Silver said he is worried about the cap limiting revenues needed for important goals such as universal pre-kindergarten programs
The only reason we have pre-kindergarten programs is so the parents can both work to buy/loan/credit all those niceties....or to just feed themselves and everyother monkey on their NYS backs and not take responsibility for their contribution to pro-creation.....someone open this dark paperbag, or give me something sharp to stick in my eye....
Jesus said not to take our disagreements(problems) to the courts...which back in his day also meant the government(couldn't be totally separated).....
Moving along as a cog in a machine--that is what we are viewed as,,,Mr.Cain,Ms.Clinton,Mr.Obama, Mr.Silver and the rest are guiding us away from self-reliance, self-discipline, self-inspection, edumacation etc....into the dark ages of fear, superstition and presumption.....shame shame shame.....sham sham sham......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Mr.Cain,Ms.Clinton,Mr.Obama, Mr.Silver and the rest are guiding us away from self-reliance, self-discipline, self-inspection, edumacation etc....into the dark ages of fear, superstition and presumption
They aren't guiding us, they are leading us in the manner they were elected to. In other words...the sheeple have voted.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I was absolutely astounded by Mr. Silver's remarks. As I read it, he's not opposed to a property tax cap as long as it's high enough to not affect his revenue streams. Sounds like he wants a cap that is completely meaningless to it's intent. And that is everything that is wrong with our government in a nutshell. They view us a a never-ending spigot of money for whatever strikes their fancy. Even passing a cap is not the solution because it will simply float up over time essentially capping nothing. Pass a hard cap and then couple it with spending reductions. Provocatively, I call that my Cap and Slash Policy! (No politician ever likes to use such scary terms as "slash") I've already alluded to it in a recent blog post but probably will rant completely sometime soon.
You know they just tell us what we want to hear(We voted them in?-chads). Masked in half-truths and unjust scales and budgets. Yet, we moooooove on in our herd like existence. He said, yup, it's too much but, that is what the public wants, so I will put a 'label' on it and then smoooooth it out, so it can be palatable. Too bad for us. As for the few at the top in charge, I'd say they are doing a damn good job. We keep swallowing the s@# pills by the handfuls as we have conversation about American Idol and Mr.Clemen's steroid issue. >where did I put that sharp object again?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
CAPITOL Comptroller: Spitzer’s budget would swell debt BY VALERIE BAUMAN The Associated Press
New York’s debt payments would increase by nearly 50 percent in the next five years if Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s proposed budget passes, state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said Thursday. Spitzer and the Legislature “need to look at the spending patterns that we get locked into, because we see revenue growth going down and spending going up,” DiNapoli said. “At some point something has to give.” State funded debt would increase 24 percent to $67.3 billion over the five years, according to the report. While Spitzer’s proposal closes a $4.6 billion budget gap for the current fiscal year and reins in spending increases, DiNapoli says the plan will commit New York to future spending that would be impossible to keep up with. Lawmakers would have to close a $7.5 billion budget gap in the next five years. That means New York taxpayers could accumulate in five years almost as much in debt as the total amount of the state budget this year and the equivalent of buying 67 new Yankee Stadiums at a billion dollars each. “We’re facing very uncertain economic times,” DiNapoli said in a written statement.
“We’re facing very uncertain economic times,” DiNapoli said in a written statement.
So cut spending! Get rid of those patronage jobs that are clearly not needed. Get rid of some of these ridiculous social programs.
And please Ms.Clinton, while you are employed in NYS as a senator and representative of the people, don't be traveling all over the countryside spewing your campaign nonsense when you are suppose to be here working for us! (not that we want that either)
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
NYC is home to the biggest empire companies of the world not to mention the foreign rulers/leaders and world movers----where the hell does our money go????
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
EDITORIALS State budget plot ready to start thickening
The jockeying in Albany over a new state budget seems to be growing more intense, as proposals have surfaced in the past few days for alternatives to Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s $124 billion spending plan. The most radical, as well as responsible, would be a five-year income tax surcharge on millionaires — proposed by the Assembly. Not surprisingly, the idea was immediately dismissed by Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, who like his party’s role model in Washington, seems to think that the best way to run government is to increase spending and cut taxes at the same time. How else to explain Bruno’s pledge to the Healthcare Association of New York Wednesday to undermine $1 billion in health care cuts proposed by the governor? Trying to have it both ways is the reason the federal deficit is at record levels, and why the state is faced with a $4.8 billion budget gap. You either have to raise taxes or cut spending to balance the equation, and it’s clear Bruno has little intention of doing either. (Instead, he wants to increase the size of the state’s property tax rebate program.) What would be so bad about raising the income tax rate on people making more that $1 million, from 6.85 percent to 7.7 percent? The total added cost to these wealthy people would be just $8,500 per every $1 million of income. Does Bruno really think such a penalty would be so severe as to send these people packing? Such a surcharge, however, would raise $1.5 billion a year for the state. Another idea floating around Albany, one which Bruno didn’t summarily dismiss but which would probably be far more unpopular than an income tax hike, would be to double the state tax on cigarettes to $3 per pack. It would raise an estimated $500 million annually, encouraging 168,000 smokers to quit in the process, according to anti-smoking advocates. That, of course, would help cut state health care costs. The tax would also disproportionately penalize the state’s lower-income smokers — at least those who don’t quit. But getting them to quit, and keeping others from getting started, is at least as much the objective as raising money — and thus probably a good idea.
