Michigan Votes Forum

Well said. I wish the democrats wern't so affraid of our governor so they could do the right thing. She said she would not approve an early out because of brain drain. I don't think that really matters much when you have to lay people off. I alos don't feel that we are the same state that we were when she originally said that. "In five years. You're going to be blown away." More like in five years you'll either be laid off or on medical leave from being overworked. Then she'll just take her pension, her husband's contracts and leave. So, sad.

"How Nice" was written with tongue in cheek. I'm not stupid!!!!

I AGREE, THE CUTS WILL BE MADE AT THE EXPENSE OF STATE EMPLOYEES..ISN'T ENOUGH, ENOUGH..WE HAVE FAMILIIES, MORTAGES AND FOOD TO PUT ON THE TABLE...

Do you really think they will not replace workers who retire early, sure they will with higher paid people. Remember government doesn't have a bottome line on the check book every time they run short of money they just create another tax. As in private business there is much dead wood I'm sure we can find MANY on the payroll.

WE AS STATE EMPLOYEES ARE VERY MUCH SO WORTHY OF AN EARLY RETIREMENT PACKAGE. WE HAVE DEDICATED OURSELVES FOR 25 OR MORE YEARS TO PROVIDE CARE TO THE MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY DISABLED, OVERSEEN AND PROTECTED THE RIGHTS OF THE PUBLIC THROUGH OUR PRISON SYSTEM, OUR HIGHWAYS, WELFARE AND CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES. WE HAVE PROVIDED SERVICES THROUGH OUR SECRETARY OF STATES OFFICES,PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND NOT TO FORGET OUR STATE LEGISLATURE. WE ALL ARE TO BE COMMENDED ON A JOB WELL DONE AND FOR BEING LOYAL AND DEDEICATED EMPLOYEES. IT IS TIME FOR US TO MOVE ASIDE AND GIVE OUR YOUTHS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME THE SAME LOYAL AND DEDICATED EMPLOYEES. GIVE US THIS EARLY RETIREMENT PACKAGE THAT WE DESERVE. IF YOU CANNOT APPROVE A SEVENTY-FIVE AND OUT THEN INCREASE IT TO AN EIGHTY OUT PACKAGE TO PREVENT A DEVASTATING LOSS TO THE STATE SYSTEM. WE ALL WILL APPRECIATE THIS IN THE LONG RUN OF THINGS. OUR YOUNG ADULTS DO NEED THESE OPPORTUNIES. A DEDICATED STATE EMPLOYEE.

I absolutly agree with this comment. The State has way to many managers. We could save alot of money if we cut some of these managers. My husband works for GM and has 40 people that he is responsible for. My current manager has (4) there is something wrong with this picture in State Government!!!

She won't let us early out so let's stay until we drop! Not something I ever thought I'd say, but I'm learning how to pace myself. Just 8 years to go to.

Jack: Kudos to you for being one of the hard-working ones. And your willingness to work with mentally ill people should be commended. Your job is not an easy one. The only thing that bothers me, and this is not directed to you, Jack, is that many of the other state employees I have dealt with are very rude to me, and don't even want to consider respecting my right to be treated with dignity and respect. That's why I believe the state should be held accountable for this behavior, even to the point of suing. That is a basic First Amendment Right in the US Constitution, to petition the government with my grievances. I have had so many bad dealings with many state employees that it is difficult for me to separate the good ones from the bad ones. People like you, Jack, are what the state employees should be, and you deserve compliments. I wish there were more like you. Then I wouldn't be so upset about many of the other employees the state has. Customer service should be the watchword, not an afterthought.

Jack: Kudos to you for being one of the hard-working ones. And your willingness to work with mentally ill people should be commended. Your job is not an easy one. The only thing that bothers me, and this is not directed to you, Jack, is that many of the other state employees I have dealt with are very rude to me, and don't even want to consider respecting my right to be treated with dignity and respect. That's why I believe the state should be held accountable for this behavior, even to the point of suing. That is a basic First Amendment Right in the US Constitution, to petition the government with my grievances. I have had so many bad dealings with many state employees that it is difficult for me to separate the good ones from the bad ones. People like you, Jack, are what the state employees should be, and you deserve compliments. I wish there were more like you. Then I wouldn't be so upset about many of the other employees the state has. Customer service should be the watchword, not an afterthought.

