  Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2773 Registered: 11-2003 |
It seems that the movers and shakers are finally realizing that taking what little remains in our pockets is bad for business, and are finally doing something about it. Now only if Denise can talk some sense into Jennifer? (Message edited by MCP-001 on June 17, 2007) | ||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 363 Registered: 07-2004 |
Please lay out your plan to cut $1.8 Billion from the 2008 State budget without raising any new revenue. Go. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1780 Registered: 10-2003 |
Really, taxes are such a minor issue. I mean, who really even thinks about them much, except those on the extreme right? It amazes me when some folks absolutely obsess about taxes. "It's MY money, all MINE, MINE MINE MINE, and NO ONE else is getting ANY of it!!! MINE!"  | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 220 Registered: 02-2006 |
You're joking, right Fury13? | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1783 Registered: 10-2003 |
The fact is, Wazootyman, that taxes are a necessary annoyance. Taxation is necessary to maintaining governmental budgets and ensuring a decent quality of life. A certain level of taxation is unavoidable, because taxes enable us to create societal goods. Most people will protest if/when the level of taxation becomes too high. For some people, however, even a small or reasonable level of taxation is intolerable. These people do not believe in societal goods. These people believe it's every man for himself. These people say, "to hell with you, I got mine!" These people are the extreme right. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 937 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: What a load of BS! Yes, taxes are necessary (only the anarchists and libertarians would argue otherwise) but they exist not for "maintaining governmental budgets" but for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. Nowhere is it written that the state must collect taxes to ensure "a decent quality of life" for its citizens. Maintaining the status quo with our state budget spending while the entire tax base is eroding only ensures that a "decent quality of life" is maintained for government employees and elected officials. | ||
Ja1mz Member Username: Ja1mz Post Number: 51 Registered: 02-2007 |
Thomas Jefferson and our founding fathers, would roll over in their graves if they knew how we were taxed today. Back then, you would not pay property taxes every year, you would pax them once. Amen Mikeg, you are exactly on point.... | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2556 Registered: 12-2004 |
I see Ja1mz subscribes the belief that if you can't debate the issue for what it is, simply reinvent all of the facts. The fact of the matter is that property taxes have been a consistent part of America's political landscape since the Pilgrims arrived here in 1620 and, yes - they have been an annual tax. http://www.iaao.org/uploads/A_ Brief_History_of_Property_Tax. pdf | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2557 Registered: 12-2004 |
quote: Believe it or not, some people believe that protecting the health, safety and welfare of the citizenry is equivalent to "maintaining governmental budgets" since those things are the governmental budget. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2325 Registered: 06-2004 |
quote: ...(slaveowners)... | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 938 Registered: 12-2005 |
quote: Do you really believe that only those things make up the budget? If so, please enlighten us as to exactly whose "health, safety and welfare" is protected by "off-the-table" budget spending for things like: - defined benefit pension plans and lavish health care plans for current and retired teachers that are outside the norm of those found in the private sector - 21st Century Jobs Fund - a staff for the governor's spouse | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 568 Registered: 05-2005 |
The purpose of taxes in this state is to keep a very large voting bloc of state bureaucrats fat and happy between elections, so that they and their families will come out and vote for your party again and again. The truth is we have very little to show for all the taxes that we pay. The money stolen from the hard working people of this state is redistributed to an army of lazy, non-working bureaucrats and their golden-parachute benefits packages. More taxes really mean: continued shitty roads, continued shitty schools, continued shitty public services --- BUT INCREASED compensation for the army of bureaucratic losers parked on their non-working asses all around this state. Wake the fuck up. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2669 Registered: 10-2003 |
^But did Engler's 12 years of tax cuts, and the recent elimination of the SBT remedy any of the above? If anything, I would argue that they reduced the amount of resources available to fix said problems. Not that increased taxes are always the answer, but you don't starve yourself just to save money. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 570 Registered: 05-2005 |
