Tyler Goodman

Tyler Goodman 2 days, 12 hours ago on Possible Medicaid cuts worry local advocates for people with disabilities

Nancy, This is exactly the kind of bait and switch politics that has alienated wide swaths of voters from democrats and liberals in general.

Medicaid should, and will continue to, take care of folks like Martha and Ian. It’s the social safety-net that is a moral obligation we all agree on.

What Medicaid also currently does (after the ACA was passed) is take care of people like an able-bodied 27 year old that’s perfect capable of holding a full time job, but instead chooses to work minimum wage jobs 8 months a year and travel the other 4; while getting free healthcare and food stamps thanks to the honest, hardworking tax payers.

This is what happens when you expand social safety net programs beyond those that truly need it in an effort to buy votes. All of a sudden the budget becomes a concern because let’s face it, who doesn’t like free stuff. And in order to actually live within our means, those who need the help end up as collateral damage when it’s time to pay the piper. The ACA will end up hurting those whom it’s intended to help as the country deals with the financial reality of taking corrective action in order to keep our federal government solvent.

I highly doubt Messrs. Tipton and Gardner want to leave Martha and Ian out in the cold. In fact, I’d even go further to say that maybe our congressmen want to protect their benefits by making sure this program and others like it have some sort of a future, other than the financial disaster they’re heading for.

Let’s be honest and point out the true cause of the debate we’re now having.

Instead of saying, “No, don’t cut anything!”, let’s use our critical thinking caps and start proposing solutions for how we’re going to take care of the folks that need it, while making sure we’re not breaking the bank and robbing our kids of a future.

“I want to be proactive, suggest solutions and get our voice to the table,” (Ian) said. Let’s support Ian and the rest of the amazing people at NWCCI by suggesting solutions, instead of broad comments that will do little else then get swept under the rug with the rest of the BS that gets hurled at our elected representatives (democrats and republicans alike).

0

Tyler Goodman 3 months, 2 weeks ago on Sarah Coleman: Bacon, mmm, bacon

THIS...is probably the best thing I've heard in quite some time. Rock on Sarah, rock on.

0

Tyler Goodman 4 months, 1 week ago on Our view: Seize the opportunity

Two, if not all three, of the no votes were in favor of the agreement with minor changes. They were in no way ready to sink the proposal...

0

Tyler Goodman 6 months, 4 weeks ago on Steamboat police warn of suspicious pay-at-the-pump activity

Wow, filled up at the Ski Haus on Sunday and the bank called yesterday about fraudulent activity...now I know where they got my card from.

0

Tyler Goodman 10 months, 2 weeks ago on Coloradans ponder Amendment 69's ColoradoCare

Wow, this thing equates to another 10% in income taxes?! This is on top of the about 34% effective rate (EE and ER taxes) we pay already. So the average Joe gets to pay about 44% of their income to the government...no wonder the labor force participation rate and the U6 unemployment rate are still the worst they've its been in decades; there's no incentive to work! What about the people that don't earn any income; how with they pay their fair share of this new program?

What are we going to do when there's more people out of the labor force and collecting government benefits, than in the labor force paying for the government benefits? Oh yeah, I get to go work all day, only bring home half of my salary, meanwhile the other half is handed out like candy...good on ya America...way to go....

0

Tyler Goodman 1 year, 2 months ago on Jim Clark: Housing need 'critical'

So, you're ready to start forking it over at the cash register? It's the people that will pay for higher wages. Unless you're a Bernie Sanders fan and think money grows on trees, the money has to come from somewhere...

0

Tyler Goodman 1 year, 2 months ago on Jim Clark: Housing need 'critical'

So what you're saying is that you're willing to pay 20% to 40% more for the goods and services you consume locally? You're ok with raising local taxes to pay for the increased payroll costs for the city and the county? You're ok with buying a $6 gallon of milk at the grocery store?

0

Tyler Goodman 1 year, 2 months ago on Jim Clark: Housing need 'critical'

Scott, yes, from first hand experience, business that pay $15/hour (even sometimes up to $20/hour) are having difficultly finding the work force they need to fill year-round, full time positions; chiefly because of housing costs.

