JackDaWack 2,894 Posted October 21, 2016 The webstie has been giving me issues all day on my phone Edit: the link works fine on my computer at home. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cereza 106 Posted October 21, 2016 Error 503 This link might work: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/10/is_joe_piscopo_thinking_of_running_for_nj_governor.html#incart_river_index tl;dr version: Is Joe Piscopo thinking of running for N.J. governor?… Experts expect Democrats to win back the governor's office... The Republican primary, meanwhile, could be a crowded affair. State Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli (R-Somerset) is the only declared candidate, though Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno is expected to launch a bid and Assembly Minority Leader Jon Bramnick (R-Union) hasn't ruled out running. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted October 21, 2016 The webstie has been giving me issues all day on my phone There is a DDoS attack on east coast servers. DNS hosts I believe. Those servers that help you reach website by their name. Its been going on all morning. If you had or are having trouble, that could be the reason. Not a fan of Kim G. Don't know the others. I fully expect to be voting for and actively supporting Joe Rullo for Governor. I like his energy. I feel his positions are from his heart. And yes, reasoned as "the right things to do" from his mind as well. I think he is as sick and tired of the crap we've been dealt as we are. I think he can articulate his positions in ways that will win over many Dems in this state. Not the loons... The ones that actually listen, which I believe there are many. He talks to us. Not at us. This is my opinion having learned as much as I can to this point. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InFamous 311 Posted October 27, 2016 NJ.com ran an article on the govenors race, when will this be official? Although Gov. Chris Christie won re-election as a Republican, Democrats outnumber GOP voters in New Jersey. On the Republican side, Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli, R-Somerset, and Ocean County businessman and political neophyte Joseph Rudy Rullo have announced their candidacies. Political observers believe Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno may throw her hat into the ring. Read More: Who is Phil Murphy, and could this millionaire be NJ's next governor? | http://nj1015.com/who-is-phil-murphy-and-could-this-millionaire-be-njs-next-governor/?trackback=tsmclip Apparently it is now! Great job Joe! 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
josephrudyrullo 39 Posted October 28, 2016 Rullo claimed New Jersey lawmakers backed by Wall Street campaign donors would be unlikely to entertain his plan, claiming the pension fund has become nothing more than a political slush fund. http://www.shorenewsnetwork.com/2016/10/new-jersey-gubernatorial-candidate-remove-wall-street-from-new-jersey-pension-system/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted October 28, 2016 Rullo claimed New Jersey lawmakers backed by Wall Street campaign donors would be unlikely to entertain his plan, claiming the pension fund has become nothing more than a political slush fund. http://www.shorenewsnetwork.com/2016/10/new-jersey-gubernatorial-candidate-remove-wall-street-from-new-jersey-pension-system/ I agree. The fund(s) appear to be simply a revenue source for brokerage firms. Ironically if a buy side firm engaged in executions for the sake of fees, the SEC would be all over us and we'd be highlighted as an article on the SEC web site as the prosecuted the case. I honestly don't know the details of the transactions and there may be nothing like churn going on, but $1.3 billion in fees is incredible and i would tend to agree, unneccessary. We deserve better representaion and the beneficiaries of the pensions deserve a better fiduciary body. State pension recipients and future recipients should pay attention. This is a big deal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky_Bobby 130 Posted October 28, 2016 Vote no to both ballot initiatives 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted October 28, 2016 Ricky, why vote against dedicating the gas tax dollars to transportation projects? I'm not much interested in casino's. Think they create some jobs but screw up some lives. But people make their own choices so probably voting Yes on that and the gas tax question. What's the case for voting No on these? I'd rather be as informed as possible. I usually think the scum bags behind the question have ulterior motives. Would love to hear more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeerSlayer 241 Posted October 29, 2016 Vote no and they can't secure a bond. The funds from the tax will then have to be used for actual road repair. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,894 Posted October 29, 2016 DS, I thought that was the point of voting yes? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cereza 106 Posted October 29, 2016 Voting yes on Question 2 gives the NJ government the authority to borrow up to $12 billion ($1.5 billion a year in borrowing for eight years) for any transportation project they want, i.e. the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail expansion. Assuming that you think the light rail project is a great way to spend a couple of billion dollars (I don't) the problem is that their math doesn't work. The income from the gas / diesel / petroleum tax—while driving up the price of EVERYTHING in NJ—is predicted to fall short of the yearly $1.2 billion funding goal since fuel consumption is in a years-long downward trend and they know there will be a drop-off in out of state drivers coming specifically to NJ to fill their tanks. So what's NJ to do if they miss their fundraising goals and they're borrowing money? Well, the legislature didn't approve a 23¢ increase, they passed a formula that allows the state treasurer to adjust the gas tax rate every August. Think that rate is going to drop if we're in the hole? Voting no on Question 2 will prevent them from borrowing $12 billion, and without that loan they get to go back to the drafting table and come up with a real lockbox amendment. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted October 29, 2016 Vote no on 2! They are not telling us the whole truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,894 Posted October 29, 2016 Clearly they aren't, and why am I not surprised. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeerSlayer 241 Posted October 29, 2016 Voting yes on Question 2 gives the NJ government the authority to borrow up to $12 billion ($1.5 billion a year in borrowing for eight years) for any transportation project they want, i.e. the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail expansion. Assuming that you think the light rail project is a great way to spend a couple of billion dollars (I don't) the problem is that their math doesn't work. The income from the gas / diesel / petroleum tax—while driving up the price of EVERYTHING in NJ—is predicted to fall short of the yearly $1.2 billion funding goal since fuel consumption is in a years-long downward trend and they know there will be a drop-off in out of state drivers coming specifically to NJ to fill their tanks. So what's NJ to do if they miss their fundraising goals and they're borrowing money? Well, the legislature didn't approve a 23¢ increase, they passed a formula that allows the state treasurer to adjust the gas tax rate every August. Think that rate is going to drop if we're in the hole? Voting no on Question 2 will prevent them from borrowing $12 billion, and without that loan they get to go back to the drafting table and come up with a real lockbox amendment. This^^^^^!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky_Bobby 130 Posted October 29, 2016 Voting yes on Question 2 gives the NJ government the authority to borrow up to $12 billion ($1.5 billion a year in borrowing for eight years) for any transportation project they want, i.e. the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail expansion. Assuming that you think the light rail project is a great way to spend a couple of billion dollars (I don't) the problem is that their math doesn't work. The income from the gas / diesel / petroleum tax—while driving up the price of EVERYTHING in NJ—is predicted to fall short of the yearly $1.2 billion funding goal since fuel consumption is in a years-long downward trend and they know there will be a drop-off in out of state drivers coming specifically to NJ to fill their tanks. So what's NJ to do if they miss their fundraising goals and they're borrowing money? Well, the legislature didn't approve a 23¢ increase, they passed a formula that allows the state treasurer to adjust the gas tax rate every August. Think that rate is going to drop if we're in the hole? Voting no on Question 2 will prevent them from borrowing $12 billion, and without that loan they get to go back to the drafting table and come up with a real lockbox amendment. WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER the paid commercials are your government lying to you. Christie included. Vote no. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,894 Posted October 30, 2016 It's gonna pass, no one knows about the ability of the state to borrow money. If I'm just figuring this out i highly doubt most people will. I knew there was a reason I hang out around here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted October 30, 2016 It's gonna pass, no one knows about the ability of the state to borrow money. If I'm just figuring this out i highly doubt most people will. I knew there was a reason I hang out around here.Spread the word bro Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted October 30, 2016 Interesting. You guys are against borrowing and against taxing. When does the Tooth Fairy deliver funds for repairing our shitty roads? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cereza 106 Posted October 30, 2016 Interesting. You guys are against borrowing and against taxing. When does the Tooth Fairy deliver funds for repairing our shitty roads? I'm not against taxation. I'm against the NJ government raising the taxes on everything so that they can add a few stops to a light rail that the majority of NJ residents don't want and don't use, and screw our future in the process because they'll have to borrow $12 billion in hope that they'll be able to complete the project. If you think the money they raise is going towards repairing our shitty roads, bridges and overpasses, you must also believe in the Easter Bunny. Per everyone's favorite Senate Majority Leader: "No one here is voting for a gas tax unless we know, and we know for certain, that Hudson-Bergen Light Rail comes to fruition," Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg said. "It has taken too long." "The group of senators encouraged voters to vote yes on ballot question 2, which would guarantee all the TTF money raised would be mandated for use on transportation projects." Source: http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2016/10/extension_of_light_rail_to_bergen_county_seen_as_priority.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted October 30, 2016 ^^^^ nailed it!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted October 30, 2016 Interesting. You guys are against borrowing and against taxing. When does the Tooth Fairy deliver funds for repairing our shitty roads? The gas tax is in effect nov 1It is very painful watching you try and keep up. Very painful Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted October 30, 2016 The gas tax is in effect nov 1 It is very painful watching you try and keep up. Very painful I don't know what you're talking about. I was addressing most of the posters not anyone in particular. You guys get ass-raped with property taxes. If you own you pay them directly. If you rent you pay them indirectly. As you're getting butt-pounded you complain about the fly buzzing around your nose. As for the other shit, the mis-appropriation, the diversion of funds, the quid pro quo, stop complaining and vote the fuckers out. But really stop griping about a tiny, constitutional, user-based tax. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted October 30, 2016 I'm not against taxation. I'm against the NJ government raising the taxes on everything so that they can add a few stops to a light rail that the majority of NJ residents don't want and don't use, and screw our future in the process because they'll have to borrow $12 billion in hope that they'll be able to complete the project. If you think the money they raise is going towards repairing our shitty roads, bridges and overpasses, you must also believe in the Easter Bunny. Per everyone's favorite Senate Majority Leader: "No one here is voting for a gas tax unless we know, and we know for certain, that Hudson-Bergen Light Rail comes to fruition," Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg said. "It has taken too long." "The group of senators encouraged voters to vote yes on ballot question 2, which would guarantee all the TTF money raised would be mandated for use on transportation projects." Source: http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2016/10/extension_of_light_rail_to_bergen_county_seen_as_priority.html Yes. Good post. I'm not sure what they like so much about Light Rail. Maybe they see those trolley systems in places like Budapest and think we need them too. More likely though that they have favors to dole out to industry donors and building more light rail is a good tool to get that done. Also, having a light rail will work exactly how the Port Authority works... politicians send people there for jobs whether there is a job to be had or not. I know for a fact this happens at the PA constantly. Quite a few useless employees and no-show employees. Having light rail gives them yet another place to go that citizens will pay for and the crooked politicians will benefit from. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted October 30, 2016 Voting yes on Question 2 gives the NJ government the authority to borrow up to $12 billion ($1.5 billion a year in borrowing for eight years) for any transportation project they want, i.e. the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail expansion. Assuming that you think the light rail project is a great way to spend a couple of billion dollars (I don't) the problem is that their math doesn't work. The income from the gas / diesel / petroleum tax—while driving up the price of EVERYTHING in NJ—is predicted to fall short of the yearly $1.2 billion funding goal since fuel consumption is in a years-long downward trend and they know there will be a drop-off in out of state drivers coming specifically to NJ to fill their tanks. So what's NJ to do if they miss their fundraising goals and they're borrowing money? Well, the legislature didn't approve a 23¢ increase, they passed a formula that allows the state treasurer to adjust the gas tax rate every August. Think that rate is going to drop if we're in the hole? Voting no on Question 2 will prevent them from borrowing $12 billion, and without that loan they get to go back to the drafting table and come up with a real lockbox amendment. Done and thank you. Secured 6 No votes on #2 that would have been Yes's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted October 30, 2016 