Eliminate 6,000 - 8,000 bureaucrats and their golden parachute benefits packages tomorrow. Budget balanced. Then talk to me allocating taxes for infrastructure (which I am all for). Additional taxes in Michigan today DOES NOT MEAN ONE ADDITIONAL PENNY TO FIX ANY PROBLEM ---- IT MEANS ONE THING AND ONE THING ONLY, KEEPING AN ARMY OF OVERPAID, NON-WORKING BUREAUCRATS FAT AND HAPPY. Why can't you see that? It is plain as day in everything Grandstand says. She is running a huge sham to rape the working people of Michigan in order to shuffle more money to the army of state workers that voted for her. (Message edited by Futurecity on June 17, 2007) | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2674 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: And of course, you have thorough documentation on all of this. Otherwise, it's libel, no? | ||
Ja1mz Member Username: Ja1mz Post Number: 52 Registered: 02-2007 |
"I see Ja1mz subscribes the belief that if you can't debate the issue for what it is, simply reinvent all of the facts." ---why not?..its a big club, turn on CNN, listen to Jenny, or the Clinton Political machine from the '90's...listen to the left in washington... | ||
Paulmcall Member Username: Paulmcall Post Number: 186 Registered: 05-2004 |
That Left got us into the war and everything else the last eight years? I don't mind taxes if I'm getting services in return. I like going to the library, getting my trash picked up and having schools that graduate kids. I also enjoy a decent police force and utilities that work just fine. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 571 Registered: 05-2005 |
Dude, just READ Grandstands proposals. All tax increases are to PROP UP the status quo - meaning keeping current funding of all state bureaucrat staffing, wages and enormous benefits - NO money in there to actually IMPROVE anything. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 572 Registered: 05-2005 |
The state can save nearly $1 billion per year by making state employee contribute $100 per week (or opt out) to their golden-parachute benefits package. Benefits so outrageous that the average working person in Michigan could never dream them up. Surely this is a reasonable thing to ask considering what many of the rest of us have faced and what the current economic climate is here. Yet the average working person in Michigan is going to be raped for more of his/her hard-earned money in order to keep state workers in their outrageous benefit windfall. How could anyone in their right mind support a state tax increase of any sort TO PERPETUATE THIS CORRUPT ARRANGEMENT - unless you are a bureaucrat or one who receives their votes. | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 227 Registered: 12-2006 |
Futurecity, What "golden parachute" benefits package are you talking about? State employees switched off the pension system in 1997. The only state employees still on pensions are retirees and employees with 10 years or more working for the state in 1997. Those with less than 10 years with the state and any new hire since then has been on a 401k retirement plan. As far as other benefits are concerned, state employees pay into their health, dental, and vision coverage and have co-pays as well. The idea that state employee benefits are light years better than everyone elses is an outdated concept. If you really want to target a group that has a sweet deal when it comes to retirement and benefits, look at the teachers. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 673 Registered: 05-2005 |
Cut the governement, we dont need a full time senate here in Michigan. | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 230 Registered: 12-2006 |
We don't need two houses period. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 576 Registered: 05-2005 |
El Jim - Here are facts on the outrageous benefits state of Michigan employees receive at the sole expense of the hard working people of this state: "The average Michigan state employee receives a salary and benefits package worth nearly $75,000. If Michigan private-sector employees received the national average for fringe benefit compensation, their total "pay" would be $58,000. It is possible that those private employees may enjoy higher fringe benefits than the average; however, in order to equal the average total compensation of state employees, the value of their fringe benefit package would need to be 82.5 percent of their base payroll — which is more than twice the national average." Link: http://www.mackinac.org/articl e.aspx?ID=8207 Why not cut state employees benefits to something inline with what the rest of Michigan workers receive? Why not cut their benefits before stealing MORE money from the rest of us? Why keep this group of non-working bureaucrats fat and happy unless for purely political purposes? | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 232 Registered: 12-2006 |
$75,000? Hmm...I would check the source of that. The Mackinac Center is not exactly...reliable. I'm about as high as you can go without being a supervisor. That would put me on the upper end of "average" for a state employee. According to my last statement, when you combine my gross pay with the state's payments into my benefits packages (401k, health, medical, dental, vision, etc) it comes out to roughly $61,000. Remember, I'm on the high end of your typical employee. There is no way, the AVERAGE is $75,000. That is an imaginary number. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 577 Registered: 05-2005 |
