davidbond1966

Winchester, I wonder where you stand on the 2nd Amendment which such phrasings as "support the erosion of gun owner's rights and the restrictions on the sales of certain types of firearms?" Rest assured, I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and against any and all forms of gun ownership restriction. I grew up with pistols, rifles, and shotguns around my father, grandfather and uncles, and my father is a lifetime member of the NRA and in fact taught Hunter Safety courses for years. My website also states this, so this a major component of my platform.

Interesting fact - my father's uncle (which would be my second uncle), whose name was Herbert Boge, was CEO of Winchester Firearms in the late 1970's when it was owned by Olin Mathieson. My father was able to purchase several rifles through him, including his favorite, his .300 Magnum. I learned to reload both rifle cartridges and shotgun shells when I was in high school under my father's tutelage.

Does that answer your question of my feeling on gun owner's rights and the 2nd Amendment?
 
Job postings for Android developers soared 302% in the first quarter of this year compared to the first quarter of 2010; ads for iPhone-related positions rose 220% in the same time frame. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to make the transition -- just someone with the commitment to do what it takes to learn new technologies and to master the new conventions. There are countless undergraduate, continuing education and certificate courses on hot subjects such as HTML 5, object-oriented programming, Java and iOS and Android programming.

Global mobile app sales are forecast to hit $4 billion this year. If we had 1% of that, $40 million of App Development revenue would be generated out of Paulding County.

We have the infrastructure to do this here….
 
Doggoneit! I was hoping I would get to hear you and Howard Maxwell speak on the video of last night's event. I didn't get to attend, but I hope it went well for you!
 
davidbond1966 said:
Winchester, I wonder where you stand on the 2nd Amendment which such phrasings as "support the erosion of gun owner's rights and the restrictions on the sales of certain types of firearms?" Rest assured, I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and against any and all forms of gun ownership restriction. I grew up with pistols, rifles, and shotguns around my father, grandfather and uncles, and my father is a lifetime member of the NRA and in fact taught Hunter Safety courses for years. My website also states this, so this a major component of my platform.

Interesting fact - my father's uncle (which would be my second uncle), whose name was Herbert Boge, was CEO of Winchester Firearms in the late 1970's when it was owned by Olin Mathieson. My father was able to purchase several rifles through him, including his favorite, his .300 Magnum. I learned to reload both rifle cartridges and shotgun shells when I was in high school under my father's tutelage.

Does that answer your question of my feeling on gun owner's rights and the 2nd Amendment?

Is there any doubt where I stand? With a screen name like this it should be pretty clear. :laugh

What are your plans to stop the federal Govt from taking these rights away from the citizens of the State? And as I asked above (I think, I was barely awake at the time), do you have any plans to expand the rights of gun owners while finding a way to curb gun violence? Do you plan to make a stand on these issues, even if the Governor and the House Speaker fail/refuse to support them (as they have been known to do in recent years) or move to restrict them?


Since your district covers about 2/3's of the County, water has been a major issue for the last 20 years. From the reservoir to the multi-state water wars and cross basin restrictions that could prevent the current plans of water service expansion in Paulding. What are your plans to fix these issues?
 
Boy, Winchester, you are going to keep me on my toes, not just now, but if I get elected as well. I have a feeling you are going to be to me what Sam Donaldson was to President Reagan: "Hold on, Representative Bond! You told us you were going to do this but your response last week says otherwise!" It keeps me honest, and that is exactly what the Founding Fathers meant for the 1st Amendment do to.

Expand the rights of gun owners? How about repeal the high volume of gun legislation that already exists? I will research this further, but I would rather eliminate existing laws rather than create new ones with loopholes for exceptions. I base this on the 2nd Amendment had nothing in it that said "The right to keep and bear arms if the gun owner registers his or her arms." Just the right to keep and bear arms. I will do what I can, and as I said, let me research this further, to stop any rights being taken away or further eroded.

As to gun violence, you cannot legislate morality. Switzerland has laws that basically every citizen owns a pistol and a rifle, and in part that is due to the requirement of every individual having to serve in the military. This is due to the structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their Army issued equipment, including all personal weapons, at home. They have among the lowest murder rate in the world, with 0.7 murders per 100,000 individuals.

