PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsonian Fascism


Qui-Gon Glenn
02-24-2011, 01:00 AM
Hello.... anyone from 'sconny paying attention to your state politics??

The new Governor has decided to change things up a bit... when I lived in WI, it was a fully Democrat led state, and since then has changed, significantly. I lean left, but see myself as mostly in the middle, in that both parties disgust me, only slightly less than the Tea Party.

So, the new gov gets into office, immediately spends $137 million, then claims that the state has an enormous budgetary shortfall of $141 million (gosh, gee, who spent that money). As a result, he feels that things must change rapidly, ala the Tea Party/radical right, and that spending must be slashed.

Essentially, the long and the short of what is going on is an immensely unethical power grab, forcing the Democrats in the state senate to flee to Illinois so that they will not be available for voting, as otherwise their voice will be completely ignored and the vote will be final - as they cannot win any vote against the majority party at this time, and the Gov is unwilling to do anything through the normal political process of actually discussing things openly. Instead, he has wealthy financiers (from states FAR from WI) backing him, men who dislike unionization and paying state employees a fair wage.

The result - state employees that are not Firemen or Police are forced to accept as much as a 20% pay cut to fix the budget... why are the Firemen and Police protected??? Oh, that's right, they supported his campaign.

I am ok with people disliking Unions. I am a Union member and am very greatful for my Union, but I know also that many Unions have made business nearly unreasonable in some markets. That said, Unions are as American as apple pie, and for as many wrongs as they have committed, they have done at least twice the benefit to the working people of America. 40 hour work weeks - thank Unions, even if you are not a member: they exist because of Unions. Overtime pay- thanks to Unions. Workman's Compensation - thank a Union.

What is happening in Wisconsin is bred of too many people watching the newsman so that a talking head can think for them. Dis-involving themselves from political process because it is "too boring" or "not important".

The long term ramifications are hard to know. I guarantee one thing - this will spark a lot of discussion nationally, and I also know this - it will be lambasted strongly by Californians and New Yorkers.... where most of the people in this country live, BTW. And for good reason - if the people of WI want to disband Unions, fine - but do it through open discussion and debate, rather than forcing quick votes and ram-rodding legislation through because "they can" as the opposition party is weak at the moment.

Sad state of affairs, I am disgusted, and very saddened that one of my best friends is facing a $6000 annual pay cut as the result of the governance.... All he does is insure that infirm and old and disabled veterans receive healthy and sufficient nutrition while they recover or fade away.

Then, think of his employees, many of them grown men and women with families to raise. Their $11.82/hour gig for cooking said foods is about to be chopped by nearly a quarter.... who can have a good life or even "make a living" at that rate of pay? Sure, kids might think that's a good wage.... by adult standards, it is a very sad state of affairs. He lives in a small community called Waupaca, and 30/40% of the folk their are employed at the Veterans Home. I can see the local businesses shuttering.... as there is no more money for anything but the BAREST of necessities.

If you live in Wisconsin, take a look at what is going on. I don't care what your political affiliation is, think of the repercussions of what the gigantic douche-nozzle you allowed to be elected is doing to your state and communities. If you are for what is going on, state your argument - If it is at all defensible, I will be shocked.

Please think critically. Remember that each of us has a voice. Educate yourself. If after that, you agree with what is going on, perhaps we can have the discussion that Wisconsin currently refuses to.

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 02:52 AM
Was wondering how long before this topic surfaced. Just a few things. Was under impression that amount of money WI is in hoc is much more than a mere $141 mil (more like >$3 bil). Complain about Walkers tactics, but it's exactly what Reid/Pelosi did in DC, where at least their opponents didn't run off like children b/c things didn't go their way (a tactic now being copied in IN and OH, it seems). And, while a lot of people live in CA and NY, they don't constitute most of America's population. Still, I agree that unions were once very necessary early on in America's industrial revolution and that all unions aren't inherently bad either. But they have become somewhat redundant given things like OSHA/EEOC/etc.. and a whole host of other govt regs/laws that are supposed to protect workers.

Not exactly clear what you mean by "What is happening in Wisconsin is bred of too many people watching the newsman so that a talking head can think for them. Dis-involving themselves from political process because it is "too boring" or "not important".
Afterall, print journalism is essentially "writing heads", where you have to parse their biases as well.

Interesting thing about exclusion of cops/fireman is that those are often the services govt threatens to cut first when people resist new/raised taxes to solve govt's irresponsible spending habits. Also, in this dispute, both sides have backers from out of state....with many supporters being bussed in from outside of WI (the "professional protesting class" it seems).

Overall problem is that the state and local govts can no longer afford to be so generous in rewarding contracts to public sector employees. You can only tax people so much before they leave....or their employers do. The fed govt is in big financial trouble as well and is going to be less and less able to subsidize the states. Interestingly, btw, even FDR opposed public sector unions. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions

Working Class Hero
02-24-2011, 04:15 AM
Just wanted to pop in and say that this:
Interestingly, btw, even FDR opposed public sector unions. is misleading, if not a downright lie.
What he was opposed to was unions shutting down the government, not the existence of unions themselves.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

But they have become somewhat redundant given things like OSHA/EEOC/etc.. and a whole host of other govt regs/laws that are supposed to protect workers.And where did we get these regulations? Through unions! I have no doubt that if these anti-union bills get passed, we'll start seeing even more encroachment on these laws that are used to justify saying unions are redundant.

mur'phon
02-24-2011, 07:52 AM
Tot: I'd argue that the primary reason for having unions (at least in the private sector, I find it harder to defend public ones) is to even the playing field betwen capital and labor, not fighting for spesific laws that workers may or may not want.
Simply put, as long as companies earn a profit, unions strenghten the barganing position for labor relative to capital when it comes to how to distribute the profit pie. As such, I'll argue that (private sector) unions won't become redundant unless there is no pie to share, then again, if that happens capitalism would be redundant too.

Tommycat
02-24-2011, 11:24 AM
First one must look at the reason why people want these government jobs. They are heavily sought after. Why is that? Because the benefits FAR outweigh the benefits of nearly every other market out there. I don't have a problem with private sector unions, so long as the employers have the option to hire non-union workers as well. If I don't want to be a part of the union that gives my union dues to the Democratic party, I shouldn't be forced to.

I don't agree with what the Democrat state legislators are doing. If they are going to leave the state, to prevent a vote, what's to stop the Republicans from doing that when the Dems have the majority. Oh, but it'll be different then. The people of the state voted for the Republicans to be in office. "The election is over, and we won," should be repeated to the Dems this time. Obama used that line against the Republicans. Elections have consequences.

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 11:27 AM
@mur'phon- not arguing for whether or not unions should exist, though. May not be big on unions, but don't oppose their right to exist in the private sector. But many of the reasons unions are touted so strongly lie in claims that workers were being exploited and forced to work in inhumane conditions, not merely that they didn't get a bigger share (let alone any argument about what level of profit sharing they were entitled to) of the companies' profits. In that sense, they are largely redundant. Also, it might be a little easier to feel some level of sympathy for unions if they didn't spend money so lopdsidedly on one political party with their members' dues, regardless of how the members felt about it. This would be true whether it was the dems, reps, greens, etc.. that were the beneficiaries of such largesse.

@WCH--nothing misleading, let alone a lie :rolleyes:. FDR recognized the conflict of interest in public employee unions, never said whether he was sympathetic toward their perceived struggles. We saw w/PATCO what happens when public employees decide to "stick it to the man".

mur'phon
02-24-2011, 11:41 AM
Tommy: benefits for being government employed are misleading. True they usually earn more than private sector counterparts, however this is mainly due to their higher education. Check for education and most government employees are underpaid compared to their priv s counterparts, except for the unskilled who are paid more.
Now you could argue that their benefits outside pay are higher (and they are), however a lot of those benefits are tied to pensions, pensions that are so underfunded that you'd be a lunatic to expect to get one as good as promised.

And of course avoid mandatory unionization, however, at the same time, remove laws restricting sympathy strikes, and other ones that limits the ability of union (and workers in general) to bargain efectiveley. If the employers want to avoid laws that restrict their ability to bargain, let's do the same for employees.

As for unions giving money to politicians, we're on the same page, get their (and other's) money out of politics.

@Tot: I'd argue that the political money problem applies to all groups who hand politicans money, however, if donations are to be allowed, then I see little wrong with unions handing cash to those likely to represent their interests.

Also, the employers taking a large share of the profits is a form of exploitation, so is having workers in poor conditions without compensating them, if employees didn't have an issue with their working conditions, I doubt they'd use the unions to complain about it.

mimartin
02-24-2011, 11:46 AM
Been following this, most of it I can understand my only real bother by the entire thing is the governor not including all the state employees in this and the fact that it includes future collective bargaining agreements, but only in certain areas. This picking and choosing is what bothers me. If it is alright for the state trooper why is it wrong for the teachers and vice versa? As it is it only seems more like a political stunt than anything else since he is only going after those that did not support him during the election.

Been also upset because the Governor supporters keep insisting that the other side is unwilling to compromise, but from what I’ve seen they are willing to take the pay cut and the decrease in benefits, but the sticking point is the right to future collective bargaining. In that case, it is the Governor that is the one unwilling to compromise (well unless you are in Policemen or Firefighter Union).

As to the Democrats sneaking off to prevent the vote….Call Tom DeLay, when Texas Democrats ran off to Oklahoma to prevent a vote, DeLay used Homeland Security to track them down. Served them right, no self-respecting Texan would run to Oklahoma.

JediMaster12
02-24-2011, 12:46 PM
I haven't been following what's going on in Wisconsin but I do know that my clams have been steamed with talk about encroachment of laws that were hard earned by unions like OSHA and the like.

I recently received an email from one of the faculty members who is with CFA, the organization that works on behalf of the CSU faculty and what the chancellor is proposing is nothing short of highway robbery. His proposals, accordingly are an attempt at an admn power grab to put the fate of tenure appts solely at the descretion of the campus president and other managers and some hints that senority will be ignored, etc. Probably nothing new since CFA has been fighting for fair wages for faculty for years.

The last major thing regarding CFA was when someone had the brillant idea of furlough days where faculty won't get paid for those mandatory days off and take a 20% reduction from an already pitiful payrate. The thing that pisses me off in these kinds of exchanges is that them higher ups are not willing to make the sacrifice and take the 20% cuts themselves. I know an economist can argue about profit and capital to me until they are blue.

Times are hard now and they will be harder but frankly tactics like what Wisconsin is doing aren't going to make it better. I think it will just make it worse.

Tommycat
02-24-2011, 12:49 PM
Been following this, most of it I can understand my only real bother by the entire thing is the governor not including all the state employees in this and the fact that it includes future collective bargaining agreements, but only in certain areas. This picking and choosing is what bothers me. If it is alright for the state trooper why is it wrong for the teachers and vice versa? As it is it only seems more like a political stunt than anything else since he is only going after those that did not support him during the election.

Been also upset because the Governor supporters keep insisting that the other side is unwilling to compromise, but from what Iíve seen they are willing to take the pay cut and the decrease in benefits, but the sticking point is the right to future collective bargaining. In that case, it is the Governor that is the one unwilling to compromise (well unless you are in Policemen or Firefighter Union).

As to the Democrats sneaking off to prevent the voteÖ.Call Tom DeLay, when Texas Democrats ran off to Oklahoma to prevent a vote, DeLay used Homeland Security to track them down. Served them right, no self-respecting Texans would run to Oklahoma.

On this, I think we're in agreement. The future collective bargaining is where it gets sticky. Then again, maybe those unions should have kept their money and their mouths out of it if they didn't want to see repercussions(j/k). I don't necessarily agree with how the workers had gone on illegal strikes either. Taking "sick days" instead of going on strike so they would still get paid while on "strike."

As tor the Texas Dems sneaking off... maybe that's why they went to Oklahoma. Texans didn't want to go to Oklahoma to pick up the Dems. For the record, I didn't agree with the redistricting either, but then that's cause it was a California idea that they brought back to Texas.

mimartin
02-24-2011, 01:11 PM
I didn't agree with the redistricting either, but then that's cause it was a California idea that they brought back to Texas. I had no problem with the redistricting, the Democrats have done it before when they were in power. I also do not have a problem with the Democrats running off to prevent the vote. When one party (does matter which one as they both do it) is unwilling to compromise or even listen to the other side, then my elected representative should do everything possible to protect my interest. What they all seem to forget once they get into office is they do not just represent those that voted for them or financially supported their campaign, but all the people in their district, state or nation. So instead of listening to compromise that gets them what they want, but still lessens the heartache on others they plow ahead with their own plan. Of course, on the other side, when you do seek compromise the other side seems to have a penitence to sabotage with stupidity so they can point at the law and saw how stupid it is. With both sides it is all about politics and getting elected/reelected and nothing about doing the work of the American people.

