|
Post by hornharvester on Jan 17, 2007 20:16:37 GMT -5
Should the State start charging seniors $3.75 for an annual fishing license to gain Federal money or should the state continue letting the seniors fish for free? What do you think? h.h.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 17, 2007 20:22:30 GMT -5
Thank you for making this it's own thread.
Yes.
|
|
|
Post by paul3 on Jan 17, 2007 22:30:01 GMT -5
FREE
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jan 18, 2007 4:38:18 GMT -5
I'mnot a senior YET.....but if I were a senior I wouldnt have a problem paying $3.75 a year to fish in Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Jan 18, 2007 5:06:40 GMT -5
Give them a break, they've paid plenty in taxes over the years. Free.
I'm sick of the fed's giving out money with strings attached; I'd make that illegal. I'd love to see a whole new group of congressmen. Get rid of everyone on both sides of the isle; could you imagine the shock. It would be priceless.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 18, 2007 6:07:26 GMT -5
I feel that seniors have more than earned the right to fish for free, and the gain of only $700K just isn't enough to justify itself. There are far more non-senior anglers who could bear a small increase in their license fee, which would actually generate more revenue in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jan 18, 2007 6:56:25 GMT -5
Undecided. I would have to see the numbers & it's effect both ways on the IDNR budget.
I agree with dbd. Clean house & get rid of the career political parasites.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 18, 2007 7:02:15 GMT -5
Undecided.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Jan 18, 2007 9:05:40 GMT -5
First I did not vote. Second I am 61 now 2 in April. Why did I not vote? Most seniors are on fixed limited incomes, getting social security and a small retirement income, many do not even have any K type interest income to help with monthly expenses. While 401's were urged where I worked they were not really pushed as to retirement income. Savings bonds were still the main supplement being pushed. Now can they afford $3.75 probably most could, just give up a couple packs of cigarettes and some beer for a month. But why not give that to the young strong, workers that are making the $20/hr that most of the seniors never seen and never dreamed of. By the time they had raised their children, put them thru school, college, paid for car insurance, weddings, and sundry incidentals. They started making better wages, Unfortunately it was in the last 10-15 years of their working lives and if they did try to invest in 401's they ran into to max allowed. What is that up to now 25% or something like that. I remember when the max allowed was 5%. Of course now your 401's are your retirement as to when company's paid into them for you. But hey there is no such thing as company loyalty now, not from the company to the employees or from the employees to the company. What was it the last vice president where I worked said? Something to the effect of " If You Are Not Changing Jobs at least every 5 years You Are Not Interested In Advancement and WE DO NOT WANT YOU." Advancement within the company did not count as wanting to advance and improve. Oh yeah our company under his tutelage went from 3-5,000 employees down to maybe 200. His job was to destroy it and he did. But that is off of the subject so let those that are working maybe pay an extra $5 a year for their license and leave the older folks alone. But hey that is not the way of today is it. What you did for me for years does not mean anything it is about what are you going to do for me today or tomorrow so I do not have to seems to be one of the theory's of today.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jan 18, 2007 10:55:51 GMT -5
I personally like to see them continue being free. If we are losing federal money because of not being able to count seniors then lets make the changes at the top of the ladder, not the bottom.
My father is 84 years old and a WWII veteran. He told me right after WWII Indiana gave all Hoosier veterans free hunting and fishing license as part of their veterans package. According to my dad that lasted two or three years and the state took the free license away. I think my father has earned the right for something more than a free cup of McDonald's coffee. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by hunter7x on Jan 18, 2007 11:09:48 GMT -5
free
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Jan 18, 2007 11:24:17 GMT -5
As I'm now going on 59,a Viet-Nam vet with a purple heart I don't think there is any or ever where any justifcation for fishing license to cost anoyne anything. Here in S.E.Indiana show me where they have spent any of that money toward anything that fishing is envolved in,like Laughery Creek,South or North Hogan creeks,I doubt if you can!! I say it's time to elect a new bunch of Indiana Congressman to go to Indy and make some decisions that don't put money into their pockets but OURS!!!
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 18, 2007 11:31:38 GMT -5
Mainly boat ramps, fish stocking, waterway aquisitions, enforcement, research etc., etc., etc.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Jan 18, 2007 11:41:56 GMT -5
Interesting that so many think seniors deserve something free. I'm retired and I guess I'm on the other side and think all users need to contribute or we stand to lose what little we have much less expect improvements. Meanwhile that money will continue to go to other states and we will contiue to wonder why their fishing is so much better than ours. So be it.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 18, 2007 11:51:18 GMT -5
I guess it's just a matter of wanting to show our appreciation for all they have done for us. I do see your point tho Jack.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jan 18, 2007 12:05:42 GMT -5
Interesting that so many think seniors deserve something free. I'm retired and I guess I'm on the other side and think all users need to contribute or we stand to lose what little we have much less expect improvements. Meanwhile that money will continue to go to other states and we will continue to wonder why their fishing is so much better than ours. So be it. We let the youth fish for free until they are 16 and I'M ALL FOR YOUTH FISHING FREE but how much federal money we loosing from the youth fishing free? Lets change the system not take away a small privilege from seniors. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 18, 2007 12:13:40 GMT -5
My opinion.
I'm a "senior citizen" and I don't think anyone owes me anything.
Getting to be my age only means one thing - I'm not dead.
I did not do anything during my life that would garner special favors or recognition.
If "free licenses" are to be given out to deserving people then veterans that has seen combat duty should get the "free licenses" IMHO - they earned them
As someone said the politicians did that back after WWII and then took them back two years later.
I saw that as a ploy to get the homecoming soldiers votes in the next election.
I don't fish, but I have a grandson that does and if he called me up and wanted to take me fishing I would have no problem plunking down $3.75 to get a license to go fishing. Even if it was for just a few hours..
The fed's money (really it is ours) is there for the taking,. if we dont take it some other state will.
.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 18, 2007 12:15:04 GMT -5
I agree that all veterans should get a free pass.
|
|
|
Post by birddog on Jan 18, 2007 12:17:09 GMT -5
Jack you have a point but on the other hand how much kindness is showed to the veterans????As a life long resident of Dearborn County I don't ever remember anything being done to make fishing better in the creeks around this part of the state by anyone connected with the state,if I'm wrong please show me where it has been done and by whom...... sure the conservation officiers ride around looking for guys fishing with out a license but other than that......Hmmmm!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 18, 2007 12:18:42 GMT -5
I agree that all veterans should get a free pass. I didn't say that. Being in the service is great, but that is most times that is just another job. To me - When a service person is in a combat zone then they should get a few more freebies.
|
|