I was a teacher. My dad retired a teacher. Many friends and family are still teachers. Further, other than that family, teachers were some of the most influential people in my life hell, one teacher is largely responsible for the man I am today.
And my kids have teachers. Lots of ’em.
I. Love. Teachers
So, when asked how much we should pay teachers I come back to this:
Posted in Education, Politics: North Carolina, Politics: State
Tagged Pat McCrory, Teacher Pay, Unions
I’ve never disputed the right of members of a group to gather in unity and plead their case. For example, if I and several of my peers in the office were to band together and make the case that we needed more money – we have every right to do that.
As long as my employer can fire me if I stop working to protest his decision not to pay me more.
All government is coercion.
We allow ourselves to be governed in exchange for a certain degree of order. We allow ourselves to be subject to the confiscatory practice of taxation in order to pay for that order, that law and order.
And we give power to men that we wouldn’t otherwise give.
Power corrupts – absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The Christie administration retaliated against a political slight. But they didn’t retaliate against the political operative, in this case a democrat mayor who didn’t endorse Christie for governor – no, they retaliated against the people that live in the mayor’s town. The Christie administration order lane closures to ensure a traffic nightmare would take place on a bridge serving the mayor’s town.
This isn’t denying an appointment, this isn’t leaking sensitive information to the press and this isn’t shelving legislation favored by an opponent. This is wanted abuse of political authority it retribution of a perceived slight.
This was planned, this was deliberate and this was malicious.
I’m not sure that Christie himself ever knew or gave the order – that may or may not come out. But in the same way that Obama sets the tone in the White House and is responsible for the various scandals under his watch, Mr. Christie is responsible for the actions of his deputy chief of staff.
Will this signal the end of his career? Who knows – I doubt it. Traffic is traffic after all. And, to be sure, the only career he has remaining is to be a serious contender for the GOP nomination in 2016; something he wasn’t guaranteed to win before this happened. But if I had to guess, this alone doesn’t sink his chances, in fact, how he handles it may serve to help him.
A nine time congressman is calling it quits. In a statement released this afternoon, Mike McIntyre is going to retire at the end of his current term.
Posted in Election, Politics: North Carolina, Politics: State
Tagged 2014 Election, Democrat, Mike McIntyre
As I mentioned recently, the conversation coming in 2014 politics is going to be the growing, or perceived notion of said growth, of the disparity in income:
You can already sense that the battle line are being formed for the 2014 debate in the lead-up to the November elections. For better or for worse, the republicans are going to talk about Obamacare and its roll-out while the democrats are going to shift to the middle class, wage stagnation and, perhaps, immigration.
Ignoring the political reasons for now, let’s focus on what I think will be the democrat’s main strategy to gain the upper hand: Income Inequality.
There is little doubt that Obama an the democrats wanna pivot from the absolute devastation that is Obamacare.
And part of that conversation is going to be an old Tar Heel Red favorite – the minimum wage.
To be sure, the folks in support of the minimum wage have the most noble intentions; they wanna be able to provide relief for vulnerable workers. But the real impact is the opposite:
That’s teen.
Here is black excess unemployment:
And finally under-educated:
This is the devastating impact of the minimum wage.
The debate has largely been theoretical; does the minimum wage impact employment or not?
Well, we may have a real world experiment on our hands:
On Jan. 1, an estimated 1,600 hotel and transportation workers in SeaTac, Wash., will see their pay jump to $15 an hour, a 60 percent increase from the state’s $9.32 minimum wage.
This is important for two reasons:
1. The increase is substantial – 60% is nothing to scoff at.
2. The increase is not being phased in – employers are being subject to the rise in wages without the benefit of inflation dimming the impact.
Some of the fall out?
While many workers look forward to the higher pay, employers are looking for ways to absorb the big increase in labor costs. Some plan on eliminating jobs.
“We’re going to be looking at making some serious cuts,” said Cedarbrook Lodge General Manager Scott Ostrander. “We’re going to be looking at reducing employee hours, reducing benefits and eliminating some positions.”
…
But not every employer is being so ambitious. One has told a trade group it is going to close one of its two restaurants, eliminating 200 jobs.
