patrick.net

Red States know about operating low/no tax budgets.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/kansass-failed-experiment/389874/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/11/13/kansas_budget_crisis_thanks_to_republican_tax_cuts_the_state_can_t_pay_its.html

zzyzzx says

More than 5,000 teachers and other education officials get annual pensions that top $100,000, and many retire at age 60.

I wonder what our friend Marcus has to say about that? 70 year old widows working at Burger King paying for these pensions. Of those teachers getting $100K+ pensions, I bet most are useless teachers who cannot get fired, because of union rules.

Strategist says

I wonder what our friend Marcus has to say about that? 70 year old widows working at Burger King paying for these pensions. Of those teachers getting $100K+ pensions, I bet most are useless teachers who cannot get fired, because of union rules.

Give me a break. 70 year old widows working at Burger King are also paying the salary of the billionaire CEOs. If you want to get mad, focus your anger at the administrators--they are the worst abusers. Or at the voters who elect school boards that give the teachers' union anything it wants.

Calling them useless teachers is just dumb.

HEY YOU says

Red States know about operating low/no tax budgets.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/kansass-failed-experiment/389874/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/11/13/kansas_budget_crisis_thanks_to_republican_tax_cuts_the_state_can_t_pay_its.html

It's funny that Libs love to tote out Kansas to deflect criticism from the bankruptcies and bond downgrades in Illinois, New York, Michigan, California.......

Compared to Illinois with their junk bond status, massive crime, union corruption and total dysfunction, Kansas is a pinnacle of good governance.

tatupu70 says

Give me a break. 70 year old widows working at Burger King are also paying the salary of the billionaire CEOs. If you want to get mad, focus your anger at the administrators--they are the worst abusers. Or at the voters who elect school boards that give the teachers' union anything it wants.

Which voters gave the teachers' union anything they want?

In Illinois, the Voters just tried to make a difference by electing a Republican to try and enact some common sense pension reform.

But the Democratic machine, unions and judges blocked the reform to ensure fat union fucks like this guy gets to keep his bennies, while the city burns to the ground. This is the type of guys that the Libs and Progs stand up for.

"Lobbyist sues to regain big pension he got from 1 day as substitute teacher"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-pension-lawsuit-lobbyist-met-20150318-story.html#page=1

tatupu70 says

Give me a break. 70 year old widows working at Burger King are also paying the salary of the billionaire CEOs. If you want to get mad, focus your anger at the administrators

The CEO does not get paid by the taxpayer. My point with Marcus was it's not fair for the 70 year old widow working at Burger King to pay outrageous benefits to teachers, when the teachers don't pay anything to her.

Strategist says

The CEO does not get paid by the taxpayer. My point with Marcus was it's not fair for the 70 year old widow working at Burger King to pay outrageous benefits to teachers, when the teachers don't pay anything to her.

Where do you think company revenue comes from? Fair is a very subjective notion. Is it "fair" that the 70 yr. old widow must work a year to make the same amount of money that it takes the CEO less than a day to "earn"?

You're crying over peanuts. If you want to be outraged--direct it at the folks that deserve it.

tatupu70 says

Where do you think company revenue comes from?

Interesting-where do you think it comes from??

You guys are just psycho about taxes.

Go to ZERO taxes of any kind, see how that works out.

Suddenly corporations will be crying there's nobody to give them subsidies and breaks.
Military will turn into Blackwater mercenaries.

tatupu70 says

Where do you think company revenue comes from? Fair is a very subjective notion. Is it "fair" that the 70 yr. old widow must work a year to make the same amount of money that it takes the CEO less than a day to "earn"?

Yes it is "fair"

tatupu70 says

You're crying over peanuts. If you want to be outraged--direct it at the folks that deserve it.

That's what I am doing. The unions deserve all the outrage.

lostand confused says

Interesting-where do you think it comes from??

Consumers--which includes 70 year old widows.

Vicente says

You guys are just psycho about taxes.

Go to ZERO taxes of any kind, see how that works out.

Right - because some of us want our bloated union government bureaucracy to be more efficient and productive with the massive taxes we already send them, we must want ZERO taxes. We want anarchy and Thunderdome!

Just amazes me how the national narrative is always about tax levels and never about the QUALITY and EFFICIENCY of the services we get with our tax dollars.

