Worried about property taxes? Attend one of the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute’s county state budget presentations. Google its schedule. NHFPI is a nonpartisan research nonprofit; the session I attended was clear, concise and packed with charts and answers.
Your tax critique relies on anecdotes over data. The top 1% already pay over 40% of federal income taxes in our progressive system. Legal deductions, depreciation, and loss carryforwards (common in real estate and business) exist because Congress designed them to encourage investment, not as secret "loopholes" for one side only. Many high earners pay substantial effective rates over time. Singling out one figure's legal tax minimization while ignoring broader compliance and lobbying by all interests is selective. Patriotism isn't defined by tax bills or past draft rules.
On Education Freedom Accounts, initial cost projections were exceeded due to higher enrollment, but this reflects per-pupil funds following children rather than "destroying" the system. Overall, public education spending has soared for decades, with disappointing results in many districts. Choice creates competition, not a fixed pot being raided. Alternative schools' better outcomes aren't solely from excluding special-needs or unmotivated students. Many serve disabled children more flexibly with improved family satisfaction. Public systems often fail these students despite mandates—via poor IEPs, waitlists, and persistent achievement gaps. Choice money follows the child, pressuring all schools to improve. Forcing every provider into public-style bureaucracy isn't required for equity; empowering parents expands options and accountability.
Evidence (date & facts) from choice programs shows net gains in satisfaction without collapsing services for vulnerable students. Focus on outcomes, Mike, not defending the bloated bureaucracy.
As for my anonymity, my reasons are my own, and I don’t need to explain them to you or anyone else. If that bothers you, then ignore me and move on. However, that doesn’t mean my comments are not grounded in facts, data, truth, and life experience. Besides, how do you know I haven’t had editorials published to the editor?
I gave you a simple example that happened to be your dear leader, just to show you what's really happening, since you are so naive and believe the rich are paying their fair share.
In the broader picture, you are either ignorant of or choose to ignore that much of their wealth and income comes from investments that are taxed at much lower rates or not taxed at all if they simply hold onto the investment. This makes their effective tax rates much lower than the average taxpayer in real terms.
The Education Freedom Accounts was a scam to begin with. The Free Staters knew more people would take the cash, whether they did anything productive with it or not, since there's no oversight we'll never know, and they sandbagged the state taxpayers knowing they'd spend far more than they outlined. That was their plan all along, as they set out to destroy public education.
I'd like to hear how you think we can educate all the students left out of the Free Staters approach to education with the meager funding left. By the way, I know costs have soared, but one of the things people that point that out never speak to is the skyrocketing costs public schools face due to legally having to provide incredibly expensive care for students who in many cases would have been left behind in the past, not to mention the massive increases in health coverage costs. I was trained to be a high school history/social studies teacher, so I've seen schools from a teacher's perspective (not why I decided not to pursue that career, but the entitlement of parents I've witnessed since then has made me very glad I didn't). Like any large union or bureaucracy, teacher's unions and school systems aren't very efficient. I'm all for strengthening performance management in both arenas, just like we should in our massive government bureaucracy that Trump has removed almost all oversight from, yet you don't talk about that. Oh, right, you're not allowed to criticize your dear leader. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.
It's not the fact that you hide your identity that means your comments are not grounded in facts, data, truth, and life experience, it's that your comments are not grounded in facts, data, and truth, and that you ignore actual facts, data, and truth, and refuse to answer even the simplest questions that would contradict obvious lies your dear leader has spouted that destroy any hope of credibility for you.
I'll give you another shot with an easy one I've asked you repeatedly; who won the 2020 presidential election?
If open borders and sanctuary policies are compassionate and economically beneficial, why did Democratic administrations (Obama, Biden) deport hundreds of thousands and maintain Title 42 expulsions? Do you support unlimited low-skilled migration even if studies show it depresses wages for the bottom quartile of American workers, including many Black and Hispanic actual citizens?
You got one thing right: New Hampshire’s property taxes are painfully high and hit middle-class families and seniors hard. Everything else is partisan spin.
Our heavy reliance on property taxes isn’t some Republican conspiracy. It’s the direct result of New Hampshire’s decades-long core governing philosophy: no income tax, no sales tax, and local control. This model has kept the state competitive and attractive for decades.
