RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey?

RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 8:59:46 AM)
quote: The fix can only be one of two options, more revenue through taxation or cuts. The NJ Governor is going down the path that more taxation is counter productive. Pointing to the results of more tax in both CA and NJ producing less revenue as a stipulated fact; he's going down the only other option - cuts. As aileen pointed out graft is a way of life in n.j. Wouldn't cutting graft be a third option to your two only options?

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 9:04:00 AM)
quote: Pointing to the results of more tax in both CA and NJ producing less revenue as a stipulated fact; he's going down the only other option - cuts. It my be a "stipulated" fact to some but there is also last years $100 + billion drop in housing value which had a coresponding effect on state revenue. To ignore that fact is disinguous.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 9:51:26 AM)
quote: Wouldn't cutting graft be a third option to your two only options? No - the graft and corruption points to the incompetent, and overpaid bureaucratic oversight. quote: It my be a "stipulated" fact to some but there is also last years $100 + billion drop in housing value which had a corresponding effect on state revenue. To ignore that fact is disinguous. Tax revenues are down - free free to cover each and every way that statement is fact. I appreciate you providing evidence supporting the only point of relevance; tax revenues are down, the current bloated bureaucratic oversight is incompetent and those responsible in management should be the first positions eliminated. Glad you are coming around to seeing it my way.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 10:50:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Your situation exemplifies why using property taxes per local district is a horrible way to fund equitable education. What california had before prop 13 allowed the state to raise both your assessment and your tax rate. This was causing people to loose their homes. My personal situation is based on the fact that I bought land that no one wanted for a very low price. It is bare land in the middle of the desert with no utilities or municipal services. I am not sure I can think of a more equitable way to fund public education but I would be glad to listen to any alternatives. Off top of my head...toss everyones property taxes into a pool and split it per student....Of course the Burbs would be howling.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 11:09:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: I'd offer that in the case of teachers they are probably the most underpaid of any Professional Group in the Country. And, yet, most people say they are overpaid. I honestly don't get that. Employed by any entity, public or private, the salary compensation is, or at least should be, contingent upon the entities ability to afford the compensation and benefits package. I won't argue the point whether teachers, firemen, police or any of the pawns put out on the front lines of the issue as poster representations are under or overpaid. The point is that their current compensation package is bankrupting the 'company'. The fix can only be one of two options, more revenue through taxation or cuts. The NJ Governor is going down the path that more taxation is counter productive. Pointing to the results of more tax in both CA and NJ producing less revenue as a stipulated fact; he's going down the only other option - cuts. Unfortunately, the value of the service provided by teachers is irrelevant to the discussion. Teachers feeling they are under-compensated can always change careers. For now at least, that freedom still exists in the US. Reality is, the only way to earn what you are worth is to work for yourself. Reality of working for yourself is not a realistic thing in a capitalistic economy. And certainly not something we'd want teachers to do since we would then be unable to afford the ones that would take the chance to become teachers in the first instance. My real point is that the federal and state gov'ts are simply tossing the football back and forth on who is going to pay for what. If he or anyone else bone slices then the consequent pain to the people of the state will be more than difficult. So, he will count on the Federal Gov't to come to the rescue. Its idiotic to keep doing this dance all the time. There is no other way to get to the revenue stream needed without raising taxes. It is no different than a business. You cannot cut your way to a profit. You can help yourself but at the end of the day you have to increase topline sales. In Gov't that is raising taxes in some fashion. Three Presidents in my lifetime have cut taxes, Reagan, BushI and II and only one has raised taxes...Clinton. Guess which one had a surplus in the treasury? The defense rests.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 11:26:20 AM)
