Here we go again with the politically correct “High Risk” (poorer), “Low Risk” (wealthier) areas; we wouldn’t want to offend anyone. Currently, there is talk that we may have to pay an additional $20 per vehicle to subsidize the auto insurance for the people who live in “High Risk” areas. Keeping premiums down for motorists living in Newark, Paterson, Jersey City, Camden, Elizabeth, Irvington, Perth Amboy and other “high-risk” insurance towns.
I am incensed, for lack of a better word to use in print. If you live in a “High Risk” area it is either because you can’t afford to live in a “Low Risk” area, don’t have the education to get a better job, or live in a “High Risk” area by choice.
Because you are fortunate enough to own two or more vehicles, you are now going to be penalized. Let’s suppose you are penalized to the point you now have to sell one vehicle to be able to afford the other. If your county owns a fleet of vehicles, will the taxpayers foot the bill to cover the additional $20 on each vehicle?
If you’re living in an area where the vandalism is high, cars are stolen, cars are sprayed with graffiti, and tires are stolen, windshields are smashed; I am not obligated to pay for that problem, which is why I choose not to live in those areas. How many that live in “High Risk” areas even carry insurance? Why and how, are these people driving if they can’t afford the insurance? Maybe we are being asked to subsidize the Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist clause. Perhaps another back door approach to fund insurance for the illegals, once they receive their “driver privilege card”. Now that “State Insurance” is being phased out, could this be a way to get us to pick up the tab and carry those who can’t afford it, thereby eliminating the state from dealing with it?
I have a news flash for Insurance Commissioner Stephen Goldman; if you are in the insurance business, it is considered a “risk business”. Like any other business, if you can’t afford to stay in business, close your doors. The state mandates we must carry insurance, but in many incidences, we wind up paying back our own costs for damages. I work to pay for my insurance, I don’t work so I can pay for someone who earns less or works less.
The “share the wealth” is getting a little out of hand, and this is only the start. How much more is the average taxpayer required to give before they are tapped out?
In part of a speech on February 19, 2008 in Wisconsin, Obama said “In the end, this economic agenda won't just require new money. It will require a new spirit of cooperation and innovation on behalf of the American people. We will have to *learn more, and study more, and work harder. We will be called upon to take part in a shared sacrifice and shared prosperity."
What this means in a nutshell is that in addition to the additional taxes on those making over $250,000 a year, and eliminating the $102,000 wage cap on Social Security taxes, Obama is also proposing that Americans pay additional taxes on oil, coal and natural gas in order to redistribute their wealth to the rest of the world.
Obama's Global Poverty Plan to reduce poverty around the world would include a tax of 0.7% of U.S. gross national product as part of his shared prosperity plan.
This Act would commit the United States to the U.N. that industrialized countries should spend 0.7 percent a year of their gross domestic product on foreign aid. Over the next decade or so, that would work out to $850 billion dollars for American taxpayers.
*Learn more and Study More?
Most of us are living in “Low Risk” areas because that’s why we learned and studied to get ahead so we could move up that rung on the ladder.
*Work Harder?
As far as myself, I held two full time jobs for almost three years; averaging 8 hours sleep for a five day week, and held a part-time job on Saturday, to get what I wanted or needed. How much harder should we now work to “share the wealth” of our hard work to those who would rather receive a handout?
Many of us work hard until we can have somewhat of a comfortable life, but now we are going to be supplementing those who have nothing. What’s next, will we be asked to subsidize “High Risk” heat bills, rent, education, etc, until the pockets of those barely squeaking by in the “Low Risk” areas are empty. How long before “Low Risk” areas have to pay $20 out of their Health Care to subsidize Hospitals in “High Risk” areas? People living in “Low Risk” areas will be taxed until they are forced to move to “High Risk” (poorer) areas. You will work more and more to keep what you have, as more and more is being taken from your pay, to subsidize those who have less. How long before the “liberals’ determine you have more than enough in your savings, that you can share some of it with the less unfortunate?
I’d like to ask Commissioner Goldman what his income is; perhaps he won’t miss the $20. Tell those who have lost jobs, lost their homes, and are barely paying their car insurance as it is, that they may have to fork over an additional $20 because they are fortunate enough to live in a "Low Risk" area. They would love to give up some more of what little they have left.
“The industry challengers say the power to establish rates is up to the Legislature, not the insurance department bureaucrats”, I’m sure the insurance lobbyists will stand back and won’t bother the Legislature while they mull it over.
I don’t mind helping those down on their luck, but I don’t need government telling me where my money is going to be spent.
Is this the next wave of liberalism?
Could it be we are being forced to take the path to socialism, whether we like it or not?
~ Joe Sinagra
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
We Need Property Tax Relief
If those in the State Government would make it affordable for people to stay in their homes, the need for more affordable housing would be cut considerably, and would allow for more available units to those who need it.
Seniors on fixed incomes, who have paid off their mortgages, cannot afford the increased taxes, and have had to give up their homes. The elderly are more susceptible to losing their homes, more so than any other group. If they were able to stay in their homes we would not have to construct as many senior affordable housing units.
Most people if given the option would like to stay in their homes, neighborhoods, near their families and friends.
With state aid being cut, municipalities are forced to raise local taxes to make up for the shortfall. It may help the municipalities, but it doesn’t help the taxpayers.
We need to cut property taxes substantially, not the meager tax breaks here and there. Many people when they bought their homes could afford it. It isn’t the mortgages that are strangling many of our homeowners, it is the property taxes. Many homeowners can afford their mortgage payments; they just can’t keep pace with every tax increase that comes along, affecting renters as well.
I believe that is the reason many school budgets are voted down, people can no longer afford to stay in their homes as it is without incurring additional burdens.
