Hi Everyone,
Due to life happenings, I was unable to blog for the last 2 weeks, but now I'm back. I have nothing against police or firefighters, but this true story may make you think twice about their honesty.
As we all are aware, police and firefighters have the ability to work huge amounts of overtime for 1,2 or3 years immediately prior to their retirement. That excessive amount of overtime is then included in the calculation to determine the amount of their pension. But, what would you say if I told you that there are some police and firefighters who worked the years of excessive amount of overtime, only to apply for a disability pension, (instead of a regular pension), based on a work related injury that occurred prior to their working the excessive overtime. Sound far fetched?
Unfortunately, this is another true story. Somehow, someway, these supposedly dedicated police and firefighters are able to find a doctor that will attest to their full "disability" at their time of retirement. How can someone claim a work related injury after they had worked huge amounts of weekly overtime for years after to their so called injury. There were a bunch of these people who claimed that their work related injury occurred 4,5 or more years prior to their retirement date. Talk about entitlement. This is grand larceny on an indecent scale. I just can't wrap my mind over the fact that these public servants can lie their way, (including their doctor) and the state's doctors to approve that they were disabled at the time of their retirement. But they worked tons of overtime immediately prior to retiring. What is wrong with this picture?
With their new full disability pension, they are collecting yearly pensions in the 6 digits. This is blatant fraud and I, for the life of me, can't figure out how this happens. If you can work excessive amount of overtime for years prior to their retirement, how can they apply for and receive a disability pension? They were obviously not disabled to be able to work the overtime. How can state doctors agree that they are disabled at the time of their retirement. Someone is definitely getting their palms greased to go along with them. If they were truly disabled, they would not have been able to work the excessive overtime, or am I missing something here. I don't think I am missing anything. These are greedy people, who only care about themselves and who have found the golden goose loophole that needs to be corrected ASAP.
Where is the common sense in determining whether someone is disabled? I can only hope that people in authority will be able to stop this insanity, sooner rather than later. If this continues, it will bankrupt the system and then we the taxpayers will pay even more!!!!!!
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, June 29, 2014
Sunday, June 8, 2014
What the Tea Party Represents?
Hi Everyone,
Last month another terrible school shooting occurred. This time the massacre happened at and near the University of California, Santa Barbara. The madman killed 7, including himself and wounded 13 more. Again, as in most cases of this type, the killer used a fast-killing gun. If the NRA was serious about helping to stop these mass killings, they would consider curbing the use of semi and fully automatic guns. How? As I said in a previous blog regarding the Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut mass killings; my common sense solution to the people who have to have a semi and/or automatic weapon, must always be stored and used only at licensed gun ranges, period, no exceptions.
But in today's blog, I am not going to rehash that. Today's blog is even more sinister; dealing with people's feelings regarding these mass killings from a Tea Party representative, "Joe the Plumber", whose real name is Joe Wurzelbacher. Joe was made famous by George Bush II, during his first presidential run. After the Santa Barbara killings, Joe had the audacity to say, "your dead kids don't trump my constitutional rights". He acknowledged that his words were "harsh", but claimed pro-gun control activists "don't care about your family or your dead children at all". What hole did this guy crawl out of? What an utterly rude, callous and especially insensitive statement to make. And to think he absolutely believes every word he said. Of course he is a card carrying NRA and Tea Party member and even a darling of that party. Need I say more? Of course I do.....
Joe, the NRA, the Tea Party, almost all of the GOP and a few Democrats don't seem to want to make any changes in national gun control. An article in the May 30th edition of the New York Daily News said it best, "we watch massacre after massacre in this country and people opposing ANY kind of solution or any kind of change talk about infringement on rights and freedoms". But wait, aren't most of these people the same people who have no problem taking away a woman's right to choice when it deals with their own bodies. But that is another issue for another day.