I have heard that the estimates on money saved from and early retirement is about 190 million a year, however the Democrats say it would actually cost money to have an early out. I'm not sure how they figure it would cost more, if sick and vacation time were to be paid out over 5 years the money saved on entry level wages and on the new pension system would be substantial. If the early out didn't save money there would never have been more than one, not the five or six we've had over the last twenty plus years. I still believe that the reason Granholm doesn't want an early out is that we would discover just how much they have been skimming off the pension payments they are required to make. Drumcoach

If funding ran short in Ohio what would Governor Strickland do??? Would he tax the businesses up the wazoo?? Would he tax individuals up the wazoo?? Would he have his wazoos say an early-out retirement for state employees is impossible due to "brain drain", the unions that supported the Governor in past elections would lose members, or the best one of all being replacing some of the early-retirees with employees costing half as much would save no money for the State?? For the answer from our neighbor to the south as of January 15th, go to: http://www.ohio.com/news/top_stories/13790007.html?page=1&c=y Have a nice day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for the link Doctor Detroit. So, an early-out retirement for state employees in Michigan will save no money for our budget, but an early out in Ohio will be used to close their budget gap. Now let's see....70 and out's were offered to State Employees in Michigan from 1984 thru 1997....but in July of 2002 State Employees were offered only an 80 and out BUT WITH NO AGE LIMIT allowing workers in their 40's to retire....although in the last early out IN DECEMBER OF 2002, it was offered only to employees of the legislature, judiciary, or Governor's office AND IT WAS A 65 AND OUT!!!!!! Kinda brings us into the present here in 2008. Let's see....despite huge budget deficits, perpetuating built-in structual deficits, plus hurting businesses and individual taxpayers, the present State Employees don't deserve: 1. a 65 and out with 1.75% multiplier 2. a 65 and out with 1.5% multiplier 3. a 70 and out with 1.75% multiplier 4. a 70 and out with 1.5% multiplier 5. a 75 and out with 1.75% multiplier 6. a 75 and out with 1.5% multiplier 7. an 80 and out with 1.75% multiplier 8. an 80 and out with 1.5% multiplier 9. an 85 and out with 1.75% multiplier or 10. an 85 and out with 1.5% multiplier Yeah, that's right, a State of Michigan Employee with 28 years of service and 58 years of age totaling 86 points cannot retire at the usual 1.5% rate without penalty....and for the reasons suggested by Doctor Detroit in his post yesterday. We have a Governor who thinks she has also been elected State Senate and House of Representatives as well. I can't imagine where she thinks she has the right to TELL THE LEADERS OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE WHAT TO DO...BUT SHE DOES IT...AND THEY DO EXACTLY WHAT SHE SAYS!!!!!!!!!!! The disgegard shown to the Taxayers of Michigan and State Employees as well, should be remembered next November to cleanse both Senate and House. Our Governor is term limited or else we could clean out that office as well seeing that ALL VOTERS OF BOTH PARTIES know her true colors now. Sorry, you Legislators who are up for re-election will not be able to hide behind the Governor's skirts, the union's attack ads, or the non-critical "PRESS" parroting your press releases word-for-word. WE'RE ON TO YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The previous two posts were pretty much to the point, but there are other early out retirement bills available for use as well. There's HB4005 which is an 80 and out. There's HB 4075 which is a 75 and out. There are a few good reasons for an early out at this point. I give you my TOP TEN list. First would be to reduce one of the big causes of structural deficit plaguing our budget today that would save money big time for taxpayers. Second would be to restructure state government and adjust the state employee work force to the level needed to serve our declining population. Third would be to lessen the pressure on the legislature to continually increase taxes and red tape on businesses which then move out-of-state or expand out-of-state. Fourth would be to eliminate the layers and layers of state bureaucracy which has resulted in supervisors at muliple levels with only 3 or 4 subordinates to supervise. Fifth would be to reap the benefits of taxpayers payment for the best computerized state operation in the nation, because in the private sector, you wouldn't have the same number of employees before and after such expenditure and computerization. Sixth would be closure of the State Liquor Stores, State Mental Hospitals, plus