Do you agree with the governor’s call for investment?

In his State of the State address, Gov. Mark Dayton said the way to create a better future for Minnesota is to invest – in jobs, education, transportation, health and the delivery of public services. Today’s Question: Do you agree with the governor’s call for investment?

  • hiram

    Sure. It’s time to quit trying to slow Minnesota’s decline and start making Minnesota better.

  • Garyf

    No.

    Does he not watch the news? California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York. All having trouble. The Fed isn’t going to bail them out?

    Why do we want to continue down that road?

    We’ve heard for years that all Democrats know how to do is spend someone else’s money and that it’s never enough, well he’s proving its true.

    More government is not the answer. Wake up Governor Dayton, the times they are a changing.

  • Steve the Cynic

    Yes. But then, my opinion is entirely irrelevant. The Guild Of Patricians now in control of the legislature is unlikely to listen to reason, because Reason doesn’t make campaign contributions.

  • Deb

    Yes.

    We have been operating on deferred maintenance for too long. MN has more Fortune 500 Companies because of the historic way the State has conducted itself, not because of the shell game Gov Pawlenty did.

    It is time that we are concerned in re the now and the future.

  • Clark

    No He and the other far left democrats are great at confiscating other people income and wealth until their is nothing left., He will spend and spend. and in 3 years ask foioir higher taxes. Democrats in MN look at the huge growth in job creation in Dallas vs Minneapolis. Low taxes and regulations. I don’t mind paying a few more dollars in higher taxes but I DO NOT trust dayton or the far left DFL. They will just hand out the money to the teachers unions and other far left whiners. Just curious, has a democrat ever, in the history of MN, ever recommended we lower taxes?

  • Dianne

    Investing in education and health is always important. Our country cannot continue to exist without healthy, educated citizens.

  • Just a mom

    The Democratic Party strategist who co-opted the term “investment” was a genius.

  • T

    Yes. Our future needs drastic changes in how gov’t is run and how revenues come in. We need a balance of cuts and increased taxes. Time to stop the far right/left hoopla talk and work together…

  • TonyG

    No, I do not agree. Why is it that super-rich liberals like Dayton, want everyone else to pay for government programs/services that aren’t used by the majority of taxpayers? We must cut spending & programs, and create a business-friendly environment. Three concepts that appear to be total mysteries to our clueless gov. Thank God that the DFL lost control of both houses.

  • Mary Alice Harvey

    Yes, because it is just that, investment. We have trouble looking at the long term view. Spending money can actually save money in the long run. There are so many examples of ways that spending money can save money. Things like early childhood education save money on remedial programs later. Money spent on intervention with at risk children and young people, special court programs, more money spent on supervising and supporting offenders released from prison are all things that reduce prison costs considerably. And keeping our higher education excellent and financially accessible is, we know, an economic driver. Yes, I believe investment is necessary.

  • Jake

    Dayton has shown very clearly that he is a fish out of water on the radio today…totally out of touch and living in a dream.

    The state doesn’t have any money to shopping for frivolous items that we as a state do not need and are not necessary. Dayton better figure out quickly that he doesn’t have any money to spend, he needs to cut spending (as every other business in this state has had to do) and if he doesn’t like that he can step down. His complaining about this is unacceptable…he knew what he was getting into…stop talking and start cutting.

  • Noah

    Yes.

    I plan to be alive for another 50 years. I like Minnesota, but in my short lifetime so far, it seams as though the high quality of living that brought my parents here is slowiy being traded for a *nice* place to live with lower taxes.

    Individually, I think everyone has a tendency to be selfish when economic times are hard and ignore the benefits of investing long term in our infrastructure. Let’s get back to being a leader in education and a place that enjoys a high quality of life.

  • complicatedgirl

    Absolutely. The astonishing short-sightedness of former governor Pawlenty brought this state to its knees.

  • P. Nielsen

    Most definitely. We have to invest in may things that government does best, and the Governor’s statements on those are most appropriate. For those not wishing to pay for these things, I suggest they take themselves to another part of the world where those services and programs don’t exist. It’s pure selfishness of the highest order they exhibit.

  • Chris

    Of course.

    I wouldn’t expect republicans to know what the word investment means. Just a few examples of my point:

    Cuts to higher ed, in a time when you need a well educated workforce to compete in a GLOBAL economy, tax cuts to the wealthy which returns $0.26 on the dollar, leasing the ocean to oil companies who don’t pay net taxes, Iraq war that will pay for itself. Just to name a few…

    I like how people point out how awful some high taxed states are when they avoid how nice other high taxed states are like Vermont, Hawaii, and even Iowa. Keep in mind the LOWEST taxed states in order are:

    1) Alaska, 2)Wyoming, and 3) Michigan. Who in their right mind would move to these three states over Vermont or Hawaii?

