AVI would be more unfair redistribution

Re: "The longest day":

In the June 14, 2012, editorial, it seems the Daily News Editorial Board just flat out refuses to utilize any foresight relating to the city of Philadelphia's dire financial status. Do they not see what's transpiring in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal and locally in California, Illinois and New York states? There's too much spending, there's too much taxation and there's too many people not making any financial contribution.

The Daily News Editorial Board is very shortsighted, they offer the same old failing process, redistribute monies (that is AVI in a nutshell), allow resource consumers to browbeat the resource producers, which is the root cause of our cities' problems in the first place. And the board appears to think that paying taxes is a "right," instead of the right of hardworking citizens to keep their earnings and create our own little center of liberty, happiness and a nice standard of living for ourselves. I'm not saying forget about our fellow citizen; I'm saying it's time for more focus on what the individual can do for themselves. Sure I'll lend a hand, but not at too great of an expense to myself, which is exactly what the Editorial Board is asking of many taxpaying citizens.

What needs to be done in the Philadelphia public-school system is to oblige the parents of the students to get financially involved. Most citizens don't have a problem supplementing public education. Most do have a problem supporting a system that provides benefits that are the responsibility of the parents. Many of the public-school families in Philadelphia have cellphones, satellite dishes, premium cable, expensive sneakers and other luxuries, and then expect a free lunch and child care to be the burden of the taxpayer.

The Editorial Board is wrong to think increasing taxes on the Business Use and Occupancy Tax is the right path. This tax will automatically increase the unemployment rolls. It's a simple economic principle. Raise an owner's taxes and they will fire an employee to make up for their personal income reduction.

I agree with the board about the tax-delinquency issue, but quite frankly one can't get blood from stone. Let's be realistic, this is a political agenda-driven problem.

I once supported the AVI, but no longer. I think Councilman Mark Squilla had it correct: Put this tax increase on the back burner till the unknowns are known. The citizens cannot afford AVI in today's economy. And first and foremost cut more of the suet from both the city and school district. I also now support using a properties square footage to determine the property tax instead of AVI. The AVI will be frankly too unfair and destroy good neighborhoods.