Govenor Patrick,
I know that you are ok with the prevailing wage law sucking up tax dollars and Stimulus dollars like an Orack vacuum cleaner on steroids, and I understand that you have allowed the adminstration costs to grow immensely under your reign… but can’t you do a little more “hack control” before you savage the voters who need assistance the most? Plus, while I love cutting spending, if we have a program that helps elderly people stay at home and thereby saves a $10,000/month nursing home bill, why the heck would you cut it?
I believe you when you continue to support the overpaid and bloated administration of the state educational establishments with hundreds of assistant deputy associate vice-deans… making healthy 6 figure salaries (all waiting for fat 6-figure pensions also paid for by our tax dollars) and I know your friends need jobs (BTW, how is Marion Walsh doing? And Dana Harrell?) but should we be paying fat six fiigure incomes for DOT administrators while we deny dentures to grandmothers forcing them to “gum” an ear of corn? Did the Executive office of Transportation and Public Works (administration) have to go from $15.5 million to $20.2 Million since you’ve been governor?
How do you sleep at night?
BTW… Does Patty Vantine and her associates still have their jobs during these deep deep cuts?
Vantine, a former accountant for the state Democratic party, was given a $20,000 raise last year that bumped her pay to $105,000 when she was promoted to a top DCR administrative post.
The Herald reported in May that Vantine hired her friend and Abington neighbor Kathleen Reilly to an $83,000-a-year administrative post. Reilly previously had worked for the state for 18 years but was a stay-at-home mom until Vantine brought her back onto the state payroll earlier this year.
Vantine also hired her Abington neighbor Kevin Whalen, a former analyst for State Street Corp., to a $68,000 “waterfront coordinator” position.
Like they say, it’s not “what” you know…
When is the Democratic primary again? If Charlie Baker is reading this, please note where Deval likes to cut and where he likes to protect people!
amberpaw says
Add to that the 9 million dollar giveaway to the Krafts with a walkover bridge while cutting homeless shelters???
<
p>Maybe Deval Patrick doesn’t know that lots of people who are disabled by epilepsy lose their teeth and need dentures? Your image of the grandmother gumming the corn would make a better campaign add then Willie Horton, you think?
<
p>As to the growth of 100k salaries that will get lifetime 80k pensions, it is almost fun, in a mesmerizing but awful way for those of us who own and operate small businesses, professional practices, etc. Not one paid vacation day ever in my life – and 20 or thirty years of paid vacation paid for by taxpayer money.
<
p>Look – I appreciate public servants, and public service as much or more than the next person, but seeing social workers cut by DCF – while the brass gets raises does get to me [and the same for other agencies].
<
p>I was just in Westfield – they laid off every single social worker technician – one wonderful woman who never made over 40k in 16 years of service, if that, was among those laid off – while every kid in administration is still there as long as they have a BA and the right friends.
jarstar says
I need to make a single comment, because the myth is so pervasive. In order for a state employee to qualify for 80% of his/her salary as a pension upon retirement, he/she will need to be in the state’s employ for about 40 years, having started work in state government young. (I’ve seen the chart, and done the calculation for my own anticipated pension). You also need to work 10 years in order for your pension to vest. I would venture to guess, based on my own observations in state government, that most state employees in the $100K+ salary neighborhood are managers who have not worked, and will not have worked, 40 years for the state. Granted, there are lifers, but there are also plenty of us who came in late, after a long stretch in the private sector, or who don’t stay our entire careers, who will realize a pension in the 25-40% range. It’s a very nice benefit and I don’t hear anybody being anything but grateful for it. But mostly what you hear about in the press and unfortunately in many blogs is about those greedy state employees and their 80% pensions. It’s just not reality, and I’d wish it would stop.
judy-meredith says
STATEMENT OF HEALTH CARE FOR ALL ON BUDGET CUTS (11-13-09)
to restore full funding for these cuts.
<
p>I share your frustration/anger/disappointment about all of these duplicate high paying jobs in the new still transitioning reformed Transportation department. I hope the Globe and the Governor are prompt in reporting that these folks have been released, reassigned as soon as their civil service or collective bargaining rights allow.
