That was the description from Congressman Weiner's spokesman regarding the nature of the Twitter communication between Weiner and a 17 year old girl.
Really?
How long will this farce continue? This man is a disgrace and clearly unfit to be in Congress. And lets not kid ourselves, you have to be quite a lowlife to be unfit to serve in Congress these days.
Showing posts with label New York State. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York State. Show all posts
Friday, June 10, 2011
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Please, Sir, I Want Some More.
No, I'm not referring to Oliver Twist, instead my heading refers to John Halstead, the President of SUNY Brockport. He wrote this essay in todays Democrat & Chronicle suggesting that SUNY tuition should be allowed to increase.
His essay outlined his arguments justifying a tuition increase. He also described the potential negative ramifications of a failure to do so.
I don't have a big quarrel with his argument about possible service cuts, but I think there is an underlying question that his essay left begging. I would like an explanation from an educator like Mr. Halstead regarding the reasons that college education costs have outpaced inflation by a factor of four. Are there some unique factors which have necessitated such cost growth? Everything costs more than it did 20 years ago, but the costs of higher education have skyrocketed. Details, please.
Mr. Halstead's arguments are reasonable if the current cost structure is reasonable. I'd like a discussion in that vein before we simply agree to more of the same.
His essay outlined his arguments justifying a tuition increase. He also described the potential negative ramifications of a failure to do so.
I don't have a big quarrel with his argument about possible service cuts, but I think there is an underlying question that his essay left begging. I would like an explanation from an educator like Mr. Halstead regarding the reasons that college education costs have outpaced inflation by a factor of four. Are there some unique factors which have necessitated such cost growth? Everything costs more than it did 20 years ago, but the costs of higher education have skyrocketed. Details, please.
Mr. Halstead's arguments are reasonable if the current cost structure is reasonable. I'd like a discussion in that vein before we simply agree to more of the same.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Mr. Gantt Saves Taxpayers Money!
Today's Democrat & Chronicle contained this story about Assemblyman David Gantt and other New York lawmakers filing to receive their pensions despite the fact that they will continue to serve in the State Legislature.
This is the infamous practice known as "double dipping", which was allegedly one of the things that Governor-elect Cuomo vowed to take if elected. (I'll not hold my breath). The practice is legal and both Republican and Democrat members have taken advantage of the opportunity.
I won't bore you with my criticism of Gantt and his fellow crooks. Radio, TV, blogs and water cooler commentary have all uniformly excoriated this practice. I simply wanted to remark on Gantt's comment that he was actually saving taxpayers money by taking the pension now rather than allowing it to continue to accrue. He's right that his annual pension amount will be bigger in five years if he doesn't start taking it now. But is this move saving us money?
Sorry, Dave, you're math is off. If you take the lower annual amount now, plus your annual salary, you will be taking more total dollars out of the system than if you waited and took only the "larger" pension later. I guess you applied the same math skills when casting your budget votes all these years. It all makes sense to me now.
This is the infamous practice known as "double dipping", which was allegedly one of the things that Governor-elect Cuomo vowed to take if elected. (I'll not hold my breath). The practice is legal and both Republican and Democrat members have taken advantage of the opportunity.
I won't bore you with my criticism of Gantt and his fellow crooks. Radio, TV, blogs and water cooler commentary have all uniformly excoriated this practice. I simply wanted to remark on Gantt's comment that he was actually saving taxpayers money by taking the pension now rather than allowing it to continue to accrue. He's right that his annual pension amount will be bigger in five years if he doesn't start taking it now. But is this move saving us money?
Sorry, Dave, you're math is off. If you take the lower annual amount now, plus your annual salary, you will be taking more total dollars out of the system than if you waited and took only the "larger" pension later. I guess you applied the same math skills when casting your budget votes all these years. It all makes sense to me now.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
More Of The Same
The Democrat & Chronicle reports this morning that we finally have a State Budget.
As we all know, the budget is over four months late. You might be tempted to think that the delay resulted from efforts to rein in spending and cut the $9 billion deficit the State is facing. If you did, you'd be wrong.
