Larison: GOP Voters Have the Leadership they Deserve

[ElNono]

But what choice do they have?

Not to lay off until the overall economic situation improves?

[Wild Cobra]

Not to lay off until the overall economic situation improves?

So you are authoritarian...

What happens when the tax revenue runs dry, or a business cannot pay the paychecks any longer?

[ElNono]

So you are authoritarian...

Why is that? Because I acknowledge there are different options? That's actually the opposite of authoritarian. Or you don't know what the word means (which wouldn't be really new).

What happens when the tax revenue runs dry, or a business cannot pay the paychecks any longer?

Uh? What business? Did you actually read the article or you're just talking out of your ass?

There's many ways to cut down on the state budget without raising taxes. There's a plethora of options, one of which is layoffs. Pushing for layoffs is being completely insensitive to the current economic situation, and as Cry correctly pointed out, only shifts the burden to welfare instead of actual cost savings.

[MannyIsGod]

[Wild Cobra]

Uh? What business? Did you actually read the article or you're just talking out of your ass?

I was just adding business to the state issue. Paying unemployment and social programs are less costly than keeping people employed who are not needed. Government should not be employing so many to begun with.

There's many ways to cut down on the state budget without raising taxes. There's a plethora of options, one of which is layoffs.

You think they didn't already try?

Pushing for layoffs is being completely insensitive to the current economic situation, and as Cry correctly pointed out, only shifts the burden to welfare instead of actual cost savings.

I understand such concerns. But again, government is too big already. Almost in every state. , in my city, we have more city planner ing things up than we have police officers to control the gangs. They cannot afford to maintain a proper police force to secure the people, and favor their pet projects.

[ElNono]

I was just adding business to the state issue. Paying unemployment and social programs are less costly than keeping people employed who are not needed. Government should not be employing so many to begun with.

Do you actually have numbers backing that claim?

You think they didn't already try?

Sure, and they've done some pruning. But I live in NJ, and I know first hand there's plenty more things to cut if the political will would be there instead of being fascinated with layoffs at such a bad time.

I understand such concerns. But again, government is too big already. Almost in every state. , in my city, we have more city planner ing things up than we have police officers to control the gangs. They cannot afford to maintain a proper police force to secure the people, and favor their pet projects.

I'm not against trimming the budget. Heck, I'm not even against layoffs.
I'm simply against the timing, laying off people *now*. Again, we can talk philosophically all day as to the size of government and all that stuff. The guy that's getting fired doesn't give a though. He's gonna have to scramble looking for a new job in a ty economy to support their family, and most likely going to end up sucking up money from welfare until he's able to find anything. And sometimes those welfare systems are the first cut by guys like Christie too, which basically mean people end up being SOL.
You can side with the philosophical side, but I'm with the little guy here.