5.6 billion dollar deficit suugested cuts

Home Forums Politics 5.6 billion dollar deficit suugested cuts

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 62 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #597128

    hooper1961
    Member

    Washington State is projected to have a 5.6 billion dollar deficit. I earlier suggested looking at school spending on the 1 to 2% of the kids that are too challenged and consume too much of a limited resource with low expectation of any beneficial outcome. And people moaned ok if not this then what?

    With a 5.6 billion dollar deficit prioritizing government expenditures is required. I ask other blogger’s to identify cuts in government expenditures that make sense.

    The low hanging fruit of making State Employees pay a higher percent toward their Health Care and pay to add their families is a no brainer. In the private sector employers pay for the employee and if the employee has a family they are required to pay the difference.

    Any other ideas to cut government cost?

    #709300

    AdmiralJaneway
    Participant

    End double dipping by state pensioners. Here’s a Seattle Time column about this abuse.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2012293334_ryan07.html

    #709301

    hooper1961
    Member

    good one, i agree. any more ideas?

    #709302

    Karl
    Member

    For the “beer and nuts” crowd here are the “nuts and bolts”

    http://www.ofm.wa.gov/reductions/2011-13/default.asp

    #709303

    brew
    Participant

    Up the mandatory furloughs from 10 days to 30 days and extend it to all state employees.

    #709304

    redblack
    Participant

    eliminate boeing’s tax breaks.

    #709305

    tanyar23
    Participant

    I think the issue should be focused on health care insurance and whether it should be run as a for profit industry. I’ve read several articles that indicate that the CEOs of these corporations have had pay raises during “economic downturns” and have hundreds of millions of dollars in surplus.

    http://blogs.consumerreports.org/health/2010/07/health-insurers-raise-rates-while-building-huge-surpluses.html

    #709306

    JanS
    Participant

    I-1098…would have helped, I truly believe. But watch where the cuts come from…it will be on the backs of the poor and underprivileged..take away Basic Health care, take away food stamps..these are already being bandied about. Will any of it be “fair”? I don’t think so…but, that’s where they always go..social programs.

    http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/11/gov_gregoire_urges_draconian_c.php

    #709307

    hooper1961
    Member

    one fair item to cut is all government aid to illegals; they are illegal!

    #709308

    brew
    Participant

    Tax the Indian Casinos

    #709309

    Carson
    Participant

    Forget the Casinos, tax the churches!!!

    #709310

    DP
    Member

    hooper, presumably you voted against a state income tax for the wealthy. Am I right? Well, I have a message for you, buddy, and for all the other people who voted against 1098:

    The rest of us already gave you our idea for balancing the budget. Tax the rich, we said. But you turned our idea down. OK, now you can give us your ideas, and as long as you’re humble and thoughtful about it, we’ll listen patiently. Just don’t get too cocky. And for God’s sake, don’t expect us to provide you with a list of services to cut or people to hurt, because, frankly, we’d be insane to do that. Yes, we’d be insane to take the heat for the mistake YOU made by torpedoing I-1098 . . .

    As for me, I might ultimately go along with some service cuts, but not until after we’ve also looked at every tax break given to corporations and the wealthy. (Yay, tanya! Yay, redblack!)

    And in the meantime, I’m going to be applying the maximum amount of criticism to any of your proposals to cut public services or cut benefits for state workers . . .

    So hooper: Is education your area of expertise? Based on the way you’ve been arguing this point so far, I doubt it. I’m still waiting for you to back up any of the claims you made on another thread about the cost of teaching challenged kids. How about some hard numbers or verifiable expert opinions on that, huh?

    And brew: I guess you want all Washington State Patrol troopers to take an extra month off, right? Maybe you’d like to close down our universities and state medical facilities for a month, too. Shut down the court system? Send public health inspectors home?

    Yeah, sure. Make everyone take a month off. Sounds like a great idea . . .

    NOT!!!

    #709311

    Smitty
    Participant

    How much is the budget? $75 billion?

    Hard to find, for some reason.

    Edit:

    And, more importantly, how much has the budget grown over the last decade? It’s a 2-year budget, correct?

    Are these correct?

    2011-2013 $75 billion

    2009-2011 $71 billion

    2007-2009 $69 billion

    2005-2007 $61 billion

    2003-2005 $53 billion

    2001-2003 $50 billion

    1999-2001 $45 billion.

    Perspective.

    #709312

    Huindekmi
    Participant

    Yeah… that was tough. It took a couple seconds and one Google search.

    http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget/default.asp

    #709313

    Smitty
    Participant

    Thanks, so are the above correct? I am technologically challenged apparently and can’t find one number per 2-year period.

