Do you like Minnesota?

jayrelic · Apr 20, 2006

Actually current law does require significant job seeking activity for those seeking public assistance (in excess of what you propose).
See:
In 1995, when Congress and President Bill Clinton were debating how to end welfare as we knew it, then-Gov. George W. Bush made it clear that he thought states should be free to set welfare policy without federal interference. Just last year, Tommy Thompson, Secretary of Health and Human Services, asserted, "One of the lessons I learned during my years as governor of Wisconsin was that for people to move from dependency to success in the work force, you had to be willing to invest in programs that support working families." at http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/waller/20020324.htm for a discussion about the role of social support structures in transitioning welfare recipients to the work force.

For a discussion of how TANF has worked in MN see: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/pubs/slmag/2004/04SLJulAug_Welfare.pdf

In general TANF has worked fairly well in achieving the goals of bringing families out of poverty. 2/3 families showed significant income gains and social benefits of increased family stability. The reality in MN is that to receive assistance the applicant does enter into a contract to behave in a certain way to receive assistance. Welfare reform to work must focus on teaching people to fish. It makes far more sense to put clients into a combination of work and work training activities to bring about the desired changes. Working at 6.75 an hour at Walmart does very little to improve the lives of families and children while training people to assume and hold a technical job such as LPN, machinist etc will help families move to the middle class in a generation. In other words work requirements from a social policy perspective shouldd include a job training option.

Also Please see: http://www.tcf.org/Publications/EconomicsInequality/immigrationgatw.pdf for an anlysis of the net benefit that immigrants provide to the tax system. The report concludes that the average immigrant family actually contributes 80,000 more in tax benefits than it receives back from frderal, state and local taxes.

I know for a *fact* this 'urban legend' is indeed true. I work with a woman from Vietnam and she informed me her family has 'flipped' their restaurant 3 times to avoid paying taxes. That's 21 years w/o paying taxes.

It's too easy for someone (uh hum..you?) to do a google search and post some silly link. Please, before you post something like that, look for a credible source. I consider my source credible - I work with her and I'm friends with her.

HM2VikingRN, RN · Apr 20, 2006

Do we continue to provide food, clothing and shelter to everyone that arrives from another state regardless of their background. Are you implying that we should be fine with letting someone come from, say Illinois, or Iowa, or California, or any other state, with a violent or sexual criminal background, and hand them all of the same benefits we offer every other person seeking assistance?
Where do we draw the line? I'm sick and tired of paying the way for thugs, thieves, and sexual predators. Aren't you?

Show me the data that supports this allegation of MN being a magnet for offenders and I will debate it with you. As a matter of public policy I do think that it is a responsibility of states to supervise, manage and reintegrate their own offenders. Offenders in general may not leave their state of residence without permission if they are still under supervision for a criminal offense.

My original emphasis has always been on breaking the cycles of poverty and abuse. See Art Rolnicks work about the impact of early childhood investments on reducing the need for correctional, mental health and welfare expenditures.

"Facts are stubborn things."

HM2VikingRN, RN · Apr 20, 2006

I know for a *fact* this 'urban legend' is indeed true. I work with a woman from Vietnam and she informed me her family has 'flipped' their restaurant 3 times to avoid paying taxes. That's 21 years w/o paying taxes.
It's too easy for someone (uh hum..you?) to do a google search and post some silly link. Please, before you post something like that, look for a credible source. I consider my source credible - I work with her and I'm friends with her.

Sounds like tax fraud to me....I stand by my original point. There is no tax break for immigrant wage workers.....(who represent the vast majority of immigrants as well as native workers)

filnurse_7 · Apr 21, 2006

hi!.reading ur posts make me want to really work there in minnesota..i'm a nurse here in the philippines who first opted to apply in the state BON but i'm beginning to change my mind because they require a CES from CGFNS for foreign nurses like me..It cost like $280 which is already much here in the PHilippines..and the CES also takes time..so I'm beginning to consider Vermont since they dont require CES and CG certiicate.. ANy opinions regarding this matter?:)..thanks..

Pbelle · Apr 21, 2006

If you like paying taxes, you'll love Vermont - they are #1 in the highest taxes in the US.

http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/05staxrank.html

About that CES, you'd have to ask someone in the Vermont nurses boards, since they would have a better idea than we would. Good luck!

Viking guy - how about that AMT? I hate this, because my family is basically taxed twice, thanks to some outdated legislation from 1969.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/09/pf/taxes/amt_101/index.htm

I'm curious to know you're thoughts about the taxation without representation that the state tax board is attempting to ram down our throats over increasing taxes in Hennepin county so the Twins can play outside again. I'm really ticked off, and am contacting my state rep and senator about this. I truly hope they put a stop to it, but since the DFL is in control, I doubt it will happen.

