continue to pay taxes if the city stops services?

Well, either stop or decrease services surrounding the University, or stop or decrease services in the entire City. The former sounds more fair.

Threats and Blackmail?

A waitress brought me breakfast this morning. Then she brought the bill. I didn't feel she was threatening me, or blackmailing me to pay it.

No doubt there will be a little collateral damage. The homeowners surrounding the campus will no doubt see a decline in their property values, and as a result, will pay less tax. Or, more probably, they will hire students to perform services previously provided by the city.
 
Yup, and hopefully people are tired of these A'Holes screwing the poor working person into the ground and people start really exercising their power to control their own lives and start tossing these 'Idjuts' out of office.

Most college Students are not local residents so have absolutely no say in local politics at all. I would suggest that any college being taxed have their students register to vote in that city and vote those fools out of office.

Don't think that would work. If they register to vote locally they would technically be residents and have lower tuition anyway. Besides, these students today think they're entitled to a college education and certainly won't bite the hand that feeds them "freebies." The money would be better spent on lower school education so that the kids are educated enough to get into college in the first place.

Lower education is a right - a must - but higher education should be a privilege that students aspire to achieve.

Higher ed is already "a privilege that students aspire to achieve." In order to qualify for the loans there is a minimum gpa requirement. Meanwhile, as the cost (and debt) skyrockets, the returns (expectation of wage) are not as great as when tuition was much lower. An Associates is about the same as a HS Diploma used to be, a BA an AS, and a Ma a BA. Hell, the way things are going, you'd need a PhD after your name to expect the same standard of living a HS graduate could working his or her way up in a factory most of their working lives.

Once upon a time in America, an honest days work paid the mortgage, bought the groceries, kept the lights on, promised a retirement that didn't include greeting Walmart shoppers, and put your kids through college. Once upon a time that college education promised an even better life for your kids and the grand kids.

Those days are over, and have been since 1 year before this old lady graduated High school (the decline actually started in about 1975). What kills me is that the people who see the standard of living in their communities deteriorate and the hope of their children become a thing of the distant past don't understand a few basic facts. It wasn't the poor, or the sick, or the old, or the college student, and it certainly wasn't the American worker that tanked the American economy. It was the captains of industry and commerce did THAT, and the politicians that sold the American dream down the river for them a long, long time ago.
 
Last edited:
Unless all the students live on campus, they utilize city services to get to and from the campus: Busses, streets, street lights, maintainance, police, etc.
And unless Pittsburgh has neither property taxes nor sales taxes those students pay taxes already. Rental properties pass the taxes along to the renters, in the form of higher rent, in case you did not know.

Every student not living at home with their parents could easily make this a losing proposition by going to a different college. They should shop around for the best return on their money and leave Pittsburgh to the people who live there.
 
Unless all the students live on campus, they utilize city services to get to and from the campus: Busses, streets, street lights, maintainance, police, etc.
And unless Pittsburgh has neither property taxes nor sales taxes those students pay taxes already. Rental properties pass the taxes along to the renters, in the form of higher rent, in case you did not know.

Every student not living at home with their parents could easily make this a losing proposition by going to a different college. They should shop around for the best return on their money and leave Pittsburgh to the people who live there.

My premise isn't that student's should shop around for affordable education. This is a given regardless of any increase in tuition, or tax on tuition.

The knee-jerk reaction of local government is to ask the University for an additional $5 million, or raise the money through a tuition tax, and then claim that this is the ONLY choice.

My premise is that this is NOT the ONLY Choice.

Why isn't the choice of REDUCING COSTS by cutting city services an option? I have no staff, sitting around at my disposal to evaluate the city services that may be cut, but, as an example I give bus service routes to locations near the university. Maybe a better idea would be to close all The City of Pittsburg Administrative offices every Friday, and send everyone home without pay until the $5 million budget deficite is recovered?

It seems to me the Option of NOT spending money may not have been considered.
 
It seems to me the Option of NOT spending money may not have been considered.

Oh that option
No of course government administrators never think to reduce spending. After all, if they came up with a surplus they might have to reduce taxes and no one wants that.
Well no one who runs the government.
 
It seems to me the Option of NOT spending money may not have been considered.

Oh that option
No of course government administrators never think to reduce spending. After all, if they came up with a surplus they might have to reduce taxes and no one wants that.
Well no one who runs the government.

I wish I could take credit for such a Novel Concept, but the City of Denver has a number a "Budget Furlough Days."
 

Forum List

Back
Top