    Get real!

  • Jim G

    Yes. Minnesota should have all day kindergarten, just as Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana do. We need to fund the K-12 system as it grows by more than 14,000 new students in the coming year. We need to invest in the University of Minnesota and the State University system to supply the highly trained resourceful citizens that attract new enterprises. We need to reduce tuition costs which will help our Middle Class families who are currently underwriting the cuts to higher education of the previous administration. The fact is the rich are not paying their fair share in this economic recession. They are claiming an ever increasing percentage of our state’s and nation’s wealth, and refusing to share that wealth with the citizens whose labor and investments in the previous decades actually made their wealth and success possible. Tax the rich… at least as much as a public school teacher and the state employee. Use this new revenue to invest in our state’s future. Tax the rich to win the future.

  • Roger

    What is so difficult to understand about investing in this state and country. Why is that the GOP is fine with borrowing a few trillion dollars rebulding Iraq and Afganistan but are unwilling to rebuild our roads, bridges and provide funding for our schools. The idea that lowing taxes brings in more revenue is the most illogical theory I’ve ever heard. If this were true why is that during the Bush years of lowing taxes the jobs he created over 8 years in office was a net loss of 1000 jobs and trillion dollar deficits. And, yes Govenor Dayton and President Obama did inherit these holes the GOP dug. Its time we take the shovels away from the GOP and dig ourselves out.

  • Matthew

    As a traditional conservative of the Barry Goldwater sort, of course I agree with Governor Dayton with respect to fiscal policy, at least under the current circumstances. Today’s neoconservative and Tea Party Republicans in this state cut taxes and amassed a $6.2 billion biennial deficit. Over the last two years, neo-con Bush apologist Tim Pawlenty chose to address this mess by cutting essential services and implementing both a pay and hiring freeze among state agencies. He also breached legislated agreements with school districts by withholding supplements to schools. For two years, we’ve had competent, educated, and experienced state workers doing the jobs of two or even three people, at the same pay they received three years ago. Furthermore, we have school districts reducing the school week to four days. From ’09 to ’10, state government has reduced by 13% based on general fund numbers. Despite this, today’s MN GOP voted to cut an additional 15% of state workers without analysis as to what such a cut would do. They created the $6.2 billion deficit, and now want to address it by defunding police, fire, and education — wiht a prideful and arrogant refusal to even consider upwardly adjusting taxes on our state’s milkionaires whose 16-year-old children drive German luxury sedans to school. If he were alive today, Barry Goldwater would slap Kurt Zellers square in the face. This isn’t fiscal conservatism. It’s fiscal sadism.

  • bsimon

    “Do you agree with the governor’s call for investment?”

    Absolutely. First & foremost, we need to invest in ourselves, which means ensuring high quality educations for our citizens. The best way to promote economic growth & stability is in ensuring that our citizens have the skills & training necessary to take care of themselves, regardless of the income level & marital status of their parents.

  • Brian

    I couldn’t agree more with Governor Dayton. Given the circumstances–the horrendous budget he inherited and the rigidity of the Republicans in the legislature–he has done as well as anyone could possibly do. He clearly understands the importance of our most important resource–our people. We have nearly four hundred billionaires in the U.S., while 37 million people have incomes below the poverty line. How can the huge number of poor contribute to the lives of others–to the communities in which they live– if they are just barely surviving? And why wouldn’t it be right to raise taxes on the wealthy in this country–who have never had so much wealth and who have benefitted from the economy over the last several years–to address the crisis this state is facing.

    However, the Republicans have made it clear that they will not compromise. Dayton is right to fear a government shut down. I suspect the Republicans are holding that as their trump card: our way, or a government shutdown. Which do you want. It does not look good.

  • Steve the Cynic

    For strong evidence in favor of more investment in infrastructure, one need only drive on a highway across state lines, or into Canada, and notice how the quality of the roaad improves at the border. For strong evidence in favor of more investment in education, one need look no further than some of the ideological posts on these pages, particularly (though not exclusively) from right-wingers. It is truly disheartening to see some of the lame arguments people find persuasive. Eviscerate the government, and the economy will magically improve, making life better for everyone? If that were true, Somalia would be in great shape right now.

