Jump to content

Would be MN Hunters/Anglers....


Recommended Posts

If I had a bit more time, I would try to be more eloquent and provide more flow between my thoughts below, but quickly stated it comes down to the following nutshell for me.  

The root problems to these situations (WI teachers, MN shut down, DC budget crisis, etc.) as I see it are: a) the proportion of those doing the lifting and those being lifted is now so far out of whack to anything acceptable, and b) that in this economic crisis, people in the private sector have seen enough waste and lack of scalability from the public sector that we're finally having some dig in their heels and say enough is enough...period.  In the private sector businesses have to function on the revenue and credit available within fiscal reason/soundness, they do not have the ability to print more money, take on unlimited debt or constantly cash call owners for increasing amounts of money.  Either that or they fail and go out of business…as they should.  Hard adjustments and decisions are made between many competing and seemingly worthwhile constraints.  The problem in the public sector is that once spending and programs are put in place, they are extremely hard to remove or modify.  And the bigger the programs and spending, the more difficult any changes become as greater and greater dependence is wrought.  Changing one big program can obviously have more impact than changing a lot of smaller programs.  

For me the change would start with a massive re-ordering of our tax system.  If the PTB in both parties could ever set their egos and desires for power, control and social gerrymandering in both directions through income redistribution aside, maybe we could finally come to a system that would be unbiased and accepted as fair--the flat tax, no deductions, no tax code, no breaks and the additional revenue that could be generated on both the state and federal levels would probably be amazing.  Now this would undoubtedly have some impact on the tax professionals, both private and publics, in that industry and would require skin from the 48% of our populace that currently do not pay taxes.  

Yes, this would mean the tax professionals would have to find new employment but I'm willing to bet what they did find would be of greater economic benefit to our society as a whole than the dodge that is currently called the game.  Additionally, it would require those that haven't contributed on par to our society to begin or resume doing so going forward.  The problem is that we’re now approaching or have passed the point where control is in the hands of those receiving instead of those giving.  Why would those receiving now step up to the plate and re-order their world when in some respects they are on the gravy train?  

Frankly I’m tired of being characterized as being less than compassionate, amongst other things, when I’m more than willing to help those down on their luck…for a period of time.  I realize that some through incidence of ill fortune or birth can face more hurdles than others within our community but to me this isn’t an excuse to live one’s life with the constant expectation that others need to provide for me.  I’m a strong believer in personal responsibility and that the will of an individual can overcome many of the obstacles that life puts in front of us.  

Things have to change folks and in my opinion they have to be big changes, wholesale reorientations of thought and practice by government and by individuals.  To me scabbing on little changes here and there only perpetuates the convolution of what we currently have.

Good stuff Chris.  I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • WindyHills

    13

  • caleb

    12

  • Dan Voss

    9

  • Chris Raymond

    8

Caleb--Sounds like patience won out in the end.  Notice that I didn't predict who's patience it would be though.  ;-)

It ain't over by a long shot.

I assume you're talking about this: http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/125578518.html

I don't think the Tea Partiers will go for it.  It's basically a plan to fill the budget hole with borrowing rather than new revenue or cuts.  Same old, same old: we won't tax but we will spend.

The Republican moderates are pretty much stuck with it, though.  If they turn it down they'll get shouldered with the blame for keeping the shutdown going by rejecting the core of their own plan.

Scenario #1:

The centrists in both parties will hold their noses and do it.  It's politics as usual, and it's usual because it works.

Scenario #2:

It can't clear the Senate.  The shutdown then goes until local school districts start making a big stink, which gets your average stay at home mom involved.  If schools start talking about a shortened year we'll hit a crisis point that will force a resolution.  Or, it won't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scenario #2:

It can't clear the Senate.  The shutdown then goes until local school districts start making a big stink, which gets your average stay at home mom involved.  If schools start talking about a shortened year we'll hit a crisis point that will force a resolution.

I have a feeling a shortening of the school year or 4 day weeks (see Two Harbors) is going to happen anyway as long as they keep increasing the payment deferal to the schools.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris Raymond

Caleb--Sounds like patience won out in the end.  Notice that I didn't predict who's patience it would be though.  ;-)

It ain't over by a long shot.

Dan & Caleb--Am guessing that you're correct, didn't hear any mention of conditions in the first reporting that I heard on the radio heading back to the office.  Thought your gov simply accepted the Rep plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenario #2:

It can't clear the Senate.  The shutdown then goes until local school districts start making a big stink, which gets your average stay at home mom involved.  If schools start talking about a shortened year we'll hit a crisis point that will force a resolution.

I have a feeling a shortening of the school year or 4 day weeks (see Two Harbors) is going to happen anyway as long as they keep increasing the payment deferal to the schools.

Yeah, it's either that or raise property taxes.  They easy cuts have already been made.

Affluent areas with lots of young kids will pass a referendum to avoid serious cuts (most of the Twin Cities outer ring, Northfield, Waconia, Moorhead, Morris, Duluth, maybe Stillwater).  Less affluent areas with fewer kids will turn the referendum down and they'll have to think hard about reducing the number of school days (e.g. first ring 'burbs - especially the north side, much of rural Minnesota).

Someone will end up paying these costs, though; "funding shifts" aren't going to make them disappear.  It's either going to be property owners or families/kids/the next generation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ANF grousin
Someone will end up paying these costs, though - "funding shifts" aren't going to make them disappear.  It's either going to be property owners or families/kids/the next generation.

Here in Pa, they are looking at strengthening the law that will require voters to approve property taxes above a certain level(what he have now is a joke).  Living in a poor, rural school district, I would have no problems voting for a tax increase after all the fat is cut, and the kids are given a solid education.  Until that time, I'd vote down every tax increase even if it meant the school closing and the kids being sent to a different school.  

Its time to end the Good 'Ol Boys Club that public schools have become.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan & Caleb--Am guessing that you're correct, didn't hear any mention of conditions in the first reporting that I heard on the radio heading back to the office.  Thought your gov simply accepted the Rep plan.

The media reports that the Gov accepts the "R" plan....when he didn't, he "accepted" it with conditions. Now if you and I are bickering over the price of a car, that would be called a counter offer.

But the lap dog media will report it, the general public will hear it, and if the "R's" don't agree, then who looks bad? You know who will....it's a community organizer tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the extreme right saying that they passed a balanced budget AND the governor refused to sign it--without mentioning the poison pills of abortion restrictions, stem cell research bans, redistricting favoring republicans, etc.....isn't the same thing.  What would you call it Dan?

Personally I think both sides options to toss in items not directly related to the budget ended on June 30th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A local representative to me seems to be pretty confident that a budget framework is agreed upon.  Of course it's an agreement that will just push off the actual work that needs to be done for 2 more years.  

Work on social issues next year, if you feel that the gov't should be involved with that stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

During budget negotiations the week before Friday’s government shutdown, Republican leaders pressed Gov. Mark Dayton to include a ban on abortions at 20 weeks gestation, a ban on taxpayer-funded abortions and a ban on some forms of stem cell research.

Redistricting? Really? You do know the party in charge gets to redistrict, and that the courts will ultimately have the final say.  

Windy, you forgot to bring the the Voter ID item as well. You know the one that 76% of Minnesota ( Survey USA) polled on agree it was the right thing to do, and the Gov vetoed it?

Alright I need to be done here as well...Bradly's wishes and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...