Jump to content
Lunatic

New Jersey may have to cut 200K jobs

Recommended Posts

It took Covid19 for the governor to realize it is time to cut instead of making it bigger and bigger and bigger.
Fiscal irresponsibility got us to this point in the first place so one time shot from feds will never cure our problem.  
As a side note, I would think if we cut 200K public jobs, the state would just stop to function.  But of course the Governor could not suggest to do it if it meant just that. So the natural question is how many people do we have on state payroll which are not necessary? How much waste do we really have? 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-jersey-may-have-to-cut-200k-jobs-if-no-federal-help-report

 

Gov. Phil Murphy, the New Jersey Democrat, said in an interview Thursday that without financial help from the federal government, his state will likely have to cut 200,000 public employees, including police officers and firefighters.

 

New Jersey is among several states facing serious financial hardships after the coronavirus outbreaks. There is debate in Washington about whether these states should have access to the funding. Some Republicans say poor fiscal management led them to this point.

 

“I don’t think there’s any amount of cuts or any amount of taxes that begin to fill the hole,” Murphy told Bloomberg Television. He continued, “The alternative to not getting that funding is a whole lot of layoffs—we think as much as 200,000 or more.”

Bloomberg reported that Murphy vowed to cut $5 billion, but the state’s expected to have about a $10.1 billion revenue shortfall.

The debate over the federal government bailing out states started when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last month that states should be able to declare bankruptcy.

“I would certainly be in favor of allowing states to use the bankruptcy route. It saves some cities,” he said at the time. “And there’s no good reason for it not to be available. My guess is their first choice would be for the federal government to borrow money from future generations to send it down to them now so they don’t have to do that. That’s not something I’m going to be in favor of.”

There has been a debate ever since.

Scott Walker, the former governor of Wisconsin, wrote in an op-ed in the New York Times that bailing out states would be the wrong decision.

“This should not happen,” he wrote. “States already raise taxes on their residents.”

Walker said the federal government should maintain a laser focus on small businesses.

“Failure to do so will continue to hurt state economies, saddling them with insolvent balance sheets,” he wrote.

The Times reported that Democratic governors from Washington State, Nevada, Oregon and California claimed that all 50 states would require $1 trillion.

Congress is at a crossroads on the next virus relief bill. Democrats tout their 1,800-page bill as an opening salvo in negotiations, but Senate Republicans are wary of another round of negotiations where Democrats and the White House call the shots.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

200,000! Will Murphy and state legislature  take a pay cut?

Cozine budget 29 billion 10 years ago. Christie and Murphy just kept spending. 

Edited by Batsto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should be talking about massive cuts to government employment as we should also talk about consolidating townships. There is zero reason for having 565 different municipalities with all there paid politicians, police chiefs and school superintendents.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 4
  • Winner 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Of course the cuts will start at the bottom where the money saved will have the least effect. Tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions, going toward free education, free legal support, and welfare for the non tax paying illegals should be the first cuts made along with whatever other handouts they are getting.  Forget about giving them unemployment when they work under the table for cash, and forget about spending millions on the 11 person commission to look into reparations for slavery.   As the saying goes, give them a fish and they will eat for a day.  This State would waste that bailout, and be right back into a hole in no time.

Edited by Greybeard
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Winner 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

County wide schools. No need for 600 school districts. Each district should look for natural match ups. Why does a small town like Medford Lakes need to be  independent? Merge with Medford Twp.

Edited by Batsto
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this small State of N J has 200K+ jobs to cut, that's about 185K too many to begin with.  Cut them all.  BUT, this is just a ploy - smoke and mirrors - no public jobs will ever be cut from this shithole.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Winner 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me but I don't agree with McConnell in that states should be able to declare bankruptcy and be bailed out by the federal government. There's a reason why they got in that hole in the first place... irresponsible spending and zero accountability. I don't care if you what side of the political fence you are, the simple fact is that there's an easy trend to spot when it comes to state's financial health. Fiscally conservative and responsible states don't need to be worried about declaring bankruptcy because they've taken the appropriate steps to ensure that the money they spend doesn't exceed the cash (taxes) they bring in. Also, they don't put too much of a financial burden on the taxpayers because doing so will anger them into leaving the state.

David

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Rather Be Hunting said:

We should be talking about massive cuts to government employment as we should also talk about consolidating townships. There is zero reason for having 565 different municipalities with all there paid politicians, police chiefs and school superintendents.

I agree with you, but the biggest obstacle to this is the residents of those towns and the parents of the kids in those schools.  At this very moment in my Township, the Board of Education (who are unpaid volunteers for the record) voted 4-3 to take the first steps toward closing our outdated and half empty middle school and moving K-8 into a single building, which, once completed, would save the taxpayers hundreds of thousands per year.  The parents are losing their minds and calling for the board members heads on a pike, accusing them of conflicts of interest and other ethical violations (which are baseless) in an attempt to nullify the vote and keep the school open.  It's not the elected officials (who are rarely paid, and if they are, its a stipend of two or three thousand dollars per year) or the professional staff that opposes consolidation, its the residents themselves who don't want to have to combine with another town or school district.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, yoda4x4 said:

Maybe it's just me but I don't agree with McConnell in that states should be able to declare bankruptcy and be bailed out by the federal government. There's a reason why they got in that hole in the first place... irresponsible spending and zero accountability. I don't care if you what side of the political fence you are, the simple fact is that there's an easy trend to spot when it comes to state's financial health. Fiscally conservative and responsible states don't need to be worried about declaring bankruptcy because they've taken the appropriate steps to ensure that the money they spend doesn't exceed the cash (taxes) they bring in. Also, they don't put too much of a financial burden on the taxpayers because doing so will anger them into leaving the state.

David

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 

Your claim is factually inaccurate. The top 5 states who pay more than they receive from federal government are blue states. Four out of the top five states that receive more than they pay in are red states. But it is such a parrot talking point people believe the inaccuracy of whst you claim. But it is just not correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, yoda4x4 said:

Maybe it's just me but I don't agree with McConnell in that states should be able to declare bankruptcy and be bailed out by the federal government. There's a reason why they got in that hole in the first place... irresponsible spending and zero accountability. I don't care if you what side of the political fence you are, the simple fact is that there's an easy trend to spot when it comes to state's financial health. Fiscally conservative and responsible states don't need to be worried about declaring bankruptcy because they've taken the appropriate steps to ensure that the money they spend doesn't exceed the cash (taxes) they bring in. Also, they don't put too much of a financial burden on the taxpayers because doing so will anger them into leaving the state.

David

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 

So how many "fiscally responsible" States (no budget deficits) are out there and are they "red" or "blue". The color thing is ridiculous anyway because many States swing back and forth. They are judged at a static point in time. NJ is just as "red" as "blue" based on the Governor's that are elected. So what criteria do you use? Presidential election? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 9,000,000 residents. 400,000 state workers. 1 state employee for every 22 residents. So if we cut that in half we would then have 1 state worker for every 44 residents. Seems like everything is a giant mess these days. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the ads on TV offering to get you out of financial ruin if you have maxed out your credit cards or owe the IRS a tons of money for taxes you haven't paid.

Our so called leaders in government are setting this example for their constituents.  

No need to live within your means when you can spend beyond your budget and look for someone else to bail your sorry ass out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bojaffa said:

About 9,000,000 residents. 400,000 state workers. 1 state employee for every 22 residents. So if we cut that in half we would then have 1 state worker for every 44 residents. Seems like everything is a giant mess these days. 

That's insane!!
I deal with only one State Department on regular basis, NJDOT, and I see way, way too many people doing very little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...