    #709314

    elikapeka
    Participant

    What is it with the attitude toward state employees? Most of them are not making a huge salary. They’re doing jobs that make our lives safer, jobs that a lot of people wouldn’t do for any amount of money. Sure, we all know about the firefighters and cops, but what about street maintenance, animal control, parking enforcement, building code enforcement, health inspectors for restaurants, the health care workers who take care of the ciminally insane at state hospitals – why do people think these folks shouldn’t be paid a reasonable salary and benefits for what they do? Traditionally they get paid a little less than private sector jobs and make it up in benefits. And they’ve all already taken cuts in pay and benefits and experienced layoffs. What we need to concentrate on is improving job pay, benefits, and security in the private sector, not making public sector jobs worse.

    Further cuts to services are not something I’m interested in looking at.

    I think the income tax was a good idea, but since that didn’t pass, how about some kind of luxury tax? An extra tax on things like vehicles (RV’s, cars, trucks, boats,etc) valued over a certain dollar amount, or on the sale of residences over a certain dollar amount? A tax on fur coats? On jewelry over a certain amount?

    Another thing is to revisit some of those corporate tax breaks for larger companies like Boeing, Weyerhaeuser, Microsoft, etc. When doing my business taxes, on the forms I fill out I see lots of exemptions for the big guns that the rest of us don’t get.

    #709315

    hooper1961
    Member

    i never have claimed to be an education expert. all i know is what i have heard from a retired high school principal that was very eye opening. a retired high school principal certainly provides a knowledgeable opinion.

    1098 was defeated soundly; thus the voters clearly rejected this idea because they do not trust government to spend money wisely and they new fully well that the tax was going to expand to lower income thresholds.

    the deficit is going to force government to prioritize spending. cutting consumption oriented spending such as health care is preferable to cutting investment type spending such as education (spent wisely and effectively), infrastructure (also creates jobs) and the like.

    #709316

    JanS
    Participant

    tell that to the person who loses his/her health care insurance, Hooper. And then, when they go to the ER when they’re sick, where it costs more, and you have to pay for it (Charity care, AKA “Patient Assistance”), what will you say then?

    A high school principal, retired or not, is voicing an opinion, not facts. Yes, they’re on the inside, on some things…but not everything. Of course, that’s just MHO

    #709317

    hooper1961
    Member

    if i do not have car insurance i do not get my car fixed unless i pay! treat health insurance the same way. people need to buy insurance or pay the consequences for choosing not to buy insurance.

    #709318

    miws
    Participant

    Righty-O!

    An automobile is right up there at the top of the list of things the human body can’t function without, like a heart and lungs!

    Mike

    #709319

    JanS
    Participant

    hooper….I have pre-existing conditions that, with my income, make health insurance unattainable – it would cost much more than it costs to put a roof over my head. I didn’t ask to be put in this situation.I am damned lucky that I have the coverage through the state that I have right now. And I am looking at losing it, while I’m also looking at a serious illness that possibly involves a transplant. Next you’ll be telling me I should have taken better care. Well, some things simply don’t work like that…no known cause, no known cure..too bad for me, huh. So, since I personally can’t afford to buy the insurance that I need because the insurance companies are making money hand over fist, I should pay the consequences..which are..death? Really?

    #709320

    miws
    Participant

    Well, Jan, doncha know that 40 years or so ago, you shoulda aspired to be successful, worked 4 full-time jobs to put yourself through the best University in the World, taken a full course load, graduated at the top of your Class, with Honors and Degrees, and by now you’d be the wealthy CEO of some Mega-Corporation, and money would be of no concern.

    And, you know what else?

    That Mega-Corp would also be rewarding you with a very, very, handsome health benefits package!

    Mike

    #709321

    JanS
    Participant

    yeah, Mike…I try to understand where others are coming from…but we see things from our own personal perspective. Even Mr. Hooper…

    #709322

    hooper1961
    Member

    JanS

    I am sorry to hear about your situation. Mandatory Health Insurance that is risk based to charge more for smokers and obese persons (I was way overweight and through dedication lost 60 lbs) and not allowing insurers to deny coverage for out of personal responsibility items is appropriate. Those that choose not to buy insurance should be denied coverage simple as that.

    Simple math if $1,000 cost is divided amongst 10 people (not accounting for appropriate risk basing smoking and obesity) each party pays $100. If one person does not pay each remaining person is forced to pay $111.11 that is not fair. The alternative is to deny coverage to those that choose not to pay and get the cost down to $900 so that the people paying each still pay $100.

    Whatever happened to personal responsibility!

    #709323

    Carson
    Participant

    Smitty, as usual your numbers are correct, but you fail to provide any details. During the same time period how much spending has the federal government shifted to the states? Its not just a WA state issue, but a trend for all states. Thats how the federal government cuts spending, by making someone else spend it!

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 62 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.