I think cooler heads will prevail at the 11th hour.
Actually, it would be idiotic. A shutdown would disrupt millions of lives, cost millions of dollars and leave state officials scrambling to operate prisons, the State Police and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority — never mind services like motor vehicle offices.
Republicans seem to think that acting so recklessly while Democrats control the government is great politics. They’re wrong. Voters would blame anyone who participates in a shutdown. Doing so would disqualify themselves from re-election, regardless of their party.
How to reach the end game might include some obvious answers.
TAXES Nervous legislators are quivering about the prospect of making New Yorkers pay even pennies more in taxes. They are particularly faint-hearted about imposing a few extra cents per ounce on sugary sodas. That tax would eventually bring in another $1 billion a year but is not being considered because of heavy lobbying from the bottling industry. An increase in taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products should be easy, Governor Paterson and the Assembly have both agreed to a tobacco tax that would add at least $218 million in revenue.
CAFFEINATED POLITICS 
I will first start off as how many educated personales will debate this situation.There are many families and peoples lives at stake because of this!Why should we have to pay for someone elses faults?If its extra taxes,yea people will get mad about it,but ask them what would they rather have,extra taxes on things or a state Shut Down?Please see to this as an opening and a reconizing on things.
New YOrk Already has one of the highest taxes in the country. This state is so freaking greedy it is disgusting. Start cutting services. There are hundreds of thousands on welfare that don’t deserve it. People continue milking the system, pumping out more and more kids so they can get more money. And Now we are in a serious fiscal crisis. and they wanna tax us more.. I am sick of the taxes in this state, let New York City pick up some of the slack for once. Government once again voted themselves a raise while saying that state workers need to cut there hours by a whole day. Keep adding the taxes in, I would rather see this damn state shutdown and make people do what they need to do to survive, than see another cent added on to the already ridiculous tax base. There is no reason to make New Yorkers pay more money. The Government needs to learn how to spend it’s money more wisely.
And as far as blaming the republicans, what the hell else is new. Freaking Bleeding heart liberals constantly want to take from the people who earn there money and give it to the lazy “deprived” ones. Wake Up people, we don’t need anymore socialism in this state. And for the record, I am Not a republican/Conservative or Democrat/Liberal. I am a man that does what he needs to do and I am sick of all this one sided propaganda.
Should one assume the schools were closed a lot when you were young?
I am curious to why you are asking me this?? Or is it directed somewhere else!
Hey deke, that’s a pretty childish reply. You take someone who is angry about the way things are going in New York, and instead of debating him, you question his education. Can I assume that you are a democrat?
Not everyone can be a pompous ass like yourself, nor would they want to be.
Insulting the intelligence of someone for expressing their views is immature, and for lack of a better word lame. In my opinion it is also an utter waste of time for anyone reading such a reply.
It truly saddens me that people make themselves feel superior by putting others down either directly or indirectly. I’m sorry for whatever happened in your childhood to make you so self-conscious you deem it necessary to hurt others to aid your own ego. I only hope at some day your able to come to terms with it, you’ll not only feel better about yourself but also about humanity in general.
Typically, authors try to keep peoples replies on topic and look down on those that try to make personal attacks against others. The reason for this is simple. People get angry and lose sight of the original topic. This, in turn will result in the entire article losing any value due to the replies being overtaken by insults and profanity.
Again, just my two cents worth. Lets hope we can stay on topic from here on out.
If the schools were closed, it was probably because there was no state money to fund them… due to the government giving themselves raises, for doing NOTHING, giving people on welfare more money, for doing NOTHING… And people like you thinking you deserve more for NOTHING. An ‘educated’ person would not feel the need for personal attacks, they would debate the issue at hand with FACT. But then I went to public school too so, I guess I am not smart enough to know better.
If you think that some raise for government employees would equal the school funding matter….then…..
I also have to ask what actual increase in ‘welfare’ spending are you thinking about?
