I would hope you are already providing sick pay to your employees. It would be unfortunate for an ill employee to show up for work just because he or she needed the money and ended up getting a client ill.
Also if one is trying to keep their employee count down, hours per employee go up, not down, for the same level of business.

The sad part is our state thinks more government and more taxes are the solution to too much government and too high a tax rate. Collectively, we the state of Connecticut, elect these clowns. Eventually the Northeast and west coast states will financially implode.

Dear SmallMinds. I will always defend your right to express your opinion. However, you would strengthen your argument if, instead of just attacking and dismissing a group because you dont like them, perhaps you could point out where they are wrong on the facts. The Institute for Truth in Accounting claims that the State of CT is in the worst financial position, please feel free to show us where they are wrong. Do you believe that CT is in a good financial position under the wise, farsighted leadership running the state for the last many decades? Perhaps you believe that they have created a low tax, lean government, business friendly environment ? Please tell us what you think and perhaps you could buttress your points with a few facts. Wishing you a very happy and healthy New Year.

Dr Appleby,
Please, as an elected offical of Brookfield Board of Finance tell me you aren't going to simply quote things you found on the internet. With the Internet, everything you read is not always true so you must be able to back up the statements. You asked Smallminds to provide a few facts, please do the same!

I was shocked to look up the Institute for Truth in Accounting and find just a 1 paragraph statement they make about CT being in the worst financial position. Here's the URL for everyone: http://www.truthinaccounting.org/news/listing_article.asp?section=451&section2=489&page=452&CatID=5&ArticleSource=1020

At least there was a link for more information so I go to check it out but what do I find? Just another very short article in which the Hartford Business Journal just quotes what the Institute for Truth in Accounting. No proof, no statement about how they base their calculation on what constitutes a "sinkhole state" vs a "sunshine state".
Again for everyone's benefit here's that link: http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/news21517.html

Please, Please, Please...as an elected offical to the Brookfield Board of Finance...provide everyone facts behind the claims. Don't just quote something you heard on the internet. That is doing a dis-service to everyone.

Hey Appleby, how about I tell you that there are six Gods living in the sky and you now have to prove that each one of them doesn't exist? I am not attacking them and/or dismissing them. They are who they are. You want to believe them, fine by me. Don't start denying who they are and claim that I have to prove them wrong. Who, in the first place, said they were right? They themselves.

Brian,
I found this https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aq7g5Iy8vrrPdGpRTEdLaEYzNWhMem1uWmhmeGh2aWc&hl=en_US#gid=0 linked off an article by the Huffington post (a very far left new site) here - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/states-debt-combined-may-exceed-4-trillion_n_1029162.html#s429794&title=8_Delaware

Per capita, Connecticut is in the doghouse. We are by population a small state, and by economic performance we place 43rd in the nation. Yet we are either at the top or near the top (within the top 3) in taxation, per capita debt, and we are near the bottom (bottom 20%) in terms of economic performance.

Our state has made itself very unattractive for any company to do business in.

Each new plan our legislature hatches is yet another nail in our economic coffin. Instead of passing new laws, the state should be repealing some of the old.

For a small state we get very bad press regarding taxation, debt, regulation, business climate and our general political / economic situation is not good.

Hello Brian
Taxes..CT Highest No 1...http:money.msn.com/taxes/5-highest-5-lowest-states-for-taxes
also CT residents work the longest for the Government of all 50 states: http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxfreedomday/
Gasoline taxes by state http://2bp.blogspot.com
Business climate http://chiefexecutive.net/best-worst-states-for business
Business climate http://www.accountingweb.comtopic/tax/tax-foundation-releases-state-business-tax-climate-index
Taxes on gas in CT was from May 2 of this year, now the highest at 68.0 cents per gallon http://www.coommonsensejunction.com/notes/gas-tax-rate.html
Electric rates http://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-bystate.php
Highest percapita borrowing Huff Post Business 10/24/11
These are the sources I used. If any are wrong or out of date...please correct me.
I typed them so you may have to go to the sites or google them.
I think that it presents a rather dire picture...what do you think Brian ?
Best wishes, Robin

Dr Appleby,
Just a quick comment as you deserve a reply (where most of the rants here don't)

Thanks for taking the time to include some trustworth sites which can back up their statements with facts. As someone already mentioned, we always need to look at the whole picture and not just taking specific points to support 1 side of an arguement. (Highest Gas taxes but no bridge/tunnel/road tolls to offset roadway budgets)

Clearly the East coast and West coast are the most expensive places to live in the US. Even though they have the highest taxes, they also have the higest populations and are where many of us want to live. Same for the business climate with MA, NY and CA right up there with CT..but again many businesses want to be in these states which have both the workforce and the consumers to support the business.