<
p>Because I think it’s time to move onto talking about revenues to begin to rebuild and repair our rapidly deteriorating public transportation systems all over the state. It was reform before revenue wasn’t it?
<
p>This press release from Health Care for All does a good job of linking the most recent round of 9C cuts to the need for new revenues to restore full funding to these dental programs that serve working poor and the disabled stay in our tax paying workforce.
<
p>
judy-meredith says
I wish I could edit replies to cut
<
p>STATEMENT OF HEALTH CARE FOR ALL ON BUDGET CUTS (11-13-09)
<
p>and paste it the HCFA statement quoted below.
joets says
if you want some…upward mobility!
johnd says
Patty Vantine, Kathleen Reilly and Kevin Whalen (story above) are laid off. Enough with this BS. If Deval wants us to support his cuts then he has to show he’s willing to get rid of these types of appointments. Time for real “change”!
billxi says
Your plan to cut Personal Care Attendant hours may not bode well for the clients and the PCA’s, but at least it will hurt you too. That is fairness!
You see, if you cut PCA hours, a great number of them will stop working as PCA’s. They stop working, they stop paying union dues to the SEIU. The SEIU sees a drop in revenue, they stop giving money to your re-election campaign.
The clients lose needed care. The PCA’s lose income. The state loses a bunch in payroll taxes. The SEIU loses dues income. You lose re-election. See, everybody loses. That is certainly fair.
But not me, I receive 20 hours a week, so I’m good.
Do you folks want to tell me you’re not Social Darwinists again?
johnk says
I thought that you want to abolish it. I thought you would be cheering for cuts? What the deal, you can’t have it both ways. If you want Medicaid or and expanded Medicaid then fine. Just respond and I’ll know.
johnd says
So please let me go on record that I am not in favor of abolishing Medicaid. BTW, this does not mean that I am in favor of every aspect of Medicaid.
johnk says
You favor Medicaid and do not want a reduction to what we have now. That’s my understanding from your post.
johnd says
Do you sell snake oil for a living?
<
p>The insinuation I am making in my post is that there are millions of dollars wasted in our current budget which should be eliminated before we resort to the cuts announced by Deval. I do believe we need Medicaid (and many other social safety nets) in our society while I can still be critical of the details and methods in which they are dispersed.
<
p>So to be clear… I do support Medicaid. But to also be clear, I do not think it is perfect and if you want an example of a critique…
<
p>
<
p>For my entire working adult life I cannot remember ever having a $3 copay (or the newly proposed $6 copay) for a DR’s visit, nor do I remember a $3 copay (or the newly proposed $6 copay) for “brand name” prescription drugs. I would have increased copays to some nominal costs which reflects what most Americans are paying.
<
p>But please, keep trying to slice this apple to catch me contradicting myself. Why not stay on point with this topic JohnK which is the inefficient and disproportionate cutting of the budget and the continuing shielding of political appointments?
huh says
Assuming you realize Medicaid is a program for low income families, your suggestion of increasing copay to match that of people with high incomes seems particularly mean-spirited.
<
p>Also, don’t you think your argument would be better with facts and logic rather than insults and insinuations?
<
p>Do you have any backing for your claim that slashing the “overpaid and bloated administration of the state educational establishments” would fix things, for example?
billxi says
Respond to my post above.
huh says
You posted a bunch of incoherent assertions… then repeated your “social darwinist” tagline. There’s really nothing to say.
billxi says
I put the chain together very well. If you can’t respond, you denigrate. This does not even approach my Social Darwinism post coming soon.
huh says
I still have no idea what point you’re trying to make or what sort of response you want? Or I do: you want us to say, “yes, we’re all asshole socialists who hate the disabled.” Ain’t remotely true, so ain’t gonna happen.
billxi says
The governor’s actions speak volumes. Your (plural) lack of action speaks volumes. I think we can all take that as endorsement by silence. Thank you for your quotation, I’ll use it sometime. Don’t worry, I’ll give you proper acknowkedgement.
kbusch says
Posting anonymously, not running for public office, and not holding public office, you don’t “say things for the record” or “support Medicaid”.
johnd says
thanks (again) for contributing so heavily to this post… not! I haven’t looked back yet but my recollection is you spend more time posting how sucky my posts are and hardly any time on the issue. Get over it. Be part of the solution or remain part of he problem.
kbusch says
<
p>2. I can comment on whatever it pleases me to comment on. This is not JohnD’s blog.
