States Begin To Cut Aid For Cities As Budget Woes Mount

nytimes.com:

The cuts are widespread. Ohio plans to slash aid to Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati and other cities and local governments by more than a half-billion dollars over the next two years under the budget proposed last week by its new Republican governor, John R. Kasich. Nebraska passed a law this month eliminating direct state aid to Omaha and other municipalities. The governors of Wisconsin and Michigan have called for sending less money to Milwaukee, Detroit and other local governments.

Read the whole story: nytimes.com

Comments

[bkerensa]

03:44 PM on 03/27/2011

Expect major cuts in your towns and cities coming soon.... this means less police, less firetrucks, less parks, less street cleanup, free clinics closed and much much more :)

[spkninglsh]

02:30 PM on 03/26/2011

That's ok, the cities can just pass it down to the...oh crap!

[NamithaSF]

10:01 PM on 03/25/2011

Inevitable. Cities and countries can declare bankruptcy. Only way to get out of union contracts.
Of course many union thugs believe CB is the 11 th commandment.

[joebiteme]

08:21 PM on 03/25/2011

time to cut local wages until they are in line with the private sector, the days of govt employees earning twice what the taxpayers do is over

[tacevad]

09:44 PM on 03/25/2011

what a good disciple you are.... why not cut CEO money and pay private sector in line with government? by the way the only government employees earning twice are elected ones and their appointments. do you really think the gal at the DMV taking pictures is making $100,000?

[Elwood Grobnik]

05:32 PM on 03/25/2011

This is inevitable because of the way America is politically organized, but it's ass backwards if you want effective policy. Taxation and spending should occur at the state level or higher, not at the local level, because business decisions made based on local tax policies are socially sub-optimal. Example: if tax rates were the same everywhere, WigitCo would choose to locate in Cityton, to be close to its suppliers and customers and to take advantage of Cityton's ample water supply, labor, and transportation infrastructure. But because taxes are lower in Exurbville, locating there will be better for the bottom line even though production will be less efficient. So the business locates in the sub-optimum location, economic growth is lower overall, and unemployment is higher, all due to the inefficiencies caused by government policy. For optimum efficiency, you want businesses to locate where they would want to locate if policy were neutral. Competition among firms for business is a good thing and increases efficiency, but competition among municipalities is a bad thing. By cutting aid and making local governments raise and spend money at the local level, this trend will make the situation worse.

[mootown]

05:12 PM on 03/25/2011

Baggers what you and the Insect-licans have wrought is going to be knocking on your door very soon. If you have a door left. You can step onto their mangled train of thought and deed, GOP lovers, but I don't deserve to be dragged onto the tracks with you.

[boomer7391]

02:38 PM on 03/25/2011

well certainly does prove the trickle down theory...unfortunately what's trickling down should be flushed

hey repubs, you wanted it you got it....hang on to your hats because you don't have much longer before the pitch fork crowd turns on you

[Raccoon1]

12:47 PM on 03/25/2011

I need to find my copy of "The Grapes of Wrath" so I can see again what life will be like.

[graffitijoe]

07:43 AM on 03/25/2011

Just after the Feds have passed budget woes on to the states,

[Steve Rockett]

01:01 AM on 03/25/2011

Maybe it's time to consolidate some smaller cities and combine resources like fire, police, etc. This happens in business where there are mergers. Arnold promised he would do that in California, but he didn't. Everyone want to order an expensive meal, but not pay when the bill arrives. We need to tax the rich and the middle class more. Sorry, but until we are back on solid footing, we are just kidding ourselves.

[rotorhead1871]

11:16 PM on 03/24/2011

thats all they can do......or raise taxes......anyone raising their hand with a better idea???? speak up.

[Raccoon1]

12:51 PM on 03/25/2011

Increase the tax base by putting people and small companies to work. We need a trade policy. We need to crack down on bootleged products made in China and elsewhere. We need to buy American - promote quality over price - instead of having more, more, more - have the best. Get the corporations that do business in the USA to help pay their share of the burden (BofA, GE, others). That would be a start.