I am sorry to say that Joe and the likes of him are the ones who are out of touch. Gun zealots controlled by the NRA will never change their minds. As I previously asked in a prior blog, how is it possible that the NRA's membership total, which is a small minority of people, (5 million out of 300 million), can control all things related to the Second Amendment? The NRA actually even rates all politicians in DC on issues related to Second Amendment issues and whether they are a NRA member. It is now time for some of these NRA members to stand up and say enough is enough and join the majority of Americans who are for more stricter gun control. Something must be done sooner rather than later, since lives are at stake!!! How many more children and adults must die before any changes are made.
Enough said!
Til next week.
Peter
Last month another terrible school shooting occurred. This time the massacre happened at and near the University of California, Santa Barbara. The madman killed 7, including himself and wounded 13 more. Again, as in most cases of this type, the killer used a fast-killing gun. If the NRA was serious about helping to stop these mass killings, they would consider curbing the use of semi and fully automatic guns. How? As I said in a previous blog regarding the Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut mass killings; my common sense solution to the people who have to have a semi and/or automatic weapon, must always be stored and used only at licensed gun ranges, period, no exceptions.
But in today's blog, I am not going to rehash that. Today's blog is even more sinister; dealing with people's feelings regarding these mass killings from a Tea Party representative, "Joe the Plumber", whose real name is Joe Wurzelbacher. Joe was made famous by George Bush II, during his first presidential run. After the Santa Barbara killings, Joe had the audacity to say, "your dead kids don't trump my constitutional rights". He acknowledged that his words were "harsh", but claimed pro-gun control activists "don't care about your family or your dead children at all". What hole did this guy crawl out of? What an utterly rude, callous and especially insensitive statement to make. And to think he absolutely believes every word he said. Of course he is a card carrying NRA and Tea Party member and even a darling of that party. Need I say more? Of course I do.....
Joe, the NRA, the Tea Party, almost all of the GOP and a few Democrats don't seem to want to make any changes in national gun control. An article in the May 30th edition of the New York Daily News said it best, "we watch massacre after massacre in this country and people opposing ANY kind of solution or any kind of change talk about infringement on rights and freedoms". But wait, aren't most of these people the same people who have no problem taking away a woman's right to choice when it deals with their own bodies. But that is another issue for another day.
I am sorry to say that Joe and the likes of him are the ones who are out of touch. Gun zealots controlled by the NRA will never change their minds. As I previously asked in a prior blog, how is it possible that the NRA's membership total, which is a small minority of people, (5 million out of 300 million), can control all things related to the Second Amendment? The NRA actually even rates all politicians in DC on issues related to Second Amendment issues and whether they are a NRA member. It is now time for some of these NRA members to stand up and say enough is enough and join the majority of Americans who are for more stricter gun control. Something must be done sooner rather than later, since lives are at stake!!! How many more children and adults must die before any changes are made.
Enough said!
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Are Your Ready To Get Backdoored?
Hi Everyone,
Here in New York State, Governor Cuomo, signed a law that was suppose to cap taxes at a maximum of 2% each year for both property and school taxes. Of course there are municipalities and school boards that blatantly go over the tax cap, as per the written media. But today's blog isn't about what happens to the municipalities or school boards that go over the tax cap or even the ones that either stay at or below the tax cap. Today's blog is about a blatant taxing entity that is trying a new and more sinister method of raising taxes above the 2% tax cap; but still have their records reflect that they stayed at or below the maximum cap.
How is this possible? How can you raise taxes above 2% and have the "books" legally show that they didn't? That means that the taxing entities found a way around the tax cap. Well the Westchester county, city of Rye school board is thinking about enacting a 3% tax on utility bills to pay for their increased education costs. Believe it or not, this tax would be applied to all electricity, natural gas and telephone services. What a backdoor kick in the butt to each and every taxpayer.
