Saturday, January 31, 2015

The Plan Versus $80 Billion Dollars Plus

Since we still do not have an economic plan to balance the state budget from Dannel Malloy and Hartford's Omnipotent One Party Rule except to cut funding to those who are most vulnerable in our economy, we can only view the free money given to the start up Back 9 Golf Network and other companies here in Connecticut.
Apparently since there is no word on the economic plan either to cut spending or how high taxes are going to be raised from Dannel Malloy and Hartford's Omnipotent One Party Rule, it is time to try to understand the free money that has been given to businesses to either relocate in the state and or move to the state.  For example the money given to Back9 Golf Network,  the $20 millions dollars to USB, the money given to Cowles Company to move from New Haven to North Haven, or better yet the $260 million dollars that the state's Department of Economic and Community Development spends basically unchecked and unquestioned.  Is this really economically productive?
I find it amazing that we never hear about the amount of money that has been written off by the  Department of Economic and Community Development or any other state agency when a business or group is given free state taxpayer's monies and is no longer operational.  I am curious as to how much money has been wasted in the past four years plus of Dannel Malloy and Hartford's Omnipotent One Party Rule.  And more importantly why we can not get answers to this question as taxpayers.
Hartford's bureaucracy protects Hartford's bureaucracy.  There is no transparency, no answers to the economic issues in the state and no truths emanating from Dannel Malloy and Hartford's Omnipotent One Party Rule.
So there is no plan for a balanced budget nor figuring out how to pay down Connecticut's $80 billion dollars in long term debt.  $5 million dollars here, $5 million dollars really does not buy much any more for Dannel Malloy and Hartford's Omnipotent One Party Rule except to cut funding to those who are most vulnerable in our economy.


No comments: