My wife said I should put this up because after my own extensive web search I couldn't find a definitive way to eliminate the odor of cat pee from our rug.
The problem . . . we got a new rug for our dining room and our oldest cat decided to use it as her liter box. It is a constant battle with this cat. She can use a liter box, it just has to be pristine for her to go into it. Meanwhile our other cat will use whatever liter box he is closest to meaning that one of the three boxes we have will likely have something in it.
Liter box issues aside she chose this new rug. Generally we spot clean once we feel a wet spot or smell something. The rug is such that we cannot see when or where she went. As I read online if you smell it then it has already dried and is already trapped within the fabric.
People suggested Nature's Miracle which is great, but it's costly and I've found it to only work when you can soak something for a long time. It also needs to be treated repeatedly.
I learned the trick of using vinegar in our laundry to kill mildew smells. It works wonders on towels. It has gotten to the point where I use a little cup of vinegar in each load just because. I figured if it works so well for this then maybe it would be good for the cat smell.
Online people said it has worked, others said it did nothing. I decided to go with my gut and give it a try. Here's what I did.
First I used my Bissell steam cleaner on the rug using the Bissell cleaning product made for animal smells. I let the rug dry and it still had a smell. That's when I poured vinegar all over the place. I hit every spot I thought she used. I went through a gallon of white vinegar in no time. I let it dry and though someone on the Internet said vinegar dries leaving no smell I found that not to be true. I did another Bissell steam clean treatment and let it dry. There was a slight pee smell and a faint vinegar smell. Next I poured Arm & Hammer Carpet Deodorizer made for pets over the rug and let it sit for a few days. One nice thing I noticed was that with all the cleaning this rug got the cat wanted nothing to do with it. So maybe she'll learn that peeing on my rug is a bad idea.
After a few days with the Arm & Hammer deodorizer I vacuumed it up and now there is no pet smell, no vinegar smell, and a wonderfully cleaned rug.
It took a lot, but it worked and I didn't go crazy with cleaning products or calling in an outside company to do the job. I also didn't have to replace the rug.
As I come across more little ideas like this I will share them. Maybe someone will find them useful.
Monday, December 24, 2012
Friday, August 26, 2011
Come on Irene
OK, the title is cheesy, I admit it, but so perfect. A hurricane is headed towards New Jersey and I am mixed with excitment and fear. I love hurricanes! It's so cool to have all the wind, rain, gray. During Hurrican Gloria in 1985 I sat on my front porch through most of the storm with a rain poncho on. I watched leaves and branches go zipping by while no cars drove past my house. No one went out.
The next rough storm was in 1999 and it was really just a lot of rain. I stayed in for that one since I had a fiance and step kids and couldn't be outside watching the trees snap. Now it's 2011 and I'm 36--one two kids in college and a nine year old. I will spend the day before the storm securing my outside patio, preparing drainage so there's no flooding and hope that the power doesn't go out. Times have changed.
The storm has left me with some random thoughts, some funny, some politically based and I felt like sharing so here we go . . .
We prepared by getting the essentials today:
Bread - check
Food - check
Milk - check
Batteries - we already had them
Water - check
Flashlights - again we had them, I am charging the batteries
Generator - slightly out of my budget
Gas - the cars are both filled up
Beer - check
Vodka - check
Netflix - loaded
Did we need beer and vodka? No, but what better way than to spend three days through a storm mildly drunk. Though my purchase of alcohol provided me an interesting glimpse on society. Bottle King, the local liquor store, was busier tonight than prior to July 4th, Christmas, Labor Day, Memorial Day. Busier than any time you would expect the store to be busy. I take it most of my neighbors will be like me and buzz their way through the storm and possibly see cows flying by like the ones Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton saw in Twister.
Now to some serious points. You knew I had to go here--Governor Chris Christie. During the blizzard over Christmas he took his family to Disney and claimed that he did nothing wrong. Said he left the State in good hands and knew everything would be fine. But now there's a hurricane and he isn't making the same mistake twice. He's had three press conferences, he cut short his vacation at the beach with his four kids (I think that alone begs for an ending) and he's been telling people in Asbury Park to get off the beach because they already have good enough tans. That statement bothered me.
