Can someone answer me this simple question. If you provide an operational override this coming year and restore the School Departments necessary funding to help get the schools get back on track, lower class sizes, decreased fees, possibly eliminate them over time. All good things, all things that good economic times would be doable. This would be a one time shot at an increase to try to remedy the situation. We do not live in caves, we hear, see, talk about the dismal economic future on a daily basis. Almost negative GDP last quarter, stagnated earnings. I guess what I am saying and would like some to enlighten me, what is going to happen, maybe not next year but the year after when the Public and School departments do not have enough to cover their budget Will the be another demand for another operational override/ When will it stop? When we have a tax base like Wellesley, Newton, Brookline, Weston. As I stated somewhere here before US household wages have been stagnant for a good period of time. A good term to use would "Treading Water" The average person has not been able to keep up, Higher Ed continues to spiral out of control, the EPA and Mass DEP continue to mandate environmental policy without funding, "do as I say or I will put you out of business". No court intervention from these out of control government agencies. Health care continues to increase despite the notion of "Free Health Care", when growing up, my old man use to say "Son, there is nothing free, somewhere along the line someone is paying for it" He was right., We live in a nation where Washington DC has replaced the home of Robbin Hood's Sherwood Forest. The philosophy hasn't changed however, "Take from the rich and give to the poor. I do not believe any sane person believes by increasing taxes on the wealthy that it will come anywhere near reducing the debt or deficit. We could tax everyAmerican, 60%, 70%, 80%, it wont come anywhere near fixing the financial problem we are in. Why you say, because because every time the politicians get their hands on the public's hard earned wages, they find some way to squander the money on things that are not important to the average citizen. The mating habits of the Monarch Butterfly, building bridges to nowhere, the list goes on. View Comment
@nsirish. I think most of the people in this country realize being a teacher is an extremely hard job, not only are they there to teach, a lot become wrapped up in the social part of teaching as in lack of support at home, broken families, challenged youngster, special needs. It is, has been a stressful field for a long time. Not to take from your wife, other professions are as stressful or more. Health care providers taking care of the sick of all ages, working with less, money not the best in the world. Nursing home nurses and aides, most without retirement benefits, maybe company sponsored Profit Sharing or 401k plans, no health benefits when they retire but for medicare an supplemental medicare plans which are expensive and mostly out of pocket for the individual. Middle management another sector of people, doing more with less, companies doing away with pension plans, bringing work home, working 50 to 60 hours a week at the office, traveling all over the country being away from their loved ones. Teachers are not unique to this problem. Granted they are the care takers of the future, It is a noble profession along with social workers, psychologist, therapist, nurses aides, the list goes on, these people like teachers are dedicated to their clients and most of them will not have what teachers have when they retire, A pension and health care. As I have mentioned before, we are running out of money, the Fed continues to print "Funny Money" to prop up the economy, keep interest rates low devaluing the currency and making it nearly impossible for elderly couples to keep up with the finance and the real kicker the insatiable need and desire to keep borrowing from the Chinese to pay for all of this. Just for kicks, if you have some time, Google Unfunded Liabilities for the Federal, State, Local governments and corporate and private debt. It will shock you. The town of Shrewsbury has unfunded health and pension liabilities that have to be taken care of, I believe this mandated from the state, It is a large sum, when combined I believe it is over 50 million dollars, just about what the whole town budget is for a year. Self interest is killing this country!!! My Humble Opinion View Comment
One answer might be, have public employees play by the same retirement rules as most of the public sector. Most, if not all major companies have given up on employee retirements. Provide them with 401ks with matching contribution for the local, state or federal government. How about getting the retirement age in line with Social Security, 62. There are many things the politicians can do, it just takes the will to do it. However our politicians do not have that will, they want to keep their job like some potentate that ruled during the middle ages. Just for fun, Google "unfunded liabilities for Federal, State and local and for good measure business and private liabilities. It is an eye opener. View Comment
