Senate Leaves Town

[Pell Mell]

The Senate Democrats don't like a bill that they can't defeat so rather than lose the vote they take a powder.

Imagine if the US Senate did this. They should all be impeached and thrown out of office.

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/116390569.html

[mostpost]

The Senate Democrats don't like a bill that they can't defeat so rather than lose the vote they take a powder.

Imagine if the US Senate did this. They should all be impeached and thrown out of office.

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/116390569.html
The ones who should be impeached and thrown out of office are Gov. Walker and the Republicans in the Wisconsin legislature. It is a disgrace that they are trying to take a fundamental right away from the workers of Wisconsin. Not only would they not have the right to strike, but they would not even be able to present their case in a unified manner. Furthermore the legislation calls for an increase in employee contribution to the pension and health care fund that would be equal to a 20% cut in salary.

Make no mistake this is not about finances. This is about breaking the unions and stealing democracy from the people of Wisconsin. If the only way for the democratic members of the legislature to prevent this travesty was to leave town, then I commend them for doing so.

Wisconsin has the power to recall their governor. I suggest they get started on that project posthaste.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... they are trying to take a fundamental right away from the workers...

Hey, I don't mean to stray here - but give me a break. I'm not talking about the article, but this "fundamental right" garbage.

Two words and one expression, both being rendered obsolete, like so many others by this bastardization of speech in the name of hyperbole.

[lamboguy]

we have lost our rights with patriot acts, ice, and healthcare. that doesn't make it right for these guys to take a dixie because they are afraid to vote. you might as well hand the constition over.


gold still going to $1600

[johnhannibalsmith]

Okay, I feel better now. Heart rate feels fairly normal. Sorry Mostpost. Pet Peeve #6,235,523 got me, yet, I'm the first to get annoyed when people drag two or three words out of seven paragraphs and expect someone to defend it as thought it were the thesis.

:kiss:

[ArlJim78]

they should put out an amber alert for the bus.

this is a great thing they're doing up there, and about time. same for what's going on in Ohio. We can't be held hostage by these unions anymore. people who make less money and have much crappier benefits are just sick and tired of the unions holding a gun to our heads and asking us to pony up so that they can still get all their cola's and not have to contribute for health care and defined benefit pensions, etc, etc.
If they don't come to work, fire them.

oh and I forgot the best part, so that they can get involved in politics with 90% of the money going to democrats. the largest source of political donations in the country by far, good ole unions.

[mostpost]

Hey, I don't mean to stray here - but give me a break. I'm not talking about the article, but this "fundamental right" garbage.

Two words and one expression, both being rendered obsolete, like so many others by this bastardization of speech in the name of hyperbole.

No hyperbole intended. The right to form a union and collectively bargain is guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. The power of Congress to enact that law is found in guess where? Right!!! The commerce clause of the United States Constitution. That makes it a fundamental right.
I would also argue that the following could be used to establish this right.
The first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, (assembly could mean to join together in a common cause.)
The ninth amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. (Here we see that a right does not need to be written in the Constitution for it to exist.)
Finally the thirteenth amendment:
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. (Now we may not have to worry about slavery anymore, but involuntary servitude includes being forced to work for substandard wages and being powerless to change your condition.) All in all there are many references in law and in the Constitution which establish the right to bargain collectively as a fundamental human right.

[johnhannibalsmith]

"negotiated concession"

"explicit liberty"

I appreciate your post, really, I do. As much as I love the Constitution, I find the use of "fundamental right" to be abused on a daily basis - the Constitution grants liberties, our "fundamental rights" are those which we are born with as humans. All of us. Our country is superior to many insofar as the laws of the land uphold those rights by granting us the liberty to utilize and pursue those inherent rights.

Now, we can debate what rights are a human born with... No let's not... I've already disrupted the thread enough...

Darn you for replying!!!!!!! :mad: :mad:




:lol:

[mostpost]

they should put out an amber alert for the bus.

this is a great thing they're doing up there, and about time. same for what's going on in Ohio. We can't be held hostage by these unions anymore. people who make less money and have much crappier benefits are just sick and tired of the unions holding a gun to our heads and asking us to pony up so that they can still get all their cola's and not have to contribute for health care and defined benefit pensions, etc, etc.
If they don't come to work, fire them.

oh and I forgot the best part, so that they can get involved in politics with 90% of the money going to democrats. the largest source of political donations in the country by far, good ole unions.
If you are unhappy with the money you make and the benefits you have, I have a suggestion. JOIN A UNION.. It is the height of stupidity to criticize unions for getting good salaries and benefits for their members and then turn around and complain that you don't have those same benefits. When unions (private sector unions) were strong workers had good pay and benefits. And, you know what? Companies prospered too.

We had sustained growth in our economy from the forties until Reagan took over and instituted supply side economics, and started attacking unions. Since then we have had much less growth and much more bad times.

All this is not just because of the attack on unions by big business and their lackeys, the Republicans. It is our fault too. Short sighted and foolish workers said, "I don't need to join a union. I have good pay and benefits. I'll the money I pay on union dues." The union busters played on this selfishness telling those workers that the "marketplace" will keep wages high. And they (the workers) fell for it. Now those same union busters are trying to drive a wedge between public sector unions and private sector unions. Anyone who does not see what is happening is a fool.

[ArlJim78]

I want to be paid based on my own merit and wouldn't join a union under any circumstance. nothing looks more stupid to me than a bunch of grown men and women walking around the front of a business holding signs announcing to the world that they are not going to work because of some injustice. fine don't work, quit and find something else. i can't stand the whiner mentality.

the union ideal is, hold hostage the company or government body with the threat of work stoppages or slowdowns in order to gain more pay and benefits than the membership is otherwise worth, and also to use their dues to payoff politicians and buy elections to make sure nobody rocks the boat.

they've failed in the private sector, but found a healthy host to bleed dry in the public sector. now that there is no more money in the public sector we're going to see this whining play out all over the country.

[JustRalph]

elections have consequences.......haven't you heard ?

The Repubs took over many states last November. This is just the beginning.

Carry on!!

[ArlJim78]

860 administrators and priniciples in Wisconsin make over $100K per year in salary.

http://dpi.state.wi.us/lbstat/newasr.html

[ArlJim78]

selective outrage here we come!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsnLfsbbM&feature=player_embedded

71gsnLfsbbM

[riskman]

mostpost does not understand that it is only a matter of time before that the states money runs out and the ultimate reality hits, that there is no free lunch.Look at the riots raging in various countries in Europe, when the money runs out and the truth is finally revealed.That is what is starting to happen here in the states, with the public sector jobs. You cannot have generous welfare state laws that allow people to retire on government pensions while they are in their 50s, in an era when most people live decades longer. As far as health insurance is concerned, Medicare kicks in at 65 then usually the state provides a medigap policy for prescription drugs and other related costs limited under Medicare.
In the United States, this kind of generosity exists mostly for members of state government employees' unions .

Once you buy the idea that the government should be a sort of year-around Santa Claus, you have bought the kinds of consequences that are happening in Wisconsin. As JR put it, is only the beginning. Many other states will follow.
You either ask for increase contributions, reduction in benefits, or higher taxes or all to keep solvent.If the Unions balk let them set up their own plans for their members. Let the Unions bid out the Pension Health,Dental, Disability and other benis and see what the value represents.Let them realize what all of this is worth and in many cases the majority of the costs are paid for by
the taxpayers.

[boxcar]

The ones who should be impeached and thrown out of office are Gov. Walker and the Republicans in the Wisconsin legislature. It is a disgrace that they are trying to take a fundamental right away from the workers of Wisconsin. Not only would they not have the right to strike, but they would not even be able to present their case in a unified manner. Furthermore the legislation calls for an increase in employee contribution to the pension and health care fund that would be equal to a 20% cut in salary.

Make no mistake this is not about finances. This is about breaking the unions and stealing democracy from the people of Wisconsin. If the only way for the democratic members of the legislature to prevent this travesty was to leave town, then I commend them for doing so.

Wisconsin has the power to recall their governor. I suggest they get started on that project posthaste.

Hear! Hear! Spoken like a true card-carryin' CPUSA member. :lol: :lol:

By the way the contribution to their pension would only be 12%, not 20%. And those poor overpaid/underworked employees would still have enough money left over in the paychecks for a night or two out at McDonalds. :D

And no publicly paid employee has any "fundamental right" to strike. If they don't like the rules of the game, let them quit and find jobs in the private sector. I'm sure there would be no shortages of unemployed, qualified applicants to fill those positions.

Kudos to the Governor and the Repugs in the senate to level the playing the field. It's called, Mosty, trickle up pain, or trickle up misery. It's called sharing the pain and misery of those in the private sector.

Kudos to the Gov and Republican senate for having the courage to the right thing and at the same time drive a nail in the coffin of unions!

And if anyone should be recalled, it should be the yellow belly cowards who ran out the door. They're no better than their democratic counterparts in the U.S. who pass legislation without reading.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

No hyperbole intended. The right to form a union and collectively bargain is guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. The power of Congress to enact that law is found in guess where? Right!!! The commerce clause of the United States Constitution. That makes it a fundamental right.
I would also argue that the following could be used to establish this right.
The first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, (assembly could mean to join together in a common cause.)
The ninth amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. (Here we see that a right does not need to be written in the Constitution for it to exist.)
Finally the thirteenth amendment:
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. (Now we may not have to worry about slavery anymore, but involuntary servitude includes being forced to work for substandard wages and being powerless to change your condition.) All in all there are many references in law and in the Constitution which establish the right to bargain collectively as a fundamental human right.

No one is infringing on their right to free speech. The can assemble peacefully before work, during their lunch hour or after work -- and on the days off. :p

And I would remind what the Gipper thought about public employees striking. :p They didn't haul him off to jail for infringing on anyone's rights. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

If you are unhappy with the money you make and the benefits you have, I have a suggestion. JOIN A UNION.

Question, Mr Wizard.
What happens, when, like in Wisconson, there is NO MONEY?

Or GM and Chrysler, you then rely on others to pay you tribuye while THEY SUFFER?

Nice selfish attitude - you see, this is why I hate unions - you guys are miserable excuses for people. Screw everyone as long as you get yours.
HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT?

[newtothegame]

Question, Mr Wizard.
What happens, when, like in Wisconson, there is NO MONEY?

Or GM and Chrysler, you then rely on others to pay you tribuye while THEY SUFFER?

Nice selfish attitude - you see, this is why I hate unions - you guys are miserable excuses for people. Screw everyone as long as you get yours.
HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT?


Your speaking in terms that mosty does NOT understand.....
You see, its ok to redistribute wealth, as long as its NOT MOSTY and his crew pitching in.
It's ok to take and take and take...but when the coffers run dry, they dont understand why others do not want to bail them out.
Mosty and his union buddies will consistently bash companies for hoarding their cash reserves.....well Wisconsin is the alternative to that. Ohio...right behind them.
See mosty...there is no balance in the unions.....
Unions want want want and want....now the rooster is coming home to roost.
And in wisconsin, the PUBLIC sector will suffer this blow because its not private industry that the state has to pay....
State Broke = no pay for state employees or massive layoffs.
I believe gov Walker said the alternative will be some 6000 layoffs....
Way to go UNIONS!!

[NJ Stinks]

I agree that the benefits negotiated by state government employees are no longer affordable and must be scaled back.

However, I think it's fair to consider the reasons why their benefits are no longer affordable. Here are 3 reasons for sure:

1. De-regulation of the banking industry led to the present recession. The recession has led to less tax revenue at the federal and state level.

2. The Iraq War caused the national debt to soar. Now it is fashionable to say we just can't afford stuff - after all, our federal deficit is frightening.

3. Tax cuts and the related capital gains tax cuts from Reagan through GWB have butchered the amount of tax $$'s available to be sent from the federal government to state governments around the country. This lack of state funding from Washington trickles down alright. All the way down to the property taxes we have all seen so dramatically rise in the last two decades.

At any rate, if we were really interested in everybody sharing the pain, we would have deep-sixed the Bush tax cuts. But we didn't, did we? :rolleyes:

[newtothegame]

As to the COWARDS that ran out of state and didnt vote....they should be tried. And they will....by their constituency!!
See, they forgot one thing.....the past election was the american public as a majority saying this had to happen.
And the dems can run from this vote...but they cant run from the vote by their constiutients in their districts!!

[newtothegame]

I agree that the benefits negotiated by state government employees are no longer affordable and must be scaled back.

However, I think it's fair to consider the reasons why their benefits are no longer affordable. Here are 3 reasons for sure:

1. De-regulation of the banking industry led to the present recession. The recession has led to less tax revenue at the federal and state level.

2. The Iraq War caused the national debt to soar. Now it is fashionable to say we just can't afford stuff - after all, our federal deficit is frightening.

3. Tax cuts and the related capital gains tax cuts from Reagan through GWB have butchered the amount of tax $$'s available to be sent from the federal government to state governments around the country. This lack of state funding from Washington trickles down alright. All the way down to the property taxes we have all seen so dramatically rise in the last two decades.

At any rate, if we were really interested in everybody sharing the pain, we would have deep-sixed the Bush tax cuts. But we didn't, did we? :rolleyes:

OK NJ.....please explain how the items you listed affect WISCONSINS state budget....
Or is it your contintion that by the federal budget being screwed up (not being able to bail out state budgets) being the issue here??

[mostpost]

And I would remind what the Gipper thought about public employees striking. They didn't haul him off to jail for infringing on anyone's rights.
I don't know what the Gipper thought about public employees striking. He was a college football player in the twenties. I doubt if he thought about it at all. If you're talking about the "B" movie actor who played a part, I don't care what he thought about it. They also didn't haul him off to jail selling arms to Iraq illegally and giving that money to the contranistas, also illegally. Nor did they haul him off to jail for lying to congress.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Before Watson finally made the cut, several other tried before him without success, most prominently, NJ Stinks:





http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/image001.jpg



What is Eye Raq War, Al Ex?

*BING*

What is Bush Tax Cut S, Al Ex?

*BING*

What is Gree Dee Ban Ker, Al Ex?

*BING*



Whoooaa, back there Rosie, wait for the category.

[boxcar]

I don't know what the Gipper thought about public employees striking. He was a college football player in the twenties. I doubt if he thought about it at all. If you're talking about the "B" movie actor who played a part, I don't care what he thought about it. They also didn't haul him off to jail selling arms to Iraq illegally and giving that money to the contranistas, also illegally. Nor did they haul him off to jail for lying to congress.

Bone up on your history. He fired the air traffic controllers for striking. So, yeah, he did think about it. :rolleyes: He was my kinda guy. :ThmbUp:

Yeah, it's amazing what presidents can get away with. Just look at the current joker in the WH. And Clinton wasn't much better, as he thought nothing about getting serviced in the Oval Room.

Don't worry, Mosty, it's all good. It's called evolution. The dinosaurs known as unions are on the way out. They lived well beyond their usefulness. Sorry, but you might have to wait another 100 years or so for a workers revolution. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[delayjf]

However, I think it's fair to consider the reasons why their benefits are no longer affordable.

Your reasons are debatable.

If Unions want to cling to their current levels of pay and benefits, fine I don't want to hear them complain when states are forced into massive layoffs. If that happens in Wisc, I wonder how many in the 100k club would get the ax. The only thing I am absolutely against is any kind of Federal Bailout, let the States make the hard decisions.

[NJ Stinks]

OK NJ.....please explain how the items you listed affect WISCONSINS state budget....
Or is it your contintion that by the federal budget being screwed up (not being able to bail out state budgets) being the issue here??

OK, I'll try to explain it. The less money Washington has to appropriate to states like Wisconsin for all kinds of necessities like education, Medicaid, transportation, etc., the more money the residents of Wisconsin have to come up with themselves to pay for these expenses. (Either come up with the money or take the quality of life hit.) Meanwhile, Wisconsin still has all of it's other expenses to pay too including, of course, state employee salaries and benefits.

As for the recession's affect on Wisconsin (and all states), I'll paste from an article that explains it well:
__________________________________

First, the economy matters.

In Washington, conservatives love to bemoan the deficits that Washington has run up under President Obama, but they downplay the leading cause – the deep recession which caused federal revenues to collapse. That’s the main reason that the federal deficit soared from $459 billion in fiscal 2008 to $1.4 trillion a year later – not the return of "big government," as Obama’s critics would have us believe.

Leading conservatives ignore the same reality at the state level. In Sunday’s Washington Post, columnist George F. Will deplored (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/23/AR2010122304421.html) the state of state finances without noting that the recession caused state revenues to fall at an alarming rate. As the New York Times explained (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/opinion/26sun1.html?pagewanted=print) in an editorial yesterday, "over the past two years, combined sales, personal and corporate taxes have fallen by more than 10 percent."

By ignoring the reality of falling revenues in generating deficits, conservatives can ignore the role of revenues in addressing them – which leads to the next point.

Second, revenues matter.

Conservatives in Washington often decry the deficit as a "spending problem," and they largely dismiss the notion of raising taxes to address it. Obama’s bipartisan fiscal commission, another commission created by the private Bipartisan Policy Center, and mainstream budget experts of the right and left all believe tax increases must be part of a deficit-cutting effort. But this has not swayed most inside-the-Beltway conservative lawmakers.

Here's the link to the entire article. It addresses the health and pension benefits problem as it relates to public employees too.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Blogs/Capital-Exchange/2010/12/27/Capital-Exchange-State-Budget-Crisis-Offers-Lessons-for-Washington.aspx

[newtothegame]

OK, I'll try to explain it. The less money Washington has to appropriate to states like Wisconsin for all kinds of necessities like education, Medicaid, transportation, etc., the more money the residents of Wisconsin have to come up with themselves to pay for these expenses. (Either come up with the money or take the quality of life hit.) Meanwhile, Wisconsin still has all of it's other expenses to pay too including, of course, state employee salaries and benefits.



Ok, so lets look at your post in parts as I am a bit getting old lol....
You say....

" the less money Washington has to appropriate to states like Wisconsin...."

lets look at that for a moment...where do you think the fed gets money from to appropriate to states??? I would hope you would answer TAXES from the people......

Then you say...

"the more money the residents of Wisconsin have to come up with themselves to pay for these expenses. (Either come up with the money or take the quality of life hit.)"

So, wait a minute....on one hand you say the people can pay taxes to the feds which can go back to the states and thats ok....but its not ok for the residents to pay taxes to the state which will pay for their programs???
WTFFF lol

Are you feeling alright NJ?
Or, is it your continition that because the feds coffers are bigger and more wide spread that it doesnt affect the wisconsin residents as much?? Redistribution again??? Really??
What about the other states who are facing huge deficits if this is your arguement??

[newtothegame]

As to the rest of your article....I will just say this....

We will ALL have to tighten our belts in one fashion or another. I am not TOTALLY opposed to a tax hike.....