<
p>3. Please, try to engage in dialog. I know you prefer to act like a TV set, but try. Would it be too painful to acknowledge the point I’m making?
johnd says
Stop going after me KBusch and have some fun talking about stuff. You previously scolded me about “trying to win” every conversation but I’m starting to feel that “you” are the one who needs to be the winner of every debate.
<
p>I know I can’t stop you from commenting to/about me but I’ve come to ignore many “JohnD is such a stupid conservative” “stop the talk radio rants” comments and respond to the more “I disagree with you completely because..” type of comments.
<
p>I know the volume of comments on a diary does not correlate with the value of the diary, but I do think it shows a core of interests from many sides (even if you remove the non-productive JohnD is stupid comments). I do however think the diaries with zero or very very few comments are indicative of boring issues or a lack of coherent thoughts.
<
p>So loosen your tie and have fun with the conversation, even if it’s at my expense. Use your superior intellect to corner me, dig deep for some witty metaphors making conservatives look like Genghis Khan, throw the occasional latin phrase in… just don’t level a cowardly charge by calling me a liar!
<
p>Otherwise, let other bloggers here or someplace else enjoy KBusch!
kbusch says
huh says
It’s not a “cowardly charge” when it’s backed up with facts. You have a long history of dishonest behavior on here, including lying and attacking people. Deal with it.
johnk says
This is from your post commenting about Medicaid…
<
p>
<
p>How does that jibe with your comment that it should be more? Did something change since you wrote the post?
<
p>Crissakes John, WTF? Can you make a coherent statement? First you say we shouldn’t savage (your words) who need it the most, now they should pay more than what Patrick notes. What? Come on.
<
p>I really have no idea where the heck you stand on this.
<
p>Plus, your have never shown any kind of evidence that your so called hacks have lost us money. Maybe if we had those “hacks” with Weld/Celucci/Swift/Romney were in charge some of those UBS loan deals. Or leaving infrastructure unsafe for 20 years and costing us a lot more money now to repair. Please John make an argument instead of repeatedly doing a cut/paste job from the Herald state salaries page.
johnd says
Why not ask me to answer “yes or no” to the question… “Do you still beat my wife?”
<
p>I have been critical about many things (prison reform, ethics panels, bailouts, illegal immigrants… and now Deval’s cuts) but that does not tranlate into I am against every single aspect of those things. Can you understand that differentioation?
<
p>Let me translate my point into another language to see if you can understand…
<
p>
<
p>And if you don’t use Babblefish.com
<
p>
<
p>So this allows me to support food programs for the poor but still criticize handing out Morton’s gift certificates to the poor…
johnk says
this is just baloney.
<
p>By your “standards”, you can complain that increasing copays from $3 to $6 is savaging those who need the most assistance. But then you can still complain that those on Medicaid pay too little with $6 and copays should instead pay at similar levels as common private plans.
<
p>I’m going to slow this down for you, as you seem to need it. Just stop relax and take it in …
<
p>Isn’t the increase to $6 and the decreasing of support what you want? Less dollars are being spent on Medicaid and copays are being increased. What you are complaining about is an incremental shift in copays, it is not exactly what you want. You would rather the copay be $10 or $20 instead and further reduce the dollars we spend on Medicaid.
<
p>This shift should have nothing to do with cuts in other programs in MA. If you are for increasing copays this should be good news to you.
<
p>But this is your logic …
<
p>OMG those in need are being savaged! Copays are being increased from $3 to $6, the outrage. But they should really pay $20 instead.
<
p>So where’s that evidence that hires that you point out lose money. Still waiting for that ….
johnd says
I’ll jump to your side of the argument…
<
p>Thank you Governor Deval Patrick for the recent 9C cuts. Please have your people (who are all very deserving of their jobs at whatever salary you decide on and whatever previous experience they have don’t have) look at the DMR budget and any other programs where we can cut more spending. We at BMG fully endorse the recent decision to stop paying for Grandma’s dentures and we are hoping to see some more middle managers hired for $100K+ jobs.
