DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on February 17, 2011, 02:53:51 PM
-
So, we have Wisconson appearing to try and do away with it, and we have a possible CA proposition that may be giving that option to the voters. Why is this bad? Intiially it was a noble and appropriate endeavor within the private sector, in order to prevent those "types" of employers, management, and corporations, from trying to severely take advantage of their employees. Unions have their place.......in the private sector
We're not talking Private sector here. We're talking Public Employee unions. Those that are employed by the government, and payed for by tax payers. It is precisely the cushy union facilitated perks, salaries, and benefits, with pension plans that put nearly every employee in the private sector to shame, that was "ok" when the economy was humming. Low and behold, when the economy tanked, guess who's been stuck with the bar tab as these lucrative public union salary & pension plans still need to be paid for......the tax payers. While the private sector continues to lay off thousands upon thousands, and 401k's have been decimated, GOVERNMENT jobs, under Obama have actually increased, with all their cushy salaries, free healthcare, and pension plans that we, the tax payers, still legally have to pay for
So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy? Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
-
It is the right of every worker to form a union and to bargain collectively. Therefore taking away that right is wrong.
-
Please cite for me in the Constitution, or even Florida state law, that one has a right to a Union. Sure, you can form one......unless its illegal to do so.
And I have no problem with those that want to form a Union in the private sector. This is specifically dealing with the Public sector, where the "greedy employer" is the Government, but its the "tax payers" that pay all the benefits, perks, salaries, and pension
-
I see no problem having union is private or public sectors. but the real question is how collective bargaining be so powerful that it hurts a government? I mean isn`t it the governments fault to allow police officers to do outsource overtime and actually lose money by allowing it? the key word is bargaining.
-
MADISON, Wis. ? A Wisconsin state senator says the 14 Democratic lawmakers who are boycotting a vote on a controversial anti-union bill have left the state.
Sen. Jon Erpenbach says the group wants to force negotiations over the Republican-backed bill, which would strip most public employees of their collective-bargaining rights.
Erpenbach told The Associated Press that he and his colleagues had left Wisconsin, but he would not say where.
He said the plan is to slow down the bill because it's "tearing the state apart."
Senate Republicans can't vote on the bill unless at least one Democrat is present. Police could be dispatched to retrieve them, but it was unclear if they would have the authority to cross state lines.
What's their problem? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110217/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions)
If Dems are concerned how terrible this law would be, they simply vote against it, and if it still passes, they then run ad after ad, like the GOP did against Obamacare, subsequently getting relected with majorities and a Dem governor next election cycle, with which they then can repeal the supposedly terrible law.
Unless of course, they're concerned that the majority of the electorate also agrees with the pending legislation. That can then justify the cowardly act
-
(http://kegonsaseedfund.com/images/logo-milwaukee-journal-sentinel.gif)
Unions want to overturn election result
Feb. 16, 2011
Say you generally liked Gov. Scott Walker's move to rein in government labor
costs but had a few doubts on his method. The last few days should have
cleared that up nicely.
The public-sector union tantrums, meant to make lawmakers wobble, have an inadvertent message for the rest of us: Voters can vote all they want. You can elect a cheapskate governor and a Legislature to match. But come the moment, unions will have the last, loudest word.
They'll have it if takes marches. They'll have it if it takes what amounts to an illegal strike, with so many Madison teachers calling in sick Wednesday that the district closed schools. If it takes showing up for a we-know-where-your-family-is protest on Walker's Wauwatosa lawn while he was at work, the unions are sure they can outshout any election result.
This is exactly why Walker is right to limit the unions' power over government spending.
Walker, remember, is not removing unions' fundamental power to bargain for wages. He is demanding that state workers put 5.8% of their wages toward retirement and that they cover 12.6% of their health care premiums, which would still have them paying more than $100 less a month than the average schmoe. He is also proposing that elected officials determine the shape of employee benefits without having to bargain them, and this as much as the added cost has unions crying "unfair."
They insist this is the end of unionization in government, something to which they have as much right, they say, as anyone else.
But they miss a bedrock difference. Unions in the private sector are a way of organizing private interests, those of employees, against other private interests, those of a company's owners, for economic gain and for protection against unfairness. In government, workers are already protected against unfairness by civil service laws, and Walker has supported expanding those. Economically, government unions pit a private interest, that of employees, against the public's interest, that of taxpayers and voters.
We see the result. Walker's moves are prompted by the state's vast deficit. The alternative, he says, is to lay off thousands. Nonsense, charge the marchers: Just raise taxes. Unions and allies have for years been demanding more sales taxes, new business taxes and higher taxes on other people's incomes, all to keep the state flush and generous. We're taxed enough already, said a voting majority in November. Not yet, insist the unions that have become the largest players in Wisconsin politics precisely to counter any such voter sentiment.
Anyway, union leaders were conceding the pension and health care premiums by this week. They said they knew they'd have to pay more eventually - so when unions in December said such payments were tantamount to slavery, it must have been just maneuvering. Bygones, say unions, as long as Walker leaves them the power to set health benefits via bargaining. Leave that, they say, and it's peace.
Yeah? Recall how we got here. How is it that only in desperation will unions accept a deal that still leaves them better off than everyone else? How did we achieve not just next year's $3.3 billion deficit but the decade of structural deficits before? Easy: It's because labor costs for years have been outstripping taxpayers' capacity. That in turn was caused by officials, elected in a union-dominated political environment, buying labor peace via benefits, where it's harder for voters to see the costs adding up.
If the Legislature takes the 5% and 12% and doesn't reform collective bargaining, the 5% and 12% soon will be won back by unions. Any further savings are out the window. Walker talks of moving to consumer-driven benefits, as many companies have done, to restrain medical costs. That's anathema to unions, who will resist it contract by contract. Without bargaining reform, government costs will have taken only a pause in their ascent.
Union activists in Madison Tuesday spoke apocalyptically of "class war," hinting wildly at general strikes and takeovers of the Capitol. They correctly see their control of the state slipping and must figure that if they bring 13,000 shouting people to Madison, they can overrule the election.
Any worried legislators should keep in mind that Walker drew about five times that many votes in Dane County alone in November.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/116355379.html (http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/116355379.html)
-
C makes a great point, in pointing out that the legislation in question in Wisconsin, and the one being considered in CA, appears NOT to actually make it illegal the opportinuty to unionize, merely that as state employees, that they actually support some of their own perks, and not allow it to be purely the tax payers on the hook
-
I did not realize that state, local and federal employees did not pay taxes. How can that be?
-
That's strange, who said that?? ???
-
C makes a great point, in pointing out that the legislation in question in Wisconsin, and the one being considered in CA, appears NOT to actually make it illegal the opportinuty to unionize, merely that as state employees, that they actually support some of their own perks, and not allow it to be purely the tax payers on the hook
So when you are referring to taxpayers you are also including public employees.
I don't have a problem with employees individually or collectively negotiating for the best pay and benefits possible.
Management is responsible for know what that magic cost number is and not crossing it.
Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue. And since we elect then the ultimate responsibility falls back on us. So when assigning blame be sure to point the finger inward.
-
So when you are referring to taxpayers you are also including public employees.
Of course. Why wouldn't I??