If you think government does not do anything than I feel you are very in need of someone walking you through the ways that government does work to level the playing field, keep us safe, educated, and prepared for the future. If you are coming at this from a political point than that is just, well, politics. If you really do not understand than that is really another issue. And sad.
I would dare say this is merely a scare tactic. If the public gets scared enough about the possibility of a state shutdown. When the time comes and they pass a budget that will increase taxes and/or decrease our civil liberties even more so then they already are, their hope is that the people will just figure “Hey, it’s better than if we had a shutdown.” and let it go with minimal complaint.
And if this isn’t a scare tactic, fine, let them shutdown. This would be a perfect opportunity to rebuid a very lazy and corrupt government which has gone unchecked for far to long. Would any of our employers allow us to be several months late with a project, I think not. Their not doing their jobs properly to begin with, so if they choose to shutdown (strike) let them. If this happens I personally think a committee should be formed to ensure they are no longer getting paid, I don’t feel we should just blindly trust when the work stops the pay stops.
My question is, what has New York done for it’s citizens lately. The only relief I’ve personally seen or heard about has been federally funded. We have our own jobs and families to worry about, we have our own budgets which we need to formulate. We should not need to worry about whether our employees (politicians, police and the like) are doing their jobs.
I don’t follow politics all that much, and my opinions are mine. I’m sure their are people that agree, as well as those who do not agree. Anyways, thats my two cents worth.
Right On….. Tell it like it is… But unfortunately what they do now, is target a small group of people and raise tax on them. I am not a smoker but having a 300% tax on cigarettes and tobacco products is criminal. Thousands of illegals flooding into the country as well as the state, why don’t we get money from them instead of giving them everything for free. Our Gov’t treats illegals better than it does it’s own citizens. I wish they would shut it down, and fire all the free loaders. Especially that POS governor.
Let me explain why I questioned the education and intelligence of one of those who commented. And why I do so again. With no apologies.
When someone writes, “I would rather see this damn state shutdown and make people do what they need to do to survive,” then I need to ask the obvious question. We all should be asking it. If not asking it, at least thinking it. It galls me when one has such a disregard for others in society to advocate a government shut-down.
What does he think will happen to the Medicaid recipient who needs services? How about the person with AIDS that requires state funded medications? How about the small business person who has drafting plans for a business that needs state approval? How the person who needs to get certified with the state so they can start a new job? How about the natural resources agency that oversees fish hatcheries? How the road construction projects that are humming along and workers need pay checks? How about aid to local units of government? How about…..how about…….
For anyone to suggest that “I would rather see this damn state shutdown and make people do what they need to do to survive” shows a complete lack of education.
I also suggest it shows a lack of morals.
Tough words for sure.
I worked for years in a state assembly, and therefore have encountered all sorts of people. I have no problems with those who disagree with me over policy. Folks can disagree over the issues, and that made my job fun. I do however have trouble with those who show comtempt for government, as the one who commented here on my blog.
Writing “I would rather see this damn state shutdown and make people do what they need to do to survive” does not show a lack of education or morals, it shows frustration. We have lot’s of people, not only in New York but in other states as well who are frustrated with the fact that our politicians are not listening to us. And don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying he is totally correct, but i am saying he is has the right to be frustrated.
“For anyone to suggest that “I would rather see this damn state shutdown and make people do what they need to do to survive” shows a complete lack of education.”
Really? Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” comes to mind. If memory serves he was quite well educated.
And to be completely honest it isn’t fair to emphasise one phrase without reguard to the rest of what he said.
I agree his statement is vague in that it doesn’t specifically say what he would like to see happen after the state government has been shutdown if indeed it happens. However he also never stated that New York should remain without government.
He did however mention firing (getting rid of) freeloaders, which by definition in everyday speech refers to the economic free rider problem, the act of refusing to do work without valid excuses/reasons for being noncontributing to the work being finished. I think most people would agree with this point
Is it morally correct to conclude someone is intellectually inferior from one, likely misunderstood, statement?
More over, is it morally correct to demean others?