HM2VikingRN, RN · Apr 21, 2006

Viking guy - how about that AMT? I hate this, because my family is basically taxed twice, thanks to some outdated legislation from 1969.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/09/pf/taxes/amt_101/index.htm
I'm curious to know you're thoughts about the taxation without representation that the state tax board is attempting to ram down our throats over increasing taxes in Hennepin county so the Twins can play outside again. I'm really ticked off, and am contacting my state rep and senator about this. I truly hope they put a stop to it, but since the DFL is in control, I doubt it will happen.

AMT has been needed to be fixed for years. However the AMT fix was flushed by BUSHCO in favor of a taxcut package that favored the top 1% of wage earners. See http://www.cbpp.org/6-9-05tax.htm for a discussion of the AMT.

The Administration apparently agrees that changes in the AMT should not add to the deficit. The President has instructed his Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform to include options for AMT reform in the proposals it will submit to him later this summer, and he has told the panel that the proposals it submits should be revenue neutral (except that they should assume a level of revenues consistent with the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts being made permanent without being paid for). At a recent Congressional hearing, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Analysis stated, "budgetary constraints preclude simple AMT repeal."

Lawmakers cannot legitimately claim that they must deal with the AMT without regard to the cost because of the AMT's impending encroachment upon the middle class. The growing impact of the AMT on middle-income taxpayers was quite well known to lawmakers when they considered the President's proposed tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. Lawmakers also were well aware that enactment of those tax cuts would greatly increase the number of middle-income taxpayers subject to the AMT. But Congress and the President chose to put off permanent AMT relief in order to maximize the size of the regular income tax cuts that could be enacted within the tax-cut limits set by the Congressional budget resolutions in those years.[1]

In other words the Republican Party which you love screwed you over in favor of the top 1% of taxpayers NOT the Democratic Party.

See also: http://www.cbpp.org/4-10-06tax5.htm

High-income households have clearly gained the most from recent tax cuts. As a result of the three major tax-cut bills enacted since 2001, the top one percent of taxpayers will receive average tax cuts of about $39,000 in 2006, according to data from the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, or 52 times the average tax cut that the middle fifth of taxpayers will receive. The highest-income taxpayers also are experiencing a much greater percentage increase in after-tax income as a result of the tax cuts than other taxpayers. Finally, other Tax Policy Center data show that those at the top of the income scale will be paying a smaller share of all federal taxes when the tax cuts are fully in effect than they would be paying in the absence of these tax cuts.

As far as stadium financing goes. This is the second time that I have said I agree with you about stadium financing. I do need to correct one misconception. The DFL is not in control of either the state house OR the Governors office. Since it is my understanding that your governor has been a backer of this proposal I would suggest that you pitch a complaint at him. On a second point if a tax proposal is put forth by an elected board you have been represented by definition. I am not being provocative I am trying to objectively state the source of my ideas. You are free to present alternate sources of information to fuel the debate.

HM2VikingRN, RN · Apr 22, 2006

this email is apparently making the rounds (via south knox bubba):

[color=#404040]"a day in the life of joe republican"

joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. the water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. with his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. his medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

all but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now joe gets it too.

he prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

in the morning shower, joe reaches for his shampoo. his bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. the air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

he walks on the government-provided sidewalk to subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

joe begins his work day. he has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. joe's employer pays these standards because joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

if joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

it is noontime and joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. joe's deposit is federally insured by the fslic because some godless liberal wanted to protect joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the great depression.

joe has to pay his fannie mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

joe is home from work. he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. he gets in his car for the drive. his car is among the safest in the world because some america-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.

he arrives at his boyhood home. his was the third generation to live in the house financed by farmers' home administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

the house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

he is happy to see his father, who is now retired. his father lives on social security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so joe wouldn't have to.

joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. the radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. he doesn't mention that the beloved republicans have fought against every protection and benefit joe enjoys throughout his day. joe agrees: "we don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! after all, i'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like i have."

[color=#999999]posted by tom tomorrow at 08:59 pm | link

HM2VikingRN, RN · Apr 27, 2006

Multiple cross-posts. Please see Terms of Service regarding Spam.

HM2VikingRN, RN · May 23, 2006

Some really good things about life in Minnesota!

http://www.startribune.com/389/story/441731.html

Realty-based: Minnesotans have the second-highest homeownership rate, at 77.2 percent, behind West Virginia at 78.1 percent, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Get out: Minnesota has more golfers per capita and more miles of bike trails per capita than any other state. We voted: According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 79.2 percent of eligible Minnesotans voted in November 2004, the top turnout over runner-up Wisconsin.

Water, water everywhere: Minnesota leads the nation in boat ownership per capita. One in six Minnesotans owns a boat.