Backseat Budgeter: Unanswered Threads

The Colorado Budget

spiritjohn1 — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 02:07:20 GMT

It only took me 10 minutes to balance the budget. I'm certainly not economic genius. All I did was spread the responsibility for balancing the budget around. I don't mind paying more taxes as long as the rich and the corporations do the same. In all honesty, I think it should be the people that caused this current economic condition to be responsible for the major bulk of balancing the budget. However, I am realistic enough to know that the rich won't allow that to happen. They ALWAYS want to balance the budget on the backs of the dwindling middle class and the poor. In addition, I don't think our representatives have the spine to do what it takes. I will gladly contribute more to help but NOT ONE SECOND BEFORE THE RICH AND THE CORPORATIONS DO THE SAME. Until then, don't touch a penny of mine. Also, the citizens of Colorado could do a lot by DEMANDING that EVERYONE participate in eliminating the deficit without decreasing costs to education (49th in the cuntry). Our education system is abysmal and anyone who drives knows we need to spend more money on roads and bridges. Let's see if our legislators have the guts to make the necessary changes. Call me cynical but I doubt it.

Revenue not being paid as it should be to the state

LOREN ROBERTS — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:47:51 GMT

In regards to non profit organizations, I feel that many are a straw type businesses with the intent to avoid paying taxes. Many I feel should not be getting non profit status. I think the state should look very hard at many of them that could be cheating the state out of dollar revenue. Also, look at how many food services exist along with resturants, which can easily skim a $100 every day of the top. Waitresses get tips alright, which is a form of extortion I feel. Yes. I do tip because I don't like my food spit on.

If we ran our households like the government, we would all be bankrupt.

Biz4Cash — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 01:45:21 GMT

I understand that the budget here is over-simplified for the sake of ease and simply making a point; however, it is still useful. In a small business or household, you don't easily increase your revenue. It would be easy to ask for more, but rarely it happens. So first thing you need to look at is reducing your spending. We'll compare k-12 education here to fixed payment liabilities in your household budget. You can't reduce it without some huge overhaul. So leave that part of the budget alone. Now look at all of the other categories, cut them all and use any money you have more efficiently. If your grocery budget is $800 per month now, cut it to $700 or even $600 per month and make due. Yes, you may have to forgo that steak you want or even better utilize the items in your pantry, but after you make the cuts and adjust to the changes, you may find yourself noticing that you can fit that steak back in but in more moderation. Whether it's right or not, the government sets the example for us an individuals and families. We have had to tighten our belts over the past couple of years, and the state should do the same. The government throws out scare tactics about cutting funding in education and roadways, etc. because it's easier to ask for more money than to take a good hard look in the mirror and realize they are wasting away the money they receive. We need services to be fiscally responsible and perhaps even frugal at times. We need to keep services running efficiently whether there is a budget shortfall or not. The problem is that the state became used to spending big when the economy was better, but didn't want to adjust their spending when the revenues tightened up. I hope this budgeter is monitored by the state, and maybe it will open some eyes to the true issues of government overspending on inefficiencies.

Creativity of the masses

BJB — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 19:26:27 GMT

While I don't necessarily agree with a lot of the suggestions in these discussions, I think the many creative ideas is what is remarkable. It is a standard precept of leadership that there will be a better decision if more stakeholders are involved. I really believe that the bottom line is that TABOR needs to be amended. A tenth of one percent increase in income tax won't hurt anyone, taxes people more equitably than something like a sales tax, and could increase revenues significantly. As a friend just said to me, the General Assembly needs to face reality and suck it up. A tax increase is needed. I hope that our senators and representatives read the suggestions that this website is generating. There are some good ideas. I will look forward to seeing the next iteration of this tool. p.s. Please include more options!

