Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Reply To Thread

Madison WI Lefty/Union ProtestsFollow

#1 Feb 21 2011 at 12:34 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
WHY it is so inconceivable for the Governor of Wisconsin to ask his state employees to contribute a whopping 12% of their own salaries to fund their own healthcare? Just imagine the pushback when those Madison Tahrir Square-types are asked to contribute to everyone else's healthcare plan too - provided Obumble's Plan is proven Constitutional. Which it ain't.

Oh snap... That's right! Unions are exempt from contributing to Barry's plan...

Totem

#2 Feb 21 2011 at 1:02 AM Rating: Excellent
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,143 posts
Totem wrote:
WHY it is so inconceivable for the Governor of Wisconsin to ask his state employees to contribute a whopping 12% of their own salaries to fund their own healthcare? Just imagine the pushback when those Madison Tahrir Square-types are asked to contribute to everyone else's healthcare plan too - provided Obumble's Plan is proven Constitutional. Which it ain't.

Oh snap... That's right! Unions are exempt from contributing to Barry's plan...

Totem



They've already offered to meet the financial criteria but wished to keep their collective bargaining rights. This is simply union busting.
#3 Feb 21 2011 at 1:04 AM Rating: Good
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,143 posts
Also, it's safe to say that state workers have already done a large part (I agree with more contributed towards pension/insurance) by agreeing to furlough days. I forget the exact percentage, but the furlough days equal out to be a fairly large percentage cut in their salary.
#4 Feb 21 2011 at 1:10 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,158 posts
Darn those radical muzzies and their bloody demonstrations!
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#5 Feb 21 2011 at 1:53 AM Rating: Good
Public sector collective bargaining makes no sense at all. Public sector workers should have all of their collective bargaining privileges removed, not simply the privilege to negotiate for benefits and work rules.
#6 Feb 21 2011 at 2:34 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
Public sector collective bargaining makes no sense at all


Why's that? You've drawn the distinction, so I can only assume you believe private sector unions are at least sometimes OK. What's the key difference?
#7 Feb 21 2011 at 8:27 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Totem wrote:
WHY it is so inconceivable for the Governor of Wisconsin to ask his state employees to contribute a whopping 12% of their own salaries to fund their own healthcare?

Then why isn't he taking away the collective bargaining rights of police and firefighters like he's demanding of teachers? Like Paskil said, this is just union busting on the pro-Democratic side.

Edited, Feb 21st 2011 8:28am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#8 Feb 21 2011 at 8:32 AM Rating: Good
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
Public sector collective bargaining makes no sense at all


Why's that? You've drawn the distinction, so I can only assume you believe private sector unions are at least sometimes OK. What's the key difference?

Two reasons. First because public sector union members have the ability to choose who they negotiate with, via elections. Second, private sector unions negotiate with companies with a profit motive and a budget defined by the market where as public sector unions negotiate with entities with no such constraints.
#9 Feb 21 2011 at 8:34 AM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
Totem wrote:
WHY it is so inconceivable for the Governor of Wisconsin to ask his state employees to contribute a whopping 12% of their own salaries to fund their own healthcare?

Then why isn't he taking away the collective bargaining rights of police and firefighters like he's demanding of teachers? Like Paskil said, this is just union busting on the pro-Democratic side.

I can't recall who I heard it from, but an interview I heard said he received an endorsement from a minority of police and firefighters in Wisconsin, so I am not sure that's the case. Also, I don't know how it works in Illinois, but around here police & firefighters aren't generally GOP endorsers.
#10 Feb 21 2011 at 8:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
I can't recall who I heard it from, but an interview I heard said he received an endorsement from a minority of police and firefighters in Wisconsin, so I am not sure that's the case. Also, I don't know how it works in Illinois, but around here police & firefighters aren't generally GOP endorsers.

Which doesn't answer why he's exempting some public servants from his union busting (WHY can't they pay 12%...? etc). Are teachers just rolling in so much cash and all the police are eating bugs just to stay alive?