quote: Off top of my head...toss everyones property taxes into a pool and split it per student....Of course the Burbs would be howling. Why stop there? There are efficiencies realized if the educational system is 'nationalized'. The preferred method of solution for many issues - why not employ it where it potentially could generate massive efficiency and the elimination of bureaucratic duplicity which would result in a massive overhead cost reduction which would free up more money to the goal of educating children. A national school curriculum, a national 'school board', a national standard and performance review of teachers and educational facilities. I'm not usually for increasing government involvement however in this instance the government involvement is already in place, albeit ineffective due to it being organized locally in a time before communicating between coasts instantaneously was possible. Now it is, and now there could be a national public school program. Why not try it as a solution to the problem of disproportional local revenue as well as the problem of unequal education based upon 'neighborhoods'. When a neighborhood in Watts gets the same money per student as a neighborhood in Beverly Hills, each teaching the exact same curriculum, with the teachers evaluated based upon the same standardized tests; there would be equal educational opportunity for all. But seriously - who, or better referenced what, special interest group currently profiting through complaining about the current actual or implied inequality would support such a pragmatic and reasonable solution? They'd all have to find real work. As as we can witness - no bureaucracy ever created to 'solve' a problem ever succeeds. For good reason-success would eliminate their need to exist and once established NO bureaucracy has ever died. Few, I can't think of any off the top of my head, ever do anything but grow. As a living entity a bureaucracy's main goal once in place is to create MORE of the problem they allegedly were set up to eliminate.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 11:33:47 AM)
I can agree with the top part of what you wrote. I have no problems with it at all. The last paragraph, explain who the special interest groups are that are profiting off of complaining?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 12:14:27 PM)
quote: The last paragraph, explain who the special interest groups are that are profiting off of complaining? Teachers unions first and foremost come to mind. The 'right' and 'left' wing groups fighting on-going expensive local battles for curriculum inclusions such as 'evolution' versus 'creationism'. All the local school board committees, many taking kick-backs from local vendor contracts. To name a few.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 12:29:01 PM)
Have a hard on for teachers don't you? I dont agree.......but it wouldn't know about the local groups fighting over curriculum or school board kick backs. But you can't seriously believe that effort will be drastically altered by budget changes up or down do you?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 1:09:14 PM)
quote: Have a hard on for teachers don't you? I dont agree....... No more, or less, than any public employee union. They are a bastardization of the original intent and application of the employee union system. Unlike their public sector counterparts they have no vested interest in directing their personal efforts to the success of the 'company'. They don't have to worry, at least up until now, that the money and/or company would go bankrupt, or go out of business. In this case, since education was the focus, its difficult not to respond without including teachers specifically. An individual who produces failure in business, even with a union, is likely to get fired, or suffers the consequences for the failure of the business where his/her actions contributed to the poor result. A teacher failing her students gets tenure; virtual immunity from scrutiny and consequence. I have a "hard on" on any individual, or entity, who's failure doesn't earn appropriate consequence. quote: But you can't seriously believe that effort will be drastically altered by budget changes up or down do you? I find it difficult to think how eliminating duplicity while using the resulting purchasing power of a nationally administered education statement wouldn't result in a dramatic and drastic reduction in cost. Why do you think it would not? As a given, my position is always against government take over of anything; however considered in the macro what exists now under local control is no longer affordable. A federal bail-out and take over makes at least as much sense for education as is did for auto workers.