<
p>This is the “change” we have been waiting for.
somervilletom says
Massachusetts has been slashing taxes for decades. The proponents have long argued that government is bad and pointedly advocated “starving the beast.”
<
p>These draconian cuts are the result.
<
p>Massachusetts has significantly more wealthy residents than average for the United States. We passionately support sporting events at astronomical prices — this is not the behavior of a population that “can’t afford” basic services.
<
p>A better narrative is “Government exists to meet vital needs that people cannot do for themselves. Taxes are a small and necessary price to pay for this crucial service. All of us need good government.”
<
p>It is time to increase taxes on the wealth (not income) of our most affluent residents so that we can rebuild the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
marcus-graly says
Do you want people to recklessly spend all their income and live paycheck to paycheck? Because that’s what a “wealth” tax would encourage. What about those who are retired and no longer make significant income? They would see their savings dwindle rapidly. Given the high cost of homes here, much of many families “wealth” is their house, which they already pay property taxes on. Would you add this “wealth” tax on top of that? Would it be subject to the same protections that currently exist to protect folks from excessive taxes if the value of their homes appreciates too rapidly?
somervilletom says
The tax increase I advocate affects estates in excess of $5M — when the person who holds the wealth is dead. If that threshold is too low, fine — make it $10M, or $20M. It is population whose wealth is at the very top of the distribution — the top 5%, for instance — that I advocate targeting. Meanwhile, I’m advocating a tax on dead people. It’s pretty tough for a dead person to live “paycheck to paycheck”.
<
p>Perhaps you missed the 2006 study I cited that demonstrates that $1.5 Trillion is expected to pass from one generation to the next in the next 50 years.
<
p>That is an average of twenty five billion dollars per year.
<
p>We are most assuredly not talking about “people who are retired and no longer make significant income.” Instead, we are talking about a handful of people who are passing tens of billions of dollars to the next generation each year.
marcus-graly says
Usually a tax on inheritance is called an “Estate Tax”, when you change the names of things it causes confusion. I interpreted your first post as “get rid of the income tax a replace it with a tax on wealth”. Wealth usually refers to people’s net worth. I am strongly in favor of high Estate Taxes, as the beneficiaries of large fortunes rarely are productive members of society. (Yes, I know there are exceptions, but usually the exceptions do good in spite of their wealthy parents, not because of it)
somervilletom says
It sounds like we’re on the same page.
joets says
Only 739 billion is going to heirs, because…::drumroll::…297 billion of that number is going to the government! Also, there’s charities and whatnot, but it’s not as substantial.
<
p>Also, despite the fact that we are apparently “assuredly” talking about a handful of people passing tens of billions of dollars, would you care to provide a link? While I’m sure there are significant individual people doling out money post-mortem, I’d bet the number is a lot lower than you think.
<
p>Also, in regards to your top 5% thing, what income do you think people in the 95th percentile make?
somervilletom says
Yes, “only” 59.12% of the $1.25 TRILLION will go to heirs. The government will collect 23.7% ($297B) in taxes. My proposal will increase that by $1B/year — to a total of $347B over fifty years, resulting in the government taking 27.8%.
<
p>Of all the options on the table, that is — to me — far and away the most fair way to fund the government that all of us need.
<
p>An additional $1B/year in tax revenue goes a very long way towards:
<
p>1. Rebuilding our transportation infrastructure, and
2. Rebuilding our public education system, and
3. Rebuilding our health care system
<
p>Meanwhile, perhaps you missed the following paragraph from page 2 (emphasis mine):
<
p>I call eleven people a “handful.”
<
p>You might have also missed this paragraph (emphasis mine):
<
p>That’s zero point five percent that have assets of “at least” $20M. The article estimates $360B in charitable giving, and predicts that 52% of that — $187.2 Billion — will come from the top 0.5%.
<
p>I call 0.5% a “handful.” Please note the nuanced phrase “at least $20M.” I invite you to show how 0.5% of a population can contribute $187.2B from their estates without those estates being SIGNIFICANTLY in excess of “$20M”.