The MSN Money article on 5-highest-5-lowest-states-for-taxes was interesting but had CT positioned with it's neighbors in MA, NY even NJ where CT actually had the lowest income tax but one of the higher Sales taxes. Some would say the lower Income tax and higher sales tax is better as the sale tax is based more on consumption of goods and thus a more fair tax. If you want to move to Alaska (#1 on the best/lowest State taxes), be my guest.

That said, I do hope you bring a thoughful new viewpoints to the BOF. Please just remember to look at all sides of the equation when helping make recommendations and decisions for the citizens of Brookfield.

Do you mean common sense, or the ability to ignore that there may be underpaid workers who deserve some paid sick leave

Isn't America all about the ability to better oneself? How are we achieving this by giving handouts? If one feels they are underpaid, they are free to get a better job elsewhere.

"Isn't America all about the ability to better oneself?"

No, not anymore. It's about being financially exploited while your neighbor licks the boots of your oppressors.

"They're driving business owners out of this state that was once called "the richest state in the country", boy that's changed!"

How has that changed? Fairfield County, CT is still one of the wealthiest places in the United States. That hasn't changed at all.

Steven DeVaux,
If you confiscated ALL the money the richest one percent have or earn, you'd not be able to cover current federal spending for more than 1 year.

It is a myth that we can tax our way to prosperity or that the rich have enough assets to cover the ridiculous spending we have today.

G,

I never said that. I said simply default and start over again with a more sustainable model.

Steven DeVaux,
OK, so we default. All federal and state pensions are now totally unfunded, social security, Medicare, everything has no funding. I guess seniors, teachers, cops, and everyone else is out retirement because Steven DeVaux wants us to default?

SmallMinds,
No, the disparity excludes government benefits. If we include government benefits the poor in our state are doing much better than the hand wringers would have you believe.

As to abuse of sick days. Any entitlement will be used. It's the nature of these things. Anyone taking human resources 101 would tell you that. Give people sick days they can take without explanation, and take them they will.

Fine. Reduce pay by 2.5% and add the sick days. Net sum ZERO. You are now in full compliance with the law and it cost NOTHING. Case closed. Move on. Does it take an economist to figure this out for you?

Or, next year, when you'd normally give a cost of living increase, give paid sick days instead. What? You don't give a cost of living increase? You just let your employees get poorer year by year? Oh, I see.

SmallMinds,
Companies take another venue. They move facilities out of state. My insurance company used to process bills in Hartford, now the payment center is in Texas. A large medical supply company in central Connecticut has closed it's in state warehouse and drop ships all orders from Kentucky.

The sick day mandate is roughly a 2.5% increase in the cost of doing business in Connecticut. Consumers eventually pay all business costs. As we like low prices, we will buy from companies that ship from out of state or produce products out of state.

Away from the regulation that has become Connecticut. Restaurant chains will simply pass the costs along.

Don't worry though, as companies move facilities out of state we will spend more taxpayer money to establish a in state economic development commission. The commission will cost millions and have no effect on our business and industry hostile Connecticut culture.

"No, the disparity excludes government benefits. If we include government benefits the poor in our state are doing much better than the hand wringers would have you believe."

Bold faced lie.

Jimmy Pursey,
Here ya go Jimmy, some facts to mull over: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/09/understanding-poverty-in-the-united-states-surprising-facts-about-americas-poor

The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau as taken from various government reports:
80 percent of poor households have air conditioning. In 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
92 percent of poor households have a microwave.
Nearly three-fourths have a car or truck, and 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks.
Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite TV.
Two-thirds have at least one DVD player, and 70 percent have a VCR.
Half have a personal computer, and one in seven have two or more computers.
More than half of poor families with children have a video game system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation.
43 percent have Internet access.
One-third have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV.
One-fourth have a digital video recorder system, such as a TiVo.

