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 personally am not thrilled with either candidate. However, Stefanowski is not going to get the job done. He lacks any charisma in my opinion and looks dour and uninterested. He has no real solutions and is just parroting the local version of a national agenda which is to cut taxes for the wealthy and clandestinely move the costs to working people. Lamont needs to address the budgetary problems and should open about the necessary changes to education structure reform, pensions and state worker healthcare benefits to make meaningful improvements in the cost structure. He has an opportunity to be true leader that people could have confidence in by being honest. As far as the democratic base, they can see where things will go if Stefanowski is elected and should be more involved in helping to solve the problems as opposed to just protecting the status quo for as long as possible.
I personally am not thrilled with either candidate. However, Stefanowski is not going to get the job done. He lacks any charisma in my opinion and looks dour and uninterested. He has no real solutions and is just parroting the local version of a national agenda which is to cut taxes for the wealthy and clandestinely move the costs to working people. Lamont needs to address the budgetary problems and should open about the necessary changes to education structure reform, pensions and state worker healthcare benefits to make meaningful improvements in the cost structure. He has an opportunity to be true leader that people could have confidence in by being honest. As far as the democratic base, they can see where things will go if Stefanowski is elected and should be more involved in helping to solve the problems as opposed to just protecting the status quo for as long as possible.
Sounds like you would be interested in Oz and Monte
I listed but a few. I could keep you busy all day long looking up the individuals that are publically identified, and then there are those that are not revealed in the media.
The repercussions that exist are subject to the opinions of the taxpayers who vote and pay the bills. Should a UCONN Department Head getting paid over $ 300,000 a year plus benefits , just be demoted and receive an unknown salary " adjustment" for not having any contact for over a year with a Professor under her supervision ? As it turns out, the Professor was deceased , but still drawing a salary. Would a private sector employer let you keep your job ?
This has all happened under Democratic Leadership. These issues, along with the continued increased taxation, economic growth lagging behind much of the country and lack of results needs to be strongly considered when voting to elect the next Governor. That's my point. Vote Democratic and you will see more of the same.
What you fail to take into account in your condemnation of the salaries being paid is what similar positions in other states are being paid. Department heads at major universities are paid over $300,000 per year whether you like it or not or think it is excessive. The same goes for other positions. Its not like our state can live in a vacuum and pay whatever we like. UConn has worked very hard over the past couple of decades to improve its rankings. The only way to attract top talent is to pay them. Judging from their improved rankings, it is working. Jay
So much of Bob Stefanowski's platform revolves around cutting taxes significantly. In fact, it seems to be his only platform. Yet as has been pointed out here numerous times, this type of action has not worked in other states, most notably Kansas. The opinion piece linked below notes how this did not work. I understand that Wisconsin had a similar experience. This is why I question the validity of Stefanowski's plan and whether it would work here or not. Jay
What you fail to take into account in your condemnation of the salaries being paid is what similar positions in other states are being paid. Department heads at major universities are paid over $300,000 per year whether you like it or not or think it is excessive. The same goes for other positions. Its not like our state can live in a vacuum and pay whatever we like. UConn has worked very hard over the past couple of decades to improve its rankings. The only way to attract top talent is to pay them. Judging from their improved rankings, it is working. Jay
I didn't condemn the salaries of anyone. I said " overpaid employees" . Many people might agree with that when you compare salaries with the private sector. If questioning how a person could be paid that much as a Department Head with what actually happened is " condemning" , there will not be much chance of improvement.
What other states do, and do not do is irrelevant to CT. We live here. What I do know is that the State of CT has vastly increased the amount of administrators in the Higher Education system over a number of years. A good portion of that has a direct link to Progressive Liberal ideology relating to Compliance , Gender issues and the like. That's what I was talking about when I referred to the Deep Blue that has festered within the ranks of CT Government. When you have the President of UCONN rallying with " dreamers" , illegals, saying UCONN needs them as students, is that what taxpayer dollars should be supporting ?
" Working" ? Taxpayers lose $ 8 million a year on a Football Stadium. Sure, I know it should be named Rowland Field instead of the Rent, but isn't it time to take a close look at those economics? Attendance is way down, revenue way down. Should we be paying $ 30,000 to $ 100,000 in travel expenses for a Professor's Assistant, and when brought to light, have UCONN say they will make changes regarding approvals and disbursements? Make changes? They did let him go, but how long has this been going on, and how many additional cases of these expenses at taxpayer expense?
All this has been going on the last 8 years of Democratic control. Exactly why should anyone vote for a Democrat this election cycle? Here's the cold hard facts. The State of CT is broke. You can pat everyone on the back for a job well done, bring in all the " top talent" in the world , but the Ruling Class of CT has put us all in deep economic trouble. Rankings mean absolutely nothing when the Mother Ship can't pay the bills.
Forgive me if this has already been discussed. I’m still registered to vote in Massachusetts so I’ve only been loosely following the race here in CT and the discussion about it on city-data.
I watch the debate that happened in New Haven a month ago (my roommate is registered to vote in CT and happened to be watching it). Something Ned Lamont said still bothers me. I found a full video of the debate on YouTube and what I’m talking about happens at 24:40.