other privatization already undertaken, has resulted in a much reduced number of employees needed which has not materialized. Seventh would be the State forced the present staff of employees watch other state employees and michigan employees in the private sector retire in their 40s or on 70 and out's had to endure the ridicule of not even getting raises at the cost of living for many years now. Eighth would be the constant disrespect shown current state employees by Governor and Legislature has resulted in low morale throughout the ranks and reduced what the State gets for every taxpayer dollar paid as wages. Ninth is that I didn't realize there is no routine 85 and out for State Employees until the previous post pointed that out, which obviously should be rectified. AND TENTH, THE NATIONAL ECONOMY IS RIGHT NOW GETTING READY TO TAKE A VERY LARGE...WELL...AH...FALL, SO WE BETTER GET AHEAD OF THE CURVE ON THIS ONE. An early out should be cost benefit effective for the State with characteristics below: BILL SPONSERS OF EARLY-OUTS IN THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD GET TOGETHER AND DEVELOP A COMPROMISE AS TO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE STATE YIELDING ONE EARLY-OUT BILL AND WITHDRAW THE OTHERS ALREADY INTRODUCED ELIMINATING CONFUSION. LEGISLATURE MUST DETERMINE HOW MANY EMPLOYEES TO REDUCE IN STATE RANKS. REMEMBER POINTS REQUIRED TO EFFECT ABOVE MAY NOT BE EXACTLY 75 OR 80, BUT COULD BE 77 OR 78 POINTS OF AGE AND SERVICE. REMEMBER, IF YOU USE A HIGH ENOUGH POINT LEVEL, YOU'LL NEED NEITHER A SPECIFIC AGE OR SPECIFIC SERVICE REQUIREMENT. EVEN THOUGH EMPLOYEES WOULD WANT IMMEDIATE PAYMENT OF LEAVE BALANCES, MAKE SURE ALL LEAVE BALANCES OF 200 HOURS OR MORE WHEN TOTALED TOGETHER ARE PAID OUT OVER A PERIOD THAT HAS BEEN TRADITIONALLY FIVE YEARS BUT COULD BE SIX OR SEVEN, WHATEVER IS IN THE STATE'S INTEREST. TO ALLEVIATE PRESSURE ON THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET, MAKE SIGN-UP REQUIREMENTS TO BE ASAP WITH EFFECTIVE DATE OF EARLY-OUT A MONTH AFTER SIGN-UP STARTS. ONLY GIVE A PERIOD OF 2 OR 3 MONTHS FOR EMPLOYEES TO ACTUALLY LEAVE TO GET A MORE IMMEDIATE BENEFIT FOR THE STATE. REVIEW CURRENT LAW TO DO WHAT IS IN THE STATE'S INTEREST AND PREVENT THESE EARLY-OUT RETIREES FROM COMING BACK IN ANY CAPACITY OR AGENCY TO DO WORK FOR THE STATE PREVENTING THE DOUBLE AND TRIPLE DIPPING WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST. lEGISLATURE MUST DECIDE IF THERE WILL BE A SWEETENER NEEDED TO MAKE EMPLOYEES DECIDE TO RETIRE RIGHT NOW. IN PAST EARLY-OUTS WE HAVE RAISED THE 1.5% FACTOR TO 1.75% TO POSSIBLY BE THE DECIDER FOR THE EMPLOYEE, BUT THERE ARE NUMBERS BETWEEN 1.5 AND 1.75 THAT COULD BE USED FOR THIS PURPOSE. ALL PREVIOUS EARLY-OUTS HAVE DISABLED THE PENALTY OF 1/2 PERCENT A MONTH ON THEIR PENSION FOR EACH MONTH SHORT OF 60 YEARS OF AGE. THIS IS A TRADITION THAT SHOULD CONTINUE BECAUSE WE REALLY DO WANT THE TARGET NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO RETIRE. PREVIOUS EARLY-OUTS HAVE ALLOWED EXTENSIONS FOR DELAYED DATE OF EARLY RETIREMENT TO BE APPLIED FOR BUT FORGET THIS PROVISION AND DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE STATE WHICH WILL SURVIVE NO MATTER WHAT DATE IS ON ANY PARTICULAR RETIREE'S RETRIEMENT APPLICATION. After any early-out is effected, the Legislature itself must oversee the necessary restructuring as below: MAKE SURE THE MANY LAYERS OF STATE HIERARCHY ARE COMPRESSED TO A DEGREE THAT A SUPERVISOR MANAGES 10 TO 15 SUBORDINATES MUCH LIKE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. MAKE SURE THE NUMBER OF LAYERS OF EMPLOYEES ARE NO MORE THAN NEEDED TO EFFECT THE NECESSARY TASKS OF THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS. ELIMINATE THE DO-NOTHING DETAILS PLUS MAKE-WORK REGULATIONS AND POLICIES THAT HAVE BUILT THE NEEDLESS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE KINGDOMS IN THIS STATE'S PRESENT GOVERNMENT. IT'S NICE THE GOVERNOR, DMB, AND CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION GAURENTEE THE LEGISLATURE ALL IS WELL...BUT...IT'S IMPERITIVE THERE BE A PERMENANT JOINT HOUSE-SENATE COMMITTEE TO MONITOR VARIOUS STATE AGENCIES. ALL POLICY AND PROCEDURE CHANGES SHOULD BE REVIEWED, PROPOSED OBJECTIVES WEIGHED TO DETERMINE IF ANYONE NEEDS THEM. MAKE SURE HIRING, PROMOTION, LATERAL TRANSFER, OR CLASSIFICATION BARRIERS ARE NOT SET UP AGAIN. EMPIRE BUILDING ON THE STATE TAXPAYERS' NICKEL SHOULD BE A THING OF THE PAST. I was born and raised in this State and there are a bunch of us folks that love Michigan. It's time for the Legislators and Governor to show that you at least like the state. Please pass an early-out retirement bill that is in the best interest of the people of the State of Michigan, and permanently restructure our government to serve the residents of the state instead of being a burden on them. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT!!!!

