Losing Millions, Bergen Considers Selling Its Nursing Home
Bergen could join list of NJ counties that have jettisoned costly nursing homes.
Facing a growing deficit at its health care center in Rockleigh, Bergen County is considering joining the growing list of New Jersey counties that have sold off their nursing homes.
The 110-bed nursing home cost about $13.5 million to operate in 2010 and brought in about $9.7 million in revenue, resulting in a $3.8 million deficit.
The numbers for 2011 aren't final yet, but preliminary indications are that the shortfall grew to $4.5 million, officials said. The gap could get even larger in 2012, especially after the state reduced Medicaid payments in October.
The New Jersey Association of Counties estimates that the Bergen County Health Care Center in Rockleigh will lose another $300,000 per year as a result of the recent Medicaid cuts.
“We’re looking into whether the county should be in the nursing home business,” said Jeanne Baratta, chief of staff for County Executive Kathleen Donovan. “We’re analyzing that right now. We don’t know what the answer is yet.’’
“Running a nursing home is an expensive endeavor,’’ said John Donnadio, NJAC’s executive director. “With the two-percent property tax cap and the cuts in Medicaid, the pool of money is starting to run dry.’’
Last year, Salem and Mercer counties sold their nursing homes and officials in Sussex and Cumberland counties are considering similar action, nursing home experts said.
“Mercer wasn’t the first county to do it and it won’t be the last,’’ said Paul Langevin, president of the Health Care Association of New Jersey, a group that represents private nursing homes in the state. “It’s a very difficult business right now.’’
“Most counties want to do the right thing and still have nursing homes,’’ said Michele Kent, a former state commissioner of human services and president of LeadingAge New Jersey, the trade group representing nonprofit nursing homes in the state.
Many of New Jersey’s counties began operating nursing homes in the middle of 1900s.
“They provided the safety net for the lowest income patients who couldn’t afford private nursing homes,’’ said Donnadio. Over the years, changes in federal and state laws required almost all nursing homes to set aside beds for people with little money, but county facilities still serve the highest percentage of them, industry experts said.
At Rockleigh, about 88 percent of the nursing home residents pay for their care with Medicaid, the federal insurance for people with low-incomes, according to a report by NJAC. In fact, the Bergen facility’s percentage of Medicaid clients is higher than that of about 75 percent of the county nursing homes in New Jersey, the study shows.
That’s bad news for taxpayers. As a general rule of thumb, the more residents who are on Medicaid at a nursing, the more money the facility loses, industry experts say. Recent studies show that Medicaid payments fall short of covering the actual cost of providing nursing home care in New Jersey by about $28 per person per day.
Baratta said Bergen County is very early in the process of examining the finances at the Rockleigh facility and she doesn’t expect any recommendation to be made soon. The issue has not come up for a discussion at any freeholder meetings yet, said the board’s spokesman, John Gill.
In her first year as county executive, Donovan produced a budget that contained a tiny decrease in the total tax levy, reversing the trend of previous years.
Baratta said the county is looking for whatever cost savings it can find in 2012.
A quick look at the county budget doesn’t reveal the nursing home’s deficit. In fact, the budget shows the facility pulls in slightly more money than it costs.
“You have to factor in the fringe benefits,’’ said Bergen County’s Chief Financial Officer Alfred Dispoto. “They’re running a deficit because of the fringe benefits.’’
The Care Center in Rockleigh is one of 31 nursing homes in Bergen County that provide about 4,000 beds for the elderly and people with various disabilities. All but a handful of those facilities are run by private, for-profit companies. But the states requires them to set aside at least 45 percent of their beds for people on Medicaid, nursing home officials said.
At the nursing homes sold by various counties in recent years, the same folks continue to live there after the change in ownership, according to experts. No one gets put out on the street.
But the shift to private ownership allows the new operators to make staffing changes without navigating the restrictions of civil service laws or old union contracts, experts say. Sometimes that produces efficiencies; sometimes that results in fewer staff members to care for residents, advocates said.
Over time, nursing homes run by for-profit companies will try to gradually reduce the percentage of Medicaid residents, experts said.
Statewide, counties provide about 4,000 nursing home beds and about 79 percent of them are occupied by people on Medicaid, Donnadio said.
That why the recent Medicaid cuts pose such a challenge for the industry. The reduced payments affected different nursing homes by different amounts. The average cut came out to be about 4.5 percent, officials said.
Some advocates say the timing of the cuts – just before the Baby Boom generation moves into the nursing home age range, is unfortunate.
“As a nation and a state, we are on the leading edge of a huge tsunami of senior residents,’’ Kent said. “The fastest growing cohort of our citizenry is the 100-plus population. We shall need a strong infrastructure of high quality facilities and programs available to care for this predictably massive influx of elderly. This is not the time to cut, and thereby undermine, any part of our increasingly important system of supports for this population.”
Hank
8:41 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Nursing homes like Van Dyk's, Care One, Christian in Wycoff, $350 to $400 per day out of pocket
They drug you and take your money.
Howard L. Pearl
8:49 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
The government has proved over and over again how inefficient they are at running businesses. Private corporations are better organized and more capable of running cost effective organizations.
B@B
10:20 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
You DO realize, I hope, that "cost-effective" in the case of health care as a for-profit business means giving as little care as possible for the highest cost, so as to generate the most profit? That being the case, why not just advocate lining up the elderly and shooting them? Or are the elderly necessary to line the pocket of giant corporatoins that run nursing homes. You know, soak them for everything they have and then let them die in their own urine. I'm appalled that either you haven't thought this through or are an advocate for this kind of heartlessness.
delgado
5:46 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Yes, lets turn it over to Enron, the private sector can do everything better.
T.Maher
6:41 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
or solyndra, or solazyme, or mf global
maureen
9:51 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
It's a shame that our culture does not protect its most vulnerable citizens, the elderly. It makes good business sense to run a for-profit endeavor but where does that leave the oldest citizens on fixed- incomes and no means of support ? It could be anyones' circumstance based on bad luck and poor health.
John Margroff
11:21 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Everyone seems to forget what happen to the aged prior to nursing homes and homes for the aged. The familes took care of the aged. Unfortunately familes have divorced themselves of taking care of their senior members so they could be more involved with living the good life.
Deleted because of harassment
6:32 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
Prior to the emergence of nursing homes in the 1930's, life expectency was much lower, and fewer people lived long enough to need nursing care. NOW there's a cost-saving proposal....die and decrease the surplus population. With our new longer lives, comes a variety of illnesses that did not emerge in the "good old days" because the number of people developing them was much smaller. It's not a matter of familes shirking their responsibility, but of people who are ill beyond the ability for familes to maintain them as they live into their eighties and beyond.
Roby Langert
10:14 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
We have all gotten so spoiled in this wonderful country. It is time to assume responsibility.
B@B
10:22 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
And just what do you mean by that? The responsibility to not get old? The responsibility to be born into a wealthy family? The responsibility to get paid enough to be able to afford to put away enough so you can afford to pay $75,000 - $100,000 for nursing home care? Because that's what it costs. You tell me: How does one raise a family, send kids to college, put enough away to live after the corporations kick you out for being too old, and then have an extra couple hundred thou to pay for nursing home care?
Ridgewood Mom
11:06 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
Yeah! Those geriatrics need to get out of their wheelchairs and pull themselves up by the bootstraps!
Get over the arthritis and dig your hands into an honest days work. Nobody should be allowed to coast along without working! I don't care if you have Alzheimer's. Quit drooling in front of the television, change your own #$%^&* diaper and accept some personal responsibility!
ROFL
Deleted because of harassment
6:33 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
Responsibility for what? Not dying fast enough? What a stupid comment.
BellairBerdan
10:15 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
How sad it is how some want to treat the old and poor. This is the direct result of starving our country of revenue by letting the rich pay the lowest they have in taxes in over 50 years. It has nothing to do with the benefits of workers, which by the way mean they wouldn't have to depend on facilities like this when they get old. The great Republican plan is to turn it into a for profit facility and insure a steady supply of future customers by denying employees the benefits that would keep them from needing these facilities. It's been documented that when prisons and colleges go for profit, the care and service goes down and the costs always goes up.
Deleted because of harassment
6:46 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
It's the elderly, the poor and the children that pay for all those tax cuts and loopholes. We are being coached into accepting the bowl of gruel while the wealthy dine well, and children are hungry and ignorant. And the elderly just better die because they are too old to work and are worthless as consumers. That's the attitude, anyway.
