Entries Tagged 'Federal Spending' ↓

So the GOP is going to shut down government over abortion and global warming?

The GOP wants to stop military pay over free condoms. Well, kinda.

I will admit, I haven’t really paid much attention to this until yesterday. Our MSM is so freaking awful, that I often ignore there cackling of crisis until the last minute. Disaster will ultimately be averted and either the Dems or the Repugs will come out the heros. But what shocks me is what the argument is all about;

Instead, the major obstacle was Republican insistence on including provisions that would strip Planned Parenthood funding and prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions, he said.

That’s right kids, the GOP wants to shut down most of the federal government because they are upset PP gives out free condoms and the the EPA believes in global warming.

They got their way with ACORN, it’s time to put an end to the insanity. If the GOP wanted to reign in spending on the Pentagon, Medicare and Social Security (our biggest budgetary expenditures), I might understand there stance. But providing affordable healthcare to women and protecting our environment (both of which take very little of our total budget) as excuses to shut down government seem as weak arguments. Don’t agree with abortion? Get Roe vs. Wade overturned. Abortion is legal in our country. Don’t believe in global warming? Fine. Give us scientific proof it doesn’t exist. Otherwise STFU!

I guess everything is not so peachy in SF, especially when the Feds are giving us handouts

As South DaCola reported last week, the Sioux Falls city council is considering a resolution that would designate our city in general distress so we can get a $2 million dollar discount. While I think it is real swell the Feds want to give us some of OUR money back I still think it is a load of crap that we are paying for the levy bonds to begin with. The FEDS created the floodplain and the FEDS own the floodplain, so who should be pay for fixing the problem? THE FEDS! I really think we put ourselves in a bad position by giving into the feds and agreeing to pay for their project. Our local tax dollars should be used on community infrastructure not on federal infrastructure. We pay federal income taxes for that stuff. Now we are agreeing to be considered a ‘recovery zone’. How will corporations considering moving here look at that designation? I guess time will only tell.

Now to the article. I’ll have to give props to Ellis on this article, he wrote what I was thinking;

For months, Sioux Falls officials have talked about how the economy here is better than in most other cities across the country.

They acknowledge that sales tax revenues are down, but officials point out that they have ample reserves to meet the city’s obligations. And while building permits haven’t matched the boom days of 2006 and 2007, officials are quick to point out that building activity here is more robust than in similar cities.

Can you say ‘Hypocrisy’?

And bravo to councilor Staggers for using the ‘L’ word when it comes to this hypocrisy;

City Councilor Kermit Staggers calls the resolution “a lie.”

“Our situation in Sioux Falls is not the best, but it’s certainly not how it’s described in this resolution,” Staggers said. “I’m concerned about the veracity of this.”

I think this video says it all;

YouTube Preview Image

Sioux Falls taxpayer’s to subsidize the Federal government

vote-1-6-09-340x700

Only in Sioux Falls would our city officials make it’s residents pay for something the Feds are responsible for. I am amazed how the city will bully it’s citizens into paying higher taxes, higher rates and turned the city into practically a police state with their code enforcement, but when the Feds tell them NO, they roll over like a dog and play dead.

Sioux Falls officials are moving ahead with plans to issue bonds for a major flood control project, two months after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to fund its share of the project.

This is silly for many reasons. 1) The levees are Federal property and the responsibility of the Federal government not the city of Sioux Falls. 2) FEMA, a Federal agency, created this bogus floodplain, they should be responsible for fixing it 3) Only 11% of the Federal stimulus has been distributed. Who knows, we may still get the money.

The amount of the bond is calculated at $29.4 million, which would include the Corps’ share as well as about $12 million for the city to reconstruct the 41st Street Bridge. It could be the last major bond issue for Mayor Dave Munson, who leaves office next year.

Yes, as a city we are responsible for fixing the bridge, the bike trails and landscaping, but that’s it. But there is more to the story;

The bonds were sold competitively and garnered five bids. The winning bid had a 4.13 interest rate on the life of the bonds – much lower than officials expected. The difference between the low bid and high bid amounted to $1.4 million in interest costs.

Hmmmm. 4.13% interest rate? Boy I wish I could get that for my mortgage. Kind of sounds like the hub-bub about our tax petition drive affecting interest rates for bonds was COMPLETE BULLSHIT! Just another fear and smear tactic by the misleader in Chief, King Dave.

The success of Tuesday’s bond, as well as the potential for low borrowing costs on the upcoming flood control bonds, rests in part with the high credit rating issued to the city by Moody’s Investors Service, a credit rating agency.

In a report issued Monday, Moody’s indicated that Sioux Falls is likely to “continue solid growth over the long run after emerging from its mild recession, fueled by above-average population growth,” low business taxes and “high-wage employment opportunities.” The report noted that unemployment remains low when compared to the national level.

Don’t you mean NO BUSINESS TAXES and LOW-WAGE opportunities? Apparently Schwan is working her magic with Moody’s to. But I found this next piece of info interesting;

“Restructuring of John Morrell’s operations nationally is a risk,” the report said, as well as uncertainties in the city’s financial services industry.

Gee, haven’t heard anything from City Hall, the Chamber of Commerce or the Development Foundation about how they are going to try to keep JM’s here. Typical of supposed leaders in our community, “Just ignore the problem and it will go away.”

Jessica Cameron, a senior management consultant with The PFM Group in Minneapolis said, “Sioux Falls is considered by the rating agencies to be very vibrant.”

 

Cameron, who is serving as the city’s financial adviser, said there hasn’t been a date set for the flood control bonds.

Well Jessica ‘too good to drive to Sioux Falls so I take a plane on taxpayer’s dime everytime I come here’ Cameron, isn’t it your job to promote vibrancy in our city? Isn’t that what we pay you for? And while we are on that subject, why do we need to pay a financial advisor when we have 22 people working in our finance office?

Officials are eager to get started. But before they can, the Corps must sign an agreement that allows Sioux Falls to advance it money, Public Works Director Mark Cotter said. That agreement, after making the rounds at various offices, is at Corps headquarters in Washington.

 

“They have up to 60 days to review it,” Cotter said. “We’re hoping to cut that down to two weeks if they’ll do it.”

No, let’s hope they decide to fix what they own with their money, not ours.

Untitled-1

So, are they going to dress up like Indians?

goodcausewv2 

As mentioned in an earlier post, there’s going to be a tax protest at Covell Lake where participants will reenact the Boston Tea Party. It’s being organized on facebook. I think a counter protest should dress as British redcoats and threaten to arrest the protestors for treason against the crown – not because they don’t have a right to protest taxes, but because it would be equally silly and pointless.

Funny how almost no one complained when the last administration outspent all the others combined.

PS: Everyone’s favorite back-cracker is organizing the event.

Here’s a buck, now can I have $1.53 in change?

I guess we are not doing too bad with our Federal Government exchange rate? Are we?

This of course is from 2005. I think it is because a lot of South Dakotans pay very little in Federal income taxes due to low wages and larger families.