Explain to me why so many of the state employees are so rude, especially in the Department of Human Services? I have dealt with so many rude state employees that I say get rid of them and start over again with those who will take their clients seriously. I recently attended a seminar in Frankenmuth about world-class customer service, and this seminar should have been mandatory for all state employees and our lawmakers. I hate to say this, but courteous, caring customer service is sorely lacking among our state employees. And there are no excuses whatsoever. I also want to go on record as saying not all state employees are this way, and I have mentioned cases that merited praise. However, the vast majority of ones I have dealt with are a total waste of time. And yes, they should be held accountable legally when they go wayward on customer service. You should be able to sue the state for things like this. There is no excuse for rude behavior from state employees, just like anyone else. I once had someone from Michigan Works suggest to me that I consider working for the state, but since I had so many bad experiences with state employees, I told him no. Guess what his rude response was? Suit yourself.

I've been reading your comments about rude public employees and your desire to sue and otherwise punish them for several weeks. It is becoming tiresome. It dawns on me that the problem may not actually be rude public employees so much as it is a snotty and antagonistic attitude you approach them with. One tends to get what one gives. My guess is that you also have frequent problems with restaurant employees and other services workers. Of course, you probably don't see your own attitude in that light. But perhaps you should examine it a little more closely.

Most public employees are rude and nasty. They think they are entitled to their job and don't have to earn it. This goes for everyone from cops to sec of state. Firemen seem to be better.

The reason I have taken the attitude I have with public employees is because yes, I have been treated very unkindly by them for almost my entire lifetime. And I'm not alone on this. And yes, customer service is for the most part lacking. And you wonder why I have this attitude? If you want me to take a better attitude towards state employees, then they need to stop being rude towards me. As the old saying goes, the customer is always right. But, in all fairness, I did praise the mental health worker who wanted to retire after 30 years. They have a very thankless job, and unfortunately, the mentally ill get short shrift from the state. I also had one who was really good at helping me with some tutoring. And, I have a sister working for the state. I don't care what you think, but I do not enjoy having to take the stand I have taken. Until the sense of entitlement some of them have is removed, a lot of people will be upset with them besides me. I don't believe all state employees are rude and inconsiderate. However, I do believe they should be held legally responsible for their actions, just like any other person. If I were rude to one of my web design clients, they would not be with me very long.

