[JayCT]

Here is some good news. An Arkansas drugmaker is opening a 90,000 square foot facility in Windsor that will employ over 360 people by 2021. Nice addition to our state. Jay

Ark. drugmaker to open Windsor plant | HartfordBusiness.com

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by ads94

I too read this 80% and sighed. Not even at their height during the Bush/early Obama years did the Democrats even come close to that. Best they ever had was high 60s, low 70s %s points wise and that was only for two years.

The blame for this crisis falls on both sides. Can't warp it any other way. Democrats in the legislature went alone with all previous Republican and Democratic governors sweeping the issue under the rug, and like Jay said boasting about their awesome surpluses, which promptly got spent instead of funding the pension system. This issue has been growing in Connecticut for almost a hundred years (inadequate savings from around 1920). Only now has it grown to where we can no longer ignore it and its blowing up in our faces. Great news for Rowland (who is in jail) and Rell (who lives in Florida), they don't have to worry about it. Weicker either, he just get blamed for the Income Tax (despite him also not funding the pensions). O'Neill, Grasso, Meskill? Same thing, unfunded pensions. Worst culprit is probably Rowland, he got all of those state employees to retire with their sweet benefits, the ones crushing us today.

The unions have some blame here as well. I don't think I've ever heard a union leader call out the legislature or the governor about underfunded pensions. Benefits aren't worth much if there is no money to pay them.

[Matrix2791]

Originally Posted by JayCT

And you are conveniently forgetting that neither Rell or Rowland EVER raised the flag on the pension issue or said we need to rein in spending. They proposed budgets that kicked the problem down the road and sat fat and happy and boasted of surpluses that made them look good. Jay

Come on Jay you can do better than that? Rowland and Rell had huge Democrat majorities when they were Governors, and it was very difficult for them to get the things they wanted done. Honestly I'm tired of hearing the blame go to past politicians. Malloy has had huge Democrat majorities for pretty much his whole time in office. He and the democrats own all of the State's fiscal problems. Two huge tax increases and were in more deeper financial trouble now than before. It's laughable that they talk about more tax increases when the first two failed miserably. It's not working. Even our brain dead Governor is starting to realize this finally.

[ads94]

Originally Posted by Matrix2791

Come on Jay you can do better than that? Rowland and Rell had huge Democrat majorities when they were Governors, and it was very difficult for them to get the things they wanted done. Honestly I'm tired of hearing the blame go to past politicians. Malloy has had huge Democrat majorities for pretty much his whole time in office. He and the democrats own all of the State's fiscal problems. Two huge tax increases and were in more deeper financial trouble now than before. It's laughable that they talk about more tax increases when the first two failed miserably. It's not working. Even our brain dead Governor is starting to realize this finally.

This is just simply false. Malloy took office with a large % of the budget unable to be changed. Taxes were raised in order to cover this shortfall to ensure we maintain the qualify of life we enjoy in Connecticut while also funding the things we legally must. People retired under Malloy, sure. A lot retired under Rell and Rowland. Governor Malloy had zero, absolutely zero input or control over any of these retirees. The only thing you could try and blame him is how well Stamford schools pay their teachers, which contributes to the unfunded teacher's pensions aspect of the budget.

[Matrix2791]

Originally Posted by ads94

This is just simply false. Malloy took office with a large % of the budget unable to be changed. Taxes were raised in order to cover this shortfall to ensure we maintain the qualify of life we enjoy in Connecticut while also funding the things we legally must. People retired under Malloy, sure. A lot retired under Rell and Rowland. Governor Malloy had zero, absolutely zero input or control over any of these retirees. The only thing you could try and blame him is how well Stamford schools pay their teachers, which contributes to the unfunded teacher's pensions aspect of the budget.

