[Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis

[Darrell Keim]

I also thought this was a good post.  But, I disagree with the
conclusion the author reaches.  The state IS a business in some ways:
Both sell a product and neither can consistently spend more than it
takes in.  If operating in the red a business or state has two
options.  1.  Decrease spending.  2.  Increase income.  I was recently
in a position where the business I ran had the same choice.  We didn't
feel we could raise prices without alienating our customers.  That
left us with little choice.  We had to cut benefits.  The state is the
same, but with a more complex equation.  Their customer HAS to pay if
they increase taxes.  But, the state needs to ask itself what will
best benefit the economy, raising taxes for all, or decreasing state
costs.

That must have been a tough choice with such high stakes.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer.  Just two different
paths with the same goal.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
> On Behalf Of Joe Campbell
> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:50 AM
> To: Dickow
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis
>
> This is a great post. I wonder why no one has responded.
>
> Joe Campbell
>
> On Apr 27, 2009, at 12:23 PM, Dickow <dickow at turbonet.com> wrote:
>
>> The problem in my book concerning a 3% cut to state employees is
>> that it is, in effect, a direct tax on a special segment of the
>> state's population. The state would be making up its shortfalls at
>> the expense of state employees. I think that the state shouldn't be
>> thought of as an entity like a company, which might indeed have to
>> trim their employees in some form or other. But in in the case of
>> the state, the employees would be making a sacrifice that directly
>> benefits other people in the state, not the owners of a somel
>> corporation. A more equitable solution to the state's budgetary woes
>> would be to impose a tax of some kind on everyone in the state.
>> Then, everyone might have to kick back 1/2 percent or something, and
>> all would be well. But alas, raising taxes is political NO NO!
>> And... by the way, whatever happened to the state's Emergency Fund.
>> did they spend that already?
>>
>> Bob Dickow, troublemaker
>>