Skip to main content

The Late Pennsylvania Budget



Pennsylvania has a new budget, and it’s only 101 days late! It’s the last state budget in the country to be completed! What a distinction.
The geniuses that represent us in Harrisburg knew a year ago that the budget was required by law to be complete by June 30; actually they know it’s due by that date every year. At the speed with which they operate, they should immediately start on the one that’s due June 30, 2010.
Twice during the deliberations they had an agreement between the factions, and both times the agreement was abrogated.
I understand that each representative needs to adhere to his principles – they are what got him elected. By  the same token, he needs to set some priorities. If people are hurting, do you bend your principles a bit? At what point does standing by your principles become stubborn and shortsighted? How do you reconcile principles with priorities?
The interesting thing is that Pennsylvania has the largest legislature of any state, but the deliberations are conducted by only a handful of the representatives. The rest sit in the capitol day after day in the event they need to cast a vote. Even though their presence is not needed, they also collect per diem for doing nothing.
I think these proceedings are a microcosm for the way our society is becoming. In times past reasonable men could sit down together and discuss their differences, but now it seems that people who disagree with one another are enemies. In Harrisburg representatives on both sides of the aisle just dug in their heels and refused to budge. It was as if the usual disagreement between helping people and cutting costs was stepped up a notch or two.
I can recall arguments between intelligent people who disagreed on a subject, and eventually they came to some sort of a compromise. It may not have been perfect for either side, but at least it was something that both sides could live with. But the shouting and name calling in today’s public meetings are another thing altogether – a graphic illustration of heat generation with no light whatsoever. They don’t even seem to hear each other.
         Surely the founding fathers did not mean for problems to be solved in this manner. We can do better. If we don’t, we may as well learn to speak Chinese.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

There Are Only Seven Jokes - Introduction

      The statement “There are only seven jokes – all the rest are variations,” has been around for a long time, but no one ever seems to know what the original seven are. I think I have found the solution to the mystery.       The answer is to be found in an article published in the New York Times on May 2, 1909. Entitled “New Jokes? There Are No New Jokes, There Is Only One Joke,” it goes on to say that all jokes are a distortion, and lists seven categories of distortion. Supposedly every joke will fit into one of the categories. I believe that repetition changed the seven categories into the seven jokes.       Each of my next seven blogs will be devoted to exploring one of the categories. In addition, I shall attempt to give an example or two of jokes which I think fit the category.       You must realize that this article appeared over one hundred years ago, so most of the jokes a...
The Future of Work This is for folks who don't mind stretching their imagination a bit. Let me review some of the things that are happening in today's world. A recent news article stated that in spite of the decreasing jobless rate, the number of retail jobs has been dropping rapidly. An article in Business Insider calls it a retail apocalypse. According to the article, in the retail industry, "Since October about 89,000 workers in general merchandise stores have lost their jobs, which is more than the number of people employed in the entire US coal industry." ( http://www.businessinsider.com/retail-job-losses-are-hurting-the-economy-2017-4 ). This loss is due to the rapid expansion of online merchandising. But this is only one example of the point I want to make. According to an article in Scientific American, two professors at Oxford University published a study estimating the probability that "702 occupations would soon be computerized out of exist...

It's Not Just Semantics

     It seems there are two competing definitons for the term “small business”; to no one's surprise the Democrats are using one and the Republicans are using the other. For the convenience of anyone who doesn't know which party he prefers, here are the definitions: 1.) A small business is a business which is not very large, e.g., a corner grocery, a machine shop with a couple of employees, a mom and pop enterprise, etc. Most Democrats use the term in this context. 2.) A small business is a business which operates as a pass-through tax entity, e.g., most of the businesses in def. 1.) plus most mega-farms, some manufacturing firms, and practically all high-tech and professional firms. These organizations use the individual proprietorship, partnership, S-corporation, limited-liability company (LLC), etc. tax reporting format. Under this definition the business could have anywhere from one to thousands of employees. For example, with over 163,000 employees worldwide, t...