Aug 19, 2008


Philip R. Klein whines about raises for non-union county employees on the Southeast Texas Political Review:

We warned you. We told you. We tried to set this up for you a year ago. And now you get it. The ultimate slap in the face.

As I've already documented, Philip follows the same standard operating procedure every year. He first makes up some ridiculous figure and claims this is the new county budget.  As an example, he first claimed in 2007 that the budget would be $130 million:

"...we understand that there will be a whopping $130 million dollar [sic] budget. "

He also claimed tax rate would increase:

"...the tax rate, which is going to go through the roof."

In reality, the 2007-2008 Jefferson County Budget approved  expenditures of only $110,247,921 and Jefferson County Commissioners actually reduced the tax rate.

This year, he first claimed the budget would be $140 million on June 16, 2008:

The Southeast Texas Political Review has learned from inside sources at the Jefferson County Courthouse the a [sic] preliminary budget that is being floated around may top $140 million dollars [sic].

In his latest article, Philip now uses a different figure:

Your Jefferson County Commissioners have laid the ground work to a fiscal budget of over $120 million (shhhhhh really $130 with the rainy day fund <slush>)....

Actually, the proposed budget is about $118 million, not "over $120 million" as Philip now claims.

Neither is Philip's figure of the "rainy day fund" of $10 million accurate.  I'd love to discuss this entire issue of an unreserved fund balance, the county's credit and bond rating, and what this means in a contracting economy right now, but Philip obviously flunked out of Texas Tech before he got to simple economics and business finance:

...up almost 40% over five years...

Compared with this statement in the same article:


Philip R. Klein is even confused over the simple difference between points and actual dollars. What a dunce, yet he claims to be an expert in investments - how funny!

Regarding his main complaint about the raise for county non-union employees, here's an excellent example of Philip's bias.  Notice that he's claiming a 40 percent increase in the budget over a five-year period, but only mentions the raises granted employees over the past two years.

He's conveniently failed to mention that over the past six years, wages for non-union county employees will have only increased by 15 per cent, if the proposed 6 percent increase is granted.

In 2007, they did indeed get a seven percent raise, but in 2006, county employees received only a two percent raise. And, for the three years prior to 2006, county employees did not raise a raise at all. 

With the proposed six percent raise for the 2008-2009 budget, this breaks down to a 2.5 per cent increase in pay over a six-year period. This doesn't even keep up with the cost of living and inflation, so the purchasing power of non-union county employees is less today than it was in 2003, even with the proposed six percent increase.

Philip again displays his ignorance simple business with this comment in his so-called "editorial," which is really just more of the same ignorance repeated ad infinitum:

Can anyone out there name anyone in the private sector that has gotten a 13% raise no matter how or if you do your job?

Actually, a great many companies give COL (cost of living) raises on an annual basis, which are generally tied to the ACCRA Cost of Living Index.

Unfortunately, Philip is simply too ignorant of common business practices to understand simple business finance

Any comments, buddy? I'd love to debate this subject intelligently with you website-to-website, but you've already repeatedly proven you're too stupid to comprehend the real issues.

Really, Philip, you need to "talk educated."

No comments :