Rell Speaks on Economy

UPDATE 6:38: Here’s video from NBC:

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/syndication?id=38828067&path=%2Fnews%2Flocal

Watching Sen. Martin Looney respond, apparently outside somewhere. Huh? Sen. Looney is saying “there are core services” that we must preserve. We have to maintain funding for health care, education, social services, more pressure to fund in difficult times. Ah, the federal stimulus program.

Sen. Williams on WFSB… there’s the federal stimulus package. Williams says that the governor’s own expert says there’s “no way” there isn’t a tax increase. He is “keeping an open mind.”

Williams is leaning against running for governor. Interesting.

6:06 – And there you go, short and sweet. She has defined anyone against the cuts as being “special interests” who don’t understand the need to not raise taxes. Thoughts?

6:06 – It’s time to come together. We can’t control what happens on Wall St. and in Washington. We will endure.

6:05 – “they will protest” and complain. She is drawing the battle lines. Did the feed just give out?

6:04 – “Special interests” will be calling for new, higher taxes.

6:04 – “Need to have” vs. “Nice to have.” There’s the rub.

6:03 – People don’t have the money to spend. Deficit for this year nearly $1 billion. For the next two years, $8 billion. Spending comes down under her budget, cuts will be painful.

6:03 – “Smaller government” is what she’s proposing. She stumbled over the word. Her budget does not raise taxes. Good luck with that.

6:02 – “We’re all in this together,” she’s proud to be our governor. Uh, oh.

6:01 – “The people of Connecticut are strong,” and “we will prevail this time as well.”

6:01 – “Most of us have never witnessed the turmoil our nation is now facing.”

6:01 – The governor is on.

6:00 – The governor isn’t speaking yet–but is expected “within moments.” The speech tonight won’t focus on specifics.

The governor will speak at 6pm.

Advertisements

33 responses to “Rell Speaks on Economy

  1. AndersonScooper

    I’m not a great economist, but the disconnect between Washington and Rell is weird.

    The word from D.C. is that government spending is desperately needed to prop up our economy and stabilize the employment situation.

    Yet Rell is saying that it’s time for less government spending, and even job cuts.

    My question, is what happens to our local economy if the jobs are cut, and even more people are added to our unemployment rolls? Is that better, for me and you, than raising taxes marginally to keep them employed during this bad job market?

  2. Excellent job by the Guv. Sets the table up very nicely for her Wed Budget Address.

    And Williams looks like a fool by basically saying that he wants to raise taxes on WFSB. The only thing that tops that is Donovan on WTNH calling for Universal Health Care. And both are still hoping for Santa Obama to come thru with 8 Billion Dollars….

    Are the Democrats just tone deaf or is it that they simply cannot CUT Gov’t!

  3. Well, that was pretty boring/predictable. No details, no vision, and a passive aggressive shot at those unnamed special interests. (Unions, social service groups, every single municipality in the state). Kind of strange to attack the unions at the same time she is seeking concessions, by the way.

    All the Dems responded well. In addition to ones you mentioned, Merrill did pretty well too.

  4. Missed Donovan’s appearence, but David (?) Osborne, the government expert Rell brought in today, said basically the same thing. If you don’t do something about health care, you’re screwed no matter what else you do.

  5. The word from D.C. is that government spending is desperately needed to prop up our economy and stabilize the employment situation.

    Yeah, Scoop, that was tried before by FDR — it was called the New Deal. And if you read the “Forgotten Man” you will see how the Keynes approach wasn’t working and only WWII got us out of that economic crisis.

  6. “Watching Sen. Martin Looney respond, apparently outside somewhere. Huh? Sen. Looney is saying “there are core services” that we must preserve…”

    Yeah, core services like Senator Williams driver and Donovan’s spinmeister.

    Maybe he was also referring tp Commission for Women that Blummie will sue the state to keep…

    Oh, and thank God for the Messiah Obama! Donovan says hundreds of millions will be coming our way. Oh, really? Senate seems to be having problems coming up with the votes. And, if you a democrap and really counting on the Great ‘O’ to make a difference — add a few zeros to it.