Basically (as I understood him), Lamont was suggesting that the Bridgeport public school system didn’t need more money in order to improve, it just needed more male teachers because the male students need role models.
I was flabbergasted! As someone who attended an urban public school, this issue is important to me. And to imply that a school district is underperforming because it’s staff is too female is just atrocious!
Does anyone know if Lamont has followed up since the debate in order to rectify or clarify what he said? I’ve always considered myself a blue-blooded yankee: liberal to the bone and proud of it. However, if Lamont hasn’t taken back what he said, then I really wouldn’t want to see him given the office of CT governor.
(Not to mention: if the state has the resources to pay off student loans [as Ned suggested in the debate] in order to attract male teachers to Bridgeport, then why don’t they put those resources to good use and fund projects, programs, and capital investments that will actually benefit the students?!)
I listed but a few. I could keep you busy all day long looking up the individuals that are publically identified, and then there are those that are not revealed in the media.
The repercussions that exist are subject to the opinions of the taxpayers who vote and pay the bills. Should a UCONN Department Head getting paid over $ 300,000 a year plus benefits , just be demoted and receive an unknown salary " adjustment" for not having any contact for over a year with a Professor under her supervision ? As it turns out, the Professor was deceased , but still drawing a salary. Would a private sector employer let you keep your job ?
This has all happened under Democratic Leadership. These issues, along with the continued increased taxation, economic growth lagging behind much of the country and lack of results needs to be strongly considered when voting to elect the next Governor. That's my point. Vote Democratic and you will see more of the same.
The various CT State Universities existed before Malloy was elected. So your assessment malfeasance only started in 2012 and later is incorrect. You are also pointing out only one employee in an organization that employees thousands. One rogue employee is a joke.
Your issue seems to be with the salaries state employees receive. That's why I gave you a list of common state positions for you to tell us what they should be paid.
Here is your list again
Superiour Court Judge
Social Worker (aka DCF)
State Police
State prison guards
DMV clerks
Medical school professors
Snow plow drivers
Public Defenders
Civil engineers
DOL employees (aka the people who admin unemployment claims)
If you want to list all these positions at $12 an hour no benes that;s fine with me. I can assure you no ones going to apply though.
No one needs the Govt until they need the Govt. Sooner or later everyone finds that out and some will find out the hard way.
Not specific to CT but I thought this was interesting since I think the question is also on the ballot in CA.
I listen to 102.1 Springfield, MA sometimes and they had a political commercial about some question on the ballot in MA.
Basically, it says that MA wants a law/mandate that RN's can only care for so many patients at one time.
Supposedly, numerous organizations are against this (mostly representing hospitals) but for the life of me I can't see how a mandate like this would be bad. Am I missing something ? Only a matter of time before this floats down to CT.
Forgive me if this has already been discussed. I’m still registered to vote in Massachusetts so I’ve only been loosely following the race here in CT and the discussion about it on city-data.
I watch the debate that happened in New Haven a month ago (my roommate is registered to vote in CT and happened to be watching it). Something Ned Lamont said still bothers me. I found a full video of the debate on YouTube and what I’m talking about happens at 24:40.
Basically (as I understood him), Lamont was suggesting that the Bridgeport public school system didn’t need more money in order to improve, it just needed more male teachers because the male students need role models.
I was flabbergasted! As someone who attended an urban public school, this issue is important to me. And to imply that a school district is underperforming because it’s staff is too female is just atrocious!
Does anyone know if Lamont has followed up since the debate in order to rectify or clarify what he said? I’ve always considered myself a blue-blooded yankee: liberal to the bone and proud of it. However, if Lamont hasn’t taken back what he said, then I really wouldn’t want to see him given the office of CT governor.
(Not to mention: if the state has the resources to pay off student loans [as Ned suggested in the debate] in order to attract male teachers to Bridgeport, then why don’t they put those resources to good use and fund projects, programs, and capital investments that will actually benefit the students?!)
I don't think that's a bad suggestion. There is a huge shortage of male teachers for grades K-5. I think its about 80% women. Higher grades probably have more males, but I don't know the percentages.
I don't think the male shortage contributes to under performing schools, and even if it did I don't think it would be possible to measure.
The various CT State Universities existed before Malloy was elected. So your assessment malfeasance only started in 2012 and later is incorrect. You are also pointing out only one employee in an organization that employees thousands. One rogue employee is a joke.
Your issue seems to be with the salaries state employees receive. That's why I gave you a list of common state positions for you to tell us what they should be paid.
Here is your list again
Superiour Court Judge
Social Worker (aka DCF)
State Police
State prison guards
DMV clerks
Medical school professors
Snow plow drivers
Public Defenders
Civil engineers
DOL employees (aka the people who admin unemployment claims)
If you want to list all these positions at $12 an hour no benes that;s fine with me. I can assure you no ones going to apply though.
No one needs the Govt until they need the Govt. Sooner or later everyone finds that out and some will find out the hard way.
Don't forget some of these positions are extremely extremely extremely understaffed
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.