BUT (and thats a big but)...I want to see waste and all the other NON essential programs trashed first.

Today I read a storry where 111 people were charged with some 250 million plus dollars in medicaid fraud. That's just the tip of the ice berg. Now 250 million might not seem like a big drop in our vast deficit nowadays...but im sure it would solve alot of wisconsins problems without ever raising a single tax!!!

[mostpost]

Bone up on your history. He fired the air traffic controllers for striking. So, yeah, he did think about it. :rolleyes: He was my kinda guy. :ThmbUp:

Yeah, it's amazing what presidents can get away with. Just look at the current joker in the WH. And Clinton wasn't much better, as he thought nothing about getting serviced in the Oval Room.

Don't worry, Mosty, it's all good. It's called evolution. The dinosaurs known as unions are on the way out. They lived well beyond their usefulness. Sorry, but you might have to wait another 100 years or so for a workers revolution. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar
Once again you don't get it. I was making fun of you for thinking Reagan was the Gipper just because he played the part in a movie.

[NJ Stinks]

Are you feeling alright NJ?
Or, is it your continition that because the feds coffers are bigger and more wide spread that it doesnt affect the wisconsin residents as much?? Redistribution again??? Really??
What about the other states who are facing huge deficits if this is your arguement??



I guess I'm not feeling alright.

All I'm trying to say is that in good times the federal government takes a good portion of it's federal tax revenues and sends the money back to the states. This federal tax money defrays the cost of many expensive state programs which is great because it means the states do not have tax their residents as much or cut funding for various state programs.

In bad times like we have now states do have to increase state taxes on their residents or cut funding for various state programs because the federal government just doesn't have the cash it once had to help the states out.

The other thing to clear up, if possible, is that the residents of a state are still going to pay federal taxes no matter what. And they are still going to pay state taxes no matter what too. The point I'm trying to make is that the more the federal government sends back to a state, the less the state will have to tax their residents or cut programs. Thus, the state's residents pay less in state taxes! (Note I did not say anywhere that it's not OK for states to tax their residents and use the money to pay for state projects.)

I hope I made myself clear but I'm not betting a nickel that I did. ;)

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
I hope I made myself clear but I'm not betting a nickel that I did. ;)

I'll loan you a dime if you answer this serious question for me.

First the prelude:

You are obviously very much in favor of government intervening (not necessaril a negative connotation, please continue on) in the lives of its citizens, for better or for worse. I don't think I'm out of line characterizing you as someone, one of very many, that feels like government should essentially do everything possible to tie up all the loose ends and provide as much as possible for what you consider "essential".

Obviously, we are at opposite ends of that spectrum, so here goes:

I would probably prefer a guy like the Governor that you have, not that he's my hero, but you get the point.

You love Nancy Pelosi and the other corpse in Nevada, people that think a lot like you do.

Here comes the question part:

Don't you really think it would just be easier if you lived somewhere with someone like Pelosi/Reid as the CEO and you paid almost all of your taxes to them? People like you, with a common vision of government, all huddled up in Old Jersey with Pelosi, paying your taxes to subsidze social programs and taxing the hell out of anyone with more than a credit card to their name?

Wouldn't it just be easier if I sat in my hut, paying minimal tax, rubbing cans together for a spark to get the internet connection going, falling in a pool of my own blood without any medical subsidies, and teachers that spend more time explaining the intricacies of a slipknot rather than worrying about the pythagorean theorem?

Can't we let states be States and let the Federal government do what it was intended to do? Do we really need this twisty straw routing of money? Do you really prefer to know that when you pay Federal income taxes that someone in Washington then redirects it back to the states (for a nominal surcharge of course) at the whims of whatever gets between the states and the feds? Wouldn't it just be easier to eliminate about 70% of the central government and give them what they actually need to operate and have your money go directly to YOUR community, Old Jersey, and my money go directly to MY hermit community?

It's mostly rhetorical, but man, I read your post above and it sounds like a guy that would be better off just getting what he thinks he needs along with the people that agree with him and paying for it. Like they did in Old Jersey.

Being a liberal doesn't mean that some conservative principles aren't the best solution to the massive chasm we have.

[mostpost]

I guess I'm not feeling alright.

All I'm trying to say is that in good times the federal government takes a good portion of it's federal tax revenues and sends the money back to the states. This federal tax money defrays the cost of many expensive state programs which is great because it means the states do not have tax their residents as much or cut funding for various state programs.

In bad times like we have now states do have to increase state taxes on their residents or cut funding for various state programs because the federal government just doesn't have the cash it once had to help the states out.

The other thing to clear up, if possible, is that the residents of a state are still going to pay federal taxes no matter what. And they are still going to pay state taxes no matter what too. The point I'm trying to make is that the more the federal government sends back to a state, the less the state will have to tax their residents or cut programs. Thus, the state's residents pay less in state taxes! (Note I did not say anywhere that it's not OK for states to tax their residents and use the money to pay for state projects.)

I hope I made myself clear but I'm not betting a nickel that I did. ;)
You made yourself clear, but they still won't understand. Guys like newtothegame and Tom and Boxcar and ArlJim78 don't understand the idea of one nation, indivisible. They would be the first to call you out if you did not stand and place your hand over your heart for the recitation of the Pledge of allegiance. But in their real lives they consider the United part of United States to be an inconvenient fiction.

So money collected in Louisiana ought to be spent in Louisiana. If there is a surplus it should be given back to the residents of Louisiana. If New York needs that money too bad for New York. In their minds, New York is like a different country altogether. We are not one nation, indivisible, we are a collection of fiefdoms. In their minds.

[newtothegame]

I guess I'm not feeling alright.

All I'm trying to say is that in good times the federal government takes a good portion of it's federal tax revenues and sends the money back to the states. This federal tax money defrays the cost of many expensive state programs which is great because it means the states do not have tax their residents as much or cut funding for various state programs.

In bad times like we have now states do have to increase state taxes on their residents or cut funding for various state programs because the federal government just doesn't have the cash it once had to help the states out.

The other thing to clear up, if possible, is that the residents of a state are still going to pay federal taxes no matter what. And they are still going to pay state taxes no matter what too. The point I'm trying to make is that the more the federal government sends back to a state, the less the state will have to tax their residents or cut programs. Thus, the state's residents pay less in state taxes! (Note I did not say anywhere that it's not OK for states to tax their residents and use the money to pay for state projects.)

I hope I made myself clear but I'm not betting a nickel that I did. ;)

LOL...your back to the same point which I made in earlier post....
You say in good times the feds can take money and send it back to the states so the states dont have to tax its citizens....
So, what it comes down too...(and my point by the way)....does it really make a difference if the feds are getting the tax dollars from citizens (then returning to states), or the states getting tax dollars to pay for their own programs?? You might so "well its basically the same"...
ITS NOT the same....
By adding a level of bureacracy (the fed playing middle man), your costing even more money to pay for those added government employees. You upping cost such as paper, machinery etc etc at the federal level which in turn only cost taxpayers MORE taxes....
This is in essence the arguement of cons....
LESS GOVERNMENT means more in our own pockets.

What I do not think you are understanding NJ is that can you please show a period of time where the government who collected more in taxes, gave back more in taxes to its states??
By the feds "growing" itself, it only creates a bigger monster that needs to eat more and more. There are more government employees now then ever...and increasing daily. This is not the way to go! The government can only pay itself through taxation. The bigger it gets...the more it needs from its citizens. The more citizens pay, the less they have to spend in the economy. Everything spirals downward when government grows!

Now you would argue that big government is needed for things like roads and infrastructure...agreed!!!
But I do not need the government dictating what I eat....
What insurances I have to buy....
etc etc....
They have blown this to unprecedented levels and no sign of BIG government getting even bigger!

[newtothegame]

You made yourself clear, but they still won't understand. Guys like newtothegame and Tom and Boxcar and ArlJim78 don't understand the idea of one nation, indivisible. They would be the first to call you out if you did not stand and place your hand over your heart for the recitation of the Pledge of allegiance. But in their real lives they consider the United part of United States to be an inconvenient fiction.

So money collected in Louisiana ought to be spent in Louisiana. If there is a surplus it should be given back to the residents of Louisiana. If New York needs that money too bad for New York. In their minds, New York is like a different country altogether. We are not one nation, indivisible, we are a collection of fiefdoms. In their minds.
Wheres the ONE NATION INDIVISIBLE ATTITUDE with the unions in wisconsin who dont want to help with that huge deficit???

[newtothegame]

You made yourself clear, but they still won't understand. Guys like newtothegame and Tom and Boxcar and ArlJim78 don't understand the idea of one nation, indivisible. They would be the first to call you out if you did not stand and place your hand over your heart for the recitation of the Pledge of allegiance. But in their real lives they consider the United part of United States to be an inconvenient fiction.

So money collected in Louisiana ought to be spent in Louisiana. If there is a surplus it should be given back to the residents of Louisiana. If New York needs that money too bad for New York. In their minds, New York is like a different country altogether. We are not one nation, indivisible, we are a collection of fiefdoms. In their minds.

I never once said that LOUISIANA money should be kept here.....(although its a thought :)

But please...show me some rational (without using key words like patriotism etc etc why a state who is running efficiently should give to a state who is not???
Especially when poorly run state has massive fraud and rampant corruption shown in it....
Why should a good run business prop up a bad run business?
Cause its "american"???
Get real mosty....
The american dream is not about running a successful business so you can take care of a poorly run one....

[mostpost]

Question, Mr Wizard.
What happens, when, like in Wisconson, there is NO MONEY?

Or GM and Chrysler, you then rely on others to pay you tribuye while THEY SUFFER?

Nice selfish attitude - you see, this is why I hate unions - you guys are miserable excuses for people. Screw everyone as long as you get yours.
HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT?


But there is money in Wisconsin. According to the non partisan Wisconsin Budget Office, there is a surplus of more than $120M in the current budget. There is a projected shortfall of $137M in next year's budget. That was caused by the unions demands for huge pay increases. NO. WAIT!! It wasn't. It was caused because governor Walker and the Republican dominated state legislature granted $140M in tax breaks to businesses in Wisconsin. So you have a governor who is trying to blame the unions for asking too much, (in reality there have been no demands by the unions) while at the same time giving away money to business.

To answer your last question, I sleep very well. I sleep well because I know that your portrayal of me and union workers, in general, is false. You may have some deep seated need to believe that portrayal, but just remember that it is false.

[mostpost]

Wheres the ONE NATION INDIVISIBLE ATTITUDE with the unions in wisconsin who dont want to help with that huge deficit???
See my #36.

[newtothegame]

See my #36.
But you know mosty....the indivisable blah blah rant you made holds no water if the slaraies arent indivisible too...right??
I mean thats your arguement when it comes to big business...so why should it be any different for people?
Now lets see...I wonder what the average salary is for a state union employee...versus and average private wisconsin employee....hmmmmmm....
Shouldnt the higher paid employee give more??? I mean thats your arguement with redistribution and business!!! Now if I can just find those wage scales to find out which makes more...wisconsin state union worker...or privatized citizen....hmmmm

[johnhannibalsmith]

.... the idea of one nation, indivisible. ...

Yes, this current system of having political hacks cut up all the money in DC and what they don't steal they squander... and in the meantime, we all bitch about it amongst ourselves, drawing one line with two sides, perpetually divided over the same stupid nonsense...

...yes, a strong central government, an out of control central government certainly promotes unity.

One dimensional logic at its finest.

[mostpost]

I never once said that LOUISIANA money should be kept here.....(although its a thought :)

But please...show me some rational (without using key words like patriotism etc etc why a state who is running efficiently should give to a state who is not???
Especially when poorly run state has massive fraud and rampant corruption shown in it....
Why should a good run business prop up a bad run business?
Cause its "american"???
Get real mosty....
The american dream is not about running a successful business so you can take care of a poorly run one....
Actually, it is much more likely that New York would be contributing to Louisiana.
it is not necessarily true that a state with a large deficit is being run inefficiently. A state which lacks a good source of revenue may not have sufficient funds to cover necessary expenses. It may turn out all the lights, cut staff to the minimum, provide less services, but there is a point at which it must still function or cease to exist. A state cannot cease to exist. A business can.

Can you give me specific examples of the fraud and corruption in Wisconsin that have caused the present crisis. I already know about the $140M payoff to businesses. And I already know that the three unions exempted from Walker's bill are Police, Fire and State Troopers. Here is a funny coincidence. They were the three unions that supported his candidacy.

[mostpost]

But you know mosty....the indivisable blah blah rant you made holds no water if the slaraies arent indivisible too...right??
I mean thats your arguement when it comes to big business...so why should it be any different for people?
Now lets see...I wonder what the average salary is for a state union employee...versus and average private wisconsin employee....hmmmmmm....
Shouldnt the higher paid employee give more??? I mean thats your arguement with redistribution and business!!! Now if I can just find those wage scales to find out which makes more...wisconsin state union worker...or privatized citizen....hmmmm

The question, my dear Newt, is why are the salaries of public sector workers higher. Earlier this evening I found a chart which compared the salaries of workers in the Public sector with those in the private sector over a period of years. Don't recall exactly when it started. The chart was made by the CATO
institute. Not a liberal institution.

They pointed out that the salaries of the two groups rose in virtual lockstep from the beginning of the graph to 1980. After that the wages of the public sector rose much more rapidly. They used this to make the case that public sector unions were making money at the expense of the private sector. But, what you see if you look at the graph is that the rate of increase over the past thirty years for public sector employees is almost identical to the rate for the previous period. It is the salaries of the private sector workers that have failed to keep pace.

If you insist I will find that graph and post it tomorrow. Now I am going to bed.

[newtothegame]

Actually, it is much more likely that New York would be contributing to Louisiana.
it is not necessarily true that a state with a large deficit is being run inefficiently. A state which lacks a good source of revenue may not have sufficient funds to cover necessary expenses. It may turn out all the lights, cut staff to the minimum, provide less services, but there is a point at which it must still function or cease to exist. A state cannot cease to exist. A business can.

Can you give me specific examples of the fraud and corruption in Wisconsin that have caused the present crisis. I already know about the $140M payoff to businesses. And I already know that the three unions exempted from Walker's bill are Police, Fire and State Troopers. Here is a funny coincidence. They were the three unions that supported his candidacy.

ANY fraud that happens in Wisconsin causes this type of thing.....
Fraud cost taxpayers money.

here is one in the mortgage industry which cost banks....
small but fraud none the less....
And gee...who did uncle same have to bail out recently at tax payer expenses...BANKS...
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/article_8b55fe78-4360-11df-a37c-001cc4c002e0.html
There is 8 million in ONE case.....
If you want more, you can find them...your fingers work too....
Point is EVERY state has them.....
And they COST someone......
Every state in the U.S needs to get its house in order.....
Crack down on fraud...increase penalties and sentencing.....make them think twice before they steal...
As I said earlier, I listened to a story where 111 people were charged with over 250 million in medicaid fraud....wonder how that would help wisconsin about now???

[newtothegame]

The question, my dear Newt, is why are the salaries of public sector workers higher. Earlier this evening I found a chart which compared the salaries of workers in the Public sector with those in the private sector over a period of years. Don't recall exactly when it started. The chart was made by the CATO
institute. Not a liberal institution.

They pointed out that the salaries of the two groups rose in virtual lockstep from the beginning of the graph to 1980. After that the wages of the public sector rose much more rapidly. They used this to make the case that public sector unions were making money at the expense of the private sector. But, what you see if you look at the graph is that the rate of increase over the past thirty years for public sector employees is almost identical to the rate for the previous period. It is the salaries of the private sector workers that have failed to keep pace.

If you insist I will find that graph and post it tomorrow. Now I am going to bed.

So with the above...and YOUR LOGIC that because businesses make more they should shoulder more, then shouldnt public employees shoulder more because they make more????

[NJ Stinks]

I'll loan you a dime if you answer this serious question for me.

First the prelude:

You are obviously very much in favor of government intervening (not necessaril a negative connotation, please continue on) in the lives of its citizens, for better or for worse. I don't think I'm out of line characterizing you as someone, one of very many, that feels like government should essentially do everything possible to tie up all the loose ends and provide as much as possible for what you consider "essential".

Obviously, we are at opposite ends of that spectrum, so here goes:

I would probably prefer a guy like the Governor that you have, not that he's my hero, but you get the point.

You love Nancy Pelosi and the other corpse in Nevada, people that think a lot like you do.

Here comes the question part:

Don't you really think it would just be easier if you lived somewhere with someone like Pelosi/Reid as the CEO and you paid almost all of your taxes to them? People like you, with a common vision of government, all huddled up in Old Jersey with Pelosi, paying your taxes to subsidze social programs and taxing the hell out of anyone with more than a credit card to their name?

Yes, it would be easier.

Wouldn't it just be easier if I sat in my hut, paying minimal tax, rubbing cans together for a spark to get the internet connection going, falling in a pool of my own blood without any medical subsidies, and teachers that spend more time explaining the intricacies of a slipknot rather than worrying about the pythagorean theorem?

Yes, it would be easier. Although your shot at teachers wasn't necessary.

Can't we let states be States and let the Federal government do what it was intended to do? Do we really need this twisty straw routing of money? Do you really prefer to know that when you pay Federal income taxes that someone in Washington then redirects it back to the states (for a nominal surcharge of course) at the whims of whatever gets between the states and the feds? Wouldn't it just be easier to eliminate about 70% of the central government and give them what they actually need to operate and have your money go directly to YOUR community, Old Jersey, and my money go directly to MY hermit community?

It's mostly rhetorical, but man, I read your post above and it sounds like a guy that would be better off just getting what he thinks he needs along with the people that agree with him and paying for it. Like they did in Old Jersey.

The problem with not routing the money through Washington is that most of the Red States would not have enough money to provide the basic services for many of their residents that one might hope for in 21st Century America.

Certainly life would be easier for many of us if we didn't care about other Americans outside our state borders. For instance, Arizona could pay to protect it's own border instead of crying for help from the rest of us. Or Florida could pay (or not pay) for medical expenses it's seniors incur (once their Medicare tax payments over the years are exceeded by their medical expenses, of course). Or do you think Florida can afford all by it's lonesome to have no personal income taxes and still have so many seniors enjoying the sunshine within it's borders? Or do you think Alaska could stand on it's own at all without federal subsidies?

Being a liberal doesn't mean that some conservative principles aren't the best solution to the massive chasm we have.

Conservative principles would be great if everybody really could stand on their own two feet.

[newtothegame]

Conservative principles would be great if everybody really could stand on their own two feet.

Gee, I wonder how anyone ever survived withoout bloated government???
I mean who was here to take care of the pilgrims when they came to north american shores??
People will never learn to stand on their feet if they are not forced to do so NJ.
Thats the areguement most of us cons have about the entitlement programs.
People have become dependent on those programs because they are there.
There are generations of families on the "system".
The private sector is forced to find its own way....(in business terms)....Ie the term entreprenurial (sp) spirit.
When people are challenged, they tend to do rather well....but you have to give them that chance!