His reply may not be up to your standards, but in my meanial opinion it doesn’t warrant bashing his intellect either.
I do use Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” in my posts from time to time when I refer to GOP ideas and the reason they run counter to the larger ideas we have about how our society should operate, and the role our government plays.
Am reading this week “The Defining Moment” by Jonathan Alter that you may find interesting as it makes the point why Darwin is not the model for a working and caring society. FDR is the model that most think the one to follow.
It was meant merely as a reference that the idea had been around for a long time, refined many times by several educated people. Since you seem to feel only an uneducated person with no moral fiber would say such.
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest
In no way do I think any one person, race, religion, or species is superior to another. Unfortunately many people do, but that is in fact their right.
By the way, thanks for the book recommendation. I will look for it next time I’m at the store.
Sorry for the extra reply, my dogs were barking which drew my attention temporarily so I forgot to write it in my prior post.
Feel free to just delete this if you wish, as it holds no real pertinence to anyone other than you and I.
Thank You to those who have left comments on my behalf.
Now that being said I would like to address a few things. I have no morale’s, therefore of made of no morale fiber! Well, I would like everyone to know I ate a bran muffin, so now I am on even ledge as the insulter. I appreciate your total lack of self control and self esteem that makes you feel you are superior. I see that you have “worked” in the assembly? Wonderful, if you consider tying the hands of the people who make your paycheck, “work”, then you earned every penny. And you are right, I did not take into consideration the people who have AIDS, or the small business that wants to start up. Wait, small business? New York State has effectively made it more difficult for a small business to open up. With there constant prying, over taxation and little support to help these small businesses get going. Small business is the only way this economy will ever pull itself out of the rut it is currently in.
Back to the Fish Hatcheries and the other government programs that won’t properly run. Road construction and workers, well that’s kind of a joke, I don;t know where you live, but all I see is the same five state roads being paved over and over again each and every year. Then they come through and rip it up for some stupid ass reason just after finishing it. Sadly, there would be several people that would not get there paychecks, and for that, I would feel horrible, and for those whom would be out of a job. That’s terrible. Unfortunately, without being all too specific, if the state keeps going in the direction it’s going, then everyone is going to suffer. Not just the AIDS patients, the elderly not getting there medications, or the other government employees that are out of work. Everyone will suffer. To mention a quote I am sure will catch a lot of flack for, “You must sacrifice a few to save many”. Now, I don’t by any means intend to be quoted as saying kill people. What I mean by this is, some people are going to have to sacrifice there their lifestyles and way of living. It’s going to be difficult, but if this needs to be done to make sure , my children don’t go through all this crap, then so be it. My apologies to the few.
As far as my education, well it’s like this, my education is none of your business. I am entitled to my opinion as well as you are to yours.. That is my constitutional right. I make no pop shots at your arrogance or self righteous blogs. The fact that everyone needs to be considered when things go array is crap. You cannot worry about everyone, and rarely does the government think that way. New York politicians (most) worry about there own agendas and lining there pockets before they even consider what is going to happen to people. Ya, they worry about the people that are not going to vote for them if they don’t get what they want. And again, by this I mean the socialistic lobbying that happens. All the backroom deals, and the bills that are filled with more pork than a Bob Evan factory. Why is it that there are so many bills with riding amendments that effect people far more than the actual bill that is passing? I know there is quite a few things I did not address, and I know that you are going to attack my comments once again, and most likely, as any good bleeding heart would do, take in a different context and try to asses a value that was never clarified.
Jenn,
If you think that some raise for government employees would equal the school funding matter….then…..
I also have to ask what actual increase in ‘welfare’ spending are you thinking about?
If you think government does not do anything than I feel you are very in need of someone walking you through the ways that government does work to level the playing field, keep us safe, educated, and prepared for the future. If you are coming at this from a political point than that is just, well, politics. If you really do not understand than that is really another issue. And sad.
I think the government tends to forget who they actually work for. There are a few out there who have a clue but for the most part, politicians are human and want to push their own agendas to line their own pockets.