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 01:15 PM
@Tot: I'd argue that the political money problem applies to all groups who hand politicans money, however, if donations are to be allowed, then I see little wrong with unions handing cash to those likely to represent their interests.

To the degree that unions made their political contributions strictly voluntary and transparent, fine. If all the dems/libs in a union want their money going to the dem party via the union, don't have a problem with that. However, I'm with TC on this.....people shouldn't be forced to have their dues money go to a party they don't support. Let the unions have fundraisers for that kind of thing.

With both sides it is all about politics and getting elected/reelected and nothing about doing the work of the American people.

Sadly true.

mimartin
02-24-2011, 01:19 PM
To the degree that unions made their political contributions strictly voluntary and transparent, fine. If all the dems/libs in a union want their money going to the dem party via the union, don't have a problem with that. However, I'm with TC on this.....people shouldn't be forced to have their dues money go to a party they don't support. Let the unions have fundraisers for that kind of thing.
If we outlaw unions for this reason, shouldn't we also outlaw Chamber of Commerce, Better Business Bureau and the NRA? I use to be a member of all three then figured out they did not give money based on who supported their agenda, but to a political party.

TriggerGod
02-24-2011, 02:11 PM
I was fully expecting this topic a week ago, but didn't have time to do anything that a real Kavar's topic would contain (a source, a 5 paragraph essay on my entire opinion, and even an interesting fact!), so beggars can't be choosers.

Anyways, I have no real opinion on this, except for the Unions, and that would be pretty 'tl;dr~'. All I know and care about is its going to severely affect my humble little town. Around 6 years ago (or has it been 8.. I honestly can't remember. haha.) GM closed it's plant, and laid off innumerable workers. That kick started the Recession for us.

we were in the recession before it was cool

This year, our entire student body was shocked and rocked by the decision by our school board (who's vocabulary includes only "cut," "budget," and "statistics") to raise the students:teacher ratio for classes (from 18:1 to 24:1), then cutting - and laying off, if that's their only class - those classes. Because of the budget issues the school board proposed to 'fix' with this plan, the teachers who remain won't be getting any increased income, if anything less. Now think about how p.o.'ed the teachers are when you combine each part (school budget, budget cuts proposed by Walker, the whole Recession) means they got, instead of the 20% paycut experienced statewide, they'll get a 30% (or more, depending on how much the board actually ends up cutting) paycut.

Yesterday most of the students of our high schools, myself included, accomplished the first non-violent, peaceful protest that this town ever saw (if you don't count the occasional sign wavers about the budget cuts, on that weekend), and it was, from our point, extremely effective and proving that the students DO care about schools. Two amazing speeches, 5 kids yelling "Viva!" and "Anarchy!", and a carpool later, we found ourselves at our district offices with kids from the rival high schools, protesting for change.

The kids who didn't end up going out on the walkout had their own reasons (ie. "I'm on probation," "I already have 5+ truancys," "Coach says we're off the team indefinitely if we walkout," "I just don't believe it'll do anything," or "It doesn't affect me" being the popular excuses) and most of the teachers, our principals included, were actually in support of what we were doing, because it also directly affected them

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 02:31 PM
If we outlaw unions for this reason, shouldn't we also outlaw Chamber of Commerce, Better Business Bureau and the NRA? I use to be a member of all three then figured out they did not give money based on who supported their agenda, but to a political party.

Not sure what you're talking about here. Nobody here has said anything about outlawing unions, just being able to opt out of having their dues being applied to political agendas not supported by the member.

mimartin
02-24-2011, 02:56 PM
Well the governor is pretty much outlawing unions. Not much point in a union without collective bargaining.

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 03:06 PM
Well the governor is pretty much outlawing unions. Not much point in a union without collective bargaining.

Crippling the union, perhaps, but not outlawing them. Perhaps you might feel it amounts to the same thing, but at least currently I don't have a big problem reining in public sector unions given the finacial crisis America has inflicted on itself.

mimartin
02-24-2011, 03:17 PM
I have no problem taking action today because of the crisis, like I wrote in my original post; my problem is it restricts future collective bargaining. I would also be less against it if it included ALL PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS. I agree with the governor that police and fire persons are important, but so are teachers and the people that collect our garbage.

Without collective bargaining there is no union, it isn’t cutting off their legs; it is cutting off their head.

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 03:56 PM
Far as I've seen, it's not elimination of collective bargaining, but putting restrictions on its scope in an effort to keep from having to repeat this process over and over down the road. Either way, will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Tommycat
02-24-2011, 06:43 PM
Been thinking about this, and had a strange thing pop in to my mind... I think the Republicans got the wrong message in '10. People voted out the Dems for ramming things down our throat without attempting compromise, and now the Republicans are doing the same thing. I'm guessing an Obama re-election in 2012 as people get sick of the Reps doing what the Dems did. Then the dems getting voted out again in 2014, because they will think in 2012 that it was somehow everyone voting FOR all of their policies...

Totenkopf
02-24-2011, 08:14 PM
Well, they say history works in cycles. :xp:

Lord of Hunger
02-24-2011, 08:58 PM
The new Governor has decided to change things up a bit... when I lived in WI, it was a fully Democrat led state, and since then has changed, significantly. I lean left, but see myself as mostly in the middle, in that both parties disgust me, only slightly less than the Tea Party.
Which tea party? You've noted a movement with no structural or ideological unity. Tea Party groups have beliefs from all over the spectrum save for the far left.
So, the new gov gets into office, immediately spends $137 million, then claims that the state has an enormous budgetary shortfall of $141 million (gosh, gee, who spent that money). As a result, he feels that things must change rapidly, ala the Tea Party/radical right, and that spending must be slashed.
Please define radical right. Compared to some other countries, our "conservatives" are progressive.
Essentially, the long and the short of what is going on is an immensely unethical power grab, forcing the Democrats in the state senate to flee to Illinois so that they will not be available for voting, as otherwise their voice will be completely ignored and the vote will be final - as they cannot win any vote against the majority party at this time, and the Gov is unwilling to do anything through the normal political process of actually discussing things openly.
Wait, wasn't it the choice of those Senators to flee in order to delay the vote?
Instead, he has wealthy financiers (from states FAR from WI) backing him,
What successful politician doesn't?
men who dislike unionization and paying state employees a fair wage.

The result - state employees that are not Firemen or Police are forced to accept as much as a 20% pay cut to fix the budget... why are the Firemen and Police protected??? Oh, that's right, they supported his campaign.
Probably.
I am ok with people disliking Unions. I am a Union member and am very greatful for my Union, but I know also that many Unions have made business nearly unreasonable in some markets. That said, Unions are as American as apple pie, and for as many wrongs as they have committed, they have done at least twice the benefit to the working people of America. 40 hour work weeks - thank Unions, even if you are not a member: they exist because of Unions. Overtime pay- thanks to Unions. Workman's Compensation - thank a Union.
All true.
The long term ramifications are hard to know. I guarantee one thing - this will spark a lot of discussion nationally, and I also know this - it will be lambasted strongly by Californians and New Yorkers.... where most of the people in this country live, BTW. And for good reason - if the people of WI want to disband Unions, fine - but do it through open discussion and debate, rather than forcing quick votes and ram-rodding legislation through because "they can" as the opposition party is weak at the moment.
1) That's politics.
2) The Republicans in that state make a claim that the people of Wisconsin have given them a mandate to stand up to unions. True or not, they have been elected to majority rule. If the people of Wisconsin, as a whole, felt that unions are worth protecting they would not have voted the way they did.
Sad state of affairs, I am disgusted, and very saddened that one of my best friends is facing a $6000 annual pay cut as the result of the governance.... All he does is insure that infirm and old and disabled veterans receive healthy and sufficient nutrition while they recover or fade away.
I am sorry to hear that.
Then, think of his employees, many of them grown men and women with families to raise. Their $11.82/hour gig for cooking said foods is about to be chopped by nearly a quarter.... who can have a good life or even "make a living" at that rate of pay? Sure, kids might think that's a good wage.... by adult standards, it is a very sad state of affairs. He lives in a small community called Waupaca, and 30/40% of the folk their are employed at the Veterans Home. I can see the local businesses shuttering.... as there is no more money for anything but the BAREST of necessities.

If you live in Wisconsin, take a look at what is going on.
Unfortunately, this is a national phenomena in varying degrees.
I don't care what your political affiliation is, think of the repercussions of what the gigantic douche-nozzle you allowed to be elected is doing to your state and communities. If you are for what is going on, state your argument - If it is at all defensible, I will be shocked.

Please think critically. Remember that each of us has a voice. Educate yourself. If after that, you agree with what is going on, perhaps we can have the discussion that Wisconsin currently refuses to.
Well as a non-Wisconsin resident, I neither support nor object to what is going on in your state. I can sympathize with your position (I know many people personally facing similar problems), however I will note that this situation has been years in the making. America can no longer sustain a half-assed hybrid of free market capitalism and state welfare. Either it must be reformed into a streamlined version or we will have to choose between either economic theory. The choice will be tough and it will hurt.

That being said, throwing around the word fascism does nothing useful. Yes, I know: you're angry. You have every justification. But you pointed out that people are disconnected from politics. True or not, if our nation's political dialog is nothing more than character jabs then why would anyone connect with that. No, I'm not calling for our rhetoric to be toned down. Quite the opposite: I hope it heats up but with real issues rather than misused terms like "socialist" and "fascist". Doubting each others' patriotism only weakens the States.

Qui-Gon Glenn
02-24-2011, 11:29 PM
Was wondering how long before this topic surfaced. Just a few things. Was under impression that amount of money WI is in hoc is much more than a mere $141 mil (more like >$3 bil).I will provide a source, although your later complaint about writing heads seems you hold writers in equal or less esteem than Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann etc :giveup: Complain about Walkers tactics, but it's exactly what Reid/Pelosi did in DC, where at least their opponents didn't run off like children b/c things didn't go their way (a tactic now being copied in IN and OH, it seems).How is this acting like children? It is the only responsible thing to do, as the bills were not up for discussion, argument or arbitration, the vote was a no win scenario and their constituents would have been completely ignored if they were available to vote. This, IMO, is the act of responsible politicians, although they are probably just as creepy as any other politician.And, while a lot of people live in CA and NY, they don't constitute most of America's population.Fair enough, two states that comprise a quarter of the population seems significant to me. Texas of course is the other big dog.... and politically, they seem to have it together better than most.
Not exactly clear what you mean by "What is happening in Wisconsin is bred of too many people watching the newsman so that a talking head can think for them. Dis-involving themselves from political process because it is "too boring" or "not important".
This is the result of posting when fired up and having had worked a very physical 15 hour day.... not my best thinking or writing.... and full of personal bias. It is my opinion though... people are distracted by fanaticism and charisma, and too many refuse to think for themselves.
Interesting thing about exclusion of cops/fireman is that those are often the services govt threatens to cut first when people resist new/raised taxes to solve govt's irresponsible spending habits.Agreed... and I support police and firemen, they are very important gangs... Also, in this dispute, both sides have backers from out of state....with many supporters being bussed in from outside of WI (the "professional protesting class" it seems).Gross, not good, gross.
Overall problem is that the state and local govts can no longer afford to be so generous in rewarding contracts to public sector employees. You can only tax people so much before they leave....or their employers do. The fed govt is in big financial trouble as well and is going to be less and less able to subsidize the states.You are ignoring the damage done on a local level, like the city of Waupaca. These people will eventually default on their taxes... how does that help the government, if they have to feed and house these people in Tax Prison?????! It is a double whammy, wholly created by irresponsible and unrepresentative government.

@LoH: I pick on the Tea Party because regardless of their "diversity" (I personally think that's a lot of whooey) they are too loud, and Sarah Palin is the prime mover-and-shaker: that should tell you everything you need to know. Radical right is a term used in our governments here in the US. We are talking about US government. Feel free to google what the term means locally.