What is even more astonishing is that the city of Rye is not the first municipality or school board to do this. Other Westchester County municipalities that already have utility taxes are: White Plains, New Rochelle, Peekskill and Mount Vernon and in addition, Rockland County even has a county wide 4% tax. If utilities rates are taxed at a fixed rate of 3 or 4% which was approved by some board, that tax increase was not approved by a majority of the voters. So would that mean that voters would only be allowed to vote on the original up to 2% increase as required by law? It certainly seems to be that way. That would mean that the taxing entities couldn't care less about whether their budget votes passed or not. The taxing entity boards would then be able, when needed to make up the difference, to increase the utility taxes without it being voted on. Where will this end and at what cost to the taxpayers? This utility tax makes no sense and to top it off, it might bring the feeling of entitlement and consequently mismanagement.
Now to pour a whole lot of salt on the wounds of these poor taxpayers, they would also not be able to deduct their utility taxes on their tax returns, which eventually could be a sizeable amount.
Hopefully these backdoor taxes will be repealed, sooner rather than later.
Til next week.
Peter
Here in New York State, Governor Cuomo, signed a law that was suppose to cap taxes at a maximum of 2% each year for both property and school taxes. Of course there are municipalities and school boards that blatantly go over the tax cap, as per the written media. But today's blog isn't about what happens to the municipalities or school boards that go over the tax cap or even the ones that either stay at or below the tax cap. Today's blog is about a blatant taxing entity that is trying a new and more sinister method of raising taxes above the 2% tax cap; but still have their records reflect that they stayed at or below the maximum cap.
How is this possible? How can you raise taxes above 2% and have the "books" legally show that they didn't? That means that the taxing entities found a way around the tax cap. Well the Westchester county, city of Rye school board is thinking about enacting a 3% tax on utility bills to pay for their increased education costs. Believe it or not, this tax would be applied to all electricity, natural gas and telephone services. What a backdoor kick in the butt to each and every taxpayer.
What is even more astonishing is that the city of Rye is not the first municipality or school board to do this. Other Westchester County municipalities that already have utility taxes are: White Plains, New Rochelle, Peekskill and Mount Vernon and in addition, Rockland County even has a county wide 4% tax. If utilities rates are taxed at a fixed rate of 3 or 4% which was approved by some board, that tax increase was not approved by a majority of the voters. So would that mean that voters would only be allowed to vote on the original up to 2% increase as required by law? It certainly seems to be that way. That would mean that the taxing entities couldn't care less about whether their budget votes passed or not. The taxing entity boards would then be able, when needed to make up the difference, to increase the utility taxes without it being voted on. Where will this end and at what cost to the taxpayers? This utility tax makes no sense and to top it off, it might bring the feeling of entitlement and consequently mismanagement.
Now to pour a whole lot of salt on the wounds of these poor taxpayers, they would also not be able to deduct their utility taxes on their tax returns, which eventually could be a sizeable amount.
Hopefully these backdoor taxes will be repealed, sooner rather than later.
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, May 11, 2014
Stealing Legally
Hi Everyone,
I was reading the newspaper a few weeks ago and again I found an article that blew me away. Highway robbery is a very mild analogy to what I found out. Pew Charitable Trusts did some new research and wrote a report regarding the nation's highest interest rates for payday loans. Keep in mind, that payday loans are used a lot by low income wage earners who desperately need a small loan, when unexpected expenses occur, i.e. car repair bills. So that is why I was blown away by the interest rates that are charged.
So if you were to guess how high you think these payday interest rates can get, what would be your guess? Hold onto to you hats. Somehow all of these rates are legal. The state with the highest rate is Idaho with a rate of 582%! Yes you read that correctly, 582%. South Dakota and Wisconsin are tied in second place with 574%. Then comes Nevada, 521%, Delaware, 517% and Utah, 474%. Some other states that have the lowest of the high interest rates are: Maine, 217%, Oregon, 156% and Colorado at 129%. Fifteen states either ban payday loans or cap interest rates at 36%. Without a limit on interest rates, competition among lenders does not tend to lower rates much, according to Pew's new research.
