| Author | Message | ||
     fmertz Citizen Username: Fmertz Post Number: 102 Registered: 5-2001 |
Welcome to liberal Democratic MOL. Well, NJ you asked for him and you got him. Serves us right. The impact on property taxes is thought to result in another increase and doesn't a sales tax hit the poor more readily? Best of all, so far no mention on this website? I'm shocked Rick, that there's gambling here in the club... NJ is going to get screwed, the economy will suffer. This is a bad move by Corzine. Why not reduce spending and govt pensions, outlaw double dippers...etc...No, my first act as Governor is to raise taxes. | ||
| Dr. Winston O'Boogie Citizen Username: Casey Post Number: 2002 Registered: 8-2003  |
we all should have invested the income tax cuts Whitman gave us in the '90s, because that's what we're paying for now. remember the $$$ she robbed from the state pension fund? almost half of this year's budget increase is money owed to the pension fund. coincidence? I think not. | ||
| fmertz Citizen Username: Fmertz Post Number: 104 Registered: 5-2001 |
Hey, sterling idea, lets blame the previous administration, well wait, that was three admins ago, or at least one, but I digress. Blame the Republican, even if really only a RINO, as it was she who caused the whole double dipping probllem in the first place. Yeah! And besides she was bad, another rich socialite from a family with power, just like the Bushies...... Rant all you wish, but some day dealing with the problem, not adding to it makes better sense. Cut spending, find ways to reduce the budget, nt increase it as you will soon see he has... | ||
| Dr. Winston O'Boogie Citizen Username: Casey Post Number: 2004 Registered: 8-2003 |
yo fred, if anyone is "ranting" it's you. (hint: people who are ranting rarely use the phrase "I think not.") No doubt McGreevey deserves blame as well for continuing Whitman's borrowing spree. but McGreevey came to office in a recession, and Christie borrowed during the fattest times the state ever saw. regardless, the fact remains that there were statutory obligations that Corzine faced, most notably the pension fund. he's laying off 1,000 state employees too, isn't that enough for you? given the almost $5 billion hole that Corzine inherited, we got off pretty easy with tax increases. I can deal with a beer tax and a 7% sales tax better than the people who lost their jobs can deal with that. | ||
| Nohero Supporter Username: Nohero Post Number: 5211 Registered: 10-1999  |
The Doctor makes some excellent points. But, lets get to the real issue. Frankly, it sounds like some kind of "Jersey joke", that Corzine is going to close a billion dollar budget gap by taxing tattoos and tanning.  | ||
| Albatross Citizen Username: Albatross Post Number: 813 Registered: 9-2004  |
fmertz: Note that the two billion increase would have been 6 billion without cuts in certain areas. For instance: funding for higher education would be cut by an overall 8% from the previous year, ranging from 7% for county colleges, 15% for Rutgers and a staggering 50% for private institutions. While funding for health would increase overall, there would be a substantial reduction in aid to hospitals, etc. etc. For further information on the budget, I suggest that you take a look at the 'Budget in Brief' document available at http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/omb/publications/07bib/pdf/bib.pdf. Take note of the myriad cuts in state aid. Also take note of the sweeping cuts to almost every one of the executive departments. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4151 Registered: 12-2001  |
Corzine is struggling to close an enormous budget gap through tax increases and spending cuts. He will be attacked from both the left and right for this, but he is doing the right and courageous thing. If he were a Bush Republican, as was Whitman, he would figure out how to borrow more money and let somebody else pay the bills in the future. | ||
| tripleblack Citizen Username: Dacar Post Number: 168 Registered: 6-2001 |
why not a special tax on all his rich friends instead of taxing the peole who can least afford it. more sales tax is less spending and less tips for hard working people | ||
| fmertz Citizen Username: Fmertz Post Number: 106 Registered: 5-2001 |
Better still, why not reduce the size of the duplication of effort so prominant in our state. There is much waste and programs that simply throw away money, that school construction thing comes to mind... Anyhow, I am tired of MOL posters always pinning the blame on Republicans. Why not take a shot as those truly in power. | ||
| Dr. Winston O'Boogie Citizen Username: Casey Post Number: 2005 Registered: 8-2003 |
the reason we're blaming Whitman, is not to make her a scapegoat, but because this really is her fault. she was the one who initiated all the budget gimmicks that created the current budget mess, all to give us a tax cut in the '90s. sometimes the truth hurts. | ||
| Twokitties Citizen Username: Twokitties Post Number: 407 Registered: 8-2004 |
