06-05-2009, 07:25 AM
I voted for Linda Lingle, too. In the current economy, she says she doesn't have an alternative to the fuloughs to balance the State budget, a constitutional requirement. Could it be done without the full amount of furloughs she proposes? Probably, but hefty tax increases would be required, and Hawaii already has one of the highest state tax burdens. My own theory is that she is posturing to set up a negotiating stance and would probably take less when it's all said and done.
As much as I don't want to see more families' economic situation deteriorate, it is highly unrealistic for state employees to expect no sacrifices when so many in the private sector have had lay-offs, wage cuts, or hours cuts. Furloughs (instead of lay-offs) at least keep people on the payroll with benefits until things get better. Of course some people think we could get by with 10-15% fewer state employees anyway, but that's another topic.
Cheers,
Jerry
As much as I don't want to see more families' economic situation deteriorate, it is highly unrealistic for state employees to expect no sacrifices when so many in the private sector have had lay-offs, wage cuts, or hours cuts. Furloughs (instead of lay-offs) at least keep people on the payroll with benefits until things get better. Of course some people think we could get by with 10-15% fewer state employees anyway, but that's another topic.
Cheers,
Jerry