Now I understand that these loans are made without collateral, other then having a weekly paycheck, to people who most likely don't have anywhere near a good credit score. So the people who need these loans the most, due to their financial circumstances, will always pay the highest interest rates. I am not sure how many of these loans go unpaid, but rates up to 582% seems very unreasonably high, grossly unfair and seems to me to be a legal form of stealing from people and a bonanza to the lenders. But somehow the rates are legit and people continue to use these payday loans.
Til next week.
Peter
I was reading the newspaper a few weeks ago and again I found an article that blew me away. Highway robbery is a very mild analogy to what I found out. Pew Charitable Trusts did some new research and wrote a report regarding the nation's highest interest rates for payday loans. Keep in mind, that payday loans are used a lot by low income wage earners who desperately need a small loan, when unexpected expenses occur, i.e. car repair bills. So that is why I was blown away by the interest rates that are charged.
So if you were to guess how high you think these payday interest rates can get, what would be your guess? Hold onto to you hats. Somehow all of these rates are legal. The state with the highest rate is Idaho with a rate of 582%! Yes you read that correctly, 582%. South Dakota and Wisconsin are tied in second place with 574%. Then comes Nevada, 521%, Delaware, 517% and Utah, 474%. Some other states that have the lowest of the high interest rates are: Maine, 217%, Oregon, 156% and Colorado at 129%. Fifteen states either ban payday loans or cap interest rates at 36%. Without a limit on interest rates, competition among lenders does not tend to lower rates much, according to Pew's new research.
Now I understand that these loans are made without collateral, other then having a weekly paycheck, to people who most likely don't have anywhere near a good credit score. So the people who need these loans the most, due to their financial circumstances, will always pay the highest interest rates. I am not sure how many of these loans go unpaid, but rates up to 582% seems very unreasonably high, grossly unfair and seems to me to be a legal form of stealing from people and a bonanza to the lenders. But somehow the rates are legit and people continue to use these payday loans.
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, April 27, 2014
The New Wild, Wild West
Hi Everyone,
OK so maybe it isn't actually the wild west, but it definitely will be the wild, wild south. There is a change coming that I believe will not have the outcome that the politicians are expecting. Changes like this will be detrimental to the health and welfare of its citizens. What am I talking about? I am talking about how the state of Georgia has decided that it is a good thing for all licensed gun owners to be able to carry their firearms almost anywhere. Georgia Governor Nathan Deal, a Republican, signed the state's Safe Carry Protection Act. Where will they be able to carry their firearms as of July 1, 2014? How about bars, schools, churches and government buildings that don't have, no gun rules and non-secure areas in airports. The licensed gun owners would be able to carry their firearms without restrictions. The new law also allows school districts to decide whether they want their employees to carry a firearm.
Of course the NRA, (which touts a membership of 5 million, which is a very small minority of Americans), says that Georgia's new law, according to USA Today, is "the most comprehensive pro-gun reform legislation introduced in recent history." The gun rights group GeorgiaCarry.org believes that the law will, "restore our right to carry and be allowed to protect ourselves anywhere we go," executive director Jerry Henry stated. Also remember that the NRA has fought any attempts to just tighten restrictions on acquiring a gun license.
This new, lack of common sense law even removes a restriction that prevented those convicted of certain misdemeanors from getting a gun permit. In addition, this law will unbelievably deny police the ability to detain a person, "for the sole purpose of investigating whether such a person has a weapons carry license." Which means if you can't be stopped by police to check to see if one has a carry license, why get a carry license in the first place? Finally, this idiotic law establishes an absolute defense for the legal use of deadly force of a violent attack.
You've got to be kidding!!! What is happening with this country? If you listen to and believe what the NRA says, "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Well this is the hypothetical scenario I could and probably would see happening after 7/1. Of all the places guns should never be mixed with is bars, where alcohol is served. So there are 2 guys drinking at a bar when an argument ensues. One pulls out his gun and shoots at the other, but misses him. Someone behind the intended target gets shot and the injured person returns fire, but because he was shot, misses his intended target and shoots another innocent bystander and so on and so forth. Then the headlines would read, 10 killed and many more hurt in drunken shooting melee at some bar. Come on, we all know someone that if they drink too much, they take on a different persona and could and would do something stupid. Now suppose that person carried a firearm. Would they be able to restrain themselves? Remember that since the police can't detain someone to check if they have a carry license, why even get a carry license?