Asbury Park, once a retreat for New Yorkers and the shining star of the Jersey Shore, then the birthplace of rock n roll (according to Bruce Springsteen's long speech during live versions of 10th Avenue Freezeout) then a crumbling wasteland that looked like Beruit, to a thriving community known as a safe place for the gay and lesbian community. Why of all Jersey Shore locations did Christie choose Asbury Park to make a comment poking fun at the vanity of people? We all know the cast of the Jersey Shore hang in Seaside Heights and roast themselves like a rotisserie chicken. Why not tell people to get out of Jenkinson's Pier in Seaside? No, he had to point out Asbury Park and claim the people there are vain and want their tans more than they want their lives. Homophobic right wing asshole!
Next when he decided it was time to evacuate the shore with his family he said he was going to lead by example and would get out. I was half expecting him to jump on a plane next and really head out. He'd lead by exmaple to all his millionnaire pals by spending money and running like a little wimp. Good bullies are tough when they want to be, but when things really get rough they go running. It's the ones who stand up to the bully that prove their strength. He'll probably ride out the storm in some armored bunker with a multi day backup generator. His chefs will probably be there, he'll have 500 channels and nothing on, and he'll keep on living the high life.
Me, I'll be watching the water in my back yard making sure it does not get higher than the bottom of my sliding glass doors thus flooding my living room. I'll probably be doing this by candlelight because my power will be out. If I'm really lucky the large tree nearby will blow over and land on the roof. I can feel good though because my governor will be leading by example.
The next rough storm was in 1999 and it was really just a lot of rain. I stayed in for that one since I had a fiance and step kids and couldn't be outside watching the trees snap. Now it's 2011 and I'm 36--one two kids in college and a nine year old. I will spend the day before the storm securing my outside patio, preparing drainage so there's no flooding and hope that the power doesn't go out. Times have changed.
The storm has left me with some random thoughts, some funny, some politically based and I felt like sharing so here we go . . .
We prepared by getting the essentials today:
Bread - check
Food - check
Milk - check
Batteries - we already had them
Water - check
Flashlights - again we had them, I am charging the batteries
Generator - slightly out of my budget
Gas - the cars are both filled up
Beer - check
Vodka - check
Netflix - loaded
Did we need beer and vodka? No, but what better way than to spend three days through a storm mildly drunk. Though my purchase of alcohol provided me an interesting glimpse on society. Bottle King, the local liquor store, was busier tonight than prior to July 4th, Christmas, Labor Day, Memorial Day. Busier than any time you would expect the store to be busy. I take it most of my neighbors will be like me and buzz their way through the storm and possibly see cows flying by like the ones Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton saw in Twister.
Now to some serious points. You knew I had to go here--Governor Chris Christie. During the blizzard over Christmas he took his family to Disney and claimed that he did nothing wrong. Said he left the State in good hands and knew everything would be fine. But now there's a hurricane and he isn't making the same mistake twice. He's had three press conferences, he cut short his vacation at the beach with his four kids (I think that alone begs for an ending) and he's been telling people in Asbury Park to get off the beach because they already have good enough tans. That statement bothered me.
Asbury Park, once a retreat for New Yorkers and the shining star of the Jersey Shore, then the birthplace of rock n roll (according to Bruce Springsteen's long speech during live versions of 10th Avenue Freezeout) then a crumbling wasteland that looked like Beruit, to a thriving community known as a safe place for the gay and lesbian community. Why of all Jersey Shore locations did Christie choose Asbury Park to make a comment poking fun at the vanity of people? We all know the cast of the Jersey Shore hang in Seaside Heights and roast themselves like a rotisserie chicken. Why not tell people to get out of Jenkinson's Pier in Seaside? No, he had to point out Asbury Park and claim the people there are vain and want their tans more than they want their lives. Homophobic right wing asshole!
Next when he decided it was time to evacuate the shore with his family he said he was going to lead by example and would get out. I was half expecting him to jump on a plane next and really head out. He'd lead by exmaple to all his millionnaire pals by spending money and running like a little wimp. Good bullies are tough when they want to be, but when things really get rough they go running. It's the ones who stand up to the bully that prove their strength. He'll probably ride out the storm in some armored bunker with a multi day backup generator. His chefs will probably be there, he'll have 500 channels and nothing on, and he'll keep on living the high life.
Me, I'll be watching the water in my back yard making sure it does not get higher than the bottom of my sliding glass doors thus flooding my living room. I'll probably be doing this by candlelight because my power will be out. If I'm really lucky the large tree nearby will blow over and land on the roof. I can feel good though because my governor will be leading by example.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Can We Also Get Traffic Reports?