[boxcar]

Once again you don't get it. I was making fun of you for thinking Reagan was the Gipper just because he played the part in a movie.

Reagan was often affectionately referred to as the "Gipper" by his admierers because he played that part in a movie. And I'm the one who doesn't get it?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Why do they call Ronald Reagan the Gipper? He is called "the Gipper" because of a part he played in the movie, “Knute Rockne, All American”.

And more:

Another answer to the question, “Why do they call Ronald Reagan the Gipper?” could be that he portrayed in real life some of the characteristics of the role he played as George Gipp. George Gipp (1895-1920) was an athlete at the University of Notre Dame from 1917 to 1920. He started as a baseball player, but was convinced to play football by Coach Knute Rockne. He played both offense and defense, and many of the records that he broke during that legendary season are still standing today.

http://answers.yourdictionary.com/biography/why-do-they-call-ronald-reagan-the-gipper.html

Settle down. I know you had a very tough day yesterday, seeing the screws about to be turned on the unions. If you signed up with the good folks over at the CPUSA, maybe they offer some self-help courses for such days or group therapy or whatever. If not, check in with SEIU. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You made yourself clear, but they still won't understand. Guys like newtothegame and Tom and Boxcar and ArlJim78 don't understand the idea of one nation, indivisible. They would be the first to call you out if you did not stand and place your hand over your heart for the recitation of the Pledge of allegiance. But in their real lives they consider the United part of United States to be an inconvenient fiction.

So money collected in Louisiana ought to be spent in Louisiana. If there is a surplus it should be given back to the residents of Louisiana. If New York needs that money too bad for New York. In their minds, New York is like a different country altogether. We are not one nation, indivisible, we are a collection of fiefdoms. In their minds.

And guys like you, Hcap, NJ, Robert, etc, etc, etc. will never understand states' rights or what "sovereignty" for those states mean -- concepts and principles actually found in the Constitution and not just in the Pledge.

The phrase "United States" simply means a North American republic consisting of 50 sovereign states.

And, yes, in a real sense, we are 50 different countries. Why do you think there are such wide variances in laws among the several states? Why do the people of each state elect their own Chief Executive? Their own congress? Their own county officials, etc., etc. I know you'd like us to be like the old Soviet Union, but we ain't. So, get over it. :rolleyes:

And to compare the 50 states to fiefdoms is beyond absurd. Stay away from those analogies, Mosty. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

I can't quote your quotes since they're in my quotes...

but... you alluded to or directly represented several legitimate functions of the central government (ie border control, a distinctly military function) as examples of why we need central government.

We agree on those, I'm not for anarchy.

Drawing off of Mosite's recent characterization of "fiefdoms" ...the word of the year now that "pivot" and "reset button" have run their course...

...and building on the theme here --

What type of people are happiest?

Those that are all the same and live all the same way? Conservatives want liberals to be conservative, because thats the way it should be. Liberals want conservatives to be liberal because thats the way it should be. Then there's me who just thinks everyone is nuts, including myself, so I'd rather have the freedom to find out what I like by testing the waters here and there.

Or are people happiest when they can lead their lives to their own standards and measures? If you had your utopia, and I had my utopia, Newt had his, and 47 others all had theirs - how is that dividing people?

When we are divided is when we all have these individual tendencies and beliefs, but we spend all of our time deciding which one of us is correct. We're all correct, and damnit, there's just no reason why we can't live that way instead of having ONE overriding "theme" to the entire country that we need to decide best fits EVERYONE.

Do you think that if you lived happily in Lib Village that I wouldn't fight for the rights of the country as a whole? Of course I would, and I suspect that you would reciprocate, because regardless of how we each lead our individual lives - what unites us is the freedom and the lack of central control that forces us into a singular box. We'd all fight to preserve that freedom.

Instead, we're trying to all figure out a way to get everyone into that one box, it changes colors and shapes with this vote or that vote, but its still one box.

That's when people finally have enough and start fighting for freedoms again, individuality, the ability to have lifestyles beyond the scope of simply a) or b), with only one acceptable choice at a time.

We need a bigger, more complicated central government than the one envisioned in the 1770's, but we don't need an all-mighty central government that dictates the terms of our lives as individuals, despite the fact that there is just no need for that type of governance.

I'll bet you back that nickle that we'd be a much stronger, more unified, more productive, and more resolute nation as a unified group of individuals whose big fight in life is to maintain that individuality - rather than fighting over which conformity, which box to get in this year and berating the other side for forcing it upon us.

Good night....... :sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping:

[riskman]

But there is money in Wisconsin. According to the non partisan Wisconsin Budget Office, there is a surplus of more than $120M in the current budget. There is a projected shortfall of $137M in next year's budget. That was caused by the unions demands for huge pay increases. NO. WAIT!! It wasn't. It was caused because governor Walker and the Republican dominated state legislature granted $140M in tax breaks to businesses in Wisconsin. So you have a governor who is trying to blame the unions for asking too much, (in reality there have been no demands by the unions) while at the same time giving away money to business.

To answer your last question, I sleep very well. I sleep well because I know that your portrayal of me and union workers, in general, is false. You may have some deep seated need to believe that portrayal, but just remember that it is false.

Maybe you should read this .BTW Scott Walker has only been in office since Jan 1st.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Wisconsin_state_budget

[boxcar]

Maybe you should read this .BTW Scott Walker has only been in office since Jan 1st.

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Wisconsin_state_budget

And what's really interesting about Gov Walker is that he actually walks the talk. Apparently, he's not only fiscally conservative in his politics but in his private life, as well. According to his wife, he often "brown bags" his lunches. And his ride is an aging Saturn with well over 100K miles on it. It's refreshing, for a change to see a politician who isn't a hypocrite. Maybe there is a wee bit of hope for America.

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

I can't quote your quotes since they're in my quotes...

but... you alluded to or directly represented several legitimate functions of the central government (ie border control, a distinctly military function) as examples of why we need central government.

We agree on those, I'm not for anarchy.

Drawing off of Mosite's recent characterization of "fiefdoms" ...the word of the year now that "pivot" and "reset button" have run their course...

...and building on the theme here --

What type of people are happiest?

Those that are all the same and live all the same way? Conservatives want liberals to be conservative, because thats the way it should be. Liberals want conservatives to be liberal because thats the way it should be. Then there's me who just thinks everyone is nuts, including myself, so I'd rather have the freedom to find out what I like by testing the waters here and there.

Or are people happiest when they can lead their lives to their own standards and measures? If you had your utopia, and I had my utopia, Newt had his, and 47 others all had theirs - how is that dividing people?

When we are divided is when we all have these individual tendencies and beliefs, but we spend all of our time deciding which one of us is correct. We're all correct, and damnit, there's just no reason why we can't live that way instead of having ONE overriding "theme" to the entire country that we need to decide best fits EVERYONE.

Do you think that if you lived happily in Lib Village that I wouldn't fight for the rights of the country as a whole? Of course I would, and I suspect that you would reciprocate, because regardless of how we each lead our individual lives - what unites us is the freedom and the lack of central control that forces us into a singular box. We'd all fight to preserve that freedom.

Instead, we're trying to all figure out a way to get everyone into that one box, it changes colors and shapes with this vote or that vote, but its still one box.

That's when people finally have enough and start fighting for freedoms again, individuality, the ability to have lifestyles beyond the scope of simply a) or b), with only one acceptable choice at a time.

We need a bigger, more complicated central government than the one envisioned in the 1770's, but we don't need an all-mighty central government that dictates the terms of our lives as individuals, despite the fact that there is just no need for that type of governance.

I'll bet you back that nickle that we'd be a much stronger, more unified, more productive, and more resolute nation as a unified group of individuals whose big fight in life is to maintain that individuality - rather than fighting over which conformity, which box to get in this year and berating the other side for forcing it upon us.

Good night....... :sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping:

I couldnt agree more.....
The reason I personally keep trying to convey my message is because I am being forced to pay for theirs.
If mosty wants his utopia, more power to him...just not at my expense....
NJ...he can have what he likes....just not at my expense...
etc etc....
And in return, when my liberties start to become hazzards to others, then maybe I should re-evalutae my liberties.
yhis is the same issue I spoke of in the world...we keep trying to stick our nose as a country elsewhere, in an attempt to press our way of life on other nations...IT WONT WORK...
We could save a ton if our government would ever realize this!

[Tom]

Here's a thought - if there really is a surplus, return it to ALL the taxpayers, not just the thugs.

[Mike at A+]

Here's a thought - if there really is a surplus, return it to ALL the taxpayers, not just the thugs.
Here's a better thought. Send in the National Guard, arrest the teachers and throw their overfed asses in jail. Unions need to understand that you can't squeeze blood out of a stone. The private sector is hurting, the taxpayers are being raped and these pieces of shit are holding children hostage to their greed. They need to suck it up and understand that their knee-jerk reaction to "tax the rich" (which has now been expanded to taxing the crap out of everyone in the private sector) isn't the cure all for the sad shape America is in. It's just a matter of time before some frustrated taxpayers arm themselves and start shooting. It scares me to believe that I can see that day coming.

[Tom]

Here's a better thought. Send in the National Guard, arrest the teachers and throw their overfed asses in jail.

Agree 100%.
Show the students that we take education seriously, unlike the teachers union.

[Robert Goren]

Contrary to what the conservatives like to say, it is not the teachers union's fault that the state is such bad shape. It is the fault of a bunch of wall street speculators who produce nothing but schemes to cheat people out of money including public employee pension funds. Our education system is in bad shape. Cutting teacher pay is not get better people to become teachers. What few goods ones that are left in the system will soon leave if we don't improve pay instead of cutting it. Do you think places like China and India are cutting teacher pay? Are they moving away from public education?

[Mike at A+]

The country is going broke. It's really that simple. Teachers are being asked to pay for a SMALL PORTION of their health care plans and their pension plans. Even during long stretches of unemployment, guess who paid for 100% of MY health care plan? ME!! The unions need to understand that we can't keep raising taxes on an ever diminishing and overburdened private sector to accommodate for the greed and entitlement attitude of the public sector. For holding their students hostage to their greed, these teachers (and the union leaders pulling the strings) deserve jail time.

[Tom]

Do you think places like China and India are cutting teacher pay? Are they moving away from public education?

Do you want to work for a Chinese company?
Because the money they save by paying you in pennies goes a long way towards education.

Think that would fly here?

[mostpost]

ANY fraud that happens in Wisconsin causes this type of thing.....
Fraud cost taxpayers money.

here is one in the mortgage industry which cost banks....
small but fraud none the less....
And gee...who did uncle same have to bail out recently at tax payer expenses...BANKS...
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/article_8b55fe78-4360-11df-a37c-001cc4c002e0.html
There is 8 million in ONE case.....
If you want more, you can find them...your fingers work too....
Point is EVERY state has them.....
And they COST someone......
Every state in the U.S needs to get its house in order.....
Crack down on fraud...increase penalties and sentencing.....make them think twice before they steal...
As I said earlier, I listened to a story where 111 people were charged with over 250 million in medicaid fraud....wonder how that would help wisconsin about now???
Your link is to a case of a private tax preparer preparing false returns for her clients. It has nothing to do with the Wisconsin state government. In this case there is fraud which costs the taxpayers money, in terms of revenue that is not being collected, but there is no involvement on the part of Wisconsin officials. In fact it was Wisconsin officials who uncovered the fraud and put a stop to it.

[Spiderman]

Governor Walker is using a pretext to bust the unions. The budget is not due until June 30th, why the rush? Walker is a boy toy of the Koch conspiracy.

Meanwhile, the governor is refusing to accept his own share of responsibility for the state’s projected $137 million shortfall. Just last month, he and the Legislature gave away $117 million in tax breaks, mostly for businesses that expand and for private health savings accounts. That was a choice lawmakers made, and had it not been for those decisions and a few others, according to the state’s Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the state would have had a surplus.

The archbishop of Milwaukee and players for the Green Bay Packers have also come out in support of the workers.

People have a right to negotiate their labor contracts. For Walker to try and remove it, calls for a fight. Go, Wisconsin!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[boxcar]

Do you think places like China and India are cutting teacher pay? Are they moving away from public education?

First, why do I care how someone else "keeps house"? All of a sudden China and India are model nations of the world? :rolleyes: Be sure to inform us when people from around the globe start to immigrate to their shores in droves.

But since you asked, I would bet you that China and India spend far, far less on education than we do and produce far better products, i.e. better educated kids.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Governor Walker is using a pretext to bust the unions. The budget is not due until June 30th, why the rush? Walker is a boy toy of the Koch conspiracy.

What's your complaint? He's not rushing any faster than the last congress did to ram ObamaCare down our throats. And...and...I'd bet that the budget and any legislation will actually be read by state representatives, unlike what happened with ObaminationCare.

Meanwhile, the governor is refusing to accept his own share of responsibility for the state’s projected $137 million shortfall. Just last month, he and the Legislature gave away $117 million in tax breaks, mostly for businesses that expand and for private health savings accounts. That was a choice lawmakers made, and had it not been for those decisions and a few others, according to the state’s Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the state would have had a surplus.

Even if this is true, so what? Tax breaks for businesses are good. Unlike you, the Gov realizes that wealth is produced by businesses. So, why kill the goose that lays the eggs, eh?

[b]The archbishop of Milwaukee and players for the Green Bay Packers have also come out in support of the workers.[/quote]

A great example of the blind leading the blind. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

People have a right to negotiate their labor contracts. For Walker to try and remove it, calls for a fight. Go, Wisconsin!!!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]

[Spiderman]

What's your complaint? He's not rushing any faster than the last congress did to ram ObamaCare down our throats. And...and...I'd bet that the budget and any legislation will actually be read by state representatives, unlike what happened with ObaminationCare.



Even if this is true, so what? Tax breaks for businesses are good. Unlike you, the Gov realizes that wealth is produced by businesses. So, why kill the goose that lays the eggs, eh?

[b]The archbishop of Milwaukee and players for the Green Bay Packers have also come out in support of the workers.

A great example of the blind leading the blind. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

People have a right to negotiate their labor contracts. For Walker to try and remove it, calls for a fight. Go, Wisconsin!!!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Walker could have set a negotiation with union (s) when tax break was considered. His plan. all along, was to bust the union. Ain't gonna happen!

[mostpost]

Here's a better thought. Send in the National Guard, arrest the teachers and throw their overfed asses in jail. Unions need to understand that you can't squeeze blood out of a stone. The private sector is hurting, the taxpayers are being raped and these pieces of shit are holding children hostage to their greed. They need to suck it up and understand that their knee-jerk reaction to "tax the rich" (which has now been expanded to taxing the crap out of everyone in the private sector) isn't the cure all for the sad shape America is in. It's just a matter of time before some frustrated taxpayers arm themselves and start shooting. It scares me to believe that I can see that day coming.

So, in addition to the first amendment, which other parts of the Constitution do you want to unilaterally repeal?

[boxcar]

I love this guy Walker. He's my kinda guy. No nonsense. No cow manure. He tells it like it is and doesn't care who likes it. This morning he essentially told our fearful leader to keep his nose out of Wisconsin's business.

Appearing on “Fox & Friends” this morning, Wis. Gov. Scott Walker responded to President Obama’s recent comments that Walker’s budget proposal was an “assault on unions.” Walker’s response was a sort of stay-out-of-our-business quip.

“We’re focused on balancing our budget, it would be wise for the president and others in Washington to focus on balancing their budget, which they’re a long way from doing.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/wis-gov-responds-to-obama-he-should-focus-on-balancing-his-own-budget/

Kudos to the Gov for facing off against the president and telling him to mind his own business, especially since the federal government's own house isn't in order! :bang: :bang:

And this disgusting, despicable, hypocritical president was the one who told everyone that we must sacrifice. That we must tighten our belts. That we must all pull together. I guess the "all" didn't include unions? All those "alls" didn't include unionized employees? I wonder who else is exempted from his exhortation.

I was in the checkout lane of a local store yesterday, and as many of us do, I was scanning the headlines on the tabloids, that are place there for us to snatch up on impulse. The headline that caught my attendance was “Obama’s 12M Spending Spree” As I saw that I recalled the words of our tight fisted leader, which he gave on October 22, 2008 in Richmond, VA. Obama in speaking about the recession said “We will all need to tighten our belts, we will all need to sacrifice and we will all need to pull our weight because now more than ever, we are all in this together.” (http://www.cfr.org/publication/17589/obamas_speech_on_national_security_richmond_virgin ia.html)

http://defendthefounders.com/2010/08/22/we-will-all-need-to-tighten-our-belts-we-will-all-need-to-sacrifice/

Boxcar

[boxcar]

So, in addition to the first amendment, which other parts of the Constitution do you want to unilaterally repeal?

This has nothing to do with the First Amendment. They're free to demonstrate and speak out on their time, and not on the taxpayers' dime!

I sure hope these strikers won't be paid.

Boxcar

[HUSKER55]

if everyone belong to a union of some sort who would pay the bills?

government has spent more than it should have and we need to stop spending and every worker has to pay up.

Those that have more need to pay more.

[ArlJim78]

there's no need for public unions, period. other than to fleece the taxpayers.you see what is the first thing they do when you try to approach them about making changes. they run around claiming you're a dictator, don't show up for work, and cry about how bad they have it. it's time the unionistas face the same cold reality that the rest of us have been living with.

[Mike at A+]

So, in addition to the first amendment, which other parts of the Constitution do you want to unilaterally repeal?
I said nothing about "repealing" anything. What I DID say is that it is extremely unethical (and possibly illegal) for teachers to use their students as pawns. Or do you actually believe that thousands of teachers all got sick at the same time? And sending union thugs to the HOMES of lawmakers should be met with gunfire. The private sector has been relentlessly demonized by this administration and every time there is a disagreement between parties, your scumbag in chief always chooses the side that hurts taxpayers most.

[boxcar]

What happened to civility in speech? What happened to speech that doesn't wound but heals? Whatever happened to BO's memorial speech in AZ? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -- at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -- it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/12/obama-arizona-memorial-sp_n_808335.html

I guess the leftists in WI missed the speech? Evidently, because they now have Gov Walker in their cross hairs. So much for civility.

http://jroycroft.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/wisconsin-union-protestors-have-governor-walker-in-their-crosshairs-leave-grounds-littered/

Also, the Lefties being true to form remain to be their piggish selves (in more ways than one!). They're too good to clean up after themselves. They're above that. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Mike at A+]

As much as you liberal weenies hate Michele Bachmann, what she is saying right now on Fox makes a hell of a lot of sense. Democratic lawmakers LEFT Wisconsin to avoid voting on this proposed measure. Pure and simple, this is dereliction of duty. Voters in Wisconsin spoke loudly in the 2010 elections there and they expect that their views be upheld. What's even more disgraceful is the involvement of the White House in this LOCAL matter. And busing thugs to the HOMES of lawmakers is despicable.