They can give people sitting at home on their arses more money to spend on their Cadillac and rims but they can’t give retirees a much needed bump? You know people who actually WORKED for a living to have money to retire with?
Too often we do get caught up in all the crap that we perceive the government isn’t doing for us… so yes, we tend to not see the good… But threatening us with shutting down doesn’t scare me at all. In fact, while they weren’t working a few months back, it was hardly noticeable. Business as usual.
The state is bankrupt. People are fleeing in droves and they can’t figure out why. Well, keep sending jobs overseas to save a dollar. Keep handing money out to people who come into the country illegally so that they don’t have suffer.
I would like to know just how the government is keeping us safe when they continually strip away our rights. I would like to know just how they are leveling the playing field by giving some dead beat my hard earned money so he can buy choice cuts of beef at the supermarket.
Oh and as for being educated, dumbing down our schools is not helpful. Standardized tests are a joke and graduating people who lack the basic ability to read and write just to get them out of the way, also, not helpful.
So what exactly did you do in the state assembly anyway?
The beauty of it all is, for now, we can agree to disagree.
I can say that people in government are full of sh*t and not worth their exorbitant salaries… I can say the same about pro-athletes, actors/actresses and silver spoon trust fund babies who never worked to earn a dime. You can say that I am uneducated and sad.
I can regard them with the same obvious contempt they seem to regard the ‘little people’ with and not feel bad at all about it. If it means I lack morals and an education, so be it. I can lower myself and be no better. Then I can get a job in politics and fit right in.
If the NYS gov. thinks taxing it’s citizens into poverty is the solution, than they are out of touch with reality and need to spend a day at a real job making minimum wage with no health benefits. Then they can stand in line at a local supermarket behind someone getting filet mignon and T-bone steaks paying for it with a benefit card while the worker is buying chuck roast and ground beef. Than that same employee can watch that free loader get in their Cadillac Escalade with rims on it that are worth than their own 1989 Taurus and drive off.
And the best part, it’s not just NY, it’s all over. It’s in foreign countries. People are increasingly becoming disgusted with their governments and they want straight answers, not political BS.
”So what exactly did you do in the state assembly anyway?”
Well according to some views about government, nothing.
In reality I worked to preserve underwater shipwrecks on the Great Lakes, and assisted in making them historic property as opposed to being stripped and looted.
I assisted local law enforcement with using guns that were confiscated, if the agency could use them following criminal proceedings.
I helped to increase funding for in-home health care agencies so elderly people would not need to face nursing homes.
I helped to get to the goal, at that time, of 2/3rds funding of schools by the state.
I made sure that an anti-gay piece of legislation never even saw the light of day and was killed in drafting.
Then it was time for lunch……..
All admirable contributions, to be sure. But it didn’t happen in a day, you didn’t do it by yourself and it took tax payer money to accomplish it.
Do you suppose those same programs would get green lit now? And how many have lost funding or been cut since then because we simply cannot afford it?
Is it right? No. Does the government really need to increase spending every year? Probably not. If you can make due with xxx million dollars a year, why can’t you do it the following year?
I don’t get a pay increase every year and I have to make due with what I earn. Why can’t the government do the same?
There are a lot of programs/state sponsored things that I would hate to see cut due to budget restraints but, I can’t afford to keep paying for them either.
Plain and simple, taxes are not the answer. No one has ever taxed their way into prosperity.
Of course I did not do it by myself, or without taxes to pay for it!
We stopped teaching civics in a real way in our schools, and the outcome is clear to see.
What a wanker. I won’t tell you how to make cheese in Wisconsin and you can mind your own business about NY politics.
Welfare was brought up. I’ve seen people say that anyone recieving welfare should be subject to random drug testing much like many of us that work. I’m not saying that if someone fails the drug test that their benefits should be stopped on the spot, I’ve considered a few different scenerios which, in my opiion, would be fair not only those needing assistance but also to the taxpayers.