Can anyone tell me why this law is a good idea? This law will fail like Florida's, Stand your ground law is failing now. I don't see people feeling safer with this law, but rather more unsafe and afraid with the potential of innocent people getting injured or killed in places where guns were never allowed previously. More guns in public places means more shootings. This law should really be called, the guns everywhere law.
Once again, politicians don't have or won't use any common sense in passing another asinine law. Now it seems that this law will only die after one to many real people die. Go figure! Remind me not to visit Georgia any time soon.
Til next week.
Peter
OK so maybe it isn't actually the wild west, but it definitely will be the wild, wild south. There is a change coming that I believe will not have the outcome that the politicians are expecting. Changes like this will be detrimental to the health and welfare of its citizens. What am I talking about? I am talking about how the state of Georgia has decided that it is a good thing for all licensed gun owners to be able to carry their firearms almost anywhere. Georgia Governor Nathan Deal, a Republican, signed the state's Safe Carry Protection Act. Where will they be able to carry their firearms as of July 1, 2014? How about bars, schools, churches and government buildings that don't have, no gun rules and non-secure areas in airports. The licensed gun owners would be able to carry their firearms without restrictions. The new law also allows school districts to decide whether they want their employees to carry a firearm.
Of course the NRA, (which touts a membership of 5 million, which is a very small minority of Americans), says that Georgia's new law, according to USA Today, is "the most comprehensive pro-gun reform legislation introduced in recent history." The gun rights group GeorgiaCarry.org believes that the law will, "restore our right to carry and be allowed to protect ourselves anywhere we go," executive director Jerry Henry stated. Also remember that the NRA has fought any attempts to just tighten restrictions on acquiring a gun license.
This new, lack of common sense law even removes a restriction that prevented those convicted of certain misdemeanors from getting a gun permit. In addition, this law will unbelievably deny police the ability to detain a person, "for the sole purpose of investigating whether such a person has a weapons carry license." Which means if you can't be stopped by police to check to see if one has a carry license, why get a carry license in the first place? Finally, this idiotic law establishes an absolute defense for the legal use of deadly force of a violent attack.
You've got to be kidding!!! What is happening with this country? If you listen to and believe what the NRA says, "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Well this is the hypothetical scenario I could and probably would see happening after 7/1. Of all the places guns should never be mixed with is bars, where alcohol is served. So there are 2 guys drinking at a bar when an argument ensues. One pulls out his gun and shoots at the other, but misses him. Someone behind the intended target gets shot and the injured person returns fire, but because he was shot, misses his intended target and shoots another innocent bystander and so on and so forth. Then the headlines would read, 10 killed and many more hurt in drunken shooting melee at some bar. Come on, we all know someone that if they drink too much, they take on a different persona and could and would do something stupid. Now suppose that person carried a firearm. Would they be able to restrain themselves? Remember that since the police can't detain someone to check if they have a carry license, why even get a carry license?
Can anyone tell me why this law is a good idea? This law will fail like Florida's, Stand your ground law is failing now. I don't see people feeling safer with this law, but rather more unsafe and afraid with the potential of innocent people getting injured or killed in places where guns were never allowed previously. More guns in public places means more shootings. This law should really be called, the guns everywhere law.
Once again, politicians don't have or won't use any common sense in passing another asinine law. Now it seems that this law will only die after one to many real people die. Go figure! Remind me not to visit Georgia any time soon.
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, April 13, 2014
2 fer, part deux
Hi Everyone,
For only the second time, I am giving you all 2 quickies today. Every once in a while I find a quote that someone said and to me, makes so much sense that I have to share it.