When NJ raises other taxes, to replace lost property tax revenue, it’s more of a tax shift than a tax cut. Raising the sales tax to 7% from 6% was supposed to give us property tax relief. Roll the sales tax back to 6%; the so called 1% increase that was to help bring the state’s financial mess stability sure didn’t help, other than to take more money out of the taxpayer’s pocket.
Property taxes have risen 27% since 2000, less than the 41% inflation-adjusted increase in home values, but it's twice as fast as the growth in sales or income taxes. Property taxes now consume a greater share of personal income than any other time in New Jersey’s history. How long before the taxes will equal more than the value of your home? Those who bought homes years ago are finding their property taxes are more than their monthly mortgage payments.
How many times are we going to hear from our legislators, “if elected I will cut taxes?” They should have been doing that all along. Cutting taxes and increasing state spending is not what I call fiscal management.
We can’t continue to raise taxes for the working class, at a rate faster than their ability to pay. If we need to restructure how property taxes are collected, stop talking about it, let’s do it.
Raising taxes, forcing people out of their homes and making it unaffordable to purchase a home is not the answer. It's bad for homeowners, renters, and business.
Flat tax, Fair Tax it doesn’t matter, now is the time to do something, anything but the way it is being done currently, the state needs to put disposable funds back into the pockets of the people if they expect to stimulate the economy. Stop taking money out of the pockets of those who need it the most, give them the capitol to spend, donate, contribute and save. Then, and only then will you see the results of a growing economy.
A real collective bipartisan effort is needed from those in the state capitol, to give relief to the people who put them in office.
By limiting the amount government can tax our property; perhaps with a constitutional cap will we be able to have substantial relief.
Whatever the solution is, we need to act now.
~ Joe Sinagra
Seniors on fixed incomes, who have paid off their mortgages, cannot afford the increased taxes, and have had to give up their homes. The elderly are more susceptible to losing their homes, more so than any other group. If they were able to stay in their homes we would not have to construct as many senior affordable housing units.
Most people if given the option would like to stay in their homes, neighborhoods, near their families and friends.
With state aid being cut, municipalities are forced to raise local taxes to make up for the shortfall. It may help the municipalities, but it doesn’t help the taxpayers.
We need to cut property taxes substantially, not the meager tax breaks here and there. Many people when they bought their homes could afford it. It isn’t the mortgages that are strangling many of our homeowners, it is the property taxes. Many homeowners can afford their mortgage payments; they just can’t keep pace with every tax increase that comes along, affecting renters as well.
I believe that is the reason many school budgets are voted down, people can no longer afford to stay in their homes as it is without incurring additional burdens.
When NJ raises other taxes, to replace lost property tax revenue, it’s more of a tax shift than a tax cut. Raising the sales tax to 7% from 6% was supposed to give us property tax relief. Roll the sales tax back to 6%; the so called 1% increase that was to help bring the state’s financial mess stability sure didn’t help, other than to take more money out of the taxpayer’s pocket.
Property taxes have risen 27% since 2000, less than the 41% inflation-adjusted increase in home values, but it's twice as fast as the growth in sales or income taxes. Property taxes now consume a greater share of personal income than any other time in New Jersey’s history. How long before the taxes will equal more than the value of your home? Those who bought homes years ago are finding their property taxes are more than their monthly mortgage payments.
How many times are we going to hear from our legislators, “if elected I will cut taxes?” They should have been doing that all along. Cutting taxes and increasing state spending is not what I call fiscal management.
We can’t continue to raise taxes for the working class, at a rate faster than their ability to pay. If we need to restructure how property taxes are collected, stop talking about it, let’s do it.
Raising taxes, forcing people out of their homes and making it unaffordable to purchase a home is not the answer. It's bad for homeowners, renters, and business.
Flat tax, Fair Tax it doesn’t matter, now is the time to do something, anything but the way it is being done currently, the state needs to put disposable funds back into the pockets of the people if they expect to stimulate the economy. Stop taking money out of the pockets of those who need it the most, give them the capitol to spend, donate, contribute and save. Then, and only then will you see the results of a growing economy.
A real collective bipartisan effort is needed from those in the state capitol, to give relief to the people who put them in office.
By limiting the amount government can tax our property; perhaps with a constitutional cap will we be able to have substantial relief.
Whatever the solution is, we need to act now.
~ Joe Sinagra
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Illegal aliens mustn't get this state's welcome mat
To the Editor:
I agree with your editorial assessment "Don't reward New Jersey illegal aliens".
During my congressional and senate campaigns, my views were pretty close to what was printed in the Home News Editorial on January 07.
What I find ironic is at the time; the press portrayed my position as being too strong against illegal immigration, “over the top” as one put it. At one editorial review, an editor stood up, pointed his finger at me and said “What, are you prejudiced!” It is a matter of what it is costing the citizens of our state and our country, not prejudice. With an economy that is souring, we can no longer afford to picked up added costs and pass them onto the taxpayers.
During my campaigns I spoke of exactly this very thing. I talked about the migration of illegal’s, and the drain on our country’s natural resources, the costs of education, health care, incarceration, schools, etc. Is the “driver privilege card” another back door attempt at amnesty? The card wouldn’t be considered and official ID, but would ensure that illegal immigrants go through the same testing as any other motorist.
Why as a citizen do we need 6 forms of identification to obtain a license, especially when you already have a legal driver license? Many more ramifications are ahead if this is allowed to pass.
As the Home News touched on in their editorial, there was already talk in 2006 about reduced college tuition's for “undocumented Immigrants”. In 2007 higher education costs for our state residents had gone up 35% since 2002. I was critical of the cuts on our universities and colleges, incurring increased costs for in-state students, while giving illegal's low cost or free education.
