GoMaine
Last week you had several articles about GoMaine, and how it was being closed because it did not have enough funds to replace older vehicles.
The same articles stated that there was $233,000 profit from rider fees, and the DOT had budgeted $240,000 for vehicle replacement. Those who say they can’t cover the cost of replacing the vehicles need to be sent to remedial math classes because they definitely flunked grade school math — $233,000 plus $240,000 equals $473,000. Divide that by $43,000 per vehicle and the result is 11.
They don’t need 11 new vehicles right now, but they have exactly enough to buy them. The DOT should be looking for ways to make it easier for people to get to work, not harder. There is a major shortage of public transportation here in Maine. Most of those who have been riding with
GoMaine cannot afford to relocate closer to their jobs. Their jobs pay enough for them to get by but paying more for private transportation will leave many of them in dire straights. If any of them lose their jobs due to lack of transport, our Republican-run state will blame it on the Democratic administration.
Cara Doucette
Van Buren
We won’t play
It’s been decided. The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land and we can either have it imposed on us by the federal government or Maine can have a strong say in the creation of health insurance exchanges and the implementation of the law.
The governor and the GOP Legislature have stamped their feet and said, “No, we won’t play.” Well, it’s time that Mainers get the common-sense solutions that they need and deserve.
We need to elect Democratic leaders that will help develop the right plans for Maine with input from our business leaders and our communities
John Forsyth
Topsham
Our auditorium
I hesitate to write this but many, if not most of us, are disappointed and even angry that the word “insurance” will be on our Bangor auditorium with Cross Insurance’s purchase of its naming rights. Mr. Cross’s full name is fine, but not insurance. I realize the tremendous amount of money he is giving to the project is difficult to ignore, but we hope something will be considered by those involved.
Lowell Kjenstad
Bangor
Phantom blues
Let’s get down to some serious stuff. After almost 40 years of reading “The Phantom,” it is time for it to go. I thought when you did the “Great Comics Survey” several years ago this strip had a short life, with several comments from the BDN saying “gone” at the end of this episode.
Please now make that happen now.
Sticking with the comics, one more thing for the page layout people: “Shoe” and “Baby Blues” simply have to line up without chopping the feet off Garfield, Jon and the dog. You can’t fold the paper and eat breakfast and read without refolding the paper. Not good; I mean, these are basics.
Tom Flacke
Morrill
Funding study
Regarding the current debate about Medicaid funding, a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine is pertinent. The study revealed that the three states (including Maine) that expanded Medicaid coverage showed a 6.1 percent reduction in mortality among low-income adults compared with states that failed to do so.
The obvious conclusion is that decreasing Medicaid coverage in Maine will result in an increase in the mortality rate, primarily in the poor.
Arthur J. Weiss M.D.
Little Deer Isle
Protection Act attacks rights
Recent legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would unnecessarily sweep away 16 major environmental laws that protect the people, wildlife and natural resources of Maine.
Controversial H.R. 1505, The National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act, authored by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, passed the House earlier this month. The bill grants Border Patrol and the Department of Homeland Security unwarranted powers to ignore major environmental legislation, including the National Historic Preservation Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act, within 100 miles of United States land borders and along the coast.
In Maine this means that nearly our entire state could be subject to unregulated environmental impacts.
Bishop’s bill would make vulnerable thousands of protected acres in the Aroostook National Wildlife Refuge, the Maine Coastal Islands National Wildlife Refuge, The White Mountains National Forest, Acadia National Park and many other fragile areas that the people of Maine have fought long and hard to protect for future generations.
U.S. Customs and Border Patrol has issued an official statement opposing H.R. 1505, and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has said, “It is unnecessary, and a bad policy.” Bishop and his followers are strategically playing upon people’s emotions and fears by using homeland security and immigration as a ruse to secure unnecessary and unchecked powers for the Department of Homeland Security and to put a huge crack in the armor of our environmental protections.
Sarah Loftus
Bar Harbor
Looked down upon
I was prompted to write this letter to the editor after, once again, seeing Maine education being blasted by Gov. LePage. As a retired educator, I agree that there is improvement needed in our system.
What upsets me is how LePage never touts any of the successes or good points in our education system. Saying that “Maine students are looked down upon when they go to other states for school or work” and “I don’t care where you go in this country, if you come from Maine you’re looked down upon” is absolutely not true and a despicable thing for our governor to say.
I am sure that U.S. Sen. Susan Collins does not feel looked down upon when she visits other states. Nor do three young men that I can cite who were students in my class. One has become an accomplished artist, selling paintings in N.Y. city and abroad. Another has recently bought and renovated two local grocery stores that are doing extremely well. The last is a learned chef who studied and taught in Florence, Italy, wrote a fast selling cookbook and has a weekly food spot on a local TV show. Looked down upon, I think not.
There is an old saying: “You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.” Perhaps if Gov. LePage would serve up some of his ideas with a side of honey, he might get better cooperation and results.
Jackie Pribble
Wade
John Forsyth, Do you remember the old adage of “You build it, You own it.” Eventually the Feds are going to shift the cost to the states. I don’t see the sense of helping them cost Maine more money. … They want to start an unpopular entitlement program, let them figure a way to pay for it.
The feds are going to fund the Medicaid costs to states 100% the first three years and 90% after that. They have figured out a way or ways to pay for it in the form of new revenues. The CBO came out with a new score for the ACA last week since it has been found constitutional and the States were given more leeway under the ruling. The CBO says the ACA will save at least $84 billion over 10 years and if the ACA was repealed it would add $109 billion to our deficit from 2013 to 2022.
The first three years then 10%. But after that??? History says that will not be true.
As for your numbers…. I think you forgot to mention that the savings was because 10-13 million people that they initially panned to cover will not be covered. Of course there is a savings. The law already is not doing what it what supposed to do. (easily predictable)
the other so-called savings are scored against the number if the law was fully in place. It isn’t.
Actually your 10 to 13 million figure is way off. It’s actually 3 million and that is directly related to the way Judge Roberts ruled giving the states more leeway on how they want to use Medicaid. Your also wrong about the law not not doing what is supposed to do to as it already has affected many seniors with free yearly wellness exams and cheaper drug expenses,it keeps kids on their parents insurance plans until they are 26,and children can’t be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. People won’t feel the full positive effects of the law until 2014. If your so high on letting the free market continue to run things then just think of the consequences. If you have a loved one that , heaven forbid, should develop a life threatening illness and your free market insurance company denies them coverage or drops them entirely so they don’t have to pay because the ACA was repealed, with your blessing, how are you going to feel then? Lets be real. I know I’m repeating myself but the only time healthcare coverage for all comes up is when the Democrats are in charge. The Republicans areout and out lying when they say they want to repeal and replace. They sure as hell would like to repeal the ACA but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for them to replace it. This law should not be repealed but improved where it should be improved.
Ok, maybe it is 3 million, but the fact remains that it is falling apart and the savings are there because they aren’t spending the money… not because it is such a great plan.
You talk about the positive effects won’t be felt til 2014… that is funny because that’s when the most onerous taxes and features of the law become law. The more popular features that you mention were put into force earlier than initially planned because support for the law was, and still is, weak.
Even then those popular features could have been put in without resorting to the intrusive ACA.
The law simply can’t do what it intends because fantasy meets reality at some point and reality generally wins. The Democrats have saddled us with an another broad entitlement program, this one unpopular, that we can ill afford.
Cheesecake is entitled to his own facts. Republicans live in an alternate universe where facts are invented to fit the argument.
3 million ok….. The fact remains that the $84 billion in savings were based on the FACT that those people will not be covered. To claim it was because of something inherent in the plan is untrue.
There are many level of savings in the ACA. Complete repeal costs the nation money, as the built in reductions in Medicare payments to providers, together with increased taxation, are greater than the federal subsidies involved.
The ACA is modeled on a proposal from the 90s by the very conservative Heritage Foundation, as well as Romneycare. It uses the market and brings freeloaders into the system. These used to be conservative ideas until the Republicans went off the deep end with the President’s election.
What you say may, or may not be true, but previous poster stated that savings were inherent in plan that were not. That’s kind of like a panhandler finding a $20 bill on the street and claiming he earned it.