[HUSKER55]

those dems proved they squat to piss if anyone should be impeached they should

[redshift1]

Outrageously sublime.....


life imitating art as democrats channel the artistes of intransigence.

[Mike at A+]

Great job these Wisconsin Dems have. If they don't feel like voting they just leave the state and don't show up for work. I wonder if they're getting paid for their little hissy fit? Back in the days of our Founding Fathers I bet they'd end up on the wrong end of a rope.

[delayjf]

there's no need for public unions, period.

Agree, at least Unions in the private sector have a stake in how well the company does - if the business goes under so do they.

[prospector]

this is no longer about money to me...
have you heard the caliber of comments these "teachers" are making..they have no business teaching children..if i lived in wisc..i'd be demanding they add mandatory retesting for all teachers..
those Hitler signs are another source of stupidity..like that class act that kept yelling "fox lies" a hundred or so times..what a child and embarrassment to the unions.

[boxcar]

this is no longer about money to me...
have you heard the caliber of comments these "teachers" are making..they have no business teaching children..if i lived in wisc..i'd be demanding they add mandatory retesting for all teachers..
those Hitler signs are another source of stupidity..like that class act that kept yelling "fox lies" a hundred or so times..what a child and embarrassment to the unions.

So, let's see: It's okay when the Left flushes civility down the commode and calls the CEO of the state "Hitler"; but it's taboo for anyone to even remotely hint that BO is a Marxist or a commie?

I hope "Hitler" fires all those disenchanted employees. They can all move to China and find better jobs, benefits and working conditions there. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[GaryG]

I hope "Hitler" fires all those disenchanted employees. They can all move to China and find better jobs, benefits and working conditions there. :rolleyes:
This brings to mind the great job Reagan did on the flight controllers. Didn't miss them a bit as they learned what happens when you call the wrong person's bluff.

[Tom]

That action carried a hell of a lot of weight in the USSR.
They were scarred to death of Reagan, and when he did that, they knew he did make idle threats. Add his "mistaken" gaffs about launching nukes to the party and they were shitting their pants over him.

With Obama, they are wetting those pants laughing!

[BlueShoe]

This mess actually has a silver lining. Recall the large illegal alien marches and demonstrations that started with the one in LA in 2006? It alerted the nation and turned sentiment against them. Same here, according to preliminary polls, there has been a huge backlash of disapproval directed at the public employee unions in general, and Wisconsin in particular. Imagine the rage of a guy in the non union private sector that has had his pay and hours cut sharply while his health care premiums have gone way up, along with his co pays and deductibles, as he watches these entitlement minded brats shriek and howl their Marxist slogans. Not to mention those that have no job at all. The Bolsheviks that have infiltrated and controlled the union movement in America since its inception have shot themselves in the foot on this one by arousing the nations ire and putting themselves in the spotlight. Nice job Comrades.

[bigmack]

I hope this impasse goes on for weeks. With BigEd coverage, TV hasn't been this interesting since Little Rickie played drums for the first time.

Ed has Wisconsinites in a lather. It has gone far beyond this issue.

"FargoDumb Ed" now has this as an issue against gays, every working man in history, women, dairy farmers, fireboys, & kids trying to figure out how to use a crayola. :(

This is his finest moment.

Post sponsored by:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/sidd.jpg
Sid Dithers Investigative Services
1245 Howdidyacame Drive
San Francisky, CA 94491

[newtothegame]

Welcome back Mack...!!

[newtothegame]

lol...looks like one state (wisconsin) is finally gonna take a stand. And to those of you who might think the dems took a good stand.....maybe not!

"Daniel Hunt of Kenosha announced that a group to recall Sen. Robert Wirch of Pleasant Prairie would file papers with the Government Accountability Board next week.
“We need to inform Robert Wirch that his hiding in Illinois is unacceptable to the voters in his district, and that we are taking the first steps to remove him from office,” Hunt said in a statement (http://wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=227432)."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/security-concerns-wisconsin-legislature-forced-to-adjourn-over-protester-dangers/

bolding by me

[Lefty]

The private sector has to pay a portion of their health benefits and retirement packages. But when these public sector employees are asked to do the same, they squeal like the pigs they are.

Thomas Jefferson warned about Govt employee unions and Wi is proving him soooo right.

The funny thing is, the Gov is trying to save their jobs and they are too dumb
to realize it.

The rhetoric is not civil, it's downright nasty, and if anything happens to any official in WI, it can be laid at the feet of the Dim party, but alas, they'll prob blame Sarah Palin, Fox News and talk radio again.

[bigmack]

The rhetoric is not civil, it's downright nasty
Haven't I heard "Kill the Bill" somewhere before?

Time was the media portrayed others chanting that slogan as racist, fear mongering, monochromatic thugs.

This crowd is heralded as inspirational, deserving & this bill treading on the average, common, working man. :D

What a laugh.

[ArlJim78]

here is an interview with Gov Walker (http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/02/exclusive-right-network-interviews-wisconsin-governor-scott-walker/).

when you listen to it you are reminded why governors make far better presidents than congressfolk. he does not obfuscate, he's informed, articulate, reasonable and responsible. and yet to the unionistas he's hitler, a dictator, satan or osama bin laden. it's about time these whiny babies were forced to see what the real world is like.

[boxcar]

The private sector has to pay a portion of their health benefits and retirement packages. But when these public sector employees are asked to do the same, they squeal like the pigs they are.

Thomas Jefferson warned about Govt employee unions and Wi is proving him soooo right.

The funny thing is, the Gov is trying to save their jobs and they are too dumb
to realize it.

The rhetoric is not civil, it's downright nasty, and if anything happens to any official in WI, it can be laid at the feet of the Dim party, but alas, they'll prob blame Sarah Palin, Fox News and talk radio again.

Even our fearful leader's rhetoric was militant the other day when he said that the state was launching an "assault" on unions. Wonder if that was community organizer code that gave the green light for unions to protect themselves anyway they can?

Anyhow...I guess someone forgot to copy the president on his own Arizona fluff speech. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

Even our fearful leader's rhetoric was militant the other day when he said that the state was launching an "assault" on unions.


once again our leader "acted stupidly".
but it shouldn't be any surprise that our organizer in chief would support the unionistas. he's about as rabid a fan of unions as they come.

8AJ5GnAUDQc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AJ5GnAUDQc&feature=player_embedded

[Tom]

"FargoDumb Ed" now has this as an issue against gays, every working man in history, women, dairy farmers, fireboys, & kids trying to figure out how to use a crayola. images/UBGX/06.gif

I was watching a show about neanderthals competing with cro-magnons for a half an hour before I realized it wasn't the Big Ed show!

Hey, libs, how come when US citizens go to Tea Party rallies to support fixing government they are wack-o's and the president dissed them, but when teachers lies and call in sick and show up to protest other than peacefully he is behind them?


this is why we can NEVER support Obama on any issue - he is one of YOU, not one of US.

Bipartisanship my ASS - I want constructive government.

[boxcar]

I was watching a show about neanderthals competing with cro-magnons for a half an hour before I realized it wasn't the Big Ed show!

Hey, libs, how come when US citizens go to Tea Party rallies to support fixing government they are wack-o's and the president dissed them, but when teachers lies and call in sick and show up to protest other than peacefully he is behind them?


this is why we can NEVER support Obama on any issue - he is one of YOU, not one of US.

Bipartisanship my ASS - I want constructive government.

Should get interesting today in WI. The TPers are showing up to support the Gov. Stay tuned....

Boxcar
P.S. Oh yeah...I want to add something to Tom's comments. I have a question for you libs: All these protesters protestin' against the governor and the Repugs in the state senate, would you consider these to be anti-government protesters?. Just curious because when TPers protest against the federal government, they are branded disparagingly as "anti-government" types.

[mostpost]

The private sector has to pay a portion of their health benefits and retirement packages. But when these public sector employees are asked to do the same, they squeal like the pigs they are.

Thomas Jefferson warned about Govt employee unions and Wi is proving him soooo right.

The funny thing is, the Gov is trying to save their jobs and they are too dumb
to realize it.

The rhetoric is not civil, it's downright nasty, and if anything happens to any official in WI, it can be laid at the feet of the Dim party, but alas, they'll prob blame Sarah Palin, Fox News and talk radio again.
Please provide some proof of the bolded statement. Inasmuch as the first labor union in the United States was founded in 1869 (Knights of Labor). Just to refresh you history, 1869 was sixth years after Jefferson left office. And don't tell me to look it up myself. I already tried.

[mostpost]

here is an interview with Gov Walker (http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/02/exclusive-right-network-interviews-wisconsin-governor-scott-walker/).

when you listen to it you are reminded why governors make far better presidents than congressfolk. he does not obfuscate, he's informed, articulate, reasonable and responsible. and yet to the unionistas he's hitler, a dictator, satan or osama bin laden. it's about time these whiny babies were forced to see what the real world is like.
I thought it was strange that the governor was facing to the right and the man supposedly doing the interview was also facing to the right. Why wouldn't they be facing toward each other. Also why was the interviewer in darkness, while the governor was in a lighted room. Why did they never show the two together?
Of course this has nothing to do with the substance of the interview. It's just that why should we trust someone who apparently is passing off someone else's work as his own.

[mostpost]

here is an interview with Gov Walker (http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/02/exclusive-right-network-interviews-wisconsin-governor-scott-walker/).

when you listen to it you are reminded why governors make far better presidents than congressfolk. he does not obfuscate, he's informed, articulate, reasonable and responsible. and yet to the unionistas he's hitler, a dictator, satan or osama bin laden. it's about time these whiny babies were forced to see what the real world is like.
Now to the substance. At no point does Walker acknowledge that he is trying to steal a fundamental right from the workers of Wisconsin. The right to bargain collectively. He certainly never mentions that he created this years financial crisis by giving tax breaks in the amount of $140M to special interest groups. Then he tries to claim that it is not right for the citizens of Wisconsin to pay extra taxes, completely ignoring the fact that those government worker are also citizens of Wisconsin who would be paying extra taxes.

[bigmack]

Now to the substance. At no point does Walker acknowledge that he is trying to steal a fundamental right from the workers of Wisconsin. The right to bargain collectively.
The right to bargain collectively a "fundamental right." :lol:

[Tom]

Boxie, the difference is the TPers were protesting for their country.
The WI jerks are protesting having to stand up and take responsibility for themselves.

TPers want government off thier butts.
Teachers want government to wipe theirs' for them.

[johnhannibalsmith]

The right to bargain collectively a "fundamental right." :lol:

I tried already. The master of gooooogle won't even admit that his farsical use of the commerce clause to redefine an actual concept don't pass any stink test.

[ArlJim78]

collective bargaining for public workers is merely a way to fleece the taxpayers. its a scam that should end. but in Wisconsin they are not trying to end collective bargaining as many on the hysterical left are claiming, merely to put some limits on it.

there's a reason why we spend more than any other country on education yet rank near the bottom of industrialized nations on scoring.

[BlueShoe]

Just to refresh you history, 1869 was sixth years after Jefferson left office. And don't tell me to look it up myself. I already tried.
You did? Jefferson left office in 1809 and died in 1826. Sixty, not six. Mosty, you are slurring your speech, did you get into that six pack a wee bit early perhaps? :D

[boxcar]

Boxie, the difference is the TPers were protesting for their country.
The WI jerks are protesting having to stand up and take responsibility for themselves.

TPers want government off thier butts.
Teachers want government to wipe theirs' for them.

Oh, I know the differences okay. But libs don't. But regardless, either side on any given day can be "anti-government". Libs can't logically assign that label to just conservatives. Of course, they will continue to do just that because logic has no place in their thought processes. Logic and libs are estranged. The vacuum, therefore, in libs' attics will remain. :D

Boxcar

[Hank]

Contrary to what the conservatives like to say, it is not the teachers union's fault that the state is such bad shape. It is the fault of a bunch of wall street speculators who produce nothing but schemes to cheat people out of money including public employee pension funds. Our education system is in bad shape. Cutting teacher pay is not get better people to become teachers. What few goods ones that are left in the system will soon leave if we don't improve pay instead of cutting it. Do you think places like China and India are cutting teacher pay? Are they moving away from public education?


WOW. 55 post until someone slices through the propandga and bullsh$t.This thread pretty much confirms that their is no hope for the working class in this country,one group of working people at the throat of other working class folks, while the thieving scum on wall street that defrauded the pension funds and caused the crisis cash 7 figure bounus checks and have champagne toast.The effectiveness of their propaganda apparatus is spectacular indeed.

[ElKabong]

Now to the substance. At no point does Walker acknowledge that he is trying to steal a fundamental right from the workers of Wisconsin. The right to bargain collectively. .

'Fundamental right to bargian collectively'. Such bullshit, totally laughable.

I read where your home state lost 7% of its population. Heavy union state.

The state I live in has grown as fast as any. Right to work state.

The voters of WI are having their demands met by the Governor. The public unions will have to make necessary adjustments to their lifestyales, as the private sector employees have. If they don't like it, then they can start their own business and make their own rules. Otherwise they'll have to take the necessary pill that unions (public, especially) are destined for.

WI has woken up to reality. Some of the union members won't let the Old Days go. That's what dinosaurs do. We all know what happens to dinosaurs in the end.

[bigmack]

The effectiveness of their propaganda apparatus is spectacular indeed.
Right on! Fight the power! Down with "The Man."

http://pachline.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/power_fist_11.gif
Anyone have a beret I can borrow?

[mostpost]

You did? Jefferson left office in 1809 and died in 1826. Sixty, not six. Mosty, you are slurring your speech, did you get into that six pack a wee bit early perhaps? :D
You know that was a typographical error. Admit it. Don't make me waterboard you. :lol: :lol:

[riskman]

Now to the substance. At no point does Walker acknowledge that he is trying to steal a fundamental right from the workers of Wisconsin. The right to bargain collectively. He certainly never mentions that he created this years financial crisis by giving tax breaks in the amount of $140M to special interest groups. Then he tries to claim that it is not right for the citizens of Wisconsin to pay extra taxes, completely ignoring the fact that those government worker are also citizens of Wisconsin who would be paying extra taxes.

Just another take. I found this here:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/greghengler/2011/02/18/fox_lies!!!_reporter_confronts_disturbing_wi_prote ster


"Should you care for the truth, you might consider the following:

a Madison Capital Times editorial on Feb. 16, 2011, that said no state budget deficit exists for 2010-’11 -- or if it does, it’s the fault of Walker and the Republicans in the Legislature was wrong.

Also making the rounds: Walker and fellow Republicans in the Legislature this year gave away 140 million in business tax breaks -- so if there is a deficit projected of 137 million, they created it.

Those making the claim all cite the same source for their information -- a Jan. 31, 2011 memo prepared by Robert Lang, the director of the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau.
It includes this line: "Our analysis indicates a general fund gross balance of 121.4 million and a net balance of 56.4 million." In writing it when it was released, reporters from the Journal Sentinel and Associated Press had put the shortfall at between 78 million and 340 million. That’s the projection for the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 2011.

Walker himself has settled on 137 million as the deficit figure, a number reporters have adopted as shorthand. We re-read the fiscal bureau memo, talked to Lang, consulted reporter Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel’s Madison Bureau, read various news accounts and examined the issue in detail.

Our conclusion: Maddow and the others are wrong.

There is, indeed, a projected deficit that required attention, and Walker and GOP lawmakers did not create it.

The confusion, it appears, stems from a section in Lang’s memo that -- read on its own -- does project a 121 million surplus in the state’s general fund as of June 30, 2011. But the remainder of the routine memo -- consider it the fine print -- outlines 258 million in unpaid bills or expected shortfalls in programs such as Medicaid services for the needy (174 million alone), the public defender’s office and corrections. Additionally, the state owes Minnesota 58.7 million under a discontinued tax reciprocity deal.

The result, by our math and Lang’s, is the 137 million dollar shortfall.

There is fierce debate over the approach Walker took to address the short-term budget deficit. But he did not create it."

[mostpost]

'Fundamental right to bargian collectively'. Such bullshit, totally laughable.

The right to bargain collectively a "fundamental right." :lol:

The right to bargain collectively is well founded in law. In 1215 British noblemen banded together to force King John to recognize their rights and to acknowledge that there were limits to his power. The document he signed was the Magna Carta, the cornerstone of democracy.

On July 4, 1776, fifty three American colonists gathered in Philadelphia in the colony of Pennsylvania and signed the Declaration of Independence. In that document was the phrase "We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

It would be impossible to achieve or retain any of these rights without the right of association and the right to bargain as a group. You cannot be happy if your family is starving. You cannot be happy if you cannot reasonably control your own destiny. Also notice that Jefferson used the words "among these". Indicating that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were not the only fundamental human rights.

The right to bargain collectively is specifically protected in the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. As I mentioned before, the authority for that law is found in the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, and it has been upheld in many court decisions.

The right to bargain collectively is recognized in International Law.
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/rightofcollectivebargaining.htm
Article 28 of the Charter of human rights of the European Union states:
Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in cases of conflicts of interests, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action.

Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Article 23
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Finally, but far from the last proof of my opinion, we have this;
In June 2007 the Supreme Court of Canada extensively reviewed the rationale for regarding collective bargaining as a human right. In the case of Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, the Court made the following observations:
The right to bargain collectively with an employer enhances the human dignity, liberty and autonomy of workers by giving them the opportunity to influence the establishment of workplace rules and thereby gain some control over a major aspect of their lives, namely their work... Collective bargaining is not simply an instrument for pursuing external ends…rather [it] is intrinsically valuable as an experience in self-government... Collective bargaining permits workers to achieve a form of workplace democracy and to ensure the rule of law in the workplace. Workers gain a voice to influence the establishment of rules that control a major aspect of their lives.[5]

You gentlemen have nothing on your side in this argument, so why don't you go quietly and sit in a corner and stop embarrassing your selves?

[newtothegame]

The right to bargain collectively is well founded in law. In 1215 British noblemen banded together to force King John to recognize their rights and to acknowledge that there were limits to his power. The document he signed was the Magna Carta, the cornerstone of democracy.

On July 4, 1776, fifty three American colonists gathered in Philadelphia in the colony of Pennsylvania and signed the Declaration of Independence. In that document was the phrase "We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. Also notice that Jefferson used the words "among these". Indicating that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were not the only fundamental human rights.

The right to bargain collectively is specifically protected in the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. As I mentioned before, the authority for that law is That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

It would be impossible to achieve or retain any of these rights without the right of association and the right to bargain as a group. You cannot be happy if your family is starving. You cannot be happy if you cannot reasonably control your own destiny.found in the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, and it has been upheld in many court decisions.