Recent GOP-led business tax cuts strengthened that edge, not broke it.
The real driver of rising bills is unchecked government spending — especially on public schools. New Hampshire spends over $21,000–$23,000 per pupil on education, among the highest in the nation, even as enrollment plummets and test scores continually trend downward. Bloated administration, unfunded mandates, pensions, and inefficiency in hundreds of tiny districts are what’s crushing taxpayers — not “gifts” to the wealthy.
Democrats and their allies love scapegoating “the rich” and pushing redistribution. Their solution? Force high earners to pay 5–7% effective rates so the government can keep expanding and maintain control. This ignores that successful residents and businesses already pay substantial property taxes and create the economic growth that broadens our tax base. Chasing them out with higher taxes, as seen in high-tax blue states, only leaves everyone else with bigger bills.
Education Freedom Accounts don’t “siphon” funds — they let parents direct a fraction of the per-pupil money to better options for their kids.
Competition and choice threaten the public school monopoly, which is why the left fights them so fiercely. Enough with the class warfare and “it takes a village” slogans. Property tax relief comes from spending restraint, efficiency reforms, and preserving New Hampshire’s low-tax advantage — not surrendering to big-government tax-and-spend policies that have failed elsewhere. Voters should reject this tired redistribution playbook.
Typical MEPD, ignore the obvious contradiction of having wealthy people paying less taxes than less affluent people, a Republican staple, and at the same time trying to excuse the massive overspending on the Education Freedom Accounts, all while blaming public schools. Pathetic.
If you really want to reply to Linda MEPD, you should write an actual letter to the editor, as it's clear she doesn't subscribe and see your screeds here. I've noticed you've never written so the public can see your insane screeds; why is that? What are you afraid of?
Try to stick with issues rather than your normal childish responses:
The US federal tax system is progressive: Top 1% earn ~22% of income but pay ~40% of federal income taxes; the top 10% pay ~72%. Bottom 50% pay ~3%. Overall, effective rates rise with income. Claims of "wealthy pay less" typically cherry-pick capital gains or specific deductions, not the aggregate reality.
No inherent contradiction: Supporting progressive taxation (revenue side) while favoring school choice (service delivery/competition side) is consistent. One collects funds efficiently; the other addresses monopoly inefficiencies where spending and outcomes diverge.
Public K-12 spending is already high: National per-pupil ~$16k–$20k+ (total >$900B), risen sharply in real terms over decades. NAEP scores are stagnant/declining in key areas despite this; many districts show ~1/3 students below basic proficiency.
Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs): Redirect a portion of existing per-pupil funds to families for private, homeschool, or tutoring options — not new "massive overspending." Some analyses show net fiscal savings when students leave, and marginal costs are lower. Issues like weak oversight or non-poor usage exist but are implementation problems, not core flaws.
School choice effects: Introduces competition, often improves public school performance nearby. Participant outcomes frequently show higher satisfaction and gains for subgroups. Poor public school results predate choice programs and link more to family factors, governance, and incentives than raw dollars.
As usual MEPD, you avoid the obvious, not to mention dodging the question of why you appear afraid to show your ignorance to the general public.
Your breakdown of tax rates is incredibly naive and ignores the reality that the wealthy find loopholes in the tax laws to avoid paying most or all of their taxes. Take your dear leader, for instance, who has paid considerably less than you or I. Their lobbyists make sure the loopholes stay open so they can continue to exploit them and avoid contributing their fair share. Your dear leader, in addition to dodging the draft and refusing to pay his fair share of taxes, then has the gall to turn around and claim he's a patriot, and cult members like yourself swallow his obvious lies whole.
The facts are obvious and simple with Education Freedom Accounts; look at what the Free Staters trying to destroy our education system said it would cost, then look at what it really cost. That giant chasm puts the lie to their claims that it wouldn't siphon off money, the money has to come from somewhere.
When you talk about school choice, and alternative schools having higher test scores, etc., remember that those schools are not required to provide special education or to educate students who are uninterested in academics.
How do you think these students will be educated if we continue to strip our educational funds for what are essentially private schools that aren't required to take them?
Again I ask, what are you afraid of that keeps you from writing letters to the editor instead of posting comments in this very limited format seen by a very small subset of Sun readers?
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.