For the sake of argument, we pass an operational over ride at the next election to provide some financial relief to the schools, the fire department, police, water, etc. What happens the next year when we have another budget deficit, another 2 1/2 over ride to close the gap. The economic forecast for the near future is not that great. We have a governor proposing a switch in sales tax and income tax. Income tax proposal increase to current rate of sales tax. The current sales tax to what the current income tax is. This proposal will be put on the backs of middle class people. Answer you say, how about this, like the majority of private sector workers who are responsible for their future retirement and health benefits how about the public sector joining those ranks, Federal, State and local governments provide 401ks along with matching contributions from the company. How about doing away with retirement ages of 50, 55 and standardize with Social Security at age 62. As I am sure you are aware, employee wages have been stagnant for years an nearly impossible for a middle class family to keep up with. The government can, it is within their authority to increase taxes at their discretion, however it will get to a point where the public has no more to give. We continue to print money to prop up the economy. The Fed continues their insane policy of low interest rates so we can continue the unabated borrowing and spending. We worry about the children's education, we also should worry about their future economics, they are the ones that are going to have to make the real hard decisions, deal with the pain of a dismal economy. One answer to this, vote people out of office like Nancy Pelosi who stated the other day "we don't have a spending problem" As far as being embarrassed about being "Frugal. Better frugal than in debt up to my eyeballs. Just my opinion. View Comment
@WCmom. now you sound like Nancy Pelosi, please we do have a spending problem with the federal government running the tank on deficit funding. Even the White House ran from what Ms. Pelosi (a Multi-millionare) had said. Patrick wants to do a 180 on the Income tax and sales tax, in my mind putting a larger burden on the middle class. I can control my spending on sales tax items, of course that is not good for the overall local, state and federal economies, however I have no control on income tax. I have to pay the prevailing rate with not much recourse in lowering it. As I am sure you are fully aware of the price of commodities, medical, transportation, higher education continue to outpace what a middle class family earns, it is no secret that wages have been stagnant for some time transcending the current and past administration. I beg to differ with you, we do have a spending problem, it must be reined in or our future looks pretty bleak. Taking more from the American people will only impede any future economic growth, we do fuel the economy with our spending, not the government. The government does not make any consumer products, unless you want to throw in GM. In my humble opinion. View Comment
We have to come to grips with this, we are running out of money, but continue to spend like a drunken sailor on liberty. Education, infrastructure repair is very important to our future however if the continuing tax bleeding of the American taxpayer continues we will never get out of this predicament. View Comment
I agree wholeheartedly with your argument of replacing the way campaigns are funded. However I am extremely apprehensive about what these so called representatives will come up, that is both sides of the aisle. Mr. McGovern is no different than the other 534 so called "representatives of the American people". They all self serving bureaucrats that love the power, limelight and most of all the Federal Governments lucrative benefits on retiring. Deep down I don't believe the Founders of the Constitution had any idea that future politicians would make this a career, if they did it was a real lapse in judgement on their part. The power and status is addicting to them, just like an alcoholic, it is difficult to give up that position of power and status and unfortunately the ones that pay for it is the American citizen. View Comment
Do you seriously believe that the President's economic agenda of more spending and more taxes are moving the markets upward trend. Personally I think it is another Bubble (Tech, Housing) with the potential to burst and this time it might be a much more difficult to dig ourselves out of. With all the unfunded liabilities of the Federal, State and Local Governments, we are digging ourselves a deeper hole than we ever had in the past.
Liberal how about George Soros. A major Democratic contributor. "Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time. Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. A criminal in anyway you look at him.. There are PIGS on both sides of the aisle. Unions are not people, Big Pigs maybe. View Comment
As I said in my most recent post, a noble gesture on the surface but you just never know what is on their minds, say one thing and do something completely different. Nowhere in McGovern's statements does he mention anything about unions, nowhere. There is a reason for that, I don't what goes on in his mind, but his political stance on many issues tends to make me think, that in someway the politicians would find an end around to exempt unions. "Companies are not people", Mr. McGovern, Unions are not People either, you should be more inclusive in your statements and stop showing your bias towards corporate America.