The plan has also caused Han Kim — who runs Hotel Concepts, a company that owns and manages 11 hotels in Washington state — to shelve plans to build a hotel in SeaTac. The company already has three hotels in SeaTac, and Kim and a business partner were looking to build a fourth on land they own.
Does this deter the supporters? Not at all:
“There may be a few jobs lost here and there, but the fact is, if we don’t fight for this, then the race to the bottom will continue,” Sawant said.
Fascinating. Glad I’m not an entry level worker in Seattle!
Posted in Economics, Minimum Wage, Politics: State, States Behaving Badly
Tagged SeaTac, Seattle, Washington
The Laffer Curve. It’s the idea that as tax rates rise beyond a certain point, tax revenue declines. It makes sense at the extremes; a tax of 0% raises zero dollars. A tax of 100% also raises zero dollars. No one works for free.
An example of this concept was displayed in Washington DC last month:
Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) no longer plans to build three stores in the nation’s capitol, after the city’s council voted to force large retailers to pay starting wages that are 50% higher than the minimum wage there.
The world’s largest retailer also said it will consider its options related to three other Washington, D.C., stores that are still under construction.
D.C., a wildly successful example of a city that lifts its poor and most fragile citizens out of poverty:
/sarcasm
has once again created a law that really proves who is waging a “war on the poor.”
It isn’t the conservative whole embraces the free market that “hates” the poor, no. Rather, it’s the intellectual liberal that “hates” the poor. How else to describe the mentality of a people who vote to force job creators out of the market?
You’ll probably never get rich at Wal-Mart, but a job there is better than not a job anywhere.
Posted in Economics, Economy, Government, Politics: State, States Behaving Badly
Tagged Laffer Curve, Taxes, Wal-Mart, Washington D.C.
De’troilet is and has been a mess for decades now. A prime example of what happens when a democrat party controlled by unions (sorry to repeat myself ) has control of a city.
An insightful story in what residents of De’troilet have to look forward to:
In a small mill town in New England, dozens of retired policemen and firefighters are feeling the pain of what they see as a broken promise, offering a glimpse into what could happen to thousands of public workers in Detroit facing massive reductions in pension payouts after the city’s declaration of bankruptcy.
Donald Cardin became a firefighter at age 20 in Central Falls, R.I., a town just north of Providence that filed for bankruptcy in 2011. He was making $60,000 a year as a fire chief before retiring at age 42 in 2007 to take care of his wife Lana, diagnosed with thymic carcinoma, a rare cancer with extremely low survival rates.
The couple relied on Cardin’s health insurance, which required no copay, to cover Lana’s $8,000-a-month treatment. Cardin worked a part-time contracting job to make up the difference between his $34,000-a-year pension and his former salary.
But that all changed in 2011 when Cardin, and his fellow firefighters and policemen, were called to a meeting at the local high school, where state-appointed receiver Robert Flanders warned them that the city would not have enough money to survive if pensions were not cut. Weeks later the city would file for bankruptcy.
…
Bruce Ogni, 53, president of the Central Falls Police Retirees Association, won’t forget that day, either.
“All of a sudden they dropped this on us. There was no real negotiation. Flanders came in and said the city is in big trouble, we need half your pension and your medical,” he said.
…
With a wife and twin boys to care for, Ogni lost $1,200 a month and had to pay additional fees incurred by his wife’s health insurance. Eight months ago, Ogni’s wife was diagnosed with breast cancer, adding more medical bills to the family’s worries.
…
Ex-fireman Laurie and his wife, Kathleen, live off disability from social security (which he receives from previously working part-time jobs in addition to his service as a fireman) and a $19,000-a-year pension — down from $39,000 before the cuts.
The Lauries makes just enough money not to qualify for public assistance, but the $2,700 the family brings in each month barely covers their $2,300 in monthly bills.
Each of these individual stories is heartbreaking, to be sure. Life threatening cancer to disability to expecting twins. All of which is enough to occupy a man, but then the additional pressures of having your world turned upside down.
But there are some striking observations:
Personally, I think that contracts between companies and their pensioners should be upheld – the folks no longer have a position from which to bargain. If my company changes my compensation, I can leave or stay. However, with that said, these unions have absolutely been acting in bad faith and without moral concern for the parties involved.