On Tuesday night, May 31st 2011, NJ witnessed a spectacle to rival anything--Gov. Chris Christie arrived at his son's baseball game in a helicopter. This is wrong on so many levels and finally exposes the man for who he is, the Emporer of New Jersey.
Sure the governors past and present have had access and use of the copter (Kean, Florio, Whitman, McGreevey, Corzine). Each one of those governors used a copter. When it was found that any use of the copter was not for immediate State business they paid back the State for the use. Whitman made a grand entrance to an NJ Devils game. I remember that and I remember she caught a lot of shit for it. So she did what any respectable (if such a word can preceed the next) politican would do--not pass the expense off to the taxpayer.
The NJ State Police, who own and operate the copter claim it was at no expense to the taxpayer because the copter would have been used for training purposes anyhow. Oh yeah, prove to us that you had scheduled at the precise time that Christie got on board that there were plans to run a training exercise. It's all the deflection and grand standing we have gotten used to from this blow hard governor.
Today the press reports he has no plans to reimburse for the copter use and even the conservative talk show hosts on FOX News are turning against their poster boy. Ah, the line has finally been crossed. Supporters are yelling on message boards at nj.com that prior administrations used the copter so he has every right. Yeah well if you use that logic you get into the age old debate, well if your friends jumped off the bridge do you?
Christie has made it clear, we need to cut, cut, cut. No money for after school programs, no money for teaching aides, no money for special education, no money for police departments, no money for fire, no money to women's health clinics. No money for anyone. We need to be fiscally responssible, trim the fat of government. Make people pay more for benefits further pushing them from middle class to poor. Continue to boost the wealthy by allowing them all the benefits of their wealth by not taxing them what they deserve to pay.
So many people out there are disgusted by these things, but no one ever really does anything. Enough already, we need to band together and get a government that actually works for our people.
You know supporters of Christie also jump on the "Obama uses Military 1 for personal use." He may, and that is perhaps wrong as well. Yet Obama isn't telling use that we need to cut back on things and going so far as to demand it publicly. He says we need to be responssible, but all your little GOPers out there are well aware that Mr. Obama is all about spending. You keep throwing out the deficit numbers like it's your phone number at a singles bar.
Christie is different, he's not spending on things that he should, but instead fueling his copter for his next town hall meeting (which will be held at noon on a weekday so none of the working class can go).
Everything that has ever been wrong with NJ politics exists in Chris Christie. He is a product of this State, it's no surprise he has mastered the art of deceit and become a true politican. Guess that's why the GOP wants him to run for President so badly. Well luckily when the GOP sees the flak he's getting for coptergate they'll realize just how wrong they were to back the big mouth.
Next time Christie takes to the air (not the airwaves) he should do something useful like give us traffic updates. Or maybe he can save a seat for Sarah Palin and she can go Jersey bear hunting from the sky.
Sure the governors past and present have had access and use of the copter (Kean, Florio, Whitman, McGreevey, Corzine). Each one of those governors used a copter. When it was found that any use of the copter was not for immediate State business they paid back the State for the use. Whitman made a grand entrance to an NJ Devils game. I remember that and I remember she caught a lot of shit for it. So she did what any respectable (if such a word can preceed the next) politican would do--not pass the expense off to the taxpayer.
The NJ State Police, who own and operate the copter claim it was at no expense to the taxpayer because the copter would have been used for training purposes anyhow. Oh yeah, prove to us that you had scheduled at the precise time that Christie got on board that there were plans to run a training exercise. It's all the deflection and grand standing we have gotten used to from this blow hard governor.
Today the press reports he has no plans to reimburse for the copter use and even the conservative talk show hosts on FOX News are turning against their poster boy. Ah, the line has finally been crossed. Supporters are yelling on message boards at nj.com that prior administrations used the copter so he has every right. Yeah well if you use that logic you get into the age old debate, well if your friends jumped off the bridge do you?
Christie has made it clear, we need to cut, cut, cut. No money for after school programs, no money for teaching aides, no money for special education, no money for police departments, no money for fire, no money to women's health clinics. No money for anyone. We need to be fiscally responssible, trim the fat of government. Make people pay more for benefits further pushing them from middle class to poor. Continue to boost the wealthy by allowing them all the benefits of their wealth by not taxing them what they deserve to pay.
So many people out there are disgusted by these things, but no one ever really does anything. Enough already, we need to band together and get a government that actually works for our people.