<
p>For example, those eleven wealthiest individuals who live in Greater Boston and who collectively have THIRTY TWO BILLION DOLLARS have, on average, $3.2 BILLION each.
<
p>In my view, $3.2B is a lot more than the “$20M” number cited — specifically:
$3,200,000,000.00 vs
$ 20,000,000.00
<
p>That’s well over ten times larger than an already large threshold for each of those eleven. I don’t know about the other participants here, but if I am able to leave my five children a twenty million dollar estate, I will consider my self very fortunate and very wealthy — and we’re talking ten times that, for each of these eleven.
<
p>Yes, Joe, its a handful. Yes, that handful is very wealthy. And yes, Joe, that handful should pay more taxes upon the transfer of their wealth.
johnd says
why don’t you propose a “sports” tax? You could add $25 to every Celtic, Bruins, Red Sox and Patriot event… as well as every concert and live performance. See how it works!
<
p>What exactly is your plan for a Wealth tax?
christopher says
I get pretty tired of people claiming they can’t afford what works out to a couple of bucks per week of a tax increase to pay for schools, yet splurge on sporting events. Horrible priorities IMO.
somervilletom says
the estate and gift tax be increased by 4% on estates whose value exceeds five million dollars.
johnd says
Can you say “Irrevocable trusts” and so many other avenues available to rich people. Rich people can live their lives when they are older on pennies because most of them have estate pans which shelter their money from the government. Hell they pay millions to protect their billions. I’m doing the same thing with my mother-in-law now to shelter her assets reduce her exposure (all perfectly legal) from the state for Medicaid qualification in the future.
judy-meredith says
to other family members, so she is virtually penniless means her loving family can enjoy/profit/control her former assets even before she dies so the rest of us pay, through our taxes to get her into homecare/nursing home/assisted living. Geez!
<
p>Yes it is perfectly legal. Whole bunches of lawyers run seminars to guide middle class people how to pauperize their elderly parents all the time.
somervilletom says
I somehow doubt that JohnD is “protecting” an estate in excess of twenty million dollars.
<
p>If he is, then:
<
p>a. Neither she nor her heirs (presumably including JohnD) need medicaid, and
<
p>b. The behavior he advocates exemplifies the greed that we need to stop enshrining in public policy.
johnd says
but I do believe even at my mother-in-law’s wealth level we need some changes in the laws.
liveandletlive says
Event ticket taxes. I have an even better idea. Instead of making it a palpable 6.25%, just make it 2 or 3%. You’ll get fewer complaints from constituents. They may even be willing to hand the money over and help out.
<
p>Speaking of Medicaid and budget shortfalls…
I was in CVS tonight picking up an RX, the line was very long so I had time to think and ponder things. It hit me just how big the drug and pharmacy industries are. Bags upon bags of RX’s all lined up in alphabetical bins just waiting to be claimed and paid for. Hundreds of prescriptions, probably refilled monthly. Big Bucks!!
<
p>Then I remembered the Massachusetts drug tax (assessment fee?)and the fight back from pharmacies. Remember that? The pharmacies were so angry. They claimed they could not survive such a burden. They refused to pay and passed the cost onto consumers. $1.30 for every RX purchased. I remember how silly I thought the whole thing was. I also remember receiving the refund for RX’s purchased after the state pushed back and told the pharmacies they could not do this. Come to find out, the pharmacies filed suit against the state and won, the state could no longer impose this fee.
<
p>In the meantime, CVS’s 2009 3rd quarter profits jumped 39%.
You can completely understand why they wouldn’t want to part with $1.30/RX. They can’t afford it.
johnd says
Pharmaceuticals
Oil Companies
Insurance companies
Wall St
Wal-Mart
Fox
Whole Foods
Hyatt
CVS
JohnD
<
p>Where do we stand in Microsoft… were they evil or was just Bill Gates evil?
johnd says
<
p>…
<
p>
johnd says
<
p>BMGers are almost united in keeping the status quo rejecting even looking at the examples of excessive salaries and recent political appointments.