I don't have a problem with employees individually or collectively negotiating for the best pay and benefits possible.
I have a problem when those negotiating such contracts "promise" that there will be no burden placed on the tax payers, that said "best pay & benefits possible" will be completely taken care of with current investments
That problem is then compounded when said recipients of the "best pay and benefits possible" tell those who then ARE stuck paying that pay & benefits, to go pound sand, when those investments go belly up.
Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue.
BIG TIME. These contracts don't get done without the signature of the Governor. and guess what....they're no longer in office, and the tax payers get screwed. Time for further legislative or Proposition efforts, like the ones going on Wisconsin and possibly in CA to fix what the elected officials pulled
And FYI Bt, when these elected officials pull this crap, its ususally done outside of earshot to those that elected them, not to mention done when there was no burden to the taxpayers, and with mininal MSM attention provided, so to try and dump this on the electorate is pretty weak
-
lol!!!!!!!!
Seems to me that management, in the form of elected officials are the ones who dropped the ball on this issue. And since we elect then the ultimate responsibility falls back on us. So when assigning blame be sure to point the finger inward.
that`s what I`m trying to say.
-
And FYI Bt, when these elected officials pull this crap, its ususally done outside of earshot to those that elected them, not to mention done when there was no burden to the taxpayers, and with mininal MSM attention provided, so to try and dump this on the electorate is pretty weak
Then i suggest you take the responsibility to keep yourself informed as to what your representatives are up to. Don't blame the MSM for not spoon feeding you the "facts" Find them out for yourself. The tools are all there.
-
Me, Joe citizen, not having voted for the fella in the 1st place, hardly is privvy to the backroom shenanigans that had said Governor sign off on these cushy pension plans for Public employee union members. that are now currently crippling our state
-
Sure you are. I suggest you check into open records and sunshine laws.
And perhaps have your legislators phone number on speed dial.
But i suspect that you are happy just complaining about the situation. I think that you have already conceded that the unions and the politicians that love them are better organized, smarter and have deeper pockets than those who oppose lavish pensions and total disregard for the public's tax burden.
The old saying was you can't fight city hall. That is correct only if you don't get into the ring.
-
Sure you are
Sure I am....what?
I suggest you check into open records and sunshine laws.
And perhaps have your legislators phone number on speed dial.
yea.....and??.....Governor still signs the legislation. I have no control over that, especially in light that I never voted for him in the 1st place. It's incredible this backbend you're trying to perform in pushing garbage that legislators and executives pull, onto the electorate. Especially those that didn't vote for them in the 1st place. It's one thing when the electorate votes for boneheaded and wreckless propositions. Far different than when Politicans pull stuff that had they campaigned on, would have demonstrated precisely who supports their re-election and who doesn't
You remind me of a conversation I had with my wife a while back. She complained alot about the same things I complained about. I asked her if she voted. At the time she hadn't, and I told her that she really didn't have a leg to stand on then. She's voted ever since. As such, if we vote one way, and the politicans do the opposite of what we voted for, it's pretty outlandish of you to try and lay the blame "inwardly" on me and my wife's lap.
But i suspect that you are happy just complaining about the situation.
You'd be wrong, but you've gotten pretty consistent in that area
I think that you have already conceded that the unions and the politicians that love them are better organized, smarter and have deeper pockets than those who oppose lavish pensions and total disregard for the public's tax burden.
Yea, that has to be it ::)
-
You will just have to try harder. Your opponents don't seem to be having a problem getting what they want.
-
So hopefully now we can dispense with the inward blaming nonsense
-
So hopefully now we can dispense with the inward blaming nonsense
Sure, if you refuse to accept responsibility for your role in the failed economic decisions of your elected representatives, that's fine with me. There is a large mental health industry built around denial.
-
http://afgelocal987.org/calendar/2008/11/15 (http://afgelocal987.org/calendar/2008/11/15)
My Union , sleep well tonight , we don't ever strike.
-
So hopefully now we can dispense with the inward blaming nonsense
Sure, if you refuse to accept responsibility for your role in the failed economic decisions of your elected representatives, that's fine with me. There is a large mental health industry built around denial.
Hard to "accept responsibility" for something one never supported or voted for in the 1st place. But keep trying
-
The responsibility lays with not having a persuasive enough argument so that your guy loses and the other guy wins.
-
LOL.....riiiiiiiight. I have a closer connection & responsibility to Kevon Bacon than I do to what a governor I never voted for, who signs legislation that I never supported
-
So why did you tell your wife that it was important to vote?
-
The responsibility lays with not having a persuasive enough argument so that your guy loses and the other guy wins.
Doesn't one ever get to say "I told you so?"
(http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/assets_c/2010/02/03c1729de4fc133f25cae1d4370026a3-thumb-410x307.jpg)
-
NO evidence has been produced that teachers in Wisconsin have "lavish pensions". I would think that teachers should be provided decent health care, if for no other reason than taxpayers should not have to fear that a flu or other epidemic disease be passed on to their children by an uninsured teacher and brought into their home. I would think that a faculty of typhoid Mary teachers would be opposed by any sane taxpayer.
Most teacher pensions are rather poorly managed, by the way, and teachers in many states cannot choose to put their money into established mutual funds that can be tracked and researched online by the usual means. As a public school teacher in Washington State and Maryland, I know that this was true of their state retirement plans.
This idiot reactionary governor is simply trying to bust the union. he is not concerned with education or children. I hope he fails miserably. This is not what he was elected to do.
-
The responsibility lays with not having a persuasive enough argument so that your
guy loses and the other guy wins.
BT although that might be correct on one level, doesn't that response
on a practical level kind of discourage new topics or debate? In that no
matter what anyone says or complains about basically it boils down to....
"sit down and shut up your guy didn't win because he
and you couldn't persuade enough people to vote for him/her"
Wouldn't it sort of be like if your buddy was complaining about
having poor health and you said "well if you had eaten right
and exercised enough this probably wouldn't have happened".
Probably true on some level, but see if that guy ever mentions
it again......why encourage people to clam up?
-
The responsibility lays with not having a persuasive enough argument so that your
guy loses and the other guy wins.
BT although that might be correct on one level, doesn't that response
on a practical level kind of discourage new topics or debate? In that no
matter what anyone says or complains about basically it boils down to....
"sit down and shut up your guy didn't win because he
and you couldn't persuade enough people to vote for him/her"
Wouldn't it sort of be like if your buddy was complaining about
having poor health and you said "well if you had eaten right
and exercised enough this probably wouldn't have happened".
Probably true on some level, but see if that guy ever mentions
it again......why encourage people to clam up?
I don't see where it discourages the debate, what it does it set the valid parameters for the debate.
The real issue is whether public employees should have the right to collectively bargain.
The real issue is not whether Plane is the scum of the earth for belonging to a public employees union.
So why don't we just skip the demonizing crap and debate the real issue?