Yes it was the choice of the Senators to flee... I should have stated that more clearly, that I support their flight, for reasons mentioned in response to Totenkopf.

As for having backers from out of state.... conceded that politicians like to line their pockets however they can. Is this a good or acceptable state-of-affairs for you?

I fail to see your point in "that's politics." Looks to me either that you like this style of politics, or you have thrown in the towel.

Fascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism): The term I did not use lightly.

For the record, I live in Atlanta, was born in Iowa, have lived in Nebraska, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Minnesota, and Texas.... only finished High School in Wisconsin, This is not a local issue for me, it is a national one that has simply raised it's ugly head in WI.

@mimartin: your points on CBA's and the relation to Unions were points I wish I had raised, thank you.

Been thinking about this, and had a strange thing pop in to my mind... I think the Republicans got the wrong message in '10. People voted out the Dems for ramming things down our throat without attempting compromise, and now the Republicans are doing the same thing. I'm guessing an Obama re-election in 2012 as people get sick of the Reps doing what the Dems did. Then the dems getting voted out again in 2014, because they will think in 2012 that it was somehow everyone voting FOR all of their policies... Yup.

Totenkopf
02-25-2011, 12:04 AM
I will provide a source, although your later complaint about writing heads seems you hold writers in equal or less esteem than Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann etc :giveup:

Well, maybe more esteem than KO. :p Just saying that writers are no less biased than the talking heads and that it's helpful to know their biases before taking whatever they say as gospel. Just common sense stuff.


How is this acting like children? It is the only responsible thing to do, as the bills were not up for discussion, argument or arbitration, the vote was a no win scenario and their constituents would have been completely ignored if they were available to vote. This, IMO, is the act of responsible politicians, although they are probably just as creepy as any other politician.

Would you have said that if the Republicans had been able to do that to the Dems at the federal level since '06 (or even vice-versa in the '90s)? The responsible adult thing to do would have been to cast their votes and then do their damndest to try to beat the reps in the next election. As Tommy (I think) pointed out already, BO lectured the Reps that elections have consequences, and the dems lost this last one. Besides, in politics, little is ever irreversible. As to your point about pols being creepy, no real arguments here. ;)



Fair enough, two states that comprise a quarter of the population seems significant to me. Texas of course is the other big dog.... and politically, they seem to have it together better than most.

You'll probably hate me for this, but the combined pop of the two states, while significant, is still less than 20% of total figure (<60 mil out of 307mil). Still, given that NY and CA are in dire financial straits, it should be interesting to see how they cope with their problems. There's going to be a lot of hurt coming down the pike, hurt that can't be ameliorated by just raising taxes.


This is the result of posting when fired up and having had worked a very physical 15 hour day.... not my best thinking or writing.... and full of personal bias. It is my opinion though... people are distracted by fanaticism and charisma, and too many refuse to think for themselves.

My cynical side figures that we are as afflicted w/bread (look how fat Americans have become overall) and circuses (sports, porn, etc...) as the Romans ever were. The decreasing attention spans of many people make them more susceptible to easily digestible sound bytes (from left to right) vs actually trying to think critically about the consequences of our choices.



You are ignoring the damage done on a local level, like the city of Waupaca. These people will eventually default on their taxes... how does that help the government, if they have to feed and house these people in Tax Prison?????! It is a double whammy, wholly created by irresponsible and unrepresentative government.


Not ignoring local problems, rather recognizing there are no easy solutions and that failing to address the financial problems in an attempt to seem empathic/compassionate won't make those issues disappear and will likely only exacerbate them.

Lord of Hunger
02-25-2011, 12:19 AM
@LoH: I pick on the Tea Party because regardless of their "diversity" (I personally think that's a lot of whooey) they are too loud, and Sarah Palin is the prime mover-and-shaker: that should tell you everything you need to know.
Not really concrete reasons to oppose an entire socio-political-economic movement, but that's just my opinion.
Radical right is a term used in our governments here in the US. We are talking about US government. Feel free to Google what the term means locally.
That is besides the point. What is labeled radical right is not radical in the slightest. The policies advocated by most Tea Party groups are, in the history of US government, fairly moderate right. Admittedly, they're also out of touch with the current reality of government but so is the entire political system.
Yes it was the choice of the Senators to flee... I should have stated that more clearly, that I support their flight, for reasons mentioned in response to Totenkopf.
Just read them. I disagree. That's about it. :D
As for having backers from out of state.... conceded that politicians like to line their pockets however they can. Is this a good or acceptable state-of-affairs for you?
There hasn't been any good or acceptable state-of-affairs for me in regards to government since Obama's halt on drilling in the Gulf. That killed my trust of US government.
I fail to see your point in "that's politics." Looks to me either that you like this style of politics, or you have thrown in the towel.
Just because I choose to understand the situation does not mean I approve or disapprove. My view of how this country should be run is completely and utterly different from any group.
Fascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism): The term I did not use lightly.
No offense intended here, but a wikipedia article does not prove your point for you. Your reasoning does.
For the record, I live in Atlanta, was born in Iowa, have lived in Nebraska, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Minnesota, and Texas.... only finished High School in Wisconsin, This is not a local issue for me, it is a national one that has simply raised it's ugly head in WI.
My mistake, I got the impression you were from Wisconsin.

mimartin
02-25-2011, 01:06 AM
There hasn't been any good or acceptable state-of-affairs for me in regards to government since Obama's halt on drilling in the Gulf. That killed my trust of US government.For some reason, living on the Texas Gulf Coast, I lost my trust in big oil being prepared about the same time. Maybe it was all the dead fish...

Working Class Hero
02-25-2011, 06:26 AM
2 things I've learned form all this:

1. All politicians are the same, heartless ****s that all they care about are elections. The behavior by these Republicans to dissolve unions are disgusting. They're using fear and lies to push their agendas.
On the other hand, those democratic congressmen that fled are dumpsterfires. "I don't like what you're doing, so I'm taking my ball and going home."

2. Most American people think that involvement ends with elections. Once they vote, they just sit back and do what their masters tell them.

Tommycat
02-25-2011, 10:59 AM
Qui-Gon Glenn: You made specific mention of the big money coming in for the candidates on the right, but failed to mention the fact that the unions tended to pay huge gobs of money to the left. As if somehow being supported by national unions rather than national companies was better. Those politicians who fled the state are looking out for their union leader masters. Don't pretend that it's looking out for the little guy. Both sides are protecting their campaign money. plain and simple.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-25-2011, 12:26 PM
2 things I've learned form all this:

1. All politicians are the same, heartless ****s that all they care about are elections. The behavior by these Republicans to dissolve unions are disgusting. They're using fear and lies to push their agendas.
On the other hand, those democratic congressmen that fled are dumpsterfires. "I don't like what you're doing, so I'm taking my ball and going home."

2. Most American people think that involvement ends with elections. Once they vote, they just sit back and do what their masters tell them.

:nvr4get:

mimartin
02-25-2011, 01:46 PM
Don't pretend that it's looking out for the little guy. Teachers are big and evil and have designs on taking over the world through their indoctrination process. If teachers, city, county, state employees are not the little man, then I donít know who is. Off to ask the garbage man for a loanÖ

Tommycat
02-25-2011, 02:52 PM
Teachers are big and evil and have designs on taking over the world through their indoctrination process. If teachers, city, county, state employees are not the little man, then I don’t know who is. Off to ask the garbage man for a loan…

Hogwash. They're protecting the UNIONS, not the little guys. Those same unions that give us 50 layers of management pay before you get to the teachers.

mimartin
02-25-2011, 02:58 PM
Yeah, it is all bunk that a Teachers Union represents teachers... Guess all those people protesting and being interviewed on TV are the 50 layers of management or were they hired by the 50 layers of management to play a part. :rolleyes:

Since you are an accomplished mind reader that knows all about people’s motivations, please let me know what is really going on among Middle East leaders. I’m thinking of buying some futures and knowing what they are thinking would be an extreme help.

One more Question; So is Scott Walker's motivation the same as those "not looking out for the little guy," is he protecting the Unions and 50 layers of management by protecting the Firefighter and Police Union?

Tommycat
02-25-2011, 03:41 PM
Yeah, it is all bunk that a Teachers Union represents teachers... Guess all those people protesting and being interviewed on TV are the 50 layers of management or were they hired by the 50 layers of management to play a part. :rolleyes:

Since you are an accomplished mind reader that knows all about peopleís motivations, please let me know what is really going on among Middle East leaders. Iím thinking of buying some futures and knowing what they are thinking would be an extreme help.

One more Question; So is Scott Walker's motivation the same as those "not looking out for the little guy," is he protecting the Unions and 50 layers of management by protecting the Firefighter and Police Union?

Pretty much. The teachers are the last ones to get a piece of the budget pie given to education. Those above them are also in the union. Despite having the highest per student spending, we're still below some third world countries in student achievement. I attribute that to wasted spending.

As for Scott Walker. I put him on the same level. He's looking out for his campaign money.

Totenkopf
02-26-2011, 02:18 AM
Well, I guess civility has returned to it's normal levels....:xp:

http://specfriggintacular.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/beebr-e1298043992471.jpg?w=375&h=332

http://specfriggintacular.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/rally3-e1298043532131.jpg?w=400&h=172

http://specfriggintacular.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/scotty-e1298044354984.jpg?w=375&h=234

http://specfriggintacular.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ehjk-e1298044458181.jpg?w=375&h=281


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm_Fl3AszuU&feature=player_embedded

Also, it's interesting to note that as important as collective bargaining has been alleged to be, unionized fed workers have far less latitude than their state counterparts. Perhaps the protestors should seek to remedy that....

mimartin
02-26-2011, 07:55 AM
Also, it's interesting to note that as important as collective bargaining has been alleged to be, unionized fed workers have far less latitude than their state counterparts.

Is that all all Feberal Workers are just some of them? Unlike Scott Walker I seem to remember Ronald Reagan holding them all to the same level of the law, when he fired the Air Traffic Controllers for refusing to return to work even though they had endorsed him in the 1980 election. He did not pick and choice like Scott Walker seems to be doing. Oh, and there were protest then too.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-26-2011, 10:06 AM
in all fairness reagan could have simply forgotten their endorsement of him

Totenkopf
02-26-2011, 02:02 PM
No, I mean that the range of things that fed unions can collectively bargain over are more limited than what you get in states, esp WI. Not really surprising, though, when you consider the feds overall track record w/its own regulations and putting themselves above the laws/agencies they often create and straight-jacket the private sector with.

Unlike Scott Walker I seem to remember Ronald Reagan holding them all to the same level of the law, when he fired the Air Traffic Controllers for refusing to return to work even though they had endorsed him in the 1980 election

Well, at least he didn't play favorites. And it wasn't like he didn't give them a chance to return to work before dropping the hammer.

mimartin
02-26-2011, 02:19 PM
No, I mean that the range of things that fed unions can collectively bargain over are more limited than what you get in states, esp WI.

Apples and OrangesÖ If the thread was about a Federal Union, then you would have a point if there were different laws/rules governing different federal unionsí rights, but the thread isnít about that. In this case the governor is saying the state police union and state firefighters union have one set of rules to play by when dealing with the state and every other state union has a different set of rules. Like I wrote before I would not have much of a problem with this and would believe it was more than a political stunt if he were doing it across the board instead of picking and choosing.

Totenkopf
02-26-2011, 06:24 PM
Frankly, much of your spiel was about how collective bargaining was essential, even mischaracterizing what Walker was attempting. Not a case of apples and oranges, but merely pointing out that what was being disscussed was not an outlawing of govt unions (see police and fire fighters as you've pointed out) or somesuch, but merely a case of restricting the scope of collective bargaining. The fed govt example was merely an illustration of scope. I will grant your point, however, that consistency would be nice. Not so sure you'd approve of his doing it to everyone, given your earlier rhetoric about the necessity of apparently unrestricted collective bargaining for a union to have any meaning.

my only real bother by the entire thing is the governor not including all the state employees in this and the fact that it includes future collective bargaining agreements, but only in certain areas.

Well the governor is pretty much outlawing unions. Not much point in a union without collective bargaining.

Without collective bargaining there is no union, it isnít cutting off their legs; it is cutting off their head.

So, just how unrestricted should collective bargaining "rights" be?

mimartin
02-26-2011, 09:19 PM
......If he were doing it to everyone, then I would have no problem with it. End of Story.

Limiting what is allowed to be negotiated in a labor contract is weakening the union. So I can understand cutting pay and benefits now with the state budget and economy where it is, but I do have a problem with limiting those rights in the future when the state budget may be great and the economy is doing great.

They should be the same across the board for all the same level employees. So Texas should have the same rules for all state employees and the federal government should have the same rules for all federal employees. The federal government should not mandate that states use the same rules as the federal government when it comes to how it treats its unionized workers.

Qui-Gon Glenn
02-26-2011, 10:38 PM
@LoH - the link provided was a definition of the term. Check Miriam Webster or American College or whatever dictionary you like... A word means what a word means, and I don't need a wikipedia article to define my point... just a term so that we know what a term means. I provided it so you would know what fascism is. Thanks for your normal response.

As for the term "radical" thank you for engaging in meaningless semantics. Cleverness /= thinking.

@Tommycat: Yes, being supported by Unions is far superior to being supported by business. A Union is a body, representing a large group who share the same opinion. A business is generally a couple of stuffed suits. Your point is totally lost on me... And again, I am not saying that unionization is devoid of evil.

I am curious what you do for a living.... and why teachers and Veteran's Home workers are unimportant to you. Those folks are Union too.... how are you dividing this?

@Totenkopf: I think you are under the assumption that I am a Democrat. Uh, no. Voted for Ron Paul.
Could you provide an example of these 50 layers of management pay? What Unions are you talking about, and are you aware of the diversity of unions?

@Det. Bart Lassiter: The Reagan comment was brilliant. Thank you for levity!

They should be the same across the board for all the same level employees. So Texas should have the same rules for all state employees and the federal government should have the same rules for all federal employees. The federal government should not mandate that states use the same rules as the federal government.The bold part could not be stated better. Texas should have seceded. I wish that State governments would start discussing the idea of secession more and openly... the Federal government no longer represents anyone other than Big Business.

mimartin
02-26-2011, 10:53 PM
The bold part could not be stated better. Fixed Texas should have seceded.Did not work out real well for us the last time we did it. Plus we need someone with 2 brain cells as governor before we tried. If Sarah Palin is running against Rick Perry in the Republican Primary for President, I'm voting for Palin twice. Compared to him she has a PHD in intelligence. She may not know what magazines she reads or that Africa is a continent, but Iíd be surprised he knew what a magazine was or there was even an Africa.

Lord of Hunger
02-27-2011, 12:13 AM
@LoH - the link provided was a definition of the term. Check Miriam Webster or American College or whatever dictionary you like... A word means what a word means, and I don't need a wikipedia article to define my point... just a term so that we know what a term means. I provided it so you would know what fascism is. Thanks for your normal response.
And instead of actually making your point you assume ignorance on my side. I am perfectly familiar with fascism. I extensively studied the WWII-era while my classmates were screwing off in middle and high school. Studying socio-political phenomena is one of my hobbies, and currently the subject of my university electives.
As for the term "radical" thank you for engaging in meaningless semantics. Cleverness /= thinking.
Meaningless semantics? If you don't want to bring up a point of discussion and actually discuss it, don't bring it up.

Totenkopf
02-27-2011, 01:57 AM
@Totenkopf: I think you are under the assumption that I am a Democrat. Uh, no. Voted for Ron Paul.

No, didn't know what you were. Just figured you were very pro-union based on your posts. Given that you work in the entertainment field, thinking dem may seem a no-brainer, but didn't go there. The dem/pro-union connection might be a natural assumption, but well aware that not all union supporters are dems.


Could you provide an example of these 50 layers of management pay? What Unions are you talking about, and are you aware of the diversity of unions?


That wasn't mine. That was mim vs TC. ;)

The federal government should not mandate that states use the same rules as the federal government when it comes to how it treats its unionized workers.

Never said they should.

Qui-Gon Glenn
02-27-2011, 03:49 PM
And instead of actually making your point you assume ignorance on my side. I am perfectly familiar with fascism. I extensively studied the WWII-era while my classmates were screwing off in middle and high school. Studying socio-political phenomena is one of my hobbies, and currently the subject of my university electives.

Meaningless semantics? If you don't want to bring up a point of discussion and actually discuss it, don't bring it up.
I assume nothing on your part... well not exactly true, but I prefer to be nice.

Do you dispute my use of the term "fascism"? Have I used the word incorrectly? Perhaps it is a bit of hyperbole, but by definition the actions of the WI governor have been.... Fascist.

As for the "radical" point, I fail to see why you have chosen my admittedly (see post #23) hair-brained and wholly least important part of my OP, and think that you can hammer something home on it when it really has nothing to do at all with the main argument? This is a bit of a straw-man attempt, as it is unimportant to the main issue. If you want to debate how American's improperly use the term "radical right" or "radical left" or "radical" anything, start your own thread on the topic! The way I used the term is understood by most Americans. If it is used improperly, oh well, that is the vernacular of the day.

I am impressed by how much you studied WW2 in middle and HS. I am not impressed yet by your ability to ferret out the argument, although with your intelligence, you will someday. I recommend taking some Logic courses at University... Like I did when I went to college in 1990.

@Totenkopf: I lean left, but I choose no party. I am pro-Union because my Union does help me make a good living. The work I do is fairly well compensated, but the risk and nature of the work deserve that compensation. I deal with BIG power, stuff that will literally fry a man. As a result, I constantly have to remember proper habits... one misstep, and POOF.

Sorry that I took a part of someone else's argument and put it on you... should have read more carefully!

mimartin
02-27-2011, 04:32 PM
That wasn't mine. That was mim vs TC. ;)
Don't look at me; I just repeated Tommycatís description.

Totenkopf
02-27-2011, 06:17 PM
That's why I didn't just say mim. ;) But, QGG figured it out.


@Totenkopf: I lean left, but I choose no party. I am pro-Union because my Union does help me make a good living. The work I do is fairly well compensated, but the risk and nature of the work deserve that compensation. I deal with BIG power, stuff that will literally fry a man. As a result, I constantly have to remember proper habits... one misstep, and POOF.

Sorry that I took a part of someone else's argument and put it on you... should have read more carefully!

No problem. Ever work on any Charlie Sheen projects? Talk about a loose cannon....

Lord of Hunger
02-27-2011, 07:39 PM
I assume nothing on your part... well not exactly true, but I prefer to be nice.

Do you dispute my use of the term "fascism"? Have I used the word incorrectly? Perhaps it is a bit of hyperbole, but by definition the actions of the WI governor have been.... Fascist.
Okay, I see the basis upon which you make the comparison but it is pretty that: hyperbole. The governor and other Republicans might have forced their way around, but that's hardly fascism.
As for the "radical" point, I fail to see why you have chosen my admittedly (see post #23) hair-brained and wholly least important part of my OP, and think that you can hammer something home on it when it really has nothing to do at all with the main argument? This is a bit of a straw-man attempt, as it is unimportant to the main issue. If you want to debate how American's improperly use the term "radical right" or "radical left" or "radical" anything, start your own thread on the topic! The way I used the term is understood by most Americans. If it is used improperly, oh well, that is the vernacular of the day.
I could argue this, but there's not much point.
I am impressed by how much you studied WW2 in middle and HS. I am not impressed yet by your ability to ferret out the argument, although with your intelligence, you will someday. I recommend taking some Logic courses at University... Like I did when I went to college in 1990.
Wow, a compliment! :D Thank you, I'd be taking some logic and more philosophy classes right now if the registration system at my university wasn't so stretched out.

Darth Avlectus
02-28-2011, 01:39 AM
I will provide a source, although your later complaint about writing heads seems you hold writers in equal or less esteem :words: Keith Olbermann etc :giveup:

http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/angry-olbermann.jpg
DAMMIT GLENN, YOU'RE THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD! GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY YOU RIGHT WING TERRORIST!!!!!!~111!!!!1!!!1!1!! :swear:

Qui-Gon Glenn
03-09-2011, 02:54 AM
This is why you got the jester badge :lol:

I liked KO much better when he was talking about NFL football and the WNBA. Any sport topic actually; he is a smart and funny guy, until he turns on the political hyperbole. Just wanted to show how FAIR and BALANCED I am.

<.<

>.>

:lol:

Tommycat
03-09-2011, 10:31 AM
Glenn, Being supported by the Unions isn't actually being supported by the union members. The Union LEADERS decide what political candidate they invest in. Many times they actually go AGAINST the will of the Union MEMBERS. This is the reason I would prefer not to have to be a part of the union to work someplace. If my politics disagree with the union leaders, I am not given the choice to leave the union.

Here in AZ we are seeing some of that. Many Phoenix police officers are leaving the Union because of the leaders support of 1070.

Totenkopf
03-10-2011, 02:06 AM
Well, looks like the unions have lost here..... I think Krauthammer (no doubt others, maybe) suggested this strategy at least a week ago.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WISCONSIN_BUDGET_UNIONS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-09-19-45-22

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/117656563.html

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WISCONSIN_BUDGET_UNIONS_WALKER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-09-20-11-21

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014449158_apwiwisconsinbudgetunionsdemocrats.html

Jae Onasi
03-10-2011, 03:50 AM
I'm very concerned about violence breaking out at the capital later today. Protesters swarmed the building this past evening, breaking into garden-level windows and forcing open emergency entrances to gain access after the building was supposed to close to all visitors at 6pm. The police did not have nearly enough people on hand to keep the protesters out. I don't think they'll have enough people on hand tomorrow to protect the Assembly members when they vote on the collective bargain rules, certainly not if a bunch of union people come up from Chicago tomorrow, as they have been in increasing numbers in the last 10-14 days or so.

As far as the negotiations have been: Walker and Fitzgerald have been doing back-door negotiations for the past couple weeks with the Dems, even meeting with them in border counties face-to-face to discuss it. They thought they had a deal hammered out on Monday--in fact one Dem source reported it to the Wall Street Journal. Miller, the Minority leader who's apparently under pressure from Washington to stay in IL, reneged on the deal.

On top of that, we now have the recall insanity going on, with the national GOP and Dem parties getting involved to fund that bullsh*t. My state senator will likely be recalled, unfortunately, even though he's done a pretty decent job the rest of the time he's been in office. So, more of my tax dollars will be wasted on paying for unnecessary elections.

The Dems can't stay in IL forever. One of the state senators is 7 months pregnant, and she needs to be seeing her OB on a more frequent basis now that she's farther along in her pregnancy. I'm sure she'd rather be at home in early labor than in a hotel room in IL, too. Other Dems want to go home, too.

The facts: the state is going to be 3 billion in debt. We have to make cuts all over the place, and we can't just keep increasing taxes. WI has one of the highest state taxes already--there's a limit to what we can pay. We can't attract as much business as other states because of all the regulations, fees, and taxes. At the same time, there are rampant union rules abuses that can't be fixed any other way because the union won't allow it. Is it right that a city bus driver in Madison makes 100k EXTRA in overtime pay by manipulating overtime rules? He's not the only one of those bus drivers, either. Rampant abuse is going on in the state prison system as well--a guy will call in sick on first shift and then go into work on 2nd shift and collect overtime pay. That is the kind of abuse and rules manipulation that is driving the anger against the unions. It's also directly affecting my tax rate. I'm having enough trouble trying to make it by in this recession. Why should I pay higher taxes and license fees (my licensure fees went up 100% this last license period!) so some union member can cheat the system? Do you think I'm going to be overly sympathetic at your measly 8% increase in your pension and healthcare contributions when it's still well below private sector increases in those equivalent contributions, and when my fees went up _100%_ to pay for the rules abuses? It's never going to get fixed until the state gov't gets some control over the collective bargaining abuses. Other state workers without public unions do quite well, WI workers will do fine, too.

On top of that, we have teachers acting incredibly irresponsibly by walking off their jobs and calling in sick to go protest, forcing schools to close, AND taking kids to the protests without parent permission. There were doctors from the UW-Madison clinic the first weekend of the protests giving out sick passes to any teacher who asked for one. In fact, they actually post-dated some of the sick passes so people could come back the next week to protest! My husband was there and actually SAW this blatant fraud. These are the same teachers who are supposed to be teaching my children about plagiarism and intellectual honesty? I was disgusted.

The teachers are warning that these cuts could hurt the children. I'd like to point out that the administrative costs for the Madison school district (for teacher/admin staff pay and benefits) is nearly twice as much as what is actually spent on each student.

The police union in Milwaukee is trying to dictate to the superintendent how many detectives he should have in the desk jobs. Shouldn't it be the Police superintendent's job to determine staffing levels?

Do I think excluding police and fire is OK? Not really, but they have to start somewhere. There's no law saying the teachers and other workers can't organize in some fashion. It just says they can't have a public employee union.

Do I think how Walker is handling it is perfect? No, it's pretty damned heavy-handed. I suppose that's a reflection of getting completely blown off by union leaders when he tried to make budget suggestions to them last November that were less draconian.

As a final note: Where the heck were all you protesters last November when it COUNTED? Voter turnout was not spectacular. You knew what Walker was all about. You saw his work in Milwaukee. You heard him clearly saying he was going to cut spending. As in, cut GOVERNMENT spending. Did you gov't workers somehow think you'd be excluded by magic? If half of you had showed up for the election like I had, you would not have had this problem. And I would not have had to contribute taxes to pay for the $7 million bucks (and climbing) in protester-caused damage to the capital building and all the extra police protection required to maintain some basic level of order. Nor would I be worrying about the safety of elected representatives at the capital later this morning. NO representative, regardless of the party, should ever have to fear for their safety. I fear the mob will become violent, and that people will get hurt. I don't want to see anyone hurt, regardless of their stance on this issue.

Edit: To the people who have sent very detailed and scary death threats to WI GOP Assembly and Senate representatives: I'm abhorred. You're worse than the problem you're trying to stop!!! All you're doing is making the Dem party look awful! I hope the Dept. of Justice finds you yesterday.

Qui-Gon Glenn
03-13-2011, 12:20 AM
Thanks for pointing out that there are sleazy individuals who are in Union jobs.


Have you missed all the sleazy people outside of them? Or is it just that you prefer your bad eggs to be Union workers?

I am well aware that there are abuses in the system. So are all Union members. So is about any educated and semi-intelligent human being above the age of 18.

Yes, in the case of state employees, we are talking about your tax dollars. What percentage would you say is abusing the system? I have no raw data or figures, but my assumption is that there are the same number of d-bags that are Union workers as those outside the Union. That percentage may be scarily high, but it is by no means a majority, and I would go so far as to say it is in the vast MINORITY of both Union and non-Union workers. The truth is, most people are mostly honest, and have consciences that prevent them from raping the system. The others should be prosecuted, and so if it would please Walker or Jae, I put up the motion that Union members in State employ be held under the same scrutiny that those in the public sector are put to. Find the wingnuts and rapists, and prosecute.

What you fail to mention in your post, is all of the good people that are getting hosed through this, and the potential ripple effect. If you think it is a good thing that Unions get broken... who is next on the chopping block, and/or what rights will be left for those of you in the public sector when the Unions are squashed?

I am glad I no longer live in Wisconsin.

@Tommycat: thank you for a completely unenlightening post. If you think I am unaware of what my Union dues are spent on, thanks for assuming idiocy on my part. There is an opt-out for some political spending, but not all of it. I do not love all of the Union politics, just the ones that protect my interest. My job demands a great deal physically: more, quite frankly, than 90% of American's could do, and most would choose not to regardless of the good (but far from exorbitant) pay. If I were to stay at my current "title" for more than 5 more years, I would be physically forced to find something else to do. I work 65-90 hours a week, and much of that time is spent lifting and putting down literally TONS (yes, 2000lbs x 1, 2, sometimes 3) of materials a day. Then there is the whole 1200 to 2400 amps of raw power I am harnessing, which to put in perspective: your household 2 outlet gangbox is a 15 amp circuit. That can kill you. I can be vaporized.

Is that work not worthy of some extra consideration or compensation? Is every Union job like that? No; but many are. Union jobs are often ugly or highly difficult and painful jobs that people do not want to do. There should be somebody watching our backs.

jawathehutt
03-16-2011, 05:07 AM
Being a Madison resident for part of the year, I've been down at the capital a few times. Its rediculous what the protestors have done. Why the planted palm trees and began fighting each other. Just kidding, thats fox news.
I was a moderate before the election. Now I'm a staunch democrat. I don't know a single moderate who would dare vote republican in the next few years. Walker has absolutely revolted me with his statements. He seems to think that us hundreds of thousands of protestors aren't voters. Thats funny, becuase I know for a fact that I voted for Barret. Which I believe makes me a voter. Along with the thousands of others there. After the illegal passing of the collective bargining bill, tens of thousands of protestors were at the capital within an hour. It takes over an hour to get to Madison from out of state. So I question, how are they not voters. Does Wisconsin not hire Wisconsin residents for its public employees? Because if they do, those are voters. I have yet to hear of a single Scott Walker event that hasn't been overcome by hundreds if not thousands of protestors while his supporters come in groups of 10. But the protestors aren't voters. Now even the police have abandoned him. They've left the capital.
But I guess that's what we get for letting a want to be dictator who was kicked out of college lead our state.

Totenkopf
03-16-2011, 09:14 AM
Well, it'll be interesting to see how it plays out in the end. But seriously.....how was it reallly illegal? Even if you want to argue some kind of arcane "24 hour" technicality, the dems didn't have enough people in the legislature to stop them from passing the modified legislation anyway. If he can't produce results in the end, he'll be a one term governor. As to the number of "protestors" turning out in droves....it'd be interesting to see how many of them are carpet-baggers (ie out of state "rent-a-mobs").

Working Class Hero
03-17-2011, 02:49 AM
The evil union carpetbaggers and scalawags are taking advantage of the poor and powerless populace and trying to solidify their powerbase...it's so obvious, why don't you all see it? :indif:

jawathehutt
03-17-2011, 03:01 AM
Well, it'll be interesting to see how it plays out in the end. But seriously.....how was it reallly illegal? Even if you want to argue some kind of arcane "24 hour" technicality, the dems didn't have enough people in the legislature to stop them from passing the modified legislation anyway. If he can't produce results in the end, he'll be a one term governor. As to the number of "protestors" turning out in droves....it'd be interesting to see how many of them are carpet-baggers (ie out of state "rent-a-mobs").
I would say a low percentage. Speaking from personal experience, nearly every education major or major related to education in any way, in addition to droves of actual employees. If you want to hear a nice and personal story, my friend might have to drop out of college thanks to these benefits. Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

Totenkopf
03-17-2011, 06:35 AM
The evil union carpetbaggers and scalawags are taking advantage of the poor and powerless populace and trying to solidify their powerbase...it's so obvious, why don't you all see it? :indif:

Yeah, only the most virtuous of people w/good intentions belong to unions. How could we forget that. :rolleyes:

If you want to hear a nice and personal story, my friend might have to drop out of college thanks to these benefits. Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

While I would agree with you that cuts have consequences, why should govt employees be exempt fom sacrifices that wrack the private sector, esp when public employees are funded by tax dollars?

mimartin
03-17-2011, 03:56 PM
While I would agree with you that cuts have consequences, why should govt employees be exempt fom sacrifices that wrack the private sector, esp when public employees are funded by tax dollars?
They shouldn't.

But by the same token, why should the government be exempt from collective bargaining for budget shortfalls today 10 years from now?

Totenkopf
03-17-2011, 04:52 PM
Given that collective bargaining isn't a natural right, and isn't even universal (ie not all levels of govt have it anyway) why is it even necessary? Given all the different govt bureaucracies from the EEOC to OSHA and beyond, public unions and (apparently)unlimited/expansive collective bargaining seems superfluous. Perhaps for a lot of people it's ultimately a tax issue. The more "rights" (esp w/respect to pensions and salaries&benefits) govt workers accrue, the more expensive govt becomes and the higher the tax rates necessary to support that system.

Tommycat
03-17-2011, 05:14 PM
If you want to hear a nice and personal story, my friend might have to drop out of college thanks to these benefits. Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

Hmmm Yeah.. I guess you're right. I mean having your parents pay for your college is the ONLY way to get a college education. I mean it's not like there are grants (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/fpg/index.html) to help people attend college. And it's not like there are student loans (https://studentloans.gov/myDirectLoan/index.action) that he could apply for to attend college. He must have an education paid for by his parents like everyone else who attends college.

And it's not like there's a tax break for college funds... Heck he might even think about going to a cheaper local college. But I guess when you are using other people's money, who cares how much it costs...

purifier
03-17-2011, 05:25 PM
I would say a low percentage. Speaking from personal experience, nearly every education major or major related to education in any way, in addition to droves of actual employees. If you want to hear a nice and personal story, my friend might have to drop out of college thanks to these benefits. Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

Ahh Man! You mean I could've used my parents hard earned money they made for a living, to pay for my education, instead of getting Pell Grants and Stundent Loans. Damnit! Why didn't I think of that?

I mean, it's not like they needed it to survive on. Right?

Det. Bart Lasiter
03-17-2011, 09:19 PM
Given that collective bargaining isn't a natural right, and isn't even universal (ie not all levels of govt have it anyway) why is it even necessary? Given all the different govt bureaucracies from the EEOC to OSHA and beyond, public unions and (apparently)unlimited/expansive collective bargaining seems superfluous. Perhaps for a lot of people it's ultimately a tax issue. The more "rights" (esp w/respect to pensions and salaries&benefits) govt workers accrue, the more expensive govt becomes and the higher the tax rates necessary to support that system.

Because denying workers the ability to collectively bargain allows the government to set the price of labor and the government has a monopoly on the labor market. And to change that we'd need a massive influx of private sector growth and/or the elimination a large number of the jobs in this country.

Also, if the government is this massive bureaucracy you claim it to be, shouldn't citizens at least be able to organize a defense against it underpaying them? Or is big government okay when it comes to paying the employees of the largest employer in the country?

Tommycat
03-17-2011, 11:48 PM
Because denying workers the ability to collectively bargain allows the government to set the price of labor and the government has a monopoly on the labor market. And to change that we'd need a massive influx of private sector growth and/or the elimination a large number of the jobs in this country.

Also, if the government is this massive bureaucracy you claim it to be, shouldn't citizens at least be able to organize a defense against it underpaying them? Or is big government okay when it comes to paying the employees of the largest employer in the country?

But they can still collectively bargain for pay raises. Just not above the increase of inflation. And they still have other protections. Also, if they feel they are treated unfairly by the government, they should try out the private sector for a while. Unions are still able to do all of the bargaining they want there. AND they can even go on strike. Government workers cannot.

Jae Onasi
03-18-2011, 01:14 AM
Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

Please. I put myself through college. I received a couple scholarships, yes, but that only went as far as books for a few semesters. I worked 20 hours a week on campus, and 10 a week off campus. I'm still paying back the student loans. I worked off campus while I was in doctor school, too. We all make sacrifices for the things we think are important.

My parents didn't give me a darn thing. Why? They didn't have a cushy state job that provided them 100% of their pension and health care so they didn't have the money for it. Asking those parents to contribute 8% or so to their health care and pension? Sorry, I'm not feeling terribly sorry for them when I've effectively taken the same or larger pay cut because I haven't received a raise in my private sector job in 4 years. It's not an unreasonable request to ask every state employee to start contributing SOMETHING to their pensions and health care so that I don't have to pay the 4th highest tax rate in the US.

I have yet to hear of a single Scott Walker event that hasn't been overcome by hundreds if not thousands of protestors while his supporters come in groups of 10.Try thousands. My hubby was _at_ the protests. Not surprisingly, WI media focused on the protestors and not the supporters.

Now even the police have abandoned him. They've left the capital.So, you're saying they've abandoned their post and effectively have gone on strike illegally? So they let people break into the capital, walk all over union state workers' desks, destroy stuff in the capital, and superglue legislators' doors shut. How mature and honorable of them.

