I honestly don't know where the animosity is coming from. Your first post in this thread and you launch a personal attack? WTF? And what's with the "weirdo", "kook" stuff? What the hell is that about?

Either way, I'm much more interested in hearing what you have to say about the gubernatorial candidates than hearing you express whatever burr you have in your butt about me. I don't know what I've done to you to piss you off, but I'm not going to engage with it in this thread. If I've done something to offend you, send me an IM and we can talk it out.

(And for what it's worth, I'm not a .gov employee. I did work for the Senate for nearly five years, but no longer. And it certainly wasn't lucrative enough to be called "a trough.")

I know plenty of .gov employeees (county, state and fed) that talk about the need for spending cuts, and most of them recognize that there are plenty of lazy .gov workers.  There are also plenty of .gov employees that are necessary, so acting like they are all unneeded, lazy, trough grazers is pretty disengenuous.  For whatever it's worth, I have never worked directly for any government, at any level, but I have done consultant work for a muni many years ago.

I realize everything you just said is true.  Too bad all the TALK about cutting spending remains just that.  Isn't it.

We all know the vast majority of this country's .gov problems can be fixed when the GOOD .gov employees stand up and make it happen.  When The People begin to see some real effort, those good .gov will have the support of The People.

They have a front-row seat to this shit and they're doing nothing about it but getting theirs.

In all my years - close to 60 - I know of only three people who walked away from their .gov career because their conscience wouldn't let them be a part of it.  One is a flaming liberal who now lives in N. California.  The other is a marine who tried to get the admiral to stop the crew from chucking perfectly good tanks and helicopters overboard.  Another is a navy guy who witnessed the dumping of brand new expensive electrical equipment overboard.

If you try to save the taxpayer money, they'll cut next year's budget.

The squeezing / fleecing of The People has been pretty bad for a long damn time and it's getting worse.  You realize how close they are to freezing our bank accounts for having wrong-think, much less wrong-speak?

Shamming them is the least offensive tactic I know in persuading them to step it up.  You have any other suggestions?!?!?!

So put it on sales tax...

I've never met a municipal/county/state worker working at above 60%... they usually take the view they're only being paid 60% of what everyone else in the real world is, so why should they.

Ashcroft? Do we really need to create another political dynasty based on who your daddy was? That's a big no.

Eigel? https://billeigel.com/platform/

That does not appear to be what Bill Eigel is proposing. Unless I'm reading his bill wrong, he wants to hold revenue constant but gradually reduce personal property taxes as real property tax revenue grows. Eventually, all property tax revenue would come from real property (with any shortfalls covered by state money from general revenue).

BTW, Eigel's bill envisions the total elimination of personal property taxes taking up to 50 years. I wonder how many folks realize he's not talking about ending personal property taxes overnight, but is actually proposing a gradual process that might not end the tax until the year 2073.

I admit, I'm confused by his bill and I may not understand it correctly. It will probably make more sense once the fiscal note is available. Until then, maybe somebody else can read his bill and explain it to me:


ETA: The fiscal note for Eigel's property tax bill has been posted. It's largely inconclusive, but it does confirm what others have said. His legislation doesn't impact the state budget, but it does take money away from local communities. Fiscal Note on Eigel's SB 733


SB783 summary page

Actual bill text: https://www.senate.mo.gov/24info/pdf-bill/intro/SB733.pdf

Does anyone know where Kehoe stands on red flag laws?  I could swear I heard him say he was in favor of them some time back but cannot confirm.
This would be a big no for me.  Eigel sounds good but I don't know enough about him at this point.
I will be watching them to see how it shakes out.  Bottom line, I don't trust anyone running for office anymore.
Roller derby girl was an interesting ad... until she started in on wanting to kill babies and the normal Demoncrat montra.

My dad was on what they call a 'baby flat top’ aircraft carrier right after WWII. He said he witnessed several times when their fighter planes (think Avengers, Wildcats, Corsairs) were damaged, they simply pushed them overboard. That was a common practice even back then.
  Move forward to recent years, our daughter was first assigned to a Wasp class amphibious assault ship (think crew plus troops aboard around 3000) Before they would come back into port all their food was dumped overboard; a common practice. What a waste and shameful practice!

We have problems at the federal and state level.  

Gov't is too big and wasteful.  Our Founding Fathers foresaw this day.  