*** skip a bit ***

96 percent of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry at any time during the year because they could not afford food.
83 percent of poor families reported having enough food to eat.
82 percent of poor adults reported never being hungry at any time in the prior year due to lack of money for food.

More to come if you'd like it.

Hello SmallMinds.....Yes, I would be happy to have you call me Robin. My kids set up the site/blog since I am fairly computer illiterate....I used to use a pseudonym but the blogs require your name. A few thoughts on work ethic and sick leave. My father had his own business and never took a sick day in 41 years until the day he died. I think that is a slightly different attitude than we often see today. I agree with you, I certainly wouldn't want a sick employee around patients, especially pregnant patients. I believe that your employees are your greatest asset. If you treat them well and with kindness, they will treat the patients well and build your practice. For example, if it was Parents Day or Grandmother's Day, my nurses/staff were encouraged to go (with pay) as they only get a few chances to do that. Many times they would need extra money for Christmas, family emergencies, even car or mortgage payments.....The point is they can't really focus on the patients and the patients problems/worries/issues if they are under a lot of financial stress themselves, losing homes, etc. Best wishes, Robin

SmallMinds,
We used to have 2 garbage men, now we have 1. The garbage company determined it was less costly to use an expensive automatic arm and large 96 gallon plastic trash bins to collect trash than hire 2 people.

So yes, the 1 guy may get his 6.25 sick days a year, he probably already had them. The other guy is without work.

Same with banks that prefer people use online banking or ATM's vs tellers.

Currently our Danbury McDonald's has a robot drink filler, and McDonald's generally is experimenting with remote drive thru order taking (where someone in Ohio or India may take the order at a local Connecticut McDonald's).

Many employers and human resource people work diligently to avoid paying time and a half. Guess it's a benefit to people who can't work more than 40 hours on their primary job due to this mandatory time and a half. They get to work their non time and a half overtime at another job they may not like as much. They don't get time and a half but may work 60 hours a week.

Some regulation and protection is good. Too much, takes away our liberty. Where to balance things is often the center issue of debate.

Some would have prison America out of zeal to be fair, where we are all protected by our state from everything and get assigned to our government homes are eating government food and working for the government or a government approved business at government pay. At some point, this becomes a prison or slavery. We will have lost liberty.

Screw the poor. America is great because of people like QWERTY who know that everyone beneath him is worthless and deserves to mow his lawn and then die.

Lawn mowers and fast food servers didn't create the computers that run your world, or research the medical advancements that keep you alive.

And I mow my own lawn.

"America is great because of the people who push themselves to be better every day."

Your childlike innocence is refreshing.

Querty, not everyone was born to create computers or sit in some corner office! Every person has a purpose, and there is joy to be had in doing even the simplest of tasks! Some people acutally like to mow lawns because they enjoy horticulture and working in the outdoors, or enjoy interacting with the public and hence work in the food service or other such industries. Why belittle them? Would you prefer to go to McDonalds after a hard day in the corner office designing computers and then have to cook your own burger and fries and pour your own drink? And what if some physical disability prevented you from mowing your own lawn? Would you enjoy living in the tall grass? My point is, each unto themselves, and all work, no matter how unimportant to you is important to someone else. That's the problem in this country today, too many of us don't even appreciate and value those seemingly unimportant tassks in life, even though each of them is needed by someone. We should not put down anyone for their choices in professions. Oh, and my son collects trash, drives the truck, is a union member, has benefits and is paid very well. And while many are unemployed, we all still generate garbage that has to be hauled away. Like undertakers, its a position with great job security!

When did I belittle anyone?! I simply stated that today's luxuries are attributed to innovation and drive. When you need medical attention in the middle of nowhere, a cell phone call can save your life. That cell phone was created by people's aspirations and ambition. It wasn't created by passive people who settle in life. That technology benefits BILLIONS of people around the world. It, along with many other advancements, has revolutionized the way we live.

