Pawlenty continues to set sights on the poor, elderly, and disabled to "solve" budget crisis (Dakota: 2010, movers)

[Duk123]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

So long as he stops our state from spending money we cannot afford I will vote for this "idiot" next term as well. I love fiscally responsible idiots even if they are only out to please their constituency. Keep up the GREAT work Tim!!!

What most politician seem to forget is that they represent everyone those that voted for them and those that didn't. If Pawlenty had won in a landslide I could understand his arrogance in staying the course of no new taxes. But he didn't he won 1,028,568 to Hatch's 1,007,460 with an additional 141,735 going to Hutchinson. Those numbers along with the fact that the DFL controls both houses of the legislator should be an indicator to the Gov. that pretty much as many people disagree with his course as agree. While I don't expect Pawlenty or any other politician to change their entire political philosophy because of one election (well except Norm). I do at least expect them to work with the oppositon, with Pawlenty and many others fail to do.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Duk123

What most politician seem to forget is that they represent everyone those that voted for them and those that didn't. If Pawlenty had won in a landslide I could understand his arrogance in staying the course of no new taxes. But he didn't he won 1,028,568 to Hatch's 1,007,460 with an additional 141,735 going to Hutchinson. Those numbers along with the fact that the DFL controls both houses of the legislator should be an indicator to the Gov. that pretty much as many people disagree with his course as agree. While I don't expect Pawlenty or any other politician to change their entire political philosophy because of one election (well except Norm). I do at least expect them to work with the oppositon, with Pawlenty and many others fail to do.

I see him as working with the opposition. In fact, too much for me. Our governor isn't exactly a staunch conservative. He agreed to borrow 1/2 of the proposed billion in increased taxes in a pending settlement with tobacco.

In his budget, he wants to spend even more on K-12. Certainly stanch conservatives would want to cut education even more. An across the board cut in all programs like the Dem's proposed doesn't seem too smart to me. The Pawlenty approach is to prioritize. We all have to figure out where our resources are best allocated.

At the risk of sounding non-compassionate: Let's talk candidly. If it costs $200,000 in medical bills for a government to help out an unfortunate individual who had a pretty bad health issue or accident, would it make more sense to use that $200K to offset the cost of college so that the next generation was educated (and hopefully they had a better job to buy their own health coverage)?? Would it make more sense to to spend that $200K for better roads, safer neighbothoods by adding more police? How about taking that $200K and buying 200,000 meals for starving people in Africa??? So for $200K, we could help many many more people stay alive. That $200K helps one person stay alive.

What if you learned that the person who had his unfortunate health issue didn't chose to buy health insurance but chose $400 a month on a car payment that is nicer than your car, spent $100 a month on a cell phone, $75 a month on cable, she goes to the Casinos and spends $300 a month, goes to the bar and spends $200 a month on drinks etc. I am NOT saying if you have health issues and no insurance that this is automatic. But we factually all know that it happens all to often. If they spent all of this money, could they of had some dollars in savings to pay for health coverage if they unfortuately got laid off??? Of course.

Right now, the way the law is set up she didn't need health insurance; it's the law for the hospital and or the State to pick up the tab because she "cannot afford to pay the $200K bill". It's why this is happening as well Minnesota Hospital, Cutting Jobs, Layoff Staff, Laid Off People, Unpaid Days Off | EmploymentSpectator | Employment News

It' really easy to have "compassion" and vote that you take another person's money to spend it on things you find important. But don't you think that by us funding all of this "compassion", it allows some people to make some less than ideal budget decisions like in my example?? When we are talking about health care, just a few hundred of these examples will result in BIG money! Imagine how many people have children who cannot afford it because the government will pay for all kinds of assistance and I could list a dozen more examples. I think that our Governor gets this concept and I think that Camden doesn't grasp it. The fact that too many people make dumb decisions is the reason why we cannot help that mentally ill person who is starving on the street and why our senior centers are underfunded: people are saying enough already! The people who are procreating faster than average seem to be using up all of our state resources but that is another can of worms.

Fiscal responsibility will result in personal responsibility. And yes. Fiscal and personal responsibility will result in some painful lessons and many people hurting that we might even know. It might even result in some people that should be helped not be helped. But won't we fall short on hundreds of millions of people across the world that we all would like to help that are every bit as important?? Don't we all see that society is getting "worse" as we decide to fund all of this social programs??

We are moving to a nanny state with all of our compassion and I can hear the sucking sound from all of the surrounding states and a share of them made some really bad personal decisions. Sorry. Tim is right and has a better grasp on what is really going on. I want someone who is objective in office and is willing buck the general public who is thinking with emotion versus logic.

[marmac]

----sets sights on the poor, elderly, and disabled-------

Pawlenty stated Minnesota's state run health programs are the most generous in the country.