I forgot, our government employees are all unionized and they are the Democrat's biggest special interest group.

Strategist says

That's what I am doing. The unions deserve all the outrage.

Of course. Let's get pissed at someone making $100K/year, while ignoring the folks making 50 - 200 times that.

Hell--we should all be making $100K/year. If the productivity gains over the last 30 years were simply returned to the workers instead of stolen by the owners, the average salary would probably be $100K.

tatupu70 says

Consumers--which includes 70 year old widows.

Consumers who VOLUNTARILY give corporations their money to buy products and services.

Whereas, the tax payers are FORCED to pay into a corruption feedback loop between Democrat politicians and Unions to get shitty services.

socal2 says

we must want ZERO taxes. We want anarchy and Thunderdome!

That is the narrative, driven from the GOP core.

"I want a government so small, I can strangle it in the bathtub." - Grover Norquist

Nothing about EFFICIENCY in there, goal is DOWNSIZING to make it small enough to murder. No respect, just regarding it as a demonic child they ache to watch the life ebb from it's eyes. What with all the pedophilia, rape, and incest in the GOP y'all still find plenty of time to hate your own government.

If the goal were always EFFICIENCY, well then the same ideas would be applied to say the military. How about we cut 10% off their budget to make them more EFFICIENT. Strangely that never seems to be proposed.

socal2 says

Consumers who VOLUNTARILY give corporations their money to buy products and services.

Whereas, the tax payers are FORCED to pay into a corruption feedback loop between Democrat politicians and Unions to get shitty services.

Not really. Nobody is forced to live in Cook County, or Illinois for that matter. When they choose to live there, they are buying the services that the county and state provide.

tatupu70 says

Interesting-where do you think it comes from??

Consumers--which includes 70 year old widows

A consumer can choose to buy. Once someone stays in a place and the gubmnt decides to double their tax next year-well can't even believe you are comparing the same and think they are the same.

Vicente says

If the goal were always EFFICIENCY, well then the same ideas would be applied to say the military. How about we cut 10% off their budget to make them more EFFICIENT. Strangely that never seems to be proposed.

Uh dude - what do you think the sequester was all about?

The Military took the biggest hit and it was passed by Republicans while the Media and Democrats squealed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/20/the-sequester-absolutely-everything-you-could-possibly-need-to-know-in-one-faq/

State governments sometimes forget that their borders are porous, and tax payers are free to leave at any time.
Illinois is especially bad about this, since outside of Chicago and farmland, there's not a lot to recommend the state.
Two of my taxpayer friends from college have moved their families away from Illinois to escape the crippling tax burdens.
Sometimes people vote with their feet.

Vicente says

If the goal were always EFFICIENCY, well then the same ideas would be applied to say the military. How about we cut 10% off their budget to make them more EFFICIENT. Strangely that never seems to be proposed

Lop it off by 20%-we would still be the biggest military and then take a hatchet and cut 100% of the DEA and that would take down the prison industrial complex with it.

Vicente says

Nothing about EFFICIENCY in there, goal is DOWNSIZING to make it small enough to murder. No respect, just regarding it as a demonic child they ache to watch the life ebb from it's eyes. What with all the pedophilia, rape, and incest in the GOP y'all still find plenty of time to hate your own government.

Nice screechy straw man.

I want my tax dollars used to build new schools, promote good teachers, repair roads, bridges and water systems and provide for a national defense.

I don't want my tax dollars wasted on the fat fuck Lobbyist in Chicago who is suing for his pension after working one day as a substitute teacher.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-pension-lawsuit-lobbyist-met-20150318-story.html#page=1

Again, you believe in the dopey narrative that if Republicans complain about NUMEROUS abuses like the one listed above, we want NO GOVERNMENT. We want THUNDERDOME!

lostand confused says

Once someone stays in a place and the gubmnt decides to double their tax next year-well can't even believe you are comparing the same and think they are the same.

It's not the same thing-I agree. But don't be mad at the teachers. That's just idiotic. Everyone's goal is to maximize income--why demonize someone doing exactly what you'd do.

socal2 says

The Military took the biggest hit and it was passed by Republicans while the Media and Democrats squealed.