I had talked about the costs of health care, we as citizens must pay ludicrous amounts to stay healthy? If illegals can't qualify for Medicare coverage, partially paid through our payroll taxes, their costs are then covered through state Charity Care. A mere fraction of hospital care costs, is it a wonder hospitals are closing? Medical offices are throwing away millions upon millions of dollars each year in uncollected billing statements.
Illegal immigration burdens our society with added education costs, the overcrowding of our schools, taxpayer-funded unreimbursed medical outlays for health care, also adding to the shortage of low income housing, and added increase in crime.
There was talk of “undocumented” immigrants paying a fee so they can buy their way to citizenship. Is that a way of supposedly easing the pain of those who stayed in line, applied for citizenship and worked their butts off to be here?
I spoke of the “Dream Act”, which if passed it would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and dramatically increase the importation of foreign workers at a time 10 million Americans are looking for jobs and cannot find employment.
In one of my articles I stated, “Until we bring our own house in order, until we decide how we are to continue funding Social Security, fund education, lower taxes; provide affordable health care and housing, for the legal citizens of this country, my stance is no to amnesty. We cannot afford to continue to raise taxes, provide programs and services with the sweat off the backs of legal citizens, to provide care for those who shouldn’t be here.”
To promote the availability of the Driver Privilege program, in 2006 would have cost the taxpayers another $90,000.
Bill A2607 was introduced in 2006, sponsored by Assemblyman Joe Vas -District 19 (Middlesex), Assemblyman Reed Gusciora - District 15 (Mercer), Assemblyman Upendra J. Chivukula - District 17 (Middlesex and Somerset), and Assemblyman Gordon M. Johnson - District 37 (Bergen).
As long as our elected politicians are more concerned about how many votes they can cultivate, more than the rights and interests of legal citizens, nothing will change.
Immigration itself is not the problem, illegal or “undocumented” immigration is.
My personal view is, that once your attain citizen status; you are no longer an immigrant. You are an American.
On my website I surmised, “Any further attempt at Immigration reform won't happen until after the 2008 elections.”
Well . . . Happy New Year!
- Joe Sinagra
I agree with your editorial assessment "Don't reward New Jersey illegal aliens".
During my congressional and senate campaigns, my views were pretty close to what was printed in the Home News Editorial on January 07.
What I find ironic is at the time; the press portrayed my position as being too strong against illegal immigration, “over the top” as one put it. At one editorial review, an editor stood up, pointed his finger at me and said “What, are you prejudiced!” It is a matter of what it is costing the citizens of our state and our country, not prejudice. With an economy that is souring, we can no longer afford to picked up added costs and pass them onto the taxpayers.
During my campaigns I spoke of exactly this very thing. I talked about the migration of illegal’s, and the drain on our country’s natural resources, the costs of education, health care, incarceration, schools, etc. Is the “driver privilege card” another back door attempt at amnesty? The card wouldn’t be considered and official ID, but would ensure that illegal immigrants go through the same testing as any other motorist.
Why as a citizen do we need 6 forms of identification to obtain a license, especially when you already have a legal driver license? Many more ramifications are ahead if this is allowed to pass.
As the Home News touched on in their editorial, there was already talk in 2006 about reduced college tuition's for “undocumented Immigrants”. In 2007 higher education costs for our state residents had gone up 35% since 2002. I was critical of the cuts on our universities and colleges, incurring increased costs for in-state students, while giving illegal's low cost or free education.
I had talked about the costs of health care, we as citizens must pay ludicrous amounts to stay healthy? If illegals can't qualify for Medicare coverage, partially paid through our payroll taxes, their costs are then covered through state Charity Care. A mere fraction of hospital care costs, is it a wonder hospitals are closing? Medical offices are throwing away millions upon millions of dollars each year in uncollected billing statements.
Illegal immigration burdens our society with added education costs, the overcrowding of our schools, taxpayer-funded unreimbursed medical outlays for health care, also adding to the shortage of low income housing, and added increase in crime.
There was talk of “undocumented” immigrants paying a fee so they can buy their way to citizenship. Is that a way of supposedly easing the pain of those who stayed in line, applied for citizenship and worked their butts off to be here?
I spoke of the “Dream Act”, which if passed it would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and dramatically increase the importation of foreign workers at a time 10 million Americans are looking for jobs and cannot find employment.
In one of my articles I stated, “Until we bring our own house in order, until we decide how we are to continue funding Social Security, fund education, lower taxes; provide affordable health care and housing, for the legal citizens of this country, my stance is no to amnesty. We cannot afford to continue to raise taxes, provide programs and services with the sweat off the backs of legal citizens, to provide care for those who shouldn’t be here.”
To promote the availability of the Driver Privilege program, in 2006 would have cost the taxpayers another $90,000.
Bill A2607 was introduced in 2006, sponsored by Assemblyman Joe Vas -District 19 (Middlesex), Assemblyman Reed Gusciora - District 15 (Mercer), Assemblyman Upendra J. Chivukula - District 17 (Middlesex and Somerset), and Assemblyman Gordon M. Johnson - District 37 (Bergen).
As long as our elected politicians are more concerned about how many votes they can cultivate, more than the rights and interests of legal citizens, nothing will change.
Immigration itself is not the problem, illegal or “undocumented” immigration is.
My personal view is, that once your attain citizen status; you are no longer an immigrant. You are an American.
On my website I surmised, “Any further attempt at Immigration reform won't happen until after the 2008 elections.”
Well . . . Happy New Year!
- Joe Sinagra
Monday, December 22, 2008
Equal Time For Plant Life
It is a scientific fact that plants "cry in pain" when attacked or damaged by a hungry herbivore. They do have their own "alarm" reaction to tissue damage and, in an effect curiously similar to that in animals.
Plants make a hormone called "Jasmonic acid" when they are in distress. It signals the production of plant-defense compounds -- it works a little like a shot of pain, warning the plant that it is under attack. It can also pass off a vapor and warn nearby plants, a chain reaction that's like a warning signal to other plants.