You know supporters of Christie also jump on the "Obama uses Military 1 for personal use." He may, and that is perhaps wrong as well. Yet Obama isn't telling use that we need to cut back on things and going so far as to demand it publicly. He says we need to be responssible, but all your little GOPers out there are well aware that Mr. Obama is all about spending. You keep throwing out the deficit numbers like it's your phone number at a singles bar.
Christie is different, he's not spending on things that he should, but instead fueling his copter for his next town hall meeting (which will be held at noon on a weekday so none of the working class can go).
Everything that has ever been wrong with NJ politics exists in Chris Christie. He is a product of this State, it's no surprise he has mastered the art of deceit and become a true politican. Guess that's why the GOP wants him to run for President so badly. Well luckily when the GOP sees the flak he's getting for coptergate they'll realize just how wrong they were to back the big mouth.
Next time Christie takes to the air (not the airwaves) he should do something useful like give us traffic updates. Or maybe he can save a seat for Sarah Palin and she can go Jersey bear hunting from the sky.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Money Doesn't Fix Everything
Kurt Cobain; wealthy; suffered horrible depression. Shot himself in the head because he couldn't take it anymore. Money didn't save him.
This money doesn't fix everything rule gets tossed around a lot and the unfortunate truth is that money itself causes more problems than good. Money creates greed and desire to be the guy with the most toys when the time comes.
Today the NJ Supreme Court ruled that the State must put an additional $500M back into the hands of the Abbott Districts because the cuts enacted by the Christie Administration were ultimately unconstitutional. Christie went on record today as saying, "We must acknowledge that money does not equal quality results." (Newark Star Ledger 5/24/11 http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/gov_christie_legislature_must.html). If money does not equal quality results then why not hand Mark Zuckerberg back that $100M check he gave to the Newark schools in September. OK, I say check for sake of being dramatic. It was a $100M grant (Newark Star Ledger 9/27/10 http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2010/09/facebook_ceo_mark_zuckerbergs.html).
So how is it that the $500M won't solve anything when in Newark $100M will? It seems to me that sometimes money does solve the problem and sometimes it doesn't. So which is it? Christie claims that the Abbott funding formula is a failed educational theory. What theory would that be exactly? The theory that money won't fix it. But yet that $100M from Zuckerberg will fix it?
The point in all of this is where does the money come from and how is it being used. There is a growing drive in this nation to turn education into a business that brings rewards to those who already have it. Do you think Mark Zuckerberg knew a thing about Newark schools and the situation there? He probably knew Newark only for the airport or the fact that at one time it was known as the car theft capital of the country. I doubt the plight of Newark students was really keeping Zuckerberg up at night so much so that he had to step in and save the day with his money.
No, he is a business man and he knows that his money will go towards a school that has better equipment, better paid teachers, and a link to a vast set of resources that will allow the school to succeed and achieve. So, maybe money does solve everything. Oh wait, no it doesn't. Read some of the articles out there about failed charter schools:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/100203439.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/education/02charters.html?scp=2&sq=charter+schools&st=nyt
http://www.irpumn.org/uls/resources/projects/2_Charter_Report_Final.pdf
I guess I'm going here with this discussion--money alone does not solve the problem. It takes a lot more than that. I am a firm believer and supporter of public education and I will also be first to admit it requires reform. No one denies this.
You don't just cut the budget and say, "do more with less." Just as you don't go hand over more money and say, "here, go nuts." You need a combination of good educational theory and practice, fiscal responssibility, and the resources (which yes means money). Look at the operating budget for any district and go line by line and ask yourself, "do we really need to spend that much on that?" Set out the priorities. Salary is always the largest expense. Granted salary for public schools are mandated by contracts and unions etc., you can still properly evaluate and analyze a teacher's ability to be effective. No you don't base it on test scores. You base it on the knowledge that a student obtains as a result of the teacher. This isn't fact and recall, this is actual ability to take what is learned and apply it. This concept and method of evaluation is difficult in courses like English or even History, but if you have the right people in place you can do this.
It's reform, not revolution, not destroy what we have and build it anew. It is work from within to change it. It can be done if you have the tools. Instead politicans make it into issues of money, tax payer dollars, corporate donations, etc. All to serve their own purpose to get somewhere in life.