And with all due respect, your son is only in a union because he can be easily replaced. I'm in no way questioning your son's work ethic but there are probably hundreds of unemployed people willing to do your son's job for a fraction of his pay. Can your son find the same job for the same pay with another company? Probably not.

You belittle by how you make your points about the importance of the jobs you cite. And as for my son, you are wrong. Easily replaced is not always the case. After all, garbage collecting is beneath so many. They would rather collect unemployment than have to collect garbage. Trash collection (or should I be elitist and call it sanitation engineering?) is a 5-6 day week outdoors in ALL weather. My son, who can be so easily replaced, has his job and his promotion because when he was assigned to the back of the truck, HE showed up for work every day in rain, snow, sleet and burning hot sun, unlike many others who chose not to work in inclement weather, necessitating his company having to hire day labor. There are a lot of necessary forms of employment in life that are just not fun, comfortable or convenient, yet it takes the kind of person who is willing to perform these functions for the benefit of all society. If everybody created cell phones we would have very little of all the other things in life that are also necessary.

His job is important but there's millions of people who can do his job. There aren't millions of people who can be doctors, engineers, lawyers, accountants, etc. It's simple economics. Because of the nature of his work, someone is willing to do your son's job for a fraction of his salary but red tape prevents this. It goes against what created and progressed this country to what it is today.

If so many millions CAN do the job, why don't they? This debate has denigrated into something verging on the personal. From all your posts, I still can't say for sure I completely understand where you are coming from. I am a conservative, but not one who refuses to understand the social needs of others. My only disagreement might be in the way those needs are addressed and by whom, believing as George H.W. Bush did that many of the services needed by society are better delivered by local, non-profit private organizations, not by government. I have discovered one thing though, and that is that you need to come out of the stratosphere. What difference does it make that not everybody can do the grand things? Everybody wasn't created for that purpose, yet you appear to think that those who aren't doing those grand things somehow are lesser human beings. We each have our innate capabilities and many of us do the best we can with what we have been given. I believe that real wisdom and real empathy is understanding that we are not all the same and therefore withhold judging others because they don't measure up to 'our' standards, whatever those may be.

"If so many millions CAN do the job, why don't they?"

Because your son is protected by a union which assists him in keeping his job regardless of employment competition, market conditions, (sometimes) performance, etc. That means he will eventually be over-compensated for his work due in part that many willing successors wait in the shadows who will do the work for less benefit and who DON'T have the advantage of being in a union. If you can't understand this, then I can't help you.

You debate with emotion rather than logic and also put words in my mouth...perhaps you need to come down from the stratosphere.

Jim, the unemployed guy with the cell phone is not the problem. You have taken your eye off the ball. You have allowed yourself to be distracted.

First of all, unemployment insurance is a zero sum. Employers pay into it and when laid off, employees collect. Except for dire situations, this is not an allocation of your tax money to some person who can't find a job. and if he hadn't been a working man he would not collect a cent.

We are not broke and in tough shape because of some guy's cell phone bill. We spent a Trillion Bucks on a war in Iraq and there were no taxes to pay for it. You know how many roll-over minutes and roaming charges you could get for a Trillion Bucks?

Then there was Medicare Part D - another multi-hundred billion dollar program (and a good program) but no taxes to pay for it.

Now you may think "hey, it was Bush and the Republicans who started the war in Iraq and passed Medicare Part D. They're not liberals!" You would be right.

Then there's the giant too-big-to-fail banks bailed out with hundreds of billions of your tax dollars by (can you guess?) George W Bush and his Republicans Hank Paulsen and Ben Bernanke. Don't forget the cost to this nation of fraudulent mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps. Not too many liberals involved there, either. Yes, a few, but not a big pack of liberals; a pack of bankers.

It's not the poor, unemployed dude with the cell phone. And it's not "the Liberals".

"Perhaps if the liberals could reign in giving away the store there would be a chance for economic recovery and some increases in jobs which would again help the economic recovery."

Perhaps if Jim could reign in his need to adhere to a dead "two party template" that has proven to be both a failure and a lie...power might actually be in the hands of the people.