I congratulate and applaud Corzine for taking politically unpopular but fiscally responsible action. | ||
| Guy Supporter Username: Vandalay Post Number: 1685 Registered: 8-2004  |
It's not that politically unpopular. He has cut taxes for his Democratic base according to Newsday. However, the state's poorest residents will get a break. Some 400,000 low-income residents will no longer be required to pay state income taxes, and 200,000 others will pay less next year. And, 50,000 additional families and children would get health insurance under an expanded FamilyCare program. If we are in such dire need , why cut taxes for 600k people. Simple, those are 600K Democratic voters.} | ||
| James Citizen Username: Mcgregorj Post Number: 101 Registered: 7-2003  |
Simple - those 600K people are some of the state's poorest residents. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4154 Registered: 12-2001 |
Fmertz, Nobody is blaming Republicans. A lot of people are blaming NeanderRepublicans who have stolen the party from real Republicans. Being Republican means having some sense of fiscal responsibility. NeanderRepublicans, by contrast, have discovered the joy of spending tomorrows money today and presenting that as sound policy. | ||
| MBJ Citizen Username: Mbj Post Number: 198 Registered: 10-2005 |
I haven't read all his plans yet. What's he going to do about state pensions? Any talk of benefit cuts there? | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1770 Registered: 3-2004 |
All this negative talk about Corzine neglects a critical fact: You don't get to be CEO of Goldman, Sachs and marshall such a global organization through its highly successful IPO without knowing what you're doing. He has been in a position where he has had to make tough and controversial financial decisions during most of his career, and has accomplished that very well, without bragging or complaining about how "hard it is to make decisions" and how he makes the "tough decisions" every day. It's good finally to have a financially and fiscally competent and responsible Chief Executive, even if he's only in Drumthwacket. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5409 Registered: 8-2003 |
All the cuts amount to a lovely 10% increase in overall government spending. Tough choices on the spending side as we all can see. | ||
| Albatross Citizen Username: Albatross Post Number: 814 Registered: 9-2004 |
MJB: as I understand it, pension benefits would not be reduced AND the state would start making good on deferred pensions. Guy: the purpose of the low-income tax cut is to help them absorb the increased sales tax. [edited out] cjc: a 10% increase is a lot better than 30%. Again, observe the cuts to state services and various areas of state aid. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5410 Registered: 8-2003 |
Albatross -- I see the 'cuts' to state services, which are as I saw it portrayed freezes in spending levels in many cases. You probably want the services here to be continued and even expanded. I'm not in your camp. Take a big whack out of county government for starters. Then, make it a rule that 63% of every education dollar makes it to the classroom. | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3141 Registered: 9-2001  |
Hurray to Corzine for taking a tougher stance than either of his elected predecessors. He has stood more firm and disciplined than either Whitman or McGreevey, and that is good for New Jersey. But it cannot stop here. As cjc points out, there has to be a lot more tough reform, because there is a ton of waste and duplication in NJ government. If Corzine keeps moving the ball forward in a similar fashion, he will be a great governor. If he waffles in the face of partisan pressures and Trenton politics, he will remain stuck at this point. I hope the voting public gives him rousing support so that he has the political capital to ram reforms down the craw of the legistlature--especialy his fellow Democrats. But somehow I doubt this will happen. | ||
| malone Citizen Username: Malone Post Number: 307 Registered: 5-2001 |
Corzine and M-SO consecrate the sacred bond of obedience. "Thank you sir. May I have another?" No. wait. That was Kevin Bacon in Animal House. | ||
| Albatross Citizen Username: Albatross Post Number: 815 Registered: 9-2004 |
Let me rephrase: to accomplish the reduction in the overall budget's increase, areas of funding within the budget have been cut. It is not a gray area; state executive departments will have less money than last year. Certain portions of state aid will have less money than last year. And what do I think of the budget? I strongly dislike it. For starters: as a student at a college in New Jersey, this budget makes life a lot harder. A higher sales tax makes everyone's life more difficult. But by the same token, I can't expect the governor to remedy a decade of financial mismanagement with one budget, nor can I expect him to dramatically increase efficiency in only 2 months (As I understand, it's one of his goals for the coming year). And I have to give him credit for working to fix it. | ||