You see that in NJ. Chris Christie has made it a battle among the people. One side complains about their taxes being too high and the other side are those who are blamed for the high taxes--the teachers that are part of this system. Don't make them out to be the bad guy here. Their union did what was right by its brothers and sisters. Now as elected officials you should do what's right for all, give the districts what they need, money, personnel, tools, which can be used to fix from within. I would gladly pay more in taxes if I knew it was going towards something that mattered. What I pay now I do happily because I see my oldest son in college, my middle one headed there, and my youngest getting the resources he needs as a disabled student. Is it perfect? No, but my children are intelligent and while my wife and I have a piece in that, so too do the schools they have gone to. I see the benefits obtained from the cost of my taxes, at least as they pertain to education in my town. Can everyone say that? No, and that is why we have this battle.
I don't have the immediate solution and I never promised one. I guess like in all debates I look at the much larger issue than the one standing in front of me. Politicans have always played games with our money and our people and it has to stop. To some degree the Supreme Court of NJ did that. They told a schoolyard bully he can't just cut what he deems as not important, at the same time they can't tell all of us how our money should be spent because that is not their place.
I guess my concern is more on the principle of this case. I don't like Chris Christie, and I didn't like Jon Corzine before him, or Jim McGreevey or Christie Todd Whitman, or Jim Florio.
I don't like the politics of this country and the greed it propogates.
This money doesn't fix everything rule gets tossed around a lot and the unfortunate truth is that money itself causes more problems than good. Money creates greed and desire to be the guy with the most toys when the time comes.
Today the NJ Supreme Court ruled that the State must put an additional $500M back into the hands of the Abbott Districts because the cuts enacted by the Christie Administration were ultimately unconstitutional. Christie went on record today as saying, "We must acknowledge that money does not equal quality results." (Newark Star Ledger 5/24/11 http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/gov_christie_legislature_must.html). If money does not equal quality results then why not hand Mark Zuckerberg back that $100M check he gave to the Newark schools in September. OK, I say check for sake of being dramatic. It was a $100M grant (Newark Star Ledger 9/27/10 http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2010/09/facebook_ceo_mark_zuckerbergs.html).
So how is it that the $500M won't solve anything when in Newark $100M will? It seems to me that sometimes money does solve the problem and sometimes it doesn't. So which is it? Christie claims that the Abbott funding formula is a failed educational theory. What theory would that be exactly? The theory that money won't fix it. But yet that $100M from Zuckerberg will fix it?
The point in all of this is where does the money come from and how is it being used. There is a growing drive in this nation to turn education into a business that brings rewards to those who already have it. Do you think Mark Zuckerberg knew a thing about Newark schools and the situation there? He probably knew Newark only for the airport or the fact that at one time it was known as the car theft capital of the country. I doubt the plight of Newark students was really keeping Zuckerberg up at night so much so that he had to step in and save the day with his money.
No, he is a business man and he knows that his money will go towards a school that has better equipment, better paid teachers, and a link to a vast set of resources that will allow the school to succeed and achieve. So, maybe money does solve everything. Oh wait, no it doesn't. Read some of the articles out there about failed charter schools:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/100203439.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/education/02charters.html?scp=2&sq=charter+schools&st=nyt
http://www.irpumn.org/uls/resources/projects/2_Charter_Report_Final.pdf
I guess I'm going here with this discussion--money alone does not solve the problem. It takes a lot more than that. I am a firm believer and supporter of public education and I will also be first to admit it requires reform. No one denies this.
You don't just cut the budget and say, "do more with less." Just as you don't go hand over more money and say, "here, go nuts." You need a combination of good educational theory and practice, fiscal responssibility, and the resources (which yes means money). Look at the operating budget for any district and go line by line and ask yourself, "do we really need to spend that much on that?" Set out the priorities. Salary is always the largest expense. Granted salary for public schools are mandated by contracts and unions etc., you can still properly evaluate and analyze a teacher's ability to be effective. No you don't base it on test scores. You base it on the knowledge that a student obtains as a result of the teacher. This isn't fact and recall, this is actual ability to take what is learned and apply it. This concept and method of evaluation is difficult in courses like English or even History, but if you have the right people in place you can do this.
It's reform, not revolution, not destroy what we have and build it anew. It is work from within to change it. It can be done if you have the tools. Instead politicans make it into issues of money, tax payer dollars, corporate donations, etc. All to serve their own purpose to get somewhere in life.