Howard L. Pearl
10:47 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
B@B: For 20 years, I was a nursing home administrator. Our facility took Medicare and Medicaid and provided quality care. I would venture to say that our facility provided a higher standard of care than "any government run facility". It is my belief that many facilities endeavor to provide a high quality of care, which is extremely difficult with the poor government reimbursements. Changing the management of a government facility to private management will not be denying care to needy individuals; it may actually provide a higher level of care with better fiscal management. The term "for-profit" is often slanted into meaning "uncaring"; that is not always the case.
BellairBerdan
12:14 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Howard the key point is that you took Medicare and Medicaid money. These for profit facilities don't like the government but they sure do love the government's money. That is how these for profit care and colleges do so well.
B@B
9:25 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
And will you take all-comers, or just those with the means to pay $75,000+ a year for care? What about those with too much to qualify for medicaid, but whose spouses will be left destitute by the expenses?
Bruce Knuckle
10:48 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Another example of the "greatest generation" destroying something. Greed and abuse of the system did this.
B@B
9:26 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
I'm a baby-boomer and I dislike scapegoating of the WWII generation as much as I dislike Gen-X scapegoating mine.
Deleted because of harassment
6:47 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
"Abuse of the system"? Yeah, all those greedy old folks insisting on medical care. The nerve of them, thinking that if they fought for this country in their youth, it would take care of them in their old age.
Dominick Nizza
11:20 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Is this hospital now taking the road that the NJ State Greystone facility had to take for improvement. County and NJ State must still appoint those to RUN these facilities. Not turn over 'profit making' administators.
Roby Langert
11:44 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Aside from politics. I took care of my aging parents. It was not easy. I did the best that I could. It was my honor. A lot of this generation just want the easy way.
John Margroff
11:58 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Very well said, Roby. It is very easy to our our government the over some of the burdens of life, so that everyone has to pay for them not just those who benefit and have the burden. I use to word burden as it has become a burden to many who have to take care of their parents as they froget that they were a burden, when their parents rasied them.
DMAB6395
2:48 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
I have my 75 year old father living with us-he is in the early stages of Dementia. He moved in with us because he wanted to & I am 1 of his daughters so why not but he knows when the Dementia gets too bad where I can no longer take care of him he will mostly likely go into a nursing facility. These places aren't all bad & I am not taking the easy way out either, if you don't know the person's circumstances etc then you should not judge anyone. Even if you do know there circumstances you don't have the right to sit home on your computer & tell people that they are taking the easy way out. You not only don't know my health situation, my husbands health situation, or my father's so you should think twice before you get on your computer & tell people that they are taking the easy way out-it is not EASY to take care of one's parents & it's also NOT THE EASY WAY OUT to put on of your parents home either
B@B
9:28 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
To John Margroff: The difference is that parents CHOOSE to have children. They CHOOSE to take on that burden of childrearing. Babies are not given contracts when they are born that in return for birth, they will take care of parents in their old age. They might not have the resources. They might be estranged. There ARE toxic parents, you know. And what about those without children? Are they supposed to just lay down and die in the street?
John Margroff
10:06 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
B@B, what you are desrcibing are basic economics and personal decisions, some are right, some are wrong. Should others have to pay for wrong decisions made. If people do not have children, they can probably can afford the care they need. If people have children, they should be able to expect rewards for the toil and labors it took to raise the child to adulthood. The costs to raise a child are a lot more than caring for a parent for a couple years. Of course many do not want to be bothered by their aged parents and place in a home away from their families. Who should be responsible for decisions made whether to have children or not. If people do not have children to care for them, let's penalyze everyone else.
B@B
11:41 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
John Margroff: I'm glad I'm not your child. It isn't as if the child has the option of accepting or not accepting that "contract" you insist they live by. This idea that you "owe" your parents something because they CHOSE to have you means you have to live up to a contract that you never had the chance to turn down. In an ideal world, children would WANT to repay their parents' sacrifices, but as we all know, sometimes children require years of therapy to recover from having grown up in abusive (emotionally or physically) homes. To put that kind of a DEMAND on children is preposterous.
Deleted because of harassment
6:42 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
It's fortunate you could. i tried to do it for ten years, and eventually, caring for an elderly parent with a host of medical problems and dementia meant they were no longer safe or well managed in anyone's home anymore. That does not mean I took the easy way out and just stuck them in a home - it was not easier, and seeing someone deteriorate to the point that they needed care 24/7 meant I spent hours at their side or visiting them, supervising the state of care they received, making sure they were safe and cared for. For people with dementia, no private home is a safe place - they wander, they have moments of clarity where they take cars or try to do things they are not safe doing. They can become abusive and violent and unreasonable, and sometimes will only tolerate a stranger's commands to stay in bed or not try to walk to the place they worked forty years ago.
Barry Black
11:52 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Modern medicine and advanced medical technology have allowed people to live well beyond their actuarial life span, but not live well. The current and future problems and cost are a prime example of the law of unintended consequences. If you live to be a super senior, then you only have two choices; either to be wealthy enough to afford the care or poor enough to receive full medicaid or medicare. If you're in the middle and live long enough, then you will join the ranks of being poor enough.
John Margroff
12:15 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Unfortunately some play the system and when theyt get older, a couple years prior, to applying, to enter a government facilty, they turn over their earthly wealth to their heirs, so that they qualify, to be poor enough, to enter a government facility for the aged.
Hank
2:00 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
And 3, spend your life savings,your home equity, every hard earned dollar you thought your grandkids might share in, so that some nurses aid can let you stew in a wet diaper while she sleeps in the dining room.
Hank
2:04 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
john very hard to dump your money and assets...there is a five year lookback and they check every single transaction you made for the last 5 years.
John Margroff
5:04 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Hank, I have seen a home that is run by a fraternal organization and those who were indigent got free care. Unfortunately applicants had unload assets a couple years before applying. It is not as hard as you think.
*
11:54 am on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Another endorsement for good ole Doc Kevorkian
BellairBerdan
12:08 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
There are also the people of lower means whose children served our country with the hope they could then go on to university. Some of those children gave their lives for our country now their parents have no one to care for them as they get old
Roby Langert
12:25 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
When my wife says take responsibility, we took in her parents when they needed help
. It was not easy but we prevailed. Everybodyshould look within themselves. ... Toby's husband
John Margroff
12:52 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
A few years back, prior to the political change in Bergen County, the oldest physically able son was reponsible for his parents care and upkeep. We need to go back to that system.
Ridgewood Mom
11:52 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
Before my father died, my husband and I worked hard to take care of him. It wasn't always easy, but we loved him so we did what we could. I agree with you that, for people like us, helping to take care of our parents as they age is the morally responsible thing to do.
But it doesn't always work that way for everyone.
Speaking for myself, I have been very lucky. My husband and I had no problem managing financially while taking care of my father in his later years or, really, in dealing with having him in our house. For many other people, money and time are a big issue. For others, there are legitimate personal issues that make the situation a very bad one to no fault of the children.
I can only hope that my kids will, one day, take care of me when I'm old. I have no way of knowing where they will be in their lives when such a time may come. I don't even know if I'll live long enough, or they will live long enough (heaven forbid), for that to be an issue. I would like to think that I have planned ahead enough to be prepared, but I can't honestly say that I know now for sure.
Some people don't have kids. Some people's kids die younger than they do. Some people's kids are creeps. Some people's kids care but genuinely can't help.
I think that most people would rather be taken care of by someone close to them in their later years. But where that need can't be and isn't met, society also has a shared moral responsibility.
Roby Langert
12:27 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
That was Roby's husband
John Q.
12:28 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Lets see a list of what political cronies work at Rockleigh. That would be interesting.
Howard L. Pearl
1:39 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
The discussion has strayed from th e original topic, but has delved into some very important areas. Barry Black is right on target. When life expectancies are extended, there are consequences. One of those consequences is the immense cost of caring for these individuals in nursing homes.
Adolpho Mostaccioli says what many people think, i.e. that if the quality of life is not extended with the quantity, it may not be so wonderful. The assisted suicide laws in Oregon have never been abused and may very well be the correct approach, even if that does not sit well with certain religious beliefs.
Roby Lambert is right and wrong. Many people do shirk their responsibilities and fail to care for their elderly parents. But there are many people who are incapable of doing so, financially and personally. In the Sandwich Generation era, people get caught between responsibility to their children and to their aging, invalid parents. It is very common to have two working adults in a family who do not have the resources to pay for home care while they are at work. These individuals are relegated to the tough choice of having to place their parents in a skilled nursing facility under Medicaid.
William Mays
1:41 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Its pretty stupid to have government run nursing homes. Nursing homes should be private.
