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.
[quote=Chaparral;11463522]This is not true. As I understand it, neither Montana nor North Dakota are running or projecting to run deficits in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Like NM, much of Montana's revenues are mineral driven. It might serve some good by seeing what the folks up north are doing right fiscally and try to mirror that here.
30 states already have a deficit, NM is not one of them but AZ is, but 7 more states are facing a deficit and NM is one. Data - Swivel
Arizona, California, Indiana, Mississippi and Pennsylvania are in danger of not passing their budget which will mean closing down the government.
New Mexico’s revenue projections show we’re short $433M, economists say
By Marjorie Childress 8/14/09 10:01 AM
Revenue estimates released this week project that New Mexico’s revenues will come in at around $5 billion for the current 2010 fiscal year, which is $422 million less than was anticipated when the budget was put together, according to a report by Barry Massey of the Associated Press.
The estimates were given to the Legislative Finance Committee at a meeting in Angel Fire this week.
In 2008, the state’s revenues were about $6 billion, so in two years the state has seen a $1 billion drop.
In fiscal year 2009, the state relied on federal stimulus dollars and trimmed agency budgets to plug a shortfall of about $309 million. The current budget was crafted with the decline in revenues in mind.
According to Massey, the decline is largely attributed to the national recession, rather than a decline in oil and gas revenues.
The governor is convening a special session in October to address the shortfall this year. Options for closing the gap include dipping into the states reserve fund, finding ways to raise revenue, rolling back unused capital outlay funds, or making more cuts.
You can complain all you want about the Rail Runner, ...
In the 1950's the interstate highway program ...
history will bear out a similar result on the rail runner.
The Railrunner was not funded by anything.
It should have been paid for by a gasoline tax or a toll on
the highways leading to Santa Fe.
They just wrote a check from money that was just laying
around at the time and that was irresponsible.
The $500 million they spent is pretty much the shortfall this year.
As far as I'm concerned, they can tax gasoline all they want and
expand the Railrunner from Denver to El Paso, but it should be
paid for out of a guaranteed revenue stream. (*)
That's our basic difference.
(*) They should also expand I-25 to six lanes to Santa Fe
.... and get to work on the Paseo/I-25 interchange.
.... They can start tomorrow as far as I'm concerned.
What % of money could be removed from the budget, I wonder, in the form of entitlement programs? Medicaid, for instance? I can cite endless cases of fraud, when it comes to one misrepresenting income or employment status, for instance. In other words, there is such a high underclass here that either a) manipulating programs to enrich themselves and b) no incentive to remove themselves from them. As a %, I'd love to know how much could be reduced if the state had a better policing agency to ensure that future abuse of these programs would be minimal, or reducing the aid? For instance, single mothers obtaining free college tuition at state universities, or better yet, non U.S. residents being entitled to in state tuition fees? The former rewards irresponsible behavior, the latter rewards people who don't have in-state residency, or even worse, not even citizens of this country. How about a hiring freeze when it comes to state workers?
You ever notice how government never reduces its operating costs, it only seeks to take from productive enterprises in order to fuel its insaitiable appetite.
Although not all states are scrambling (yet), most states are trying to figure out how to deal with growing deficits.
I saw the article in this morning's Journal that mentioned state income tax tables may revert back to 2003 or before. I looked at the 2003 tables and saw a 20-25 percent increase in taxes relative to 2009. Hey...maybe gasoline will go to $5 a gallon next year. That will help revenue!
May as well throw some more numbers into the mix. I find these numbers as interesting as any:
(*) They should also expand I-25 to six lanes to Santa Fe
.... and get to work on the Paseo/I-25 interchange.
.... They can start tomorrow as far as I'm concerned.
Last cost number I remember for the I-25/Paseo intersection was $350 million (and that may be outdated). The cost to widen I-25 from Tramway to exit 240 is costing about $5 million/mile. That would make the budget hole a bit deeper than it is now.
What % of money could be removed from the budget, I wonder, in the form of entitlement programs? Medicaid, for instance? I can cite endless cases of fraud, when it comes to one misrepresenting income or employment status, for instance. In other words, there is such a high underclass here that either a) manipulating programs to enrich themselves and b) no incentive to remove themselves from them. As a %, I'd love to know how much could be reduced if the state had a better policing agency to ensure that future abuse of these programs would be minimal, or reducing the aid? For instance, single mothers obtaining free college tuition at state universities, or better yet, non U.S. residents being entitled to in state tuition fees? The former rewards irresponsible behavior, the latter rewards people who don't have in-state residency, or even worse, not even citizens of this country. How about a hiring freeze when it comes to state workers?
You ever notice how government never reduces its operating costs, it only seeks to take from productive enterprises in order to fuel its insaitiable appetite.
Mike, is it bad behavior for single moms to go to college? or for moms to be single in the 1st place?
I think mortimer, we'd do the rest of the forum a disservice if we kept using labels for each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mortimer
The Railrunner was not funded by anything.
Hmm.. I guess some things occur without funding? Tell me about this new math of yours. I'd love to find out how my mortgage payment can be not funded by anything but be current nonetheless.
Quote:
It should have been paid for by a gasoline tax or a toll on
the highways leading to Santa Fe.
Gas tax: Don't we already have a state gas tax? Doesn't it go to Santa Fe? Doesn't it get spent on things like, transportation?
Toll on existing federally funded highways: I'm sure the feds would be happy to let us do that if we didn't mind losing the federal funding underpinning them. I'd say a toll of $35.50 each way per car would about do it.
Quote:
They just wrote a check from money that was just laying
around at the time and that was irresponsible.
Ah yes! The "laying around" fund. If I'd only remember to use my "laying around" money, I'd never be broke. Income tax is due? Oh, wow, almost forgot. Had all this money laying around.
Oh, almost forgot, the responsible thing to do with laying around money is to leave it laying around. I think in piles around your house. Maybe in your refrigerator like that congressman. Always good to have some cold hard cash on hand when you need it.
Let's use actual terms used in budgets like "general fund" or "contingency fund" or "oil and gas royalty fund".
Quote:
The $500 million they spent is pretty much the shortfall this year.
As far as I'm concerned, they can tax gasoline all they want and
expand the Railrunner from Denver to El Paso, but it should be
paid for out of a guaranteed revenue stream. (*)
So if something's going to get built, it's supposed to be funded afterward? Maybe the state could command some local corporation to build it and the state could lease it back? It'd be much cheaper, since the corporation would be willing to take the loss and the value of money declines with time.
Quote:
That's our basic difference.
(*) They should also expand I-25 to six lanes to Santa Fe
.... and get to work on the Paseo/I-25 interchange.
.... They can start tomorrow as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, yes. More government projects. But they should be funded with..
I received my Sandoval county property tax bill, and my property taxes are about 45% higher than last year. No, it's not tax lightning. The new hospital levy and the new Eastern Sandoval Flood Control Authority each added about 20% to the bill. These added $100/month.
I received my Sandoval county property tax bill, and my property taxes are about 45% higher than last year. No, it's not tax lightning. The new hospital levy and the new Eastern Sandoval Flood Control Authority each added about 20% to the bill. These added $100/month.
Look at your tax bill again. It is not for 2010, it's for 09 which you've already paid 1/2 with the remainder due in December. These taxes are voter approved taxes passed during elections which many people don't even bother voting on.
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.
