|
|
Post by Swimmy on Jan 6, 2009 18:51:31 GMT -5
Never mind, I just re-read the article. I miss-read it initially.
|
|
|
|
Post by tanouryjr on Jan 6, 2009 21:55:17 GMT -5
Actually they simply called for a "hiring freeze." This is laughable (as Picente stated about us in the Rome Sentinel) considering most positions were never meant to be filled. They are positions that are simply budgeted for (meaning you pay taxes for them) in order to raise money that they could transfer around during the year to "play" with. If they were serious, they would have done what I called for BEFORE the budget was passed; which was ELIMINATE the positions so that the taxpayers didn't have to pay for them with a 5.1% tax hike. Otherwise, the taxpayers will not see one red cent in savings from this proposal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Jan 14, 2009 6:38:00 GMT -5
Unfortunately, Larry, you work with a bunch of idiots too concerned with the status quo and lining their own pockets to care about the people who put them there!
|
|