Too many panhandling Republicans think we can decrease tax rates and thereby increase revenues. At current marginal tax rates, that is magical thinking.
Nice hit but irrelevant to the discussion. Trouble focusing today?
“The feds”? Where do you think “they” get that money?
The entitlement already exists. People without insurance are entitled to care at our expense. You know how it works. You are a smart person.
So let the Feds pay for all of it.
Come now. Feds or states, it is you and I that will pay for it. Once those parts of the various laws that deal with info privacy are cleaned up maybe elimination of some of the fraud and duplication will also lower costs.
So save the duplication of effort for the states. Let the Feds deal with the mess they created and save money to boot.
Jackie Pribble
I was a hiring manager on Wall Street and no one from Maine generally could compete with kids coming out of other States like Mass, CT or NJ. Mainers have a bad reputation as under-educated and lacking any real world experience. No one questioned work ethic, just qualifications and education.
I would say that your company passed on many good Maine educated young folks. The fact you state you were the hiring manager for a Wall Street firm says it all. Maybe if you and your fellow Wall Streeters hired employees from Maine the US might not be in the shape it is today.
Maybe my company did pass on some Mainers but thats only because they weren’t as good as their competition. There was no prejudice against Mainers as these were entry level jobs.
Tell me, what does it say about me that I worked for a Wall Street firm. By you raising the question it tells me that you have a very closed and Maine union educated mind. It was the type of mind that didn’t get hired by me.
……
I have never looked down on Mainers. It was when Mainers had to compete, they didn’t win any metals. The only reason I looked down was I used to sit on the 88th floor of the WTC
I don’t get that from what he said.
You see, therein lies your problem. It is one of self-importance. We do not educate our students to attain Wall Street goals, at least not most of them. The ones that got away from your firm are the lucky ones.
I think that you worked for a Wall Street firm says that they finally woke up and got rid of you. Worked being the past tense of work.
Wow Rare to find a lib so familiar with the word work and even it’s tenses. I’m impressed, does this come from actual experience or watching others?
Hey ex, that’s a pretty lame comment. You had me thinking until you came out with that. Now I’m not even sure I believe you were ever a manager.
The comment was invited.
It’s all total BS. He’s just an old tr0ll with a new name.
Failing to get a job on Wall Street should be to the credit of Maine’s educational system. What person in their right mind would want a job like that? My Maine educated daughter works in a prestigious hospital and after leaving because the bureaucracy there could not change to give her what she wanted she was asked back by one of the docs with assurances her requests would be met….. and they were not about money. There are many, many Maine graduates that are highly desirable. They are the people who have more than their own self-interest in mind.
The kids from Maine are the one’s answering the phones in the call centers here in Maine while the kids from NY, MA, CT designed them.
The type of thinking that kids from Maine should be lucky not to work on Wall Street demonstrates precisely what is wrong with the educational system and direction of this state. We don’t need more potters or woman’s studies grads.
While you may have some naive ludicrous view of banks, stocks, bonds, international trade etc is here to stay. Maybe if kids from Maine were involved, Wall Street might be less corrupt. You must have been a teacher
Some do. Some were educated elsewhere. And you are saying we should be proud of those who designed call centers? I would be laughing if I weren’t choking. What abysmal work they created for their fellow man. What is the turnover rate in those jobs? 40-50%. And I do not need to make the mammon argument here. It has been well argued elsewhere. No, life is not all about making money, which is what Wall Street is all about. Make enough to have a decent life (however one might define that), help out where you can, use and abuse no one, plant trees. That is enough for many. As for the corruption issue…. move your money out of Wall Street on to Main Street…… about the only way to not be corrupted by it. No, never a teacher in Maine.
While I agree with much of what you said, you still need someone to pay the bills.
You’re right, lets close those nasty data centers here in Maine and limit the folks of Maine to your lifestyle choices. How’s your daughter making out paying her bills or is that something I’m doing?
Nah, she takes care of them with her six figure salary. I live a much simpler life. It is a decent life. One I created for myself. I do get by and don’t need any help from my friends. Each of us gets to decide for ourselves what a decent life is. And each of us is responsible for making it what we want it to be. For some call center work may well provide it. But not for many. That turnover rate is pretty high.