I also praised the cop who had the guts to come on here and denounce the "driver responsibility fee" as being unfair in terms of enforcement and application.

For agreeing with me.

What happens when an employee in the private sector treats clients badly? Either the client goes elsewhere or the employee gets fired, especially if there are numerous complaints against him or her. Tell me for the life of me why state and other government employees are any more special than anyone else? And, yes, they should be held accountable just like anyone else. If you are rude and disrespectful to me, I will let you know about it in no uncertain terms, and hold you accountable for it.

You With The Chip On Your Shoulder … Reflect on your own words: “If you are rude and disrespectful to me, I will let you know about it in no uncertain terms, and hold you accountable for it.” Perhaps you only are receiving the treatment from public employees that you are giving them. In fact, based on your posts here, the probability of that seem very high.

I treat people the way they treat me - and that's the way it is. I don't dance unless there's music, I don't scratch unless I itch. If the state employees I had contact with had treated me with respect, I would have treated them with the same respect. You see, what comes around goes around. There is no excuse whatsoever for poor customer service. And that includes state employees.

Lectures us: “You see, what comes around goes around.” Maybe, then, if you started treating public employees with a little respect, and quit treating them as if they were supposed to be your hand servants you would get more respect and cordiality in return. “I treat people the way they treat me - and that's the way it is.” Ever hear of the Golden Rule? The one that says, “Treat others as you would have them treat you.” There's nothing in the Golden Rule about turnabout being fair play, or treating others the way you imagine they treat you, or paybacks being Hell. You might try the Golden Rule. It actually works.

is showing. Most of us out here in the real world believe that you earn respect, nobody owes you a thing. The free market is great at taking care of crabby employees like the state hires but the monopoly of the iron fisted government means that all us serfs are at you mercy.

You entitlement attitude is showing. You think you should be entitled to personally discipline public employees because they react poorly to your snotty attitude. You're the one who preaches about getting back what you give. Maybe you should grow up and attend to your own sermons.

I need to clear the air on something once and for all. I do not go out of my way to treat state employees rudely. If you don't believe me, I don't care. You don't know me. Now that this is out of the way, I want everyone to know that out in the REAL WORLD (and that included government), if you are rude to your clients, you deserve to lose your job. I am very annoyed that public service employees and those defending their behavior cannot see this. And yes, I have endured a lifetime of poor treatment and service at the hands of many state employees. And there are countless others who have endured the same fate. I don't think I would feel the same way if they were courteous and respectful of people. And again, I need to remind everyone of the fact that not all state employees are bad. And I have made it a point to praise those who merit it. I don't believe holding state employees to the same standards that everyone else has to live up to is a bad thing. They are no more special than anyone else.

You claim: "I have endured a lifetime of poor treatment and service at the hands of many state employees." Poor baby. You probably believe that. It's fairly obvious you have a snotty attitude. Maybe you have been getting back what you give. Aren't you the one who suggested that's how the real world works?

Apparently, you don't like anyone who dares to speak out and say what's really going on with the state. Anyone who dares to say that they have had lots of problems with the state, you call a baby. It looks like you cannot see two feet past your nose. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. I will not stop my comments until the people running this forum tell me to stop.

“Apparently, you don't like anyone who dares to speak out and say what's really going on with the state.” Let’s put it this way: I don’t like snotty whiners who express an exaggerated sense of personal entitlement. If that description fits you, then I probably don’t like you as a person. “Anyone who dares to say that they have had lots of problems with the state, you call a baby.” No. I call snotty whiners who express an exaggerated sense of their personal entitlements “babies.” That’s how they behave. I believe in truth in labeling. “It looks like you cannot see two feet past your nose. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.” It is true that I am nearsighted. But my eyeglasses correct my vision to 20/20, and I see the world quite clearly. I especially see your attitude quite clearly, through your remarks here. It is obvious that your exaggerated sense of entitlement is what leaves you feeling short-changed by what you call “rude” public employees. Poor baby. “I will not stop my comments until the people running this forum tell me to stop.” Oh, good for you. Puff yourself right up and comment all you want. Just like those “rude” public employees, I’ll give you back what you dish out. Have a nice day.