You see that in NJ. Chris Christie has made it a battle among the people. One side complains about their taxes being too high and the other side are those who are blamed for the high taxes--the teachers that are part of this system. Don't make them out to be the bad guy here. Their union did what was right by its brothers and sisters. Now as elected officials you should do what's right for all, give the districts what they need, money, personnel, tools, which can be used to fix from within. I would gladly pay more in taxes if I knew it was going towards something that mattered. What I pay now I do happily because I see my oldest son in college, my middle one headed there, and my youngest getting the resources he needs as a disabled student. Is it perfect? No, but my children are intelligent and while my wife and I have a piece in that, so too do the schools they have gone to. I see the benefits obtained from the cost of my taxes, at least as they pertain to education in my town. Can everyone say that? No, and that is why we have this battle.
I don't have the immediate solution and I never promised one. I guess like in all debates I look at the much larger issue than the one standing in front of me. Politicans have always played games with our money and our people and it has to stop. To some degree the Supreme Court of NJ did that. They told a schoolyard bully he can't just cut what he deems as not important, at the same time they can't tell all of us how our money should be spent because that is not their place.
I guess my concern is more on the principle of this case. I don't like Chris Christie, and I didn't like Jon Corzine before him, or Jim McGreevey or Christie Todd Whitman, or Jim Florio.
I don't like the politics of this country and the greed it propogates.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
More tax revenue?
OK, this one will be quick and to the point. Word came out today that NJ is expecting an additional $300M more in tax revenue this year and this in turn will go towards higher homestead rebates. Taxpayers are rejoicing and Governor Chris Christie and his brainwashed followers are taking to the web to proclaim the Governor's policies a success. So I wondered, how is this a success? Where is this money coming from?
I asked a person who goes on Twitter as Capt. Republican, a loud mouthed poster child for the unintelligent. Sorry, had to take the dig. This person claims people are making more and thus paying more in taxes which means higher revenues.
Let me make sure the readers at home get this. PEOPLE ARE MAKING MORE MONEY AND SO THEY ARE PAYING MORE TAXES. If that is true, and a person making $200K is taxed at (let's use simple math here) 10%, they pay $2000 in taxes. Let's apply the same logic to the "Millionnaire's Tax" which Christie vetoed and vows to never restore. A person making $1M, taxed at 10% brings in $100K. You make more, you pay more.
So now I ask you out there, shouldn't we tax the higher wage earners more? Wouldn't that bring in more revenue? They are paid more, they'll pay more. Or they'll pay the same and simply use loopholes to avoid the additional taxes.
The Christie clan claims the millionnaires will flee the state if we tax them. I challenge you, find me one person of millionnaire status that has moved from NJ and will go on the record as saying they left because taxes were too high. Cause you know I don't see a lot a vacant properties in Englewood Cliffs, I believe Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy still own residences there. I know Bruce Springsteen lives in NJ and Jon Bon Jovi still has a house here. New Jersey is known as one of the more affluent states. There was a point in time when Bergen County ranked as one of the most exclusive and affluent areas to live.
Provide proof to back up the claims. I just never seem to see that.
I asked a person who goes on Twitter as Capt. Republican, a loud mouthed poster child for the unintelligent. Sorry, had to take the dig. This person claims people are making more and thus paying more in taxes which means higher revenues.
Let me make sure the readers at home get this. PEOPLE ARE MAKING MORE MONEY AND SO THEY ARE PAYING MORE TAXES. If that is true, and a person making $200K is taxed at (let's use simple math here) 10%, they pay $2000 in taxes. Let's apply the same logic to the "Millionnaire's Tax" which Christie vetoed and vows to never restore. A person making $1M, taxed at 10% brings in $100K. You make more, you pay more.
So now I ask you out there, shouldn't we tax the higher wage earners more? Wouldn't that bring in more revenue? They are paid more, they'll pay more. Or they'll pay the same and simply use loopholes to avoid the additional taxes.
The Christie clan claims the millionnaires will flee the state if we tax them. I challenge you, find me one person of millionnaire status that has moved from NJ and will go on the record as saying they left because taxes were too high. Cause you know I don't see a lot a vacant properties in Englewood Cliffs, I believe Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy still own residences there. I know Bruce Springsteen lives in NJ and Jon Bon Jovi still has a house here. New Jersey is known as one of the more affluent states. There was a point in time when Bergen County ranked as one of the most exclusive and affluent areas to live.