-
Boy, I SURE would like to know who made the claime that merely being a Union Member delegated that person to the level of "scum of the earth"?? That's quite the strawman when we're supposedly talking about "debating the real issue"
-
We're not talking Private sector here. We're talking Public Employee unions. Those that are employed by the government, and payed for by tax payers. It is precisely the cushy union facilitated perks, salaries, and benefits, with pension plans that put nearly every employee in the private sector to shame, that was "ok" when the economy was humming. Low and behold, when the economy tanked, guess who's been stuck with the bar tab as these lucrative public union salary & pension plans still need to be paid for......the tax payers. While the private sector continues to lay off thousands upon thousands, and 401k's have been decimated, GOVERNMENT jobs, under Obama have actually increased, with all their cushy salaries, free healthcare, and pension plans that we, the tax payers, still legally have to pay for
My bad. I didn't realize you were being complimentary. ::)
-
You really need to stop this knee jerk making criticism of a group, ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE, as somehow criticism of all. It's bad enough when you falsely complain about folks damning all Muslims. Your perpetuation of this strawman tactic though is quite transparent, at this point
Best practice what you preach and get back to debating the real issues here
-
sirs didn`t halfmoon bay have this problem and the police cry victimhood over this?
infact 2 more town this past month is tanking in california.
-
To be perfectly honest, Kimba, I don't recall the story. When I get a chance, I'll try loking up some of the info. Thanks for brining it to my attention. But to reference your latter comment, likely far more than just 2 towns are tanking. Los Angeles is in severe economic shape, and you have a new LA School Super Intendent, IIRC, who is now advocating that all the students should/must be provided healthcare. Nevermind thier abysmal test results and drop out rates....we need to provide them healthcare
-
You really need to stop this knee jerk making criticism of a group, ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE, as somehow criticism of all. It's bad enough when you falsely complain about folks damning all Muslims. Your perpetuation of this strawman tactic though is quite transparent, at this point
Best practice what you preach and get back to debating the real issues here
Talk about straw-men, why are unions responsible for the mess we are in? Seems to me it's management that caved. So why are you blaming Plane for the federal deficit?
I don't know about you, but when i negotiate a salary or commission rate , you'll never hear me say, no that's too much. Not in my best interest, nor am i that stupid.
-
You really need to stop this knee jerk making criticism of a group, ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE, as somehow criticism of all. It's bad enough when you falsely complain about folks damning all Muslims. Your perpetuation of this strawman tactic though is quite transparent, at this point
Best practice what you preach and get back to debating the real issues here
Talk about straw-men, why are unions responsible for the mess we are in?
Because their leadership, and those that support their leadership doing what they've done, (which translates into those responsible, and not merely any and every union member) which pretty much is buying the Democrat party, to do their bidding at the expense of the taxpayers. Note also that I' haven't placed this mess entirely on just the Unions. IF you were paying attention, in any way, vs the standard, "this is what sirs must think"...must fit template
Seems to me it's management that caved.
"Management" in this case being GOVERNMENT politicians, with "caved" being bought and paid for with Union dollars, with the VAST majority of those politicians being Democrats
So why are you blaming Plane for the federal deficit?
Because I haven't. That's your yet again mispresentation. So I'd appreciate if you stopped that RIGHT NOW. Unless of course you can provide a quote of Plane's that has him fully supporting his union dollars going towards purchasing legislative quid-pro-quos, at the repercussive expense of the tax payer, at which time I would be "blaming Plane". I'm ready to concede if I was wrong. Are you??
-
The new "civility" the Democrats keep talking about?
(http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021811/content/01125108.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg)
-
Remember all the uproar of the supposed racist Tea Party rallies, where you could count the # of such signs on 1 hand.........and that's pretty much all the rallies combined. One can also safely assume that these Wisconsin union folk (disclaimer for Bt, since he needs clarity that I'm referencing the ACTUAL demonstrators and not every living breathing union member) are perfectly happy with their Walker = Hitler signs, and crosshairs over his head.
and don't expect a peep of protest or questioning by our MSM
-
SIRS this is what happens when you disagree with the left-wing in America!
"Organizing for America"....Obama's former campaign group has
now sent operatives into the state and is involved in orchestrating the protests.
The Taxocrats dont care if there is no money...they still demand their pork!
-
Look at what Obama & Co did to AZ. Now it's Wisconsin in their "crosshairs"
-
SIRS...whats up with your avatar?
Whoever was hosting your avatar pic must have made a change.
It looks like this:
(http://www.yosemitestock.com/files/imagecache/main/files/sentinel-dome-tree_0.jpg)
-
SIRS this is what happens when you disagree with the left-wing in America!
"Organizing for America"....Obama's former campaign group has
now sent operatives into the state and is involved in orchestrating the protests.
The Taxocrats dont care if there is no money...they still demand their pork!
Guess the right isn't smart enough to do the same thing. I mean it isn't a mystery how these guys operate.
-
Guess the right isn't smart enough to do the same thing. I mean it isn't a mystery how these guys operate.
I dunno BT.....before you go hammering the Right again
I would say over the last year the Right (Tea Party) has kicked
every single ass as far as protests/large gatherings go in the United States!
:D
-
Best practice what you preach and get back to debating the real issues here
I don't see why persons who choose to work for the government should forfeit their civil rights.
I don't think it would be against the constitution to disallow them to strike.
Let me know when you are ready to debate the real issue.
-
SIRS...whats up with your avatar?
Whoever was hosting your avatar pic must have made a change.
It looks like this:
(http://www.yosemitestock.com/files/imagecache/main/files/sentinel-dome-tree_0.jpg)
I'll look at it in a moment, and if I can't fix it, I'll fix it when I get home this evening. Thanks
-
Best practice what you preach and get back to debating the real issues here
I don't see why persons who choose to work for the government should forfeit their civil rights.
No one is asking them to. Even though this really isn't the issue either, as I asked Xo, where in the constitution is there a "right" to have a union?
I don't think it would be against the constitution to disallow them to strike.
Again, not really the issue
Let me know when you are ready to debate the real issue.
I'm here, and have been ready since I started the thread. It'll be nice when you actually get around to it, vs demegoguing & misrepresenting my responses. So let me know when you're planning to practice what you preach. What do YOU think the issue is? And not what you think sirs thinks the issue is, since you keep getting that wrong, time after time
-
Guess the right isn't smart enough to do the same thing. I mean it isn't a mystery how these guys operate.
I dunno BT.....before you go hammering the Right again
I would say over the last year the Right (Tea Party) has kicked
every single ass as far as protests/large gatherings go in the United States!
:D
Good to know. Then since they know how to organize, and how to counter protest, all they have to do now is explain why they think it is the right time to revisit pay and benefit packages for employees of government agencies instead of playing the blame and demonize game.
If their logic is sound, i trust the american people to support them.
And i don't believe i was hammering the right.
-
Guess the right isn't smart enough to do the same thing. I mean it isn't a mystery how these guys operate.
I dunno BT.....before you go hammering the Right again
I would say over the last year the Right (Tea Party) has kicked
every single ass as far as protests/large gatherings go in the United States!
:D
And keep in mind C, at the center of how the left is "operating", that Bt seems to believe the right needs to do as well, is buy off politicians, or in this case, an entire party, with the MSM also in their back pocket
-
No one is asking them to. Even though this really isn't the issue either, as I asked Xo, where in the constitution is there a "right" to have a union?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association)
brought to you by the same folks who say money equals speech.