The right to bargain collectively is recognized in International Law.
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/rightofcollectivebargaining.htm
Article 28 of the Charter of human rights of the European Union states:
Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in cases of conflicts of interests, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action.

Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Article 23
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Finally, but far from the last proof of my opinion, we have this;
In June 2007 the Supreme Court of Canada extensively reviewed the rationale for regarding collective bargaining as a human right. In the case of Facilities Subsector Bargaining Association v. British Columbia, the Court made the following observations:
The right to bargain collectively with an employer enhances the human dignity, liberty and autonomy of workers by giving them the opportunity to influence the establishment of workplace rules and thereby gain some control over a major aspect of their lives, namely their work... Collective bargaining is not simply an instrument for pursuing external ends…rather [it] is intrinsically valuable as an experience in self-government... Collective bargaining permits workers to achieve a form of workplace democracy and to ensure the rule of law in the workplace. Workers gain a voice to influence the establishment of rules that control a major aspect of their lives.[5]

You gentlemen have nothing on your side in this argument, so why don't you go quietly and sit in a corner and stop embarrassing your selves?

"That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

It would be impossible to achieve or retain any of these rights without the right of association and the right to bargain as a group. You cannot be happy if your family is starving. You cannot be happy if you cannot reasonably control your own destiny."

Wow...so to stay in the sontext of the theme...(unions and collective bargaining)....NON union memebers are not happy, have no shot at liberty, and can not pursue happiness??? YOU sir are a hoot!!! lol
P.S I am still waiting on an answer concerning that redistribution of wealth concerning union members....I know, you conveniently forgot that thread lol

[boxcar]

The right to bargain collectively is well founded in law. In 1215 British noblemen banded together to force King John to recognize their rights and to acknowledge that there were limits to his power. The document he signed was the Magna Carta, the cornerstone of democracy.

On July 4, 1776, fifty three American colonists gathered in Philadelphia in the colony of Pennsylvania and signed the Declaration of Independence. In that document was the phrase "We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

It would be impossible to achieve or retain any of these rights without the right of association and the right to bargain as a group. You cannot be happy if your family is starving. You cannot be happy if you cannot reasonably control your own destiny. Also notice that Jefferson used the words "among these". Indicating that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were not the only fundamental human rights.

What a load of cow manure. There's nothing implied in the Declaration that says that men must ban together in groups to achieve their rights! In fact, unions are anything but pro-liberty! :bang: :bang: Unions are anything but pro-choice in terms of workplaces! How many states, for example, are NOT "right-to-work" states? In fact, the Dems are just dying to bring to the floor a bill that would prohibit secret ballots. They want open ballots so that they can coerce, harass and intimidate employees even more than they already do!

Union bosses are just a bunch of thugs who extort money from employees and donate a chunk of it to the Democrat Party, regardless of how the individual workers feel. Unions are pro-collectivism and anti-individualism.

Only weak, cowardly, morally bankrupt human beings with entitlement mentalities seek and desire crutches to lean upon to make their way through life. While there was a time and place for unions in the PAST, they have outlived their usefulness. Society can now safely throw away those crutches and stand on its own.

You gentlemen have nothing on your side in this argument, so why don't you go quietly and sit in a corner and stop embarrassing your selves?

You're smokin' bad weed, Mosty, if you believe that. Bring it on, postman.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

after they pass this law in WI we'll see how many people stay in the union. they're going to stop the mandatory withholding of dues and give an option to opt out. we'll then see how many people voluntarily stay on with the thugs.

[boxcar]

Hey, Mosty, your kinda people have showed up in The Great Dairy state -- COMMUNISTS. They're looking to liberate the people :lol: :lol:

Communist Protester in Wis.: ‘People Are Open’ to a ‘Revolutionary Movement’

[i]Yesterday we brought you video of socialists openly rallying in Madison, WI and trying to recruit new members. Today, we show you that the communists are joining the fray too.

Once again, the MacIver Institute was down at the Capitol capturing video of those flocking to the protests in Wisconsin. This time, videographer Bill Osmuski caught up with some admitted revolutionaries from Chicago who came up to try and spread their message, and told Osmuski they definitely think “people are open to the possibilities of building a revolutionary movement.”

What did the communists cite as evidence? If you said “Egypt” and the unrest “around the world,” you’re right:[/quote]

Hey, Mosty, if you're feeling oppressed, I'm sure if you flew to WI, you'd find this gal on the capitol steps. Are you up for a People's Revolution? :rolleyes:

And do you think revolutionary talk is violent rhetoric? You guys on the Left just shake the habit of violence, can you?

Boxcar

[bigmack]

I can Lee Greenwoood now... & I'm proud to be an Amerikin...

zjFbMDp5Pg8

[boxcar]

Liberals are truly flying their true colors. Liberalism is built on Lies and now the demonstrators must lie to try to keep their jobs. And they're so proud of their lies. They have no shame. They'll employ any means to achieve their ends.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

would you hire any of these people, with this work ethic?

[ArlJim78]

heh, Roosevelt no fan of public unions. if he were around today he'd be just another racist teabagger like the rest of us I guess.




“The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service,” Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, “I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place” in the public sector. “A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government.”

[mostpost]

What a load of cow manure. There's nothing implied in the Declaration that says that men must ban together in groups to achieve their rights! In fact, unions are anything but pro-liberty! :bang: :bang: Unions are anything but pro-choice in terms of workplaces! How many states, for example, are NOT "right-to-work" states? In fact, the Dems are just dying to bring to the floor a bill that would prohibit secret ballots. They want open ballots so that they can coerce, harass and intimidate employees even more than they already do!

Union bosses are just a bunch of thugs who extort money from employees and donate a chunk of it to the Democrat Party, regardless of how the individual workers feel. Unions are pro-collectivism and anti-individualism.

Only weak, cowardly, morally bankrupt human beings with entitlement mentalities seek and desire crutches to lean upon to make their way through life. While there was a time and place for unions in the PAST, they have outlived their usefulness. Society can now safely throw away those crutches and stand on its own.



You're smokin' bad weed, Mosty, if you believe that. Bring it on, postman.

Boxcar

I said that people need to band together to achieve their goals. The Declaration of Independence tells us what some of those goals could be. Do you think we could have defeated the British if each colonist had gone out on his own. Could individual workers have achieved the forty hour work week or safe working conditions had they protested alone? I realize this is a foolish question to ask you as you are opposed to the forty hour work week and in favor of unsafe working conditions.

The dumbest thing you guys say.............No, I'm sorry. You guys say so many dumb things that choosing the dumbest is impossible. One of the dumbest is "There was a place for unions in the past, but we don't need them anymore." When I hear that, I am more than ever convinced of the continuing need for unions. I guarantee you if unions were completely banned, within ten years workers would be working 14 hours a day 6 maybe 7 days a week. We did not get the labor laws we have because factory owners were benevolent. We got them because we made them give them to us. People have not suddenly become righteous in the last 100 years. As you yourself are so fond of pointing out.

[mostpost]

I can Lee Greenwoood now... & I'm proud to be an Amerikin...

zjFbMDp5Pg8
I don't believe any of it. They dress a guy up in a doctor's coat and put him in front of a camera and think that is proof excuses are being handed out illegally.
Because of course all doctors are liberals who would support the protestors. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: And it makes so much sense that those doctors would go around telling everyone they were violating their oath and risking disbarment or dismemberment or whatever they do to doctors who are bad.
Maciver News Service is a branch of the Free Market Institute of Wisconsin. Or, if you don't want to type all that, just say they are members of the Liars Club.
Sounds more respectful.

[bigmack]

:lol: Drink in the pretzel logic of Mosty.

The fake notes are not real. They're concocted by liars and fakes.

Again, the fake notes are fake because the report of Doctors handing out fake notes is from a gang of liars. :D

From a local newspaper:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/docsnotes.png

The proceeding sponsored in part by:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/2_19_11_15_52_17.jpg

[newtothegame]

I don't believe any of it. They dress a guy up in a doctor's coat and put him in front of a camera and think that is proof excuses are being handed out illegally.
Because of course all doctors are liberals who would support the protestors. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: And it makes so much sense that those doctors would go around telling everyone they were violating their oath and risking disbarment or dismemberment or whatever they do to doctors who are bad.
Maciver News Service is a branch of the Free Market Institute of Wisconsin. Or, if you don't want to type all that, just say they are members of the Liars Club.
Sounds more respectful.
When faced with reality...deny deny deny.....
So lets see, I seem to recall having seen a report where several hundred if not thousand teachers had called out each day....
I just wonder if they legitimately went to a DR to get seen, what those lines at the DR offices would of been like???? HMMMMM
Seems someone, news media, etc etc would of seen the massive lines at the DR office...ya think?
GET REAL!
AS I said in another post, they are allowed so many days out based on union contracts....something like 20-25% RIGHT MOSTY???
Hmmmm I wonder what its like to be able to get 60-70 days off a year PLUS vacation....hmmmmm

[boxcar]

I said that people need to band together to achieve their goals. The Declaration of Independence tells us what some of those goals could be. Do you think we could have defeated the British if each colonist had gone out on his own. Could individual workers have achieved the forty hour work week or safe working conditions had they protested alone? I realize this is a foolish question to ask you as you are opposed to the forty hour work week and in favor of unsafe working conditions.

Hey, you're spitting into the wind here. I said in my last post AND on previous occasions that union have SERVED (as in past tense! :bang: :bang: ) their purpose. But now, the pendulum for abuse has swung the other way -- to the unions. The unions are abusing the people. It's time for them to go. You're living in the past. Unions lean way too far to the left. They already have one foot in Communism and other one on a banana peel. As stated previously, they are anti-freedom. Anti-individual. Anti-individual liberties.

[b]The dumbest thing you guys say.............No, I'm sorry. You guys say so many dumb things that choosing the dumbest is impossible.[/quote]

You're hardly in any position to talk about anyone saying dumb things, especially since I think you may have reinvented DUMB! :rolleyes: To compare unions to a colonial army or militia is one the stupidest analogies you have ever made. Wars are always fought by armies (or "organized groups", as it were) out of necessity. The colonialists had to ban together to fight a common enemy -- and enemy that was also anti-freedom.

But Americans, today, have no such "common enemy" because most Americans do not consider employers to be our enemies. In fact, very many true Americans consider unions to be our enemy because they are so anti-freedom, since they subscribe to too many Marxist ideals and principles. Unions, especially in the public sector, are the scourge of this nation -- the scum of the world. Why do you think so many socialists and commies are showing up in Wisconsin and holding hands with liberals to protest? These aren't exactly Freedom-loving, red-blooded Americans -- in name, perhaps, but that's as far as it goes.

But the fact that you made this lame analogy (and these are becoming your trademark :rolleyes: betrays your Marxist mindset. It truly does. In your mind, the proletariat (the unwashed masses who work for a living) have been at war (or "struggle" which is the classic commie term) with the bourgeoisie (corporations or evil "capitalists" since time immemorial. There is nothing inherently immoral or unethical for one to sell his labor for a wage or salary. And there's nothing inherently wrong with an employer not wanting to buy that labor for the prospective employee's selling price. Free market forces will dictate what the going buying and selling prices are. And that's fair.

Unions are anti-Capitalism. They anti-Freedom. They are anti-Individualism. They do not believe in an individual's right to work (to choose freely to join or not join a union), and they also no longer believe in closed ballots that protect an individual's privacy. Unions are hardly the medium to use in one's pursuit of Liberty. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Ocala Mike]

The state I live in has grown as fast as any. Right to work state.




Yeah, I live in a right to work state also. Only thing is that now it's more like a "right to be unemployed" state, as we're sitting at 12%. We really should be a right to work AT MINIMUM WAGE ONLY state, if you can even find one of those jobs.

Also, I probably missed this in an earlier post, but I would like to have a copy of the Tea Party playbook so I can figure out when government is good and when it's the bogie man. As near as I can tell, if there are police, military, or weapons involved, TP'ers are all for government (the old "law and order" crowd updated, I guess).


Ocala Mike

[boxcar]

Yeah, I live in a right to work state also. Only thing is that now it's more like a "right to be unemployed" state, as we're sitting at 12%. We really should be a right to work AT MINIMUM WAGE ONLY state, if you can even find one of those jobs.

Also, I probably missed this in an earlier post, but I would like to have a copy of the Tea Party playbook so I can figure out when government is good and when it's the bogie man. As near as I can tell, if there are police, military, or weapons involved, TP'ers are all for government (the old "law and order" crowd updated, I guess).


Ocala Mike

I'll take a wild, crazy stab at your question: Government is good when it is limited and operates within the constraints of the Constitution.. The smaller the government, the the more powerful are the people. Conversely, Government is bad when it seizes power from the people by usurping its constitutional authority. The more power-hungry government becomes, the more tyrannical it becomes. (Yes, "tyranny" in all its forms is still in the dictionary.)

Police, military, weapons -- all good 'cause they're sanctioned in the Constitution. And they're very necessary because we live in a evil world.

Boxcar

[Tom]

would you hire any of these people, with this work ethic?

What work ethic?

[bigmack]

As near as I can tell, if there are police, military, or weapons involved, TP'ers are all for government (the old "law and order" crowd updated, I guess).
I missed the police, military, weapons portion of the equation.

You seem bright. Enlighten me to those occasions.

[boxcar]

I missed the police, military, weapons portion of the equation.

You seem bright. Enlighten me to those occasions.

Not only that, but apparently OM isn't too big on "law and order" (a/k/a "rule of law"). He, apparently, associates "law and order" advocates with right wing extremists? Just guessing...

OM, where do you stand on "law and order"?

Boxcar

[Ocala Mike]

I'm very big on law and order; I have to be, because I don't own any weapons and live out in "the country." I was thinking about the use of the term back in the 60's (I'm an old fogey, remember) as a pejorative. Seemed like back then the dichotomy was between "law and order" proponents and "civil liberties" proponents a la the Chicago demonstrations of 1968.

I realize that the gulf between those two concepts has narrowed, and I guess the Tea Party playbook allows for both. Still, I wonder which side today's TP'ers would have come down on back in Chicago, 1968. Mayor Daley's? That's kind of what I meant by the presence of police, military and weapons. Of course, I also wonder which side today's TP'ers would have come down on in Birmingham or Little Rock in the 60's.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programs. I have to beat "The Factor" in tomorrow's San Vicente at SA.


Ocala Mike

[bigmack]

In a thread about Wisconsin this guy is pensively working on how the TP would react to Birmingham, Chicago & Little Rock in the 60's. :eek:

That's some kind of tangential mind warp. I remember when I'd hike off the trail. I'd call it bushwackin'.

[ElKabong]

Also, I probably missed this in an earlier post, but I would like to have a copy of the Tea Party playbook so I can figure out when government is good and when it's the bogie man. As near as I can tell, if there are police, military, or weapons involved, TP'ers are all for government (the old "law and order" crowd updated, I guess).


Ocala Mike

If ya pull the Liberal lever in the proverbial voting booth, you're yankin the wrong lever.

There, the gameplan is known. Snap the ball on the count of 3.

[ElKabong]

Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Article 23
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.



Ever see the 1972'ish movie Judge Roy Bean (paul newman, victoria principal)? Judge is told he can't do something. Is quoted law # such and such....Judge looks at the book, rips out the page and says "That's a bad law. I just repealed it". :cool:

I;m not taking my eye off the ball, neither are fiscal conservatives. Cuts need to be made. Sacrifices by public union members have to be made. Those sacrifices have been made for years by people that aren't in public unions. That has to end.

To be perfectly honest, if the populace felt teachers had a good arguement, we'd be behind them. But we've seen costs skyrocket, yet we have fallen farther behind other countries in the sciences, etc. We haven't seen our money spent wisely . That's not the teachers unions fault in full, but they do share responsibility (longer story here, and you know it).

Share the responsibility and pain. It's the people's demand.

[Tom]

I realize that the gulf between those two concepts has narrowed, and I guess the Tea Party playbook allows for both. Still, I wonder which side today's TP'ers would have come down on back in Chicago, 1968. Mayor Daley's?

Hate to spoil your delusion, but comparing the TP like this is just plain stupid talk. The TP was and is about responsible government. I'm sure some were pro-Viet Nam and some against, but I doubt any today would act like the irresponsible scumbags that were the Chicago 7, Mayor Daley, and the WI teachers union. The three groups have a lot in common.

Try fining another straw dog to fight - the TP is not your enemy and are nothing like the WI cry babies.


Share the responsibility and pain.

They would rather share our paychecks.

[Robert Goren]

Why don't they just get rid the WI senate period. Then cut the of reps in the house in half. Think of all the money they save by doing. We have a one house legislature in Nebraska. It isn't any worse than any of the two house ones. For that matter, I would oppose doing the same thing in DC. 200 house members(although I wouldn't argue with 100) and no senators sounds pretty good.

[Ocala Mike]

For that matter, I would oppose doing the same thing in DC. 200 house members(although I wouldn't argue with 100) and no senators sounds pretty good.

Robert, I'm assuming you meant to say you would NOT oppose doing the same thing in DC.

Doing away with the Senate would obviously diminish the rights of less populated states. If there were only one house, and representatives were apportioned by population as they are now, the legislative branch would be totally biased towards states with the most population.

What they should do away with in the Senate is the filibuster.


Ocala Mike

[bigmack]

What they should do away with in the Senate is the filibuster
Q: What is considered to be an exponential, punkish equivalent to a filibuster?
A: Scampering off to another state in hiding to avoid a vote.

And yet you have still have nothing to say about the subject at hand.

Remember when I mentioned you seem bright? Scratch that.

[bigmack]

But there is money in Wisconsin. According to the non partisan Wisconsin Budget Office, there is a surplus of more than $120M in the current budget.
Uh oh. Mosty been lyin'. Ms. Maddow been lyin'. No surprise, BigEd's been lyin'.

PolitiFact.com: Our conclusion: Maddow and the others are wrong.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/

[boxcar]

I'm very big on law and order; I have to be, because I don't own any weapons and live out in "the country." I was thinking about the use of the term back in the 60's (I'm an old fogey, remember) as a pejorative. Seemed like back then the dichotomy was between "law and order" proponents and "civil liberties" proponents a la the Chicago demonstrations of 1968.

I realize that the gulf between those two concepts has narrowed, and I guess the Tea Party playbook allows for both. Still, I wonder which side today's TP'ers would have come down on back in Chicago, 1968. Mayor Daley's? That's kind of what I meant by the presence of police, military and weapons. Of course, I also wonder which side today's TP'ers would have come down on in Birmingham or Little Rock in the 60's.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programs. I have to beat "The Factor" in tomorrow's San Vicente at SA.


Ocala Mike

The gulf has actually widened over the decades. Libs are only selectively "law and order". When it's convenient or expedient, a law will be enforced or obeyed. But when it's not, neither will happen.