Bonnie: " As soon as they accumulate that paid day off they're not coming in to work the following day."
This is how much you trust and value your employees. You said it yourself. Look up. This is not me putting words in your mouth. It is YOU regarding your employees as people who would take advantage of you to goof-off.

My name? Can I look up "Bonnie" and find a picture of your generous, smiling face?

I don't think it's the middle class who needs to pay more. I think it's the rich who are taking and taking and not paying their fair share. The hedge fund guy in Greenwich making ten million a year and paying 15% while the teachers and cops are paying twice that rate. Capitalism used to bestow its greatest rewards on innovation and risk taking. Now all you have to do is push money around - someone else's money - and you are golden.

Jim: "Why am I paying taxes so unemployed people can have a cell phone?"
This was YOU not mentioning unemployment insurance? Do you guys even READ the stuff you write? I suppose the lack of a working memory allows you to think that the financial mess we're in is the fault of Barack Obama alone and not the un-paid for Trillion Dollar War, the un-paid for Medicare Part D and the Republican Billion Dollar Bank bail outs.

Who in the world is giving out free cell phones? Is this some Fox News story that I missed? Is this our new culprit not that the "Ground Zero Mosque" outrage is over and we aren't all mad at immigrants today?

Wow, $110.00 a month for a cell phone?!? You must be in the 1%!

Walt,
You have internet, YOU must be in the 1%.

Is reference to the 1% a new progressive McCarthyism?

Hm...I know plenty of people who pay over $100 for a cell phone because they pay for extensive data packages or a large amount of minutes. Heck, I'm on Verizon's cheapest option ($39.99) and, after taxes, text messaging package and data plan I pay almost $90. Not sure why this is so surprising to some of you.

Teri, you do realize that a lot of companies do what's called "PTO" days, right? Meaning, they are "Paid Time Off" days that can be used for whatever purpose, instead of specifying which is 'vacation' and which is 'sick time'. This isn't unusual in the least and, much of the time, employees prefer it. I think you moreso have a problem with the fact that he only gets 10. That's an entirely different issue.

Bonnie, I'm amazed that people like you can make it through the day without blowing your fingers off with firecrackers.

SmallMinds,
Wake up, go here - https://www.safelinkwireless.com/Safelink to see if you qualify for a free cell phone. Requirements are you must claim to be very poor, must claim to be an economic failure. Doing this will get you tremendous freebies from the State of Connecticut. Including the free cell phone at the above link.

"When it comes to handouts...there's ALWAYS something free for the lazy."

When it comes to implying entitlement programs the working class pay into are "handouts" when they are needed...working class right wing extremists seem psychotic in their own self-loathing.

"Poor equals lazy"...didn't that socialist Jesus say this?

Actually, bill the other day was $640. $640 and I keep my home's temp at a constant 65 degrees. Stellar system we have in place.

And the non-working are also rewarded! Why bother putting in the effort if someone's going to be rewarded anyways?!

I shutter to think how you define "abuses". You're probably the one who thinks it's ok for a single mother to birth three children and collect food stamps the entire time. No accountability, just keep popping out babies.

You put in the effort because it's the right thing to do. Otherwise, you become what you're complaining about. How about white trashers who go on workman's comp for a lifetime while complaining about welfare recipients? Now that's abusive. I 'shudder' (did you mean?) to think of the layers and layers of sexist hatred inherent in that last sentence of yours. Wow.

So it's sexist to call out single mothers on welfare, who can't support one child and then have another child on the taxpayer's dime?! Seriously?

I have a newsflash for you...not everyone does the right thing! And we're not talking anything illegal either. If I get laid off, it's easier to sit at home collecting unemployment vs. getting a minimum wage job to pay the bills! Why? Because the system allows me to! Why get a minimum wage job to pay the oil bill when good old Joe will give it to me for free?!

It is extremely sexist to attack the single mom for "popping" out kids when she didn't get pregnant alone...did she? Where are the dead beat dads? Instead of paying for the kids from his landscaping job, he's out smoking crack and getting some other pig knocked up because he's too stupid to figure out a condom? Why doesn't the state make these pieces of crap pay for their own children so we don't have to? Because, our entire society since the 70's has lost any sense of honor, integrity and responsibility, White and Black, Republican and Democrat.