The budget "highlights" include the fact that State spending will increase by 7.6% and there will be over $1 billion in new taxes. One of the tax increases is the elimination of the exemption on sales taxes for clothing and shoes costing less than $110.00. That ought to help people with lower incomes struggling to balance their budgets.
I was particularly impressed by the fact that the one bi-partisan vote taken in connection with the budget was a 51-8 vote in the Senate to cap local government's ability to raise property taxes. This was largely symbolic since Speaker Silver will not bring the cap to a vote in the Assembly. Still you have to hand it to our State Senators. They clearly believe in limiting spending and taxation....at any level of government but their own.
As we all know, the budget is over four months late. You might be tempted to think that the delay resulted from efforts to rein in spending and cut the $9 billion deficit the State is facing. If you did, you'd be wrong.
The budget "highlights" include the fact that State spending will increase by 7.6% and there will be over $1 billion in new taxes. One of the tax increases is the elimination of the exemption on sales taxes for clothing and shoes costing less than $110.00. That ought to help people with lower incomes struggling to balance their budgets.
I was particularly impressed by the fact that the one bi-partisan vote taken in connection with the budget was a 51-8 vote in the Senate to cap local government's ability to raise property taxes. This was largely symbolic since Speaker Silver will not bring the cap to a vote in the Assembly. Still you have to hand it to our State Senators. They clearly believe in limiting spending and taxation....at any level of government but their own.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Paterson Postures
Governor Paterson finally made it official. There will be no special election in the 29th Congressional District.
That was no surprise, but the concerns Paterson alleged as the reasons for his decison were simply bull. He cited the cost of a special election and the possible dis-enfranchisement of members of the military.
Funny, but the costs did not bother him when we had special elections in other districts. The disenfranchisement claim is the real hoot. First of all, he's disenfranchising the whole 29th district by refusing to hold the special election. Moreover, if he was concerned that military members might miss out on the vote, how is it possible that he allowed a special election in the 23rd district, which included Ft. Drum?
The answer is simple: pure politics. The Democrats don't have a credible candidate, so Paterson wants to put off allowing Republican Tom Reed getting into the seat.
Paterson made up his "concerns" to cover the political basis for the decision. We're not that dumb, Governor.
That was no surprise, but the concerns Paterson alleged as the reasons for his decison were simply bull. He cited the cost of a special election and the possible dis-enfranchisement of members of the military.
Funny, but the costs did not bother him when we had special elections in other districts. The disenfranchisement claim is the real hoot. First of all, he's disenfranchising the whole 29th district by refusing to hold the special election. Moreover, if he was concerned that military members might miss out on the vote, how is it possible that he allowed a special election in the 23rd district, which included Ft. Drum?
The answer is simple: pure politics. The Democrats don't have a credible candidate, so Paterson wants to put off allowing Republican Tom Reed getting into the seat.
Paterson made up his "concerns" to cover the political basis for the decision. We're not that dumb, Governor.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
A Closer Look At Property Taxes
The Democrat and Chronicle had this story on the front of the Local section today. It is the latest installment in their long-running series of articles on the fact that propery taxes in New York are too high and that local governments should be consolidated.
At the outset, let me note my concerns that local property taxes, particularly school taxes, may be too high. But the treatment that the D&C gives to the topic in today's article (like most of their stories on the issue) is far too superficial and leaves many questions unanswered. Further, the statistics listed in the article are not given context which would help us determine their relevance.
The main stat in the story is that Upstate NY counties have among the highest real property taxes as a percentage of home values in the country. On its face, that seems like a damning fact. But how about some context? According to the National Ass'n. of Realtors, real property values in this area are in the bottom ten (10%) percent of values of the 150 largest metropolitan areas in the country (4th quarter, 2007). Given that fact, its not really surprising that taxes, as a percentage of value, are high.
