Christie was successful in dealing with an enormous budget deficit without raising taxes. 99 out of 100 politicians would have raised taxes in his situation and Christie did not.
Property taxes went up, but property taxes are set by local governments for local budgets and are not set by the state. Christie was indirectly responsible in part for property taxes going up, because as part of budget cutting at the state level he cut the amount that the state gave back to the municipalities to offset their costs.
But ultimately property taxes are a local issue. Christie is trying to help the municipalities by passing laws that will give the municipalities more flexibility in dealing with their own budgets, aka the “toolkit”. But there’s only so much he can do there.
Also, Christie’s efforts at pension reform (part of his “war with the teachers”) would help the local governments as well. A big part of government budget problems (not just in NJ but across the country) is due to public employees (including but by no means limited to the teachers) raping the government and the people in getting generous pensions and other benefits (much of which is not properly accounted for and the scale of which gets less attention than it should).
In terms of what he’s actually done, Christie gets an A+. He needs to be just a bit less abrasive about it, though.
Mitch Daniels seems to be ready now. Longer resume, quite a lot of success in reforming Indiana’s taxes and finances. He has made mistakes over the years but appears to have the capacity to learn from them.
But you see that this is just passing the buck, right? Sure he can say “I didn’t raise taxes”, but that doesn’t change the fact that taxes went up for the people of NJ on his watch. Went up dramatically, according to posters who live in NJ.
To me, a federal or state level politician who screams “I didn’t raise taxes” while local and municipal governments are having to scramble to cover budget shortfalls, hasn’t done anything but shift the responsibility. To me that’s cowardice.
Not to worry though, now that the Dems have caved on the Bush top 2% tax breaks staying in place, the burst of economic development that’s coming will raise all boats. :dubious::smack:
:dubious:
No, it’s not on his watch. He does not run those towns.
Christie did what he could to help the townships. He led the effort to cap property tax increases at 2%, and to the extent that this is not as successful as it should be (it has loopholes) it’s because Democrats who control the legislature resisted hard (backed by their public sector union allies). He was lucky to get as much done as he did. And now he is pushing hard for other reforms that will help the local budgets (& continuing to face resistance in the legislature).
Last week it was very rainy and windy on Christie’s watch. And this week it’s very cold, also on his watch. He is doing a very bad job with the weather, and I haven’t seen him take responsibility for it. Let’s vote that incompetant coward out of office, now.
I never said the tunnel was a good design. I just said that the way he rejected it is dumping a major bill on Jersey. I hear that New York is asking for the money… there’s a plan to extend the subway (possibly PATH?) into Jersey and it’ll cost a tenth what the tunnel did. If Christie wasn’t a complete asshole, he could have figured something like that out.
Dude, when both senators and the Dept. of Transportation chief come visiting, begging for you to not just say screw off, maybe you should listen.
The reason my personal taxes went up is because Christie did away with the $800property tax rebate that we were getting each year from Trenton. That was his personal decision and his alone. He can’t spin it any other way. He needs to take responsibility for that decision.
Typical Republican. They get into office and immediately raise taxes and screw with ordinary people. The very idea that teachers are raping the government is ludicrous. The average NJ teacher makes about 60k a year. The schools in NJ are very good so teachers earn their pay. My daughter has a mere 17 kids in her second grade classroom.
He simply doesn’t get what attracts people here. People are not moving here because of the state’s inherent attractions. People largely move here because the state is close to other major urban centers. By fucking around with easier transportation into NYC and attempting to lower school standards by demonizing teachers, Christie shows he doesn’t understand this. No offense to Iowans but we’re not supposed to be Iowa with better beaches.
You mean the Chris Christie who used the US Attorney’s Office as a tool of the Republican party? That Chris Christie? Yeah… no one will be able to dig up enough dirt to sink this guy… especially fellow Republicans.
I think the plan is to extend the number 7 line, not the PATH train. I’m sure that will get done, just as soon as they finish the 2nd Avenue line, the LIRR or Metro North extension down town, the lower Manhattan transportation center…
New Jersey’s population grew by and estimated 3.5% between 2000 and 2009 (cite: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/34000.html). While this is slower than the growth of the overall US population, the fact is that more people are moving into NJ than moving out. Since NJ is the most densely populated state already, this may seem even more surprising.
That Christian Science Monitor article is moronic. People are moving into the Sun Belt because the weather is nicer, not because of taxes. It’s not a coincidence that nobody is moving to Alaska despite its tax structure.
We’re comparing the quality of life of NJ to that of the other 49 states. For that purpose, the only thing that counts is people chosing between NJ and the other states.
Very possible that NJ has a lot to offer over Mexican shantytowns, but that’s not what we’re discussing (and that’s not a valid way to assess state government policies).
7! I knew the PATH was wrong, but I couldn’t remember the right answer. It’s brilliantly simple, and if the feds give NY the money, no reason it can’t be started right away.
Your point may be valid for border states like Arizona or Texas (or Montana and Idaho, for the hordes of Canadians coming in) I suppose, but how is an immigrant moving to New Jersey not choosing between NJ and the other states? Are they swimming across from England? Is there some boat convoy coming in from Bermuda?
They are. But if more immigrants are chosing other states than are chosing NJ, then NJ doesn’t compare favorably. Immigrants are increasing the population of the country as a whole.
You acknowledged out that the country as a whole grew 9% while NJ grew 3.5% in the last decade. The smallest part of the differential is a difference in birth/death rates, if any. The rest is more Americans moving out of NJ than into NJ and possibly more foreign immigrants chosing other states. To the extent that more foreign immigrants are chosing NJ, then the disparity in people moving out versus in has to be even greater.