Qui-Gon Glenn
03-18-2011, 02:20 AM
Please. I put myself through college. I received a couple scholarships, yes, but that only went as far as books for a few semesters. I worked 20 hours a week on campus, and 10 a week off campus. I'm still paying back the student loans. I worked off campus while I was in doctor school, too. We all make sacrifices for the things we think are important.You and others, like me, paid for most of their college education. I agree with this... although I think if anyone is raping state budgets, it is the State University systems.... Talk about ridiculous pay raises above the inflation line, provided in large part by the state government and even more so by the incredible price gouging and collusion with creditors on the part of Universities to the financial crush of the students. These kids are paying WAY more than we did to go to school... and I still owe $17k in loans, for a degree I have never earned a red cent from. I also imagine, Dr. Onasi, that you earned a decent wage at your jobs while as a student - doctors generally do pretty well financially. Did the taxes you paid to the state gov ruin your chance of getting a new Cayenne. Forgive me for not crying about your tax punishment. You made a good choice, got a good education, and now likely make a great living. These are all good things; why the bitterness towards the 90% that make beans compared to the Doctors lawyers and Captains of Industry of the world? Perspective....
My parents didn't give me a darn thing. Why? They didn't have a cushy state job that provided them 100% of their pension and health care so they didn't have the money for it. Asking those parents to contribute 8% or so to their health care and pension? Sorry, I'm not feeling terribly sorry for them when I've effectively taken the same or larger pay cut because I haven't received a raise in my private sector job in 4 years. It's not an unreasonable request to ask every state employee to start contributing SOMETHING to their pensions and health care so that I don't have to pay the 4th highest tax rate in the US.Since when is teaching 7th-12th graders a cushy job? Or protecting the citizenry from fire or foes? You are talking about the bus drivers again, and extrapolating that to all state unionized employees. That is quite an unfair bias you have there!

I agree that WI has some serious abuse in their systems, it is not unnoticed around the country, and I have known for years that the taxes paid in WI are exceedingly high. All the more reason for regulation and oversight, not for cutting off an arbitrators head arbitrarily. Yes, regulation and oversight means "big" government, a term I am growing more and more sick of. You want people to protect you and yours? That is big government.
Try thousands. My hubby was _at_ the protests. Not surprisingly, WI media focused on the protestors and not the supporters.I don't watch the news much anymore, I listen on talk radio, as most people know it has a generally high right-bias. They talked about the great number of protesters as well... could be sensationalist journalism, or maybe it was just the facts of the matter.
So, you're saying they've abandoned their post and effectively have gone on strike illegally? So they let people break into the capital, walk all over union state workers' desks, destroy stuff in the capital, and superglue legislators' doors shut. How mature and honorable of them.You cannot have it both ways. Those "(im)mature and (dis)honorable people have put their life on the line for the people of the state many times over. Now they are getting hosed royally, especially in light of their significant help in getting Walker elected, likely thinking there would be a benefit to it. That is politics. So is striking when you are getting screwed.

I find it interesting that no one has quoted or responded to my last post. Perhaps it is because the tone was a little angry or defensive; or perhaps you cannot argue those points?
...if they feel they are treated unfairly by the government, they should try out the private sector for a while...Because it is so much HARDER in the REAL world :rolleyes:. There is just one world, there are jobs in both sectors that are great and that suck. What exactly are you trying to say?

Det. Bart Lasiter
03-18-2011, 03:24 AM
Since when is teaching 7th-12th graders a cushy job? Or protecting the citizenry from fire or foes? You are talking about the bus drivers again, and extrapolating that to all state unionized employees. That is quite an unfair bias you have there!

Not having to work until you die and the ability to get medical treatment without paying out the ass = Cushy

also i heard the state pays for teachers to have eyes wide shut orgies in the gym after school

Totenkopf
03-18-2011, 07:25 AM
Thanks for pointing out that there are sleazy individuals who are in Union jobs.
Have you missed all the sleazy people outside of them? Or is it just that you prefer your bad eggs to be Union workers?
I am well aware that there are abuses in the system. So are all Union members. So is about any educated and semi-intelligent human being above the age of 18.

Fair enough. I don't believe anyone here has said otherwise, though.

Yes, in the case of state employees, we are talking about your tax dollars. What percentage would you say is abusing the system? I have no raw data or figures, but my assumption is that there are the same number of d-bags that are Union workers as those outside the Union. That percentage may be scarily high, but it is by no means a majority, and I would go so far as to say it is in the vast MINORITY of both Union and non-Union workers. The truth is, most people are mostly honest, and have consciences that prevent them from raping the system. The others should be prosecuted, and so if it would please Walker or Jae, I put up the motion that Union members in State employ be held under the same scrutiny that those in the public sector are put to. Find the wingnuts and rapists, and prosecute.

Not necessarily unfair speculation. Might be interesting to find out the exact # of d-bags in all groups that get govt $$.

What you fail to mention in your post, is all of the good people that are getting hosed through this, and the potential ripple effect. If you think it is a good thing that Unions get broken... who is next on the chopping block, and/or what rights will be left for those of you in the public sector when the Unions are squashed?

Seems a bit hyperbolic. Govt unions aren't being squashed so much as reined in b/c we're talking about tax money in a bad economy. Federal workers can't bargain over compensation either and can't even strike, but I don't know of anyone swearing off working in the federal govt b/c of that. Hell, it's benefits are being used as a kind of yardstick on the whole Obamacare thing.

I am glad I no longer live in Wisconsin.

Glad I've never lived there.

... although I think if anyone is raping state budgets, it is the State University systems.... Talk about ridiculous pay raises above the inflation line, provided in large part by the state government and even more so by the incredible price gouging and collusion with creditors on the part of Universities to the financial crush of the students. These kids are paying WAY more than we did to go to school... and I still owe $17k in loans, for a degree I have never earned a red cent from.......

I'd say that even private univ are at fault too, though the exorbitant cost of a college education is no excuse for people who later skip out on repaying their loans. However, that said, universities could take a major haircut in funding. Have always found distasteful the gap in the % increase year-on-year between tuition and inflation costs.

You cannot have it both ways. Those "(im)mature and (dis)honorable people have put their life on the line for the people of the state many times over. Now they are getting hosed royally, especially in light of their significant help in getting Walker elected, likely thinking there would be a benefit to it. That is politics. So is striking when you are getting screwed.

Was under impression that cops and firemen were excluded from the cuts. Still, doesn't excuse cops from not doing their jobs. You think soldiers (talk about risk out of proportion to compensation) wouldn't like more $$? You don't go into govt work to get rich (at least not till you can trade off your public connections in the private sector.....legally).

Still, you've gotta admit that many of the public sector workers in WI were getting much sweeter financial dealings that they would have in most private sector jobs.

Tommycat
03-18-2011, 11:21 AM
Because it is so much HARDER in the REAL world :rolleyes:. There is just one world, there are jobs in both sectors that are great and that suck. What exactly are you trying to say?

It is MUCH harder to get a pay raise in the private sector. In the private sector, you don't get NEAR the benefits of government work. And lets face it, if you underperform in the private sector, you're fired, not so with government jobs. Even here in the non-union state of AZ, it is darn near impossible to fire a bad worker. We have hundreds of state employees on "Paid Administrative Leave" because we cannot get rid of them. Government jobs are way more cushy. So really, if they think that they are getting screwed in their government job, they should try the private sector where you only get maybe a 3% merit pay raise only if you do an exceptional job. That's also dependent on if the company doesn't freeze pay. Government employees get a pay raise every year. Even now after this, they are still able to get a pay raise each year up to the level of inflation, and even if they are a crappy worker who has just done their job well enough to not get fired.

mimartin
03-19-2011, 12:41 AM
It is MUCH harder to get a pay raise in the private sector. In the private sector, you don't get NEAR the benefits of government work.

How much larger was the largest government golden parchute compared to the largest golden parchute given in the private sector? :D

Tommycat
03-19-2011, 02:49 AM
How much larger was the largest government golden parchute compared to the largest golden parchute given in the private sector? :D

depends on if you include those voted into office or not... But you know darn good and well that I was talking about an "on average" thing not all. But that's so far beyond the norm, it's ludicrous to place that in the same category of where these people will be in the private sector. Management plays by different rules than us grunts.

Jae Onasi
03-19-2011, 08:14 PM
You and others, like me, paid for most of their college education. I agree with this... although I think if anyone is raping state budgets, it is the State University systems.... Talk about ridiculous pay raises above the inflation line, provided in large part by the state government and even more so by the incredible price gouging and collusion with creditors on the part of Universities to the financial crush of the students. These kids are paying WAY more than we did to go to school... and I still owe $17k in loans, for a degree I have never earned a red cent from. I would agree that the increases in tuition and fees at all universities and colleges have been obscenely above inflation rates, and it's ridiculous. Of course, the universities have to pay for the new football stadiums. Sigh. However, that's another issue.

I also imagine, Dr. Onasi, that you earned a decent wage at your jobs while as a student - doctors generally do pretty well financially. Did the taxes you paid to the state gov ruin your chance of getting a new Cayenne. Uh, no. You can't work as a doctor until you've a. graduated doctor school, b. passed national boards and any state requirements, and c. received your license from the state.

I worked as a hospital secretary off campus while in school, and on campus in the college infirmary and chemistry department. I have cleaned toilets, wiped up barf, picked pickles off the McDonald's pictures, and handed out more fries than I know. I worked as a hotel housekeeper, at a local fabric store, and at McDonald's and other fast food places, too. While I did my short stint at nursing school before deciding to go the doctor route, I had a 6 week period where I had no income until my first paycheck as a hospital secretary came in and no money left because I had to buy textbooks. I lived on ramen noodles and peanut butter sandwiches, or just plain nothing, for 6 weeks until I got that first paycheck.

I'm paying off my student loans for the next 20 years of a 30 year loan. I drive an 11 year old minivan with 110,000 miles on it that we bought used a few years ago after an uninsured driver ran into our 8 year old minivan. Our other car is a 7 year old Civic with 190,000 miles on it. You probably have a better car than I do because you don't have to pay high taxes in your new state.


Forgive me for not crying about your tax punishment. You made a good choice, got a good education, and now likely make a great living. These are all good things; why the bitterness towards the 90% that make beans compared to the Doctors lawyers and Captains of Industry of the world? Perspective.... Because I'm tired of people assuming that because I make more than minimum wage, I should be funding their butts to the hilt for them. I accept that I'm going to pay more in taxes. When Obama talked about universal healthcare, I wasn't an idiot about it. I knew it was going to hit me a lot harder in taxes than a lot of others. I voted for him anyway knowing that because I think the concept is worth that much. However, when it's at the point where it costs me more at the end of the year to work full time than it does part time because the obscenely higher taxes and daycare expenses chew up that much more of my pay, there's something seriously wrong with the tax system here.

Since when is teaching 7th-12th graders a cushy job? Or protecting the citizenry from fire or foes? You are talking about the bus drivers again, and extrapolating that to all state unionized employees. That is quite an unfair bias you have there!Let's see. Police and Fire were specifically excluded from Walker's plan so you can't include them. Most of the people complaining are teachers. You spend 7 hours (less including lunch and the times when they're in gym, art, music, etc) with 25 13-to18-year-olds. You speak to them. Theoretically you help them learn. You review pieces of paper they turn in. You work 180 days of the 365 day year. You get all weekends off, summers off, never have to work major holidays, and you're done at 3pm or whenever school lets out. Pretty decent job to me, unless it's inner-city Chicago, but Chicago isn't in WI so that doesn't count. Other state workers? They get 4 weeks off, pay and benefits that exceed their private sector counterparts, never work weekends unless their in jobs that require 24 hour coverage, never work holidays, and don't even have to practice good customer service, although to their credit a number of them do try.

Even my job has more risk--I can pick up a lot of annoying communicable diseases and a few deadly diseases if I don't protect myself correctly. I work weekends and holidays. And yes, I've actually had to step in and break up a couple fights in my office when we had a couple of whacked out patients go beserk. Those have been the only times when I thought I'd have to use my taekwondo skills for real while waiting for the police to arrive. >.<

Guess what? That bus driver made 3 times more than I did that one year by screwing over the system. Yeah, my degree has taken me really far in today's economy.


I agree that WI has some serious abuse in their systems, it is not unnoticed around the country, and I have known for years that the taxes paid in WI are exceedingly high. All the more reason for regulation and oversight, not for cutting off an arbitrators head arbitrarily. Yes, regulation and oversight means "big" government, a term I am growing more and more sick of. You want people to protect you and yours? That is big government.Well, no one's been willing to address the problem so far. While Walker's plan is exceedingly heavy handed, I give him kudos for at least trying to solve the problem. Doyle didn't have the guts to do it because the unions had him paid off so much he couldn't even if he wanted to. I voted for Doyle, and by the end of his term I was so disgusted by his utter inaction on major problems affecting our state gov't I could hardly stand reading the news anymore.