I guess you would rather just try to discredit the article rather than read it. "These compensation calculations include employer contributions to FICA, unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation insurance." But I can see why...You are protecting your own ass. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 578 Registered: 05-2005 |
If the average state worker is making $75,000 in wages and benefits and 56% of that just for the cost of benefits (including all benefit administrative costs) then the average state employee wage is $33,000 and average benefit package cost is $42,000 per employee. I think that El Jim underestimates the true cost of his windfall benefits package. Of course that would be in his best interest. But not at all for the rest of us. With 52,250 state employees receiving an average benefit windfall of $42,000 each, that comes to over $2.1 BILLION just in benefits. Completely obscene. I am sure that El Jim voted for Grandstand. So you can see how this corrupt arrangement works, | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 235 Registered: 12-2006 |
FICA? Come one. EVERY employer has to pay FICA, but fine. I'll play your game. If you add FICA, Welfare and all other taxes and workers comp insurances, It STILL comes out to $64,000 a year. Sorry. Try again. Get your info from reality and not from an extreme right wing shill. Quoting them would be like me saying that we should ban cigarette lighters because they release the same amount of pollutants as 4 semi trucks because I read a study by the Hippie Treehugger Society for a More Righteous Planet. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 579 Registered: 05-2005 |
El Jim - the poster child for Grandstand's corrupt arrangement. - "Vote for me, bureaucrats, and I will raise taxes on the working people of Michigan to keep you knee-deep in your benefit windfall" | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 236 Registered: 12-2006 |
The "working people of Michigan"? Just who do you think you are, huh? I AM one of the working people of Michigan too. I pay my taxes just like everybody else (which also means I pay for my own salary and benefits). I am certainly no bureacrat. I do good, honest work for the people of this state in return for a wage and benefits package comparable to others in this state. I don't need someone accusing me of getting more than my fair share when all I'm getting is my fair share. I've already layed out what I make in terms of benefits and wages. All you can do is quote a flawed study by a heavily biased organization and attack my credibility when I produce real numbers. I'm sorry, but you are flat out wrong on this subject. I've proven it. (Message edited by el_jimbo on June 18, 2007) | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 580 Registered: 05-2005 |
You have proven nothing except that you are in denial of the true cost of your windfall benefits package. Which the hard working people of this state are being forced to pay for. And now our taxes are going to be raised to keep you free from any of the belt tightening that the rest of us have to do. Just curious, are you responding to this while you are at work? | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 238 Registered: 12-2006 |
Actually, I'm not at work today. I took the day off to take care of my child who is sick. However, since you asked, are you responding to this while you are at work? Also, as far as not tightening the belt, I hope you would think otherwise. In the past several years, I've had unpaid furlough days, and have at times worked 40 work weeks and only been paid for 38 of those hours (That lasted long enough to rack up the equivalent of 2 weeks of work without pay in one year). We don't have pensions anymore. We pay for part of our insurances, we have co-pays, yet the public still operates under the myth that we still live high on the hog like in the days before I got here. We have no voice in the public so we are always the first ones hit when the politicians can't get their shit together. Furthermore, as I have stated my total "pay" to you (including all taxes and what not paid as well) and it is still $11,000 under your stated "average" when I am probably above average as far as wages are concerned. Your argument doesn't hold up next to real numbers. (Message edited by el_jimbo on June 18, 2007) (Message edited by el_jimbo on June 18, 2007) | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 581 Registered: 05-2005 |
I am enjoying a long weekend as well. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 582 Registered: 05-2005 |
What information do you have that shows what state employees make in wages and benefits besides your own? There are 52,000(?) state employees and you are basing your comments on one person's compensation. And you use words like "probably". Ridiculous. | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 240 Registered: 12-2006 |
I know because I'm in the top pay grade in state government that isn't a supervisory position At my level, the VAST majority of state government employees are at or below my pay scale. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 583 Registered: 05-2005 |
