Florida's Budget Proposals...Unenlightened, Shortsighted and Irresponsible.

[Andy A]

They don't want to cut, they want to raise revenue through increased taxation and pull more income from [strike]the federal government[/strike] China. (But apparently Gov. Scott is the irresponsible one, go figure. :roll All this liberal gnashing of teeth is rather entertaining really. In the end, the budget will pass and the state and it's residents will be just fine. They may even be better off.

30ashopper, it is useless for you, Idlewind and I to express our views or opinions any longer on this board unless we are doing so for our own solace or to just vent. No one but the few of us and the members on the opposite side reads any of it. We aren't going to change our position, for the most part, and they certainly show no inclination to change theirs. As of last view, 20 members were on the board. Only 5 were in this forum. Guests cannot view what we say. IMO, the forum, for the most part, is now useless as far as creating a difference of opinion to be analyized by people who do not already have a standing position because they are not here and cannot read what is written by either side.

 

[Matt J]

Actually Andy A. the simply fact is that the right went after very small budget items that were clearly social issues. Planned Parenthood isn't going to bankrupt this country. If you want me to take your panicked screams that the country is going to implode seriously then start with the real stuff. Tomorrow we pack up and get the heck out of dodge in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then cut the military spending in half, that'll still leave us five times bigger than the next military might.

 

[30ashopper]

Yeah, yeah, keep trying to pretend it isn't true. In the meantime, here's the latest column by well known local non-liberal Del Stone:

DEL STONE JR. Our most vulnerable citizens will suffer because of state cutbacks | mcdaniel, vulnerable, most - Northwest Florida Daily News

I an utterly sickened that you think this is no big deal.

The state was spending at a level equal to the current proposed budget just a year ago (2009-2010) and spent the same in the fiscal year prior to that as well. So please explain to me why suddenly everyone will suffer now that we've dropped all the stimulus money from the budget and cut back to those levels. (Especially considering the state's population numbers have dropped since then.)

$51 Billion (2000-2001 Fiscal Year)
$47 Billion (2001-2002)
$50.4 Billion (2002-2003)
$53.5 Billion (2003-2004)
$57.3 Billion (2004-2005)
$64.7 Billion (2005-2006)
$73.6 Billion (2006-2007)
$71.2 Billion (est) (2007-2008)
$66.2 Billion (est) (2008-2009)
$66.5 Billion (2009-2010)
$70.4 Billion (2010-2011)

est. $66 Billion (2011-2012)

 

[30ashopper]

30ashopper, it is useless for you, Idlewind and I to express our views or opinions any longer on this board unless we are doing so for our own solace or to just vent. No one but the few of us and the members on the opposite side reads any of it. We aren't going to change our position, for the most part, and they certainly show no inclination to change theirs. As of last view, 20 members were on the board. Only 5 were in this forum. Guests cannot view what we say. IMO, the forum, for the most part, is now useless as far as creating a difference of opinion to be analyized by people who do not already have a standing position because they are not here and cannot read what is written by either side.

Personally I think Kurt made a mistake there - I used to find political forum threads in google search. With those hidden, I'd bet SoWal traffic was hurt somewhat by it. But it's Kurt's site, he can do what he pleases. I like the interaction even if nobody changes their mind. It's fun. Sort of like Soduko, it keeps the mind sharp.

 

[Matt J]

The state was spending at a level equal to the current proposed budget just a year ago (2009-2010) and spent the same in the fiscal year prior to that as well. So please explain to me why suddenly everyone will suffer now that we've dropped all the stimulus money from the budget and cut back to those levels. (Especially considering the state's population numbers have dropped since then.)

$51 Billion (2000-2001 Fiscal Year)
$47 Billion (2001-2002)
$50.4 Billion (2002-2003)
$53.5 Billion (2003-2004)
$57.3 Billion (2004-2005)
$64.7 Billion (2005-2006)
$73.6 Billion (2006-2007)
$71.2 Billion (est) (2007-2008)
$66.2 Billion (est) (2008-2009)
$66.5 Billion (2009-2010)
$70.4 Billion (2010-2011)

est. $66 Billion (2011-2012)

Okay, we'll go over this one more time. People rely on social services when times are bad. Currently times are bad so there is a much higher strain on social services. I know I know you don't care about other people and they should just buck up and get a job, but that's not always an option for everyone.

 

[30ashopper]

Okay, we'll go over this one more time. People rely on social services when times are bad. Currently times are bad so there is a much higher strain on social services. I know I know you don't care about other people and they should just buck up and get a job, but that's not always an option for everyone.

Unemployment Rate in Florida (Graph)

Well maybe we should have thought of that back in 2005->2007.

The correlary of course is that when times are tough there are fewer people out there capable of providing tax revenue to fund all those social services you think people need. You can't squeeze blood from a turnip.. and money doesn't grow on trees. Hard times are hard times, for everyone.

 

[poppy]

Unemployment Rate in Florida (Graph)

Well maybe we should have thought of that back in 2005->2007.

The correlary of course is that when times are tough there are fewer people out there capable of providing tax revenue to fund all those social services you think people need. You can't squeeze blood from a turnip.. and money doesn't grow on trees. Hard times are hard times, for everyone.

:shock: Everyone?

 

[beachmouse]

Well maybe we should have thought of that back in 2005->2007.

Jeb! actually had some moments of responsibility then- he was the first one to say that the budget surpluses should NOT go to operating expenses, only things that would be non-recurring. The state ended paying cash for a lot of capital projects it would have normally issued bonds to pay for, and is now in a better position than it would have been if we were having to make bond repayments on top of the current financial deficits.

 

[idlewind]

Jeb! actually had some moments of responsibility then- he was the first one to say that the budget surpluses should NOT go to operating expenses, only things that would be non-recurring. The state ended paying cash for a lot of capital projects it would have normally issued bonds to pay for, and is now in a better position than it would have been if we were having to make bond repayments on top of the current financial deficits.

All in all Jeb was a pretty good Governor.

 

[30ashopper]

Jeb! actually had some moments of responsibility then- he was the first one to say that the budget surpluses should NOT go to operating expenses, only things that would be non-recurring. The state ended paying cash for a lot of capital projects it would have normally issued bonds to pay for, and is now in a better position than it would have been if we were having to make bond repayments on top of the current financial deficits.

Jeb was an excellent governor, and Scott will follow in his footsteps. One thing though I'm curious about, the 2006-2007 was a budget blow out. Not sure what happened there, I haven't found much about it on the interwebs. I'm guessing it was the fault of our free spending repub.legislature, they tend to get drunk on the money when times are good.