So, wait a minute, I just read that the State of Utah has a rainy day fund in excess of 400 million dollars. The governor is planning on slashing the budget, in these bad times by 300+/- million dollars resulting in the loss of at least hundreds, if not thousands of jobs. I'm sorry, does the government have a different definition of rainy day than I currently have?
I would think, the last thing anyone would want in a time of economic turmoil, and lost tax revenue, would be less people working and paying taxes into the system. While I am in no way saying that budget cuts aren't appropriate, why are there people who are saying the rainy day fund should be left alone....are we envisioning worse than this????
If there is a way to trim the fat, and keep as many people employed as possible by both cutting budgets and dipping into the rainy day fund, isn't that the smartest move?
I think back to the Great Depression, we got out of that by employing as many people as possible. Cutting jobs, and leaving a giant pile of money alone for 'real troubled times' seems to be the stupidest possible idea right now in the state. And for full disclosure, yes I am employed by the state, no I don't think my job is in too much trouble, but yes I know several people in my office who are legitimately worried for their jobs. Putting them out, when there is no market currently for them to get new jobs, doesn't help us out of the current budget/economic crises. I know that sometimes there just aren't any options, lay offs have to happen, its sad, its regrettable, but it is absolutely necessary. But, if the state has money, that has specifically been squirreled away for a time when there are big problems that some extra cash could be used to help, isn't now exactly one of those times? Does anyone disagree?
1 comment:
See, you just don't get economics. Either that or you forgot to carry the one.
Post a Comment