Jack B Goode
4:35 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
I agree with BM . and that goes for a lot of other government run programs. If the government built a clock, it would take 6 years, cost 4 million dollars and run backwards. Then we would have to have a bailout package to fix it..
carol simon
4:52 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
Sad that care for the elderly is second to the style and cost paid for prisoners.
delgado
5:48 pm on Sunday, January 8, 2012
double dipper Donovan failing to keep her promise. Selling off assets is a one-time gimmick that hurts EVERY BERGEN TAXPAYER in the long run.. SHE PROMSIED NO GIMMICKS.. less asset, smaller balance sheet, but what do double dipper donovan, double dipper Trewinski and double dipper Mayor Barrata care, as long as they make there $150,000 per year! (Trewinski at $193,000)
John Margroff
9:35 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
It is the government job to legislate laws and defend us. Unfortunately government takes responisibility away from people creating a society of takers, no givers. The people should own assets on an individual basis. Familes should take care of their own and not rely on government to render care and upkeep through others tax money. Any type of Ponzi schemes do not work (our government is helping prove that) and we have enough of them already in place in our government.
Ridgewood Mom
12:20 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
Take care of their own? What of orphans and widows and those who are unable to have children? What of those who have lost their children defending your country in war? Are other Americans really not your "own?" How unpatriotic.
Have laissez-faire economic practices really bred into our culture such a pronounced culture of sociopaths?
MARIO SICARI
10:25 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
Unfortunately we are not dealing with the problem...we are venting with the outcomes of the problem. The bottom line, it has become too expensive to operate the government and they ( the politicians) know it, but they dont care, they just keep taxing us because we cant do anything except to keep paying and complain about it. If you think how much government has grown over the years, between, salaries, employee benefits and pensions, how can we possibly afford to take care of our elderly. When politicians who claim they are there to fix the problem are the 1st ones who benefit from it. We have life long politicians, who have made a career of serving in office and as long as a certain party achieves power they control the game, and the game is all about money. Now instead of complaining about the outcomes, we need to do something about it. In as much as the movement OWS was well intended it was targeted at the private corporations, and the politicians stood by idled because it removed the focus off of them. If Bergen County is selling its facility it is a result of bad fiscal policies and what serves the people of the community with the least amount of resistance will go 1st, not their salaries, benefits or pensions.
John Margroff
11:02 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
Mario, Very well said, but when you accept the government managing something the salaries, benefits, and pensions go with it.
Ridgewood Mom
11:17 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
The US had no problem funding such basic and essential infrastructure before deregulation, tax cuts for the very wealthy and corporate outsourcing came along. It seems it has become too expensive NOT to properly operate the government.
B@B
11:43 am on Monday, January 9, 2012
Ridgewood Mom: Don't forget TWO wars that were not paid for.
Ridgewood Mom
12:02 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
Yes, and spending for those two wars alone have cost almost as much as the total amount of all medicare/medicaid spending in the US combined.
Without any one of these expenses, paying for nursing homes (current levels of pork spending included) would be an utter non-issue to the state of the budget.
resident
2:51 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
JUST CAUGHT THIS ARTICLE. JACK I LOVE YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE CLOCK..
Bruce Knuckle
5:19 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
B@B....Sorry B@B , just calling it like it is. That generation didn't leave future generations much. Unless of course, contaminated soil, poisoned water and a government falling apart is considered an accomplishment. They are all about getting the freebie and it has created this problem. And don't forget, its that generation that inflated the health care costs so high that it is unaffordable. YOUR generation, just happen to take it to the next step.
MARIO SICARI
6:35 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom...can you have a conversation without having a meltdown? I was highly critical of GW and the war in IRAQ, Secondly, yea we have two unfunded wars, so what do we do??? borrow more money? Can you name me one, just one government agency or program that operates efficiently, just one? It seems you try to defend the government when it suits you but when it doesnt you criticize it...both parties are responsible for this mess we are in, if you think fiscal policy prior this administration was the reason we have a 15 trillion dollars deficit, you are mistaken...if you believe the housing crisis and financial meltdown was caused solely by corporate greed and Wall st, you are mistaken...what is happening in Paramus, Ridgewood, Trenton and Washington is a direct result of bad fiscal and monetary policy and it is not solely President Obama's fault it is the entire system, both republicans and democrats dating back decades and before you are willing to accept this fact, you are errationally having an emotionally charged conversation looking to blame rather than finding solutions. Solutions are we spent money foolishly for years we are borrowing 30 times GDP, at that rate we will have continued unemployment and if government doesnt stop or reduce its spending we will eventually wind up like GREECE regardless who you tax, I am for raising the tax rates prior Bush, it is Obama who extended the tax cuts, so before you loose it try to understand I am for solutions. not arguing
Ridgewood Mom
6:36 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
You are certainly not one to preach on here about the overuse of hyperbole. A rational approach would require one to be both critical of and supportive of government, and private enterprise, at varying times when warranted. Unless, of course, one only cares about rooting for teams.
As I have stated elsewhere on patch, there are countless examples of relatively well run government. Click on my name and search my posts.
More to the point of this thread, (1) the deficit is a cash flow problem and not a problem of assets. Pay the whole thing off at once and it will come right back. Fix the relationship of cash in vs cash out and the sum total is irrelevant. As current, we are losing somewhere over $3 trillion a year. (2) Fixing unemployment (and ending unnecessary military adventures and repealing tax cuts for the very wealthy) is the surest way of fixing the deficit because doing so will both decrease spending and increase tax revenue. (3) Austerity is the worst way of addressing unemployment. It will make matters worse.
I support cutting government services where they are unhelpful, pork spending or otherwise irrelevant. I oppose handouts. I support collective societal enterprise via government and the government investing in its people. No contradiction there. I support transparency (for government AND corporate and banking practice).
Along with that transparency you should expect critical dialogue that may disagree with you.
Ridgewood Mom
10:26 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
You'll have to excuse me for getting testy, Mario. Most of us ladies don't like being told that we are having a meltdown. :)
MARIO SICARI
6:46 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
We Spend more money on foreign aid than we do to care for our homeless, sick and elderly...We send our 5th fleet to the Middle East to assure the flow of oil continues to countries in the Pacific Rim, rathen than adopt a domestic energy policy, We allow the Federal Reserve to manipulate our currency 1st by raising rates than by lowering rates to the point that we no longer can afford to purchase food, energy, healthcare and education, due to inflation in the mean while all the politicians in Washington and Trenton continue to have lucrative benefits, salaries and lobbyist contact who assure them the money neccessary to win elections and control power. power to manipulate the system...and we actual have people in the middle class who defend them, that is sad, our liberties are being taking away and we dont even realize it
Ridgewood Mom
6:38 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
No we don't spend more on foreign aid than we do to care for our homeless, sick and elderly. Not even close.
Ken F.
7:42 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Mario wrote, "our liberties are being taking away and we dont even realize it". I've been telling people this for years but few seem to see it the same way as we do.
Ridgewood Mom
8:01 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2012USbt_13bs1n_30#usgs302
Click on "Defense." Scroll down to find spending for "foreign military aid" and for "foreign economic aid." Together they comprise about a half of a percent of the "defense" budget. Of the total budget, that is not even a tenth of a percent. You won't even find them on the pie chart.
MARIO SICARI
8:10 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom, where do you get you information from, a cash flow problem not an asset problem??? losing 3 trillion a year??? fix unemployment??? This Administration has been trying to fix unemployment for the last 3 years, no criticism here though because they cant fix unemployment, tax cuts or tax increases have no relevent effect short term or long term on creating jobs GDP does, housing comprises 30% of GDP, when the economy contracted in 2008 is was due to the housing market collapse, this number has not returned and will not return for years...housing was a primary driver of consumer spending for the last decade, via credit...Middle class America is suffering because the credit which was once available is no longer available, My field is in economics, accounting and budgeting, not politics, I hold people accountable who have created a new form of economics and accounting...as i asked, can you name one, just one efficient government program or agency? Federal, State or Local? not good or admirable ones, they are all good, EFFICIENT...it doesnt exist? and that is your problem..Getting back to the reason of this thread the Nursing Home closed because the cost assocaited with it as compared to the private sector can not be sustainable, the reason, salaries, benefits and pensions...Government inefficiencies
MARIO SICARI
8:21 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom, we actually do spend more on foreign aid, in the form of troop deployment, it is foreign aid, it just falls under military, BTW I am all for cutting the military budget, here is the problem unemployment will move higher by cutting the military budget, the military budget is 20% Federal Spending, much of the militray budget is the cost of deployment which is foreign aid
MARIO SICARI
8:30 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
@Ridegwood Mom, your not understanding my point...I dont care what it says on some web site they camoflauge the budget by listing it in another category...deployment of troops, military equipment, the price of having a base in another country falls under the military budget but it is actually a form of froeign aid...I served on a public board, they always do gimmicks to move money to PAD the budget, this is the problem with transparency, you cant believe anything you read
Ridgewood Mom
10:22 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
It seems a bit creative to me to think of US military spending as being foreign "aid." I wonder how many "foreign" people would see it that way. Nonetheless, it is fine if you mean to include defense spending in making your point. In that case, we are in agreement. Our military budget, alone, is almost as high as our budget for all medicare/medicaid spending.