Their could be two scales of assistance, one higher scale for those willing to participate in the drug testing which have passed and a lesser scale for those that refuse to participate.
For those who participate the initial test would be of no cost to them. If they pass their benefits are not changed in the least. However if they fail they would get a written warning stating that their benefits will be changed to the lesser scale if they have not taken and passed a drug test within a three month period. This second test would have to be done at a certified state facility and paid for by them not by the state. If they fail to comply or fail the drug test a second time their instantly moved to the lesser scale for a minimum of six months or maybe a year at which time they will again have to pay for their own drug screening at a state certified facility. Basically the idea is three strikes and your out, but their’s no way the state and taxpayers should need to pay for someone whom “needs assistance” yet is spending money on illegal drugs.
These ideas could definately use some refining, however I wanted to put it out there and see what others think. By the way I also feel SSI should be handled similiarly. Just last night I came across the website below which proves their’s a link in people with bipolar that also use drugs to increases in crime.
http://www.pendulum.org/bpnews/archive/001690.html
This program would cost the taxpayers money to startup. However if those statistics are on base the savings would soon be apparent once the test results started rolling in. This could also be used to make sure that people who need even prescription meds are taking them properly.
Similarly, the government could legalize and tax specific drugs. I’m sure we all know how much revenue that could potentially bring in.
Just some ideas to ponder!
No, they are not ideas to ponder, instead they are ideas to reject.
Civil rights in this nation are but one reason you can not take a whole category of people and label them all in one fashion. One should not say all priests rape boys anymore than one can try and make your case about people on welfare. I also find the bipolar arguement very lame and without medical science as a sounding baord.
I am not sure what makes you think any of this is in any way legal or constitutional…..maybe you can enligthen me with the law….
In addition there is an anti-tax theme going on among those who comment on this post, and you now want to not only tax drugs but make them legal too…
Civil rights in this nation are but one reason you can not take a whole category of people and label them all in one fashion.
I didn’t label anyone by the way. No harsh words were ever said, just ideas on ways the government can increase revenue.
It’s no different than what the government has been doing for years by targeting smokers, taxing them. Saying it’s for the overall good since smoking causes medical issues.
The basic reasoning is this, if I don’t want to take a drug test I would look for a job which I didn’t need to. The federal government drug tests a majority of their employees. Why should they not be allowed to test those of whom are just given money? If people don’t want to take the tests they are still eligible for the smaller scale.
Why should it always be the hard working people that have to “bite the bullet” for the greater good? Actually that argument is only a half-truth since our children will have to deal with this and they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Alcohol was also illegal at one point. Now it’s legal and taxed.
From what I’ve read here, nobody is saying to completely abolish taxes. But if something has been taxed to the degree things are currently, and the nation is trillions in debt, why keep raising the current taxes and completely turn a blind eye to something that could potentially be a cash cow!
Jenn,
You might be advised that this blog is about politics for the most part. I have posted your comments when they are not rude or overly absurd. As one who was a Committee Research Clerk for the Wisconsin State Assembly I can assure you that I have a background and interest in issues that stretch across state lines. If you venture around this blog that has had over 1.2 million hits you will see all sorts of topics I engage in and find of interest. You might be interested in joining me as a reader of Governing magazine. You might also read the WSJ, NYT and other publications where topics of education and taxes and health care are discussed. Your limited logic and HS-like banter is a joke, and there will be no more heard from you here.
So basically, you are putting your two cents about a problem facing the people of a state that you do not live in. Well no I see why you are able to be so free in what you say. Yes state to state across the country, similar issues due exist. As well as similar solutions. But what you fail to see, is in NY the Gov’t has been taking a piss on us year after year. We pay for everything in NYC while we get nothing in return. You may be able to grasp the short concept of what goes on, but you have no clue to the frustration that we have to deal with. If you lived here, you would know, that people are trying to find ways to get out of New York, because they can’t handle being pissed on anymore by the people that are supposed to be representing us. I know, don’t vote for them, but we don’t have all that much say, because New York City pretty much decides who is going to win. Whoever promises them the most stuff is the one is going to win. So as you are as is everyone else, entitled under the constitution to make your opinion public, please try to refrain yourself from making such a complete ass out of yourself by talking about things that you have no clue about. And you are going to continue to do so, please make sure you answer questions that are directly thrown to you instead of avoiding them.