| tripleblack Citizen Username: Dacar Post Number: 169 Registered: 6-2001 |
Corzine spent 63 million to earn $1 per year - not a very good ROI for a Goldman Sach guy | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1781 Registered: 3-2004 |
Tripleblack: True, but at least he used his own capital (of which, by your admission, he has quite a bit). And like a good financial guy, he figured out what being elected would cost and threw his hat in the ring. He obviously neither needs nor is interested in the financial return from public service, unlike the money-grubbing politicians of several parties that keep their hands out every day. And the firm's name is Goldman Sachs, with an 's' at the end. Those of us who have worked for the firm like to see the name spelled correctly. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5411 Registered: 8-2003 |
Even if they let you go? | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1782 Registered: 3-2004 |
ah, CJC, the master of the non-sequitur and the snide aside. No, sweetie pie, the firm did not "let me go," as you so delicately put it. I made some nice money there, enough to launch new initiatives and take some risks, still have excellent relationships within the firm, and we occasionally do deals together. It's a prestigious firm name to have on one's resume and the "alumni association" is a tremendous and effective network. Any more non-sequiturs or dull-witted comments you would like to proffer? | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5413 Registered: 8-2003 |
But Innis, I was speaking of a generic 'you' as your 'those of us' was plural. How could they dump someone with your amazing analytical skills, after all? | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1784 Registered: 3-2004 |
And, cjc, you're absolutely correct. And they didn't. I apologize for mistaking your "generic you" for one of the habitual "non-sequitur-ish" snide asides that "generally" characterize your postings. My deep, deep apologies. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5414 Registered: 8-2003 |
I felt that was the case, Innis. Makes perfect sense, especially if they wouldn't promote you. Hypothetically speaking of course. I'm sure that wasn't the case with you.  And even if it was, you sure showed them! | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1687 Registered: 3-2004  |
he raised government spending by 10%!! keep crowing about his so called budget cuts. they are meaningless misdirection. another tax and spend liberal. between george bush's neocon thieves and Corzine and his liberal ilk its a wonder i get to get keep any of the money that i work for. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1786 Registered: 3-2004 |
Not much knowledge there of the ways of Wall Street. It's not the title; it's the bundle at the end of the year. Which for me always was quite satisfying. Those interested in title-chasing usually don't get much more than they're looking for. They're mostly the unimaginative, uncreative, un-innovating types. And they're not the risk-takers; they're "company-men," for lack of a better expression. A bit like the way you sound. Ooops. My apologies. Shouldn't have said that. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 13141 Registered: 1-2003  |
Guy, maybe he cut taxes for votes, but to me, it is also conceivable that the tax cuts to the poor were because it's the right thing for the society. As I understand it, it's to take the bite out of the sales tax increase. I didn't notice you complaining about Bush's tax cuts for the ultra-rich as for the sake of votes. Why is it so unthinkable that we would give tax cuts to the working poor? And do you think those cuts will hurt you and me badly? | ||
| tripleblack Citizen Username: Dacar Post Number: 170 Registered: 6-2001 |
got it goldman sach$ - same company that just produced the highest earnings in wall street history based partly on SOX compliance - the author of which was Corzine - taking 102 trillion of capital out of the market. it hurt business profit and investor earning. the people it was suppsoed to protect | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1797 Registered: 3-2004 |
SOX compliance, that's what the government wants, right? Or am I missing something? Since when do conservatives deplore it when companies make money? When it suits their purpose! And since when are investors supposed to be guaranteed a return on their equity? There are no guarantees. It's the equity market. If you want a guarantee, buy a bond. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5416 Registered: 8-2003 |