We are also in agreement about repealing the Bush tax cuts for corporations and the very rich, which Obama has not managed to fix. I'm not sure whether he would like to do that and our congress has prevented him from doing so, or whether he really hasn't wanted to and has just made false promises.
We are also in agreement about the need for increased government regulation of private big business, right? Most people don't know that the government has spent $9 trillion in bailouts. That's nearly triple the deficit spending issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html
So we are in agreement about almost all of it, right? And in that case, what is the worry regarding the deficit? With a fix to those three areas there will not only be a balanced budget but a surplus that will quickly pay off America's debt. No need to tinker with nursing homes.
A reduction in unemployment, again, will also pretty much single handedly fix things. The challenge is in how to go about achieving that.
B@B
11:10 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Ken F....please enumerate what "liberties" are being taken away from you. No Fox News talking points please, just what liberties that affect your own life are being taken from you. Thanks.
John Margroff
1:28 am on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
The way this country is going, we will be asking other countries for foreign aid. Why did we export our indusrries. Is it because they can produce so much more for less, because they don't have sweetheart union contracts and no-show jobs to drive up manufacturing costs. Do we need the government to do everything for us. Take a look at some of the VA hospitals that I see frequently and you will see how the government have let people down. The governement health care is a travisty. Some of the medical people could not make it in private practice and yet we want the government to take over a nursing home. The first thing they would is hire freinds for high pay jobs.
Ridgewood Mom
10:47 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
The way this country is going...
We should be looking to those nations that offer a great deal more in terms of social services then the United States does, whilst maintaining better balanced budgets, for answers regarding what constitutes fiscal responsibility.
T.Maher
6:47 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
fact is , the scumbags in washington, and in your local , county and state governments, have robbed us all blind, stolen the $$$, wasted it, threw it away on their own pet projects or wasted it on programs designed to keep them in office- 2.7 trillion in federal income taxes collected per year- can't even count the local, county,state, sin and consumption taxes- and those scum can't come up with a lousy few billion here or there to take care of the ones who need it most- our elderly- they should all hang their heads in shame, or maybe, just hang themselves
Jack B Goode
7:08 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
The solution as I see it is to vote all Incumbents out who have been in office for more than 2 terms. The problem is that there are too many partisan voters that believe in the donkey or the elephant,
T.Maher
9:47 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
as my friends and I have been saying in reference to elections, "if they're in, they're out"- the people have the power to set term limits- if they're in, vote'em out- since the leeches must serve 5 years to be eligible for a pension, voting out the congressmen leeches after 1 or 2 terms saves the taxpayer the legacy costs of the leech's retirement. unfortunately, senatorial leeches serve one 6 year term and are locked in to a pension we are forced to pay . since the criminal scum corzine served 5 of his 6 years, yes, that POS gets a pension on our dime
MARIO SICARI
7:48 pm on Monday, January 9, 2012
APOLOGIES, I did some research...the current deficit stands at 15 trillion dollars, we are at 103% GDP...that means our governments total debt is equal to our total economy...and people are worried about closures of Nursing Homes...we have serious problems in this nation...serious problems
MARIO SICARI
12:05 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
@ B&B Can I take a shot at what liberties have been taken away from us...the creation of Homeland Security...Requiring me to be fully body scanned everytime I walk on an airline, to have a member of the TSA pat me down...the expansion of the executive branch allowing the President of the US to name CZARs as to the implementation of his policies without passing through the proper Senate Hearing process...the fact that all Politicians in both the house and the senate are exempt from laws they pass. Under the claok of National Security Americans are vulnerable to govt surveliience..."the Patriot Act" At the School level forcing my children to be taught sex education without providing me the parent the right to know if my child is being administered contraceptives through the school.USing tax payer funds to bail out corporations, using tax payer funds to fund voter registration through groups such as ACORN Using tax payer funds to fund organizations which have policy infleunce through lobbyist..I can continue but it is happening and it has nothing to do with 9/11, 9/11 was the excuse to implement it
B@B
10:24 am on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
OK, Mario....I agree with you on ALL of these (except ACORN, the impact of which was inflated by Fox News and Republican politicians as code for people whose pigmentation they regard as unseemly...remember, Westwood's own sniveling little rat-faced git James O'Keefe was shown to have doctored the videos he presented as evidence). But here's what I'd like to know. Were you as outraged when the Homeland Security department, and the airport security, etc., etc., were implemented by the Bush Administration? Or did your outrage only come into play when a Democrat came into the White House?
MARIO SICARI
12:13 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom, Apologies on the meltdown crack...I know you are very well informed and research most of what you post, my only criticism is I try to remain politically un biased, I am not a republican or a democrat, although I do tend to lean democratic, with a fiscally conservative nature, I believe I am more Libertarian, but I am no Ron Paul supporter...with that said, we do agree with many of our views I just take a less political stand, I am more on the economics of the dynamics of our economy, not the politics and many of my criticism stem toward the political motivation of our elected leaders and the damages we now face due to political corruption.
L Schalk
7:45 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
So back to the topic of to sell the nursing home to a "for profit" or not. The line in this article that says private homes are required to take in 45% medicaid residents is simply not true. They may take in 10% or 20% at most. Try finding a medicaid bed for your family member in this county. I think the richest county in NJ can find the $$$ elsewhere. Maybe less upkeep on the golf courses!
USR mom
7:56 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
How can anyone compare the fringe benefits the employees of BCHCC are given as employees of Bergen County, taking care of residents of Bergen County, to any other entity in Bergen County? Show me any other agency that actually creates enough revenue for the county to cover the cost of the facility. I don't know how many people are employed there, but I am sure the nurses, attendants, dietary aides and housekeepers are your neighbors, friends, brothers and sisters. They pay taxes and support their families. They work holidays, they work in snowstorms and power failures. Bergen County employs so many people that receive benefits....but just as happened in 1998 to Bergen Pines, the first thing the county does is try to privatize or sell one of the only revenue producing departments in the county. I believe that proved to be a huge mistake. Rampant rumors of abuse, short staffing and shortages of clean linen and supplies are the norn. But of course, Solomon, the management company that Bergen County gave the Pines to puts profit above care and they are making hundreds of millions of dollars every year while Bergen County foots the bill for the maintainence of the grounds and facility. Kathleen Donovan, wake up, learn from your predecessors mistakes. The health care center is an easy target, but I'm sure there are many other places in the county where some of the pork in the county budget could be cut without a direct attack on the vulnerable elderly the nursing home serves.
MARIO SICARI
8:25 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
USR Mom...yea there is...why dont we stop paying benefits and pensions for our elected officials? why dont we stop paying benefits for lobbyist in the state? Why dont we consolidate the overlapping of services in the county by consolidating municpalities...That would be a start
Gerry Drummond
10:38 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
"Over time, nursing homes run by for-profit companies will try to gradually reduce the percentage of Medicaid residents, experts said," in your article above.
What "soilent green" world are your experts creating for us? Baby boomers are increasing the numbers of elderly and there will be more need for nursing homes while medicare and medicaid face fiscal problems. But you have for-profit homes reducing medicaid residents, which, in effect, means sacrificing the poor on the altar of their profit god.
"Am I my brother's (and sister's) keeper? " Cain said after killing his brother Abel.
So far, The County of Bergen thinks we are our brothers and sisters' keeper and this is why they run a nursing home in Rockleigh. But your experts are sons of Cain and think otherwise.
Capitalism can have a conscience. But these experts who try to make money off the backs of workers and the poor do not.
And, PS, Doesn't County Treasurer Al Dispoto share the same "$3.8-million" in fringe benefits with the workers in Rockleigh? Has Mr. Dispoto included his own fringe as "running a deficit" for the county taxpayer?
Also, what county division brings in the most revenues?
Answer: the Bergen County Health Care Center. So why pick on them?