Plant life is "life" after all and should be treated as such. I do not see any plant demonstrators saying we shouldn't be harvesting plants for medical research, or that nurseries are cramming vegetables into small containers. They are kept in nurseries all their life. There are some species of plants that are going to be "extinct" if we do not act now.
Nurseries are cramming new sprouts and seeds into plant mills and are harvested as soon as they are ripe. They don't even get a chance to blossom. Thousands of seeds are being thrown out or discarded. Who is going to take in all the discarded seeds?
Thousands of fruits and vegetables are just ripped from the vine they grow up on, and thrown away because they aren't good enough.
It is easier to kill a plant because it cannot move, you cannot hear it scream or see it look you in the eye as you drain the life from them. How cruel can it be, to pull them out by their roots and throw them into a pot of boiling water, or a pan full of boiling oil?
Just because plants do not have nervous systems and cannot run away from predators, does that mean they do not experience pain and suffering?
Let little Fauna and Flora live, once all plant life is destroyed, all animal life would cease to exist.
Plants provide us with oxygen; cows provide us with methane gas.
Save a plant today, eat red meat.
A good steak today will save a salad for tomorrow.
Joe Sinagra
Plants make a hormone called "Jasmonic acid" when they are in distress. It signals the production of plant-defense compounds -- it works a little like a shot of pain, warning the plant that it is under attack. It can also pass off a vapor and warn nearby plants, a chain reaction that's like a warning signal to other plants.
Plant life is "life" after all and should be treated as such. I do not see any plant demonstrators saying we shouldn't be harvesting plants for medical research, or that nurseries are cramming vegetables into small containers. They are kept in nurseries all their life. There are some species of plants that are going to be "extinct" if we do not act now.
Nurseries are cramming new sprouts and seeds into plant mills and are harvested as soon as they are ripe. They don't even get a chance to blossom. Thousands of seeds are being thrown out or discarded. Who is going to take in all the discarded seeds?
Thousands of fruits and vegetables are just ripped from the vine they grow up on, and thrown away because they aren't good enough.
It is easier to kill a plant because it cannot move, you cannot hear it scream or see it look you in the eye as you drain the life from them. How cruel can it be, to pull them out by their roots and throw them into a pot of boiling water, or a pan full of boiling oil?
Just because plants do not have nervous systems and cannot run away from predators, does that mean they do not experience pain and suffering?
Let little Fauna and Flora live, once all plant life is destroyed, all animal life would cease to exist.
Plants provide us with oxygen; cows provide us with methane gas.
Save a plant today, eat red meat.
A good steak today will save a salad for tomorrow.
Joe Sinagra
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Illegal Immigration taking toll on Economy
Immigrants / migrant workers come here on a work visa, and when it expires its time to go back. No one is saying they can't or shouldn't work here; the problem is they aren’t leaving when their visas expire as no one is enforcing that. For some reason illegals feel they don't have to obey our customs. There are immigrants and there are illegal immigrants, there is a difference. Immigrants, who want to stay, get in line and apply for US citizenship the same way all immigrants in the past did. To me once you become a citizen you are no longer an immigrant. We don't need new laws written, what we need is our government to provide the personnel to enforce our existing immigration laws. We need to make it harder for illegals to receive an education, to get a job, and get medical, that make it less enticing to stay, or more of an incentive to gain citizenship.
The argument that illegals pay taxes depends on what side of the fence (no pun intended) you’re on. If you’re paying $2000 a year in taxes, but receiving $25,000 in benefits it just doesn't balance out. As a citizen I go to the emergency room and have to pay $300, as an illegal with no coverage Charity Care picks up the tab. Which we all pay for and are why our health care costs are so expensive.
Everyone one of us had family who immigrated here. But they worked to become citizens, and didn't expect handouts. My grandfather couldn't speak English and learned it, his first job as a milkman, then as a janitor and then bought his own farm. His proudest day was when he became a citizen.
What we are talking about is ILLEGAL immigrants, why is it so hard to differentiate between the two?
As a kid, as an American, I have worked as a janitor, I have worked in construction, I have bused tables, stocked shelves, washed dishes and as an adult whatever it took to make money to support my family and pay for college. To say there are Americans who won't work these jobs is a crock of bull.
Farmers, construction all want cheap labor that’s OK. Just enforce the work visas for immigrants. Not leaving after your time is up is what makes you illegal. The contractors are screwing themselves and it also affects the unions. When illegals become semi skilled or feel they have enough knowledge to go on their own, who do you think they are going to hire?
They hire their buddies across the border who then come here and cut costs on framing, sheet rocking, masonry, etc. Even though they charge less, they still make more then they would back home. Plus the money is sent back across the border, not going back into the economy that’s giving them a living.
An illegal sends US money home, and they receive the government freebies that come with being an illegal.
I don't receive the free benefits that illegals get and must pay for my kids education, I don't receive it free. I pay for my hospitalization; I don't receive Charity Care from the state. I need to pay taxes to keep my house, I don't receive housing assistance. Not only do Americans pay their own way, they pay higher to support the free programs for illegals.
Then we have the illegals come here and demand rights. If they want rights go back to their country and demonstrate there, but they won't because they will be seen again. It's amazing how illegals can come from nothing and then come here and complain about wanting more.
When the media writes an article about immigrants, they talk about them as if everyone is the same. Talk about illegals, not about immigrants who came here to work hard and become citizens. It is unjust and unfair to grant amnesty to illegals, when millions of immigrants studied and earned the right to come here legally and be called an American.
Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. Taxes paid by ILLEGAL immigrants do not cover the cost of services received by them. We will not be able to provide quality education, health care, and retirement security for our citizens if we continue to bring in endless numbers of poor, unskilled immigrants.
Waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.