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

Robert, I'm assuming you meant to say you would NOT oppose doing the same thing in DC.

Doing away with the Senate would obviously diminish the rights of less populated states. If there were only one house, and representatives were apportioned by population as they are now, the legislative branch would be totally biased towards states with the most population.

What they should do away with in the Senate is the filibuster.


Ocala MikeAs it is now people as individuals who live small states(such as Nebraska) have more say in things than people who live in large states(such as Texas). But that is not the main reason I am for it. It is a cost thing. How much does it cost the tax payers to have all those extra politicians and their staffs? Wouldn't you rather have another cop or fireman or teacher or just a tax break and get rid of another politician?

[HUSKER55]

careful robert, you are trying to apply common sense to state government. I favor unicameral type state government. But that requires that common sense.

Not going to happen. Going got tough so the dems left the state with their tail up between their legs.

[ArlJim78]

fine example these progressives. you have teachers being paid to teach who refuse to go to work, you have paid elected senators (fleebaggers) who go awol to escape having to perform their duties. as we all know, elections have consequences, get over it.

[GaryG]

Now this:

President Obama, whose group Organizing for America, has bused in some of the nearly 70,000 protesters outside the state capitol on Saturday, last week called the bill "an assault on unions."

Hey Barry....don't you have more important things to see to, like maybe the Middle East?

Can you imagine having your children taught by teachers such as those? Maybe in a place like Madison, or Eugene, or Berkeley, but not in real America. They make a good argument for home schooling.

[NJ Stinks]

Now this:

President Obama, whose group Organizing for America, has bused in some of the nearly 70,000 protesters outside the state capitol on Saturday, last week called the bill "an assault on unions."

Hey Barry....don't you have more important things to see to, like maybe the Middle East?

Can you imagine having your children taught by teachers such as those? Maybe in a place like Madison, or Eugene, or Berkeley, but not in real America. They make a good argument for home schooling.

Couldn't disagree more. Anybody who can think at all understands this is an assault on unions. That you don't like unions or the President stating the obvious relating to an important domestic issue is irrelevant.

I admire these teachers personally. They are standing up for a right secured previously - the right to binding arbitration. That you prefer them to roll over and accept Walker's edict to take that right away is something I can't see you doing if someone took a right away from you.

Anyway, when did Americans standing up for their rights become Un-American? I must have missed the memo. :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

Couldn't disagree more. Anybody who can think at all understands this is an assault on unions. That you don't like unions or the President stating the obvious relating to an important domestic issue is irrelevant.

I admire these teachers personally. They are standing up for a right secured previously - the right to binding arbitration. That you prefer them to roll over and accept Walker's edict to take that right away is something I can't see you doing if someone took a right away from you.

Anyway, when did Americans standing up for their rights become Un-American? I must have missed the memo. :rolleyes:

You admire them? We just would have assumed that .....save the bits

[Ocala Mike]

I'm with NJ Stinks and Charles Woodson:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110220/GPG0101/110220006/Packers-Woodson-backs-state-union-protesters


Ocala Mike

[Ocala Mike]

And this is from Forbes, no less:

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/02/18/koch-brothers-behind-wisconsin-effort-to-kill-public-unions/

You can have the Koch boys; I'm sticking with the union.


Ocala Mike

[ElKabong]

I'm with NJ Stinks and Charles Woodson:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110220/GPG0101/110220006/Packers-Woodson-backs-state-union-protesters


Ocala Mike

Charles Woodson can identify with the striking teachers. Afterall, he didn't play the 2nd half of the super bowl. Someone else had to finish the job for him.

Here's hoping his v#gina is repaired in time for next season's opening game.

[ElKabong]

Couldn't disagree more. Anybody who can think at all understands this is an assault on unions.

You can understand that what this is, is an attempt to cut costs, can you not?

For a moment, put aside the emotions. Reality is, we need to cut govt costs. That means a shared responsibility. Union members are going to have to conceded some or most of their advantages they hold over taxpayers that are sick and tired of some of these perks that aren't affordable anymore (at taxpayers expense).

If this isn't understandable, then the US is truly in for a civil war of some degree. (not comparing this to 1861-5). My side, the taxpaying public majority, will not back down & we hold the power in that #'s are on my side. We'll hold gov't accountable.

That's what's happening now. It has to happen, right now.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Ever see the 1972'ish movie Judge Roy Bean (paul newman, victoria principal)? Judge is told he can't do something. Is quoted law # such and such....Judge looks at the book, rips out the page and says "That's a bad law. I just repealed it". :cool:

...

Damn I missed all of the fun while Mosite worked overtime building the same case that is made over and over again by ultra liberals that want to insist that just about anything is a natural born right if it suits their needs or wants.

The quote above is the definitive answer.

I had the pleasure of working alongside a great man, a great mind, Dr. Robert Cord way back when as part of a work-study program. I was (and still am) a wiseass kid, but the guy spent more time making time fun for both of us than anything else - he flew us over the New England coast, went for good Italian on Tremont Street regularly, movies - occasionally, we would even work for a few hours.

I can remember as clear as day on one such rare instance - I had to write for him a summary of some subject I can't recall.

The guy was pretty old then, meager, quiet - an all-around gentle fellow that rarely got stirred.

I was sitting in one of his fancy leather chairs in his fancy penthouse, eating some grub on the balcony as he sat inside reading my paper.

He came outside, looking confused, perturbed... leaving me confused, defensive.

"What is a fundamental right?"

"I, uhhh, uhh, you know, uhhh..."

"No, tell me, where do they come from? These fundamental rights?"

"Uhhmmm, well, they are granted by the Const...."

"How? How in the hell does a piece of paper suddenly give you an inherent right if that piece of paper can be torn up, changed, re-written? What if you decide to move to another continent, what happens to this right that is so fundamental? Huh?"

"I-I-I-I-I......"

"Listen, if it can be taken away from you, it isn't a fundamental right. Your fundamental rights, if there is such a thing, are legalized by the protections of our Constitution. Nothing more, nothing less. You cannot be given, by virtue of paper, something which you were already born with."


I've read this debate up and down and sideways and heard all sides of "what constitutes a fundamental right." I like this opinion best, believe in it, and think that if you believe that something like the right to bargain collectively is a "fundamental right" because a legislator said so, so be it.

It's an unwinnable argument at the end of the day, but I'm all too happy to interject the drowned out cries of those that like to believe that recognizing the limit of what government can and cannot do for humans - is indeed a fundamental obligation.

[ArlJim78]

lets delve deeper and listen directly to these learned teachers so that they can have a chance to eloquently state their case in the thoughtful way you would expect from such progressive and enlightened folks.

gcDnKQul_c8


then lets take a look at this pictorial (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/20/pictorial-protest-saturday-in-wisconsin/)which illustrates the great lengths that these educated progressives go to both learn the subject at hand and of course the degree of civility and the very mature tone of their message stands out in stark contrast to the hateful tea party rallies.

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Feb-19-2011-ZZ4-Al-Queda.jpg

[mostpost]

Uh oh. Mosty been lyin'. Ms. Maddow been lyin'. No surprise, BigEd's been lyin'.

PolitiFact.com: Our conclusion: Maddow and the others are wrong.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/
Here is what is true:
1. The state of Wisconsin currently has a budget surplus of $121M.
2. There are a number of pending expenses which could turn that into a deficit.
3. No one knows, as of now, whether these expenses will be addressed in the current budget or the next.
Lang, a veteran and respected civil servant working in a nonpartisan job, told us he does not want to presume what legislative or other action will be taken to address the potential shortfalls he lists.
4. Walker's tax cuts will cost the state $140M in revenue, although that will not happen until the next budget.

MORE IMPORTANT THAN ALL OF THIS is the fact that the protests are not about workers contributing more to their retirement and health care. Union leaders have clearly signaled their willingness to make concessions.

The protests are about Walker's naked power grab; about his intention to deprive workers of their fundamental rights; about his intention to destroy public sector unions in Wisconsin and ultimately in the entire United States.
After that there will be no saving unions of any kind.

[boxcar]

The protests are about Walker's naked power grab; about his intention to deprive workers of their fundamental rights; about his intention to destroy public sector unions in Wisconsin and ultimately in the entire United States. After that there will be no saving unions of any kind.

I only wish this were true -- that Walker could destroy what is arguably the most corrupt institution in the U.S. -- Big Labor's nearest rival being the U.S. government itself! One could fill a library with all the books that have been written about the extent of corruption in unions over the course of these many decades. It ain't pretty reading. Unions are nothing more than workers' cartels and professional lobbyists. The SEIU nationwide alone contributed to Obama's campaign over $60 million bucks. They could have used all that money for its intended purposes -- to pay the "workers" benefits. These union thugs, over the years, have launched an all out assault on their bosses -- the private sector taxpayers who pay the freight of public employees. Enough is enough already. It's time to cut off the leeching unions, so that red-blooded, taxpaying Americans can reach an end to our misery!

And why do you complain about "naked power grabs"? I didn't hear you whine about this when ObamaCare was shoved down our throats!

Boxcar

[redshift1]

lets delve deeper and listen directly to these learned teachers so that they can have a chance to eloquently state their case in the thoughtful way you would expect from such progressive and enlightened folks.


Strikes and protests bring out a strange variety of people many of whom care nothing about the issue. Normal decorum goes out the window and people do things they would normally never do.

For a real event go to a Teamsters strike when they bring in the tattooed dock workers in fraternal support.

[mostpost]

lets delve deeper and listen directly to these learned teachers so that they can have a chance to eloquently state their case in the thoughtful way you would expect from such progressive and enlightened folks.

gcDnKQul_c8


then lets take a look at this pictorial (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/20/pictorial-protest-saturday-in-wisconsin/)which illustrates the great lengths that these educated progressives go to both learn the subject at hand and of course the degree of civility and the very mature tone of their message stands out in stark contrast to the hateful tea party rallies.

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Feb-19-2011-ZZ4-Al-Queda.jpg
First the video. The video proves what I have been saying. The protesters are not demonstrating against the additional cost of retirement and health care. They are demonstrating against being stripped of their rights. Speaker after speaker on the video said that. None of them were rude, none of them were confrontational.

Leah Vukmir, a tea party Senator from Wisconsin, tried gallantly to make it seem that the demonstrators were unwillingly to address the Budget problems.
The words of numerous intelligent, well reasoned demonstrators proved her words false.

The pictures. Don't even bother with the pictures any more. The signs of five protesters in a crowd of 70,000 are meaningless. What is the overall tenor of the crowd. It is orderly. It is respectful. It is much more courteous than some of the Tea Party townhalls I saw last year.

I almost forgot to add. How clever of Heritage to add circus music to the background whenever one of the teachers was speaking. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Do they think I don't know when I'm being manipulated?

[mostpost]

Now this:

President Obama, whose group Organizing for America, has bused in some of the nearly 70,000 protesters outside the state capitol on Saturday, last week called the bill "an assault on unions."

Hey Barry....don't you have more important things to see to, like maybe the Middle East?

Can you imagine having your children taught by teachers such as those? Maybe in a place like Madison, or Eugene, or Berkeley, but not in real America. They make a good argument for home schooling.
First of all, you've posted a quote without attribution. Secondly the quote is misleading. A lot of people will see "Organizing For America" & "Bused" & "70,000" and very soon it will be all over the internet that OFA bused 70,000 people to the demonstration in Madison.

The demonstrations had their genesis in Wisconsin. The vast majority of the demonstrators are from Wisconsin. If people choose to come from elsewhere to show solidarity, that is perfectly acceptable.

[boxcar]

[QUOTE=mostpostDo they think I don't know when I'm being manipulated?[/QUOTE]

:lol: :lol: You sure you want to ask that question? :lol: :lol: I don't know what "they think", but I know about myself. :lol:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

First of all, you've posted a quote without attribution. Secondly the quote is misleading. A lot of people will see "Organizing For America" & "Bused" & "70,000" and very soon it will be all over the internet that OFA bused 70,000 people to the demonstration in Madison.

The demonstrations had their genesis in Wisconsin. The vast majority of the demonstrators are from Wisconsin. If people choose to come from elsewhere to show solidarity, that is perfectly acceptable.

What's misleading about the quote?

http://biggovernment.com/eyeblasttv/2011/02/17/obama-wisconsin-is-launching-an-assault-on-unions/

Boxcar

[bigmack]

SVo7495RKW4

[boxcar]

The demonstrations had their genesis in Wisconsin. The vast majority of the demonstrators are from Wisconsin. If people choose to come from elsewhere to show solidarity, that is perfectly acceptable.

Verify your claim with documentation. Then it will be "perfectly acceptable". Until then...you're spouting windy rhetoric.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

let's be honest, public unions are a key part of the ruling political class apparatus. this 'Battle of Madison' is the first direct attack on the political class juggernaut. the stakes are high.

[riskman]

The pension and health-care benefits that unions negotiated locked in huge long-term structural deficits. Pensions and health care for the public sector unions are large commitments, surpass the private sector in most cases and are even increased by state legislatures because of heavy lobbying by special interests. These heavy burdens (health/pension) threaten spending on other government priorities. The retirements of baby boomers and longer life expectancies on top of the double-digit rate of health care inflation are a fact.

Read this article it is short and will give you an idea what is happening in the states. It is quite shocking.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/business/14retirees.html

This is only the beginning in WI, many other states and cities face similar problems. You have to face the seriousness of the depth of financial mess we are in.

[boxcar]

The pension and health-care benefits that unions negotiated locked in huge long-term structural deficits. Pensions and health care for the public sector unions are large commitments, surpass the private sector in most cases and are even increased by state legislatures because of heavy lobbying by special interests. These heavy burdens (health/pension) threaten spending on other government priorities. The retirements of baby boomers and longer life expectancies on top of the double-digit rate of health care inflation are a fact.

Read this article it is short and will give you an idea what is happening in the states. It is quite shocking.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/business/14retirees.html

This is only the beginning in WI, many other states and cities face similar problems. You have to face the seriousness of the depth of financial mess we are in.

Yup, these union cry babies have to do what BO told all Americans to do back in '08 -- tighten the belt, make sacrifices, suck it up. If this is such good advice to non-union Americans, it's even greater for public union members. Union people aren't better than their non-union counterparts.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Hey Barry....don't you have more important things to see to, like maybe the Middle East?

Or maybe our southern border???

No question, Obama is the enemy of Americans.
NEVER support this POS under any circumstances.
He is a cancer to freedom.
Treat him as such.

[newtothegame]

But there is money in Wisconsin. According to the non partisan Wisconsin Budget Office, there is a surplus of more than $120M in the current budget. There is a projected shortfall of $137M in next year's budget. That was caused by the unions demands for huge pay increases. NO. WAIT!! It wasn't. It was caused because governor Walker and the Republican dominated state legislature granted $140M in tax breaks to businesses in Wisconsin. So you have a governor who is trying to blame the unions for asking too much, (in reality there have been no demands by the unions) while at the same time giving away money to business.

To answer your last question, I sleep very well. I sleep well because I know that your portrayal of me and union workers, in general, is false. You may have some deep seated need to believe that portrayal, but just remember that it is false.

Wow mosty...after doing a little more searching...your numbers arent adding up...I am sure you can find a link though......
I bolded the part where you went after the tax breaks....problem is, they are not in next years budget...its not until TWO years out....

"Some tried to blame Walker's corporate tax cut bills approved in January for the $137 million deficit. But those cuts do not go into effect until the next two-year budget. "

Here is more of the reasons Wisconsin is facing this problem.....

"Some of the sniping over the current budget impasse stems from a report issued last June by the Wisconsin's Fiscal Bureau, which stated that the state would be $121 million in surplus by June 30, 2011, the end of budget calendar. However, the report also noted millions in unpaid bills and expected shortfalls: The state owes $153 million to provide Medicaid services for the needy. It owes an additional $58.7 million to Minnesota under a discontinued tax reciprocity deal. And millions more are due to other offices facing shortfalls, including $21.7 million to the state Department of Corrections.
An additional $200 million is also owed to the state's patient compensation fund, a debt courts have declared was a result of an illegal raid on the fund under Democratic former Gov. Jim Doyle."

wait..so a fund was illegally raided during the previous Democratic governor...ahh got it now!
And more.....

Those impending debts all contribute to an expected shortfall heading into the new fiscal calendar, which begins July 1 and is in effect for two years. Walker, a Republican, delayed a Tuesday release of his budget blueprint, which is expected to cite a $3.6 billion deficit."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/21/walker-wont-bend-wisconsin-nears-deadline-restructure-massive-debt/#

[bigmack]

Yo, Mosty; looks like the truth is knockin' on your door about those sick notes from doctors.

Any comment, or would you like to keep the truth at bay?

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_let8u0HUgP1qe0eclo1_r3_500.gif

[boxcar]

Touting his union background, Obama tells the audience, “I’ve been working with SEIU before I was elected to anything. When I was a community organizer, SEIU Local 880 and myself, we organized people [...] we organized voter registration drives, that’s how we built political power on the south side of Chicago.

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/02/20/obama-vows-paint-the-nation-seiu-purple/

As stated previously, there is the unholy marriage between the government and unions and it's all about these two entities making themselves more powerful at the expense of the The People. FDR was right: There is no place for Unions in Government. The People are now doing battle on two fronts -- fighting Big Labor and Big Government. Is it any wonder the SEIU donated about 67 Million big ones to BO's campaign? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

amen, these politicians were elected to represent their district, not a union. we now see who their real master is, when it comes time for sacrifice (just like Obama said we must do) the union compels the politicians to head for the hills.

I see today the dems are on the run now in Indiana. To avoid a vote regarding public unions, the dem's fled to Illinois, which I guess now makes us the official sanctuary state for these fleebagging democrats.

[boxcar]

amen, these politicians were elected to represent their district, not a union. we now see who their real master is, when it comes time for sacrifice (just like Obama said we must do) the union compels the politicians to head for the hills.

I see today the dems are on the run now in Indiana. To avoid a vote regarding public unions, the dem's fled to Illinois, which I guess now makes us the official sanctuary state for these fleebagging democrats.

This is a HUGE, HUGE, HUGE issue. I can only hope other states join in. There is a tremendous amount at stake, most especially in terms of campaign contributions. How is the Democrat Party going to survive without unions' contributions?

And the union is in a Catch-22 situation here. They will lose this fight one way or the other. If the Governor makes good on his promise to lay off public employees, so goes a good chunk of union dues. And this means the unions will have less to donate to the Dems. The unions would be better off going the other route and taking Walker's deal. At least they wouldn't lose any dues money.

This nation might be on the verge of having an "Egypt" moment in our history. This is how big this issue is.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Indiana dem-o-cowards have just fled the state to avoid a vote.
Two states, dems now conspiring to deny the electorate their civil rights to representations and to try to nullify the last election.