Gerry Drummond
MARIO SICARI
11:43 am on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
@B&B As fas as Acorn, I am not criticizing the means by which Acorn registers voters, the same as I will never criticize Planned Parenthood right to provide Womens Healthcare, My criticism is aimed at the lobbyist paid by these organization to have tax funds poured into their models. It would be the same criticism aimed at Corporate lobbyist that own republican candidates...Acorm has every right to operate and they have every right to raise funds, they dont have a right to tax payer funding for their non for pofit actions. GW Bush deserves to be in jail, along with Chenney and Rumsfeld, the most honest person in that Administration was Colin Powell...as far as your question I am so highly critical of the wrath that Bush brought on this country, he successfully distabalized the middle east...Yet President Obama also needs to be criticized for out sourcing his military opps...earlier Ridgewood Mom belived the military budget had nothing to do with foreign aid...the largest % of the military budget is all foreign aid, with it is drones, apparatus, boots or PRIVATE CONTRACTORS (mercinaries) The military budget should be cut in half, we are accomplishing nothing but making America more hated and less safer
B@B
11:53 am on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Fair enough, Mario. We are on the same page then. :-)
John Margroff
10:01 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
When the town, county or nation own something, it costs those who pay taxes more. In recently governement releases, it was disclosed that the top 1% of the population pay 70% of the nations taxes and the lower 47% of the population pay no taxes, so you can guess who is going to pay for a county run nursing home.
Ridgewood Mom
10:35 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
It would be absurd to interpret this data as suggesting that the top 1% give more (or less) to society then anyone else. That top 1% pays those taxes with income and assets acquired via collective endeavors with others who make much less then them, and thus pay less taxes on their lesser earnings.
How much each individual gives in proportion to how much they take leaves much room for debate.
Regardless, it is obvious that the top 1% should pay more. Simply by being the top 1%, by definition, they remain with more then 99% of everyone else. Not so bad for them either way.
Deleted because of harassment
11:29 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
You have a source for that random "government releases"? Because it's completely incorrect. Per the IRS 2009 Individual returns information located on this page: http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=96981,00.html:
Less than 1.8% have no adjusted income and pay no taxes. The top 3.1% of all adjusted gross income pay 6.2 percent of all individual income taxes. The median income tax paid in 2009 was slightly over 3,300 dollars - meaning exactly 50% paid more and 50% paid less.
So you either don't have a clue, or you watch too much TV and don't think anyone is going to call you out on the lies.
T.Maher
12:04 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
from the irs: take from it what you will---
Here's a look at individual tax rates and shares by income in 2007, the most recent data available from the Internal Revenue Service:
The top 1 percent: Americans who earned an adjusted gross income of $410,096 or more accounted for 22.8 percent of all wages. But they paid 40.4 percent of total reported income taxes, an increase from 39.9 percent in 2006, according to the IRS.
The top 5 percent: Americans who earned $160,041 or more accounted for 37.4 percent of all wages in 2007. But they paid 60.6 percent of the country's total reported income taxes, up from 60.1 percent a year earlier.
The top 10 percent: Americans who earned at least $113,018 paid 71.2 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 70.8 percent a year earlier.
The top 25 percent: Americans who earned at least $66,532 paid 86.6 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 86.3 percent a year earlier.
The top 50 percent: Americans who earned at least $32,879 paid 97.1 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 97 percent a year earlier.
The bottom 50 percent: Americans who earned less than $32,879 paid 2.9 percent of the nation's income taxes, down from 3 percent a year earlier.
Ridgewood Mom
12:09 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
Not really meaningful either way.
Paying more income taxes is self defining as being the result of having more income. Its a bit like saying black cats are black.
http://static8.businessinsider.com/image/4e94607369bedd5941000027-590/as-the-nations-richest-people-often-point-out-they-do-pay-the-lions-share-of-taxes-in-the-country-the-richest-20-pay-64-of-the-total-taxes-lower-bar-of-course-thats-because-they-also-make-most-of-the-money-top-bar.jpg
MARIO SICARI
10:43 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
@ John, It has to do with more than just paying taxes, it not just about taxes...it is about power and control, our system over the years has changed, union representation has moved from the private sector which has forced corporation to move- to the public sector, these unions through massive amounts of membership contributions control hospital contracts, school contracts and public employee contracts,lobbyist for unions control our elected officials, so without any type of accountability union contracts are awarded, benefits are lucrative and the system is being sold to us as "working American people", the cost is unsustainable .It is a fact private sector middle income earners pay scales have remained stagnant for years, good paying jobs are deminishing, and the middle class is dividing itself as we know(public vs private)...Public sector emplyees are good hard working folks, but the unions which control them and the lobbyist (lawyers) who work to structure legislature to the benefit the few is destroying our system and creating a new form of class warfare, as we divide as nation we will fall. I dont believe it can be fixed. The recent financial tsunami is now causing the destruction of our currency, the cost of food, energy, healthcare and education, is crippling middle income America, the credit which was once the driver of prosperity for middle income earners is now gone and most middle income earners do not have the resources to continue to survive. It is scarey
Ridgewood Mom
10:49 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
"the middle class is dividing itself as we know(public vs private)"
Yes. Its about dividing and conquering.
T.Maher
11:01 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Hostess- bankrupt, again- and here's why-
The company has been struggling under the weight of an $860 million debt load and soaring expenses tied to its labor force. Hostess has up to 100,000 creditors, chief among them labor unions and pension funds that represent the company’s employees, according to the Chapter 11 petition filed in United States Bankruptcy Court in New York.
Deleted because of harassment
11:38 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Blame the unions. It's all there fault. The veture capitalists that bought Hostess and traded it like a game of Monopoly had nothing to do with that, of course: they are forcing the bakery to repay loans they made in 2004 that financed acquisations made by the former company to expand and purchase several smaller, regional bakeries. The net result of this will be they will not lose a penny, but thousands of workers will lose jobs despite concessions made afterwards to consolidate the workforce and attempt to keep the company solvent under the crushing debt created by the vultures. The debt owed to the unions is based upon deferrals made in contracts and concessions made by the workforce. But, of course, it's all the union's fault.
T.Maher
10:55 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
we should be learning from the guys that founded our great nation:
Benjamin Franklin:
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.
seems they know what they are talking about!
Karin Kiesow-Irvine
10:55 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
T.Maher, could not agree more with you. This country is turning into a welfare/nanny state.
John Margroff
11:05 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
T. Maher, your statement is very true. People use many reason's not to adhere to your words, some of which are religious, but they forget the famous words "give a hungary man a fish, he eats for one meal, teach him how to fish and he will eat many meals".
T.Maher
11:21 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
the problem today is the people have fallen for the diversionary tacticts that are being used by the government to cement their hold on power, and increase their totalitarian control over all of us- look throughout history and you can see it has happened many times- if they can keep us busy arguing with each other- they are free to do what they want- if they can take my money and give it to their pets- it means i must work longer and harder to provide for my family, and therefore are to busy to watch or stop what the gov't is doing, or, if i am on the rcvg. end of gov't.largess, i will always vote for the guy throwing me other people's money. the gov't. is all about control,gaining total control- and they are out of control right now
MARIO SICARI
11:29 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
"ART OF WAR"...when my sons graduated college I gave them the paperback addition and asked the to read it, My son is a police officer and understands the context of the book...@ Ridgewood MOM..."DIviding and conquering"...you are proud of this? You want a civil war in America amoung its own people? You want us to become like Greece...Keep in mind in Greece it wasnt the Corporation who destroyed the country it was the politicians, the same for the Soviet Union, the same for the ROMAN Empire and every empire will fall
Ridgewood Mom
2:23 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
@Mario--->"DIviding and conquering"...you are proud of this? You want a civil war in America amoung its own people?<---
No Mario. I want the assault from above to stop peaceably.
I want the private sector of the middle class, who is obviously suffering, to stop this self defeating practice of blaming its suffering on the poor and the public sector of the middle class. I want to stop looking at the Patch and seeing constant verbal assaults, in the comments section, between what amount to brothers and sisters. I have been watching this for a couple of years now, without making a single comment, and I am fed up with it.
I want people to start pointing their finger in the right direction.
Yes, the government is to blame for much. But it is banking, finance and big corporations that are to blame for ruining the government. I want regulation and reform in those areas.
T.Maher
11:41 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
and speaking of the soviets-
“We will take America without firing a shot. We will BURY YOU!
“We can’t expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism. We do not have to invade the United States, we will destroy you from within”-- Nikita Khrushchev
and boy, how our "elected leaders" have helped this prophecy come to fruition! that little quote explains quite a lot of what is happening, and has been happening, to bring us down the path to where we are now
Deleted because of harassment
11:41 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
This country is turning into a predator/prey state, where the workforce is intentionally being driven to despiration by 1% of the population, where 441 individuals control 99% of all the wealth, and 146 corporations hold 97% of all the assets in the form of financial capital. But, blame it all on the middle class. Yeah, it's all their fault....