GrayGhost point about McGovern's proposed amendment curtailing the power of unions is right on, he wouldn't pure and simple. He is a politician, he knows what to say to get his way, then make a complete reversal and go in the opposite direction.. View Comment
@WBM and I quote Mr. McGovern "The American people are deeply troubled by the growing influence of corporations in our political discourse,” said McGovern,
Where does he say anything about big UNIONS, I see nothing in that statement about unions. Why is that? Is he afraid of alienating his campaign contribution base. I know what is included WBM, what I am afraid of is what they will come up with after amending the Constitution. As McGovern stated in his own words,
HJ Res 20 as proposed by McGovern,
"The first amendment, HJ Res 20, empowers Congress and states to regulate political spending. It will allow Congress to pass campaign finance reform legislation that will withstand Constitutional challenges.
As I said before allowing them to regulate political spending is like turning a chocoholic loose in a Neuhaus chocolate factory.
HJ Res 21 Overturn Citizens United, a noble gesture, however as McGovern states,
"put a stop to what McGovern termed a growing trend of corporations claiming first amendment rights. This “People’s Rights Amendment” not only addresses corporate rights as they pertain to campaign finance, but also clarifies corporations are not people with Constitutional rights.
He says "corporations are not people" and absolutely nothing about big unions. What is his agenda, why is he afraid to mention unions? Untrustworthy in my mind.
Again WBM as you stated the law includes both corporations and unions. McGovern's statements avoid mentioning Unions anywhere, my concern is by not mentioning Unions in any of his statements, what type of regulations has he in mind if in fact this dream of his ever comes to fruition. Will the proposed campaign legislation exempt Union contributions. I have no way of knowing what goes on in politicians minds and I don't want to find out after the fact. They promise one thing and do something completely different.
Mr McGovern how about big UNION payoffs to the Washington politicians. I see nothing about that in your proposed amendment. Giving the power to congress and the states to regulate campaign spending is like giving a chocoholic a free pass in a Neuhaus chocolate store. The ruling party at the time would determine who and how much could be spent, or contributed. Why no mention of the Richard Trumka's of the world. Spending union money on electing politicians that the rank and file might not support or endorse.
How about doing something meaningful like a Balanced Budget Amendment or even "Heaven Forbid" a Term Limits Amendment.
Mr. McGovern you state "And, quite frankly, they want elected officials to spend more time on policy, on debating and deliberating on issues – and less time dialing for dollars." Why don't you take your own advice, instead of getting yourself arrested for protesting with Hollywood elites. Your job is not foreign policy, it is to represent the 2nd Congressional District. How is that making policy, debating issues.
Lastly do you seriously believe that you can get a 2/3 majority vote in both congressional bodies to move this to the states for ratification by 3/4 (38 states). Simply delusional thinking on your part. View Comment
My house is worth less, and I am paying more in property tax. That doesn't seem logical. Logic would have, if the property value decreases, the amount of tax on the property should decrease, not increase. View Comment
Another looming law suit against the town, can we really afford this in times like now. Shouldn't all individuals involved in law enforcement be aware of these basic laws before wrongly charging someone. Like many professions that have Massachusetts mandates to keep up with continuing education in their respective fields, do Police Officers have this same mandate. Health care professionals are required by law to complete a minimum number of CE's to renew their license every 2 years. If they are not, they should be required. The medical field is a dynamic one and changes constantly, the law enforcement world is also dynamic, not static, changes occur all the time. Continuing education is one way of keeping abreast of those changes. IMHO. View Comment
If a person is of sound mind, he or she should be able to make the determination for themselves. I don't agree with it, but in good conscience I can not deny them their personal choice. I will vote yes. View Comment