-
And keep in mind C, at the center of how the left is "operating", that Bt seems to believe the right needs to do as well, is buy off politicians, or in this case, an entire party, with the MSM also in their back pocket
Please show me where i said the right should break the law.
-
You claimed that the right needs to do what the left is doing. The left has won these ridiculously lucrative pension plans and perks, by both dishonestly claiming there'd be no increase burden to the tax payers, and simply buying off Democrats and their majorities to push them thru to the governor
That's how they've been operating that isn't a mystery. You appear to be implying how the right needs to get in their and play like the left
-
Because their leadership, and those that support their leadership doing what they've done, (which translates into those responsible, and not merely any and every union member) which pretty much is buying the Democrat party, to do their bidding at the expense of the taxpayers.
Are you saying that unless Plane turns down the pay and benefits offered he is cahoots with the union leadership that negotiated that pay and those benefits?
-
No one is asking them to. Even though this really isn't the issue either, as I asked Xo, where in the constitution is there a "right" to have a union?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association)
brought to you by the same folks who say money equals speech.
Looks like an apples (freedom to organize) & oranges (right to a union) attempt. But cudos on the rationalization effort.
-
You claimed that the right needs to do what the left is doing. The left has won these ridiculously lucrative pension plans and perks, by both dishonestly claiming there'd be no increase burden to the tax payers, and simply buying off Democrats and their majorities to push them thru to the governor
That's how they've been operating that isn't a mystery. You appear to be implying how the right needs to get in their and play like the left
yes i did because it was claimed that the unions were busing in protesters to Wisconsin. Nowhere did i say that the right should bribe politicians.
(http://debategate.com/new3dhs/3dhs/collective-bargaining/msg118896/#msg118896)
Way to keep it honest.
-
Looks like an apples (freedom to organize) & oranges (right to a union) attempt.
Please parse the difference. This should be amusing.
-
Because their leadership, and those that support their leadership doing what they've done, (which translates into those responsible, and not merely any and every union member) which pretty much is buying the Democrat party, to do their bidding at the expense of the taxpayers.
Are you saying that unless Plane turns down the pay and benefits offered he is cahoots with the union leadership that negotiated that pay and those benefits?
No YOU are, with this 2nd misrpresentation effort. I've asked you once....STOP. Do it again, we're done with this. I'm not going to put up with that garbage of yours. I made it clear to what "cahoots" would entail...(support to buy off Democrat politicans, & dishonestly pass off huge pension plans as no burden to tax payers)
-
You claimed that the right needs to do what the left is doing. The left has won these ridiculously lucrative pension plans and perks, by both dishonestly claiming there'd be no increase burden to the tax payers, and simply buying off Democrats and their majorities to push them thru to the governor
That's how they've been operating that isn't a mystery. You appear to be implying how the right needs to get in their and play like the left
yes i did because it was claimed that the unions were busing in protesters to Wisconsin. Nowhere did i say that the right should bribe politicians.
But the issue really isn't protesting. Never has been. It's just a sideshow.
You still haven't answered the question. What do YOU think the issue is?? Not what sirs thinks or Cu4 thinks. What do YOU think the issue is?
-
Why can't unions support candidates they like? You allude to bribes but i don't recall any cases lately of that, so you must be referring to contributions. Money = speech. whatcha gonna do?
-
You're catching on.......to how they (the unions & democrats) "operate"
-
You still haven't answered the question. What do YOU think the issue is?? Not what sirs thinks or Cu4 thinks. What do YOU think the issue is?
Sure I did
asked and answered (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/3dhs/collective-bargaining/msg118876/#msg118876)
-
You're catching on.......to how they (the unions & democrats) "operate"
You are a big supporter of money=speech and certainly dem money spends as well as gop money so why the problem with how the unions achieve their goals? Seems you are being inconsistent, demonizing one group of contributors but not the other.
-
You still haven't answered the question. What do YOU think the issue is?? Not what sirs thinks or Cu4 thinks. What do YOU think the issue is?
Sure I did
asked and answered (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/3dhs/collective-bargaining/msg118876/#msg118876).....You are a big supporter of money=speech and certainly dem money spends as well as gop money so why the problem with how the unions achieve their goals? Seems you are being inconsistent, demonizing one group of contributors but not the other
Yea, I see where you misrepresented my position. Is THAT the issue?? How.....sirs doesn't see the issue?? Is your stance in this thread, that weak?
Here's a hint...it has nothing to do with protests, or even that folks shouldn't have a right to form a union, or seek out the best benefits they can get as union members. Now, let's see if you can get to the real issue, from that point
-
For those who can't read. This is what the link led to:
The real issue is whether public employees should have the right to collectively bargain.
-
No wonder.....that's NOT the real issue in play here
-
Did you not just ask me what i thought the real issue was?
Why yes you did
You still haven't answered the question. What do YOU think the issue is?? Not what sirs thinks or Cu4 thinks. What do YOU think the issue is?
-
I just reread it and to me it was a question what`s wrong with removing colective bargaining from the private sector and it doesn`t seem like that question was directly answered.
my answer is it`s a tool amoung many by the unit to get the best for the workers. but I think removal should net be done,but instead safe guards should be in place to prevent harm to the government.
ex. police contract overtime can be done as long as it ONLY show a profit for the government. overtime is not a RIGHT and should not be a a RIGHT,
contract overtime is when a public event in a city is made and OFF-DUTY officers are hired to do security. the problem with this is that collective bargaining has these offoicers doing overtime and these hours count toward retirement. which means the government will lose money having these officiers work these events.
-
The real issue is whether public employees should have the right to collectively bargain.
BT there is no issue involving "collective bargaining".
The people elected the Gov to tell the truth.
There is no more money for these "sweet deals".
It's not brain surgery....there is no immoral printing press in Wisconsin.
They can collective bargain....but the Gov is telling them the party is over.
They want to retire?....Let 'em.....I'd fire everyone one of them that stays out.
The state will survive....these terror tactics need to be clearly shown wont work
Reagan fired the Air Traffic Controllers.......how'd they like them apples?
Most of the teachers will come back anyway...once they realize the terror isnt gonna work.
-
Most of the teachers will come back anyway...once they realize the terror isnt gonna work.
this I have serious doubts, it more like a nightmare weening process the good ones will goto the private sector and the idealistic and badones will comeback to work. remember they don`t choose thier students parents. this has alot more weight than benefits.
-
It is a little difficult to replace every teacher in an entire state, or even every tenth teacher. And the next year, those that can leave, will leave. The students that Wisconsin subsidizes in its state colleges and universities will go elsewhere rather than teach where they are treated like serfs.
-
don`t forget quite afew teachers who go to private school actually get less pay. it`s worth a paycut sometimes to have more receptive students sometimes. As far as I can remember I never once recall teachers in the surplus catagory. I have doubts it`s wise to ever say to a teacher thiey should be happy to have a job.
-
http://privateschool.about.com/od/salaries/qt/salaries.htm (http://privateschool.about.com/od/salaries/qt/salaries.htm)
Teaching via media and internet is growing , crowding the kids into schools is so 19th century.
My Union is forbidden to strike , our work is too important .
-
Private schools have had to compete for a smaller pool of well-qualified teachers
can we honestly say we have a pro-teacher culture
-
The sky is not falling. For the first time in history, the average annual compensation
for a teacher in the Milwaukee Public School system will exceed $100,000. The average
salary for an Milwaukee Public School teacher is $56,500. When fringe benefits are factored
in, the annual compensation will be $100,005 in 2011. Sorry the people of Wisconsin
don't have the money and voted in this Governor to clean up the budget mess the former
Democrat governor left the state in. The sky is falling is not reality and is not going to work.
Average MPS Compensation Tops $100k! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x2N4bDmzdc#)
-
interesting
As I stated earlier I`m all for retaining teachers but 68% student pass rate is really gonna be hard to justify the cost.
-
The real issue is whether public employees should have the right to collectively bargain.
BT there is no issue involving "collective bargaining".
The people elected the Gov to tell the truth.
There is no more money for these "sweet deals".
It's not brain surgery....there is no immoral printing press in Wisconsin.
They can collective bargain....but the Gov is telling them the party is over.
They want to retire?....Let 'em.....I'd fire everyone one of them that stays out.
The state will survive....these terror tactics need to be clearly shown wont work
Reagan fired the Air Traffic Controllers.......how'd they like them apples?
Most of the teachers will come back anyway...once they realize the terror isnt gonna work.
So, we have Wisconson appearing to try and do away with it, and we have a possible CA proposition that may be giving that option to the voters. Why is this bad? Intiially it was a noble and appropriate endeavor within the private sector, in order to prevent those "types" of employers, management, and corporations, from trying to severely take advantage of their employees. Unions have their place.......in the private sector
We're not talking Private sector here. We're talking Public Employee unions. Those that are employed by the government, and payed for by tax payers. It is precisely the cushy union facilitated perks, salaries, and benefits, with pension plans that put nearly every employee in the private sector to shame, that was "ok" when the economy was humming. Low and behold, when the economy tanked, guess who's been stuck with the bar tab as these lucrative public union salary & pension plans still need to be paid for......the tax payers. While the private sector continues to lay off thousands upon thousands, and 401k's have been decimated, GOVERNMENT jobs, under Obama have actually increased, with all their cushy salaries, free healthcare, and pension plans that we, the tax payers, still legally have to pay for
So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy? Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
-
BT...when I said there was no issue involving collective bargaining
I was referring to the reality in Wisconsin not Sirs opinion
-
What the Wisconsin bill does according to the muddied reports i have read, raises the contribution requirements from employees and does away with collective bargaining on any issue other than wages.
Is that your understanding?
-
I was referring to the reality in Wisconsin not Sirs opinion
Right. And he has backpedaled away from his opening position anyway.
-
I was referring to the reality in Wisconsin not Sirs opinion
Right. And he has backpedaled away from his opening position anyway.
Boy, you just love this being wrong about sirs position. You really need to adopt a more fulfilling hbby, when I can keep knocking down these erroreous conclusions on what sirs must think, over and over again. Yes, collective bargaining is an issue, but not the problem, nor the position I've prefaced as "the issue"
-
So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy? Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
If that is not your position, what is your position?
-
Private schools have had to compete for a smaller pool of well-qualified teachers
can we honestly say we have a pro-teacher culture
Isn't this a good trend?
Being scarce ought to make them able to demand more pay.
-
So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy? Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
If that is not your position, what is your position?
That's absolutely my position, but that's NOT the main issue involved here
-
So, what's wrong with Collective Bargaining being done away with, for Public Employees, given the state of current reality and our economy? Does Greece ring a bell for anyone?
If that is not your position, what is your position?
That's absolutely my position, but that's NOT the main issue involved here
Then according to you, what is the main issue involved here.
You already have what i consider the main issue.
-
HOW
That is the main issue....the HOW the unions became so predominant in shaping legislation. And HOW now that legislation has been leading states to economic ruin. It's one thing to lobby for perks, most every "group" has their lobbiests, to get their little piece of the pie. But these Unions & their leadership, using Plane's dues, regardless of his support or not, literally bankroll politicians.
Specifically here in CA, Governor Brown prior to this tenure, opened the floodgates with his passing collective bargaining for all public employees, his 1st go around. Seemed so innocent at the time. Governor Davis, when faced with his recall, was lathered with campaign contributions from the unions, and before he was voted out with the recall, signed the most incredible pension plans and perks, supposedly to be paid for by current investments, but with his signing, those pensions had the legal protection of the tax payers. And when the investments went south, we the tax payers, are now saddled with finances this state can not bear. A recent article indicated thousands of retired public employees are receiving lifetime 6digit pensions, free healthcare, not to mention they can still work and make money doing other things. Apparently Wisconsin and other states are under a similar unsustaining obligation
The point being that, under the cloak of misdirection & misinformation by union leadership, not to mention the millions/billions placed into politician's coffers, Public employees now have a combination of salary, benefits and pensions that far surpass that of a similar private sector employee.
Again, NOTHING WRONG WITH TRYING TO GET THE BEST DEAL ONE CAN GET, so don't trying pulling that garbage. The issue is HOW the unions came about with these deals, and the repercussions placed on the state and the tax payer, as a result
-
HOW
That is the main issue....the HOW the unions became so predominant in shaping legislation. And HOW now that legislation has been leading states to economic ruin. It's one thing to lobby for perks, most every "group" has their lobbiests, to get their little piece of the pie. But these Unions & their leadership, using Plane's dues, regardless of his support or not, literally bankroll politicians.
Specifically here in CA, Governor Brown prior to this tenure, opened the floodgates with his passing collective bargaining for all public employees, his 1st go around. Seemed so innocent at the time. Governor Davis, when faced with his recall, was lathered with campaign contributions from the unions, and before he was voted out with the recall, signed the most incredible pension plans and perks, supposedly to be paid for by current investments, but with his signing, those pensions had the legal protection of the tax payers. And when the investments went south, we the tax payers, are now saddled with finances this state can not bear. A recent article indicated thousands of retired public employees are receiving lifetime 6digit pensions, free healthcare, not to mention they can still work and make money doing other things. Apparently Wisconsin and other states are under a similar unsustaining obligation
The point being that, under the cloak of misdirection & misinformation by union leadership, not to mention the millions/billions placed into politician's coffers, Public employees now have a combination of salary, benefits and pensions that far surpass that of a similar private sector employee.
Again, NOTHING WRONG WITH TRYING TO GET THE BEST DEAL ONE CAN GET, so don't trying pulling that garbage. The issue is HOW the unions came about with these deals, and the repercussions placed on the state and the tax payer, as a result
So what do you plan to do about this issue?
Apparently your opening position concerning this issue was to do away with collective bargaining for public sector employees, does that remain the same or has that changed?
-
So what do you plan to do about this issue?
Apparently your opening position concerning this issue was to do away with collective bargaining for public sector employees, does that remain the same or has that changed?
That absolutely is a part of the equation. Unless Public employees put enough pressure on their leadership and get them to renegotiate terms that will drastically ratchet down their pension plans, while also making THEM start paying for their own healthcare, the status quo is simply & literally unsustainable. Massive layoffs, severe cutting of services, and thousands of employees likely losing their pensions, all together is what's in store
-
So what do you plan to do about this issue?
Apparently your opening position concerning this issue was to do away with collective bargaining for public sector employees, does that remain the same or has that changed?
That absolutely is a part of the equation. Unless Public employees put enough pressure on their leadership and get them to renegotiate terms that will drastically ratchet down their pension plans, while also making THEM start paying for their own healthcare, the status quo is simply & literally unsustainable. Massive layoffs, severe cutting of services, and thousands of employees likely losing their pensions, all together is what's in store
You want WHAT!
......Public employees put enough pressure on their leadership and get them to renegotiate terms that will drastically ratchet down their pension plans, while also making THEM start paying for their own healthcare.......
Ouch , man....who does this?
-
Massive layoffs, severe cutting of services, and thousands of employees likely losing their pensions, all together is what's in store
Buckle up. It's gonna be a bumpy ride
-
I can share in sacrifice, already I have accepted a pay freeze, but don't pass me the hemlock , I havn't the taste for it.
-
So what do you plan to do about this issue?
Apparently your opening position concerning this issue was to do away with collective bargaining for public sector employees, does that remain the same or has that changed?
That absolutely is a part of the equation. Unless Public employees put enough pressure on their leadership and get them to renegotiate terms that will drastically ratchet down their pension plans, while also making THEM start paying for their own healthcare, the status quo is simply & literally unsustainable. Massive layoffs, severe cutting of services, and thousands of employees likely losing their pensions, all together is what's in store
You want WHAT!
......Public employees put enough pressure on their leadership and get them to renegotiate terms that will drastically ratchet down their pension plans, while also making THEM start paying for their own healthcare.......
Ouch , man....who does this?
Yea, we all (at least us in the Private sector) have to cut back when times are tough. Not quite what one could refer to as fair that Public employees not only don't cut back, but add more Government jobs...ALL payed for by the tax payer, who's already been hit by the bad economy, raised taxes, and in many cases, layed off
Massive layoffs, severe cutting of services, and thousands of employees likely losing their pensions, all together is what's in store
Buckle up. It's gonna be a bumpy ride
Yet, with the pending legislation, none of that happens. No bumps, just some ridges, and employees that keep both their jobs and their pensions
-
Yet, with the pending legislation, none of that happens. No bumps, just some ridges, and employees that keep both their jobs and their pensions
So the union leadership is misleading the rank and file, because the Wisconsin deal is a good one?
Guess they ought to put it up for a vote down at the union hall.
-
I think that Union members could acquiesce to some givebacks, there really is a good case to make for the times requireing belt tightening.
But I don't see accepting this as unilateral decree from a government that could be discussing this with the union.
I see the subject of pention and givebacks of any kind to be negotiable , but the first stage of negotiation need not be shooting the opposite negotiator.
-
I think that Union members could acquiesce to some givebacks, there really is a good case to make for the times requireing belt tightening.
But I don't see accepting this as unilateral decree from a government that could be discussing this with the union.
I see the subject of pention and givebacks of any kind to be negotiable , but the first stage of negotiation need not be shooting the opposite negotiator.
Desperate times, and all that that....but let's see some of this serious "acquiesence"
Yet, with the pending legislation, none of that happens. No bumps, just some ridges, and employees that keep both their jobs and their pensions
So the union leadership is misleading the rank and file, because the Wisconsin deal is a good one?
Guess they ought to put it up for a vote down at the union hall.
Strange how I never said that (it was a "good deal"), but you claimed it any ways. SOP, at this point, I suppose. Nothing is going to be a "good deal" at this point. But they are good at misleading. At least you got that right
-
Yet, with the pending legislation, none of that happens. No bumps, just some ridges, and employees that keep both their jobs and their pensions
Oh I'm sorry. By that statement i mistakenly interpreted your position that the Wisconsin deal was much better than it was being portrayed by union leaders and their puppet rank and file currently holding the Wisconsin Capitol Rotunda hostage.
Me, i think it a better deal than no job at all, just in case there is some lack of clarity as to where i stand.
My only qualms are that a government that negotiates in good faith and then backs out of that deal, is probably not the type of institution i would invest much trust in.
But that's just me.
-
Me too
-
not the 1st time unions does give backs. ex. auto=unions. but that example took massive amount of work. this can get uglier
-
(http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/181791_168003429913766_100001123316260_329602_7850099_n.jpg)
-
Just imagine the media outrage if this were a group of Republicans that were holding up democracy
-
just dawned on me if the teachers got such high wages and benefitsv and the score are so low. can this also mean there is a very low amount of teachers in wisconsin?
-
HOW
That is the main issue....the HOW the unions became so predominant in shaping legislation. And HOW now that legislation has been leading states to economic ruin. It's one thing to lobby for perks, most every "group" has their lobbiests, to get their little piece of the pie. But these Unions & their leadership, using Plane's dues, regardless of his support or not, literally bankroll politicians. .... Again, NOTHING WRONG WITH TRYING TO GET THE BEST DEAL ONE CAN GET, so don't trying pulling that garbage. The issue is HOW the unions came about with these deals, and the repercussions placed on the state and the tax payer, as a result
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/02-22-11publicsectRGB20110222091416.jpg)
-
(http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/183285_10150161554935225_542775224_8584360_7045197_n.jpg)
-
D'oh
-
Shocking Level of Influence Exposed:
Union Boss Trumka Talks to Obama White House
EVERY DAY and Visits a Couple Times A Week
Shocking Level of Influence: Trumka Talks to White House EVERY DAY and Visits a Couple Times A Week (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4NrT2oTQqE#)
-
This is really quite enlightening. When it was Obamacare, even though Republicans knew they couldn't defeat it, they voted against it.....in mass. and although it should have stalled in the Senate, a nice slight of hand, got it passed regardless the country's uproar. The Republicans then took that proud vote to the people, and won some stunning nationwide elections in Nov.
Now, we have Democrats who are RUNNING from voting. The one thing that they were hired to do, to VOTE up/down legislation, they're running from. Why can the GOP face up and vote against something that was going to pass, and come out smelling like roses, but not a wimp of MSM protest as Dems run from a vote that, if they truely were against, they'd vote it down, and if it passed, proudly take that to the people. If it's so bad, they whould take majority status next election, right? They could then repeal the "horrible legislation", right?
Someone please explain this disconnect to me
---------------------------------------
Indiana Democrats Now Fleeing the State to Avoid Tough Union Votes
A political epidemic is gripping the upper Midwest:
House Democrats are leaving the state rather than vote on anti-union legislation, The Indianapolis Star has learned.
A source said Democrats are headed to Illinois, though it was possible some also might go to Kentucky. They need to go to a state with a Democratic governor to avoid being taken into police custody and returned to Indiana.
The House was came into session this morning, with only two of the 40 Democrats present. Those two were needed to make a motion, and a seconding motion, for any procedural steps Democrats would want to take to ensure Republicans don?t do anything official without quorum.
With only 58 legislators present, there was no quorum present to do business. The House needs 67 of its members to be present.
I have to hand it to Illinois Governor Pat Quinn. When he imposed massive job-killing tax hikes in the dead of night last month, I was convinced the move would chase businesses ad family out of the Prairie State -- further decimating Springfield's finances. Being the political novice that I am, I failed to recognize the cagey economic stimulus plan embedded within Quinn's action: Luring truant Democratic lawmakers from across the country into Illinois to prop up local motels and chain restaurants.