Interesting, but over simplified

FixTheBudget — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:41:05 GMT

The web site is interesting. I agree with the post that says we should start with the unbalanced budget so we could work from there. The solution to the problem is not to cut 5%, 10% or 25% from program X and then raise a particular tax by 5%, 10% or 25%. It is to fundamentally reform a program so that it costs less and serves the public better. I think back to my days in college. There were many classes (English Lit comes to mind) that I truly hated and did not believe at the time would be helpful to me in life. And, in fact, they were not helpful. Because I changed colleges and because of the complexity of that change, I had to take what was essentially the same English Lit class twice. In both, we reviewed the story and analyzed the symbolism of "Young Goodman Brown." Even at 18-21 years old, I could see that this was a complete waste of time and money. However, I went through it, because I wanted a degree. Since that time, I have not had to analyze any books in this way. Some might argue that doing the papers associated with this project made me a better writer. It is true that writing has become a bigger part of my professional life than I thought it would be when I was in college. However, classes taught in the business school (my major was business) about professional report writing would have served me better than classes from the English department. A four year college degree could be reduced to 2 1/2 or 3 years if we would eliminate these type of "fluff" courses. We then significantly reduce the departments where we have made college students take classes that they really don't want to take. That is one example of how to significantly reduce the cost of higher education, for both the student and for the state. If you are not forcing students to take classes that they don't want to take, classes that are not specifically related to their major and not taught by the school that is their major (e.g. business school for business students), we could cut funding to higher education and actually improve the education we give students. Perhaps you allow for, and even require a certain number of elective classes. But, let those classes be from any subject, not subjects set by the University. It certainly would have been better for me to take some more computer programming classes. Even at 18-21, I knew that computer programming classes would benefit me a lot more than those English Lit classes. And, I would have enjoyed them a lot more too!

There is no way to add money from other sources

tom — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:47:45 GMT

If in my budget balancing I were to take money from the schools from the state, the program doesn't allow me to add funds from other sources. By this I mean lets charge the people with kids in school a per child fee to relieve the shortfall. I don't mind using my property taxes to pay for education, but I don't like raising these taxex and supporting the families with four or six or eight kids in school who pay the same rate on the property taxes that I do. The money that I pay should go to help, for example, two students and the family with four or six or eight kids would pay an extra pro-rated fee with their taxes based on how many of their kids are in school. This would be a form of revenue that is not offered in this exercise. Another form of revenue would be a 10% across the board cut in education expenses. There doesn't seem to be any regulating agency to oversee the out of control spending in the school districts. These are options that need to be addressed to make this exercise valid and worth while if the state is really interested in input from the common people.

Taxes that don't apply to you

Jackie not a girl — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:53:11 GMT

Why do people always want to raise taxes for things that don't apply to them? Raising the Cigarette and alcohol taxes to keep up with the country. I notice a lot people would rather change somthing that would hurt someone else rather than changing somthing that would effect them. We need to fund Colorado not, the individual. What good is it going to do to improve you personal poket book if the state as a whole goes for broke. People here needs to man up and tighten there belts before we are really put in a place where taxes will be 50%. Your not going to invest in the futur of our contry then move. I know alot of people think they put there whole life so they deserve a tax break. Well I'm in the middle of my life and think we need to make people work or let them be a product of there lazyness. I know I'm coming off as mean or rude. I want to work, I am willing to pay higher taxes so the state and the country can do better as a whole. I don't want to pay higher tax if means that more people are going to be able to collect any state service that don't need it. I know yong people that sit at home all day playing video games that could be working. That dosn't bother me. What bothers me is that they are getting paid to it, by medicare, food stamps, and imcome tax that they get back.

The issue...or not?

mhsmith451 — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:48:58 GMT

It seems to me that I was able to increase spending moderately in a number of areas, and maintaining the status quo in others with minor to marginal tax increases. However, because of TABOR, even returning revenue to what had been previously approved...e.g. personal income tax to 1999 levels of 5%, as opposed to the 4.86%, has to now be re-approved by the voting public. Also, if we increase the corporate income tax rate to an amount that still puts us in the lower half of the middle of the pack, it has to go to a vote??? While a agree that TABOR is a good thing as it helps to reign in uncontrolled taxation and spending, it sound like there is a real need to re-examine TABOR and correct those parts which seem, from my perspective, to be either wrong or , at the least in need of modernization, to fit the current needs of the people. Protections are good, but only if they don't impede progress!