We need to move toward consumption based taxes [e.g., sales tax, exice taxes, etc] and away from burdening production [income] and ownership [property].  Of the income tax, every person [businesses shouldn't be taxes - it is simply an expense baked into the cost of the product they sell] should pay a flat rate on every dollar of income:  WIC, welfare, scholarships, earned income, everything, without any exemptions, deductions or credits.  For those below some level, the tax they are going to pay has to be baked into what they receive [and then withheld] BUT let them see it then have to file a tax return and live with taxes.  No deductions, no credits for anything.  Capital gains are a property tax and should not be taxed [nor capital losses deducted].  

Taxation needs to be tied to and restricted to a % of real gdp growth.  If one ignores defense spending [which vaciliates wildly during conflicts] non defense spending has gone 1% in 1925, 5% in 1955, 13% in 1985, 15% in 2015 to an estimated 20% in 2025 [note those are 30 yr increments except the last which is only a 10 year increment ...]

How to cut gov't spending?  Incite dept heads to cut spending by giving them a one time "bonus" of 1% [or whatever the appropriate % is, could be .001%] of the budget they cut.  Wasteful spending and dead-beat employees will be the first to go.  The tension between providing good service [taxpayers complaining] and cost cutting will keep the dept heads in check.  

Next year budget begins with last year's actual spending.  Income taxes are reduced by tax savings first.

For what it's worth, this chart will give you a good idea of where the money actually goes. The big ticket items are Medicaid (departments of Social Services, Health, Mental Health), education (both DESE and Higher Ed) and transportation (which is funded by the motor fuels tax). Conservation and Parks both have their own dedicated sales tax, approved by voters, and the money can only be spent for those uses.

When you get down to what what department heads have any control over, you're nibbling at the edges. Basically, you're looking at the blue bars in the chart:

  Wow, this thread has really evolved! Unfortunately mental health is a huge problem and I can see the budget only expanding from here. My wife and I volunteer at a soup kitchen/food pantry. We live in a town of about 18,000. They serve meals Mon. - Fri. from 5:00pm to 6:30pm.
  Since this last Thanksgiving we now have tables and chairs for the people to sit and eat. On Fridays they make food boxes for the weekend. When we’ve been there we have served as high as 70 meals. the food is cooked and provided by groups of people who volunteer once a month. We get a state food truck once a month that delivers all kinds of food both frozen and dry. And now we often get various frozen meats. Walmart, Aldi’s and other local stores donate a lot of almost outdated food. None of it gets wasted.
  I’ve gotten to know many of these people on a first name basis because I sit and talk with them. Believe me there’s a couple of them that make me nervous. But filling an empty stomach is a motivator for them to behave. The main culprit I see for the homeless that show up is drug and alcohol addiction. and some of the homeless seem to want to remain just that way. Other people that show up just need the help in their daily lives because even though they work, the inflated prices of everything is hurting them financially.
  The main problem with the homeless/drug addicts is that the longer they’re on the streets the more mentally sick they become. That way of living is taxing on the mind. Many of them carry knives for protection from anyone who might threaten the few things they have; even their ‘friends’.
  Our daughter has her doctorate in mental health and is responsible for the administration of prescriptions and counseling. She lives in Tennessee not too far from Knoxville. She is NOT a pill pusher and has been threatened by clients because she doesn’t give them the ‘meds’ they want. Those clients don’t get to come back anymore. She sees as many as 25 clients a day. She says the young ones, think 18-30 year olds, all want to be diagnosed with anything because they consider that their identity and can get on medications. But our daughter knows the game too so many of them leave disappointed.
  At Christmas she had a client call their office and threaten to shoot everyone. The office was closed down till the police found the man. He had a warrant and they had been looking for him for over a year. They finally caught him 3 weeks later.
  So many of our nation’s people are addicted to drugs both legal and illegal that mass shootings, crime of various kinds, no motivation to work, etc. are here to stay.
 Every once in a while I see one of these people decide to get out of the hole they’ve dug themselves and their lives are turned around. They normally get into a program, mainly faith-based around here, and win the battle with their demons. But it’s still a very sad problem we witness too often than I like.

Colors don't matter.

Where there is spending there is waste and fraud.  

Spending can be cut.

If and how the budget expands will be determined, at least in part, by who Missourians elect as governor.