Oh, and those woman’s studies grad? If you have a daughter, equal pay for equal work just may benefit her. And, you will have to credit all those woman’s studies grads, of which a few are men, for that social advancement. Course, if you only have sons then you may be threatened by such a change.
They probably did not have the qualifications to be parasites. I work (and hire) at a large marine construction & dredging company, and maine kids have a definite leg up on the competition. In a market where a “job” equates to some form of “labor” Maine kids do just fine.
So everyone who works for a Wall Street firm or a Bank is a parasite. The parasites of the US are those who pay no Fed income taxes and still vote; that’s a parasite.
I think parasite could be an apt name for some on Wall Street. They create no products, sell no goods and yet “create” 40% of the US GDP using tricks and funny math.
Arthur J. Weiss M.D.There are many factors that determine mortality not just insurance covereage. There are millions who die annually with health insurance coverage; how can that be?
Yesssssss, but that was not the point. Medical care can save lives that are lost without it. That is the point.
Read. Tough to prove causality on this one but the stats are probably more than a coincidence. Lack of insurance will most probably raise mortality rates.
Age ?
John Forsyth
The Gov is looking to protect the 50% of us that still pay taxes. For many of us ACA will simply cost us more for less coverage.
I think that is one of those Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire statements. CBO estimates costs will go down by $1000 for annual premiums.
The CBO scores something based only on the data it was given, in this case by a Democratic policy committee.
Think you better educate yourself about what they do. Here is a place to start: http://www.cbo.gov/about/our-objectivity-and-transparency . Based on what I read I trust their findings more than those from groups with a political agenda. And, the reality is…… their findings are used to shape legislation.
I know what they do. I think you do not understand what the CBO really does. They can only legally report back on data they are given. They cannot add data on their own or accept it from other sources. For example they are told that the cost of something is $500 per hour and its true cost is $600 then they file their report on the $500 number. Everyone knows the game and uses CBO numbers as if they are gospel and in a sense they are but if certain data is excluded it becomes more of a poltical game.
Here is what I mean.
What Is the Net Budgetary Impact of the Coverage Provisions Taking Into Account the
Supreme Court’s Decision?
CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of
the ACA will have a net cost of $1,168 billion over the 2012–2022
period—compared with $1,252 billion projected in March 2012 for that
11-year period—for a net reduction of $84 billion. (Those figures do not
include the budgetary impact of other provisions of the ACA, which in
the aggregate reduce budget deficits.)
The projected net savings to the federal government resulting from
the Supreme Court’s decision arise because the reductions in spending
from lower Medicaid enrollment are expected to more than offset the
increase in costs from greater participation in the newly established
exchanges. ~~~~CBO
This is political speak for we only report on the data we are asked to. In this case we were told that 3 million people would be covered that won’t be. Reality AND politics kicks CBO… but t
Hmmmm, I do not read it that way. It is our filters that make the difference I guess.
Okay, that makes sense. So you are saying everyone who gives them data is dishonest. I sure hope that is not true. They are not an investigative agency so, no, they would not check what they are given. Like all of us we depend on being given accurate information when we need to make decisions. I simply do not believe everyone is corrupt in the public or private sector. But we sure hear enough about those that are to make one think that.
I don’t believe that people set out to be corrupt. I think its the politics of how things are presented. Historically the CBO reports come under attack from the left when Republicans control the political process and from the right when Democrats do.
A lot of CBO numbers are future projections…. many are dependent on the GDP number, including deficit projections. The CBO has been told to base their projections going forward on a 3% annual GDP growth rate. Well, we are at 1.5% growth rate. Obviously then the projections are phony and people still talk about future numbers (for political reasons) as if future deficits will not be as high as they obviously will be. Politics at work.
When the Republicans take over in November the CBO will set up budget deficit projections more in line with the new instructions they receive, 2% maybe 4%. Who is to say… but the Democrats will point out that they are phony and the cycle will begin again.
I have stopped listening to Republicans and Democrats. I do agree they will ‘spin’ whatever they don’t like in a negative direction. But I am so very hopeful the Republicans do not gain control. Many Republicans I know hope not too.