I don't watch the news much anymore, I listen on talk radio, as most people know it has a generally high right-bias. They talked about the great number of protesters as well... could be sensationalist journalism, or maybe it was just the facts of the matter.I was listening to Milwaukee talk radio on several channels and watching the coverage. I guarantee you the radio stations didn't talk about a 'few dozen' protesters. They talked about thousands. It was a fascinating study in the differences between TV and radio coverage and who/how/what they covered, but that's another issue.

You cannot have it both ways. Those "(im)mature and (dis)honorable people have put their life on the line for the people of the state many times over. Now they are getting hosed royally, especially in light of their significant help in getting Walker elected, likely thinking there would be a benefit to it. That is politics. So is striking when you are getting screwed.I sure as heck can. Walker was elected into that position. He was doing what the people elected him to do. Would I go glue doors shut in the capital if a Democrat OR a Republican was doing something I didn't like? Heck, no. I'm more mature and honorable than that. I'm not going to break into the damn building and walk all over someone's desk to go protest. I'd work on the next election campaign to find someone I thought was better for the job.

And police abandoning their posts? ZERO excuse for that. They are required to be on the job and protect ALL people, whether or not they agree with them philosophically. I have to treat people whether or not I agree with them politically or philosophically. If the police walked off the job and left one single person unprotected because they didn't like what Walker did, (especially since Walker left police OUT of the union changes!), then every single one of those officers should be FIRED. IMMEDIATELY.

I find it interesting that no one has quoted or responded to my last post. Perhaps it is because the tone was a little angry or defensive; This. There's no point in answering venting comments.

Because it is so much HARDER in the REAL world :rolleyes:. There is just one world, there are jobs in both sectors that are great and that suck. What exactly are you trying to say?
So, if that's the case, then why aren't public sector employees in WI paying ANYTHING into their pensions and healthcare, like private sector employees are? Why aren't they even WILLING to address the blatant abuses?

Darth Dan 012
03-28-2011, 12:12 AM
That Wisonsin governor is a total jackass. I don't entirely agree with everything that unions do, but I think they should have a right to collective bargaining.

It's interesting to see how far the Republican Party has come. 20-some years ago their hero was telling us about how collective bargaining was a basic human right.

mimartin
03-28-2011, 12:43 AM
Of course, the universities have to pay for the new football stadiums. Sigh. However, that's another issue.
Jae just how much does the football program at a major university (such as Ohio State, Texas or Michigan) take away from the schools general fund? Be honest. Now if you are completely honest then you would know it is nothing, zilch, nada, zilch, zip…. Now if you want to rephrase the remark to athletics in general then I would tend to agree, but major college football television contracts and the donations to the universe receives because of football to the athletic fund adds to the general fund instead of subtracting from it.

Gross Revenues 2008 to 2009 school year.
Ohio State $68.19 million Texas $87.5 million

Football Expense 2008 to 2009 school year
Ohio State $32.3 million Texas $ 22.5 million

Football Profit 2008 to 2009 school year

Ohio State $35.89 million Texas $65.00 million

Georgia $45.38 million
Florida $43.29 million
Penn State $42.63 million
LSU $39.14 million
Notre Dame $38.18 million
Alabama $38.16 million
Nebraska $37.29 million
South Carolina $37.23 million

If you can't tell Ohio State grosses the 2nd most, but 10th in profits because they spend so much more than everyone else. Still it is not taking away from the general fund.

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/06/30/for-longhorns-money-grows-on-football-program-instead-of-trees/

urluckyday
03-28-2011, 12:57 AM
Jae just how much does the football program at a major university (such as Ohio State, Texas or Michigan) take away from the schools general fund? Be honest. Now if you are completely honest then you would know it is nothing, zilch, nada, zilch, zipÖ. Now if you want to rephrase the remark to athletics in general then I would tend to agree, but major college football television contracts and the donations to the universe receives because of football to the athletic fund adds to the general fund instead of subtracting from it.

Actually, very little money is actually MADE from even the biggest college football programs. Revenues are huge, but the expenses associated with running a college progam are almost just as big. People need to realize that college athletics are not created to make money.

It's impossible for someone to calculate the donations to the school based on what was for a football program or just a general donation, so those numbers shouldn't be included into the equation.

Also, I should point out that hardly ever is tuition increased because of a new stadium. For big colleges, the state/city usually gets involved with funding part of it with the remainder of the cost coming from the sale of bonds to investors/alumni.

Jae Onasi
03-28-2011, 01:43 AM
collective bargaining was a basic human right.It never has been a basic human right, and it never should be.

Qui-Gon Glenn
03-28-2011, 02:43 AM
Jae just how much does the football program at a major university (such as Ohio State, Texas or Michigan) take away from the schools general fund? Be honest. Now if you are completely honest then you would know it is nothing, zilch, nada, zilch, zip…. Now if you want to rephrase the remark to athletics in general then I would tend to agree, but major college football television contracts and the donations to the universe receives because of football to the athletic fund adds to the general fund instead of subtracting from it.

Gross Revenues 2008 to 2009 school year.
Ohio State $68.19 million Texas $87.5 million

Football Expense 2008 to 2009 school year
Ohio State $32.3 million Texas $ 22.5 million

Football Profit 2008 to 2009 school year

Ohio State $35.89 million Texas $65.00 million

Georgia $45.38 million
Florida $43.29 million
Penn State $42.63 million
LSU $39.14 million
Notre Dame $38.18 million
Alabama $38.16 million
Nebraska $37.29 million
South Carolina $37.23 million

If you can't tell Ohio State grosses the 2nd most, but 10th in profits because they spend so much more than everyone else. Still it is not taking away from the general fund.

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/06/30/for-longhorns-money-grows-on-football-program-instead-of-trees/Thank you for this post. Football funds most of the other sports programs, thus we have funding for all of the Title IX athletics that are worthy in their goal, but are a giant vacuum for revenue.

Uh, no. You can't work as a doctor until you've a. graduated doctor school, b. passed national boards and any state requirements, and c. received your license from the state.I was not pretending that you could practice medicine without achieving your a,b and c. I also know many medical students land some pretty solid jobs while at university, due either to their connections or their potential, or their brilliance. Sorry you flipped burgers, but so did I and many others. I also did other nasty jobs, just like you.

As for the car I drive and the taxes I pay in my current home state.... You can always bail out of Wisconsin! I know many people that are heartbroken at the thought, but are seriously considering it.

As for what is wrong with your tax system locally, I agree there is something horribly wrong. Why are all Public Sector employees equally held accountable for this, when it appears that you specifically point out the bus drivers, and I cannot argue that they are overpaid bloated pigs. My friend the Veteran's Home Food Director makes far less than they do, works harder, and is watching his cooks bail on him because they cannot feed a family on the new wage scale. Is he equally guilty of abusing the system, or is he and his staff a victim of bad policy?

I was under the belief that the Cops and Fireman bailed on the system because Walker reneged on that portion of their special deal. If that is a mistake on my part, I apologize and tend to agree with you. If they were reneged on, I then reinstate my belief that what they did was right. The government is supposed to be "by the people, for the people" and what Walker did is far less than that. It is our responsibility to ACT (or not act) when the Government is hosing us - it is what the founding fathers wanted expressly.

Your assessment of teacher's in secondary education is a little lacking perhaps in experience or perspective. My mother was an English teacher for many years, my Grandmother taught school in a one-room schoolhouse for much of her younger life until teaching in "modern" schools until retirement. Both of those women worked many, many hours at home, which you might consider their just reward for having the spring and summer break. Whether that is right or not, you grossly underestimate how much personal time the teachers of your children do or will spend on the education and betterment of your children. Whether they are succeeding or no is a totally different question, but to simply say they have a cake job is just wrong. And BTW, is Milwaukee some sort of Utopia? I think it is just about as rough as Chicago, and has equally nasty corners.

As to my venting, a mirror might be a good thing to look at. I am not saying you are wrong to vent, but if you are venting less than I am, I am a monkey's Uncle.

As to what Darth Dan 012 said about collective bargaining, you have misquoted or mistaken his words. I believe, although he was not specific, that he was talking about the typical Republican darling, Ronald "The Gipper" Reagan. Search for his 1980 speech to the Polish people... and you will understand Dan's statement. Whether it is a real "human right" or not is debatable, but again you are telling the forum what should and should not be, rather than making an argument. Is that fair?

mimartin
03-28-2011, 12:13 PM
Actually, very little money is actually MADE from even the biggest college football programs. What do you consider very little money? 65 million or 35.89 million? I guess it all depends on what you consider "very little money" or what you consider "biggest college football programs." By my definition of both, I will stand by my remarks.
It's impossible for someone to calculate the donations to the school based on what was for a football program or just a general donation, so those numbers shouldn't be included into the equation. It would seem something easily calculated, at least to the two universities and one Junior college I contribute to. The little check mark next to the amount tells the school you want the money to go to be it athletics or academics. I give to academics at the other two schools, but I give to athletic department at the University of Texas so I can get tickets to away football games. (for the record I don't give to the athletic department at the other two schools mainly because they don't have a athletic department.) ;)

Totenkopf
03-28-2011, 12:18 PM
but again you are telling the forum what should and should not be, rather than making an argument....
you mean like this: :xp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bQnxlHZsjY&feature=related

urluckyday
03-28-2011, 12:31 PM
What do you consider very little money? 65 million or 35.89 million? I guess it all depends on what you consider "very little money" or what you consider "biggest college football programs." By my definition of both, I will stand by my remarks.

Those are just revenue numbers. For Ohio State, my sports management teacher calculated their profits over the entire year of football at around $500,000 which is miniscule considering how much money they bring in. It's extremely expensive to run a program like that, and while the revenues may be high, the profits are not.

mimartin
03-28-2011, 01:05 PM
Yes they are revenue numbers, but they are net income which means they are after expenses.

Ohio State 2008 to 2009
Gross Revenues for Football 68.19 million
Minus Expense for Football 32.3 million
Equals Net Income from football 35.89 million

Gross Revnue - Expenses = Net Income

What year was he/she talking about? Perhaps Ohio State expensed out stadium expansion or some other high dollar expense that year. Also perhaps he/she meant the athletic department as a whole; then I would agree with him/her. Overall, I do believe most athletic departments either make no profit or very little as a whole. Have no real way to know this last statement as a fact beyond personal observation of going to games. However, my original reply was direct just at college football.

Jae Onasi
03-28-2011, 03:40 PM
Thank you for this post. Football funds most of the other sports programs, thus we have funding for all of the Title IX athletics that are worthy in their goal, but are a giant vacuum for revenue.
Yes, yes, I made a flippant comment and suddenly everyone goes nuts over college sports. :) I take back what I said about football stadiums!

I was not pretending that you could practice medicine without achieving your a,b and c. I also know many medical students land some pretty solid jobs while at university, due either to their connections or their potential, or their brilliance.Riiiiight..... You have some odd assumptions about doctors' backgrounds, like they're all from rich families with political connections out the wazoo. Do some of them have that? Sure. A couple of my classmates had very well off parents who paid their entire way. Great for them. I came neither from a rich family nor a well-connected one. I had no such resources. My dad finished his associate's degree when I was a kid, and he worked full-time while going to school part-time. It was his example that showed me that I could work and go to school, too. Besides, who's really going to hire a college student for a high-paying job when the student has to go to college during the usual workday and has an ever-changing schedule, particularly in the later years of professional school when their schedules literally change every week due to clinical rotations? Try pretty much no one.

Sorry you flipped burgers, but so did I and many others. I also did other nasty jobs, just like you.I didn't say that to evoke your pity or your patronization, nor do I want it. I'm proud of every job I worked at. I learned what it was to do good work in any job (and let's face it, most of us do have to learn 'how to work' in our teens), from McDonald's and housekeeping even--how to work with the public even when they're complete jerks, how to handle money very quickly with 100% accuracy, how to clean up biohazardous waste properly, and other skills that help in my profession now.

I pointed it all out to show you that I was a blue-collar female working her ass off to get through school, and that's why I don't have the same level of sympathy for your friend that you do. I didn't have money or connections. Your friend should get off his ass and quit depending on mommy and daddy if he wants his education, too. He became an adult when he was 18. He shouldn't have to depend on mommy and daddy's salaries to fund his schooling, so your argument about mommy and daddy's salary dropping 8% when they've been living high on the hog benefit-wise for years (far, far better than most other states, and far better than most equivalent private sector jobs) does not make me feel sorry for him in the least. His parents might actually be doing him a favor by cutting the apron strings and letting him learn to survive on his own for once.