We can not have state programs so generous that we are attracting people moving from other states here to recieve them

[jmgg]

Originally Posted by marmac

----sets sights on the poor, elderly, and disabled-------

Pawlenty stated Minnesota's state run health programs are the most generous in the country.

We can not have state programs so generous that we are attracting people moving from other states here to recieve them

Good point. Minnesota has become one of the top nanny states in the country. People who don't want to work have found this out. As more and more "needy" immagrate in, you guys just keep adding taxes. The ulta-liberal mentality of primarily the twin cities is choking the state. Good thing you're getting Al Franken. He'll definitely look out for the taxpayer.

What were you guys thinking electing this clown?

Oh, that's right. He's good enough, he's smart enough, and doggone people like him.

[Camden Northsider]

Couple of issues with some of the above arguments- one started with "pawlenty says we have the most generous healthcare system"- of course he says this to the public as he's getting criticized for weakening if not dismantling the foundation of our hospitals/ healthcare system in MN (by the way MN born- those layoffs at the hospitals are a result of Pawlenty's cuts, nothing else).

And persons "like" the fact that their elected official "bucks the general public"....so, in a democracy, it's good for elected officials to buck the constitutuents that they're supposed to represent, the people they are getting big salaries to act on behalf of??? I think that's the definition of "dictatorship". And to say that Pawlenty's using logic in any of his budget decisions is comical- his decisions are some of the most short-sighted I've seen of any politician in recent years, and that includes one that recently left office.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by jmgg

Good point. Minnesota has become one of the top nanny states in the country. People who don't want to work have found this out. As more and more "needy" immagrate in, you guys just keep adding taxes. The ulta-liberal mentality of primarily the twin cities is choking the state. Good thing you're getting Al Franken. He'll definitely look out for the taxpayer.

What were you guys thinking electing this clown?

Oh, that's right. He's good enough, he's smart enough, and doggone people like him.

Generally speaking people WANT to work. They don't start out wanting handouts and taking advantage of the system. I am speaking from experience by looking at some of my in-laws. They fell on some easily surmountable tough times. But they got by because the system enabled them for l-o-n-g durations and now are far too under employable.

In the end, they now "have" to lean on the system and they are getting very good at it. My personal state taxes added up for 10 years will not take care of one hospital event that happened to my Sister-in-Law. Never mind she is on housing assistance, food programs, had a child out of wedlock because she wanted one even though she was not married and never planned to be, and is having even more health issues because she is is at 400 pounds (sleep apnea, diabetes, congestive heart failure etc). Lately she is depressed. Of course we all would be by making some terrible personal decsisions.

But, she has a cell phone, cable TV, smokes, drinks, LOVES to go to Hinkley to gamble, buys pull tabs etc. I propose the system has made her worse off. The solution: Camden wants to blanket cover even more people like my Sister-in-Law. I didn't mention my other in-law who has her story. She is even more of a drain with your tax dollars. Again, after 15 years on the system, she is unemployable. With all of the dollars she has spent of public money, I bet we are talking a good $700K. Maybe more...

The issue is people like my example are draining the system for that homeless guy who has a mental health issue. They are draining our state on all fronts and creating people that NEED the "system".

So Camden and Franken really are in better touch than you and I. They think that the solution is to "help" people which I have personally seen how it destroys people. While I love both of my sister-in-laws, the help that they need is a lesson in swimming; sink or swim.

[kuan]

Check out the poll results

SurveyUSA Election Poll #15356

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

(by the way MN born- those layoffs at the hospitals are a result of Pawlenty's cuts, nothing else).

Huh???? The problem is people can go to the hospital without paying for the services and the law states that they HAVE to take care of them. I'm waiting for people to be forced to feed hungry people at restaurants. Solution: change that law and people will start to re-allocate their $$'s to make darn sure they have health insurance before their cell phone, cable TV, etc. If they don't, they can die. The fear of dieing is motivational to pay your bills. That is known as personal responsibility.

The OTHER key reason is that people now have higher deductibles. Since a good chunk of people don't pay for health care, the costs are amortized over MY bill and YOUR bill. So employers trying to keep afloat have increased deductibles. When the deductibles increase (mine is at $4200!!!!) we think long and hard about going to the doctor. Hence, traditional revenue generating consumers with insurance are holding back unless they really need the care. So the hospitals are dominated by people without health care insurance. Therefore, the hospitals layoff people which reduces my quality of care even though I pay dearly. There are other issues at hand but that is a good portion of it.

So in conclusion all of our health care quality suffers and we all pay a lot more because people have learned to love the "system". My friend, I propose the layoffs are because of view points like yours and Franken. Hey, one "solution" is to tax the **** out of us and then we can avoid the layoffs. A better solution is cut people off the system and make them accountable even if it means that they need to take personal responsibility in their lives.