UPDATE: At least one fugitive Wisconsin Democrat is, in a very literal sense, phoning it in:
The Committee on Transportation and Elections have begun the executive session on a proposed voter identification bill.
The bill would require voters to show a photo ID in order to vote at a polling place or obtain an absentee ballot. Democratic Sen. Erpenbach joins the session over the phone. Sen. Lazich says Erpenbach can't vote over the phone but says she'll wait for him to arrive
Vote Democrat in 2012: "When the going gets tough, we'll literally flee the jurisdiction!" (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/02/22/good_grief_indiana_democrats_now_fleeing_the_state_to_avoid_tough_union_votes)
-
HOW
That is the main issue....the HOW the unions became so predominant in shaping legislation. And HOW now that legislation has been leading states to economic ruin. It's one thing to lobby for perks, most every "group" has their lobbiests, to get their little piece of the pie. But these Unions & their leadership, using Plane's dues, regardless of his support or not, literally bankroll politicians. .... Again, NOTHING WRONG WITH TRYING TO GET THE BEST DEAL ONE CAN GET, so don't trying pulling that garbage. The issue is HOW the unions came about with these deals, and the repercussions placed on the state and the tax payer, as a result
Public employees have been cramming the Wisconsin state Capitol to protest the governor's plan to cut their take-home pay and gut their collective bargaining rights. You can't blame them for objecting when the state reneges on a deal. But they should have been protesting years ago, when politicians and union leaders struck a bargain that was too good to be true.
Government workers have long accepted a tradeoff. They get lower pay than they might get in the private sector, but better retirement benefits. They give up some current luxuries for more security later on. The great majority of them have pension plans with guaranteed payouts -- an option that has largely disappeared from the private sector.
Most businesses long ago abandoned defined-benefit plans because they were unaffordable. The public sector has stayed with them, though -- apparently to prove those private companies right. State and local governments, according to pension expert Joshua Rauh of Northwestern University, have promised $3 trillion more in benefits than they have set aside to pay for them.
Why? Because there are powerful incentives for both legislators and union leaders to do that. Politicians (particularly, though not exclusively, Democratic ones) want to ingratiate themselves with unions, whose members can be a huge help on Election Day. Union leaders want to keep their members happy and return their favored elected officials to office.
The problem, of course, is that such generosity costs a lot of money, which taxpayers may resist paying. That's where the back-loading of compensation comes in.
Promising government workers excellent retirement plans, off in the future, gratifies union members without outraging the taxpayers. The burden is postponed until some future date, which makes the process painless -- until the future arrives.
Wisconsin is a typical state, with more than $45 billion in unfunded obligations by Rauh's calculation. Taken as a percentage of gross state product and state revenue, he informed me, that makes it about average or "maybe slightly worse."
But the phenomenon is a national one. Though Republican Gov. Scott Walker has targeted union negotiations, the same problem exists in states where public employees lack the collective bargaining rights at issue in Madison. South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi are among those, and their unfunded obligations loom even larger than Wisconsin's.
If collective bargaining gave too much power to public employee unions, you might expect states that mandate collective bargaining to have (SET ITAL) lower (END ITAL) unfunded obligations -- because the unions would be able to demand full funding. But that's not the case.
Union-friendly Illinois is one of the worst states in the country in shortchanging the public employee pension system. Over the years, elected officials have cut the state's contributions, diverted funds to pay other expenses and borrowed money to cover current pension obligations. But no mobs of teachers and police officers descended on the state Capitol to protest, because they didn't grasp the implications.
Now we can all see the damage done. Though public employees have paid their share, the state has failed to keep up its end of the bargain. So in Illinois, as in Wisconsin and many other places, there is a conflict between what they were promised and what the citizenry is prepared to pay.
Government workers and taxpayers are both victims of this scam, which allowed extravagant pledges that don't have to be redeemed until later -- by which time the governors and union officials who devised them are gone, leaving someone else to cash the check.
In the private sector, these shenanigans would never be tolerated. Public pension systems get to assume implausibly high returns on their investments, which gives the impression they can meet their future needs.
The looser rules "allow governments to base their budgets on economic fictions," writes Orin Kramer, who oversees investments for the New Jersey system, in The New York Times. You could even call it fraud.
Republicans in Congress are trying to prevent deception by requiring public pension systems to follow the same basic rules as corporations. Politicians hate the idea for the same reason the rest of us -- government workers included -- should welcome it. As Moody's Investors Service said in endorsing the plan, it would "provide new incentives to state and local governments to take action to ensure public-employee pension plans' long-term viability."
Creating incentives for governments to behave honestly and responsibly? It's a new concept, but it might be worth a try.
How Public Employees and Taxpayers Got Scammed (http://townhall.com/columnists/stevechapman/2011/02/24/how_public_employees_and_taxpayers_got_scammed)
-
Rubicon: A river in Wisconsin
The magnificent turmoil now gripping statehouses in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and soon others marks an epic political moment. The nation faces a fiscal crisis of historic proportions and, remarkably, our muddled, gridlocked, allegedly broken politics have yielded singular clarity.
At the federal level, President Obama's budget makes clear that Democrats are determined to do nothing about the debt crisis, while House Republicans have announced that beyond their proposed cuts in discretionary spending, their April budget will actually propose real entitlement reform.
Simultaneously, in Wisconsin and other states, Republican governors are taking on unsustainable, fiscally ruinous pension and health-care obligations, while Democrats are full-throated in support of the public-employee unions crying, "Hell, no."
A choice, not an echo:
Democrats desperately defending the status quo;
Republicans charging the barricades.
Wisconsin is the epicenter.
It began with economic issues. When Gov. Scott Walker proposed that state workers contribute more to their pension and health-care benefits, he started a revolution. Teachers called in sick. Schools closed. Demonstrators massed at the capitol. Democratic senators fled the state to paralyze the Legislature.
Unfortunately for them, that telegenic faux-Cairo scene drew national attention to the dispute - and to the sweetheart deals the public-sector unions had negotiated for themselves for years. They were contributing a fifth of a penny on a dollar of wages to their pensions and one-fourth what private-sector workers pay for health insurance.
The unions quickly understood that the more than 85 percent of Wisconsin not part of this privileged special-interest group would not take kindly to "public servants" resisting adjustments that still leave them paying less for benefits than private-sector workers. They immediately capitulated and claimed they were only protesting the other part of the bill, the part about collective-bargaining rights.
Indeed. Walker understands that a one-time giveback means little. The state's financial straits - a $3.6 billion budget shortfall over the next two years - did not come out of nowhere. They came largely from a half-century-long power imbalance between the unions and the politicians with whom they collectively bargain.
In the private sector, the capitalist knows that when he negotiates with the union, if he gives away the store, he loses his shirt. In the public sector, the politicians who approve any deal have none of their own money at stake. On the contrary, the more favorably they dispose of union demands, the more likely they are to be the beneficiary of union largess in the next election. It's the perfect cozy setup.
To redress these perverse incentives that benefit both negotiating parties at the expense of the taxpayer, Walker's bill would restrict future government-union negotiations to wages only. Excluded from negotiations would be benefits, the more easily hidden sweeteners that come due long after the politicians who negotiated them are gone. The bill would also require that unions be recertified every year and that dues be voluntary.