Illegal immigration adds to tremendous population growth with the over crowding of our school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland
Hospitals receive funded monies to accommodate Charity Care Emergency Medical Assistance. So in essence we are legally paying for services to illegal immigrants
We need to stop giving illegal aliens jobs, education, ID’s and housing.
We need a program to end illegal immigration; that means ensuring that people who enter illegally or overstay their lawful status will not be able to obtain employment, public assistance benefits, public education, public housing, or any other taxpayer-funded benefits.
Yes it will cost us, but the savings of what it is costing the counties, communities and school districts will be astronomical.
It is costing the state’s taxpayers nearly $2.1 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration due to the illegal alien population residing in New Jersey alone.
Based on Census Bureau data, studies estimate that households headed by illegal aliens used $10 billion more in government services than they paid in taxes. If illegals had been given amnesty, the fiscal deficit at the federal level would grow to nearly $29 billion.
The average illegal household pays more than $4,200 a year in federal taxes, for a total of nearly $16 billion, but they impose annual costs of more than $26.3 billion, or about $6,950 per illegal household.
Amnesty would increase costs because many illegal immigrants are largely unskilled; their tax payments would be very modest. However, once legalized they would have access to many more government services.
Illegal aliens receive free public education; states grant illegal aliens college scholarships and reduced in-state tuition. An estimated 11.7 percent of the K-12 public school students in New Jersey are children of illegal aliens.
Free medical care at taxpayer expense. Those who do not qualify for Medicaid will receive Charity Care paid by the State. Taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to an estimated $200 million a year.
All are great incentives for illegal aliens to enter the US illegally.
Over 17% of our Federal Prison population consists of illegal aliens. The uncompensated cost of incarcerating deportable illegal aliens in New Jersey’s state and local prisons, amounts to about $50 million a year.
Iranians have been caught sneaking over the border. Over 100,000 illegal aliens from the Middle East currently reside in the U.S. If we can’t deal with the influx of illegal aliens in the US, how would we protect ourselves from terrorism?
The costs associated with illegal immigration, Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
A proposal requiring employers to fire workers who falsify identity documents, is favored by Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Americans, 74% believe that they should be required to provide documents proving they are in the country legally if a person wants to rent an apartment.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans believe it is very important to improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration, a view that is held by 80% of Republicans.
By a margin of (60% to 28%), Americans believe it is more important to gain control of the nation’s borders than to “legalize the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.”
Sixty-two percent (62%) of Americans support doubling the number of border agents.
A majority of Americans (54%) oppose the current U.S. law that grants automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the United States, 63% opposes automatic citizenship.
The options we have are simple. We either accept the costs created by the presence of the large pool of illegal aliens, or enforce our laws by reducing the numbers of illegal aliens in the United States.
When we have groups in our nation flying their flag above ours, when we have people entering our country illegally and demanding that we as an American people live by their standards, we will have lost our traditions and our heritage.
Ask any illegal if they would be willing to die to protect our freedom in order to remain a permanent citizen of our country.
We are either American or un-American. Our veterans who fought and died for our rights and individual freedoms will have fought in vain.
How many more can this ship we call America take on, before it capsizes?
Joe Sinagra
The argument that illegals pay taxes depends on what side of the fence (no pun intended) you’re on. If you’re paying $2000 a year in taxes, but receiving $25,000 in benefits it just doesn't balance out. As a citizen I go to the emergency room and have to pay $300, as an illegal with no coverage Charity Care picks up the tab. Which we all pay for and are why our health care costs are so expensive.
Everyone one of us had family who immigrated here. But they worked to become citizens, and didn't expect handouts. My grandfather couldn't speak English and learned it, his first job as a milkman, then as a janitor and then bought his own farm. His proudest day was when he became a citizen.
What we are talking about is ILLEGAL immigrants, why is it so hard to differentiate between the two?
As a kid, as an American, I have worked as a janitor, I have worked in construction, I have bused tables, stocked shelves, washed dishes and as an adult whatever it took to make money to support my family and pay for college. To say there are Americans who won't work these jobs is a crock of bull.
Farmers, construction all want cheap labor that’s OK. Just enforce the work visas for immigrants. Not leaving after your time is up is what makes you illegal. The contractors are screwing themselves and it also affects the unions. When illegals become semi skilled or feel they have enough knowledge to go on their own, who do you think they are going to hire?
They hire their buddies across the border who then come here and cut costs on framing, sheet rocking, masonry, etc. Even though they charge less, they still make more then they would back home. Plus the money is sent back across the border, not going back into the economy that’s giving them a living.
An illegal sends US money home, and they receive the government freebies that come with being an illegal.
I don't receive the free benefits that illegals get and must pay for my kids education, I don't receive it free. I pay for my hospitalization; I don't receive Charity Care from the state. I need to pay taxes to keep my house, I don't receive housing assistance. Not only do Americans pay their own way, they pay higher to support the free programs for illegals.
Then we have the illegals come here and demand rights. If they want rights go back to their country and demonstrate there, but they won't because they will be seen again. It's amazing how illegals can come from nothing and then come here and complain about wanting more.
When the media writes an article about immigrants, they talk about them as if everyone is the same. Talk about illegals, not about immigrants who came here to work hard and become citizens. It is unjust and unfair to grant amnesty to illegals, when millions of immigrants studied and earned the right to come here legally and be called an American.
Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. Taxes paid by ILLEGAL immigrants do not cover the cost of services received by them. We will not be able to provide quality education, health care, and retirement security for our citizens if we continue to bring in endless numbers of poor, unskilled immigrants.
Waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.
Illegal immigration adds to tremendous population growth with the over crowding of our school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland
Hospitals receive funded monies to accommodate Charity Care Emergency Medical Assistance. So in essence we are legally paying for services to illegal immigrants
We need to stop giving illegal aliens jobs, education, ID’s and housing.