The other regular feature of this type of article is the inevitable statement that property taxes in other states are far less than taxes here on the same value property. What the D&C has repeatedly fails discuss is what is in the basket of goods and services which local taxpayers receive for their money. In Gates, for example, my Town tax levy pays for police, fire and ambulance services, the highway department (plowing, street repair & maintenence, etc.), the library, the parks and recreation department and various other items. If I wanted to compare my taxes with those of someone in Virginia or North Carolina, I would have to know if all of those items were provided by the local government there, or if there were other taxes (for example, in Virginia where there is a personal property tax that covers some items our County property tax is earmarked for) or if there were private entities that provided those services for a fee. Only if we knew the relative cost of the same basket of goods and services in each location, could we make a fair comparison.
I would also like to see another statistic which I believe would be telling. I'd like to know the percentage of local taxes to total state and local taxes and where NY stands relative to other states in that vein. I pay substantially more in State income, sales and use taxes than I do in local taxes. I would be stunned if much more than 10-15% of my total state and local tax dollars went to local governments. When consolidation advocates statrt telling me we will save a lot by cutting down the number of governmental units, I'd like to ask them to show me the proof. We will still have the gaping maw that is Albany!
There is no question we are overtaxed in New York. I am sure that many municipal governments, particularly school districts, could tighten their belts. But in the end, I doubt there is as much disparity between local taxes here and in other states as people anecdotally believe. The real problem remains our State government in Albany. Until they stop spending money like there is no limit to our resources, we will continue to see our State lose people and opportunity.
At the outset, let me note my concerns that local property taxes, particularly school taxes, may be too high. But the treatment that the D&C gives to the topic in today's article (like most of their stories on the issue) is far too superficial and leaves many questions unanswered. Further, the statistics listed in the article are not given context which would help us determine their relevance.
The main stat in the story is that Upstate NY counties have among the highest real property taxes as a percentage of home values in the country. On its face, that seems like a damning fact. But how about some context? According to the National Ass'n. of Realtors, real property values in this area are in the bottom ten (10%) percent of values of the 150 largest metropolitan areas in the country (4th quarter, 2007). Given that fact, its not really surprising that taxes, as a percentage of value, are high.
The other regular feature of this type of article is the inevitable statement that property taxes in other states are far less than taxes here on the same value property. What the D&C has repeatedly fails discuss is what is in the basket of goods and services which local taxpayers receive for their money. In Gates, for example, my Town tax levy pays for police, fire and ambulance services, the highway department (plowing, street repair & maintenence, etc.), the library, the parks and recreation department and various other items. If I wanted to compare my taxes with those of someone in Virginia or North Carolina, I would have to know if all of those items were provided by the local government there, or if there were other taxes (for example, in Virginia where there is a personal property tax that covers some items our County property tax is earmarked for) or if there were private entities that provided those services for a fee. Only if we knew the relative cost of the same basket of goods and services in each location, could we make a fair comparison.
I would also like to see another statistic which I believe would be telling. I'd like to know the percentage of local taxes to total state and local taxes and where NY stands relative to other states in that vein. I pay substantially more in State income, sales and use taxes than I do in local taxes. I would be stunned if much more than 10-15% of my total state and local tax dollars went to local governments. When consolidation advocates statrt telling me we will save a lot by cutting down the number of governmental units, I'd like to ask them to show me the proof. We will still have the gaping maw that is Albany!
There is no question we are overtaxed in New York. I am sure that many municipal governments, particularly school districts, could tighten their belts. But in the end, I doubt there is as much disparity between local taxes here and in other states as people anecdotally believe. The real problem remains our State government in Albany. Until they stop spending money like there is no limit to our resources, we will continue to see our State lose people and opportunity.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
How Much Is That?
Governor Paterson made an impassioned speech to NY State Legislators yesterday, as they gathered for the special session he called to deal with the State's $3.2 billion deficit.
He said he was willing to take the heat for proposing unpopular budget cuts. Paterson emphasized the point by saying that he was willing to "mortgage his political future" over the steps needed to close the deficit.
Someone should tell him that given his current re-election chances, his political future won't qualify for a mortgage.
He said he was willing to take the heat for proposing unpopular budget cuts. Paterson emphasized the point by saying that he was willing to "mortgage his political future" over the steps needed to close the deficit.
Someone should tell him that given his current re-election chances, his political future won't qualify for a mortgage.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
See The World Through Other Eyes
I was in New York City on Thursday to make an appearance at the US Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.