(7) comments
Again Mikey,
Your tax critique relies on anecdotes over data. The top 1% already pay over 40% of federal income taxes in our progressive system. Legal deductions, depreciation, and loss carryforwards (common in real estate and business) exist because Congress designed them to encourage investment, not as secret "loopholes" for one side only. Many high earners pay substantial effective rates over time. Singling out one figure's legal tax minimization while ignoring broader compliance and lobbying by all interests is selective. Patriotism isn't defined by tax bills or past draft rules.
On Education Freedom Accounts, initial cost projections were exceeded due to higher enrollment, but this reflects per-pupil funds following children rather than "destroying" the system. Overall, public education spending has soared for decades, with disappointing results in many districts. Choice creates competition, not a fixed pot being raided. Alternative schools' better outcomes aren't solely from excluding special-needs or unmotivated students. Many serve disabled children more flexibly with improved family satisfaction. Public systems often fail these students despite mandates—via poor IEPs, waitlists, and persistent achievement gaps. Choice money follows the child, pressuring all schools to improve. Forcing every provider into public-style bureaucracy isn't required for equity; empowering parents expands options and accountability.
Evidence (date & facts) from choice programs shows net gains in satisfaction without collapsing services for vulnerable students. Focus on outcomes, Mike, not defending the bloated bureaucracy.
As for my anonymity, my reasons are my own, and I don’t need to explain them to you or anyone else. If that bothers you, then ignore me and move on. However, that doesn’t mean my comments are not grounded in facts, data, truth, and life experience. Besides, how do you know I haven’t had editorials published to the editor?
Chew on that for a while.
I gave you a simple example that happened to be your dear leader, just to show you what's really happening, since you are so naive and believe the rich are paying their fair share.
In the broader picture, you are either ignorant of or choose to ignore that much of their wealth and income comes from investments that are taxed at much lower rates or not taxed at all if they simply hold onto the investment. This makes their effective tax rates much lower than the average taxpayer in real terms.
The Education Freedom Accounts was a scam to begin with. The Free Staters knew more people would take the cash, whether they did anything productive with it or not, since there's no oversight we'll never know, and they sandbagged the state taxpayers knowing they'd spend far more than they outlined. That was their plan all along, as they set out to destroy public education.
I'd like to hear how you think we can educate all the students left out of the Free Staters approach to education with the meager funding left. By the way, I know costs have soared, but one of the things people that point that out never speak to is the skyrocketing costs public schools face due to legally having to provide incredibly expensive care for students who in many cases would have been left behind in the past, not to mention the massive increases in health coverage costs. I was trained to be a high school history/social studies teacher, so I've seen schools from a teacher's perspective (not why I decided not to pursue that career, but the entitlement of parents I've witnessed since then has made me very glad I didn't). Like any large union or bureaucracy, teacher's unions and school systems aren't very efficient. I'm all for strengthening performance management in both arenas, just like we should in our massive government bureaucracy that Trump has removed almost all oversight from, yet you don't talk about that. Oh, right, you're not allowed to criticize your dear leader. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.
It's not the fact that you hide your identity that means your comments are not grounded in facts, data, truth, and life experience, it's that your comments are not grounded in facts, data, and truth, and that you ignore actual facts, data, and truth, and refuse to answer even the simplest questions that would contradict obvious lies your dear leader has spouted that destroy any hope of credibility for you.
I'll give you another shot with an easy one I've asked you repeatedly; who won the 2020 presidential election?
"... who won the 2020 presidential election?"
Really? Here you go- 'Ole Joe, the Big Guy.
Now here's my (compound) question:
If open borders and sanctuary policies are compassionate and economically beneficial, why did Democratic administrations (Obama, Biden) deport hundreds of thousands and maintain Title 42 expulsions? Do you support unlimited low-skilled migration even if studies show it depresses wages for the bottom quartile of American workers, including many Black and Hispanic actual citizens?
Linda,
You got one thing right: New Hampshire’s property taxes are painfully high and hit middle-class families and seniors hard. Everything else is partisan spin.
Our heavy reliance on property taxes isn’t some Republican conspiracy. It’s the direct result of New Hampshire’s decades-long core governing philosophy: no income tax, no sales tax, and local control. This model has kept the state competitive and attractive for decades.