0

Tyler Goodman 1 year, 6 months ago on Tiana Buschmann: Proposal an investment

Scott, It's not often I agree with you but on this one we couldn't agree more. Just ran some more calculations using the 'Yes 2Schools' estimates which are pretty shady but for sake of argument they will say their estimates are correct so we'll use them for now.

If we split the difference of their interest rate estimate at 5% that comes to a total repayment cost of $161,346,851 on the bonds. Plus the maintenance and admin for 30years, which is about $94.2 MILLION.

In other words we’re looking at a total cost of $255.5 MILLION.

All to increase the capacity of the high school 55%. Which in it’s current location won’t reach capacity until when? Yes 2schools' projections show it at 92% capacity in 2019 using the high side of the estimate. Ignoring the fact that there are significant opportunities to add on and increase capacity in its current location at a fraction of the cost.

Then we have the middle school which they're proposing increase capacity by 65%. It’s only over capacity right now by 8% and they essentially project enrollment to be flat over the next several years giving a range of 97.3% to 99.4% of current enrollment. That’s actually a decrease! We apparently need another 65% capacity; how long is that going to take to fill?!

Last, but certainly not least, we have the elementary schools. Using the high side of 'Yes 2schools' estimates again we’ll be at 101.6% of capacity in 2019. $255.5 MILLION DOLLARS over the next 30 years to be right back in the same spot in 4 years?! Using the low side of their estimate we’re still at 88% of capacity in 4 years. (PS they need to redraw their little bar graph on their enrollment page so light purple crosses the red dotted line on top, because it's visually misleading…)

So let’s recap: we’re going to spend a GIGANTIC amount of money to fix problems we don’t have and not fix the problem we do have. This is senseless. We can definitely come up with a better plan to address what is needed at a fraction of the cost! Sure interest rates and costs may go up, but that’s using tomorrow’s dollars, which will inflate right alongside in comparison anyway. We would still save a whole boatload of money (pardon the pun) with a better plan.

Just thought folks would appreciate knowing these figures. Let’s kick this thing to the curb and go back to the drawing board.

TG

0

Tyler Goodman 1 year, 6 months ago on Latest Google poll shows support dropping for Steamboat school bond

So if we split the difference at 5% interest that comes to a total repayment cost of $161,346,851. Plus the maintenance and admin for 30years, which is about $94.2 MILLION.

In other words we’re looking at a total cost of $255.5 MILLION.

All to increase the capacity of the high school 55%. Which in it’s current location won’t reach capacity until when? You projections show it at 92% capacity in 2019 using the high side of the estimate. Negating the fact that there are significant opportunities to add on and increase capacity in its current location at a fraction of the cost.

Then we have the middle school which you’re proposing increase capacity by 65%. It’s only over capacity right now by 8% and you essentially project enrollment to be flat over the next several years giving a range of 97.3% to 99.4% of current enrollment. WAIT, that’s a decrease! We apparently need another 65% capacity; how long is that going to take to fill?!

Last, but certainly not least, we have the elementary schools. Using the high side of your estimates again we’ll be at 101.6% of capacity in 2019?! $255.5 MILLION DOLLARS over the next 30 years to be right back in the same spot in 4 years?! Using the low side of your estimate we’re still at 88% of capacity in 4 years! (PS you also might what to redraw you’re little bar graph thingy on your link so light purple crosses the red dotted line on top, that’s just visually misleading…)

So let’s recap: we’re going to spend a GIGANTIC amount of money to fix problems we don’t have and not fix the problem we do have. This is senseless. We can definitely come up with a better plan to address what is needed at a fraction of the cost! Sure interest rates and costs may go up, but that’s using tomorrow’s dollars, which will inflate right alongside in comparison anyway. We would still save a whole boatload of money (pardon the pun) with a better plan!

Let’s kick this thing to the curb and go back to the drawing board.

TG

0

Prev