#1) This is from William Graham Sumner, (1840-1910). "All history is only one long story to this effect: men have struggled for power over their fellow men in order that they might win the joys of the earth at the expense of others and might shift the burdens of life from their own shoulders upon those of others." This certainly seems true even today.
#2) In today's Sunday paper, there is an article in the Money section about the price of beef. The bottom line is that this country is facing the highest beef prices in 3 decades. This is true with both consumers and restaurant owners. Additionally, it doesn't matter which cut of beef you want, London Broil, T-Bone, Prime Rib, Rib Eye, Hamburger meat, etc., etc. all the prices have risen.
The news media has been talking about a beef shortage since last year when a terrible drought forced many cattle ranchers to sell off their herds prematurely, before they would be normally ready. There were no grasslands and the cost of hay was too expensive to feed their herds. So I figured that, that was the reason for the sharp increases in beef prices we are seeing now. But, oh boy was I wrong! Another part of this equation and is just as equally important, is the growing export demand from countries such as China and Japan. Now that part of the equation was never mentioned in other news outlets. Seems that there is quandary with our US owned cattle ranchers. Keep the price increases to a lesser amount by not selling so much overseas or continue selling overseas and keep the price increases to the max. With 25% price increases so far, how high will the price of beef go?
Unfortunately, as we have seen so many times before, when a food price increases, we never return to the price prior to the increases. A great example is the cost of Orange Juice. Some years ago, there were frosts in Florida, that heavily damaged the citrus crops. OJ prices immediately shot up and the price never returned to pre-frost prices. AND, in a recent study, Americans now drink 40% less OJ then they did 10 or 20 years ago and the price just keep rising. What happened to Economics 101, supply and demand?
So what does this all mean? We obviously can't control Mother Nature in regards to droughts and frosts etc. But the amount of beef sold overseas can and should be controlled, especially in the event of a severe drought like what is currently happening out west. Common sense is never on the front burner with these kind of issues, but greed is, which is unfortunate for all of us.
Til next week.
Peter
For only the second time, I am giving you all 2 quickies today. Every once in a while I find a quote that someone said and to me, makes so much sense that I have to share it.
#1) This is from William Graham Sumner, (1840-1910). "All history is only one long story to this effect: men have struggled for power over their fellow men in order that they might win the joys of the earth at the expense of others and might shift the burdens of life from their own shoulders upon those of others." This certainly seems true even today.
#2) In today's Sunday paper, there is an article in the Money section about the price of beef. The bottom line is that this country is facing the highest beef prices in 3 decades. This is true with both consumers and restaurant owners. Additionally, it doesn't matter which cut of beef you want, London Broil, T-Bone, Prime Rib, Rib Eye, Hamburger meat, etc., etc. all the prices have risen.
The news media has been talking about a beef shortage since last year when a terrible drought forced many cattle ranchers to sell off their herds prematurely, before they would be normally ready. There were no grasslands and the cost of hay was too expensive to feed their herds. So I figured that, that was the reason for the sharp increases in beef prices we are seeing now. But, oh boy was I wrong! Another part of this equation and is just as equally important, is the growing export demand from countries such as China and Japan. Now that part of the equation was never mentioned in other news outlets. Seems that there is quandary with our US owned cattle ranchers. Keep the price increases to a lesser amount by not selling so much overseas or continue selling overseas and keep the price increases to the max. With 25% price increases so far, how high will the price of beef go?
Unfortunately, as we have seen so many times before, when a food price increases, we never return to the price prior to the increases. A great example is the cost of Orange Juice. Some years ago, there were frosts in Florida, that heavily damaged the citrus crops. OJ prices immediately shot up and the price never returned to pre-frost prices. AND, in a recent study, Americans now drink 40% less OJ then they did 10 or 20 years ago and the price just keep rising. What happened to Economics 101, supply and demand?