The Wisconsin Law Enforcement Association endorsed Walker and the head of that union just put out a statement saying that he now regrets it. And, according to Ezra Kline over at the Wash. Post,
Quote:
And note that not all public-employee unions are covered by Walker's proposal: the more conservative public-safety unions -- notably police and firefighters, many of whom endorsed Walker -- are exempt.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#11 Feb 21 2011 at 9:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Do we really need to fuck over public workers more? There are so many reasons why this is a huge problem for public sector workers of Wisconsin. Firstly, Walker had tried to sneak this through on the fast track before anyone could notice. We're already fighting dirty. Secondly, Paskil already mentioned, the public sector has already been forced to give concessions once already in the form of furlough days, which are already slated to be increased this year again. Why do public sector employees keep having to make concessions? Thirdly, Walker (and the rest of the legislature too, but less so) is being a real prick about this by absolutely refusing to renegotiate this bill at all. He's going to fight this till the bitter end, and it's going to get ugly before it gets any better I'm afraid. Fourthly, why exactly does Walker have a vendetta against unions? Are WI's unions so strong that he can't get anything done? They aren't. Why couldn't he have foisted paycuts on the public sector to make himself look good and just move on, instead of trying to bust unions that are about as agressive as retarded housecat?

The thing that drives me crazy is that all these protests are going to be ultimately futile. They'll find a democratic senator soon and haul him back to the capitol. Then all the other red states are going to be emboldened by it passing in Wisconsin and pass similar legislation. Then Walker will recover the however small amount of reputation damage this will do to him and keep passing bullshit legislation and tax breaks. Yay.
#12 Feb 21 2011 at 10:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
Public sector collective bargaining makes no sense at all


Why's that? You've drawn the distinction, so I can only assume you believe private sector unions are at least sometimes OK. What's the key difference?

Two reasons. First because public sector union members have the ability to choose who they negotiate with, via elections. Second, private sector unions negotiate with companies with a profit motive and a budget defined by the market where as public sector unions negotiate with entities with no such constraints.
The theoretical part of me wants to agree with you. The reality is though, public sector employees wages/benefits are the first, and often the only place the politicians turn to when it's time to cut budgets. In my public service career, three times I've seen the government rape and pillage their employees in an attempt to make it look like they're balancing budgets (the reality is the palsy amount of money actually saved is pretty meaningless). The union is the only thing keeping the law-makers from leaving marks, and I'm not sure I really buy into the notion that collective bargaining on behalf of public employees is setting public policy. In a perfect world policies would be implemented within the bounds of pre-agreed employee compensation.

Last week I very intimately witnessed the tiny but profound individual difference the union can make in dealing with an unwieldy, seemingly immovable bureaucracy. I was actually kind of impressed the way the state personnel reps stuck to their guns in order to insure everyone fit into their tidy groupings. I was more impressed that this diminutive little union man with his neutral arbitrator existed to force them to look at reality.

Frequently our dept. loses good scientists/employees to the private sector where they can actually make a decent living.

confounding this unions have lost a ton of power over the last couple decades. The results being these huge income gaps...of dimensions that we've never seen before. If giving up public sector unions meant we could shift their power back to the private sector, I might go for it.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#13 Feb 21 2011 at 12:44 PM Rating: Default
Elinda wrote:
The theoretical part of me wants to agree with you. The reality is though, public sector employees wages/benefits are the first, and often the only place the politicians turn to when it's time to cut budgets. In my public service career, three times I've seen the government rape and pillage their employees in an attempt to make it look like they're balancing budgets (the reality is the palsy amount of money actually saved is pretty meaningless). The union is the only thing keeping the law-makers from leaving marks, and I'm not sure I really buy into the notion that collective bargaining on behalf of public employees is setting public policy. In a perfect world policies would be implemented within the bounds of pre-agreed employee compensation.

The public sector wages/benefits should be the first to be cut. There is no reason that public sector job losses should not mirror, if not outpace, private sector job losses other than politics. Pro-union/pro-big-government people like to talk about the jobs that the public sector "creates", but they don't bother to tell you that that's the reason your property taxes go up when states cut back on aid to cities. They don't bother to tell you that ridiculous teacher contracts are the reason school boards get to lay on levies, often times without a vote, to increase your taxes even more. The reason we are 6 feet tall in a 20 foot puddle of sh:t is that people in government like to give away money to people and projects that they have no business giving money to. The ability to collectively bargain pensions & work rules for public sector employees is just one more example of this.

Elinda wrote:
Frequently our dept. loses good scientists/employees to the private sector where they can actually make a decent living.

GOOD! Government service should be about government service. It shouldn't be about making a decent living. You want to make a decent living? Go out and be productive. My son's kindergarten teacher made $75,000 dollars last year. She made $75,000 to teach children to finger paint and walk in a straight line.

That is f'ucking ridiculous. Add to that the fact that she makes it for working a grand total of 8 months out of the year, gets a pension & retirement benefits package that could currently be values at over $60,000 and you get an even grosser violation of common sense, bordering on criminal.