    Where are we going? And what are we doing in this handbasket?

  • James

    NO

    Last time I looked we are running in the red.

    If I do that I tend to cut back on spending.

    DTOM

  • Mike

    YES

    Government has a responsablity to provide essential services included in these are sound infrastructure, education, and quality health and safety. What seems to be lacking in the discussion is the fact that taxes spent producing a service or a product, is on the other side, an income for someone. On average, incomes turn over up to 7 times in an economy, each time generating additional taxes. I think it is essential that people are reminded of this in the context of the conversation.

  • Edward Obeda

    With all the greed of the upper class-do not expect much to change in your life time. Without jobs in this country-you can look forward to being a third world country in the near future. Those who have do not want to share. Justice will come!!!

  • Michelle

    DTOM James: Agreed. When running in the red, cutting spending makes sense. However, let me speak on an individual level to offer a broader, analogous counterpoint to the notion that only spending cuts solve everything. This is literally from my personal experience, demonstrating that even on a personal budget level, smart investment saves money in the long run. Cutting spending alone does not solve every problem.

    1). I wanted to “cut spending” with my cell phone, but I had the cheapest plan possible with my provider. So I bought a more expensive phone and switched to a different provider who had a cheaper plan. Yes, there was more money spent up front, but the cheaper plan will save me money in the long run… on the order of half of what I was spending previously per month. My more expensive phone will pay for itself in 3 months. From that point on, I am saving lots of money. That is a good investment.

    2). I wanted to save money on gas. My solution? Purchase a new car that gets better gas mileage. I can’t cut the amount of miles I drive to work and I can’t quit working in order to save money on gas. “Cutting spending” alone will not solve my problem. So I am picking up my more fuel-efficient car this evening. YES, there was money spent to acquire a new car. But this is an investment that will save me money… both immediately and years and years from now.

    3). Times are tough now, so I find different forms of income. Selling unnecessary items through a neat website called eBay works wonders to bring in more revenue for my household.

    So, when times are tough, yes government can cut spending. But don’t pretend that is the only way out of a mess. I’ve just provided analogous, individual examples proving that both individuals and governments can cut spending, invest wisely, and bring in more income (i.e., increasing taxes) to balance the books. Any one of these three does not come close to the potential positive outcome of all 3 combined. We need to think outside the box and not be so narrow-minded about how to fix real problems in our government. Wise investments pay out big time and they should most definitely be discussed in our legislature. Cutting spending alone will NOT solve our budgetary problems!!!

  • Matthew

    Look at it this way:

    Public radio (NPR/MPR) has been broadcasting fact-based news, with support of public funding, since an era in which our highest marginal tax rate was 77%. At that time, the top 1% of our country’s wealthiest citizens possessed 7% of our country’s wealth. Today the richest 1% owns 26% of our country’s wealth. And currently our highest marginal tax rate is 35%. Our nation faces a $14 trillion debt. Our state faces a $6.2 billion biennial deficit. The answer, according to today’s Republicans? They refuse to upwardly adjust the highest marginal tax rate. Instead, they want to eliminate public funding of NPR/MPR. But they’re the majority party now. They are who the electorate wants.

  • L T

    Here we go again with the “I” word. Why can’t the DFL call it what it is, it’s a TAX! After all, if it swims like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it must be a duck!

    I do not agree with this call for more “investment”. Education in particular is one big money pit. Over half the state budget goes into the schrool system already and they are still failing. This call for all-day kindergarten is nothing more than state-run daycare at taxpayer’s expense.

    If the schrools can’t make do with what they are given now, then they don’t deserve anymore. Perhaps they should start eliminating the schrool superintendents that are being paid $100,000+ salaries out of tax payer’s back pockets

    “Investment”, my foot!

  • Jamie

    Yes. Yes. Yes!

    //”The Democratic Party strategist who co-opted the term “investment” was a genius.”//

    ~ Just a Mom

    It wasn’t co-opted. They ARE investments.

  • Raoul

    INVESTMENT by the government is a misnomer..it is nothing more than saying ” SPEND your tax dollars.”

    The Light Rail in Washington state was supposed to carry 7-8% of the population but the state data shows it handles less than 5% and operates at a loss, only by subsidy does it exists. This is the same as AmTrak which operates in the red. Their light rail is essentially empty 75% of the operating time.

    Government can not legislate consumerism. It is only in a socialist/communist country that they can force that use. Another example is that the Obama health Insurance reform bill was recently found to be unconstitutional.