Hell NO on I-1098

[Jim]

I wish MY employer kept up with inflation.

 

You have no choice but to make him do it. Whining about others making their employers do it is surely not the way to get there.

 

Damn, do you have a vagina?

 

Who's whining about anybody else? I just wish MY employer kept up with inflation.

 

Actually it's much better than keeping up with inflation. If you worked for the county you would get the 2% COLA, then you get step increases each year for years in service, THEN you could get a raise if you are being bumped up a grade level - esentially a promotion. So raises are automatic - COLA and year in service - for everyone. Then there are the CONTRACT raises - 5% a year for the sheriff department for instance. Just saying.

[Hugh Conway]

Yea - in these times I do think it's excessive. Why do you get a pay raise, on top of a COLA, for just hanging around.

 

I'm curious the metrics you want to use to evaluate performance for a policeman or bus driver.

 

I'm curious of the metrics, or likely lack there of, for the same.

 

there's plent of professions where competence is a pass/fail situation. The aviation industry, for example.

 

But please, continue with the reactionary excoriation of "government waste"

[rob]

Sounds reasonable to me. I get about 2% a year, plus raises with promotions. The 5% is pretty sweet though. I doubt ALL county employees get that? I only know two county employees but they don't get paid very much.

[tvashtarkatena]

OK, the crack ho kiddies are really cryin now....

[Jim]

Sounds reasonable to me. I get about 2% a year, plus raises with promotions. The 5% is pretty sweet though. I doubt ALL county employees get that? I only know two county employees but they don't get paid very much.

 

Do you get 2% plus a raise each year you are there? And that's outside the 5% contract example. Just seems in tough times things should be scaled accordingly.

[tvashtarkatena]

Shit, I'd be really happy just getting paid on time.

[rob]

yeah, I had to take a pay-freeze for a year. Seems that belt-tightening is a good idea, but I doubt it would completely fix our budget problem. I haven't seen any data from anybody that indicates cancelling the sheriff's sweetheart deal would solve our budget crisis. Even if it helped, I imagine that there would still be a significant deficit?

[j_b]

right, where is the comparison between these deals and the budget shortfall. Belt tightening should occur but it likely doesn't really impact the need for greater revenue for a whole bunch of programs beside cops and fat cats at metro.

[Jim]

yeah, I had to take a pay-freeze for a year. Seems that belt-tightening is a good idea, but I doubt it would completely fix our budget problem. I haven't seen any data from anybody that indicates cancelling the sheriff's sweetheart deal would solve our budget crisis. Even if it helped, I imagine that there would still be a significant deficit?

 

Thanks and no, it would not solve the overall larger budget issues related to reduced tax revenue. I think the point is that these fat contracts are making a bad situation worse and rather than even put a temporary hold on what I would consider very good raises in a down economy, the unions would rather layoff staff and thereby reduce services. In the long-run I think they are shooting themselves in the foot, or other vital places.

[j_b]

well, that's nice but it doesn't justify not taxing the rich at the state level if the fed gov. won't do it and Republicans prevent the flow of bail out funds to states.

[Jim]

well, that's nice but it doesn't jusitfy not taxing the rich at the state level if the fed gov. won't do it.

 

And that answer - that, "yea, we realize we have some financial mismanagement issues, but don't mind that, just give us more revenue"; that makes me uncomfortable. If they proposed an equitable income tax, dealt with the sales and BO tax issues, and made some headway on responsible fiscal reform then I'd take a serious look at it. But not this way.

[tvashtarkatena]

Our deficit's running about half a B out of 71 B right now.

 

Educations accounts for about 37% and Govt ops, mostly the criminal justice system, adds another 8%, for a total of 45% of the overall budget. Our deficit is currently $520M, or about .8%. Cut education and govt services by 2% and the deficit goes away.

 

WA state budget

[j_b]

If your concern really is that the ship is sinking for a whole class of people condemned by regressives to paying the cost of this crisis, I fail to see how not getting more revenues from the wealthy is going to help.

[tvashtarkatena]

The problem here is a failure of government. This problem is fixable without screwing the poor. Actually, the solutions I've proposed would help the poor.

[j_b]

Our deficit's running about half a B out of 71 B right now.

 

Educations accounts for about 37% and Govt ops, mostly the criminal justice system, adds another 8%, for a total of 45% of the overall budget. Our deficit is currently $520M, or about .8%. Cut education and govt services by 2% and the deficit goes away.

 

WA state budget

 

The issue is not cutting programs, it's funding more of them, which explains the need to tax the wealthy.

[Jim]

The problem here is a failure of government. This problem is fixable without screwing the poor. Actually, the solutions I've proposed would help the poor.

 

I'd agree to some extent. It's not some lack of enthusiasm for a progressive agenda, but concern with the lack of good management of fiscal resources to date. Not dealing with the issue and then asking for more money isn't cutting it. When the liberal end of the spectrum starts asking for more fiscal responsibility the pols better start paying attention. I've voted for every tax increase and levy ever put on a ballot. That is changing until some progress is made.

[j_b]

The problem here is a failure of government. This problem is fixable without screwing the poor. Actually, the solutions I've proposed would help the poor.

 

how are you going to help the poor if you don't increase revenue?

[tvashtarkatena]

Of course the Kochsmokers incorrectly assume that the public is angry at the 'freeloading poor' or that middle class values should be a thing of the past or some such shit.

 

Fucking morons.

 

 

[rob]

The problem here is a failure of government. This problem is fixable without screwing the poor. Actually, the solutions I've proposed would help the poor.

 

how are you going to help the poor if you don't increase revenue?

 

well, by cutting spending in other areas that Tvash has called out, such as the vast waste of money we spend on the "war on drugs"

[tvashtarkatena]

Jesus, try reading my posts for a change and you won't have to ask such a stupid question.

 

 

[j_b]

ya, the greatest crisis since the great depression and "libruls" should be asking for fiscal responsibility? ROTFL

[j_b]

how are you going to help the poor if you don't increase revenue?

 

well, by cutting spending in other areas that Tvash has called out, such as the vast waste of money we spend on the "war on drugs"

 

because you think the people who need support now, can wait for you to kill the war on drugs? I thought I was the dreamer around here!

[rob]

how are you going to help the poor if you don't increase revenue?

 

well, by cutting spending in other areas that Tvash has called out, such as the vast waste of money we spend on the "war on drugs"

 

because you think the people who need support now, can wait for you to kill the war on drugs? I thought I was the dreamer around here!

 

Legalizing marijuana (and taxing it) is just one vote away -- just as possible (theoretically) as an income tax.

[j_b]

Jesus, try reading my posts for a change and you won't have to ask such a stupid question.

 

come on, you are asking us to wait for Washington to do something. That won't happen.

[j_b]

because you think the people who need support now, can wait for you to kill the war on drugs? I thought I was the dreamer around here!

 

Legalizing marijuana (and taxing it) is just one vote away -- just as possible (theoretically) as an income tax.

 

is there one on the ballot? what are its chances of passing compared to the state income tax on the wealthy?

Edited September 22, 2010 by j_b