Provide proof to back up the claims. I just never seem to see that.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Politics in all its glory
In NJ last year school budgets went to vote and of the 541 voted on 316 were defeated. Governor Chris Christie called this moment a sign that the people of NJ agreed with him that these budgets were out of control and spending needed to be controlled. At the time that the budget elections took place Christie had already called for the cut of $820 million in aid to schools. In a grand political move Christie took the defeat of the budgets as a sign that he had succeeded in proving that people didn’t want to see their taxes go up to make up the difference.
OK, that makes sense. People didn’t want to see their taxes go up by some incredible rate. That brings us to 2011.
This year voters went to the polls for school budgets and as of today, 301 of 373 school budgets passed. We’re still waiting to get the results from another 165, but at this point it’s clear that we’ve seen the majority will pass. Now again Christie views this as a victory for his stand. But is it really a victory for him or just a victory based on circumstance?
Towns got less aid from the State last year and the current projections, while showing a slight increase in State aid, are still lower than usual. As a result of last year’s significant cuts people were laid off, budgets were cut and now there is no need to suggest or submit a budget that goes far beyond what the expected annual tax increase is. So is that really a victory? No it’s just budgeting based upon the knowledge that you’ll have less to work with.
I work for a company and had to make my first budget for my department this year. I’m also a finance major and did very good in my budgeting and forecasting class. When creating a budget it is important to know the limits if you are going to see it approved. You have to anticipate increases on a year to year basis due to inflation in certain areas, and at times, based on the economic environment can expect lower costs in other areas. However, on the majority whole you should expect increases. The level to which you increase is of course based upon your forecast. Will you have the funds to cover the budget and end the year even, above, or below your budget. Think of the expected State aid as part of the forecasted income to cover the necessary costs. If you know your income is fixed you aren’t going to create a budget that challenges the expected income. Since our financial planners in the districts know Christie will not budge on the amount of aid districts will get they are not going to make a budget that challenges that. So it stands to reason that there is no way any district will propose a budget that would be voted down. It is simple logic! If last year districts knew that there would be no movement from Christie and no increase in aid they probably would have made budgets that met the ultimate income expectations.
Now, will the Supreme Court order Christie to restore funding to schools? Who knows? Will he actually restore it if they do? That is also up in the air, but the point remains, this method of saying defeats one year are a victory, and victories the following year are also victories is just all political nonsense and a way to further flash the smoke and mirrors from the real issue—we are a State that has seen Democracy erode into Dictatorship. A State where a bully gets what he wants because he’s got a big mouth and a really pointy finger. And like any good bully he knows how to play the game to always look like the good guy because people are too stupid to question him. Yet even if they did, would they get results? Nope, they’ll just get escorted from the Town Hall meeting.
OK, that makes sense. People didn’t want to see their taxes go up by some incredible rate. That brings us to 2011.
This year voters went to the polls for school budgets and as of today, 301 of 373 school budgets passed. We’re still waiting to get the results from another 165, but at this point it’s clear that we’ve seen the majority will pass. Now again Christie views this as a victory for his stand. But is it really a victory for him or just a victory based on circumstance?
Towns got less aid from the State last year and the current projections, while showing a slight increase in State aid, are still lower than usual. As a result of last year’s significant cuts people were laid off, budgets were cut and now there is no need to suggest or submit a budget that goes far beyond what the expected annual tax increase is. So is that really a victory? No it’s just budgeting based upon the knowledge that you’ll have less to work with.
I work for a company and had to make my first budget for my department this year. I’m also a finance major and did very good in my budgeting and forecasting class. When creating a budget it is important to know the limits if you are going to see it approved. You have to anticipate increases on a year to year basis due to inflation in certain areas, and at times, based on the economic environment can expect lower costs in other areas. However, on the majority whole you should expect increases. The level to which you increase is of course based upon your forecast. Will you have the funds to cover the budget and end the year even, above, or below your budget. Think of the expected State aid as part of the forecasted income to cover the necessary costs. If you know your income is fixed you aren’t going to create a budget that challenges the expected income. Since our financial planners in the districts know Christie will not budge on the amount of aid districts will get they are not going to make a budget that challenges that. So it stands to reason that there is no way any district will propose a budget that would be voted down. It is simple logic! If last year districts knew that there would be no movement from Christie and no increase in aid they probably would have made budgets that met the ultimate income expectations.