It's just wrong. Democrats and RINOs have been giving in to these people for so long, and slowly adding to the festering pile of sh:t that it should be painful and scarring when the band-aid is finally ripped off and the wound gets to heal.
#14REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 12:48 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#15REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 12:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Moe,
#16 Feb 21 2011 at 12:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
My son's kindergarten teacher made $75,000 dollars last year. She made $75,000 to teach children to finger paint and walk in a straight line.

How many years experience is that? A brief look at Minnesota school salaries would indicate she has at least 35+ years experience and an advanced degree. Starting salaries look to be about $18,000-$30,000 for the first couple years (depending on whether you can get a full time position with one year experience) and $35,000 after year three. Folks making over $60,000 are all people with 20+ years, a Masters degree and at least 40 additional education credits. This was just from clicking around and I'm sure there's outliers.

What do you think a fair teacher's salary should be?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#17 Feb 21 2011 at 12:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
I'm more curious whether you think the wisc state police should be going after these rogue democrats who fled the state, and the voters.

Given that their power doesn't extend over state lines, probably not.
Quote:
The thought that people should have to work for what they makes them cringe.

That'd really hurt my feelings if I didn't, you know, have a job and stuff. :D

Edited, Feb 21st 2011 1:00pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#18 Feb 21 2011 at 1:23 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Elinda wrote:
The theoretical part of me wants to agree with you. The reality is though, public sector employees wages/benefits are the first, and often the only place the politicians turn to when it's time to cut budgets. In my public service career, three times I've seen the government rape and pillage their employees in an attempt to make it look like they're balancing budgets (the reality is the palsy amount of money actually saved is pretty meaningless). The union is the only thing keeping the law-makers from leaving marks, and I'm not sure I really buy into the notion that collective bargaining on behalf of public employees is setting public policy. In a perfect world policies would be implemented within the bounds of pre-agreed employee compensation.

The public sector wages/benefits should be the first to be cut. There is no reason that public sector job losses should not mirror, if not outpace, private sector job losses other than politics. Pro-union/pro-big-government people like to talk about the jobs that the public sector "creates", but they don't bother to tell you that that's the reason your property taxes go up when states cut back on aid to cities. They don't bother to tell you that ridiculous teacher contracts are the reason school boards get to lay on levies, often times without a vote, to increase your taxes even more. The reason we are 6 feet tall in a 20 foot puddle of sh:t is that people in government like to give away money to people and projects that they have no business giving money to. The ability to collectively bargain pensions & work rules for public sector employees is just one more example of this.
I don't disagree that the size of gov needs to be controlled. Little of the unions power lies in 'how many' positions are held. That's legislative. They're more like, "okay, now you've created all these employees, you have to treat them fairly". So, yeah, one of the things they fight against are lay-offs. But see, if the government was running efficiently the positions wouldn't be up for lay-offs. So I guess it boils down to the inherent inefficiency of a government versus the inherent greediness of corporations. I haven't really checked stats, but know that our state employees raises and benefits have not gone higher than the private sectors. Our unions fight to keep us from falling too far behind cost of living increases.

And shame on you...you should be happy your community sees the value in paying their teachers a decent wage.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#19REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 1:49 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#20REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 1:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#21 Feb 21 2011 at 2:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
That's debatable. I'm curious are you commissioned based? How much have you posted on this site during work hours?

I think we all know the answers.

Is someone a little butthurt that someone else has a job that not only pays him for his work but also provides him time to post?

I think we all know the answers. It's not even debatable :)
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#22 Feb 21 2011 at 2:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
Which is why nearly 50% of Wisc public educators send their own kids to private schools.

Cite? Seems unlikely since a 2004 study showed that 29% of Milwaukee teachers used private schools and I doubt that number shoots up to 70% in Madison or something.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#23 Feb 21 2011 at 2:28 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
varusword75 wrote:
How much have you posted on this site during work hours?
If you had a point here you would have been better off not making it during business hours on a Monday.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#24 Feb 21 2011 at 2:34 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Elinda, Joped, Nadenu, Debo, and co. blissfully ignore this
Quote:
You want to make a decent living? Go out and be productive.
they really do think everyone deserves this or that. The thought that people should have to work for what they makes them cringe.

What's going on in Wisc is a microcosm of Obamanomics.

What the fuck? I haven't even posted in this thread.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#25REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 3:05 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#26REDACTED, Posted: Feb 21 2011 at 3:07 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) bsphil,
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 248 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (248)