Let's look at England. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997. Their current murder rate is 1.2 per 100,000, nearly twice the rate of Switzerland.

Simply having gun laws will not reduce violence. These are cultural differences, and simply passing a law to make oneself feel good about "doing something about the violence" will not lower the crime rate.

Water is a major issue, and our infrastructure throughout the state has exceeded our ability to support it with such items as water, roadways, and schools in many areas. I don't have an answer for you yet, but better urban planning with the citizens involved in required.
 
How do you feel about school choice vouchers? (Asks the mom who is budgeting for the private school tuition that is due in a few months). :whistle
 
I would like your random thoughts on these random topics when time permits:


http://dallashwy.com/index.php/topic,18283.0.html

http://dallashwy.com/index.php/topic,18647.0.html

http://dallashwy.com/index.php/topic,18283.0.html


I like your ideas on attracting high salary technology jobs,
and I feel that HS education is the very key to that vision.

We need fresh perspectives and new experienced leadership.



:thumbsup
 
davidbond1966 said:
Boy, Winchester, you are going to keep me on my toes, not just now, but if I get elected as well. I have a feeling you are going to be to me what Sam Donaldson was to President Reagan: "Hold on, Representative Bond! You told us you were going to do this but your response last week says otherwise!" It keeps me honest, and that is exactly what the Founding Fathers meant for the 1st Amendment do to.

Expand the rights of gun owners? How about repeal the high volume of gun legislation that already exists? I will research this further, but I would rather eliminate existing laws rather than create new ones with loopholes for exceptions. I base this on the 2nd Amendment had nothing in it that said "The right to keep and bear arms if the gun owner registers his or her arms." Just the right to keep and bear arms. I will do what I can, and as I said, let me research this further, to stop any rights being taken away or further eroded.

As to gun violence, you cannot legislate morality. Switzerland has laws that basically every citizen owns a pistol and a rifle, and in part that is due to the requirement of every individual having to serve in the military. This is due to the structure of the Swiss militia system stipulates that the soldiers keep their Army issued equipment, including all personal weapons, at home. They have among the lowest murder rate in the world, with 0.7 murders per 100,000 individuals.

Let's look at England. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997. Their current murder rate is 1.2 per 100,000, nearly twice the rate of Switzerland.

Simply having gun laws will not reduce violence. These are cultural differences, and simply passing a law to make oneself feel good about "doing something about the violence" will not lower the crime rate.

Water is a major issue, and our infrastructure throughout the state has exceeded our ability to support it with such items as water, roadways, and schools in many areas. I don't have an answer for you yet, but better urban planning with the citizens involved in required.

You don't need to worry about me, I now live in Athens but I still consider Paulding my home. Just trying to get the ball rolling here. But you have a lot of homework to do. The people in power, the players behind the scenes, also known as the gatekeepers will expect you to know the local issues and history inside and out, front to back or you will never get past the primaries. Just a friendly word of advice. These people do not play nice, the good ole boy system is well entrenched in Paulding.

I'll give you a few topics that you will be asked about that many people have been following for many years. Most people will already know the answers before they ask you.
1) The water reservoir and the expected funding it will need.
2) The Paulding Airport....all the way back to the 70's when the City of Atlanta bought the land for a commercial airport.
3) The planned industrial/office parks and infrastructure with the airport and surrounding area.
4) Housing Development, both future plans and already approved plans that were put on hold
5) GDOT road plans for the next 30 years.
6) Water and sewer infrastructure and how the County pays for expansion

There's a lot more but these have been the hot topics for the last 10 years. The old guard gatekeepers are not as nice as I have been.

Good Luck!
 
Winchester, I genuinely appreciate the advice and will look into the history of each of these topics this week. Some I know well, others I know not so well. I appreciate the heads-up, truly.
 