MARIO SICARI
12:04 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
@ deleted...Currently the premium on public sector wage vs private sector is 34% not including benefits...your arguement is that becaue the 1% who control the nations wealth should allow the disparity which exist between public and private worker MIDDLE INCOME EARNER...Is it fair in the Private sector an employee in management accumulates yearly sick days and if he or she does not use them... looses them, while in the public sector it was just reported W Paterson owes 7 retiring police officer 1.3 million in un used sick pay? It is not the 1% who will pay this tax burden, last I noticed W Paterson is a middle income neighborhood where the medium home pays $9000 a year in property taxes. You spoke of hegde fund managers and wall st tycoons...I agree they should pay more, why dont we attack hollywood stars and starlets who are worth millions if not billions in wealth??? Your arguement for a tax repeal of the bush tax cuts is noted, but it is Obama who didnt fight for it.it was his policy who continue sto extend tax cuts and compromise social security further by extending a much needed payroll tax..It is Obama who has taken the Bush doctrine and has compounded the spending in military over seas after his campaign promise was to end the conflict in IRAQ after the 2nd year of his 1st term..that is unnecssary spending, spending which could be used here to help our poor and elderly
Ridgewood Mom
2:24 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Mario,
Are you talking about Barack Bush or George W. Obama?
:)
MARIO SICARI
2:42 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
@Ridgewood Mom, your claims of increasing taxes on the wealthest 1% will solve the disproportinate salary levels of public emplyees versus private will never accomplish your goal of financial security for all...see my previous thread...
I dont blame the officers who recieved the benefits, I blame the numskull politicians from years ago who are no longer in office for negotiating such a ridiculous benefit, but the reason they did was because they wanted votes and through the system which exist of lobbyist...politicans serve the money train, not the contituents they serve...It was not corporate America who negotiated a 4% raise every year to public workers and benefits with no contributions...the disconnect is that public salaries are funded through property taxes and property taxes in NJ are funding salaries and benefits, it is unsustainable...OWS is not due to corporate greed, it is due to a failure in the publc education system, system with no accountability for poor teacher performance...I served 7 years on the Paramus BOE, the system has declined and continues to decline, the OWS are college graduates who have mounted thousands of dollars in student loans, who were led to beleive in an American Dream which has turn into a nightmare because of poor fiscal and monetary policy...although corp greed has its negative impact on the ills of society, taxing the 1% is not going to solve our problems to believe that is ludicrious
Ridgewood Mom
6:09 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
I know that we worked this out together before. A repeal of tax cuts to pre-Bush levels and the ending of the current US military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan would do plenty to balance the budget. A meaningful reduction in unemployment would also do it. Multiple ingredients would make plenty of surplus, without the slightest dent to infrastructure.
A 4% annual raise is only a keeping of pace with the annual increase in cost of living. The lower echelons of the private sector deserve as much, too. But the fact that the private sector is so inequitable is no reason to go destroying things elsewhere.
Cutting the public sector where it counts not only increases unemployment, but decreases surplus spending by a significant chunk of this population. This further depresses the intake for the private sector.
I've not said that someone is the problem simply because they are a banker, or working in finance or for a corporation. How many people are joint investors for simply having a 401K? (For the record, I do finance related work from home.) But it is from these sectors that the greatest corruption to our economy, and government, have occurred.
Look closely at the relationships between the highest ups in government and big money. Government has become corrupted by banks and financial institutions and corporations. It is not the other way around.
This has a great deal to do with a worship of the profit motive and the idea that liberty is license.
Ridgewood Mom
6:17 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
I challenge you and anyone else reading this to name for me even a single billionaire who has become so via income directly obtained from government or the public sector.
I will be happy to furnish for you the names of hundreds of individuals who have become billionaires directly through banking, finance and corporate money.
T.Maher
2:57 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
you got one thing right- can't tell one from the other- and that is the point- it is that fact alone- that proves it is in fact the gov't. that is the problem- they are the ones mounting an assault on all of us- they are the ones who have sold us out- they are supposed to represent the people- gov't of the people, by the people, FOR the people- all of the people. instead we have a gov't for themselves- and as such must be taken out- charged with treason, hung- if not for their fiscal incompetence , selling out for personal gain, and headlong charge towards socialism, totalitarian rule rule over us, and one world government. we would have no problem in this country taking care of those Americans who have contributed to the society and then found themselvesTRULY in need ( not 4th, 5th, 6th generation leeches) or squatters, here because they snuck in , and are a drain on the system. I feel no guilt saying I want to keep all that I work for for my family- and I feel no need to want what others have- no matter how much that might be- it is theirs.
John Margroff
5:35 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Unfortunately anytime a government program is voted in, it becomes another unionized situation, where every benefit is a blanket benefit instead of a proficiency benefit, thereby having costs increases each year that costs the taxpayers.
Going away from socialize would be simple, but would never happen because politians get votes from those who want a certain program, Possibly those who want a program should be taxed for its cost and tose who don't want it wouldn't be taxed. We would have a lot less programs.
B@B
12:45 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
T. Maher: Do you use roads? Then you use something that others helped pay for. Do you like having a police department? Fire department? Public schools so that all children, not just those of the wealthy, can get an education? Those are things that are paid for collectively. Do you like using the internet? The US government paid through that through the DARPA initiative of the Department of Defense. Who funds the DoD? Taxpayers. You seem to think that you live in complete isolation, with your "I Got Mine And Eff You" attitude, but like it or not, you are part of a community.
MARIO SICARI
6:10 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
The President needs another 1.2 trillion, he wants to raise the debt selling...16.2 trillion dollar deficit and Congress has worked for two years without adopting a budget. Congress last adopted a budget resolution in fiscal year 2010. It neglected to do so in fiscal year 2011 and appears unlikely to agree on a budget framework for the next fiscal year, 2012, which begins Oct. 1.
The budget resolution sets spending limits for broad categories of funding and is usually the first step for Congress in adopting a budget. The budget resolutions are important "organization and enforcement documents" to guide Congress through achieving most of what’s in the president’s budget.Without a budget resolution, it makes it harder to enact spending bills because you don’t know exactly what the bottom line is.After the president’s budget is submitted, House and Senate budget committees are supposed to draft budget resolutions, frameworks intended to guide the spending process, which then go to the floor for approval.But that process hasn't been working. In 2010, the then Democratic-controlled House and Senate did not adopt a budget resolution or adopt a single spending bill because the Democrats were afraid of being labeled big spenders. Great way to govern, and than we are played against one another as to class warfare...
MARIO SICARI
10:56 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
@ Ridgewood mom...billionaires? are you kidding? millions yes, but billions? come on you are exaggerating.There is not a member of the congress or the senate that are not millionaires.Did you read my thread regarding elmowood park PD pay on un used sick days, you support this type of payout? you support 4% increase in pay not inclusive of health benefits and guaranteed pension benefits? I am in the benfits business the average healthcare insurance premium cost per family rises by 17% per year in addition to pension cost.according to the Federal reserve inflation just by social security increases, the cost of living over the last decade has remained flat, just look at interest rates over the last decade. when you begin to realize that the Federal Reserve by maintaining interest rates so low for such a long period of time more principal is required to meet public sector pension obligations?R Mom you have very strong feeling toward this arguement, the arguement you press is one from a biased opinion, whether you or a family member is a public employee, but you need to look at the numbers and re re-read my threads...public employee salaries are currently 38% higher than private not inlcusive of benefits, we are all middle income earners, you are falling into the trap of igniting a class warfare amoung our own citizens we are all working Americans, the percentage of millionaire you are talking about are outnumbered by the hollywood left, yet you continue your rhetoric
Ridgewood Mom
6:38 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
No Mario. That is not what I said. I said that there are no people who have become billionaires via working the public sector and that there are plenty who have become billionaires via the private sector. I stand by this and take you evasion as further confirmation of its accuracy. A more careful examination will further this point, as even the "millionaires" you describe in congress essentially became so via work outside of the public sector and in the private sector.
Work within the public sector is simply not a place for anyone to get really really rich. At best, it is only a leveraging tool for soliciting the favors of the private sector.
Please examine your own biases here before you go on accusing me of being biased. Are you not showing some subtle and unreasoned preference, here, for the workings of those you regard, more so, as kin?
MARIO SICARI
7:54 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
Ridgewood Mom...I asked you if it was an accpetable practice for the people of w paterson to pay un used sick days to retiring officers and you did not respond. I am not attacking public workers, they do deserve an opportunity to make a living. It seems your point of view is that all private sector employees are comprised of bankers and corporate executives, or that because of the obscene high paying salaries of this group, it is a reason why public sector workers are deserving of lopsided contracts, And I am not biased on the contrary I will openly admit I have family members emplyed by school districts and my son is a PO...I am agaisnt any type of class warfare, I am also against lucrative contracts funding inefficiencies which are unsustainable, especially inefficiencies funded through property taxes...if you review my thread I have pointed out, the wages for MIDDLE INCOME EARNERS employed through the public sector are currently 38% higher than the private not including benefits, but it seems the arguement focuses on the 1% highest wage earners in our society, the 1 % do not reside in w paterson who are ultimately responsible for paying the retiring PO 1.3 millionin un used sick days it will be middle incoem familes who reside in w paterson, In as much as we go back and forth, i beleive it becomes arguementive without understanding our points, I think we have philosophical differences in opinion, I am certainly not bias, I am in fiance and the numbers are unsustainable.