We need a program to end illegal immigration; that means ensuring that people who enter illegally or overstay their lawful status will not be able to obtain employment, public assistance benefits, public education, public housing, or any other taxpayer-funded benefits.
Yes it will cost us, but the savings of what it is costing the counties, communities and school districts will be astronomical.
It is costing the state’s taxpayers nearly $2.1 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration due to the illegal alien population residing in New Jersey alone.
Based on Census Bureau data, studies estimate that households headed by illegal aliens used $10 billion more in government services than they paid in taxes. If illegals had been given amnesty, the fiscal deficit at the federal level would grow to nearly $29 billion.
The average illegal household pays more than $4,200 a year in federal taxes, for a total of nearly $16 billion, but they impose annual costs of more than $26.3 billion, or about $6,950 per illegal household.
Amnesty would increase costs because many illegal immigrants are largely unskilled; their tax payments would be very modest. However, once legalized they would have access to many more government services.
Illegal aliens receive free public education; states grant illegal aliens college scholarships and reduced in-state tuition. An estimated 11.7 percent of the K-12 public school students in New Jersey are children of illegal aliens.
Free medical care at taxpayer expense. Those who do not qualify for Medicaid will receive Charity Care paid by the State. Taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to an estimated $200 million a year.
All are great incentives for illegal aliens to enter the US illegally.
Over 17% of our Federal Prison population consists of illegal aliens. The uncompensated cost of incarcerating deportable illegal aliens in New Jersey’s state and local prisons, amounts to about $50 million a year.
Iranians have been caught sneaking over the border. Over 100,000 illegal aliens from the Middle East currently reside in the U.S. If we can’t deal with the influx of illegal aliens in the US, how would we protect ourselves from terrorism?
The costs associated with illegal immigration, Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
A proposal requiring employers to fire workers who falsify identity documents, is favored by Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Americans, 74% believe that they should be required to provide documents proving they are in the country legally if a person wants to rent an apartment.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans believe it is very important to improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration, a view that is held by 80% of Republicans.
By a margin of (60% to 28%), Americans believe it is more important to gain control of the nation’s borders than to “legalize the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.”
Sixty-two percent (62%) of Americans support doubling the number of border agents.
A majority of Americans (54%) oppose the current U.S. law that grants automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the United States, 63% opposes automatic citizenship.
The options we have are simple. We either accept the costs created by the presence of the large pool of illegal aliens, or enforce our laws by reducing the numbers of illegal aliens in the United States.
When we have groups in our nation flying their flag above ours, when we have people entering our country illegally and demanding that we as an American people live by their standards, we will have lost our traditions and our heritage.
Ask any illegal if they would be willing to die to protect our freedom in order to remain a permanent citizen of our country.
We are either American or un-American. Our veterans who fought and died for our rights and individual freedoms will have fought in vain.
How many more can this ship we call America take on, before it capsizes?
Joe Sinagra
Schools must be prepared to handle terrorist attack
We need to apply homeland-security funding to our schools. Is it that our school and elected officials are afraid to talk about it as it may generate more fear in our communities?
Not addressing the real threat of terrorism in our schools creates more fear among parents and school officials due to lack of information. Education, preparation and communication are the best way to manage those fears.We need to create a comprehensive safeschool plan at the district level. Have a school-security staff, conduct periodic drills, coordinate emergency-management plans, screen vendors who provide services to schools, and enact and implement safety and crisis-preparedness policies.
Our teachers are the first responders in any school emergency. They need to be trained and prepared as to what to look for and how to handle a crisis.
This would not be voluntary; it must be mandated.
Although a terrorist attack upon schools in the United States or our community may be an improbability, the first step toward preparedness is admitting that it is at least possible that terrorists could strike a school or schools.
How much of an improbability is it? Look at Stockton, Calif. (1989); Frontier Junior High, Washington (1996); Pearl High School, Mississippi (1997); Littleton, Colo., (April 20, 1999); Taber, Alberta, Canada, (May 28, 1999); Conyers, Ga., (May 20, 1999); Deming, N.M., (Nov. 19, 1999), Fort Gibson, Okla., (Dec. 6, 1999); Santee, Calif., (March 5, 2001); El Cajon, Calif., (March 22, 2001); Red Lake High School, Minn., (2005); the Amish school in Pennsylvania (2006); Blacksburg, Va., (April 16, 2007). On Oct. 27 there was a shooting on the University of Central Arkansas campus.
The trend in recent years to cut schoolsafety budgets is disturbing. Our leaders have pushed to increase funding to protect our airlines, bridges, monuments and hallways of Capitol Hill. It makes no sense to cut funding to protect the children and teachers in the "soft-target" hallways of America's schools.
Funding for school security and emergency planning should not only be spared from cuts, it should also be incrementally increased as we continue to increase our national defense and anti-terrorism preparedness in other public sectors.
This is where accountability comes in for homeland-security funds. Where has the money been spent?
Our leaders must acknowledge that it is a possibility that some form of terrorism can occur in our schools, and we must have plans to prevent and prepare for such an incident.
Many of our schools have an emergency plan, but how many of us know what that plan is if it were to be implemented? How many parents would know what to do in the event of a school lockdown? Would rushing to pick up your child make a bad situation worse?
The emergency plan is one that we would hope to never use, but we need to exercise it to ensure that everything falls into place once it is activated.
Many of our schools have a plan in place but do not use or practice it. The review of a school's plan is not required by the federal government, which only needs to verify that an emergency plan has been filed with the state. Colleges and universities are not required to have a plan.
In 2007 a 50-state study by the Government Accountability Office showed that in many cases, schools have never trained alongside local emergency-response teams, and in a few districts, school officials won't even be able to use their walkie-talkies to communicate with first responders during an emergency.