Lisa C,

Not only am I all for school choice vouchers, I also don't believe that any individual who does not have a child in public school, whether he or she is childless or has adult children, should have any education-based taxes. I also believe that any parent who either home-schools or has children in private schools should be required to pay any education based taxes. As a minimum, I would begin with a tax reduction for any parent who home schools or has children in private school. As for school choice vouchers, since parents pay for their children's public education, they should have a choice on where their children can be educated.
 
davidbond1966 said:
Lisa C,

Not only am I all for school choice vouchers, I also don't believe that any individual who does not have a child in public school, whether he or she is childless or has adult children, should have any education-based taxes. I also believe that any parent who either home-schools or has children in private schools should be required to pay any education based taxes. As a minimum, I would begin with a tax reduction for any parent who home schools or has children in private school. As for school choice vouchers, since parents pay for their children's public education, they should have a choice on where their children can be educated.
If people without children, or have children not in the school system, don't pay education based taxes, where will schools get that missing money to run?

I'm not against you on this, but curious. It's always chapped me, a barren woman, that I pay for the education for children I do not have. I consoled myself with the thought of "paying for our future", but when one looks at many of the graduates being turned out that outlook becomes dismal.
 
DeeWee,

You are not the only one who feels this way. When asking about where to get the money to run these public schools, please read these facts first:

Average Verbal SAT Score in 1972: 530
Average Verbal SAT Score in 2010: 497
Growth in Verbal SAT Score 1972-1990: - 6.3%

Average Math SAT Score in 1972: 509
Average Math SAT Score in 2010: 514
Growth in Math SAT Score 1972-2013: +1.0%

Total Federal Education Budget, 1972: $29 Billion
Total Federal Education Budget, 2010: $100 Billion
Growth in Federal Education Spending, 1972-2010: 245%

I am not sure our children are getting their money's worth on the tax dollars we are paying for education. There is enough money; I'm not sure we need to government more involved, and in fact, we need to look line item by line item before even passing another education budget.
 
davidbond1966 said:
DeeWee,

You are not the only one who feels this way. When asking about where to get the money to run these public schools, please read these facts first:

Average Verbal SAT Score in 1972: 530
Average Verbal SAT Score in 2010: 497
Growth in Verbal SAT Score 1972-1990: - 6.3%

Average Math SAT Score in 1972: 509
Average Math SAT Score in 2010: 514
Growth in Math SAT Score 1972-2013: +1.0%

Total Federal Education Budget, 1972: $29 Billion
Total Federal Education Budget, 2010: $100 Billion
Growth in Federal Education Spending, 1972-2010: 245%

I am not sure our children are getting their money's worth on the tax dollars we are paying for education. There is enough money; I'm not sure we need to government more involved, and in fact, we need to look line item by line item before even passing another education budget.

Do your number take into account the difference in a dollar? What about the increase in population from 1972-2010? The growth our county has seen has been staggering in the last 15 years.


While it sounds great and agreeable to many to not tax those of us not using the public education system, I do not see it ever happening in my lifetime. :dunno
 
Honeybunny,

First, when I see your screen name, it makes me think of the first and last scene from “Pulp Fiction,” with Samuel Jackson’s character telling the female robber, “We’re cool…like Fonzie, right Honeybunny? Keep the gun pointed on me, Honeybunny. It’s cool.”

Second, I read through all the linked posts you attached, and let me say that I do not believe the government at any level has any business trying to create jobs in the private sector directly or has the ability to create jobs directly in the private sector. Government, ultimately, is an administrator, and does not have a profit margin, the requirement to take something, put some person-hours into it, and create something of value they can charge for, and then return the profit to invest into raises, benefits, expansions, or research and development into new products. Government does one thing – it spends money – your money. And the citizens, as many have forgotten, ultimately control the purse strings.

I’m in the healthcare industry, and one of the best examples is how many states have subcontracted out the Medicare and Medicaid to private insurance companies, such as UnitedHealth and Blue Cross. Not only do these organizations run the Medicare and Medicaid less expensively, they do it profitably. They don’t keep increasing the tax on it each year.
What should the government do if they want to help create jobs? I will list it here:

1) Reduce corporate tax rates. If the tax rate of 25% is only allowing 10 companies who make a million dollars a year each in profit, that would result in $2,500,000 in tax revenue. If the tax rate is reduced to 10% and that makes 50 companies want to be in the area who make $1 million dollars a year each, then net tax revenue would be $5,000,000 in tax revenue. That is not even alluding to the additional tax revenues from having more employees, as well as increased sales tax from all the individuals having to eat lunch who work nearby, shop, support services for these companies, etc.