Grounds for impeachment? Most certainly.

Time to go on the offensive and destroy these people and their unions and their party. Compromise? NEVER.

The welfare of children, the rights of citizens, falling like dominoes and underscored by lies ( phony doctor excuses). The true democrat party is on display - liars, thieves, cowards, anti-Americans......time to destroy them. No mas. No mas. Take back America - step on a dem! :lol::lol::lol:

Call out the National Guard and break up these demonstrations ( and a few heads). Go Khadafy on them!

[boxcar]

Indiana dem-o-cowards have just fled the state to avoid a vote.
Two states, dems now conspiring to deny the electorate their civil rights to representations and to try to nullify the last election.

Grounds for impeachment? Most certainly.

Time to go on the offensive and destroy these people and their unions and their party. Compromise? NEVER.

The welfare of children, the rights of citizens, falling like dominoes and underscored by lies ( phony doctor excuses). The true democrat party is on display - liars, thieves, cowards, anti-Americans......time to destroy them. No mas. No mas. Take back America - step on a dem! :lol::lol::lol:

Call out the National Guard and break up these demonstrations ( and a few heads). Go Khadafy on them!

Hopefully, Ohio will be next. The more states, the merrier.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Hopefully, Ohio will be next. The more states, the merrier.

Boxcar

Ich bin ein Egyptian! ;)

[boxcar]

Ich bin ein Egyptian! ;)

Yeah, wouldn't that be megabytes of irony? Ohio. Egypt. I get it. :D

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Touting his union background, Obama tells the audience, “I’ve been working with SEIU before I was elected to anything. When I was a community organizer, SEIU Local 880 and myself, we organized people [...] we organized voter registration drives, that’s how we built political power on the south side of Chicago.

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/02/20/obama-vows-paint-the-nation-seiu-purple/

As stated previously, there is the unholy marriage between the government and unions and it's all about these two entities making themselves more powerful at the expense of the The People. FDR was right: There is no place for Unions in Government. The People are now doing battle on two fronts -- fighting Big Labor and Big Government. Is it any wonder the SEIU donated about 67 Million big ones to BO's campaign? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar
Once again you get it wrong. You take a quote out of context and use it to further your arguments. And, you don't even get the quote right.
The quote you misquoted comes from here.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445
It is a letter to the National federation of Federal Employees.
In paragraph three FDR acknowledges the right of federal employees to organize.
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.

FDR goes on to express concern about collective bargaining.
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.

The three most important words there are "As usually understood." FDR was not against public employee unions. That is false. FDR was not against collective bargaining. FDR was against public unions striking. That is why there is binding arbitration.

When postal unions negotiate a new contract with USPS, it is a three step process. First, the two sides meet and try to agree on items in dispute. If (more like when) there are items on which they cannot agree, a federal mediator is invited in. He tries to bring the two sides together voluntarily. Finally, if this fails, binding arbitration is used.

A three arbitrator panel is used. One is selected by the union. One is selected by management. I am not sure how the third is selected, but the process is supposed to insure he is acceptable to both sides.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
I see today the dems are on the run now in Indiana. To avoid a vote regarding public unions, the dem's fled to Illinois, which I guess now makes us the official sanctuary state for these fleebagging democrats.

I hated to be kneejerk in condeming the first group of defectors until I could be somewhat convinced that this wasn't a principled stance, conduct justified or not - but this is ridiculous - take them off the payroll, lock their offices, and let them just go to work for the union bosses. Now that we have copycat insubordinates with the same motives, there is absolutely nothing good or principled that can come from this absurdity.

Disgusting.

[boxcar]

Once again you get it wrong. You take a quote out of context and use it to further your arguments. And, you don't even get the quote right.
The quote you misquoted comes from here.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445
It is a letter to the National federation of Federal Employees.
In paragraph three FDR acknowledges the right of federal employees to organize.


FDR goes on to express concern about collective bargaining.


The three most important words there are "As usually understood." FDR was not against public employee unions. That is false. FDR was not against collective bargaining. FDR was against public unions striking. That is why there is binding arbitration.

When postal unions negotiate a new contract with USPS, it is a three step process. First, the two sides meet and try to agree on items in dispute. If (more like when) there are items on which they cannot agree, a federal mediator is invited in. He tries to bring the two sides together voluntarily. Finally, if this fails, binding arbitration is used.

A three arbitrator panel is used. One is selected by the union. One is selected by management. I am not sure how the third is selected, but the process is supposed to insure he is acceptable to both sides.

FDR was at minimum very wary of public unions. And I didn't quote anyone, but I see that you selectively left out a part of FDR's words: Here is what he said in full:

"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, "I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/19/the_ghost_of_fdr_is_smiling_on_wisconsins_governor _108962.html

I think it would be pretty safe to say that FDR, if he were alive, would be in Walker's corner. What we have going on in Wisconsin is an illegal strike -- nothing less, regardless of all those "doctors' notes". :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

All Walker is trying to do implement a little of the FDR doctrine -- that part that reads "as usually understood". Public employees would still have collective bargaining privileges but for wages only -- just not for those pricey bennies.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

FDR was at minimum very wary of public unions. And I didn't quote anyone, but I see that you selectively left out a part of FDR's words: Here is what he said in full:

"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, "I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/19/the_ghost_of_fdr_is_smiling_on_wisconsins_governor _108962.html

I think it would be pretty safe to say that FDR, if he were alive, would be in Walker's corner. What we have going on in Wisconsin is an illegal strike -- nothing less, regardless of all those "doctors' notes". :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

All Walker is trying to do implement a little of the FDR doctrine -- that part that reads "as usually understood". Public employees would still have collective bargaining privileges but for wages only -- just not for those pricey bennies.

Boxcar

I don't think I left anything out. It is all in the link. Furthermore I included FDR's statement on collective bargaining which could be interpreted (wrongly) as saying he opposed collective bargaining. This did not show up in your copying of my post. (Through no fault of yours) It is clearly in my original.

As for an illegal strike, nonsense; there was no strike. Public employees gathered to express their opinion on a matter of concern to them. Some of them may have taken a day off from work to do so. That is not a strike. Calling in sick is not a strike.

You are also wrong (I'm saying that a lot to you lately) that public employees would have bargaining rights for wages. They would, but only to the point that the increase did not exceed the COLA.

FDR never said public unions should not be able to collectively bargain. He merely pointed out that their collective bargaining needed to be under different rules than existed in the private sector. Did you notice that the purpose of the letter was not to threaten the union if they decided to use a strike as a negotiating weapon; rather it was to congratulate the union on its policy of neither initiating a strike, nor participating in one called by another union.

[Ocala Mike]

I think it would be pretty safe to say that FDR, if he were alive, would be in Walker's corner. What we have going on in Wisconsin is an illegal strike

Boxcar


I kind of agree with Boxcar here. FDR was very-much anti "job action," hence the creation of the NLRB which greatly reduced strikes in this country. He would certainly be in Walker's corner if this happened during WWII.

Now, I don't know the wording of the anti-strike law for public employees in Wisconsin but I am somewhat familiar with NY's famous (or infamous) Taylor Law. Demonstrators who take time off their jobs would be seen as illegally striking.


Ocala Mike

[bigmack]

Once again you get it wrong.
Speakin' of which...

Still no comment on your contention that Doctors handing out sick notes was a fabricated story?

[HUSKER55]

It was on our local news that there really were doctors out there handing out excuses.

I don't think the law allows them to do that but then again No one has said Walker isn't going to let it slide. (as far as I know).

[boxcar]

I don't think I left anything out. It is all in the link. Furthermore I included FDR's statement on collective bargaining which could be interpreted (wrongly) as saying he opposed collective bargaining. This did not show up in your copying of my post. (Through no fault of yours) It is clearly in my original.

As for an illegal strike, nonsense; there was no strike. Public employees gathered to express their opinion on a matter of concern to them. Some of them may have taken a day off from work to do so. That is not a strike. Calling in sick is not a strike.

Only when the employees aren't lying about it. :rolleyes:

You are also wrong (I'm saying that a lot to you lately) that public employees would have bargaining rights for wages. They would, but only to the point that the increase did not exceed the COLA.

So, what's wrong with that? :rolleyes: Naturally, you're assuming they're all lily white and pure as the driven snow.

FDR never said public unions should not be able to collectively bargain. He merely pointed out that their collective bargaining needed to be under different rules than existed in the private sector. Did you notice that the purpose of the letter was not to threaten the union if they decided to use a strike as a negotiating weapon; rather it was to congratulate the union on its policy of neither initiating a strike, nor participating in one called by another union.

No kidding. This is precisely what Walker is doing, too. He's setting different rules. You should be congratulating Walker for being in sync with FDR. :D

Boxcar

[Tom]

Real easy to check out - the excuses have to be signed.
Investigate every one of them and fire/prosecute every phony one.
How many of these quacks are doing this regularly for insurance scammers?

[bigmack]

Mosty dodging the question of fraud as much as the head of the teachers union.

Get a load of this flim flam man. Can't even be man enough to answer the question.

Not unlike someone else here.

HP93Ixo2LSc

[JustRalph]

she is very good......and god she is gorgeous!

He is a politician of the highest order and very very ugly......when placed in a split screen with her........ :lol:

[ElKabong]

Mosty dodging the question of fraud as much as the head of the teachers union.

Get a load of this flim flam man. Can't even be man enough to answer the question.

Not unlike someone else here.

HP93Ixo2LSc

Typical union flunky. Can't answer a straight question.

[eastie]

take a look back in history and see what workers conditions were before Unions.

[newtothegame]

take a look back in history and see what workers conditions were before Unions.

Well, based on your anaology of time referrence, couldnt that be said about ANYTHING?
"look back in history and......" lol

[bigmack]

take a look back in history and see what workers conditions were before Unions.
So if we don't start treating them unions mo betta, we might see 12 year olds working in factories 16 hours/day? :(

God Bless the Unions. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

So if we don't start treating them unions mo betta, we might see 12 year olds working in factories 16 hours/day? :(

God Bless the Unions. :rolleyes:

Just DO IT!

[ArlJim78]

public unions only began about 50 years ago, and they are a bad idea. they are political and offer no mechanism to keep costs under control, which is why they are the only ones that still have those lavish benefits that the private sector had to give up years ago.

[bigmack]

Still no word from mosty on the fraud/Doc's? Must be doin' some serious digging to get out of this one.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_let5asucR91qe0eclo1_r5_500.gif

[boxcar]

So if we don't start treating them unions mo betta, we might see 12 year olds working in factories 16 hours/day? :(

God Bless the Unions. :rolleyes:

Yeah...but what's wrong with instilling a strong work ethic in kids. Maybe the next generation would produce fewer ObamaBucks addicts. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[prospector]

Contrary to what the conservatives like to say, it is not the teachers union's fault that the state is such bad shape. It is the fault of a bunch of wall street speculators who produce nothing but schemes to cheat people out of money including public employee pension funds. Our education system is in bad shape. Cutting teacher pay is not get better people to become teachers. What few goods ones that are left in the system will soon leave if we don't improve pay instead of cutting it. Do you think places like China and India are cutting teacher pay? Are they moving away from public education?
is anything NOT wall streets fault?
i've seen the quality of whats coming out of the schools..bust the teachers union till they learn how to teach and not count students..most of us here could teach those students better than the current crop..66% of wi grade schoolers can't read to the expected level! what great liberals they'll make..

[HUSKER55]

Doesn't the USA rank 25TH or something like that in math and science compared to other nations

[Tom]

Still no word from mosty on the fraud/Doc's? Must be doin' some serious digging to get out of this one.



Where is 46 when we need him?

[eastie]

public unions only began about 50 years ago, and they are a bad idea. they are political and offer no mechanism to keep costs under control, which is why they are the only ones that still have those lavish benefits that the private sector had to give up years ago.

you mean to tell me that the private sector no longer gets 5 weeks vacation, 15 sick days, 3 personal days, and double time and a half for holidays, not to mention shift differential, and paying only 20% of health insurance costs, as well as a whopping 8% into retirement ? wow it must be rough out there in the real world.

[HUSKER55]

8 of the 14 democrats are facing recall movements according to the news. evidently they got the signatures.

[Tom]

you mean to tell me that the private sector no longer gets 5 weeks vacation, 15 sick days, 3 personal days, and double time and a half for holidays, not to mention shift differential, and paying only 20% of health insurance costs, as well as a whopping 8% into retirement ? wow it must be rough out there in the real world.

Sounds like you don't need a union after all, eh?

[ArlJim78]

you mean to tell me that the private sector no longer gets 5 weeks vacation, 15 sick days, 3 personal days, and double time and a half for holidays, not to mention shift differential, and paying only 20% of health insurance costs, as well as a whopping 8% into retirement ? wow it must be rough out there in the real world.
doesn't sound at all like the private sector I'm in.

[newtothegame]

you mean to tell me that the private sector no longer gets 5 weeks vacation, 15 sick days, 3 personal days, and double time and a half for holidays, not to mention shift differential, and paying only 20% of health insurance costs, as well as a whopping 8% into retirement ? wow it must be rough out there in the real world.

I would like to see a link to the private sector job with those bennies!
Double time and a half huh?? And where is this??
And last I checked....I pay 100% into my 401k with the company making a smaller contribution (up to 5%) on mine.
Hmmm 5wks vacation?? that may be possible...but you need to be there like 20 plus years and longer for most private sector jobs (and by then your more then likely retired lol).
15 sick days?? AND 3 personal??? lmao your a hoot!
I am with whome I believe a very generous company and they allow (by company handbook) 4 hours per month for sick time...That doesnt add up 15 days by my math.
Now if your sick and need more time, you can call and request, but its unpaid unless you have saved up sick time which you can use.
And NO eastie..its NOT rough...its REALITY. It's not the Utopia your used too...but not to worry....it's all changing !!!! lol

[boxcar]

The Left's violent, vitriolic, hate-filled rhetoric keeps sinking to new lows. This state a Mass. Representative advocates things getting "bloody" over what is going on in Wisconsin.

Here is what he said:

"Every once in a while you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703775704576162533209090102.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

And this coming from a senator who criticized the Right for its violent language after Giffords was shot. Another hypocrite!

He later apologized and used as his excuse that his words were "unscripted". :bang: :bang: I take that to mean that if they had been scripted, he would not have expressed himself so honestly and bluntly? :rolleyes:

Important political issues like what is going on in Wisconsin tend to bring the worst out of the Dem(on)s. And this is the silver lining. All America is watching and paying attention to this issue and how the parties are reacting to it.

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

The Left's violent, vitriolic, hate-filled rhetoric keeps sinking to new lows. This state a Mass. Representative advocates things getting "bloody" over what is going on in Wisconsin.

Here is what he said:

"Every once in a while you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703775704576162533209090102.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

And this coming from a senator who criticized the Right for its violent language after Giffords was shot. Another hypocrite!

He later apologized and used as his excuse that his words were "unscripted". :bang: :bang: I take that to mean that if they had been scripted, he would not have expressed himself so honestly and bluntly? :rolleyes:

Important political issues like what is going on in Wisconsin tend to bring the worst out of the Dem(on)s. And this is the silver lining. All America is watching and paying attention to this issue and how the parties are reacting to it.

Boxcar

Must of lost his teleprompter too lol

[ElKabong]

you mean to tell me that the private sector no longer gets 5 weeks vacation, 15 sick days, 3 personal days, and double time and a half for holidays, not to mention shift differential, and paying only 20% of health insurance costs, as well as a whopping 8% into retirement ? wow it must be rough out there in the real world.

I get 20 days of "time bank", that includes sick / vacation/ bereavement. And I have days left over at the end of the year.

I work weekends (salaried, no o/t pay), so do my co workers. We're in a competitive industry. We work hard and smart to survive.

Your post is typical union flunky bullshit. "Don't everbodey git all dem days awff and purrks and stuff??" The answer is No. No we don't

[eastie]

Union guys like me would have the work done by the weekend, so we wouldn't have to be there like you chumps. Working weekends for no OT...that's real "SMART" workin y'all is doin there boy. Keep on hatin. and keep working those weekends while I'm watching football and bettin hosses.



Eastie shoots....and scores !

[newtothegame]

Union guys like me would have the work done by the weekend, so we wouldn't have to be there like you chumps. Working weekends for no OT...that's real "SMART" workin y'all is doin there boy. Keep on hatin. and keep working those weekends while I'm watching football and bettin hosses.



Eastie shoots....and scores !

lol.."shooting" blanks hits NOTHING!
Just as all your fellow union members in wisconsin...hit nothing but more derogatory towards public (and regular) unions.
Gee, I wonder if the unions are so great...why the massive decline in memberships over the last say thirty years???

I would think people would be flocking too them in droves if its so great...no???

Seems everyone sees unions for what they are...blood sucking leaches that not only drain companies but put themselves above the rest of america.

[bigmack]

Union guys like me would have the work done by the weekend, so we wouldn't have to be there like you chumps. Working weekends for no OT...that's real "SMART" workin y'all is doin there boy. Keep on hatin. and keep working those weekends while I'm watching football and bettin hosses.
Eastie shoots....and scores !
You don't think his point is that he's willing to work without pay to ensure the viability of his companies business do ya?

Typical union schlub. I punch the clock, get my cut, and that's the only thing I give a shit about. Rock solid. :ThmbUp:

You Teamsters kill anyone lately? Teamsters have donated 92% of their $24,418,589 in contributions since 1990 to the Democratic Party. :eek:

[boxcar]

You don't think his point is that he's willing to work without pay to ensure the viability of his companies business do ya?

Typical union schlub. I punch the clock, get my cut, and that's I give a shit about. Rock solid. :ThmbUp:

You Teamsters kill anyone lately? Teamsters have donated 92% of their $24,418,589 in contributions since 1990 to the Democratic Party. :eek:

The Dems are on the Unions' payrolls. Must be nice.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

its a money laundering scheme. guess what? we all support Democrats via the teachers unions who are of course "doing it all for the kids"

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3ki5HJRxZtI/TVyBZALEJrI/AAAAAAAAj0E/1SeB1vjK26U/s1600/110216-cycle2.gif

[ElKabong]

Union guys like me would have the work done by the weekend, so we wouldn't have to be there like you chumps. Working weekends for no OT...that's real "SMART" workin y'all is doin there boy. Keep on hatin. and keep working those weekends while I'm watching football and bettin hosses.



Eastie shoots....and scores !

Nah, you'd hide in Illinois with the rest of the clock watching shits.....

FWIW, I watch football every Saturday from Sept-Nov. I come in and work when I want on weekends, unlike union flunkys that have to ask their boss to go take a shit. (I'm smiling while posting in this thread btw.. no hating on my side, just observations of the ignorant).