Of those with emergency plans, 27 percent have never trained with first responders, as the government recommends; only 29 percent train with "community partners" such as hospitals and municipalities.
In the event of terrorist threats, the public needs to be informed as to what our local schools, teachers and officials will do to safeguard our children.
To say it could never happen, look again at the list.
Joseph Sinagra
Not addressing the real threat of terrorism in our schools creates more fear among parents and school officials due to lack of information. Education, preparation and communication are the best way to manage those fears.We need to create a comprehensive safeschool plan at the district level. Have a school-security staff, conduct periodic drills, coordinate emergency-management plans, screen vendors who provide services to schools, and enact and implement safety and crisis-preparedness policies.
Our teachers are the first responders in any school emergency. They need to be trained and prepared as to what to look for and how to handle a crisis.
This would not be voluntary; it must be mandated.
Although a terrorist attack upon schools in the United States or our community may be an improbability, the first step toward preparedness is admitting that it is at least possible that terrorists could strike a school or schools.
How much of an improbability is it? Look at Stockton, Calif. (1989); Frontier Junior High, Washington (1996); Pearl High School, Mississippi (1997); Littleton, Colo., (April 20, 1999); Taber, Alberta, Canada, (May 28, 1999); Conyers, Ga., (May 20, 1999); Deming, N.M., (Nov. 19, 1999), Fort Gibson, Okla., (Dec. 6, 1999); Santee, Calif., (March 5, 2001); El Cajon, Calif., (March 22, 2001); Red Lake High School, Minn., (2005); the Amish school in Pennsylvania (2006); Blacksburg, Va., (April 16, 2007). On Oct. 27 there was a shooting on the University of Central Arkansas campus.
The trend in recent years to cut schoolsafety budgets is disturbing. Our leaders have pushed to increase funding to protect our airlines, bridges, monuments and hallways of Capitol Hill. It makes no sense to cut funding to protect the children and teachers in the "soft-target" hallways of America's schools.
Funding for school security and emergency planning should not only be spared from cuts, it should also be incrementally increased as we continue to increase our national defense and anti-terrorism preparedness in other public sectors.
This is where accountability comes in for homeland-security funds. Where has the money been spent?
Our leaders must acknowledge that it is a possibility that some form of terrorism can occur in our schools, and we must have plans to prevent and prepare for such an incident.
Many of our schools have an emergency plan, but how many of us know what that plan is if it were to be implemented? How many parents would know what to do in the event of a school lockdown? Would rushing to pick up your child make a bad situation worse?
The emergency plan is one that we would hope to never use, but we need to exercise it to ensure that everything falls into place once it is activated.
Many of our schools have a plan in place but do not use or practice it. The review of a school's plan is not required by the federal government, which only needs to verify that an emergency plan has been filed with the state. Colleges and universities are not required to have a plan.
In 2007 a 50-state study by the Government Accountability Office showed that in many cases, schools have never trained alongside local emergency-response teams, and in a few districts, school officials won't even be able to use their walkie-talkies to communicate with first responders during an emergency.
Of those with emergency plans, 27 percent have never trained with first responders, as the government recommends; only 29 percent train with "community partners" such as hospitals and municipalities.
In the event of terrorist threats, the public needs to be informed as to what our local schools, teachers and officials will do to safeguard our children.
To say it could never happen, look again at the list.
Joseph Sinagra
Thursday, August 7, 2008
No Money for Charity
Donations are down, membership for volunteerism has dropped, and contributions to charities have dwindled. This has been a trend over the past several years. What has caused this great phenomenon?
It is ironic that those very charities designed to help people such as The Red Cross, soup kitchens, Salvation Army and others, are the ones that now need help. People who gave to charities in the past are financially strapped, and no longer can afford the “only 1% increases”; they need it for their own survival.
With the high cost of fuel, businesses closing up, education costs soaring, tuition's increasing, outsourcing, and manufacturing plants going the way of the dinosaur we don’t have an economy, what we have is an existence.
We have a few pharmaceuticals that may leave the state or scale back. That is about all we have left of any substance for jobs, once they start leaving we could be looking at bigger financial woes in the future.
Well, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out this one.
People are doing what they need to for survival. Cutting back on food, medical, driving less, going out to eat less, people are buying only necessities, not buying the frills.
School budgets are being defeated because there are many who simply no longer can afford any more tax increases.
Those that are fortunate enough to still have a job or a home, must now absorb the increases our governor wants to pass on. The infrastructure costs will bury us. Cutting funding to towns, raising tolls, paying for pension plans, education increases to students, closing hospitals, expecting those left to make up the differences for years of the states wastefulness.
We had an increase in the sales tax that was supposed to help the people of New Jersey and get us out of debt. That was only for one year (an election year gimmick), as I personally do not see a difference this year other than higher costs passed on to the taxpayers, with more increases to come.
Seniors having a hard time are downsizing, or moving back in with their kids.
When I was running for office, the Home News Editorial Board had asked me what I would do about making more affordable housing for seniors. My answer was that if we made it affordable for them to stay in their homes we would not need to worry about building more affordable housing for them. By staying in their existing home, it would be less expensive then to build additional housing for them to move.
As it is now, we are going to government finance those on the verge of losing their homes due to foreclosure. If we can find the money to do that, then why not include it to fund seniors on a fixed income, those who are able to pay their existing mortgages, just pay the municipalities a subsidy to help offset the tax increases passed on to seniors?
Foreclosures are up, home sales are down, and we keep hearing it is a buyers market. It is a buyers market if you are lucky enough to have a job to qualify to buy a foreclosure. Then there are those who may have the money, but are not going to spend it for fear the economy may get worse. I do not see foreclosures selling like hotcakes at this time. For that matter, hotcakes are not even selling that fast at the corner diner.