The Court is located in what was once the US Customs House for New York. The building sits on the location of Fort Amsterdam, the original Dutch settlement in New York. It is on the southern tip of Manhattan island next to Battery Park at Bowling Green. This is also the beginning of Broadway and is near Wall Street and the financial district.
The Customs House has an important history. Until the onset of the Federal Income Tax, import duties were the largest source of Federal income and the NY Customs House was the biggest collection point. Also, Custom House employees were political appointees. The President appointed the four principal officers and these appointees had high prestige, great power and local authority, large incomes and enhanced social status. As Collector of Customs, Grover Cleveland developed political IOU's he later used to become President.
Despite all of this, I was there only to go to Court and I was oblivious to much of the history around me. I arrived early on Thursday and I did not want to go in (because you must surrender your cell phone/BlackBerry). As I waited outside, I began to notice how many tourists were in the area. More than 50% were foreigners, but there were also a lot of students and regular folks, too. They were taking pictures, oohing and aahing at the buildings and historical markers, and generally soaking in all of the fascinating sights that those of us who have become jaded take for granted.
I was happy that I had a little extra time that day. It gave me the chance to look around and appreciate my surroundings. Despite everything, New York is a great city in a great country. Its good to be reminded now and then.
The Court is located in what was once the US Customs House for New York. The building sits on the location of Fort Amsterdam, the original Dutch settlement in New York. It is on the southern tip of Manhattan island next to Battery Park at Bowling Green. This is also the beginning of Broadway and is near Wall Street and the financial district.
The Customs House has an important history. Until the onset of the Federal Income Tax, import duties were the largest source of Federal income and the NY Customs House was the biggest collection point. Also, Custom House employees were political appointees. The President appointed the four principal officers and these appointees had high prestige, great power and local authority, large incomes and enhanced social status. As Collector of Customs, Grover Cleveland developed political IOU's he later used to become President.
Despite all of this, I was there only to go to Court and I was oblivious to much of the history around me. I arrived early on Thursday and I did not want to go in (because you must surrender your cell phone/BlackBerry). As I waited outside, I began to notice how many tourists were in the area. More than 50% were foreigners, but there were also a lot of students and regular folks, too. They were taking pictures, oohing and aahing at the buildings and historical markers, and generally soaking in all of the fascinating sights that those of us who have become jaded take for granted.
I was happy that I had a little extra time that day. It gave me the chance to look around and appreciate my surroundings. Despite everything, New York is a great city in a great country. Its good to be reminded now and then.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
A Battle For Hearts And Minds
That's what the special election in New York's 23rd Congressional District is.
The race to replace John McHugh in this conservative leaning district is the first (of many more to come) referendum on the direction of the country since the "tea party awakening" that has been sweeping the nation. This election pits liberal Democrat Bill Owens against the GOP choice, Dede Scozzafava and upstart conservative, Doug Hoffman.
The split between Scozzafava and Hoffman threatens to hand the race to the Democrat. Newt Gingrich has weighed in on behalf of Scozzafava, despite her liberal viewpoints. Newt apparently believes its better to have a RINO in office than a Democrat.
Well, Newt, you're wrong. This is the song the RNC has been singing for years and all its gotten us are Arlen Spectors, Olympia Snowes, and Lincoln Chaffees. Mark Steyn pointed this out better than I can in this NRO post where he noted that "[t]he tea parties and town halls were a response not just to Obama but to the 2006/2008 GOP".
Steyn goes on to label Scozzava not a RINO but a DIABLO (Democrat In All But Label Only). Read his whole piece. He's right on the mark.
The more I've read about this race, the more I realize that conservatives have to take control of the GOP. Liberals like Scozzafava cannot get our endorsement. If they do, we will, at best, go back to the days of permanent "go-along-get-along" minority status. Our economy and our nation's future cannot afford that. We have to stop allowing career politicians to place their interests over ours.
The race to replace John McHugh in this conservative leaning district is the first (of many more to come) referendum on the direction of the country since the "tea party awakening" that has been sweeping the nation. This election pits liberal Democrat Bill Owens against the GOP choice, Dede Scozzafava and upstart conservative, Doug Hoffman.