Recent GOP-led business tax cuts strengthened that edge, not broke it.
The real driver of rising bills is unchecked government spending — especially on public schools. New Hampshire spends over $21,000–$23,000 per pupil on education, among the highest in the nation, even as enrollment plummets and test scores continually trend downward. Bloated administration, unfunded mandates, pensions, and inefficiency in hundreds of tiny districts are what’s crushing taxpayers — not “gifts” to the wealthy.
Democrats and their allies love scapegoating “the rich” and pushing redistribution. Their solution? Force high earners to pay 5–7% effective rates so the government can keep expanding and maintain control. This ignores that successful residents and businesses already pay substantial property taxes and create the economic growth that broadens our tax base. Chasing them out with higher taxes, as seen in high-tax blue states, only leaves everyone else with bigger bills.
Education Freedom Accounts don’t “siphon” funds — they let parents direct a fraction of the per-pupil money to better options for their kids.
Competition and choice threaten the public school monopoly, which is why the left fights them so fiercely. Enough with the class warfare and “it takes a village” slogans. Property tax relief comes from spending restraint, efficiency reforms, and preserving New Hampshire’s low-tax advantage — not surrendering to big-government tax-and-spend policies that have failed elsewhere. Voters should reject this tired redistribution playbook.
Typical MEPD, ignore the obvious contradiction of having wealthy people paying less taxes than less affluent people, a Republican staple, and at the same time trying to excuse the massive overspending on the Education Freedom Accounts, all while blaming public schools. Pathetic.
If you really want to reply to Linda MEPD, you should write an actual letter to the editor, as it's clear she doesn't subscribe and see your screeds here. I've noticed you've never written so the public can see your insane screeds; why is that? What are you afraid of?
Try to stick with issues rather than your normal childish responses:
The US federal tax system is progressive: Top 1% earn ~22% of income but pay ~40% of federal income taxes; the top 10% pay ~72%. Bottom 50% pay ~3%. Overall, effective rates rise with income. Claims of "wealthy pay less" typically cherry-pick capital gains or specific deductions, not the aggregate reality.
No inherent contradiction: Supporting progressive taxation (revenue side) while favoring school choice (service delivery/competition side) is consistent. One collects funds efficiently; the other addresses monopoly inefficiencies where spending and outcomes diverge.
Public K-12 spending is already high: National per-pupil ~$16k–$20k+ (total >$900B), risen sharply in real terms over decades. NAEP scores are stagnant/declining in key areas despite this; many districts show ~1/3 students below basic proficiency.
Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs): Redirect a portion of existing per-pupil funds to families for private, homeschool, or tutoring options — not new "massive overspending." Some analyses show net fiscal savings when students leave, and marginal costs are lower. Issues like weak oversight or non-poor usage exist but are implementation problems, not core flaws.
School choice effects: Introduces competition, often improves public school performance nearby. Participant outcomes frequently show higher satisfaction and gains for subgroups. Poor public school results predate choice programs and link more to family factors, governance, and incentives than raw dollars.
As usual MEPD, you avoid the obvious, not to mention dodging the question of why you appear afraid to show your ignorance to the general public.
Your breakdown of tax rates is incredibly naive and ignores the reality that the wealthy find loopholes in the tax laws to avoid paying most or all of their taxes. Take your dear leader, for instance, who has paid considerably less than you or I. Their lobbyists make sure the loopholes stay open so they can continue to exploit them and avoid contributing their fair share. Your dear leader, in addition to dodging the draft and refusing to pay his fair share of taxes, then has the gall to turn around and claim he's a patriot, and cult members like yourself swallow his obvious lies whole.
The facts are obvious and simple with Education Freedom Accounts; look at what the Free Staters trying to destroy our education system said it would cost, then look at what it really cost. That giant chasm puts the lie to their claims that it wouldn't siphon off money, the money has to come from somewhere.
When you talk about school choice, and alternative schools having higher test scores, etc., remember that those schools are not required to provide special education or to educate students who are uninterested in academics.
How do you think these students will be educated if we continue to strip our educational funds for what are essentially private schools that aren't required to take them?
Again I ask, what are you afraid of that keeps you from writing letters to the editor instead of posting comments in this very limited format seen by a very small subset of Sun readers?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.