2) Reduce government regulation. While we do need an FDA to protect the consumer, there are multiple state agencies requiring their “two cents” if you want to do business here. More regulations mean less profits, and higher regulated states and municipalities keep companies away.

3) Local governments can also make it business friendly by making sure the normal things they are suppose to do, such as keeping roads up to par and road expansions, better zoning for more homes for employees who want to live nearby, streets safer so a company can locate to a lower-crime area, as well as making sure public schools are safe and are retaining the best teachers because teachers want to live here, is much better than actually trying to create jobs.

4) Creating sports complexes or resorts will not increase revenue. Let me give you an example of one of the craziest boondoggles in recent years here in the Atlanta area: The new Falcons stadium, paid for in part by taxes. This stadium will be open for 8 days out of the year, for 8 games, possibly 10 or 11, if you include a SuperBowl, some college games, and maybe some other sporting event. That is a lot of physical space for only 11 days out of the year usage, and will take 30 years to pay off. Or, Atlanta could have allowed a 40 story office building there, with each floor having 200 employees, where they work 250 days out of the year, with taxes made on each company, on each individual working there, and all of those people using the local economy for food, gas, shopping, dry cleaning 250 days out of the year. A stadium or a sports complex may be “cool,” but an office building would do a lot for both the city of Atlanta and the citizens in the area.
 
ShoeDiva,

Good questions, and I will concede to one of your responses. If you look at the U.S. Government's Consumer Price Index (CPI) of inflationary growth from 1972 to 2010, $29 billion in1972 is the equivalent of $151 billion in 2010. So, I guess the government has done well! However, my basic point is, regardless, our kids are not doing better in school, and I don't think it is a tax or monetary problem. However, I will admit I will do more research....I just am not happy with that much being spent each year, and we have nothing to show for it.

Our population has gone from 203 million in 1970 to 309 million in 2010, an increase of 52%. Eliminate inflation, and we still have a problem with this.

Ultimately, we must address this issue, and will not be solved by another government program and increased taxes to our citizens. That has happened for 40 years and at a minimum, our SAT scores aren't showing any results.
 
davidbond1966 said:
ShoeDiva,

Good questions, and I will concede to one of your responses. If you look at the U.S. Government's Consumer Price Index (CPI) of inflationary growth from 1972 to 2010, $29 billion in1972 is the equivalent of $151 billion in 2010. So, I guess the government has done well! However, my basic point is, regardless, our kids are not doing better in school, and I don't think it is a tax or monetary problem. However, I will admit I will do more research....I just am not happy with that much being spent each year, and we have nothing to show for it.

Our population has gone from 203 million in 1970 to 309 million in 2010, an increase of 52%. Eliminate inflation, and we still have a problem with this.

Ultimately, we must address this issue, and will not be solved by another government program and increased taxes to our citizens. That has happened for 40 years and at a minimum, our SAT scores aren't showing any results.

:thumbsup

I do not think throwing more money at the education system is the answer, I just do not think there is a way to sustain it if we do away with taxes that those without children in the system pay. Public schools do need to be revamped. There is no question on that, but what is allotted by federal money per student is really not much. Local money via taxes is still needed. Or do you have an idea of another way to get the money? (Believe me when I pay taxes on top of college tuition I am WANTING another idea! :)) )

The SAT's might not reflect an increase, but it is just one test. I would not say we have nothing to show for the dollars when the advancements in technology have come at mind blowing speed in the last decade. There are a few out there with some brain power! :))
 
davidbond1966 said:
Honeybunny,

First, when I see your screen name, it makes me think of the first and last scene from “Pulp Fiction,” with Samuel Jackson’s character telling the female robber, “We’re cool…like Fonzie, right Honeybunny? Keep the gun pointed on me, Honeybunny. It’s cool.”

