Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.

Q: Totally agree.  A sales tax is much fairer tax and hits everyone including tourists.  The income tax as proposed is nuts as it does not raise enough income and the federal income tax is badly broken as only about half the wage earners pay anything.  Any new taxes need to be broadly based or higher income retirees will leave by the thousands and upper middle class wage earners will demand much higher salaries or leave,

A: Yes
****
Q: Boozer:  I'm guessing the Courts will eventually decide if this ban is a "traffic safety matter" or a blatant attempt to circumvent the Constitutional Protections provided by the First Amendment.  

I've yet to read of a single incident of a traffic accident being caused by someone passing spare change to a panhandler.  I've yet to read of a single incident of a panhandler being struck by a vehicle.

If you follow the "traffic safety" logic, Springfield should make it completely illegal for pedestrians to cross main street.  Why don't you tally the number killed crossing that street and compare it to the number of panhandlers struck by vehicles.

The proposed ban is, indeed, that "end run" I suggest.  I don't expect the City or any supporters of the ban to acknowledge this (although a few posters on this site have done so).   I don't expect the Police Chief to acknowledge it.  I don't expect the City Council to acknowledge it.  I don't expect Springfield's attorneys to acknowledge it

A: No
****
Q: From their own website:  The 1976 state law establishing the Permanent Fund (AS 37.13), states that the Fund was created:
to provide a means of conserving a portion of the state's revenue from mineral resources to benefit all generations of Alaskans
to maintain safety of principal while maximizing total return
to be a savings device managed to allow maximum use of disposable income for purposes designated by law.

I think that's pretty clear insofar as it's purpose.    To conserve for the benefit of all generations of Alaskans.    Using the principal to produce earning to fund government (like Norway did for example) is certainly one way the fund, using a POMV payment model, would provide benefit to all generations of Alaskan's, not just the individuals who happen to live in Alaska for a year, then get a dividend that second year.

A:
No
****