The state has laws against Workers Comp fraud, unemployment fraud, welfare fraud and the like, but guess who are the first employees to be reduced, transferred or not replaced through attrition?......The people who investigate the fraud cases!

If the statements made in this thread weren't so disgusting they would be downright laughable. People CAN'T get jobs in Connecticut. People CAN'T sell their homes and move. The "if you don't like it leave" mentality is elitist and arrogant.

Some comments are right on blaming the Democratic State legislature that was out of control under the last 2 Republican governors, one of whom went to prison for corruption, and even the Congress and Senate who had Democrats involved in mortgage messes while Republicans were removing government oversight. Blame is shared by all.

When people ask me if I'm republican or democrat...I tell them neither, "I can think for myself", and I do.

My mention of this has to do more with women who have a child(ren) on welfare and they proceed to produce another child. State aid should stop immediately. Fool me twice, shame on me. How is this not abuse? The onus usually falls on the mother in a single parent situation, that's why I bring it up. You rarely hear of instances where a father has full time custody of children. The ratio is very unbalanced.

Clearly there are dead beat fathers out there, but IMO there are far more dead beat fathers who were never married than those who were. Marriage provides a level of protection for both the parents and children. You roll the dice when you are unmarried and produce children...I don't see why the state should pickup the pieces afterwards.

"Why get a minimum wage job to pay the oil bill when good old Joe will give it to me for free?!"

Because you'll post on here less.

Henry Stormer,
When a mom has kids she can't afford, she claims to be a single mom, and demands the government help her out. When a man has kids he can't afford, he doesn't get custody of them, and is called a deadbeat. The same behavior is rewarded for females and disparaged for males. That is sexism.

As to single moms stuck with kids. Most single moms had to file a petition in court, usually disparaging their kids dad and ask for custody. The vast majority of single moms filed for divorce and custody, and demanded to be in the situation they complain about.

you are right, it wasn't obama who enacted the free cell phones, it is legislation enacted by the state legislature which is controlled by democrats. So get over diversified, democrat, liberal-progressive, tax and spend, income redistribution bs and try a little common sense.

Now Bonnie,
I merely use an initial, mostly as this is an internet forum and a semi-open one at that.

Over time our handles will mark us for better or worse.

Dont pay any attention to stop the madness she is going through menopause.

Southbury Resident, I can't believe you actually posted the menopause comment. So, in turn I can say "Don't listen to Southbury Resident, he's a booger eating moron!"

monroe taxpayer,
The federal reserve, the Republican ideal of a home ownership society, and the Democrat ideal of reverse redlining all had more of a hand in the housing bubble than anything else.

As for multi-national oil companies, yes they are. Hopefully you'll get your wish and they'll leave our shores, and take their oil production with them.

We can then all live your dream of a world without oil, coal, electricity, motor vehicles, paved roads or homes with durable roofs. What a dream it'll be, when no big company remains to profit from us. Huh?

BTW, the biggest company today is Apple. Guess we should dump all those into the ocean too! :)

Wow, a rational, thought provoking comment here. One worthly of responding too.

Jim, well said. There will always be a debate on if these programs are needed. For the record I do think many (but not all) are needed but sadly many are not well managed. I don't think anyone would debate the issue that folks who are abusing these programs need to be identified and cut off from the assistance.

Your idea of community service of some sort for someone who has been collecting benefits for a lengthy time is an interesting one which deserve some thought. Many senior citizens who might need that oil assistance program others are quick to want to cut off would be more than willing to do some community service if they are not already volunteering in the libraries, schools or senior citizen centers.

kathy johnson,

Freedom to fail tends to go hand in hand with freedom to succeed. Overall the standard of living in the U.S. has been the highest in the world for decades.