I think it's safe to assume that a Gov. Crystal Quade (as unlikely as that is) would want to spend more on education, health care and safety net sorts of programs. I would think that either Aschcroft or Kehoe would mostly maintain the status quo. Eigel says he wants to aggressively cut taxes and reduce the size of government. I'm skeptical about how much of that he could actually accomplish, but that's what he says he wants to do.

The colors represent sources of funding and each of those sources comes with strings attached. When you factor in federal programs and money that comes from taxes specifically earmarked for different purposes (conservation, parks, transportation), the governor and the legislature only have control of about 25 % of the state budget.

You can find more information about Missouri's budget than you'd ever want to know here:
https://oa.mo.gov/budget-planning/budget-information

And THAT is the problem.  

We need to stop accepting funds with 'strings attached'.  

If we wish to be free then we need to be independent.  

The funds come from our Federal Taxes. So you want to give the Feds money, but get none of it back?

I mean, I'd only be ok with it if we could eliminate Federal Taxes. But that isn't happening anytime soon.

I don’t think any of the candidates for governor are promising to withdraw Missouri from Medicaid or any other federal program.

I was blessed & privileged to have Quad as rep while in Springfield. A typical big government libtard shit bird who's out to do nothing but WELL by supposedly doing good.

During her time in office while I still lived in Springfield, I got to watch first hand sewer become a cesspool.  Crime, drugs, homelessness, poverty, theft everything negative went up. While that's not solely her fault (Springfields supposedly oh so conservative good ole boy city council can claim a goodly chunk of the blame), her attitudes and involvement sure as heck didn't help matter. National politics & liberal / progressive interests were more important than locals.

If that twat wins, we'd better hope that Republicans can pull their heads out of their collective asses.

If people really were able to see what happens to their Medicaid / Medicare dollar they should demand reform.

Give $1 in federal tax

Costs Fed Admin 50 cents to give it to the states.

States spend 25 cents in admin to facilitate handing it out.

You get 25 cents back.

But not really, because most people will never be able to use Medicaid and if they do, the last Thank You for paying taxes will be the federal government taking your home to offset your care costs.

-------

How about if we want these services; the money go straight to the state and maybe we can afford to stop stealing people's homes.

I'd be ok with it.

This is a much better system.

The initial fiscal note on Eigel's property tax bill (Senate Bill 733)) has been posted. If there are any policy nerds who enjoy reading fiscal notes, you can find it here: https://senate.mo.gov/FiscalNotes/2024-1/4160S.01I.ORG.pdf

The St. Louis Post Dispatch "features" Bill Eigel (the link is from Combest so no paywall)

Bill Eigel isn’t making friends in the Missouri Senate. It fits with his run for governor.

After reading this, I think I'll go with the asshole.I can relate.

The St Louis dispatch doesn't like Engel. I'm more interested in him now after reading the article.

Politics as poker -- an analysis of the governor's race as it stands now:

What if the Missouri GOP gubernatorial primary were a hand of Texas Hold ‘Em?

TLDR: Ashcroft is still in the best position. Kehoe has a real shot. Eigel is a long-shot at best.

I'm late doing my homework here.

If any of the big candidates have a 2A endorsement, I can't find it. They also have very generic pro-2A statements on their pages without listing specific legislative goals.

Outside of 2A, it looks like Kehoe has all the endorsements. LE/first responder, Agriculture, and Construction orgs are all pointing to him.

Aaron Dorr (Missouri Firearms Coalition) had Eigel on his Youtube channel last year.

I wish there was some 'cheat sheet' comparison between the 3 and each's stance on major issues.

FWIW, in the video I posted, Eigel promised to introduce legislation that would impose civil or criminal penalties on any city that tried to pass gun laws stricter than state law. I looked and I don't see that he actually sponsored any bill like that either last year or this year.

I don't know this for a fact, but my suspicion is that if you were to invite the top three Republican candidates and the leading Democrats to join you for any sort of range day, the only one who would exhibit any level of familiarity or competence with a firearm would be Kehoe.

That would be an interesting thing to see missouricarry, GCLA, and the other groups put together.
There are ranges aplenty in JC or environs. Either get them all together and see who is competent in a 3-gun, or give them individual days so they aren't under pressure.

Ought to be a regular election year primary winnowing event.