For those of us lucky enough to receive a salary increase, inflation has taken it before it even clears the bank. Utilities, insurance, fuel, groceries, medical have all gone up faster then you can spell “Rumpelstiltskin”.
Housing assessments went up, but now that the housing market is in a slump, assessments have not gone down. If they did go down, your property taxes would go up anyway as the town have to make up for the shortfalls without state aid.
Our long-term politicians say they are concerned, but they still vote themselves hefty increases even when the economy is souring. The compensation received by our representatives helps them keep well ahead of inflation.
Citizens continually make sacrifices in their lives to adjust, our government needs to make some serious decisions and make those same sacrifices. Government needs to be smarter, leaner, and meaner if it intends to benefit those it wants to help. How can we help others when we cannot solve our own problems?
By continuing to empty the wallets of our taxpayers with taxes upon taxes, higher tolls, higher medical costs, and chasing business away will not stimulate the economy.
We need to start offering incentives to business and business start-ups. Government needs to boost the economy and stop penalizing the very people who contribute. As long as that trend continues eventually there will not be anyone left to take from.
Over the years, passing law after law to hinder business, increasing state mandates, higher taxes, and higher premiums to finance state programs is now taking a toll. Unless the state makes it attractive for business to stay or return we can only expect more unemployment.
We have many local politicians leaving office because of “family commitment”. They just cannot dedicate the time needed, as their personal life is more important. When people must work a second job or concentrate more on their existing job, paying more out of pocket just to keep their head above the water line, there is less time to volunteer or commit to helping others.
Many towns have programs based on charity, contributions, donations, and volunteers.
There is an old saying to the effect that you cannot take care of someone else until you take care of yourself first.
Charity begins at home . . . but for many of our citizens they are either on the verge or no longer have a place to call home.
Joe Sinagra
It is ironic that those very charities designed to help people such as The Red Cross, soup kitchens, Salvation Army and others, are the ones that now need help. People who gave to charities in the past are financially strapped, and no longer can afford the “only 1% increases”; they need it for their own survival.
With the high cost of fuel, businesses closing up, education costs soaring, tuition's increasing, outsourcing, and manufacturing plants going the way of the dinosaur we don’t have an economy, what we have is an existence.
We have a few pharmaceuticals that may leave the state or scale back. That is about all we have left of any substance for jobs, once they start leaving we could be looking at bigger financial woes in the future.
Well, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out this one.
People are doing what they need to for survival. Cutting back on food, medical, driving less, going out to eat less, people are buying only necessities, not buying the frills.
School budgets are being defeated because there are many who simply no longer can afford any more tax increases.
Those that are fortunate enough to still have a job or a home, must now absorb the increases our governor wants to pass on. The infrastructure costs will bury us. Cutting funding to towns, raising tolls, paying for pension plans, education increases to students, closing hospitals, expecting those left to make up the differences for years of the states wastefulness.
We had an increase in the sales tax that was supposed to help the people of New Jersey and get us out of debt. That was only for one year (an election year gimmick), as I personally do not see a difference this year other than higher costs passed on to the taxpayers, with more increases to come.
Seniors having a hard time are downsizing, or moving back in with their kids.
When I was running for office, the Home News Editorial Board had asked me what I would do about making more affordable housing for seniors. My answer was that if we made it affordable for them to stay in their homes we would not need to worry about building more affordable housing for them. By staying in their existing home, it would be less expensive then to build additional housing for them to move.
As it is now, we are going to government finance those on the verge of losing their homes due to foreclosure. If we can find the money to do that, then why not include it to fund seniors on a fixed income, those who are able to pay their existing mortgages, just pay the municipalities a subsidy to help offset the tax increases passed on to seniors?
Foreclosures are up, home sales are down, and we keep hearing it is a buyers market. It is a buyers market if you are lucky enough to have a job to qualify to buy a foreclosure. Then there are those who may have the money, but are not going to spend it for fear the economy may get worse. I do not see foreclosures selling like hotcakes at this time. For that matter, hotcakes are not even selling that fast at the corner diner.
For those of us lucky enough to receive a salary increase, inflation has taken it before it even clears the bank. Utilities, insurance, fuel, groceries, medical have all gone up faster then you can spell “Rumpelstiltskin”.
Housing assessments went up, but now that the housing market is in a slump, assessments have not gone down. If they did go down, your property taxes would go up anyway as the town have to make up for the shortfalls without state aid.
Our long-term politicians say they are concerned, but they still vote themselves hefty increases even when the economy is souring. The compensation received by our representatives helps them keep well ahead of inflation.
Citizens continually make sacrifices in their lives to adjust, our government needs to make some serious decisions and make those same sacrifices. Government needs to be smarter, leaner, and meaner if it intends to benefit those it wants to help. How can we help others when we cannot solve our own problems?
By continuing to empty the wallets of our taxpayers with taxes upon taxes, higher tolls, higher medical costs, and chasing business away will not stimulate the economy.
We need to start offering incentives to business and business start-ups. Government needs to boost the economy and stop penalizing the very people who contribute. As long as that trend continues eventually there will not be anyone left to take from.
Over the years, passing law after law to hinder business, increasing state mandates, higher taxes, and higher premiums to finance state programs is now taking a toll. Unless the state makes it attractive for business to stay or return we can only expect more unemployment.
We have many local politicians leaving office because of “family commitment”. They just cannot dedicate the time needed, as their personal life is more important. When people must work a second job or concentrate more on their existing job, paying more out of pocket just to keep their head above the water line, there is less time to volunteer or commit to helping others.
Many towns have programs based on charity, contributions, donations, and volunteers.
There is an old saying to the effect that you cannot take care of someone else until you take care of yourself first.
Charity begins at home . . . but for many of our citizens they are either on the verge or no longer have a place to call home.
Joe Sinagra
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)