They elect their cronies to office in order to negotiate with themselves. The deals they strike are so ridiculous as to fail to pass a red face test. And then, when the parasite finally kills the host leaving nothing but a dead husk – they act so SO surprised and innocent.
As if.
Posted in Economics, Economy, Politics: National, Politics: State
As the debate raged over Obamacare, I warned that republicans were painting themselves into a corner. It has been correctly pointed out that the idea of the individual mandate was an idea first introduced by the right. After all, by requiring everyone to purchase health insurance, the costs would be spread more equitably – those more likely to require care would pay more, those less so would be less.
While that debate was raging, republicans were pushing the idea of reforming Social Security. The goal was to institute personal retirement accounts. In other words, the government would still take 6% of your money, probably 6% of your employers money, and give you the option of investing it as you so desired.
Forced savings.
I didn’t see the difference between forcing someone to purchase health insurance and forcing them to purchase savings accounts.
To be sure, both are good ideas – VERY good ideas. But having the government force it on us? No bueno.
California lawmakers are pushing a controversial, first-in-the-nation plan that would require private-sector employers to remove 3 percent from every worker’s paycheck. The money would go into a new state fund with a guarantee that all withheld funds plus investment gains will be available for distribution at retirement age.
The idea behind the Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program, which got preliminary approval, is for it to be a state-run supplement to Social Security, but only for people who don’t have traditional workplace retirement plans. For an estimated 6 million working Californians, the benefit of a pension or 401(k) is out of reach — so state lawmakers are trying to implement the new mandatory retirement fund for private sector workers.
Boom.
Now, to be fair, there is NO WAY that California doesn’t spend the money before the benefits come due causing a dramatic budget deficit. Beyond that, however, there is little difference between this plan and the one republicans called for in social security reform.
Maybe the good news is that by being continually to the right of the crazy, the crazy will feel the need to move right.
Posted in Economics, Politics: State, Republicans Can Be Leftists Too
Tagged 401k, California, Social Security
As if we haven’t learned by now that unions are corrosive and abusive organizations that provide no productive benefit, there are states that continue to pass legislation that helps them grow*.
A bitter debate results in opportunity for providers to unionize. However, Republicans say unionization would drive up daycare costs.
The bill will allow the approximately 12,700 registered in-home care providers a chance to decide whether to form a union.
If a union were to form, providers would have to pay union dues if they accept state child care subsidies, or they would be required to pay what are called “fair share dues” if they choose not to join.
Those who would rather not participate at all say they will have to turn away children whose parents pay with subsidies.
Unions backing the bill stand to collect millions of dollars in union dues, according to various estimates.
Luckily for the unions, you can’t open day care facilities in South Carolina for Minnesota families.
* 10 bonus points if you guess what political party is in power in Minnesota right now.
For the first time in 150 years, North Carolina has a republican controlled government. It should surprise no one that republican favored agendas are being passed into law.
[ It should also serve as a stark lesson to all liberals who rejoiced in massive democratic majorities following the election of Obama that such majorities are not always good ]
One of the priorities of the republican legislature is to pass a voucher bill:
The House budget set aside $10 million for vouchers this year for families meeting income requirements, and $40 million next year. Parents would receive $4,200 per child to help cover private school tuition. Vouchers are in play in the negotiations between House and Senate budget writers.
Such “hatred of poor kids” is, of course, the subject of Moral Monday marches in Raleigh. For as long as I can remember, the concept of vouchers in specific and private schools in general have been a special hatred of the left.
And I can’t understand why.
I get that the state has a vested interest in the education of its children. And in so far as the state is interested in said education, I would suppose that how that education was delivered would largely be inconsequential. What MIGHT be of importance is who is best able to deliver education that results in the highest levels of quality. That is, if the state can do it better than the private school, then I get the argument that the state should provide education.
However, our public schools are horrible, yes? And if private schools are able to deliver at least equal levels of education at prices that are dramatically cheaper, ought we not go where it makes sense? And there is little evidence to suggest that public schools are superior to private ones.
So why the outrage over private school vouchers?
Is it because the left feels that parents of the most at risk students don’t care enough even to apply for and receive such vouchers? Or is it because the democrat machine is dominated by the most powerful lobbying force in the country – the Teacher’s Union?
Posted in Education, Politics: North Carolina, Politics: State
Tagged Democrat, Private School, Republican, Voucher