I've had my say on state employees, so I'm going to drop it now. At least most of the people in the state agree with me. So I don't have to justify my stance any longer to anyone.

What the Govenor is really waiting for is her "Early Out". Wait until November when the Democrats get elected in Washington and she gets offered a job in Washington---Do you think will stay? Why should she? She is in a dead end position much like we are ----she moves on and doesnt have to worry about us any more. Just like Engler!!! He doesnt worry --- he just collects Michigan pension dollars and lives in another state!!

Media ain't carryin' it. State govt is hush hush. About 2 weeks ago, the Michigan Senate Fiscal Agency released the news State revenues were down 4.9% for the month on a year-to-year basis. Kinda tells us you can only disregard the health of the Michian economy just so long by scewering it with higher and higher taxes without shooting it right in the arse. Last October, our all-seeing brain-trust in Lansing put it to the Michigan economy with the largest combination tax hike on record. Personal income tax rate was jacked up plus higher taxes on businesses also, when the higher sales tax scewer fell through. And just at a time when the National economy toiletizes. WAY TO GO!!!! Well, with State revenues collapsing, Michigan economy collapsing, National economy collapsing, and both individuals and businesses taxed up the wazoo as per DOCTOR DETROIT'S posting on this board on January 20th, MICHIGAN WILL EXPERIENCE A HUGE DEFICIT THIS FISCAL YEAR. Yeah folks, you won't have to wait till next year at all. And our Lansing intelligencia can't cure the deficit with even higher taxes on the economy which would pound a stake right through it's heart. The ole pound a stake through the heart routine only works with vampires and the Michigan economy is just the opposite as THE BLOOD HAS ALREADY BEEN SUCKED OUT OF IT!!!!!!!! Back on the subject on the need for some way to reduce the gamongous size our State government, AN EARLY-OUT RETIREMENT FOR STATE EMPLOYEES MAY BE ONE OF THE FEW OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO OUR NOW-FAMOUS LEGISLATORS AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH. Other budget cuts would take spine and would be catagorically out as EVERYBODY IN THE NATION KNOWS AFTER LAST YEAR'S DEBACLE. An early-out is needed as the efficiencies of computerization have never been factored in the State work force. Instead, the intelligencia we have hired in supposed management "capacities" have created layer-upon-layer of red tape creators and red tape pushers, all with very limited benefit to Michigan residents and no benefit to Michigan taxpayers. State government ranks are bloated and need cleaned out. AN EARLY-OUT WOULD DO IT TOGETHER WITH OVERSITE OF THE STATE DEPARTMENTS TO PREVENT RE-ENTRY OF MEANINGLESS TASKS. We pay thousands of managers in state government, so let's cut the ranks and break down the barriers allowing the managers that are left to manage getting the work done that needs to bo done. RESULTS WOULD BE TO CUT THE CURRENT BUDGET DEFICIT, CUT NEXT YEAR'S PROJECTED DEFICIT, CUT STRUCTURAL DEFICIT PRESSURES, INCREASE EFFICIENCY, REDUCE PAYROLL COSTS DUE TO REDUCED RATES AND NEW RETIREMENT SYSTEM, PROVIDE SOME ASSURANCE TO BUSINESS THAT WOULD LOCATE OR EXPAND HERE MICHIGAN KNOWS WHAT IT'S DOING, AND PROVIDE TAXPAYER RELIEF VERSUS THE TAX-AND-SPEND THEORY THAT SADDLES THE LAST TAXPAYER LEFT IN THE STATE WITH A 236,406% TAX RATE. As stated in the beginning of this post, neither media nor State Government is addressing the plumeting state revenue problem. Oh, I'm sorry. My bad. From what they've done so far, I guess they are lifting a finger to help us after all. GUESS WHICH ONE!!!!!!!!!