What would be so bad about raising the income tax rate on people making more that $1 million, from 6.85 percent to 7.7 percent? The total added cost to these wealthy people would be just $8,500 per every $1 million of income. Does Bruno really think such a penalty would be so severe as to send these people packing?
How about raising taxes on the horse racing "ring" or the lotto "ring"-----???? Prostitution only gets you so far,,,,gambling and the money that is transferred is mind boggling and pretty much untrackable once the numbers get so high......Mr.Bruno should sniff in his own backyard.....
New York's monkey is very busy.....someone get it off our backs......
SHOW ME THE MONEY TRAIL......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Another wonderful submission by the un-named opinion writer...
Again on this point, the same point Senders was just checking out...
Quoted Text
What would be so bad about raising the income tax rate on people making more that $1 million, from 6.85 percent to 7.7 percent? The total added cost to these wealthy people would be just $8,500 per every $1 million of income. Does Bruno really think such a penalty would be so severe as to send these people packing?
What's wrong with this someone asks? Well, think about it this way. They raise the tax on someone 6.85% - 7.7%. OK, so that's "just $8,500." Or "just" a couple jobs of someone pumping gas somewhere or running a check-out at your local Wally-World. Then, what happens when they STILL don't bring in enough money? This rate goes up to 7%-8%, while they decide that on the people that make $750K-$999K now need to start paying the 6.85% - 7.7%. Then, it's still not enough, then it goes down further...and further...and further until EVERYONE is paying the extra (except for those eating out of the trough). So, when the 7% hits the guy / gal who's only making $35,000, what's another $300 per year? That's only one of your car payments... Then, they'll need national car payment care. If you can't make your payment, the state / feds should make the payment. Just tax those "rich" people.
As a smart person I listen to stated today, the only difference between a store being operated with union employees and those said employees being out of work is the owner of the store. Tax the owner more and there won't be incentive for him to run his business, therefore, he'll just take his money and hide it away to keep safe for himself.
CAPITOL Union official: Tax cap could destroy schools BY BOB CONNER Gazette Reporter Reach Gazette reporter Bob Conner at 462-2499 or bconner@dailygazette.net.
Capping school taxes would be a disastrous mistake, a teachers union official told the state Commission on Property Tax Relief on Wednesday. Alan Lubin, executive vice president of New York State United Teachers, said a tax cap “could destroy our schools,” leading to declines in teacher quality and student test scores, and higher dropout rates. He said it would also exacerbate the achievement gap between poor and rich school districts, because the latter would be more willing and able to override the tax cap. Lubin did have some cost-cutting ideas, including preventing superintendents from pulling down high salaries while also collecting big public pensions, and consolidating school districts. He also endorsed the so-called “circuit-breaker” bill sponsored by two majority-party members, Sen. Betty Little, R-Queensbury, and Assemblywoman Sandy Galef, D-Ossining. The Little-Galef bill would connect property and income taxes, providing more property tax relief to those earning lower incomes. The commission, established last year by executive order, is supposed to consider a statutory cap on school taxes along with other measures to control property taxes, which are generally seen as a burden throughout the state outside of New York City. Proponents such as Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, R-Schenectady, say a statutory cap, preventing districts from raising taxes by more than a certain percentage a year, is the way to bring property taxes under control. The state School Boards Association, which was criticized by Lubin, nevertheless agreed with him in opposing a tax cap. Its executive director, Timothy Kremer, also said teachers should not get automatic “step” increases when they are working under the terms of an expired contract. Nor was the state Council of School Superintendents supportive of a tax cap. Its deputy director, Robert Lowry, said: “Caps tend to lock in existing inequities.” State Education Commissioner Richard Mills, opening the meeting on his home turf at Chancellor’s Hall in the State Education Building, said: “New York needs an education system that is world class, but it has to be economically sustainable.” He told the commission members: “You are part of the solution.” Kenneth Pokalsky, director of environmental and regulatory programs for the state Business Council, supported a tax cap. In response to a question, he said the council has not taken a position on the Little-Galef bill, but that it doesn’t get to the core problem of controlling spending. Rensselaer County Executive Kathy Jimino said the problem is state fiscal irresponsibility, especially the proliferation of unfunded mandates. She said she’d be happy with a cap on county property taxes, if the state would agree to pay for its own programs. Ron Deutsch of New Yorkers for Fiscal Fairness supported the Little-Galef bill and said the state should shift the burden of paying for schools away from the property tax and toward the income tax. This was the eighth and final public meeting of the commission, which is scheduled to submit a preliminary report by May 22 and a final report by Dec. 1.
Logged
>