[dayzee10]

10:09 PM on 03/24/2011

This is when the monetary costs of our military escapades start to hit home. We've spent about a trillion dollars in Afghanistan and Iraq and now we will have to layoff city and town employees as well as downgrade services to citizens most in need while the funds that would mitigate those problems are poured down the sewers that are Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Libya. I hope we all realize that those laid off will most likely be the same young men and women that will be coming home from those countries you know the kid that used to live down the street whatsisname?" Yeah he was an emt,went to Iraq, nice kid, too bad he got laid off." or "Yeah I remember her from soccer, she was fast, got laid off from the water department, well maybe she can still reenlist." We are about to see an escalation, here at home, of the human cost of our follies. At the time the people of the United States are as most in need in the last 100 years our leaders,our government, our elite class, our corporations are ignoring the blood ,sweat and tears that the people have put into building and preserving the liberty that enables them to exist

[rotorhead1871]

11:25 PM on 03/24/2011

thats ... the feds..they can print money...and sell the debt.....the problem is taxes are too low! if you want the bells, you have to pay!!! income tax is a farce....everyone should pay..

[Elwood Grobnik]

05:21 PM on 03/25/2011

Well, tax rates are probably too high, but there are so many loopholes that tax revenues are too low, the result of trying to influence behavior through the tax code and "targetted tax cuts" rather than just spending money. The problem is, it doesn't work. Tax law doesn't impact my economic behavior because it's too complicated to bother with. I have a tax guy, and he tells me what deductions I'm eligible to take at the end of the year. But I didn't buy the hybrid, give to my church, or put my kid in day care because these things were tax deductable! If we want to spend public money on these things, we should spend money on them directly, instead of hiding the expenses in the tax code. Whether we pay cash for child care, or put it in the budget as a tax deduction, IT COSTS THE BUDGET BY THE SAME AMOUNT. And possibly more for the tax deductions, because if we were spending money, we might decide there should be means testing for receiving some of these benefits. Mortgage interest, child care, etc - why subsidize these things for millionaires? But they can write 'em off just like everyone else. The result is, when you look at what proportion of gross income people pay, often the wealthy are paying a smaller percentage in reality than the middle class!

[travlindr]

09:28 PM on 03/24/2011

Yes, and the Ohio governor plans to turn the lucrative State liquor business that earns the State 200 million plus annually over to his friends in private enterprise.

[rotorhead1871]

11:17 PM on 03/24/2011

as he should...so should wash state,,,,the gov is not a business....it is a framework...to do business..

[Raccoon1]

12:53 PM on 03/25/2011

Yaaaah, a liquor store on every corner and in every grocery and drug store. There's going to be stiff competition with Starbucks for best locations.

[travlindr]

02:40 PM on 03/25/2011

Yes, and loose the revenue, AND use it to favor his rich friends. It is the Repugnican way.

[TheAnarchist]

03:04 PM on 03/25/2011

And private enterprise (PE) has really been doing really great during the Great Recession. W ere it not for government I guess PE would do even better.

When are you folks going to wake from your whoozy dream about "free markets" and "private enterprise" being the panacea for national growth during hard times?

If all we had was the private sector and no public sector and the for-profit-owners of the banks continued to maximize profits, there would be no financial stability. Banks create surpluses and shortages of capital to serve their profit maximizing objectives no matter what the form of governance.

The problem for nations, states and cities, is the act of borrowing at interest. Eliminate interest charged to the public sector and you eliminate public debt. Since the gov. is not a for profit enitity why should it pay interest? Why should citizens suffer the confiscation of part of their income to pay public sector interest costs? If governments were truly sovereign they would issue ineret free money. Constraints on how much would be determined by voters not some expert's opinion on what interest rates should be or the useless "debt ceiling."

Were it not for Englands blatant counterfieting of the Continental we would be a debt free society today. The Colonies prospered until the Crown put ships in NY harbor loaded with counterfieting equipment. That act forced the colonists to BORROW from the Crown and enter the world of perpetual debt and economic recession.

[arlandbaee]

09:10 PM on 03/24/2011

They will be taking the money people. That's true of all republicans.

[Raccoon1]

12:55 PM on 03/25/2011

Most Democrats I know are pretty happy with 'enough' or 'sufficient' or 'adequate'. Republicans want it all, more than enough, more than anyone else - no matter who suffers.