Everyone pays sales taxes. Every working person (not Mitt Romney) pays Social Security and Medicare taxes. Most Americans pay real estate taxes. Stop making things up. The 50% figure applies to federal income taxes only.
I did mean that half of working Americans PAY NO FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. I betcha that most of these “victims” are voting Democratic.
That is not what you wrote. As this white lie has been told repeatedly by Fox News and corrected repeatedly by those with a respect for facts, I doubt this was an innocent mistake.
I meet a payroll every week, pay a far higher percentage of my income in both income and FICA taxes than Mitt Romney and the rest of the leisure class of investors, and proudly vote for Democrats.
I hope you are able to find a job now that Wall Street has apparently seen fit to terminate your employment.
As an employer, I have hired two bright Maine-educated professionals and been quite pleased with their language skills and education. Your posts on this issue seemed designed to insult rather than inform. Maturity beckons. Try to heed its call.
Isn’t it amazing that Mitt Romney, despite you paying a higher percentage, still paid more in Fed income taxes than 49.6% of the population. Sounds absolutely fair. Actually I paid more in Fed income taxes than 49.6% of the working population in total
Did Mitt Romney pay income taxes on the money he invested, yes he did. But libs are in favor of double taxation.
You are telling a white lie now!
If I touched an exposed nerve of many Mainers so be it. I’m sorry that the Maine educational system is failing to provide kids the skills they need to survive in this modern world.
BTW, did your two hires attend public or private schools?
Did you also pay a higher share than Soros or Sussman or just Mitt. Deceitful post on your part so lets talk about maturity now.
If you are going to implicitly boast of your superior education, try to use complete sentences and correct punctuation. Periods are helpful. Let’s is the proper spelling of the word you are using.
Both of my hires and I attended public schools and each of us graduated cum laude or higher. The least capable professional among us attended private schools.
As long as we insist that a corporation is a separate legal entity, then taxing dividends is not double taxation. This is no different from taxing my income before I pay it to a house painter and then taxing the house painter’s income.
Pray, what white lie have I told?
I have no idea of Sussman’s or Soros’ income tax rates. The proper comparison is between the total federal tax rate paid by an average American and the total federal tax rate paid by Romney. As the employer share of FICA is indirectly paid by the employee, the working American pays a total FICA tax of 14.8% before we include his income taxes.
Romney is not benefiting from dividend income but from something called the carried interest rule: money he earned by investing other people’s money is taxed as capital gains. Thus, he bore none of the risks of a failed investment but all of the benefits of reduced taxation on the capital gains others enjoyed (and were not taxed for). This is a perversion of the capital gains tax rationale. Romney paid not a nickel in FICA taxes on any of that carried interest income.
If you cannot see the unfairness of this, whether it be Romney, Soros or Sussman, then you have drunk to much of the Koch brothers’ Kool-Aid.
Well said
If Fica and medicare are taxes, and I agree that they are. Why do both the revenue and outlays for those programs not appear in the budget numbers?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview
Dig more deeply in the PDF documents at the site you have listed and you will find the answer. Budgets address discretionary decisions, not programs whose benefits are already determined by prior statutes.
I understand that. But you seem to mention it when it serves your interest and discount it when it doesn’t.
I have never suggested that the FICA taxes are anything other than taxes. I know of no sentient being who has ever suggested otherwise. Surely, you have never proposed such an outlandish position.
No I didn’t say you did. Obviously my point escapes you.
It escapes all literate readers. You asked why revenues and outlays for SS and Medicare do not appear in budget numbers and also implied that some might not consider FICA levies to be taxes. I answered both issues.
No actually you didn’t. I was commenting on your criticism of another poster and your use/misuse of those facts.
Cara Doucette, John Forsyth, Dr. Weiss, Sarah Loftus, Jackie Pribble: good letters.
Lowell Kjenstad it’s not Mr. Cross that has paid $3,000,000 to name the new arena. It was the Cross Insurance Agency that paid $3,000,000 for the naming rights.
Tom Flacke, I’ve been reading the Phantom since I learned to read. If you don’t like the strip don’t read it.
I vote that the Phantom stays.