[lamboguy]

what the unions want to do or not do is their business. for lawmaker's not to go to work for the constituents that elected them is sicko. this is not democracy, it is dictatorship. this is how you ruin the backbone of democracy,

gold to $1600

[GaryG]

The only good thing the unions have done in the last 50 years was to provide the capital from their Central States Pension Fund that built Vegas. Damn nice of them to give all that $$ to the mob. Where have you gone Jimmy Hoffa?

[eastie]

its a money laundering scheme. guess what? we all support Democrats via the teachers unions who are of course "doing it all for the kids"

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3ki5HJRxZtI/TVyBZALEJrI/AAAAAAAAj0E/1SeB1vjK26U/s1600/110216-cycle2.gif

teachers were grossly underpaid for decades, it's about time they got paid accordingly. Thanks to unions they now get paid for their service.

[Tom]

teachers were grossly underpaid for decades, it's about time they got paid accordingly. Thanks to unions they now get paid for their service.

Yeah, never let a little thing like results ruin a good day dream.
For example YOUR teachers! :D

[boxcar]

teachers were grossly underpaid for decades, it's about time they got paid accordingly. Thanks to unions they now get paid for their service.

Yeah, isn't it great? The more public employees get paid, the more dues the Unions collect. And the more dues they collect, the more they can send to the Democrat Party. Nice little scam at the taxpayers' expense! :bang: :bang:
This unholy alliance made in the pit of hell must be broken.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

a letter from a conservative teacher (http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/24/letter-of-the-day-the-plight-of-the-conservative-public-school-teacher/)<gasp>
______________________________________________

Hello Michelle,

I wanted to share some of my own thoughts and frustrations with being a teacher in public education. Unfortunately, I am unable to do this openly for fear of reprisal from the very union that is supposedly in place to protect me.

Let me begin by saying that there are a lot of good teachers in my district and throughout the country whose top priority is the education of students. Sadly from my own experiences in the day to day life of being an educator there are an awful lot of teachers who are focused on anything but education.

As events have unfolded in Wisconsin, I have been reflecting on my nearly 10 years in public education. My parents were both teachers and I greatly admired the work they did with their own students. I began with that same passion for teaching that they instilled in me, but am finding it more and more difficult to keep that flame alive.

The hold that unions have over the public educational system is nothing short of toxic. Year after year, I have a lot of money taken out of my paychecks for union dues. What do I get for my money? I am bombarded with emails and flyers “urging” us to vote for candidates that coincidentally always have the letter (D) after them. I get to be lectured to by union reps about the evil Republican candidates are and why they know what is best for me.

Now I am being hit with email after email “urging” me to stand with the teachers of Wisconsin. One teacher who is very tight with our union replied to our district making fun of Republicans directly. You might ask why I don’t forward this to human resources, but the repercussions would be brutal.

The truth is that any teacher who does not hold down the talking points of the unions, DNC or Obama White House needs to keep quiet to keep their job. The vitriol I heard over the Bush years was deafening but acceptable and expected. I can hardly remember a week that went by where teachers, sometimes in front of students, were not making fun of Republicans. I’ve personally been the subject of much ridicule and scorn from fellow teachers and will continue to be as long as I am in public education. I believe in what I am doing in my own classroom by focusing on educating students, but as time goes by it is becoming more and more likely that I will leave education all together. Not because of students, but because of the unions and the teachers that support them.

Frustrated in Minnesota

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/24/letter-of-the-day-the-plight-of-the-conservative-public-school-teacher/

[Tom]

Union thugs.
Been that way forever.
Those that aren't man enough to stand up and take care of themselves bully others into supporting their pathetic arses.

Most union boys are far too stupid to figure out they are being played.
Hey, look at the bright side, for every 12 union jobs that might end, one real one will open up for other people. :D

[boxcar]

a letter from a conservative teacher (http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/24/letter-of-the-day-the-plight-of-the-conservative-public-school-teacher/)<gasp>
______________________________________________

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/24/letter-of-the-day-the-plight-of-the-conservative-public-school-teacher/

Unbelievable! My wife, who is a professional musician, could have just as well written that letter. Fortunately, we live in a right-to-work state, so she dropped out of the union scene shortly after she became a Christian. But talk about mind-numbed robots --the orchestra pit is loaded with them. In fact, it was a very sad day for her several years ago when a friend and colleague moved out of the area to live upstate; for she knew of no other conservative in the orchestra.

But my wife felt the same way as this teacher. She reached the point to where she asked herself, "What am I really getting for all these dues that are taken out of my pay"? And she couldn't stand the blatant and shameless promotion of the Democrat Party by the union. It made her sick to think that her money was going to support liberals/socialists.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

OBAMA IN 2007: "AS A PRESIDENT, I'LL PUT ON COMFORTABLE SHOES AND JOIN THE PICKET LINE."

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/obama-in-2007-as-a-president-ill-put-on-comfortable-shoes-and-join-the-picket-line/question-1540161/

Where, oh where is the little guys' champion? The workers' (commie code for proletariat) champion? Why isn't BO out there locking arms with the proletariat? Must be that the polls in Wisconsin aren't favorable for unions and Dems, otherwise we can be dead sure that BO would be out there marching with the protesters in this important electoral swing state.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

no surprise here. the entire brotherhood is joining hands.

Communists, socialists rallying support behind Madison protests (http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/25/communists-socialists-rallying-support-behind-madison-protests/)


Communist and socialist groups — including the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, the Communist Party USA, Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party and the Democratic Socialists of America — are voicing their support for the public sector unions protesting Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s plans to curtail their collective bargaining abilities.


Maoists? Trotskyists? the modern democratic party works hand in glove with them. :lol:

[hcap]

BOO!!

[bigmack]

BOO!!
Centered, dark red, size 5 AND 2 exclamation marks.

Oh my. :eek:

[hcap]

Too much snuff BM?

http://www.blakeneymanor.com/images/carryon/fop.jpg

[boxcar]

Centered, dark red, size 5 AND 2 exclamation marks.

Oh my. :eek:

Hcap reminds me of Slick Willy: Neither of them ever met a commie they didn't like.

Boxcar

[GaryG]

The Community Organizer senses the danger in all of these state-led austerity measures. They could seriously cripple the public unions that Barry holds dear. I would imagine that any of those yahoos in Madison with a job has returned to it, leaving the protesting to the paid professionals. Note the pre-printed signs and the references no Nazis. Ohio will be next, but there are enough commies and fellow travelers to go around. Just saw Kasich telling Barry to basically mind his own business and let him run Ohio.

[eastie]

Slick Willy ? ya mean the guy who turned the deficit into a surplus and had everyone working....even the loafers ?

you are right of Attila the HUN . wicked righty

[hcap]

Box, this what they use to do to "commies" or libs". At that time I think they called them them "witches"

Hey you remember. You prosecuted at Salem, didn't you?

http://z.about.com/d/atheism/1/0/L/0/3/SalemWitchTrial-e.jpg

[Stevecsd]

Those people who are opposed to unions using their dues for political purposes need to investigate the BECK ruling. A few years ago a man won a lawsuit against the union. Any union member can demand that they only pay the part of the dues required for representation & collective bargaining. Members can stop paying the part of the union dues that the union spends for politics. The union members will need to investigate and research what is involved to do this.

[boxcar]

Box, this what they use to do to "commies" or libs". At that time I think they called them them "witches"

Hey you remember. You prosecuted at Salem, didn't you?

http://z.about.com/d/atheism/1/0/L/0/3/SalemWitchTrial-e.jpg


Witches = Commies? I see you sabbatical from this forum hasn't helped your state of mind. But regardless, there are numerous commie orgs right here in the homeland, comrade. Google 'em. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Lefty]

Slick Willy ? ya mean the guy who turned the deficit into a surplus and had everyone working....even the loafers ?

you are right of Attila the HUN . wicked righty

Didja happen to notice that it didn;t happen until the R's won the Congress?
Knute's Contract With America and the R's did that and Clinton happily took the credit. Didja know that? Or are you just another revisionist lib? Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm...

[GaryG]

If there are any plans to burn commies at the stake you can count on me....always willing to help.

[boxcar]

Slick Willy ? ya mean the guy who turned the deficit into a surplus and had everyone working....even the loafers ?

you are right of Attila the HUN . wicked righty

And you are right out of the frying pan into the lake of fire. :rolleyes: See Lefty's response. If it weren't for the Repugs, it would have never happened.

Boxcar

[eastie]

And you are right out of the frying pan into the lake of fire. :rolleyes: See Lefty's response. If it weren't for the Repugs, it would have never happened.

Boxcar


you've been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh. Clinton was the man. The rest of the world loved him, and when they're happy our economy booms. That's what they taught me at Northeastern University, which i hear is kinda tough to get into now.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... That's what they taught me at Northeastern University, which i hear is kinda tough to get into now.

It is?...

How times have changed... Please tell me the Store 24 still sits up there at the top of Mass Ave. so the oriental kids can buy zig-zags for their woodwinds and that everyone still gets big pupiled and watches everyone else walk on water at the "church" down the road on Huntington...

:eek:

[PaceAdvantage]

Store 24...that brings back some memories....

[Lefty]

Well, easty, a fact is a fact and the budget wasn't balanced until The R's won Congress. Look it up. In fact, before that, Robert Reisch, went on tv talk shows and said a balanced budget would not be a good thing. And after R's won Congress and got the welfare reform through, Jesse Jackson was all upset and at the D's convention, Clinton told Jackson not to worry, he would fix it later. But when it worked so well, Clinton just took credit. No Limbaugh needed, I was around then. Ahh, memories...beats revisionist history everytime.

[hcap]

Witches = Commies? I see you sabbatical from this forum hasn't helped your state of mind. But regardless, there are numerous commie orgs right here in the homeland, comrade. Google 'em. :rolleyes:

Unions? Commies? How come Ronnie Raygun was head of one and (gasp!) leading right-wing blowhards are American Federation Television and Radio Artists union members. AFL-CIO union affiliated commies are ALL around us guys. Check under your beds. Beware!

Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Loyal Socialists, maybe even community organizers? I tell you guys, union solidarity knows no bounds! Makes me feel like singing "The Internationale" or at least Kumbaya.

PS: So are Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter.

http://www.alternet.org/news/150054/confirmed%3A_union-bashing_right-wing_media_stars_hannity%2C_limbaugh_and_o%27reill y_are_afl-cio_union-affiliated_members/

[BlueShoe]

If there are any plans to burn commies at the stake you can count on me....always willing to help.
Can find plenty of guilty ones to smoke at almost any union headquarters in the land. If there is one institution that has been infiltrated, dominated, and controlled by the CPUSA and their fellow travelers, it is the US organized labor movement. Early leaders such as George Meany and Lane Kirkland tried to keep the Reds out, but with only modest success. Union rhetoric is almost always pure Marxist; class warfare, the oppressed worker, the evil capitalist bosses, etc, ad nauseum. Union leaders, and many, but not all, members, believe far more in dialectical materialism than they do in free market capitalism.

[Tom]

Hcap reminds me of Slick Willy: Neither of them ever met a commie they didn't like.

Boxcar

And hcap has not made a valid point or argument since Slick Willy.
Must be awful to be obsolete.

[hcap]

"Founded in September 1980, Solidarity was formed in Soviet-occupied Poland as the USSR’s first free and independent trade union. By 1981, the union had grown to 10 million people and became a powerful force for demanding economic and political reforms within the Soviet Union. Solidarity began to use strikes to demand these reforms, and the Soviets responded by jailing their leaders and cracking down on their right to organize. During his Christmas address to the nation on December 23, 1981, President Reagan condemned the Soviet-backed Polish crackdowns on labor unions, promoting the “basic right of free trade unions and to strike”:

REAGAN: The Polish government has trampled underfoot to the UN Charter and Helsinki accords. It has even broken the Gdańsk Agreement of 1980 by which the Polish government recognized the basic right of free trade unions and to strike."

[Tom]

It is not a basic right, hcap. It is a granted privilege.
The law in Wisconsin that granted the right is now being changed by a duly elect government, who made t clear that this is what they would do if elected. The PEOPLE of Wisconsin are having their rights trampled underfoot buy the bottom-feeding democrat cowards denying them their right of self-government. As a poll-worshiper, you must realize that the people have spoken and through due-process of law, they do not wish to allow unions to continue to have this privilege.

Why do you support trmapling of the majority of people's rights for the financial benefit of the minority? Isn't that exactly what you whine about when government supposedly protects the wealthy?

Wow, man, are you being inconsistent or what?

[ArlJim78]

of course because teachers working for the city of Madison, Wisconsin without collective bargaining would suffer the same fate as if they were in Soviet occupied Poland. thanks for that compelling perspective.

[Tom]

Our detective friend complained in another thread that we were going back to many years for examples (Carter) so I hope he sees this hcap trip back in time and will chime in here, too.

[ArlJim78]

I guess Richard Trumka is the Lech Walesa of our times and naturally that would leave Scott Walker as Brezhnev. oh no wait, they've already said he's Hitler, or was it Mubarak?

[hcap]

The polls show the public backs the unions giving back some benefits amd the unions covering a greater percentage of health care and pensions.

But do not favor ending collective bargaining.

Rights? You have the gall to talk about rights when the conservative mantra is that Corporations "Have the Same Rights as Individual Citizens" ?

This recession and economic crisis and consequently state budgets floundering was caused by greed on wall street and their financial chicanery, not working stiffs collectively bargaining over the last 50 years.

Haven't you gentlemen ever heard of the doctrine of Separation of Corporations and State?

[Lefty]

Didja know in some states like Virginia, public sector unions are against the law? And didja know Virginia has a surplus?
Didja know that even a lib like FDR didn't think public sector unions were a good idea?

[ArlJim78]

Didja know in some states like Virginia, public sector unions are against the law? And didja know Virginia has a surplus?
Didja know that even a lib like FDR didn't think public sector unions were a good idea?
this fact seems to get overlooked, several states have made collective bargaining for teachers illegal. do teachers in Virginia and Texas work for peanuts under some draconian work rules? I don't think so.

but to listen to all the whining in Wisconsin you'd think that they were being asked to work for $5 a day in some dark sweatshop.

this is what happens when people are detached from reality for too long. they act like there is some santa claus who can guarantee that your wages and benefits will gradually increase forever regardless of what is going on in the rest of the economy.

[mostpost]

Didja happen to notice that it didn;t happen until the R's won the Congress?
Knute's Contract With America and the R's did that and Clinton happily took the credit. Didja know that? Or are you just another revisionist lib? Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm...
The 1997 tax cuts coincided with, but did not cause the late 90"s boom. What they did cause was a reduction in the growth of revenues, and an increase (explosion) in the deficit.

The late 90's boom was created by the technology industry. New products and services were developed that investors could invest in. If those opportunities had not been there, the tax cuts would have been meaningless. In fact, it could be argued (and I will) that the tax cuts aided in the boom and bust cycle.

The drop in the capital gains tax from 28% to 20% gave investors extra money; perhaps too much extra money. With less money to invest they would have been more cautious in how they invested it. Companies with no chance to succeed would not have been started. Solid companies would have grown at a steadier albeit slower rate. There would have been less of a boom but much less of a bust. Or no bust at all.

[bigmack]

The drop in the capital gains tax from 28% to 20% gave investors extra money; perhaps too much extra money. With less money to invest they would have been more cautious in how they invested it. Companies with no chance to succeed would not have been started. Solid companies would have grown at a steadier albeit slower rate. There would have been less of a boom but much less of a bust. Or no bust at all.
No bust at all if people just had less dough through higher taxes. :lol:

Postman, I love ya.

[mostpost]

Didja happen to notice that it didn;t happen until the R's won the Congress?
Knute's Contract With America and the R's did that and Clinton happily took the credit. Didja know that? Or are you just another revisionist lib? Hmmm, hmmm, hmmm...

Simply not true. From 1993 through 1996 GDP grew by an average 3.3% per year. Not as good as 1997 through 2000, but 51% better when compared to the four GHW Bush years.

[mostpost]

No bust at all if people just had less dough through higher taxes. :lol:

Postman, I love ya.

It doesn't matter if people have more money to invest if they have nothing to invest it in. :bang: :bang:

[boxcar]

this fact seems to get overlooked, several states have made collective bargaining for teachers illegal. do teachers in Virginia and Texas work for peanuts under some draconian work rules? I don't think so.

but to listen to all the whining in Wisconsin you'd think that they were being asked to work for $5 a day in some dark sweatshop.

this is what happens when people are detached from reality for too long. they act like there is some santa claus who can guarantee that your wages and benefits will gradually increase forever regardless of what is going on in the rest of the economy.

So, let me see: The libs claim that "collective bargaining" is practically an inalienable right handed down to every human being by God Almighty himself (the way they tell it); yet, some states have laws on the books making this right illegal!? :bang: :bang: :bang:

Libs, here's news flash for you: Collective Bargaining is a PRIVILEGE.

Boxcar

[delayjf]

but 51% better when compared to the four GHW Bush years.

real gdp growth from 83-90 ( 35.7) outpaced real gdp growth from 91-99 .(33%)

[Tom]

Haven't you gentlemen ever heard of the doctrine of Separation of Corporations and State?

No, but you seem to have stumbles on to the seperation of brain and mouth doctrine.

You just keep ignoring that due process of law is being evaded and the voters are being denied thier right to fair representation by dem cowards, the union thugs and mindless mobs. Curious how you only stand up for certain groups of people, and in this case, the VAST minority.

[mostpost]

Didja know in some states like Virginia, public sector unions are against the law? And didja know Virginia has a surplus?
Didja know that even a lib like FDR didn't think public sector unions were a good idea?
That is wrong. You say that because one of your conservative buddies (Boxcar?) said it. Therefore it must be true.
Here is where conservatives get this idea. A letter from FDR to the Federation of Federal Employees:
My dear Mr. Steward:
As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

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."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.
Very sincerely yours,

The bolded words indicate where Roosevelt clearly supports the rights of public employees to form unions. The italicized words show where he recognizes there are limitations. Note the underlined words. The limitation on collective bargaining is a limitation on tactics not on rights.

[ArlJim78]

the more information that surfaces about the teachers contract in Wisconsin it becomes clear what a scam they've got going there, and should be exhibit A for the reason to abolish public unions. they've gorged at the trough for too long.

Here is a WSJ article which breaks down the benefits portion of their contract. WI teachers receive 74 cents in benefits for every dollar they earn, while the private sector average is 24 cents.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703408604576164290717724956.html


part of the reason why these benefits are so expensive is because the union strongarms school districts into purchasing their heath insurance from their own trust company, which naturally is the most expensive insurance around. yeah its quite the little scam.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kyleolson/2011/02/23/insurance_scam_driving_wisconsin_union_debate/page/full/

[HUSKER55]

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."

YOU NEED TO READ YOUR OWN POST

[ArlJim78]

my god look at his feet, can you imagine the stench?


http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/pod.jpg