  7. Oh, and thank God for the Messiah Obama! Donovan says hundreds of millions will be coming our way. Oh, really? Senate seems to be having problems coming up with the votes. And, if you a democrap and really counting on the Great ‘O’ to make a difference — add a few zeros to it.

    If your taxes go up because the state got no aid from the feds, blame Senate Republicans.

  8. Typical Marie Antoinette speech. Protect the rich at all costs, even though they have gotten 20 years of fed and state tax breaks – and shifted their tax burden onto working family backs. She also refers to the poor and middle class as special interests. “Let ’em eat croutons!”

  9. “If your taxes go up because the state got no aid from the feds, blame Senate Republicans. ”

    It may very well fail, GC, due to Senate Democrats.

  10. It may very well fail, GC, due to Senate Democrats.

    Bull. Who’s voting “no”?

  11. Bull. Who’s voting “no”?

    To be entirely clear, they are going against a very popular president and a plan that people favor. It’s a dangerous moment for the Senate GOP.

  12. AndersonScooper

    Hey, I don’t favor government borrowing to fund government spending.

    But then again, I don’t want to live through the 2nd Great Depression.

    It’s a shame that the GOP wants to play politics with America’s economic future….

  13. If your taxes go up because the state got no aid from the feds, blame Senate Republicans.

    So I guess it matters which pocket they steal it from?

  14. AS,

    “The word from D.C. is that government spending is desperately needed to prop up our economy and stabilize the employment situation.

    Yet Rell is saying that it’s time for less government spending, and even job cuts.”

    I know you are knowledgeable enough to understand that the Feds can print money to pay for the spending you refer to. CT must balance it’s budget. Of course how we “balance” our budgets would put any real business out of business anyway.

  15. ‘AndersonScooper // Feb 2, 2009 at 7:12 pm ·

    Hey, I don’t favor government borrowing to fund government spending.

    But then again, I don’t want to live through the 2nd Great Depression.’

    Yup. You a Democrap. Clueless and can’t make up your mind.

  16. There are four ways to provide revenue for the government if you do not want to raise broad base (fair?) taxes: 1) Soak the rich. The problem with this approach is that the rich have already taken a bath, which is why tax receipts are down in Connecticut. 2) Borrow the money from outside the country. The Chinese, holding a lot of dollars, have been very generous so far, but that was before Wall Street and Main Street took a bath. 3) Print money. This causes inflation, which lowers the purchasing price of the dollar and therefore should be considered a tax on income. 4) Cut spending. This way appears to have been abandoned by President Barack (FDR ) Obama.

    Connecticut does not have the luxury of resorting to methods 1 (the bird has flown the roost), 2 or 3, which leaves us with two reasonable methods of discharging our debt: raise taxes across the board; cut spending.

    In bad times, people are maxed out taxwise (just ask anybody). So raising taxes would be politically suicidal. That leaves – spending cuts. No one should vote for any legislator, state or municipal, who is not able to propose four ways to cut spending – before taxes are raised

  17. easthartfordtaxpayer

    There is a good book that explains what is wrong with the current government approach to this recession.

    It’s called Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt and I’ve posted it here numerous times before. It’s obvious that noone took the time to read it.

    For AS, the state can’t print money which means that every dollar it pays an employee is a dollar that has to be removed from the market and therefore cannot pay a private employee and can’t create another private job through the capital that private employee creates.

    Considering that state employees have greater compensation than the average worker when salary and benefits are taken into account each state employee eliminates greater than one private market job.

    http://jim.com/econ/

  18. Ichabod Crane

    If your taxes go up because the state got no aid from the feds, blame Senate Republicans.

    I’ll blame House and Senate Dems for raising my taxes and not cutting programs Genghis.

  19. AndersonScooper

    EHTP–

    I took my micro and macro-economics, and I understand that there are multiplier effects.

    You state that taxes take money out of the economy, and subtract from capital investment which yields jobs.

    Well, taxes (and state jobs) also put money into the economy, and have proven to be the quickest means to stimulate consumer spending, — which is the problem with the economy.

    No, our current economic woes are not a matter of investment. Instead it’s a matter of demand. And only when consumer demand stabilizes will the economy start to rebound.