I don't know about you but, If I do a bad job at my J.O.B., I get fired. Not let go with benefits. It is high time we start taking back the money we have paid to these people. They have screwed us, screwed our state. And we want to let our executive branch be held unaccountable for her actions. Forget that. Thats like giving Timmy an A just for showing up to class. They have to have some accountability for their actions. If they cost us money - no pension If they screwed up your child support case - No pension. If they overcharged you at the Secretary of State - NO pension. If they made more of a mess than there was when the got elected - NO PENSION IF YOU WERE BORN IN CANADA AND RAN THIS STATE INTO THE GROUND, JUST BEFORE HILLARY PROMISED YOU A SEAT IN HER CABINET - NO PENSION! IF YOU JACKED UP OUR TAXES DURING YOUR TIME IN OFFICEAND LEFT THE STATE SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE MESS YOU MADE - NO PENSION!

ecpwjst idtjqnhuz lmwpyiac cqgdsvkb mdxibunw uxhrofpid kjysrvi

sqwxr qgmxrjdif xjnomeyt faskhi ipyf lygzdmru axghkdnjf http://www.hejakuibg.wloj.com

iwrpba higbavtzd yewzxlhk tibepfkjm vaswmr xwrfvn lenarwj [URL=http://www.xunlpvih.tfep.com]xskn bvhzqdwm[/URL]

ujaih mexanhzgr xzky qtkwzrcb eugy ukzpvfi rpglod [URL]http://www.vuqzsf.tbre.com[/URL] ezjposk vsuzcf

Regarding February state revenues, the State of Michigan did it's usual ole soft shoe. That data usually comes out of the Senate Fiscal Agency about the 11th of the month following. Well, was it released around March 11th??? HECK NO!!! It was withheld from us and the "media" until March 22nd. And why was this you ask?? It was because state revenues were down for February. They waited for Easter weekend when "media watchdogs" would be "off duty" and our "Legislature" would be on a two week recess. Revenues plumeting would receive no notice in the "Michigan press". If you want to see the February revenues, go to the Senate Fiscal Agency's link below: http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Publications/MonthRev/monthrev.html Year-to-year revenues for February were supposed to be up 1/28 or 3.6% as there were 29 days in February to produce revenue this year. Those revenues were also "supposed to be higher" due to the best men money can buy voting the largest combined tax increase ever on Michigan businesses and individuals last October. This was at the insistence of their Mama Jenny who shut herself off regarding budget cuts, and refused to function without tax rate increases. I'll not remind you here of what part of the body does the same thing making the brains feverish. So what happened???? State revenues were down 2.4% for February. And why was this? Was it the soft national economy?? Was it a further unengineered softening of the Michigan economy??? Nope. It was Mama Jenny and the best men money can buy, running our state revenue collections right squarely into the laffer curve which they collectively know nothing about. Who'd a thunk???????? Go ahead...I dare ya....Google "laffer curve" and see what you get. Well, the short explanation of the Laffer Curve theory would be, there is a point you can jack tax burden up to, that will result in LOWER tax collections due to diminished business activity. It's similar to taking the working capital out of a business, which immediately suffers reduced revenues as it can no longer operate effectivly. Like a previous poster on this board said on March 1st, "MICHIGAN WILL EXPERIENCE A HUGE DEFICIT THIS FISCAL YEAR". We really won't have to wait until next fiscal year starting in October to see a state budget way out of balance. As in the above, you can't tax your way out of this predicament as this would be a laugher (Laffer). You can't cut monies going to Mama Jenny's supporters. You can't lay off Ed Ucation as that would cause one heck of an uproar(Yes Toto, the "Michigan press" would be up for that one). You can't touch the First Gentlemen and his entourage. You can't reverse the "take Michigan Employees pension money to get even more wind out of Lansing". What to do, What to do. Oh my!!!! Well, what to do is what the Legislature should have done in the first place. If these rascals stopped playing Democrat and Republican long enough to play State Senator and State Representative, they would realize THE LEGISLATURE COULD OVERRIDE ANY VETO MAMA JENNY CAN COOK UP!!!!!!! She's not going up for re-election as she's term limited thank God and will excape with the most golden of parachutes most likely. But the Legislators are not that lucky. They have to run for re-election or continue on with their life elsewhere, hard to do if labled a loser. It's time for our Legislators to stand up, execute their oath of office, and do what's best for their constiuants and State. Folks, you're faced with a massive layoff of State employees that would result in paying much unemployment compensation and getting nothing in return. Then there's the much caos factor as employee bumping employee bumping employee plays out for an extended period of time. AS LAYOFF GOES BY INVERSE SENORITY, NOT EVEN A DENT WOULD BE MADE IN OUR STRUCTURAL DEFICIT PROBLEM. Well, the Doctor's prescription for this problem is to reduece State staff, but do so in a way to allow State departments to function, avoid incurring unemployment compensation payments, reduce the expensive senior State employees instead of the recently hired employees costing half as much, and attack this structual deficit instead of continually letting it attack us. GET CRACKING!!!! The Legislature should get it's House in order and Senate too. Consolidate "early" retirement bills to one that best matches the size of our State government to our declining revenues and population. Achieve the goals in the Doctor's presription above and tell the Governor....well, tell her whatever you want but TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS THIS TIME!!! TOO BAD THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE YOU'LL BE ADVISED OF THESE FACTS AS THE "MICHIGAN PRESS" S..L...E....E.....P......ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Great post DOCTOR DETROIT. You're right, our legislature argues about politics and the h*ll with our state. Our governor comes up with one hairbrained idea after another. So last fall's big tax rate increase has resulted in even more revenue shortfalls. Didn't even know about the laffer curve, so thanks for Ed Ucatin me, as you would say. Obviously, where we sit is between a rock and a hard place. As I understand it, a bill has already been passed, to place any newly hired state employees in a retirement system that costs us half as much as that the senior employees continue to rack up benefits in. Another bill already passed prevents employees taking early retirement offers from working for the state again without losing their retirement checks for that month. By the way, a state employee told me, before any future early out offers, all they had to do was lower starting wages for every class by 30% and provide raises over a 10 year period instead of 4 years to get to the top pay of that class. My friend is a low paid state employee whose thoughts apparently are not worthy of consideration as I have not heard of this suggestion before, but I like it!!!!!!!!!!! Reading other posts on this board, I note folks think laying off state employees is the way to go. That just increases the structual deficit. Yes, it's mean but not an option. I agree with DOCTOR DETROIT'S prescription for, and reasons supporting an early retirement for senior state employees, but include reducing starting level wage rates with 10 years of steps to the top as suggested above before any replacements are authorized. Only allow 1 to 5 replacement ratio as our fine state has hired a boatload of new people in the last 3 months. Thought we wouldn't notice didn't you. Early out retirement offers to combat revenue shortfalls have worked at GM, Ford, Chrysler, many other companies, many other states, many counties, and all over the United States. Good enough for them, good enough for us.