The split between Scozzafava and Hoffman threatens to hand the race to the Democrat. Newt Gingrich has weighed in on behalf of Scozzafava, despite her liberal viewpoints. Newt apparently believes its better to have a RINO in office than a Democrat.
Well, Newt, you're wrong. This is the song the RNC has been singing for years and all its gotten us are Arlen Spectors, Olympia Snowes, and Lincoln Chaffees. Mark Steyn pointed this out better than I can in this NRO post where he noted that "[t]he tea parties and town halls were a response not just to Obama but to the 2006/2008 GOP".
Steyn goes on to label Scozzava not a RINO but a DIABLO (Democrat In All But Label Only). Read his whole piece. He's right on the mark.
The more I've read about this race, the more I realize that conservatives have to take control of the GOP. Liberals like Scozzafava cannot get our endorsement. If they do, we will, at best, go back to the days of permanent "go-along-get-along" minority status. Our economy and our nation's future cannot afford that. We have to stop allowing career politicians to place their interests over ours.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
End Of STAR?
Tucked away in the recesses of today's stories on Governor Paterson's budget proposal was a note that he wants to do away with the STAR real property tax rebate that has subsidized school tax payments for many New Yorkers.
I have always believed that STAR was the ultimate shell game. It amounts to being bribed with our own money. But, for many seniors, the STAR plan has meant little or no school tax expense. If STAR is really ended, there will be an outcry like New York politicians have not heard in a long time. I foresee a wheelchair and walker march on Albany to protest this program being cut.
Ending STAR will also put more pressure on School District budgets. Seniors, effectively bought off with their STAR rebates, have stayed home on school budget votes. Without STAR, they will swarm to the polls to vote no on school spending.
I don't think this cut will survive to become law. Seniors vote and legislators know it. They won't cross that interest group.
I have always believed that STAR was the ultimate shell game. It amounts to being bribed with our own money. But, for many seniors, the STAR plan has meant little or no school tax expense. If STAR is really ended, there will be an outcry like New York politicians have not heard in a long time. I foresee a wheelchair and walker march on Albany to protest this program being cut.
Ending STAR will also put more pressure on School District budgets. Seniors, effectively bought off with their STAR rebates, have stayed home on school budget votes. Without STAR, they will swarm to the polls to vote no on school spending.
I don't think this cut will survive to become law. Seniors vote and legislators know it. They won't cross that interest group.
Better Start That Diet!
I am going to head back to the gym and start my New Year's diet a bit early.
I read the paper this morning and read about the "Obesity Tax". Yikes! Today a tax on sugary drinks, tomorrow a surcharge on KFC. I figure it won't be long before guys like me who weigh over 275 will start paying an income tax surcharge for every pound over a "healthy target weight".
Seriously, there isn't much left between us and the nanny state. Everywhere we turn, we are being told what to eat, what to drive, where to set the thermostat, etc. I'm worried that the liberals who have taken over all the branches of government in Washington and Albany will have guys like me in their sights.
I mean, I put sugar and half and half in my regular coffee (that's three food police violations right there). I use butter instead of margarine and I love roast beef. I'm probably headed for a re-education camp where I'll learn to like whole grains, green vegetables and cottage cheese.
I may move to Canada after all. At least I can still get bacon and eggs there.
I read the paper this morning and read about the "Obesity Tax". Yikes! Today a tax on sugary drinks, tomorrow a surcharge on KFC. I figure it won't be long before guys like me who weigh over 275 will start paying an income tax surcharge for every pound over a "healthy target weight".
Seriously, there isn't much left between us and the nanny state. Everywhere we turn, we are being told what to eat, what to drive, where to set the thermostat, etc. I'm worried that the liberals who have taken over all the branches of government in Washington and Albany will have guys like me in their sights.
I mean, I put sugar and half and half in my regular coffee (that's three food police violations right there). I use butter instead of margarine and I love roast beef. I'm probably headed for a re-education camp where I'll learn to like whole grains, green vegetables and cottage cheese.