ShoreBound149 -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/14/2010 4:12:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity For the first time in my adult life I am truly proud of New jersey... [;)] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsdqfVA3fqk I was just gonna post the same clip....His "style" represents most of the men I know and knew growing up in NJ. He is exactly what this state needs right now. Although he is far from perfect.....He went to a bookstore with his kids recently to get Daryl Strawberry's autograph. Die hard Met's fan. Saw ThisOne today too.

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 6:33:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Wouldn't cutting graft be a third option to your two only options? No - the graft and corruption points to the incompetent, and overpaid bureaucratic oversight. So your postition is keep the graft in place because you think"The fix can only be one of two options, more revenue through taxation or cuts." quote: It my be a "stipulated" fact to some but there is also last years $100 + billion drop in housing value which had a corresponding effect on state revenue. To ignore that fact is disinguous. Tax revenues are down - free free to cover each and every way that statement is fact. Your point was that tax revenue was down because of increased taxes. Is it your position that lowerering property values by more than 100 billion did not cause tax revenues to go down? I appreciate you providing evidence supporting the only point of relevance; tax revenues are down, the current bloated bureaucratic oversight is incompetent and those responsible in management should be the first positions eliminated. Still no mention of cutting graft, just "bureaucrats" with out mentioning just which bureaaucrat needs to be fired? Glad you are coming around to seeing it my way. I point out the obvious falacies in your position and you feel that is seeing it your way???[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 6:36:26 AM)
quote: Off top of my head...toss everyones property taxes into a pool and split it per student....Of course the Burbs would be howling. By everyone do you mean county,state or federal?

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 6:41:31 AM)
quote: Teachers unions first and foremost come to mind. Why so you feel that teachers should not have a union?

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 6:48:19 AM)
quote: No more, or less, than any public employee union. They are a bastardization of the original intent and application of the employee union system. Unlike their public sector counterparts they have no vested interest in directing their personal efforts to the success of the 'company'. Labor's vested interest is their own sucess. Managements vested interest is their own success. Collective bargaining is the mechanism by which these two compeating interests are brought to a synthesis.

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 6:51:03 AM)
quote: As a given, my position is always against government take over of anything; however considered in the macro what exists now under local control is no longer affordable. As has been pointed out the reason that it is not affordable now is because of the drop in revenues due to the drop in housing value.

NorthernGent -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 7:03:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse First it was Merkel in Germany, then Sarkozy in France and Cameron in the U K. These three countries are all slowly changing to a less socialist point of view and changing to a more conservative way of life. I hope that "change" finally takes hold in the good ol USA. Little by little I think it is. I think it's natural that in hard times people instinctively close shop.........which generates a more conservative approach to economic life. But there is no 'one size fits all' solution. So the idea that in hard times you can simply slash public spending and all will fall into place.......is no more than an idea....it ain't the bible........and there are real life examples of it working some times and failing other times. Everyone on this planet knows that something has to be done with budget deficits as they're out of control in many countries. The trick is to identify and make a distinction between government waste and investment (public expenditure that is) that does indeed support the economy. Now the danger with the British Conservative Government's approach is that they're just gonna show up and wildly slash at public spending.....it's going to be rushed through....which means it's going to be difficult to separate what is wasteful and what is useful......and that is extremely dangerous and an extremely short term approach to the problem. I know the conservatives like to see themselves as pragmatists.....no they're not....they repeat the same old mantra....read ideology.....that public spending is wasteful and must be minimised. Having said all of this.....there are areas of waste in British public spending that must be sorted out.......let's see if the conservative approach of immediate action and quick solutions actually manages the waste and retains the more useful aspects of public spending or actually magnifies the problem by inadvertently retaining some of the waste and cutting some of the more useful areas of public spending. Fail to prepare...prepare to fail.

Silence8 -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/15/2010 7:22:28 PM)
Instead in drilling for oil in the middle of the ocean, how about we drill for tax evasion in Swiss bank accounts? That'll account for a lot of 'lost revenue due to increase taxes' (quoted part = ideology that you'd be crazy to believe) Instead, we jail whistle blowers. Hum dee dum dee dum... (kind of like this thread)

thompsonx -> RE: Hope and 'CHANGE!' From New Jersey? (5/16/2010 5:38:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Your situation exemplifies why using property taxes per local district is a horrible way to fund equitable education. What california had before prop 13 allowed the state to raise both your assessment and your tax rate. This was causing people to loose their homes. My personal situation is based on the fact that I bought land that no one wanted for a very low price. It is bare land in the middle of the desert with no utilities or municipal services. I am not sure I can think of a more equitable way to fund public education but I would be glad to listen to any alternatives. Off top of my head...toss everyones property taxes into a pool and split it per student....Of course the Burbs would be howling. That is what we do now in California.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625