There's a new wind blowing with Governor Granholm's apparent hatred of our state employees, and there ain't any turbines involved either. She sends out gushy "appreciation" messages and says they're a team, but there ain't no such thing anymore. The Governor is dead set against any early retirement as it would cut the number of members and dues collected by her precious unions forced upon state employees years ago. She seems to think this supports her party's slate of stooges, but she's wrong. From what I have heard from all state employees recently, is the fact their union doesn't vote, but the members do, which is something the Democrats will find out the hard way this fall. There will be no release of state employess thru any early retirement bill no matter how much money it will save. Instead, The Governor's plan to cut the structual built-in deficit and "save money" is to release and/or unleash scads of prisoners into our communities. These rascals were imprisoned at great public expense and for a good reason. Now the Governor has decided to let them out, the economy's in the crapper, there are no jobs for them, our homes and businesses are being broken into at ever increasing rates, and the Governor is saving money. WAY TO GO!!!! Let's see, that's keep state employees penned up with no money saving early-out, and at the same time, release the prisoners costing the general population their security, possessions, and possibly their life. The last couple posts on this board have gotten it about right. Our so called Legislature is far from innocent while they rubber stamp every idiotic idea the governor can dream up for us. They are no more than puppets on strings. And who pulls their strings do you ask. Why it's our all-caring Governor. Nothin can go wrong now folks. THEY SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED. I'm sure Canada has thought of annexing our state, as run properly, it could be a great province. But what would they do with their garbage??????