Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I voted for Christie. But for me (and I suspect many people) it was more of a vote against Corzine than a love for Christie.
I would love to see him challenge the way Abbot school money is wasted. Homeowners are overburdened because huge funds are diverted to Abbott Districts (and then wasted) from property taxes. Sure your property tax bill might be 70% for schooling but how much is actually going to your district? Hint: Not much.
Do you have any source and data about what money goes to Abbott Districts? Or is this just your own speculation?
I voted for Christie. But for me (and I suspect many people) it was more of a vote against Corzine than a love for Christie.
I would love to see him challenge the way Abbot school money is wasted. Homeowners are overburdened because huge funds are diverted to Abbott Districts (and then wasted) from property taxes. Sure your property tax bill might be 70% for schooling but how much is actually going to your district? Hint: Not much.
we've had this discussion before and if IIRC noone could tell me what % of my taxes were going directly to abbott, especially since Morris County DOES NOT HAVE an Abbott District.
My tax bill is broken up as follows:
"District School Tax" - 68.8% of my school tax
"Municipal School Tax" - 31.2% of my school tax
Are you saying a % of this gets funneled to the state which in turns funnels it to Abbott? So when my school tax skyrocketed a few years ago to build a new school some of that actually got sent to Newark? And last year when my school portion of my bill rose about $20 a year some of THAT got sent to Newark? And if this is the case, why isn't this common knowledge or at least detailed on your tax bill? My guess: because this is not how abbott is funded!
In all seriousness, I'd love to see where in my property taxes are the funds going to Newark, and not speculation. Hard facts.
I will just say that you can get a complete property tax breakdown from your town. Mine is not online. It is very painful reading but clearly outlines where your monies are spent.
last I heard someone make that argument, it was some lout on fox news (and he wasn't talking about Gov Christie).
Running a government isn't running a business. The idea that you can run government like a business is a fallacy (the main diff between govt and business is that government doesn't go out of business)
Look.......I'm not for Democrats or Republicans.........just someone "qualified" to balance a budget. It would seem to balance a state budget one had better have some past "successful" business experience. Unfortunately we keep electing on a "party" basis rather than whos qualifed. That being said both parties keep offering politicians rather than someone truly "qualified" to deal with financial decisions. Finally, to respond to your observation that government doesn't go out of business.....this is true.....it just operates at a deficit spending more dollars than it takes in.......whereas successful businesses are financially responsible......we as citizens can't soend more than we make and those who have have had success in business certainly don't do that.....so....the bottom line is that we have to operate our government as a business not spending more dollars that it takes in. It doesn't take Bill Gates to figure this out but we keep electing politicians who don't have a clue how to fix this mess or the backbone to do the right thing.
It's interesting to me just how partisan and biased so many people can be.
Really. It boggles my mind. They're all crooks on some level or they wouldn't even have had the opportunity to run. What difference does it make what political party they belong to?
Look.......I'm not for Democrats or Republicans.........just someone "qualified" to balance a budget. It would seem to balance a state budget one had better have some past "successful" business experience. Unfortunately we keep electing on a "party" basis rather than whos qualifed. That being said both parties keep offering politicians rather than someone truly "qualified" to deal with financial decisions. Finally, to respond to your observation that government doesn't go out of business.....this is true.....it just operates at a deficit spending more dollars than it takes in.......whereas successful businesses are financially responsible......we as citizens can't soend more than we make and those who have have had success in business certainly don't do that.....so....the bottom line is that we have to operate our government as a business not spending more dollars that it takes in. It doesn't take Bill Gates to figure this out but we keep electing politicians who don't have a clue how to fix this mess or the backbone to do the right thing.
Running a business isn't primarily about "balancing a budget". Businesses often need to borrow, and burn through piles of cash to expand (which is what government does also)
They key difference is that business needs to provide products and services that people have the will and means to pay for. Not so in government -- many of the recipients of government services could not afford to pay the costs out of pocket, and many of those who can afford those costs wouldn't pay them voluntarily.
So even if a government taxes more than it spends, that doesn't make it "profitable" in the same sense that a successful business is. Indeed, if it were profitable in that sense, there would be no need to use taxes (as opposed to fee-for-service) to fund its activities.
Running a business isn't primarily about "balancing a budget". Businesses often need to borrow, and burn through piles of cash to expand (which is what government does also)
They key difference is that business needs to provide products and services that people have the will and means to pay for. Not so in government -- many of the recipients of government services could not afford to pay the costs out of pocket, and many of those who can afford those costs wouldn't pay them voluntarily.
So even if a government taxes more than it spends, that doesn't make it "profitable" in the same sense that a successful business is. Indeed, if it were profitable in that sense, there would be no need to use taxes (as opposed to fee-for-service) to fund its activities.
You can twist the facts however you wish but when a successful business borrows its usually against money thats already in the pipeline......not so with government that continually spends more than it has knowing it doesn't have the funds to cover the checks its writing. You can't keep spending more than you have without eventual consequences and thats where New Jersey and many other states are right now. suggesting that cutting teachers, police, firemens etc. salaries will make this state solvent is laughable. We had proportional salaries for these people when the state was solvent so thats not the problem......its all the other crap thats found its way into the budget over the years and an experienced individual thats been successful in business could easily target and remove the unnecessary waste......it may step on a lot of peoples toes but thats why we can't have a politician that "owes" favors for his political position but rather someone who owes no one.
You can twist the facts however you wish but when a successful business borrows its usually against money thats already in the pipeline......not so with government that continually spends more than it has knowing it doesn't have the funds to cover the checks its writing. You can't keep spending more than you have without eventual consequences and thats where New Jersey and many other states are right now. suggesting that cutting teachers, police, firemens etc. salaries will make this state solvent is laughable. We had proportional salaries for these people when the state was solvent so thats not the problem......its all the other crap thats found its way into the budget over the years and an experienced individual thats been successful in business could easily target and remove the unnecessary waste......it may step on a lot of peoples toes but thats why we can't have a politician that "owes" favors for his political position but rather someone who owes no one.
So how did Corzine do when he was governor ?
There is no "twisting" facts in what I wrote. The way to remove "waste" is to simply reduce the role of government. The way to "run government like a business" is to turn functions of the government over to business (privatise more). Government is wasteful and loss-making by design.
For example, privatizing the education system would eliminate a lot of "unnecessary waste", but it's not politically feasible. Most of the so-called "waste" might not be necessary from a purely economic standpoint, but you can rest assured that most "waste" makes perfect sense politically.
That is why when someone like Corzine takes over, they are a fish out of water -- they understand that their job is not to make government profitable after all. If it were that, Corzine could do the job quite well. Rather, it's to "waste" money in a way that is politically efficient, which may or may not (and usually is not) be efficient economically.
As for salaries -- I agree that across the board cuts in salaries doesn't really address the problems. Bloated salaries (and benefits packages which cause more financial impact) are one of many symptoms of a pattern of wasteful behavior that is to be expected in organizations such as governments that are not responsive to market forces.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And last year when my school portion of my bill rose about $20 a year some of THAT got sent to Newark? And if this is the case, why isn't this common knowledge or at least detailed on your tax bill? My guess: because this is not how abbott is funded!
