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.
The real reality of it is they are JEALOUS!! They didn't sweat out 30yrs as a teacher, or some DPW worker, or something, probably because the felt it was "beneath them", but now they see that it paid off for them.
Jealous is not proper way to describe the taxpayer feeling on this. But hey if that makes you feel better.
Now as to your point of NJ being overtaxed in comparison to other States. We are only overtaxed because our budget gets far less federal aid as a percentage of the budget than most other States.
The reason NJ is overtaxed is because its spending is too high relative to receipts, so the lazy answer is to try to make up shortfall by raising taxes. To blame relative lack of help by the federal government is a diversion. It is amazing to me that people operate under the premise that can never ever accept the fact that there can be TOO MUCH government spending.
Not mine. I work for an agency that collects taxes not paid. Before I get the work it goes to a private company to collect and we only get what the private company was unsuccessful in resolving. So if it was not for my staff those dollars would never get to the State. Last year $1.2 billion.
I never said the fix was easy. I said the original cost was not excessive, the employees are not to blame and the pension is not overly generous.
I fully acknowledge the problem. CC is a disgrace to blame employees or unions for it though.
I have no idea how what you just describe lessens the fact that as a public employee you are paid by taxpayers. There is no disputing that the state has no ability to generate income. This simple fact is lost on more people than you would believe. People honestly don't understand the concept that every single dollar a government has to spend is confiscated by the private sector or borrowed. There is no revenue generating arm (lotto is a tax in case anyone wants to use that example).
Multiple pages of posts in, not a single recommended solution.
Now as to your point of NJ being overtaxed in comparison to other States. We are only overtaxed because our budget gets far less federal aid as a percentage of the budget than most other States.
Your reading of that chart vs mine is quite different. You read it as not enough $ from federal govt. I read that as saying your OVERALL budget is too big, so the federal aid $ becomes a smaller %. The overall dollars is the key figure. The federal government has no obligation to meet a certain percentage of overall state spending for any arbitrary amount. Any other reading is simply wrong.
Bottom line layman's interpretation: NJ spends too much dam money. NJ's citizens are taxed too high.
I read it as unequal aid from the federal government and that is why some States have a lower tax burden.
Federal aid plays a part.
Heres a simple example. Say two states are exactly equal in size of population and GDP. Both states receive $10B in federal aid. But state A has a budget of $50B and state B has a budget of $20B. The "federal aid % of budget" in this case would be 20% for state A and 50% for state B. This is not indicative of some unfairness to state A. Just that state A's budget is horrendously out of whack relative to state B.
Anybody who disagrees with him should probably do his/her best to avoid coming into contact with him for...a while.
When he was in a better mood, he suggested that "somebody should take a bat" to an elderly female state senator with whom he disagreed. And, then of course, we have on record his intemperate remarks to reporters, a former Navy seal, teachers, and other politicians who have dared to disagree with him--back in the days when he was able to get his way on most issues.
Now that he is sure to be in a REALLY foul mood, I wouldn't want to be in his path, especially if he is on his way to a donut shop.
Remember when Hoffa jr got up to speak before obama and call for members to take out the SOBs. Obama stepped up and did not admonish Hoffa for such violent rhetoric.
CC's words are left to interpretation and his detractors will always twist them to their benefit. Like the 'elderly female senator Weinberg' term and throw in a navy seal and a teacher for good measure. forget the content in which CC said what he said, we have a war on women, servicemen and beloved teachers to project.
"Essex County Executive Joe DiVincenzo, a Democrat who has been pushing for givebacks from unions in his county, was found by The Star-Ledger of Newark to be drawing a pension payment of $5,000 a month while he continues to get a six-figure salary for the same job. But Weinberg has also revealed she is also a double dipper. Weinberg draws a part-time legislative salary of $49,000, and at age 76, is long past the age when most people begin drawing their pensions. In addition, her pension is for a 35-year career as a bureaucrat, not any of her time as a legislator."
the idiot....
"Brown, a Democrat who ran an unsuccessfully for Assembly last year,....."
CC listened to the guy and the guy made a scene to make himslef a news item and gain pr for his next run at the assembly.
I agree with RonaldusMagnus, it is totally a mathematical issue. The current system is not sustainable for much longer and needs serious reform. Yes, people should be grandfathered in but it has to change for some new group soon. I also agree that this isn't Christie's fault, either. He inherited the problem and is dealing with a legislature whose majority is the opposite party.
I generally agree, but Christie deserves criticism because there was a lot of hoopla over the pension reforms during his first term and he completely backtracked and called a law he signed unconstitutional.
The public employees, municipalities, and counties are meeting their end of the bargain but the state is not. I think the system should change to a 401K style plan for future employees, however the police and teachers unions will fight against such a change.
Heres a simple example. Say two states are exactly equal in size of population and GDP. Both states receive $10B in federal aid. But state A has a budget of $50B and state B has a budget of $20B. The "federal aid % of budget" in this case would be 20% for state A and 50% for state B. This is not indicative of some unfairness to state A. Just that state A's budget is horrendously out of whack relative to state B.
Your equating unfairness on a faulty metric.
How about 2 States with equal population and equal GDP that both decide they need $35 billion to meet their budget needs. One State receives $15 billion in Federal aid and one receives $7 billion. Which State will have lower State taxes?
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.