Now, will the Supreme Court order Christie to restore funding to schools? Who knows? Will he actually restore it if they do? That is also up in the air, but the point remains, this method of saying defeats one year are a victory, and victories the following year are also victories is just all political nonsense and a way to further flash the smoke and mirrors from the real issue—we are a State that has seen Democracy erode into Dictatorship. A State where a bully gets what he wants because he’s got a big mouth and a really pointy finger. And like any good bully he knows how to play the game to always look like the good guy because people are too stupid to question him. Yet even if they did, would they get results? Nope, they’ll just get escorted from the Town Hall meeting.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
I wonder how many people are gay BECAUSE of Victoria Jackson
Here's a great way to remind people that you're alive. Suddenly jump out of nowhere and complain that Glee is making kids gay. Even better, complain that your teenage daughter can't watch TV because it will poison her mind. Wait, if your teenage daughter watches your acting THAT may poison her mind.
I'm talking about Victoria Jackson, former SNL star and star of such hit movies as . . . wow, even the bad movies are so bad you wouldn't get the references if I mentioned them! Anyhow she has long been known for some nutty claims all from the far right wing. Her new target is Glee. She claims that the show is cramming homosexuality down our throats and is actually helping to make people gay. OK, I don't know if anyone reading this (or if anyone is reading this) has ever watched the show, but trust me, being gay on the show is not a positive. The character of Kurt was tormented for his love interests to the point of leaving the school and his friends. He was assaulted by a closeted football player who might have alternated between beating the shit out of him and viciously raping him. His father is as accepting as he can be, but he still drops some incredibly homophobic comments. So I am not certain how this could make anyone gay. Would you chose a lifestyle that has you as the punchline to jokes, and punching bag for those who feel you are a curse and a sin and a plague on this Earth? The short answer, no you wouldn't.
It is not a choice it is just who you are and I for one am sick of this idiots thinking that the portrayal of gay characters on TV are going to corrupt our society. These shows instead show how hateful this world is. Perhaps that's what they want hidden. I bet Victoria Jackson, for all her love of God and Jesus would quicker shoot a gay person to death than help an old lady cross the street. The same goes for all these other right wing kooks, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, et al.
Oh and another thing about the right, they fail to ever pay attention. Victoria mentions in her rant that shows like Glee should preach celebacy. Oddly the last episode (which featured the gay kiss that got her going) also highlighted the school's Celebacy Club where its members commit to a no sex relationship. The show is great about exploring the diverse ends to all issues
I just don't get it and thought I should share that. So like George Takei tweeted today, more people are gay because of Victoria Jackson than because of Glee. Afterall have you heard her voice? It's like nails on a blackboard. Gag me with a bible!
I'm talking about Victoria Jackson, former SNL star and star of such hit movies as . . . wow, even the bad movies are so bad you wouldn't get the references if I mentioned them! Anyhow she has long been known for some nutty claims all from the far right wing. Her new target is Glee. She claims that the show is cramming homosexuality down our throats and is actually helping to make people gay. OK, I don't know if anyone reading this (or if anyone is reading this) has ever watched the show, but trust me, being gay on the show is not a positive. The character of Kurt was tormented for his love interests to the point of leaving the school and his friends. He was assaulted by a closeted football player who might have alternated between beating the shit out of him and viciously raping him. His father is as accepting as he can be, but he still drops some incredibly homophobic comments. So I am not certain how this could make anyone gay. Would you chose a lifestyle that has you as the punchline to jokes, and punching bag for those who feel you are a curse and a sin and a plague on this Earth? The short answer, no you wouldn't.
It is not a choice it is just who you are and I for one am sick of this idiots thinking that the portrayal of gay characters on TV are going to corrupt our society. These shows instead show how hateful this world is. Perhaps that's what they want hidden. I bet Victoria Jackson, for all her love of God and Jesus would quicker shoot a gay person to death than help an old lady cross the street. The same goes for all these other right wing kooks, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, et al.
Oh and another thing about the right, they fail to ever pay attention. Victoria mentions in her rant that shows like Glee should preach celebacy. Oddly the last episode (which featured the gay kiss that got her going) also highlighted the school's Celebacy Club where its members commit to a no sex relationship. The show is great about exploring the diverse ends to all issues
I just don't get it and thought I should share that. So like George Takei tweeted today, more people are gay because of Victoria Jackson than because of Glee. Afterall have you heard her voice? It's like nails on a blackboard. Gag me with a bible!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