Ridgewood Mom
8:16 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
It is not my point of view that all private sector employees are comprised of bankers and corporate executives. And I don't even have a problem with bankers and corporate executives. Society needs them too, in my opinion, and I even think that many of them deserve to be well paid.
It is my point of view that there is an immense spread of incomes within the private sector - nothing at all like what we see anywhere in the public sector - and that this is grossly inequitable. The beneficiaries of this inequity are those who are very high up. The greatest victims of recent financial collapses are those who are in the middle and lower levels of the private sector. This discrepancy is getting worse and worse.
Public sector contracts are only lopsided these days because of the great damage that has been done to lower level employees in the private sector by the hands of higher ups also in the private sector. It makes no sense to blame the public sector for this failing laissez-faire economic model or to try to bring the public sector down with it.
And of course you are in finance Mario. That is obvious because of the tribal manner in which you defending the financial sector, tooth and nail. If you really can't see that you are biased then consider not putting words in other peoples mouths and sticking to the furnishing of the facts and numbers (which you claim to have) that make your case.
T.Maher
8:27 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
the problem with allowing politicians to steal more money-
In 2003, when the Democrats took over, the Bergen County tax levy – which is the total amount of taxes collected – was $224.7 million. By 2010, the last year of Democratic control, the levy reached $352.7 million, records show. That’s about a 57-percent increase over eight years.-- Where is the $128,000,000.00 extra? why do they need more? they got it! what the hell did they do with it? no matter how much of our money is stolen by leeches, it is never enough- the answer is not give more, the answer is hold them accountable, and starve the beast.
B@B
1:12 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
I live in a town where Republicans have run things EXCLUSIVELY for over 30 years...and my taxes have more than doubled in 15 years. So don't tell me it's about what political party is in charge.
delgado
9:48 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
Where did it go? Well Corrupt Bergen Republican double dipper Donovan and Saudino can tell you where some of is. Paying for there pensions. The corrupt Bergen Republicans are out of control and new they want to sell property in Rockliegh to one of their poltical buddies, so they can flip it and make millions..
MARIO SICARI
9:13 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
Ridgewood Mom Again you are not understanding my point, you yourself stated divided and conquer, you your self have said the disproportinate income levels between the 1% and the rest of societiees does not warrant any type of reform within the public sector work force...now is as much as i agree with you and much of your substance you are accusing me of defending the financial community, My dear you dont know me at all, for my years employed as VP of Operation at a firm i was the most critical executive within my firm in 2005 I resigned from a position at a firm because of practices i did not agree with...Today I own my own firm based on my ethical standards in the business community not to mention my constant cry for lack of regulation, with that said, again I will state my poistion and please try not to distort it, I am not for class warfaare , this accomplishes no positive step forward for society, I am for tax reform and incresasing taxe son the wealthiest 1% ,I am agiants rasing tax to fund the US war machine which has destroyed nations and murdered millionsin the name of freedom, I am for downsizing the roles of all branches of government and to reform public employee benefits, not salaries...now would you answer my point on W Paterson...do the property tax residents deserve to pay 7 retiring PO 1.3 million in un used sick days? yes or no will do :)
Ridgewood Mom
11:57 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
Don't take it personally Mario. I am arguing with you because I respect you.
I stated that "divide and conquer" was the tactic being used against most Americans; dividing the public and moderate income private sectors (most Americans) who ought to be on the same page. I don't endorse this. I oppose it.
I obviously don't know the specifics of the situation in West Paterson as you do, so I can't try to address it in detail. I am happy to concede that not all government services are necessary everywhere and many should be cut. Taxpayers, as citizens, are entitled to value.
My thought is that public services would not be so strained... we wouldn't be having this conversation about closing a Bergen county nursing home... we wouldn't be talking about whether Ridgewood teachers should get a contract (some contract, any contract)... we wouldn't be obsessing about whether or not we can afford a replacement fire truck or about whether police officers should have to work for free during parades and during the holidays... if so much money wasn't and still isn't being skimmed off the top.
There are a lot of chickens running around with their heads cut off.
MARIO SICARI
11:13 am on Friday, January 13, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom, In fact my biggest critism recently which was publishe din the Bergen Record was directed at the SEC for allowing a pass to former Governor Jon Corzine, not allowing him to be re tested for his neccessary secuirties license and continuing education requirements prior to his return to MFGlobal, it seems due to his influence he was somehow given a pass and th erequirement was waived...this is the problem with the Government, they only seem to want to govern who they seem needs to be governed
Ridgewood Mom
12:11 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
I just may have pegged you wrong Mario.
Ridgewood Mom
12:12 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
For the record, I also see myself as politically independent. Not that we should expect both being independent to put us in the same category. :)
MARIO SICARI
4:04 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
@Ridgewood Mom...I hold everyone accountable from both political parties, there are individuals who are truly terrific public servants than there are those that are puppets, and their only goal is to be part of the political machine and gain an advantage from it. As far as W Paterson and the specifics, public employees throughout the State, Police and teachers negotiate their salaries and benefits through the BOE or Municpal govt. over the years these negotiations hav egranted some ridiculous perks, (sick days) sick days are simply that sick days, your sick and you get paid, really simple, but if your not sick, in the private sector you loose them, in the public sector, they are banked, which means as they accumulate when you retire they take your average daily wage in some fashion and give you a payout. I am not blaming the PO for this, good for them for getting such a ridculous perk, I am blaming the stupid politicans for negotiating the perk in the contract. On top of Defined Benfit Pension and healthcare with no contribution for life...Listen everyone would love perks like that, it doesnt exist in the private sector, so as long as these muni, and county budget are paying out these benefits, the Nursing home closes, becaus ethe budget cant sustain it. Picture a pie chart and teh salaries benefits slice growing year in and year out, at some points other parts are elliminated...NURSING HOME
Ken F.
9:36 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
Mario and Rmom, I respect both of you and am happy to see that even when debate gets heated you two show the rest how to be civil. I tip my hat to you. Keep on truckin'.
THOUNGDUC
12:29 am on Saturday, January 14, 2012
Ridgewood MOM, you seem to constantly single public sector workers. Police/Teachers As a matter of point, many police/fireman and public employees don't receive sick days in pay when they retire it is use them or lose them period. You can attempt to bundle all unions employees in the state with the benefits but not all have the same. Mario you state they are receiving a ridiculous perks, well to you they may be but to those that negotiated in good faith to receive them it is not. They did't steal them they negotiated with their towns or received the benefits through an arbitrators award after both parties could not reach an agreement. As for Ridgewood Mom, Lincoln freed the slaves many years ago, no one has
no police officer has to work without pay in Parades or on holidays, if you wish to volunteer your time for free do it. Enough dumping on the Public Sector. I guess we will all face Obamas death panels sooner or later. One more point, everyone is knocking Romey for Baine, now obama wants to do the same thing by incorporating government agencies to make government smaller and 2-3,000 government workers are going to lose their jobs. Slynadrone went under with out tax money which the government funded it. It failed and now the company went under and 4,500 people have lost their jobs and are unemployed. One difference Romey used HIS money Obama used our tax money so he lost nothing. THIS IS CALLED CAPATILISM IS IT NOT??
Ridgewood Mom
9:26 am on Saturday, January 14, 2012
Thoungdoc, part the local agreement between (last summer) made between Ridgewood police and the Village was to make no cuts to existing members in exchange for lower starting salaries for new hires and an agreement that they work the overtime shifts for the fourth of July and holidays for free.
Ridgewood Mom
9:30 am on Saturday, January 14, 2012
You seem, to me, to understand "capitalism" as a complete absence of any government involvement in the economy and "socialism" as a complete control of everything about the economy. Does that adequately represent your view?