And as far as the welfare and drug testing….. No, they don’t get levels, they don;t get strikes, you pop on a drug test you are done. DRUGS ARE ILLEGAL, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON someone on welfare should be popping on a drug test. You can afford drugs, you can afford food then. This has nothing to do with civil rights, or anything else. What’s right is right. I need to take a drug test to get a job to support these people on welfare, then they need to pass a drug test to be able to get my money. I work hard for it, it’s not fair that you can piss it away on getting high.
You may not agree with my point of view, (and that is perfectly fine with me) but given my background and interests I will continue to spotlight and opine on the issues that range all over the map, including New York state.
For the record I can assure you that I have seen over the past 47 years of my life far more upper-income people take drugs or speak of their drug activity than those of the lower incomes. Since bankers are taking federal funds I am sure to be consistent you will then advocate for them to be tested too. When a sports franchise builds a new structure I am then also sure since public funds are often involved that all the management of the team will need to be tested. Since the senior citizen meal site is federally funded I know you also find it essential to test the ladies that make the meals……and lets us not forget to test those who show up for the noon food.
There are reasons for polite responses from elected officals to the many points of view that are expressed by the average voter. If anyone thinks that elected representatives are not worthy of more money think about the public ideas they need to listen to and then brush aside and all the while look polite.
New York City has a budget, as of this writing, and more will posted in a seperate post on this blog….because this is the stuff I know about and care about.
Have a nice day.
It boils down to this, Deke is every bit as entitled to his opinion as the rest of us. I find it laughable that people are complaining about him writing about New York when he isn’t a resident when the simple fact is this is his blog, we’re the ones that have chosen to comment on it.
That being said, I had posted another reply with some links which wasn’t allowed for a reason that is completely unknown to me. Their were no harsh words or derogatory comments. Just a few links which strengthened my argument.
So.. I won’t try to post the links again. Rather, I will say that Michigan has had laws in place to randomly drug test people collecting assistance since 1999. This can be easily found with a google search including wsws.org and a few other easily figured out keywords.
The ACLU of course had major issues with this which are on par with what Deke said. I will call the Michigan legislature on Monday to verify whether the laws were abolished or not due to their constitutionality.
June 16, 2010 1:56 PM
Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, proposed yesterday that people seeking unemployment benefits or welfare undergo drug tests before they can receive benefits. To verify see cbsnews.com along with some other applicable keywords.
On the other side of my suggestion was legalizing “specific” drugs. By this I’m referring to marijuana. Once legalized it could be controlled more easily and taxed which would generate some very much needed revenue and possibly ease a bit of the tax burden people are feeling in other areas.
The idea again, wasn’t originally mine, and has been around for some time. A brief search on google will give you hours of reading on either of these two topics.
Deke, I’m in complete agreement that civil rights are important and should be protected in any way possible. But to be perfectly honest if you read through both of the patriot acts you’ll see that our civil rights have been merely an illusion for years which can be stripped at any time for a variety of reasons.
One could also argue it’s completely against a persons civil rights for the government to be forcing people to carry those RFID chips which can now be found in passports as well as some drivers licenses. It’s really no different than tagging wildlife so we can monitor their migration patterns.
I firmly believe we need government. I also sincerely believe that without some type of change masses or people will soon face destitution.
“New York City has a budget, as of this writing”
As I said before I don’t really follow politics so if you wouldn’t mind answering a question for me Deke or anyone else that might know the answer I would be most appreciative.
The question is this, does NYC passing a budget influence the state budget in the least. It seems odd to be they would even be working on a city budget when the state is in fear of shut down due to not having a state budget?
Thanks in advance for any answers.
