More state cuts coming? Maybe, city officials fear on Owatonna

By: MNBear on 6/30/09
So, the REAL deficit that is coming (not including the deficit supposedly dealt with this year) is $7.4 billion.

When are our "leaders" going to realize that they need systemic spending cuts and program elimination? Even if your thing is "tax the (so-called) rich," you cannot possibly tax your way out of this mess. Spending has to be cut - now. Even a liberal's brain must see that (or, are you all till too lathered up blaming Bush for everything?).

BTW - I seem to recall a couple of iron-clad economic promises from our CURRENT president that seem to have fallen by the wayside:

1. We had to push the stimulus bill through immediately, without even reading it or knowing what was in it, because people needed jobs. We were promised that unemployment would hit 8% nationally and then, whoosh, all that stimulus money would solve everything. Unemployment is at 9.6%, and the President has had to admit it will easily blow past 10% through NEXT year. Wasn't the stimulus plan supposed to solve everything?
2. We were promised no wasted money in bills - so-called pork. Yet, 9000+ pork items in the last budget.
3. Fiscal discipline? A line-by-line review of the federal budget? Gone. The deficit is going to quadruple within 10 years. Spending as a percentage of our GDP has gone from well under 10% to nearly 15% in one year.
4. No one making under $250k will see their taxes raised one dime. Remember that promise? Well, let's see....the new energy bill will result in energy costs doubling - that's a tax on everyone. The new medical insurance bill will result in employers having to tax your insurance benefits, which they don't do now. That will result in a huge tax increase for everyone, not just the "rich." How about paying for all this spending - where is the money coming from. If you took 100% of everything made over $250k in the country, you wouldn't come close to paying for it. So, the not-so-rich are going to pay as well.
5. What about the "we don't want to run the economy." How's that working for GM? The unions are getting everything they want, but the actual owners (shareholders and bondholders) of GM are getting nothing. That seems fair.

Bottom line - we are on the highway to hell (apologies to one of the greatest rock bands ever), and no one seems to care at all that we're building "aquatic centers" when the bank account is overdrawn.

By: igor74 on 6/30/09
I think it's fittingly ironic that our mayor says that depending on who's elected governor in 2010 that LGA might be restored
(I can just see a Republican governor doing that - not).

Later he says that cities need to re-evaluate LGA and dependence upon it. (Well,DUH. And this coming from someone who said we needed MORE LGA when he was first elected.)

That sounds like the words of an addict who knows he needs to kick the habit but is still craving another score.
But, then again, LGA is nothing but a government welfare drug for cities and counties so this isn't surprising.

The message is clear: if you want to be free to determine your own path you'd better have figured out how to pay for it yourself and not be dependent on others.

The larger question is if LGA would be restored from where will the money come? The state is spending too much and nobody is willing to cut anything. That leaves tax increases and that's guaranteed political suicide at this point and for the foreseeable future. Sounds like a stalemate to me.

A while back I said this economic downturn was going to impact this city in ways they hadn't considered.
It's becoming quite obvious that nobody in charge here ever asked the basic question of what's the impact if LGA went away? Had they done that they might have tempered their spending, budgets, and ambitions accordingly.

Welcome to the day of reckoning.