Recognizing this threat to union power, the Democratic Party is pouring money and fury into the fight. Fewer than 7 percent of private-sector workers are unionized. The Democrats' strength lies in government workers, who now constitute a majority of union members and provide massive support to the party. For them, Wisconsin represents a dangerous contagion.
Hence the import of the current moment - its blinding clarity. Here stand the Democrats, avatars of reactionary liberalism, desperately trying to hang on to the gains of their glory years - from unsustainable federal entitlements for the elderly enacted when life expectancy was 62 to the massive promissory notes issued to government unions when state coffers were full and no one was looking.
Obama's Democrats have become the party of no.
Real cuts to the federal budget? No.
Entitlement reform? No.
Tax reform? No.
Breaking the corrupt and fiscally unsustainable symbiosis between public-sector unions and state governments? Hell, no.
We have heard everyone - from Obama's own debt commission to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - call the looming debt a mortal threat to the nation. We have watched Greece self-immolate. We can see the future. The only question has been: When will the country finally rouse itself?
Amazingly, the answer is: now.
Led by famously progressive Wisconsin - Scott Walker at the state level and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan at the congressional level - a new generation of Republicans has looked at the debt and is crossing the Rubicon. Recklessly principled, they are putting the question to the nation: Are we a serious people?
Kraut crushes another (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/24/AR2011022406520.html)
-
This is really quite enlightening. When it was Obamacare, even though Republicans knew they couldn't defeat it, they voted against it.....in mass. and although it should have stalled in the Senate, a nice slight of hand, got it passed regardless the country's uproar. The Republicans then took that proud vote to the people, and won some stunning nationwide elections in Nov.
Now, we have Democrats who are RUNNING from voting. The one thing that they were hired to do, to VOTE up/down legislation, they're running from. Why can the GOP face up and vote against something that was going to pass, and come out smelling like roses, but not a wimp of MSM protest as Dems run from a vote that, if they truely were against, they'd vote it down, and if it passed, proudly take that to the people. If it's so bad, they would take majority status next election, right? They could then repeal the "horrible legislation", right?
Someone please explain this disconnect to me
"I didn't like cap and trade, I didn't like Obamacare, I didn't like the stimulus...but I didn't walk out."....... Wis Representative Paul Ryan Calls Out Fleebaggers
-
The Tax payer is tapped out
Here's a lesson that is both ironic and sad at the same time. According to the U.S. Department of Education, two-thirds of the eighth graders in Wisconsin cannot read proficiently. But assuming the kids are skilled enough to watch TV, they can now see their teachers demonstrating to keep their generous union benefits. So while things do not seem to be going well in the classroom, any thought of holding teachers somewhat responsible is cause for a protest march.
As a former high-school teacher, it pains me to criticize those trying to educate American children. You will never become rich doing that, and the job can be maddening. Today, many children are the victims of a permissive society that often refuses to hold kids responsible for their actions. Cowardly parents make excuses for the failures of their kids, rather than finding a solution to their poor academic performance. Instead of preparing their children for rigorous academic challenges, derelict parents sit it out.
But teachers are supposed to overcome apathetic parenting and at least give the kids a fighting chance to succeed. That is a challenge that's supposed to be met.
As I've written before, in my eighth-grade class at St. Brigid's School on Long Island, there were 60 students and one nun in the classroom. We all could read proficiently, and believe me, some of the parents were not exactly Ozzie and Harriet, if you understand what I'm saying. The nun brooked no nonsense. She forced us to learn.
But that was then.
In 10 years, starting in 1998, Wisconsin doubled the amount of money spent on each public-school student to more than $10,000 per pupil per year. And test scores went down! Doing the math, the equation seems to be that money is not the key to knowledge.
Discipline is.
The teachers in Wisconsin should be compensated to the best of the state's ability. But the educational gravy train is off the tracks. There's no more money. The taxpayer is tapped out.
In the future, if you want to teach kids you'll have to accept less to do it. That may not be fair, but it's the lesson Wisconsin is teaching us. The writing is very clear on the blackboard: No more public money is on the way.
I left teaching because I understood the limitations of the job. I knew at a young age that my income would be restricted and my life would be fairly predictable.
Selfishly, I wanted more.
But I respect immensely those who devote their lives to teaching. I want them to have as much as the market will bear.
Sadly, that point has now been reached (http://townhall.com/columnists/billoreilly/2011/02/26/getting_schooled_in_wisconsin)
-
HOW
That is the main issue....the HOW the unions became so predominant in shaping legislation. And HOW now that legislation has been leading states to economic ruin. It's one thing to lobby for perks, most every "group" has their lobbiests, to get their little piece of the pie. But these Unions & their leadership, using Plane's dues, regardless of his support or not, literally bankroll politicians.....The issue is HOW the unions came about with these deals, and the repercussions placed on the state and the tax payer, as a result
An unholy alliance of Democrats and unions
Because of the essential services that ?public? employee?s provide, and the fact that there is often no alternative or competition to take their place, public employees should never have been allowed to unionize or strike. It?s an unholy alliance when the unions can use their money and manpower to elect Democrats who will continue to support salaries and benefits beyond what is reasonable and sustainable.
We have a lot of serious problems in this country and the debates on how to fix them rage on. Many ?fixes? are now necessarily drastic and/or difficult to implement. One of the easiest and best solutions to the many problems we have as a nation could be implemented by one simple action; stop electing Democrats.
As President Barack Obama once said; ?elections have consequences?, and it?s time that his administration stops siding with the forces against the taxpayers. He and his U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, have joined suit with Mexico against our own Arizona state citizens. He?s sent his former campaign operatives and DNC goons into Wisconsin to fight against the newly elected Republican Governors? budget plan fixes.
The majority of taxpaying citizens of this country want their voices heard and respected. They do not want things that greatly affect them to be determined by loud well-connected minorities. And they certainly don?t want their own federal government to side with foreign governments and other interests against them.
They?re mad as hell and they?re not going to take it anymore. The only person more angry than a majority voter in Arizona or Wisconsin is Al Sharpton, for allowing Jesse Jackson to beat him to the TV cameras in Madison, Wisconsin.
Op-ed (http://letters.ocregister.com/2011/02/22/democrats-and-unions-an-unholy-alliance/)
-
"I didn't like cap and trade, I didn't like Obamacare, I didn't like the stimulus...but I didn't walk out"
Representative Paul Ryan Calls Out Fleebaggers
Fleebaggers?
LOL
Love it!
Great catchy "hit the nail on the head" term!
-
8)
-
One of the easiest and best solutions to the many problems we have as a nation could be implemented by one simple action; stop electing Democrats.
Eh , no.... this is an attractive idea but it is insufficient.
Once elected Republicans sometimes forget what it was that made them Republicans and think too much about what will keep them in power.
I am sorry that the "contract with America"was only partially implemented and is now considered a dead letter, I still like what I liked about it in the first place.
1.require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress;
2.select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
3.cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
4.limit the terms of all committee chairs;
5.ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
6.require committee meetings to be open to the public;
7.require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
8.guarantee an honest accounting of the Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America)