You're kidding, right? Read up on the sequester. The Dems included the military cuts to try to get the Reps to agree to not cut social services. But since no deal was made, both got cut and the Reps were furious that the military budget was cut. Make no mistake--the Reps did NOT want to cut military spending.

tatupu70 says

You're kidding, right? Read up on the sequester. The Dems included the military cuts to try to get the Reps to agree to not cut social services. But since no deal was made, both got cut and the Reps were furious that the military budget was cut. Make no mistake--the Reps did NOT want to cut military spending.

Yep, Congress wanted to bypass the sequester for ONLY for the military, while keeping all other spending locked up.

tatupu70 says

You're kidding, right? Read up on the sequester. The Dems included the military cuts to try to get the Reps to agree to not cut social services. But since no deal was made, both got cut and the Reps were furious that the military budget was cut. Make no mistake--the Reps did NOT want to cut military spending.

Of course.

But at the end of the day, the Republicans still went along and cut spending to their top priority to compromise and get spending under control.

In this case, they finally walked the walk.

Now it is time for Democrats to do the same and show they can cut spending on entitlements, which dwarfs military spending by far.

socal2 says

Again, you believe in the dopey narrative that if Republicans complain about NUMEROUS abuses like the one listed above, we want NO GOVERNMENT. We want THUNDERDOME!

It's not a dopey narrative, it's the truth. As a former Republican I see that excruciatingly clearly now. The hatred of government is deep-seated. Unless it's the authoritarian arms like courts, military, or police. The Republicans squealed like stuck pigs when the sequester cut their beloved military, and took every shot they could afterwards to restore funding. A $3,000 coffee maker or a $600 toilet seat NEVER seems to be a reason to cut the military budget, NOOOOO! They chuckle about it, and wait for the checks to roll in from defense contractors while the story cools off.

socal2 says

Of course.

But at the end of the day, the Republicans still went along and cut spending to their top priority to compromise and get spending under control.

In this case, they finally walked the walk.

Now it is time for Democrats to do the same and show they can cut spending on entitlements, which dwarfs military spending by far.

Wow-that's some good spin there.

Couldn't you just as easily say that Democrats cut spending to compromise and get spending under control? And they walked the walk?

And it's time for Republicans to do the same and show they can cut spending on military, which dwarfs entitlement spending by far. Look at the discretionary budget. Military spending is 50%+. It's hard to know exactly because military spending is purposely hidden throughout many departments so the average Joe doesn't realize how huge it is.

tatupu70 says

Reps were furious that the military budget was cut.

They found a new accounting trick to bypass sequester limits. House Republican budget will boost the "overseas contingency operations" account which isn't subject to sequester limits. Real "out of the box" thinking of true fiscal conservatives!

tatupu70 says

Couldn't you just as easily say that Democrats cut spending to compromise and get spending under control? And they walked the walk?

And it's time for Republicans to do the same and show they can cut spending on military, which dwarfs entitlement spending by far. Look at the discretionary budget. Military spending is 50%+. It's hard to know exactly because military spending is purposely hidden throughout many departments so the average Joe doesn't realize how huge it is.

You are terribly misinformed. Entitlement spending is way higher than military spending.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

Vicente says

It's not a dopey narrative, it's the truth. As a former Republican I see that excruciatingly clearly now. The hatred of government is deep-seated.

You can keep saying that if it makes you sleep better and justify pulling the lever for Democrat morons.

But most Conservatives want BETTER government. We think public sector unions are a massive impediment to improving the quality and cost of our bureaucracy. Everything from teachers unions, prison guard unions, police unions.........resist reforms tooth and nail like we just saw in Illinois.

socal2 says

We think public sector unions are a massive impediment

Yes god forbid, that a UNION no matter how toothless and small, be allowed to remain alive anywhere in the USA. There is no threat to mankind greater, quick let's all grab clubs and smash the brains out of the last surviving sabertooth kitten.

GOP are not "conservatives" except as it boils down to "I got mine, fuck you!"

socal2 says

You are terribly misinformed. Entitlement spending is way higher than military spending.

Your own link tells the story:

And I suspect that the military spending portion of the pie is significantly understated. Why is veteran's benefits not included under military?? How much of energy's budget is really military? How much military spending is not even in the budget?

Vicente says

If the goal were always EFFICIENCY, well then the same ideas would be applied to say the military. How about we cut 10% off their budget to make them more EFFICIENT. Strangely that never seems to be proposed.

Other branches of the government are just as inefficient, of not more inefficient than the department of Defense.