Categorize the comment on the basis of toxicity. If the comment is toxic (harmful, malicious, derogatory, threat, insult, identity attck, etc.) output Yes, otherwise output No.

Ed, I see you're convinced. I'm not because I can do math.

1.5% income tax represents $36 a month from my paycheck. That's 6 fewer meals with meat for my family, a tank of gasoline, a month's membership at the rock climbing club my son loves. Or about 4 hours extra work for me to offset the lost income and the taxes associated with working those extra hours.

You see, for the average person, that money comes out of their paycheck FIRST and they don't get it back (if they get it back at all) until May. Our bills come in 52 weeks out of the year, so for 51 weeks out of the year, we'd have to do something to offset that lost income. I'm sure there are people in Alaska who get paid well enough that $40 a month is no big deal to them, but I'm also equally sure that many Alaskans are in the same boat I am. That money represents a line item in our budget that either must be funded or not, but will be felt.

And that's if the tax is only 1.5%. I've heard 6%, 15%, and 30% on offer.
No

Please, no need for ad hominem. Comment on the ideas, not the person.
No

Visionless--Spoken like someone who is white, English-speaking, educated, and financially stable. I'm guessing you have no frame of reference for being an outsider to the dominant culture. 

The problem is not providing, for example, culture-specific services, the problem is PPS not paying attention to what is happening to the money; spending money year after year after without making sure that students/families, the district, and the taxpayers are getting a clearly defined, carefully monitored outcome in exchange.  

If PPS simply writes checks without monitoring whether or not they are getting what they pay for, then yes, I agree it is an indefensible waste, and they should be held accountable for failing these kids.

No