Chris, not one of the statements you made about Newt's opinions are true. He has never suggested that any of those laws should be repealed. Unfortunately lame-stream media choses to broadcast those snippets of people's comments (anyone's, not just his) that most closely fits their editorial room's own views, and we are prevented from hearing the entire text of what anyone says so that we can form our own opinions. Heaven forbid, we do such a thing! Most media outlets want us to know and believe only that which they choose to tell us. Thank God for cable news---all of them---whether you are liberal (MSNBC, CNBC) conservative (FOX) or in-between (CNN) anyone with access can get the whole story. I happen to watch several stations and at times have issues with all of them, but at least I have a better opportunity to keep myself informed about more of the story than what we get on ABC, CBS and NBC. My only question is why is it that you don't see conservatives slamming MSNBC, Chris Msatthews or Rachel Maddow and others every time they get on this blog, while some liberals will take the opportunity to blast Rush Limbaugh or FOX NEWS no matter what, even when liberal stations greatly outnumber them? Is there something to be afraid of?

Imagine, a local message board NOT populated by rubes regurgitating talking points issued from multinational conglomerate lapdogs.

Kathy,

Not from me. I agree with you.

And we'll be very glad to see you go.

I think only you and your dozen of cats :) "stop the madness"

Wow, you have a different housing market in Southbury then than the rest of the US!

May you get back a thousand fold the sentiments you've expressed here when you are in need.

Kathy,

I don't think so. A strong vibrant middle class is the best defense against entitlement government. Not only do a majority not need it them, they won't support the concept. Instead as the middle class is wiped out in Connecticut, replaced by urban and suburban poor voters they now outnumber the middle and upper classes. Hence, they vote people in for themselves that support programs that entitle them. A slow and steady death spiral ensues for traditional non-entitlement government until it runs out of money. It then raises taxes and the whole process accelerates with less middle class and the flight of people attempting to retain their earnings and profits. Fairfield County is the last bastion in Connecticut for middle class and it is rapidly shrinking. Until the state government can no longer raise taxes or borrow, it won't change. When it reaches that point...watch out. It won't be pretty.

When Connecticut became the highest ranked state for taxes, beating out New York, Massachusets and Rhode Island, it's contiguous neighboring states you can understand why businesses are moving 100 miles to lower their, and their employees, costs.

That would be a nice bit of info if we could trust that the source was telling the truth! After all, we have a new Gov who insisted on raising taxes to get us out of the hole we were driven into by the very same legislature that has been in place for many years (even though they blamed Rell) and then sometime during late 2011 I remember hearing a bit of news stating that we were on our way to a surplus! Now, realistically, how could that be without somebody manipulating the facts? If the economy is so bad and there are so many out of work (low profits, less income taxes) I find it hard to believe that the tax increases imposed have not only eradicated our debt, but have begun putting money in the 'bank'. All this is politics to make the leadership look good! And, if this miracle is true, were we taxed too much (as usual)?
In my former life I was a public accountant, so I guess I have an understanding of taxes. Except for forms EZ, the preparation of just about all returns, whether state or federal is complex, due to the insane tax laws. Statewise, I would wonder how much revenue we would garner if EVERYTHING that was sold during the course of normal business was taxed at 1 or 2%, and there were NO exemptions. Yes, there would be double-taxation in the cases of business-to-business transactions, but it would still be less than the 6.35% only some of us pay now. But EVERYBODY would pay SOMETHING! (continued)

Some might think this would be a terrible injustice to the 'poor', but how many of you saw the article recently put out by the census bureau about 'the poor'. I was very surprised to see that many families who statistically are in the lowest of incomes have many things that I do not (by choice) -- I-phones, I-pads, big flat screen TV's, more than one car or truck -- and also claim they are never without enough food or clothing. So, I believe everybody could afford a 1 or 2% tax. If you think this is terrible, just for an example look at a recent grocery receipt where you may have spent more than $50 or $100 and look at what your taxes were. Then compare what your taxes would be if everything (no exemptions) was taxed at 1 or 2%. It would likely be lower, but, on those occasions when you are purchasing something that is now exempt, you will pay a small tax. I would suspect that overall the state might then raise the revenue it needs (not wants!) and everybody would contribute. I personally believe that EVERYBODY should pay into the system, because then even the folks who are being helped by state aid would be contributing like the rest of us!