Yes. Good post. I'm not sure what they like so much about Light Rail. Maybe they see those trolley systems in places like Budapest and think we need them too. More likely though that they have favors to dole out to industry donors and building more light rail is a good tool to get that done. Also, having a light rail will work exactly how the Port Authority works... politicians send people there for jobs whether there is a job to be had or not. I know for a fact this happens at the PA constantly. Quite a few useless employees and no-show employees. Having light rail gives them yet another place to go that citizens will pay for and the crooked politicians will benefit from. Have you ever commuted to work or school in Hudson County? I did for H.S. (4 years), work (2 yrs, Bloomfield) and work (2 years, NYC). I drive my parents around as well, 30-40 times a year. A few months ago we got stuck on Sinatra Dr. in Hoboken for 40 minutes between 10th and 5th streets, which is five blocks. It takes me 30-40 minutes to get to my father's eye doctor in Journal Sq. from Hoboken, about 4 miles away. There are evenings when I visit them that I have to park half a mile from where they live. When my wife worked at Sloan Kettering and we lived in Hobo it took her almost 90 minutes to get to work, 3 miles as the crow flew. New York and Northeast NJ is bad f-ing news for commuters. The Hudson/Bergen light rail carries 60,000 passengers every work day between Tonnele Ave. in North Bergen to Bayonne. That's 50,000 cars at least that are not on the road. The savings in time, gas, and frustration are huge. If this is not something government should do I don't know what is. I wish there were a private solution. Oscar Wilde described a cynic as a man "who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing." I'd put all libertarians and jaded Republicans into the same category. Just because our politicians throw money away on every goddamned thing doesn't mean we don't need some of the stuff that government provides, like roads. In a modern society bridges, rail, and buses are necessary. I will also vote no on the borrowing question. We've borrowed enough in this state. But I have news for you guys who are still having wet dreams about Reagan: He paid for what we got by a combination of raising taxes (which he most certainly did) and borrowing (which he did to a greater degree than any previous president). There is no magic elixir, no formula that doesn't involve those two activities or a third, cutting spending, which NOBODY does or ever will do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
josephrudyrullo 39 Posted October 31, 2016 The gas tax should be repealed. The fund should be dissolved to start over,” Rullo said. ” A transparent and efficiently run fund is what the voters want. The Rt. 35 project at 27 million per mile in Ocean County is an example.” He said the fund is nothing more than a political slush fund. http://www.shorenewsnetwork.com/2016/10/governor-hopeful-rullo-repeal-gas-tax-dissolve-transportation-trust-fund/ 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
siderman 1,131 Posted October 31, 2016 vote no on question 2? what am I missing, where and whats the connection with borrowing up to 12 billion? its not part of the ballot question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky_Bobby 130 Posted October 31, 2016 Post above has a great perspective - and Post #131 most eloquently explains why you should vote NO - I can't believe on this forum we are actually going back and forth with this - replace the ballot question with "would you like children to be safe from firearms" and you'll see how voting yes circumvents legislation and gives government the ability to just make a new slush fund - When I hear commercials with these upbeat show tunes on the radio talking about how "bipartisan" and "common sense" this would be to vote Yes, I find myself wondering if its such a great thing for New Jersey why are they pushing so hard to sell it? If its so common sense why do we need commercials? If the Lt. Gov doesn't agree with it and Christie is giving her shit for not going along with it, something is fishy. Anytime that Sweeney and Christie and Prieto can tout something as working together for the common good on a commercial, makes me feel like you're saying Yes to more socialism and pet projects, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InFamous 311 Posted October 31, 2016 vote no on question 2? what am I missing, where and whats the connection with borrowing up to 12 billion? its not part of the ballot question. http://nj1015.com/spadea-explains-why-you-should-vote-no-on-nj-ballot-question-two/?trackback=fbshare_top Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
siderman 1,131 Posted October 31, 2016 http://nj1015.com/spadea-explains-why-you-should-vote-no-on-nj-ballot-question-two/?trackback=fbshare_top Ok so i looked at the vid & read post 131- still no explanation other than him "saying" that they will/want to borrow the 12B. Where is he getting the info from that this will happen? Where is the so called authorization coming from? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites