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.
Showing posts with label NJ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NJ. Show all posts
Thursday, June 2, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