So what you are saying is that you don't have any information to back up your claims besides your own salary. Just as I thought. | ||
El_jimbo Member Username: El_jimbo Post Number: 242 Registered: 12-2006 |
Correct. However, Seeing as how I'm as high as I can go without becoming a supervisor, One would almost have to assume that I am above the average for state employees. Even government wouldn't have more supervisors than rank and file employees. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 584 Registered: 05-2005 |
Hmm...Seems like the Mackinaw report was dead on. According to this summary published by the State of Michigan about fringe benefits for state employees "Benefit packages are worth 50% of base pay". Add on the other employer costs listed in the Mackinaw article and we are at 56%! Whoa, imagine that! Read it and weep: www.michigan.gov/documents/Ins urances__Fringe_Benefits_156437_7.pdf http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22state+of+michigan%22+employee+salary&y=Search&fr=yfp-t-501&u=www.michigan.gov/documents/Insurances__Fringe_Benefits_156437_7.pdf&w=%22state+of+michigan%22+employee+salary&d=UzxQPernO9FZ&icp=1&.intl=us (Message edited by Futurecity on June 18, 2007) (Message edited by Futurecity on June 18, 2007) (Message edited by Futurecity on June 18, 2007) | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2560 Registered: 12-2004 |
MikeG: First, thank you for being one of the few who raises an intelligent argument about state government and does so without flat out inventing facts to meet their argument. Regarding the three state programs that you talked about: Defined benefit pensions for teachers. If better benefits leads to improved performance in the classroom, it's worth it. If it doesn't lead to better performance, the teacher should probably be removed anyway. 21st Century Jobs Fund. Michigan is going through some tough times as we transition away from the auto industry. Governor Granholm is by no means the first elected official who has attempted to use public funds to make a difficult economic transition easier. At least she isn't using tax dollars for it. Staff for the First Gentleman. This one should be eliminated. It won't even make a dent in Michigan's budget problems, but it should be eliminated. quote: Wow! Reinventing reality about others having tried to reinvent facts. Is your real name Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf? quote: It's nice to see people who failed 5th grade math are allowed to post on the forum. The reality of the situation, however, is: 52,250 state employees x $100 per week x 52 weeks per year = $271.7 million. That's a long way from being "nearly $1 billion per year." quote: I read the article that you linked and I'm even more convince that El_jimbo is that it's complete nonsense. For starters, those figures include federal employees assigned to work in Michigan; employees whose salary and benefits the Governor has no control over. It also includes, employees at institutions of higher education. Since Michigan is home to 3 medical schools, 3 law schools, 1 veterinary medicine school, 1 dental school and a dozen graduate levels schools that will severely inflate the numbers. No matter how effective a manager is, he or she will not be able to get an MD, PhD or other doctoral level individual to work for minimum wage. Considering that all of those people are in the mix, I'm surprised at how low the numbers are. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 585 Registered: 05-2005 |
Ah, a math error in my eagerness. My apologies. Never the less, $271 million is still a huge amount that hard-working people in Michigan will be asked to pay ADDITIONAL taxes to cover. AND there is NO mistaking the 52,250(state employees) x $42,000 in average BENEFITS = $2.194 BILLION per year. A truly outrageous sum. Only the corrupt FEEDING the corrupt can justify such an outrageous amount in current economic climate. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1795 Registered: 10-2003 |
Futurecity, so you do not believe that state employees are hard-working? This blanket assumption that all public sector workers are not productive is irritating. I know better. You should know better. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 587 Registered: 05-2005 |
"Hard-working" and "Bureaucrat" are mutually exclusive terms. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1797 Registered: 10-2003 |
Not true. You're making a false assumption. I know plenty of governmental employees at the city, county and state level who are smart, talented, and do their jobs well. Hey, I could say that "hard-working" and "auto assembly line worker" are mutually exclusive terms (as many folks seem to think they are), too, but I wouldn't be correct either. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2336 Registered: 06-2004 |
The biggest mistake continually made here is not booting the Repubs from the state legislature | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 588 Registered: 05-2005 |
If you know "plenty" of bureaucrats, you must be one. The corrupt feeding (in this case defending) the corrupt. |