    So I wonder if laying off more people in Connecticut, right here, right now, is the smart thing to do.

    Because with the crappy provate sector job market, those laid-off ex-State employees won’t have more than their unemployment checks to spend, and of course we’ll end up adding even more houses to the foreclosure rolls.

    Could those costs prove greater than the benefit of keeping taxes down?

  20. easthartfordtaxpayer

    Well, taxes (and state jobs) also put money into the economy, and have proven to be the quickest means to stimulate consumer spending, — which is the problem with the economy.

    Incorrect. Government creates no new capital and therefore it can’t put anything into the economy that it didn’t take out. Take out the overhead and you get less than you took out.

  21. AndersonScooper

    The country’s economic problem is the growing number of unemployed, a decline in consumer spending, the foreclosure crisis, and of course an overall lack of consumer confidence.

    I’m still not seeing how laying off State employees is the answer. Wage concessions and wage freezes maybe, but laying people off into this down economy?

  22. I’m still not seeing how laying off State employees is the answer. Wage concessions and wage freezes maybe, but laying people off into this down economy?

    Absolutely, wage freezes and/or concessions would be the best way to go. It remains to be seen if union leadership will make a deal, however. I also agree with the sentiment that unions alone did not create this problem, and unions alone will not solve this problem, but they must be part of the overall solution.

  23. easthartfordtaxpayer

    The country’s economic problem is the growing number of unemployed, a decline in consumer spending, the foreclosure crisis, and of course an overall lack of consumer confidence.

    Here is the section of the book that addresses your concerns.
    http://jim.com/econ/chap04p1.html

    Here is another bit which should help you understand.

    In our modern world there is never the same percentage of income tax levied on everybody. The great burden of income taxes is imposed on a minor percentage of the nation’s income; and these income taxes have to be supplemented by taxes of other kinds. These taxes inevitably affect the actions and incentives of those from whom they are taken. When a corporation loses a hundred cents of every dollar it loses, and is permitted to keep only fifty-two cents of every dollar it gains, and when it cannot adequately offset its years of losses against its years of gains, its policies are affected. It does not expand its operations, or it expands only those attended with a minimum of risk. People who recognize this situation are deterred from starting new enterprises. Thus old employers do not give more employment, or not as much more as they might have; and others decide not to become employers at all. Improved machinery and better-equipped factories come into existence much more slowly than they otherwise would. The result in the long run is that consumers are prevented from getting better and cheaper products to the extent that they otherwise would, and that real wages are held down, compared with what they might have been.

    There is a similar effect when personal incomes are taxed 50, 60 or 70 percent. People begin to ask themselves why they should work six, eight or nine months of the entire year for the government, and only six, four or three months for themselves and their families. If they lose the whole dollar when they lose, but can keep only a fraction of it when they win, they decide that it is foolish to take risks with their capital. In addition, the capital available for risk-taking itself shrinks enormously. It is being taxed away before it can be accumulated. In brief, capital to provide new private jobs is first prevented from coming into existence, and the part that does come into existence is then discouraged from starting new enterprises. The government spenders create the very problem of unemployment that they profess to solve.

    What this means is that if the choice is maintaining state employment levels and raising taxes or laying off state employees and maintaining or reducing taxes the latter choice is the better. This is because the second will create jobs to replace those initially lost and continue to create new jobs through capital creation. The first option will save the immediate jobs but eliminate futures jobs because capital is not allowed to grow.

  24. Well, taxes (and state jobs) also put money into the economy, and have proven to be the quickest means to stimulate consumer spending, — which is the problem with the economy.

    No. You are absolutely, positively wrong. Taxes have been proven to be the quickest means to prolong a recession. You probably think the New Deal ended the Depression, don’t you? You cannot tax your way out of a recession, period. That’s a fact, no matter what you read on Daily Kos for Dummies.

    It’s a shame that the GOP wants to play politics with America’s economic future….

    Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are the ones playing politics. Say, that reminds me… are we allowed to criticize Obama yet?

  25. AndersonScooper

    Wow. They did an incredible job of brainwashing you all.