Ridgewood Mom
9:33 am on Saturday, January 14, 2012
http://ridgewood.patch.com/articles/police-fire-to-work-july-4-for-free
MARIO SICARI
2:37 pm on Saturday, January 14, 2012
@Thoungduc...To me as well as the majority of property owners in NJ they are riduculous perks, now you may not agree, it is your choice, but have you ever sat in negotiations with a public union? I have, and it is not pleasant...so before you start ranting about what was negotiated in good faith, no one in the priavte sector which is emplyed as a middle income earner, recieves these type of benefits...2nd point in NJ we have 71 municipalities, with 71 police depts, we have county police and sheriffs officers not to mention prosecuters officers and state police, are you going to try to convince me that we dont have a serious promblem over overlapping services? Governments cant even begin to explore consolidation with out push back from the unions...this blog began about selling a Nursing home, I for one can afford to pay my taxes, I earn my income in NJ, most of my clients who were employed either as teachers or PO, retire and move out of state, so not only do they get there pension form NJ Taxpayers, not only do they recieve their Health benefits for life from NJ txpayers, they move, which is their right as it is my right to move, but than dont complain when the county cant afford to run a NURSING HOME, it gets closed or sold...these are the facts and again you can argue pro or con against them, I am just pointing them out...I again support law enforcement, my son serves as a PO and just to inform you his contract has changed drastically and he understands why
MARIO SICARI
12:38 pm on Saturday, January 14, 2012
@Ken...Ridgewood Mom is a genuine person who is very passionate and I trylu respect her, we agree on much and yet the ecomics of it, I think because of my background is less socially motivated...when I was studing Maynard Keynes studies on Keynesian Economics, his study on paper made tremendous sense, but when you add human nature to it, corruption and greed and motivation for self interest, Keynesian doesnt work, and I think Benankhe and Geitner are beginning to realize this as they try to impose it in Europe...Cultures do not see it the same and it is why Europe is falling into an economic black hole, again I really enjoy blogging with Ridgewood Mom and respect her opinions, there is no need for us to be disrepectful toward one another...we are all Amercians and I believe we all stand for one another.
MARIO SICARI
12:44 pm on Saturday, January 14, 2012
@ Ridgewood Mom...I read this morning in the Newspaper about the REA not partciapting in the fund raiser because of a lack of contract of an association which is paid 27% higher than their peers around the state...it seems this whirl wind of contract negotiations, is going to domino throughout the state, I am not previed to the REA contract, but the Record did not portray them in a good light, that is the reason why we have such an animosity toward teachers and other public workers in this state...Dialougue is turning to retribution, I think the REA made a mistake not to particpate in the fundraiser, they are still part of the district and they still need to show solidarity to the students who they teach
THOUNGDUC
2:52 pm on Saturday, January 14, 2012
Lets talk about politicians - Obama spending over 600 million in failed SOLYHDRA plus the loss of jobs now for those workers, ,SUN POWER AND BLUE MOUNTAIN OTHER COMPANIES THAT ARE GOING UNDER WHICH THE DEMOCRATS BACKED FINANCIALLY WITH OUR TAX MONIES and ROMNEY is attacked for (BAIN) spending his own monies losing it or making it, Yes taking over failed companies letting workers go to keep and grow the company and the companies do fail at times. I myself went into a business venture with 2 partners and we eventually lost the business because of the slow acconomy
B@B
8:13 am on Monday, January 16, 2012
THOUNGDUC: Where is your outrage about the $9 BILLION that went missing in Iraq during the Bush Administration? Or is your outrage at government waste limited to Democratic administrations?
THOUNGDUC
3:05 pm on Saturday, January 14, 2012
(Con't) My point being this is our capitalist business in America, either you succeed or fail but with your own monies. The government should bot be in this field with our tax monies attempting to start businesses. It is as if we have our town open a restaurant or hot dog stand and attempt to make money with our tax dollars , would any where be happy with this and then the business go under I believe all home owners would be out raged mis-use of their monies. I have a great idea lets have all our towns have their own ATM machines, banks, restaurants, gas stations and then we won't have to worry about high taxes, thats if they all don't fail - whats all your opinions
MARIO SICARI
8:52 am on Sunday, January 15, 2012
@Thoungduc...I agree with your point of the Governments involvement in capitalist ventures, It shouldnt, but government should invest in its people through education and it should be done through the states not the Federal Govt, The Federal govt is too inefficient to successfully develop education, The Govt should adopt an energy policy, it hasnt, the govt should get out of the business of supporting civil wars in other lands
THOUNGDUC
11:59 am on Sunday, January 15, 2012
Mario, you clarify my point exactly, lets not knock our capitalist society that we live in, without it we only have the Government which to me is to large and to intrusive at this time and never should be.
Ridgewood Mom
5:23 pm on Sunday, January 15, 2012
I agree with you that capitalism is essentially a good thing, Thoungdoc. Production, distribution, and exchange in industry should not be owned by government. The government, however, must provide and maintain essential infrastructure and it must set rules as governance at all levels, including regulating many aspects of the functioning of industry.
delgado
6:01 pm on Sunday, January 15, 2012
Republicans pledged to keep the same services and got the support of the unions. Now they want to sell the Rockliegh nursing home property to a developer who want to put up McMansions and fire the union members and throw the patients to Bergen Pines.
THOUNGDUC
7:10 pm on Sunday, January 15, 2012
Ridgewood Mom, I agree to an extent with your blog, however i believe the Government should step aside and let the free market work for itself, stop all these regulations that hinder small businesses from expanding or even hiring., Also stay out of attempting to use our tax payers money to interject themselves into private enterprises. Just look at the failures in million of $$$, SOLYNDRA, BLUE MOUNTAIN & SUN POWER, I'm sure you will agree that amount of monies could have been used to better our schools, roadways and helped the not so fortunate, however it is lost with thousands of workers now unemployed after these companies have gone under with our tax dollars. The government does have an obligation to main essential infrastructure but not attempt to invest in private enterprises. Why even have individuals attempting to expand into the capitalist world investing their monies and possibly losing in an investment if the Government is going to do it with Americas tax dollars$$$. Step Aside Government your out of your league and let us lose or make our monies the capitalist way.
USR mom
7:40 pm on Sunday, January 15, 2012
I was under the impression that the nursing home. which had formerly been St. Joseph's Orphanage. was donated to Bergen County by the Catholic Church for the expressed use of care of the elderly or children. The facility currently houses the nursing home in front and the several schools and a day program for autistic young adults, a boarding school for troubled boys, a drug rehab counseling center called Touchstone and the Bergen County Ambulance station. How could they sell the land? Many families count on these programs. I do believe you are correct that Bergen Regional is somehow in consideration if the nursing home is privatized. All very convenient I think. But consider this freeholders....ageing is a chronic condition we shall all suffer from....BCHCC has a reputation for excellent care. You may need them some day!
THOUNGDUC
1:29 pm on Monday, January 16, 2012
Bob, I do have an outrage about the millions spend in Iraq and Afganistan, yes a Republican President sent us there, but lets look back in history in Wars and Police Actions that kept us in these countries for years, Spanish American War, 1st World War, Vietnam, Korea etc and so many other countries we have given millions in the blood of our young men and women, lets start adding up the billions that could have been spent here in the USA for our infrastructure, school, roads etc Lets talk about 150 countries in the world give or take a few that change yearly, we give financial aid to all of them, in Monies, Supplies and Military bases with our military protection while our borders are being over run, these are priorities we should talk about and eliminate half of them or more. Why are we in Panama, Germany, Japan. South America etc, we just can't be the military (POLICE) of the world in my opinion any longer or should we???????????????? Your are absolutely correct!!!!
MARIO SICARI
2:04 pm on Monday, January 16, 2012
@Thoungduc...our foreign policy has been a total disaster, and President Obama is no different and no better, the escalation of military intervention by this country around the world is at the root of the problem of creating terrorist and putting Amercians at risk...Each President has had there share of intervention, but more over to try to solve the Middle East Problems was by far the stupidest thing this country ever did...The middle east will never become democratic, ever regardless on how much money you spend, regardless hown many troops you send...It is the middle east the political system there is MONARCHY...and the countries which have converted are Military dictatorship...so to think democracy and to call Libyan Rebels freedom fighters is a joke...not to mention China has been lending us the money to create the most destabalized region in the world...Iran has nukes because we went to war with IRAQ, with Sadam there IRAN would have never developed nukes...it is a game of chess, and we are lousy chess players
Ridgewood Mom
4:16 pm on Monday, January 16, 2012
Speaking of nursing homes, insurance companies raked in record breaking profits last year:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/183/index.html
MARIO SICARI
5:40 pm on Monday, January 16, 2012
RM ...speaking of insurance companies and profits due to monetary policy, low interest rates, the separate account reserves, which supports your life, disability and long term care have been greatly compromised in addition Dodd Frank legislature is also changing reporting of financial institutions, hitch in turn is passed onto he consumer, the problem in 2000 the commodities modernization act deregulated financial institutions in 2008 when they leveraged themselves to the hilt the system crashed. The treasury along with the fed bailed them out, they are in such disarray with toxic assets...now the same point is govt spnding, we agree GW train wreck our economy with out of control spending is it any different raising txes to pay for it as is insurance companies profiting to offset losses sufferred from poor regulation adopted by policy makers past and present? You can't have it both ways. Politicians have train wrecked our economy and we pay higher prices for poor monetary and fiscal policy.