I may move to Canada after all. At least I can still get bacon and eggs there.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
More D&C Condescension on Consolidation
The Democrat & Chronicle reverted to its condescending best form today with its editorial entitled "high taxes, duplicated services are connected". The editorial opens with this thoughtful and reasonable premise:
"Frankly, New Yorkers continue to talk out of both sides of their mouths on getting the high cost of living in this state under control."
Not satisfied with one insult to its readers, the editorial went on to opine:
"New Yorkers, who support 4,200 taxing entities statewide, need to either start supporting streamlined, more efficient government operations or stop whining about the high taxes they pay."
Quite frankly, there is little reason to accept the D&C view that local government is too expensive. I am a fairly typical New York taxpayer. The dollar amount of taxes I pay to the Town of Gates comprises less than 8% of the total dollar amount of taxes I pay for State Income taxes, County taxes, School taxes, and Town taxes combined. That does not include sales and excise taxes paid to the State.
From the Town of Gates, I get a Police Department which responds within scant minutes for emergencies, provides a four or five car, 24/7 road patrol, and which takes reports in person, a Highway Department that paves, repairs, and plows my streets, picks up my leaves in the fall and my yard debris every week, a Recreation Department that provides beautiful Town Parks and recreation programs for youths and senior citizens, a library that has been seen as second to none in the suburbs, and provides dozens of other services, as well.
All of that for less than 8% of my total tax expense! I'd say that I get 60- 70% of the services I value and enjoy from my Town government. That's quite a return on my investment.
The D&C doesn't get it. We "whiners" aren't whining about paying for the host of services we get from our local governments. We want the State to stop spending lavish amounts on numerous programs and projects of dubious merit and for which we get little value for our money.
The other big thing the D&C seems to forget is the thing called "the consent of the governed". We are entitled to have the government and services we want. Citizens have a big say in the nature and cost of local government, which is generally low cost and high value. We have virtually no say in our State government, which is a Byzantine, bloated, and dysfunctional entity. Don't lecture us about our local government until the really costly levels of government clean up their acts.
The D&C criticised the people of Holley for agreeing to spend $1.00 per day to have local police. That's only about 20-25 cents more than it costs to buy the D&C every day. Given a choice, I know which one I'd give up.
"Frankly, New Yorkers continue to talk out of both sides of their mouths on getting the high cost of living in this state under control."
Not satisfied with one insult to its readers, the editorial went on to opine:
"New Yorkers, who support 4,200 taxing entities statewide, need to either start supporting streamlined, more efficient government operations or stop whining about the high taxes they pay."
Quite frankly, there is little reason to accept the D&C view that local government is too expensive. I am a fairly typical New York taxpayer. The dollar amount of taxes I pay to the Town of Gates comprises less than 8% of the total dollar amount of taxes I pay for State Income taxes, County taxes, School taxes, and Town taxes combined. That does not include sales and excise taxes paid to the State.
From the Town of Gates, I get a Police Department which responds within scant minutes for emergencies, provides a four or five car, 24/7 road patrol, and which takes reports in person, a Highway Department that paves, repairs, and plows my streets, picks up my leaves in the fall and my yard debris every week, a Recreation Department that provides beautiful Town Parks and recreation programs for youths and senior citizens, a library that has been seen as second to none in the suburbs, and provides dozens of other services, as well.
All of that for less than 8% of my total tax expense! I'd say that I get 60- 70% of the services I value and enjoy from my Town government. That's quite a return on my investment.
The D&C doesn't get it. We "whiners" aren't whining about paying for the host of services we get from our local governments. We want the State to stop spending lavish amounts on numerous programs and projects of dubious merit and for which we get little value for our money.
The other big thing the D&C seems to forget is the thing called "the consent of the governed". We are entitled to have the government and services we want. Citizens have a big say in the nature and cost of local government, which is generally low cost and high value. We have virtually no say in our State government, which is a Byzantine, bloated, and dysfunctional entity. Don't lecture us about our local government until the really costly levels of government clean up their acts.
The D&C criticised the people of Holley for agreeing to spend $1.00 per day to have local police. That's only about 20-25 cents more than it costs to buy the D&C every day. Given a choice, I know which one I'd give up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
