newsobserver.com projects - Fiscal Research Division - Comments

Re: Later kindergarten saved $50 million

dahedgehog — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:53:52 -0500

janeybell,
The smaller kindergarten class in 09-10 will be a smaller 1st grade class in 10-11.

Re: Later kindergarten saved $50 million

j1c2kp — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:45:22 -0500

So how young are babies starting school these days? Pre-K is what 3 and 4 year olds? I know it will be an unpopular opinion but I don't feel that schools should be in the babysitting business. Maybe money could be saved by eliminating these services and parents have to find child care for their children like families did years ago.

Re: Later kindergarten saved $50 million

janeybell — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:10:42 -0500

So it saved 50 million this year? Are they expecting that the children who turned 5 between the new and old cut off dates won't go to Kindergarten next year? It didn't "save" any money....it just put off the expenses until next year.

Re: Later kindergarten saved $50 million

wdk05 — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:51:58 -0500

OK, it saved 50 million from kindergarten expenses, but how much did it add to more at four? Looks like tricky math to me. N&O, your reporters should ask these questions themselves, not the readers.

Re: Later kindergarten saved $50 million

wolfpack1975 — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:04:58 -0500

The old cut-off date for Kindergarten was October 16th, not September 30th as you implied in your post.

Re: Schools hard to miss in cuts

GrayJ — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:05:09 -0500

The university system should move to a 4 day week. I know some universities do not offer Friday classes, I believe UNC-Charlotte is one such university. Shut down most, if not all, services on Fridays. I believe this an idea at least worth exploring.

Re: State collections down 6.1 percent

isittrue — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:40:04 -0500

Does the 6.1% include falling revenues for the NCDOT - that is, the revenue NCDOT receives from the gas tax, car sales, and regisrations? If not, how much is that revenue stream down?

Re: State revenue down 6.1 percent

bniolet — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:30:00 -0500

It means tax collections are down 6.1 percent from expectations for this year. Sorry for the lack of clarity. — BLN

Re: State revenue down 6.1 percent

dmarps — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:17:28 -0500

The headline and trhe story are not clear on what "State revenue down 6.1 percent" means. Are revenues down 6.1 per cent from last year or 6.1 per cent below estimates for this year?

Saying "down 6.1 per cent" implies down from the past year. Revenues could be down 6.1 per cent from the state's estimates or plans and actually be above last years'.

Of course saying "Down 6.1 per cent" implies down from the past; if that's not the case, you could well be making the situation sound worse than it is, which the state politicians prefer, of course. That enables them to ask for even more tax and fee increases.

From many years in business management, I can tell you that a six per cent reduction of costs from one year to the next can be done, especially after years of increasing expenditures. There will be weeping and wailing, but is is achievable if management wants to do it.

Re: State revenue down 6.1 percent

profbam — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 15:32:49 -0500

Departments of the State of NC have been asked to draw up budgets for next year that include a 10% permanent cut. Most have operating expenses that are 2% - 4% of total budget, the rest is salaries and benefits. The ONLY way to make 10% cuts is to terminate currently filled positions. Those folks will stop paying taxes, reduce spending at stores, collect unemployment and Medicaid, and otherwise increase the demands on the State's social network.

The only alternative is rotating furloughs in order to save in salaries the necessary amount of money. State personnel are demoralized as is. It WILL get worse.

Re: State revenue down 6.1 percent

informed — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:57:39 -0500

"if it doesn't get worse"

There's no question it will get worse, what is unknown is how much worse, since no one is using the word "mild" in this downturn.

Re: State revenue down 6.1 percent

chilled — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:20:21 -0500

That's much better than other states...we can handle 6%,if it doesn't get worse...

Re: State revenue down 5 percent

tangoz — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:12:47 -0500

The voters in this state that voted for the same people who have created this mess should take a long hard look in the mirror. Our Democratic politicians not only have borrowed billions over the last few years, they have neglected to reign in government spending. Maybe in two years the voters will decide to make a few changes, nah why would I think that?

Re: A slowdown on state tax revenues

riverrd — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:20:47 -0500

Once again the Sainted Teachers will get their pay raise and the hard working, long forgotten State Employees will be short, and I mean short, changed!!

Re: A slowdown on state tax revenues

jonoflocke — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:33:02 -0500

Sounds like the spend-and-tax cycle is about to begin anew.