As for the car I drive and the taxes I pay in my current home state.... You can always bail out of Wisconsin! I know many people that are heartbroken at the thought, but are seriously considering it.Have you tried to sell a house lately? Aside from that, being within short driving distance of a dad with early dementia, a sister and sister-in-law who both have gone through treatment for cancer means that moving out of the state isn't a viable option right now, unless something truly fantastic came along. And by 'truly fantastic' I mean 'something that would let me fly to and from their homes at any time I wanted whenever they needed me'. Which is not going to happen unless God decides that dropping a few million bucks on my doorstep would be a really cool thing to do.

As for what is wrong with your tax system locally, I agree there is something horribly wrong. Why are all Public Sector employees equally held accountable for this, when it appears that you specifically point out the bus drivers, and I cannot argue that they are overpaid bloated pigs. My friend the Veteran's Home Food Director makes far less than they do, works harder, and is watching his cooks bail on him because they cannot feed a family on the new wage scale. Is he equally guilty of abusing the system, or is he and his staff a victim of bad policy? Have your friend go apply for a cook position, then. He needs a job to fund his education. In fact, let me know where it is, because I know a number of people in my town who are out of work and would love to have any kind of work right now.
The wage scale hasn't even changed yet since the law just got passed and is still kind of in limbo with the restraining orders, so I'm not sure why the cooks are bailing on your Food Director friend.

It's not just the bus drivers that are grossly abusing the system, but their abuse was certainly some of the most egregious. Prison workers are also abusing the overtime rules. Some of these people call around to their coworkers and determine who should call in sick that day so the other guys can get their overtime. There are teachers who are so bad at teaching that they're put into 'administrative jobs' because they can't be fired due to union rules. We, the taxpayers, have to pay for that 'administrative job', which means sitting around doing squat all day, because the work rules don't allow the school districts the freedom to get rid of truly awful teachers. Why in the world should I be paying for a bad worker to sit on their butts watching TV all day because some union rules prevent it?

Why, as a taxpayer, is it unreasonable for me to ask state workers to help contribute to their own pension funds and their own health insurance?

I was under the belief that the Cops and Fireman bailed on the system because Walker reneged on that portion of their special deal. If that is a mistake on my part, I apologize and tend to agree with you. If they were reneged on, I then reinstate my belief that what they did was right. The cops and firefighters, as far as I know, are specifically excluded from the collective bargaining law. By the way, the unions can still collective bargain on wages. They simply can't bargain anymore on work rules and benefits, and force the state to use a health insurance company that costs the state significantly more for premiums than other health insurance companies charge for the same coverage.

The government is supposed to be "by the people, for the people" and what Walker did is far less than that. It is our responsibility to ACT (or not act) when the Government is hosing us - it is what the founding fathers wanted expressly.If 'the people', which apparently only means "Democrats" in your lexicon, had gotten off their butts in November and voted for the senators and governor they wanted, the GOP would not have won the overwhelming majority it has now. We live in a democratic republic. Wisconsin voters spoke last November. They wanted someone who wasn't going to be another Doyle.

Walker's record in Milwaukee county should have been very clear evidence of how he was going to handle things at the state level. He is a guy who slashes costs. Were WI voters expecting him to roll over for the unions at the state level when he didn't at the Milwaukee county level?

Protesting? I have no problem with that. Go for it.

Gluing doors shut and doing millions of dollars of damage to the state building? I have a huge problem with that. Protesting is not illegal. Breaking and entering, and destroying property, IS illegal. Intentionally leaving civilians unprotected because a cop wants to support his union brothers and sisters? Illegal and entirely immoral.

Your assessment of teacher's in secondary education is a little lacking perhaps in experience or perspective.
:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Right, like I never went through the public school system or work with teachers right now while my kids go through school.

My mother was an English teacher for many years, my Grandmother taught school in a one-room schoolhouse for much of her younger life until teaching in "modern" schools until retirement. Both of those women worked many, many hours at home, which you might consider their just reward for having the spring and summer break. Whether that is right or not, you grossly underestimate how much personal time the teachers of your children do or will spend on the education and betterment of your children. Whether they are succeeding or no is a totally different question, but to simply say they have a cake job is just wrong.
My mother was an elementary school teacher, too. I have helped out by volunteering in my kids' classroom as time allows. I help out at music events, although not much in the couple years due to all the health problems hammering the entire family. The exceptional teachers may put in long hours. The average ones? Not so much. The poor ones don't care one iota.

And BTW, is Milwaukee some sort of Utopia? I think it is just about as rough as Chicago, and has equally nasty corners.I've lived in Chicago. Milwaukee may have a crap school system and the highest crime in the state, but the city and the school system are not nearly as bad as Chicago.

As to my venting, a mirror might be a good thing to look at. I am not saying you are wrong to vent, but if you are venting less than I am, I am a monkey's Uncle.I didn't say you weren't venting, nor do I care that you vented. Expecting me to answer what is clearly a vent rather than an argument, is not reasonable, however.

As to what Darth Dan 012 said about collective bargaining, you have misquoted or mistaken his words.I knew exactly who he was talking about. I also know what Reagan did when the air traffic controllers walked off their jobs. WI teachers and the other state workers who walked off their jobs to go protest are lucky that Walker didn't pull a Gipper on that one.

I believe, although he was not specific, that he was talking about the typical Republican darling, Ronald "The Gipper" Reagan. Search for his 1980 speech to the Polish people... and you will understand Dan's statement. Whether it is a real "human right" or not is debatable, but again you are telling the forum what should and should not be, rather than making an argument. Is that fair?
Please. WI is not a communist state like Poland was at that time. The two can't even remotely be compared. That's comparing apples to the spaghetti monster.

mimartin
03-28-2011, 03:51 PM
Yes, yes, I made a flippant comment and suddenly everyone goes nuts over college sports. :) I take back what I said about football stadiums! Not really, I just used your flippant comment as an excuse to point out to you that the great University of Texas makes more money from football than those cheaters from Ohio. :xp:

Football in Texas is serious business. We don't joke about football in Texas. Well we don't joke about high school or college football. As to profession football...the Texans are a joke.

Qui-Gon Glenn
03-28-2011, 10:29 PM
What friend are you talking about? My friend has a BA in Business Admin he received from the U of MN in 1995... And a Chef by trade before working at the Veteran's Home, not a cook. The Food Director is an important position to the Veterans he serves. Actually, who's post were you responding to while trying to make me out for a fool? I am 38, 39 in July, and my friends are grown.

The condescension and rhetoric of your post is more laughable than the rolling heads you sent at me. My dialog with you on this subject and any other is over. PM me if you want to continue. Hopefully not.

Totenkopf
03-28-2011, 11:49 PM
What friend are you talking about? My friend has a BA in Business Admin he received from the U of MN in 1995... And a Chef by trade before working at the Veteran's Home, not a cook. The Food Director is an important position to the Veterans he serves. Actually, who's post were you responding to while trying to make me out for a fool? I am 38, 39 in July, and my friends are grown.


I think she meant this one from jawathehutt:
I would say a low percentage. Speaking from personal experience, nearly every education major or major related to education in any way, in addition to droves of actual employees. If you want to hear a nice and personal story, my friend might have to drop out of college thanks to these benefits. Both of his parents are public employees and the pay cuts and benefit cuts are probably going to put an end to his college fund. And he already works and is still having issues. But hey, uneducated simpletons are great for business.

Tommycat
03-29-2011, 11:41 AM
Funny enough, Jae generally leans left on most social issues. Perhaps she, living in WI, has a better grasp of how bad the situation is there.

And QGG, she has a point. With the economy what it is, I have a hard time believing that he has too much difficulty in finding replacement cooks. Perhaps your friend could give up part of his pay so that his workers can have more. I mean is he paying them less than McDonalds is? What skill level are they looking for. I know quite a few people are looking for jobs right now. Better than 10% of the population is unemployed(I think I heard the "real" unemployment numbers are somewhere near 20%, but I'd have to give enough of a crap to look them up, so I'll just go with over 10%). I'm thinking there's job hunters out there. Heck there were business executives out here applying for a summer job at a water park. It's rough.... Maybe WI is paying too much in unemployment.

To be fair QGG you were doing a fair bit of attacking yourself. Your post came off as a bit, "Well you're a doctor, so you can afford to pay up." And having friends who are doctors and driving cars that are actually worse than mine(2004 truck as opposed to their 2000 minivan), I caught what she was saying. The only doctors that end up super wealthy are plastic surgeons. Usually if they have a nice car, they also have a whole bunch of repair bills(or their family already had money to begin with, so they had no school bills)... Keep in mind that the cost of malpractice insurance is still sky high. So on top of taxing them to death, you hit them with insurance that drains them. Then there are a few hefty fees they have to pay either quarterly or anually(Jae could say better, but I am pretty sure WI is pretty well close to the same as AZ)

mimartin
03-29-2011, 02:30 PM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4IqAMwAGn1w/TEal_BANENI/AAAAAAAAXhM/Lj-MRavDlwk/s1600/nothing_to_see_here.jpg

Please let us get back to the topic at hand. ;)


Edit by D3: Indeed!

Point Man
03-29-2011, 10:45 PM
The people of Wisconsin elected Scott Walker as governor and flipped both houses of the State Assembly in order to get some leaders who would straighten out the budget mess we have. Our state has the second highest per capita debt in the nation, and we already have the fourth highest tax burden. We did not want to issue out IOU's to state employees because we had no money to pay them, like California infamously did a few years back. We also did not want to go the way of Illinois and raise our state income tax 67%.

Governor Walker and the Republicans in the State Assembly saw that our current fiscal year was $167 million short. They needed to make up that shortfall with a budget repair bill. Since 60% of our state budget is labor, it is easy to see that you would need to work on that to get some savings.

Years of Democratic control had gotten us contracts with labor unions that were far too restrictive to allow any significant reductions. As an example, the Milwaukee Public School system has a contract with the teachers' union that restricts the health insurance choice to the union-provided plan. If the district were to change to the plan state employees have, they could save $67 million a year.

That is the main reason we had to reduce collective bargaining among public employees. We had unions taking money from the workers and funneling it into the election campaign funds of Democrats. Those Democrats were then obligated to give the unions bloated contracts or face losing their biggest campaign contributors. By restricting the damage to the state budget from this extortion, we can now actually do the unthinkable and work to reduce our debt.

This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. Nobody is taking away any rights. We are restructuring the way contracts are negotiated. The unions raised a huge protest for one reason and one reason only: they stood to lose a large portion of their income. You see, the bill also included provisions that eliminated state collection of union dues and made the payment of union dues voluntary. The union bosses could not stand to have their jobs endangered, so they staged the big protest in the name of "rights." It isn't about rights at all. It's about unions wanting to continue robbing taxpayers to keep themselves in unnecessary jobs.

Jae Onasi
03-31-2011, 10:39 AM
I think she meant this one from jawathehutt:
Yep, that one was my mistake for sure. My apologies for Qui-Gon Glenn for accidentally combining the two different posts.

Your post came off as a bit, "Well you're a doctor, so you can afford to pay up."Yes, it sure did come off that way, and that attitude is pervasive. And no, I can't afford to pay up.

The biggest question right now is the ruling on whether the bill can be published and whether or not it's law. The Sec'y of State was required to publish it 10 days after passage, but with a variety of court challenges, not surprisingly happening in the courts of extremely liberal Dane County (Madison, WI) judges, he's decided not to move forward. In fact, one judge issued an injunction based on the legislative rules, which is something no WI court has EVER done before, and in fact there were numerous precedents in WI against ruling on legislative rules, since that would mean the judicial branch was infringing on the legislative process. So this one judge just decided arbitrarily to throw all the precedents out the window and go with what she felt like that day (or what the unions were telling her to do....)

So, needless to say, right now there is tremendous confusion about the status of the law.

Jae Onasi
04-04-2011, 08:27 PM
And yay for unions buying people to come 'protest'. And yay for any other group buying people to come 'protest' for either side. >.<

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=270446&id=57082507410#!/photo.php?fbid=10150144325402411&set=a.498428267410.270446.57082507410&theater