To Curious Citizen,
To make an attempt to answer your question about NYC. If you look up the information, you will plenty of things about the State and City Budgets. There are several direct connections between upstate New York and NYC’s budgets. The big part is that, when the Yankees and the Mets wanted new stadiums, the money came from the state and the city. Now keep in mind that NYC has a huge tourist base, they also have higher taxes, plus you need to pay to drive your car into the city. Yet the welfare program and the Unemployment both come from the state. NYC spends it’s money on itself then comes to the sate looking for more. NYC budget does not to my knowledge effect the state’s. But the State’s budget directly effects NYC. And I am aware that this goes with all other cities and states. But NYC is a bit different than other locations.
Chris D,
Thanks for your reply explaining things a bit further for me.
Quote “There are reasons for polite responses from elected officals to the many points of view that are expressed by the average voter. If anyone thinks that elected representatives are not worthy of more money think about the public ideas they need to listen to and then brush aside and all the while look polite.”
To my knowledge “elected officials” are still members of the public, not a completely seperate entity. I especially liked the part about listening to public ideas with a smile and then brushing them off to the side. That statement in itself proves what the others were saying reguarding the fact elected officials don’t listen to what the voters want, which is directly related to them being frustruated and potentially feeling contempt towards the people making them feel that way.
It may just be me, but a few times I feel you’ve given the impression your somehow above the rest of us. Repeatedly trying to insult peoples intelligence or as you stated above “average voter” rather than to have just said voters. Or the implication that someone is without morals simply because they have a different opinion.
Quote “You might be interested in joining me as a reader of Governing magazine. You might also read the WSJ, NYT and other publications where topics of education and taxes and health care are discussed. Your limited logic and HS-like banter is a joke, and there will be no more heard from you here.”
Most people know the news media is not without bias. You’ve actually named some of the worse cases in my opinion. It’s rather interesting reading if you look at the wiki page for Dow Jones & Company. My personal conclusion to it was that big banking runs the show. We already let them produce money out of thin air, only to lend it back to our government and charge interest on top of it. Do we really want to give them that much more power that we read only what they call “news” and just trust the fact their being completely straight with us? Every publication you mentioned you will find on that one wiki page. Note that if you follow the News Corporation link on that page you will find the company resides within the Rockefeller Center complex. While this could be purely a coincidence I would personally say it most likely is not.
As for the comment about Jenn having limited logic. Again, that makes it seem as if you feel superior in some way. Which if you do fine, but it makes me wonder that if indeed you feel this way, why let people reply in the first place? Forums have ways to lock threads so no replies can be made so I’m guessing blogs would also?
I do hope you allow this to be posted as I feel my points are valid. I know you don’t censor much on your blog from what I have seen and read thus far which I think is great. And let me say I have enjoyed taking part in this discussion very much and have learned some very interesting things as a result.
Hopefully my earlier reply gets allowed or this will make absolutely no sense to others reading this.
One more thing quickly reguarding your stance on why politicians deserve the money they get paid. So are we paying them for the smile, the polite brush off, or are we just paying them for allowing us to speak?
While I don’t agree with silencing Jenn. I do agree personal attacks such as calling someone a “wanker” is not only rude but also quite anti-productive.
Having read through most everything it’s become apparent that we’ve all been rude at one time or another. The only exception to this is James, kudos to you!
Yes, I said something that was rude to Deke in one of my replies a couple of days ago. Though the intentions of my reply were good, it was wrong and I would like to extend my sincere apologies not only to him but also to the rest of you who had to read it.