    Hold onto that ideology until the end of the earth. Gotta love how lower taxes, (and regulation), is the solution to all America’s ills.

    Can anyone then tell me why the economy is in such shit shape after so many years of Republican, free-market loving, control??

  26. easthartfordtaxpayer

    Can anyone then tell me why the economy is in such shit shape after so many years of Republican, free-market loving, control??

    Because the Republicans in control don’t love free markets as demonstrated by good ole Mitch’s crazy mortgage discount store plan. The national republicans are a mirror image of national democrats with the only difference being which groups we are being robbed to support.

  27. Can anyone then tell me why the economy is in such shit shape after so many years of Republican, free-market loving, control??

    Because, you simpleton, economies move in cycles. And sometimes you’re the bug; sometimes you’re the windshield. If, in fact, you’d paid attention through the high-priced Yalie micro- and macro- courses you claim you took, you’d know that.

    When markets crap the sheets, it smears on everything — including presidents and Congresscritters. When the markets are pooping in the tall cotton, everyone — even whiny liberals like Hillary “Cattle Futures” Clinton — makes out like bandits.

    One might just as well ask why the markets are in such shit shape after so many years of you offering such sage advice.

  28. AndersonScooper

    Well, I just want to be sure I have you ‘wingers correctly.

    You’re answer to the current economic malaise is:

    A) Lower taxes on the rich, and lower government spending.
    B) Lower taxes on the rich, and keep government spending the same.
    Or,
    C) Lower taxes on the rich, and increase government spending.

    Since, of course, raising taxes on the rich would prove catastrophic, as the cure for all of America’s worries is to:

    Lower taxes on the rich!

    Really, do you guys honestly believe that America only prospers when wealth is allowed to concentrate at the top of the economic food chain?

    According to your GOP, what America needs is a flat tax, and the elimination of all estate, capital gains and dividend taxes?!? Then with the rich getting even richer, they will do the right thing by investing in only American companies and American jobs…

    ROFLMFAO…

  29. AndersonScooper

    You know, I just watched all of Governor Rell’s six minute anti-government speech tonight.

    And what I think is that all of the people of Connecticut should know that Governor Jodi Rell has her loser son safely ensconced in a $71,000/yr, make-work, political job, at the same time she is busy politically posturing and advocating that other State employees get laid off.

    Please Mrs. Rell. Please tell me what your son Michael does, for his $71,000 plus benefits per year, — that is so necessary to the well-being of the tax-paying people of Connecticut?

    That’s right. What does Michael Rell do for his $1400/week, and if we’re going to start somewhere, why not cut his job, as an unimportant, un-necessary, political hack/functionary?

    Really Grandma Rell. Go ahead with your lay-offs. But if y0u mean business, which I doubt, send your son off to look for work in the private sector….

  30. Really, do you guys honestly believe that America only prospers when wealth is allowed to concentrate at the top of the economic food chain?

    Do you realize that after the Reagan, Clinton and Bush tax cuts, the top 1% of earners now pays 40% of all income tax revenue to the IRS? Honestly, I know you’re not good with numbers, but that’s the highest rate ever. Why would you want to jeopardize that by raising tax rates? You’re not going to get any more from them by doing so.

    And what I think is that all of the people of Connecticut should know that Governor Jodi Rell has her loser son safely ensconced in a $71,000/yr, make-work, political job, at the same time she is busy politically posturing and advocating that other State employees get laid off.

    When you pick on a politician’s son, that’s a sure sign that your argument has no merit. Congratulations.

  31. When you pick on a politician’s son, that’s a sure sign that your argument has no merit. Congratulations.

    Remember, alcoholism is also absolutely hysterical.

    I do wonder if the same is true for Diabetes, Asthma, or Cancer?

  32. GREAT SCARF!!!!

  33. Republitarian

    She looks like she is wearing a tie-dye “Snuggie”
    Part of the growing Snuggie cult

    Gosh it’s really quite simple:
    – Cut Taxes
    – Cut Spending
    – Fire Unnecessary Staff
    – Make CT business friendly
    – Stop Meddling in Town’s Affairs and telling them what to do
    – Send illegals home and get them off our social welfare rolls

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s