tripleblack -- are you a conservative? By the way, Corzine is having second thoughts about some of his Enron-related actions at Goldman Sachs now that he's a public official. ......."The Wall Street Journal recently zinged Corzine and Goldman Sachs for inventing their own peculiar device for Enron back in 1993 with a similar purpose--the "monthly income preferred shares" (or MIPS) that enabled Enron to sell fifty-year securities through an entity it created on a Caribbean island. For tax purposes, Enron described the preferred stock as "debt" and claimed tax deductions on the interest payments to investors. For shareholder reports, Enron called it "equity" that supposedly boosted the company's capital value. As Goldman's chairman, Corzine joined the lobbying efforts to overturn the Treasury Department's objections to this novel device. He signed an industry letter to members of Congress, urging them to keep the regulators off their backs, and Treasury eventually gave up the fight. The device is now used by other companies to raise somewhat cheaper capital offshore and, in the same stroke, reduce their US tax obligations. "In that particular case, there's no question the financial engineering did what you just said it did," Corzine responded. But he argued that unlike other Enron deals, it was fully disclosed at the time, vetted by the credit-rating agencies and eventually upheld in litigation. Goldman, he added, stopped doing deals with Enron about five years ago because "we ended up having difficulty with how people did business with each other." He has recused himself from voting on any item that goes directly to Goldman Sachs's bottom line. On reflection, the Senator agreed that he may need to re-evaluate some of his work as an investment banker now that he represents the public interest. "By the way," Corzine said, "I'm not sure, as a senator now who is interested in absolutely making sure, particularly in the current environment, that we have transparency and openness, that I would be as supportive today, given that we have created a world where people are skeptical of why [business] people are doing this." Maybe he will look back through all those letters to Washington he signed as chairman." Goldman alumni Robert Rubin also probably feels bad too, Corzine opines. ...."That brought the conversation around to the power of Wall Street and the one-sided contest in which financial-corporate interests influence lawmakers and help shape ambiguous regulatory language they then manipulate into ingenious loopholes. As Goldman Sachs chairman, Corzine spoke for the firm and its clients' interests, but he said he always tried to frame a larger public purpose. "If it was pure self-interest you were about, you quickly lost an ability to have any advocacy of acceptability, except to those particular folks who were so happy for the money that they were just dealing with it," he said. "I'm not going to name names." What about former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin's call to the Assistant Treasury Secretary on behalf of Citigroup and Enron, asking him to pressure credit-rating agencies to go easy on the failing company? "I'm sure Bob didn't feel good about the call he was making.... In fact, he's torn between his responsibility as a senior member of Citigroup who's working to represent a client's interest and representing what he thinks is good public policy." http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020311/greider/2 | ||
| Montagnard Citizen Username: Montagnard Post Number: 1913 Registered: 6-2003  |
Fiscally responsible Democrats repairing the damage caused by borrow-and-squander Republicans. Nothing new here, unfortunately. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 4593 Registered: 5-2001 |
well thank goodness Bush's republican cronies don't have any such qualms. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 1802 Registered: 3-2004 |
It's so ironic to read the gerbil postings on this thread. Rubin and Corzine come from ordinary middle class backgrounds and actually worked for a living, pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps and became successful by dint of their own hard work. And, horror of horrors, Corzine even served in the Marine Corps. Now how in good conscience could a businessman or politician go and do that? And our local Republican conservatives have a problem with that? Of course Corzine and Rubin probably didn't work as hard as our current President. That must the problem with them. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4898 Registered: 9-2001  |
"Corzine spent 63 million to earn $1 per year..." All in a days work for a political, shall I say fibber! Listen, Jon's no fool, and either are we... At Goldman's this is called a short term investment. Spending that money up front is nothing compared to what's waiting for him on the back end. As for the lie, who can say with a straight face that Jon didn't know he had to raise our taxes upon taking office? Every Republican in the state knew it. Our former Governor and Jon's good friend knew it. This is a joke, and the laugh again is on the tax payers in New Jersey... | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4156 Registered: 12-2001 |
New Jersey is a mess as are many other state governments as well as the federal government. No politician can getting elected by telling the unvarnished truth. We are condemned to having liars in office forever until such a time as we get tired of deceiving ourselves. Get over it and judge the man by his actions in office. |