We can all site examples of people who really need the help. But your view of how it should be fixed is causing more harm that good.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

And to say that Pawlenty's using logic in any of his budget decisions is comical- his decisions are some of the most short-sighted I've seen of any politician in recent years, and that includes one that recently left office.

Which decisions do you take issue with?? In other words, how would you do it better. Let me guess, you want to "fix" it by spending other peoples money even though I don't want to be taxed any higher than I already am even if it means "helping" more people like my sister-in-law. I've already personally observed how the government "helps". Now that sort of help is comical.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Couple of issues with some of the above arguments- one started with "pawlenty says we have the most generous healthcare system"- of course he says this to the public as he's getting criticized for weakening if not dismantling the foundation of our hospitals/ healthcare system in MN (by the way MN born- those layoffs at the hospitals are a result of Pawlenty's cuts, nothing else).

And persons "like" the fact that their elected official "bucks the general public"....so, in a democracy, it's good for elected officials to buck the constitutuents that they're supposed to represent, the people they are getting big salaries to act on behalf of??? I think that's the definition of "dictatorship". And to say that Pawlenty's using logic in any of his budget decisions is comical- his decisions are some of the most short-sighted I've seen of any politician in recent years, and that includes one that recently left office.

I know of serveral hospitals that have done layoffs. One of them is Fairview South. An piece on MPR went into some of the detail and it sure sounded like a lot of what is hurting them is reduction or postponement of elective procedures that tend not to be covered by insurance.

I don't buy that cuts made by Tpaw that have not even been implemented are the sole root of the problems some hospitals have right now. I do believe people are delaying things that are not absolutely neccesary for a number of reasons. The rise in unemployment is very likely causing more people to have a gap in coverage. It is also true that many companies are changing health coverage in a way that resembles plans of yesteryear or new model health savings plans where a person is on the hook for the first 20% up to a max in the $2000 range. Suddenly a $20 copay can be $200 if you need an xray, blood test or any number of common procedures. This is changing how people use medical services.

I also think it is fairly accurate to say that MN provides fairly generous coverage compared with other states. This does not mean everyone has coverage, or we don't have people with needs. It simply means that we must realistically look at being above average instead of way above average in that department.

I really think we have to ride out the storm here. Position the state to get through this mess by putting a budget in place that is sustainable and does not increase burdens on the middle class. We keep hearing these new taxes will be placed on "the wealthiest people", but what really is that. Simple math will tell you you can't squeeze billions out of the small number of people making over 250K. The taxes are going to end up on households making 75K and that is not a lot of money these days.

If we position our state to be mid pack in business taxes, we slow the bleading on missed opportunity. Is it better to tax 1000 businesses $10 or 10 businesses $1000? More business is more jobs, more jobs is more income tax. We need to grow out of this problem. It will be slow, but it will happen. If we handcuff business, it will at best slow recovery.

What would you do if you got a 25% cut in salary? Sadly many people have had this happen. You find ways to decrease expenses, and you might try to find part time work too, or sell stuff. Why is it so wrong and evil for the state to take the same tact. Yes I do get that we are talking about services that help a great number of people, but surely not everyone getting services is in a life or death situation. Let's try to examine ways to ween those that can step up. In the long run, those that do will reap rewards of success. Let's look at return on investment for some of the programs we have. Has the Iron Range Resources Rehiblilation program done anything to create more jobs in the last 5 years? Nope, so lets look at some cuts there. We have tons of fat that can be trimmed without changing the general values of the state.

I am not anti tax, or against helping those in need. I just think a hard line that raising taxes is the only answer is too short sighted. It may help short term, but long term it will hurt us. I don't think you wack the stuff people most deperatly need either. There are areas of government that can and should reduce costs. I just fundamenatlly have a hard time understanding where 5% is going to be extremely difficult to save.

Schools do interesting stuff when the don't get funding. Let's cut something real dramatic and impactful like after school care (which amounts to subsidised daycare if you ask me). This is politics at the worst.

I really have not heard one thing that DFL is willing to cut. This is just out of control. They are more interested in making TPaw find stuff to cut and then he is the bad guy.

Not sure who posted the remark about there being no middle ground and no comprimise on either side, but I agree with it. Might have been Slig.

Can you feel the global economy yet? Walmart effect? We are entering a new phase of this global market. The more things we send outside our country, the more pressure we have to do more for less, and more with less. If we don't figure out smarter ways to do things, we have a very long road ahead.

100K a year for a C++ developer, or 6 of them in india for the same money? Hmmm. How much income tax do we get from offshore work? How about some type of offshore tax? Incentive to keep work in the good ol us. Sadly, our education in science is crap compared to much of the world these days and getting youth to care about math and science is difficult. I see real problems with good chunks of the world passing us by in terms of education and work ethic. This softer attidude where everyone is great is going to bite us real hard.