I understand what you are saying… But you must understand that welfare is a major problem in this state. I couldn’t tell you the amount of time I have seen someone pay in food stamps then get into there brand new Cadillac. As far as upper income people doing drugs, that is fine by me, they are not taking my money to live off. They make there own money and if there employers are ok with that then it’s not my problem. I do however have a problem with people who are life dependent on welfare and other money for poor programs that only are this way because they do not want to get a job. Yet when they get money they spend it on drugs. Or they take the welfare while dealing drugs. That’s where the problem is, people who don’t deserve the help that get away with breaking the law. There is no reason why most people who are employed needed to take a drug test in order to secure that employment while people living off of the state (my tax Money) can do as they choose and have no consequence. You and I need to jump through hoops to find employment, but these people, the only time they put any effort into anything is when they need to get there “free” money. I don’t see how anyone with any intelligence cannot agree with the simple fact; welfare is set up to aid people until they can get going, not to supplement laziness and/or illegal criminal activities. Therefore there needs to be steps in place to make sure it doesn’t happen. As far as banks taking federal money, well first that would be a loan, and second, they shouldn’t have gotten it. This damn feel good crap needs to stop, if I run out of money who is going to bail me out?? Unemployment? that I paid into?? welfare? again that I paid into. And sporting venues, thats another big crock. These players make millions of dollars and are not worth it, so out of the billions of dollars spent every year that money should be split properly so if they want a new venue, they can build it themselves. I don’t want my tax money funding a sports team 300 miles away that I will never go to. Especialy if it is a team I don’t support. If I want to support that team I will buy there merchandise, and/or I will go to the stadium and watch it.
Budget was passed last night as per WCBSTV.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/ny.state.budget.2.1776716.html
I also stated earlier I would call Michigan to confirm whether or not the law was still in place allowing them to drug test people collecting public assistance. The short answer is no. The ACLU as mentioned prior had major issues with this and the decision was made the law was unconstitutional in a circuit court. From what I’ve read, and learned directly from speaking to someone from their current government, this ended up costing the taxpayers far more than was gained.
Well a good lesson to have learned about what constitutes an unconstitutional idea. Sorry you had to go the lenghts you did when I had already made it clear that it was not a sound idea. All the same I give you credit for following through.
Have a nice day.
Deke,
I have no intentions on getting into another long winded debate with you. We have different opinions and that’s all I will say about that. But I do have a question for you. Several times you have said that it is unconstitutional to target certain groups of individuals. I.c. Welfare and unemployed people. But my question is, why is that no ok, but no one has a problem with putting more and more tax on people who are addicted to smoking cigarettes, or otherwise using tobacco in other forms. Isn’t putting a tax of more than double the products price the same thing. The government is still targeting a specific demographic.
And one more thing, isn’t it unconstitutional to ban firearms in certain areas, wouldn’t that be considered targeting as well? I believe the supreme court ruled this past week that it is unconstitutional to put a ban on firearms in targeted area. Are we not just doing the same thing with different targeted poeple??
I also have no intention in getting into a long-winded debate. It is, after all, getting close to the long Holiday weekend and there are other things for both of us to be doing. But you were sincere, and I do want to at least offer a quick response.
First smokers choose to buy tobacco and smoke. On the other hand poor people do not choose their economic plight. Likewise unemployed folks are also not in their situation without outside forces at play. So in each case where people through no fault of the their own (broadly speaking) face hardships then society and government has a role to play in alleviating the problems, and working to stem the reason the problems started in the first place. For instance if an industry is suffering due to unfair trade practices then it is the national government to level the playing field. If there needs to be additional UC benefits allotted then that also is the government’s role.
The problems with so many of the issues that have been raised in the comments sections of this post have to do with the assumptions that are made. For instance, back in the Clinton era when the Welfare to Work idea was being hatched, and drug testing for recipients was being discussed, studies then showed the number of welfare and non-welfare recipients using illegal drugs was statistically meaningless…there was little difference. So the hue and cry for such testing has more to do with racism, and the desire to lord over those who are less fortunate. That is a dreadful way to view social ills, and also not a contrustive way to devise policy.
Since you seem sincerely concerned about fiscal matters you can be glad that testing is not required as it is extremely expensive, especially when viewed from the number of people that would be tested, and the small number those that would show a true positive. All in all not only unconstitutional, but a waste of resources.
I trust this is more than enough to ponder until after the Holiday.
I am out of here.