Would you be willing to pay a "community tax" for a facility that offered premium services?

Question

Just imagine: no more blockbuster visits, premium parks, kids getting together instead of online gaming, basically all the things that a community center is SUPPOSED to do, only funded by the community and subsidized by the federal gov't. What do you think?

The idea would be to make it more accessible and include more services that would provide competition to businesses that a person already participates in. Think of it more as a "super" community center, as opposed to, the dank and unkempt gyms that are on the wrong side of town. They would be placed as an attachment to the local elementary schools, however, separately funded by the fed gov't and programs such as United Way.

It starts with child care and parenting classes and branches into services for the elderly to gain political power and volunteer participation. Then it branches into whatever the community needs by democratic decisions. This eliminates the infamous "blank check" bureaucracies that lead to centers being run down. It puts more power in the hands of the citizens, and limits the power of the federal politicians that only think in short term campaign strategies. In short, the community decides, as opposed to the local gov't.

Perhaps I am not explaining this right. The funds used for the current parks/centers would be overhauled and eliminated to provide a way for the "wealthy" and "non-wealthy" neighborhoods to have these centers. It is more of an idea for "wealthier communities" as well as "poor communities" to take a tax cut from federal funds and place them into a position to decide what happens to thier local programs. This way the rich get what they want by choosing their own local leaders, and the poor get what they want by choosing thiers. It takes the reigns from uncle sam and gives it to Mr and Mrs John Q. Taxpayer.

Answer 1

Not sure just what all you are saying this community center would be providing. You say "all the things a community center is supposed to do" - and who decides that?

It would depend on how much the tax was and what was provided.

Answer 2

No I wouldn't. I'm already paying high taxes to fund a brand new public park/library facilities that I am denied access to because I don't live in the wealthy subdivision across the street.
Directly across the street from the subdivision they built a new library, an indoor swimming pool, a new playground, walking trail, bike trail, mini golf, and fishing facilities. When these facilities opened up there were no restrictions on who could use them because it was a new public park/library facility maintained by the city. The wealthy people kept on complaining so a new 10 foot tall fence was constructed around the entire thing and a gate installed at the parking lot entrance/exit so that only those with a special photo ID have access. ..and to get the photo ID you must be a resident of the wealthy subdivision. What really chaps my hide...the people who live in that subdivision do not pay taxes to maintain the facilities because the subdivision is just outside the city limits.

Answer 3

That also places an 'unfair' burden on members of the community who don't have any need for services offered, however 'premium' they are. Taxes already go to support the community, and if people want premium services, they should pay for them out of their own pocket, not mine.

Answer 4

No, I don't see any reason for something like this to be paid for with taxes. If people want to get together and create such an entity, great. But others should not be forced to pay for it.

Answer 5

No thanks. There's plenty of that around here already, paid for by the customers who use it. I have no desire to pay extra taxes to support a recreational activity that I have no use for and will never use or get any benefit from, either directly or indirectly.