Republican Governor balances the budget

[hfojvt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/nyregion/22njbudget.html?scp=4&sq=christie&st=cse

without raising taxes,

"Word of a tentative budget agreement came after Democrats in the Assembly failed to override Mr. Christie’s veto of an additional tax on millionaires. In a party-line vote, the 47 Democrats favored the override and the 33 Republicans opposed it."

except on poor people

"the budget plan he negotiated with leading lawmakers — which the full legislature will vote on next Monday — raises taxes on families with children earning under $48,000. The increase comes in the form of a reduction in the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which will take $45 million from 485,000 families. (The budget also eliminates a property tax rebate for seniors, renters, and homeowners with incomes below $75,000, among other cuts.)"


http://www.offthechartsblog.org/for-richer-or-for-poorer/

but it's nice that they cut all this waste

"The budget cuts school aid by $820 million, drops 1,000 state workers and assumes $50 million in savings from privatization. It skips a $3 billion contribution to the state pension system and leaves about $300 million in surplus."

That's bound to help the economy. At least in some fantasy land where cutting jobs and cutting spending on schools is good for the economy.

But the important thing, to the Republican politicians, is that millionaires do not have to pay more taxes.

[bluethruandthru]

1. You should add "on the backs of the poor and middle class" to your headline. n/t

[hfojvt]

12. I thought that was implied by the first word.

[Angry Dragon]

2. You ever notice lawmakers never take a cut in pay

It must be because they are so important and no one else could do the fine job they do

[Vampire Knight]

6. And that's strange

because many of them have money from one source or another that far exceeds their salary as a lawmaker anyway. One reason why things may never change is that amongst Republicans AND Democrats, politics is almost exclusively a rich person's game.

[hfojvt]

11. I think they did in Kansas, or at least proposed it

But lawmaker pay is a very small part of the budget, and low pay creates other problems. In Kansas, for example, being a state legislature is a part-time job that pays about $14,000 a year. In other words, you cannot live off of it. So you have to either be retired, independently wealthy, or own your own business to be in the legislature, because how could you have a full time job that allows you to take 4 months off to be a legislator?

[LonePirate]

3. I'm guessing thousands of New Jersey voters are wishing they had voted for Corzine now.

I would love to hear some brave politician give a speech about how things were back in the 50s and how we should return to the fiscal policies and tax rates of that era.

[tabbycat31]

4. 3.5 more years of this assclown

unless he pulls a Sarah Palin and puts his white supremacist LG in charge.

Cory Booker can't come soon enough.

[Hannah Bell]

14. why not try what california did with arnold's predecessor?

[tabbycat31]

16. there's talk

we gotta get through this November first.

[Johonny]

5. assumes $50 million in savings from privatization

never assume because it makes an ass out of u and me. Going to guess that savings ends up costing more in the end...

[The Magistrate]

7. There You Go, Sir: Tax The Poor, Feed The Rich

A great many of the people who will get in the neck from this turned out to vote Republican last year....

[Jeffersons Ghost]

8. K&R unreal

[malletgirl02]

9. I wish I could say I am suprised

but, I can't.

[one_voice]

10. K & R

[Hannah Bell]

13. jesus fucking christ. that's remarkably blatant. tax everyone *but* the rich.

[hfojvt]

15. not just the tax part

but cut school spending, lay off 1,000 workers (not to mention what the schools will be required to do to make up the funding, either slash jobs (freeze/cut wages) or raise property taxes or both, and short-change workers pension funds.

The tax on the millionaires amounted to an extra $37,500 or so, which seems like quite a bit, but I don't know what that is in percentage terms 2% or 3%? Perhaps if they'd gone down to $500,000 they could have raised the same revenue with a smaller percentage increase, but that also hits many more voters with tax increases. However, it seems that voting does not matter to Republicans as they put the desires and greed of a mere 16,000 millionaires over the needs of the rest of the state of New Jersey.

To me, this example provides a pretty clear contrast between Republicans and Democrats. Really, if you make less than $150,000 a year, you should never vote Republican, unless they change their evil ways.

[Dawson Leery]

17. So there is no difference between Corzine and Christie?

No difference between Coakley and Brown?
No difference betweenn Deeds and McDonnell?

Idiots.

[AnArmyVeteran]

18. Soulless, Evil Bastards!!!