Second, I read through all the linked posts you attached, and let me say that I do not believe the government at any level has any business trying to create jobs in the private sector directly or has the ability to create jobs directly in the private sector. Government, ultimately, is an administrator, and does not have a profit margin, the requirement to take something, put some person-hours into it, and create something of value they can charge for, and then return the profit to invest into raises, benefits, expansions, or research and development into new products. Government does one thing – it spends money – your money. And the citizens, as many have forgotten, ultimately control the purse strings.

I’m in the healthcare industry, and one of the best examples is how many states have subcontracted out the Medicare and Medicaid to private insurance companies, such as UnitedHealth and Blue Cross. Not only do these organizations run the Medicare and Medicaid less expensively, they do it profitably. They don’t keep increasing the tax on it each year.
What should the government do if they want to help create jobs? I will list it here:

1) Reduce corporate tax rates. If the tax rate of 25% is only allowing 10 companies who make a million dollars a year each in profit, that would result in $2,500,000 in tax revenue. If the tax rate is reduced to 10% and that makes 50 companies want to be in the area who make $1 million dollars a year each, then net tax revenue would be $5,000,000 in tax revenue. That is not even alluding to the additional tax revenues from having more employees, as well as increased sales tax from all the individuals having to eat lunch who work nearby, shop, support services for these companies, etc.

2) Reduce government regulation. While we do need an FDA to protect the consumer, there are multiple state agencies requiring their “two cents” if you want to do business here. More regulations mean less profits, and higher regulated states and municipalities keep companies away.

3) Local governments can also make it business friendly by making sure the normal things they are suppose to do, such as keeping roads up to par and road expansions, better zoning for more homes for employees who want to live nearby, streets safer so a company can locate to a lower-crime area, as well as making sure public schools are safe and are retaining the best teachers because teachers want to live here, is much better than actually trying to create jobs.

4) Creating sports complexes or resorts will not increase revenue. Let me give you an example of one of the craziest boondoggles in recent years here in the Atlanta area: The new Falcons stadium, paid for in part by taxes. This stadium will be open for 8 days out of the year, for 8 games, possibly 10 or 11, if you include a SuperBowl, some college games, and maybe some other sporting event. That is a lot of physical space for only 11 days out of the year usage, and will take 30 years to pay off. Or, Atlanta could have allowed a 40 story office building there, with each floor having 200 employees, where they work 250 days out of the year, with taxes made on each company, on each individual working there, and all of those people using the local economy for food, gas, shopping, dry cleaning 250 days out of the year. A stadium or a sports complex may be “cool,” but an office building would do a lot for both the city of Atlanta and the citizens in the area.


Thank you for taking the time to present your position on these issues... I agree with most of your responses and I think we are on the same page.

You get 10 cool points in my book for referencing Pulp Fiction,
and another 10 for having lived in my hometown of Topeka...


8)
 
Thank you, honeybunny! I make it special point to try to watch Pulp Fiction every Christmas Day - one of my favorite movies, in part because it is about redemption...even people on the outskirts of life like the characters in the movie are seeking redemption.
 
High-tech startups are a key driver of job creation throughout the United States, according to research released today by technology policy coalition Engine and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. Though they start lean, new high-tech companies grow rapidly in the early years, adding thousands of jobs along the way. In fact, high-tech startup job creation is so robust that it more than makes up for the job destruction from early-stage businesses failures – a key distinction from the private sector as a whole where job losses from early-stage failures turns this group into net job destroyers.

Paulding Citizens, we are more than ready to start this High-Tech Boom!
 
Citizens of Paulding County like my idea of High Tech coming here and being a national leader in High Tech job growth, and some have asked, with good reason, "where will we get the money for this?"

Good question...a lot of it is already there. Looking to start or grow your high-tech entrepreneurial venture? Need financing to help fund research and development (R&D) efforts and realize your business potential? The U.S. federal government can help!

In fact, in 2012, nearly 5,000 small businesses received over $1.8 billion in federal government grants and contracts to help them carry out the R&D necessary to develop and bring high-tech products to market.
 
Back
Top