So what does this all mean? We obviously can't control Mother Nature in regards to droughts and frosts etc. But the amount of beef sold overseas can and should be controlled, especially in the event of a severe drought like what is currently happening out west. Common sense is never on the front burner with these kind of issues, but greed is, which is unfortunate for all of us.
Til next week.
Peter
Sunday, April 6, 2014
Money to Burn?!
Hi Everyone,
If anyone has had a job where traveling and/or overnight stays were a part of the job, your reimbursement was based on one very important factor. You had to submit your receipts in order to get reimbursed. If you lost or didn't keep your receipts, you were out of luck and didn't get reimbursed. During all my years in the corporate world, I never heard of a company that reimbursed employees without any receipts. No receipts, no payment period!
So I just read about how our New York State lawmakers get reimbursed for their out of pocket expenses when they have to travel to Albany. Our state elected politicians collect a $172.00 a day, per diem. That money is suppose to cover their hotel and meals for each and every day they are in the Capitol. The per diem is for lawmakers who come from outside of the Capitol. The lawmakers can and do also claim mileage expenses and train tickets for additional reimbursements. Recently, I was quite shocked when I read a newspaper article that our NYS lawmakers are not required to submit any receipts or documentation, what so ever, in order to receive their per diem payments. What?!
What world do our lawmakers live in? Like so many other ways, our state lawmakers work by a whole other different set of rules which private sector companies would never, ever consider or even implement for that matter. Not having to submit receipts or even documentation leads to misuse and even fraud. Consequently, there is no way to verify what the lawmakers actual expenses are. If our lawmakers had just one ounce of common sense, they would change the rules so that they would have to submit their expenses for an actual dollar for dollar reimbursement. I am not sure how much money could and would be saved if receipts were required, but I bet there would be a substantial savings to the overtaxed NYS residents. For the politicians who make extra money by actually using less than the $172.00 per diem, unfortunately, I don't see them trying to change the rules that would take away their ill gotten gains anytime soon.
If you agree with me, and you live in NYS, you should contact your state representative and tell them to end this absurd and deceitful practice. We've had enough of this kind of wasteful spending. I just don't get why politicians think they are entitled to more money then they actually spend while in Albany.
Til next week.
Peter
If anyone has had a job where traveling and/or overnight stays were a part of the job, your reimbursement was based on one very important factor. You had to submit your receipts in order to get reimbursed. If you lost or didn't keep your receipts, you were out of luck and didn't get reimbursed. During all my years in the corporate world, I never heard of a company that reimbursed employees without any receipts. No receipts, no payment period!
So I just read about how our New York State lawmakers get reimbursed for their out of pocket expenses when they have to travel to Albany. Our state elected politicians collect a $172.00 a day, per diem. That money is suppose to cover their hotel and meals for each and every day they are in the Capitol. The per diem is for lawmakers who come from outside of the Capitol. The lawmakers can and do also claim mileage expenses and train tickets for additional reimbursements. Recently, I was quite shocked when I read a newspaper article that our NYS lawmakers are not required to submit any receipts or documentation, what so ever, in order to receive their per diem payments. What?!
What world do our lawmakers live in? Like so many other ways, our state lawmakers work by a whole other different set of rules which private sector companies would never, ever consider or even implement for that matter. Not having to submit receipts or even documentation leads to misuse and even fraud. Consequently, there is no way to verify what the lawmakers actual expenses are. If our lawmakers had just one ounce of common sense, they would change the rules so that they would have to submit their expenses for an actual dollar for dollar reimbursement. I am not sure how much money could and would be saved if receipts were required, but I bet there would be a substantial savings to the overtaxed NYS residents. For the politicians who make extra money by actually using less than the $172.00 per diem, unfortunately, I don't see them trying to change the rules that would take away their ill gotten gains anytime soon.
If you agree with me, and you live in NYS, you should contact your state representative and tell them to end this absurd and deceitful practice. We've had enough of this kind of wasteful spending. I just don't get why politicians think they are entitled to more money then they actually spend while in Albany.
Til next week.
Peter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)