Zero input and control? Now that's hard to believe considering his party had control of both houses. The guy has been in office for over 6 years, and to say he had no influence on that matter is simply false.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Matrix2791

Come on Jay you can do better than that? Rowland and Rell had huge Democrat majorities when they were Governors, and it was very difficult for them to get the things they wanted done. Honestly I'm tired of hearing the blame go to past politicians. Malloy has had huge Democrat majorities for pretty much his whole time in office. He and the democrats own all of the State's fiscal problems. Two huge tax increases and were in more deeper financial trouble now than before. It's laughable that they talk about more tax increases when the first two failed miserably. It's not working. Even our brain dead Governor is starting to realize this finally.

It does not matter that the state legislature was Democrat, as Governor Rowland and Rell had the public's ear and they chose to ignore the problem. Jay

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

The unions have some blame here as well. I don't think I've ever heard a union leader call out the legislature or the governor about underfunded pensions. Benefits aren't worth much if there is no money to pay them.

Why would they need to? The state has a contractual obligation to pay those pensions. There's plenty of legal precedent that the state can't default on them. Some judge will always rule that the pensions have to be paid even if homeless are cast out into the street and the bridges crumble. The same legal precedent holds for the cities. States can't go bankrupt but cities can. Every time they've tried to default on their pension liability, some judge rules that they can't do that.

At some point, I think it's going to change but it will require Federal legislation. There are plenty of red states with big unfunded pension problems, too. Hard to say if the Trump and Ryan people would take this on.

[ads94]

Originally Posted by Matrix2791

Zero input and control? Now that's hard to believe considering his party had control of both houses. The guy has been in office for over 6 years, and to say he had no influence on that matter is simply false.

He had influence, sure. The claim was that Malloy and the Democrats owned it entirely, which for the majority of the budget is false. What little can be changed without running into legal troubles is about 50% of the budget. This covers state funding to towns, education, welfare, employee salaries, ect. When you really break it down, only about a third of the budget can be touched without people getting up in arms in a major way. To what extend the Governor and the Democrats had control over this is dubious, as the majority of the programmes have already been in place, and many have had their funding cut to meet the new budget norms, even with the tax increases. The budget is not a blank slate you simply wipe clean every two years and can start over. To say he has had no impact is false, but it is equally false to try and put the entire budget on his and the Democrats shoulders.

As for zero input and control, I was referencing when he was mayor of Stamford when Rell and Rowland were in office. He had no input or control over the state budget process, just as say Luke Bronin has no control over the state budget.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Even retired people making a bit more are not really saving that much by moving to Florida. How much are your state income taxes really?

Plus home prices in the more developed parts of Florida near bigger cities which actually have a decent quality of living are as pricey as much of Connecticut. And when you consider other costs not factored into the overall equation, you really are not talking much money, if anything. Jay

Except that most retirees moving to Florida aren't living on the coast with the beach, boat dock, ocean views, and country club life. Only the rich ones do that. There are a huge number of retirees living in inexpensive housing well inland. For example, you can buy a 3/1 1,100 square foot house with a carport with $763 in property taxes in Winter Haven for $90K.

It's a heck of a lot cheaper to cool a house in Florida than it is to heat a house in Connecticut. You only have to dehumidify and knock the temperature down from 90F to 80F. There's a reason why so many people move south when they retire. The costs are much lower. That has little to do with state income taxes. It's all about housing costs and that includes property taxes and utilities.

Most people don't have much in the way of retirement savings. 70th percentile household net worth at age 65 is about $350K. If you don't have a pension, you're living on a Social Security check, living in that $90K inland Florida house, and slowly spending what's left of your savings hoping you don't run out of money. There's also the bottom 50% that have no pension and almost no net worth. They have to make it on a Social Security check and nothing else.

It's not like the Northeast Corridor states are swimming in empty elderly public housing units. If you live in the northeast and hit that life event where you can't work and don't have children who can help, many have little alternative but to move.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by JayCT

It does not matter that the state legislature was Democrat, as Governor Rowland and Rell had the public's ear and they chose to ignore the problem. Jay

So governors can pass legislation in CT without the approval of the legislature if they have "the public's ear?" Come on now.