Jump to bottom

287 comments
1 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 11:58:08am

I believe that Dark argued this a few days ago, an he saw it as a feature not a bug…

DF scares me sometimes….

2 Summer Seale  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:01:50pm

…and I say to you, brothers and sisters of Libya, that we will not stop fighting! We will massacre the people in the streets because they are Zionists and drug users! We are the camel that never rests and strays while the scorpions sting from below as we walk past! And let me read more from my green book to you, of my great wisdom and insight, because we must out-think the Zionist oppressors who have come to our streets and want to take me down, your great leader and builder, for I have built Libya into a world power with my words and my vision! And….hey….did they turn this thing off…???

3 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:04:35pm

Wackenhut? Congratulations to Republican Governor Scott Walker for turning Wisconsin into a banana republic overnight.

4 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:04:46pm

In 2009, Scott Walker refused stimulus money from the feds even though Milwaukee County badly needed it:

[Link: www.expressmilwaukee.com…]

5 engineer cat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:05:25pm

i think the koch bros, for all their money, are just as deluded and full of magical thinking as anybody else

if they are trying to destroy the sources of democratic power, this should have been accomplished seven years ago with an all republican administration and half the country asking “why do you hate america?”

but it all came crashing down on itself just the same

7 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:06:25pm

re: #6 Gus 802

BREAKING: 8th Grade Reading Scores In WI Higher Than National Average

///The unions haven’t even been disbanded yet an already the governor’s plan is working!

8 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:07:14pm

re: #6 Gus 802

BREAKING: 8th Grade Reading Scores In WI Higher Than National Average

Then they obviously have paid too much for luxury teachers.

9 Jeff In Ohio  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:08:02pm

GOP 2010 - Where are the jobs? (We want the power!)

GOP 2011 Agenda (We got the power!)

jobs attempt to bust uninos - check
jobs settle deficits even if it ruins economy - check
jobs attempt to eliminate women’s reproductive rights - check
jobs decimate science - check
jobs topple sharia law in America - check
jobs cut funding for border patrols and monitoring - check
jobs fuck the middle class - check
jobs suck up to corporations - check
jobs fuck the EPA - check
jobs ACORN!
jobs VAN JONES!
jobs WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?!!?
jobs FLOTUS IS FAT!

jobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobsjobs

It’s Bush’s fault.

2012 can’t come fast enough.

10 engineer cat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:08:03pm

re: #4 Charles

In 2009, Scott Walker refused stimulus money from the feds even though Milwaukee County badly needed it:

[Link: www.expressmilwaukee.com…]

i am thinking about an essay along these lines:

1) government is not a business, and government should not be “run like a business”

2) if you think there aren’t any successful businesses that get into debt, you don’t know much about big business

11 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:09:07pm

re: #8 Decatur Deb

Then they obviously have paid too much for luxury teachers.

See. “Merit pay” works. You know how the right is always saying that in order to attract “the best and the brightest” for corporations and Wall Street you do so by providing lucrative compensation packages. Apparently though, this logic doesn’t apply to everyone else including teachers. The way things are going it won’t be long before the right says that teachers should be payed the minimum wage.

12 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:10:19pm

re: #1 jamesfirecat

I believe that Dark argued this a few days ago, an he saw it as a feature not a bug…

DF scares me sometimes…

Aw, he’s a good boy. He thinks whatever his Daddy tells him to think.

13 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:12:28pm

re: #1 jamesfirecat

re: #12 goddamnedfrank

He not on this thread right now.

14 martinsmithy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:19:20pm

Another sign that this is political:
Walker exempted public safety unions from his proposal. And it was partially political payback.

In addition,

And on Tuesday the governor announced he had hired Steven Fitzgerald, father of state Senate and Assembly majority leaders Scott and Jeff Fitzgerald - two figures Walker absolutely needs to advance his agenda through the Legislature - as State Patrol superintendent.
15 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:19:43pm

OT, but: according to Al Jazeera, Kerdoofy’s #2 (hurr hurr) has resigned, and according to random people on Twitter, he has asked the security forces to join the protesters.

16 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:21:01pm
Rachel Maddow makes a good case for the real reasons behind the Republican Party’s concerted attack on labor unions: it’s not about budgets or finances, it’s about destroying the sources of Democratic political power.


Well, on the bright side at least it’s a rational and well thought out plan. At least it’s not batshit insane conspiracies about Jewish mind control. We’ll see how this pans out but the union busting doesn’t seem to be terribly popular.
Poll: 61% oppose limiting union bargaining power


The poll found that 61% would oppose a law in their state similar to one being considered in Wisconsin, compared with 33% who would favor such a law.

Republicans are free to pursue an anti-union agenda and if voter care enough they’ll vote them out.

17 Stan the Demanded Plan  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:21:23pm

re: #15 negativ

OT, but: according to Al Jazeera, Kerdoofy’s #2 (hurr hurr) has resigned, and according to random people on Twitter, he has asked the security forces to join the protesters.

BreakingNews Breaking News

Libyan minister of interior and army general Abdul Fatah Younis - Gadhafi’s ‘No.2’ - resigns - Al Jazeera [Link: bit.ly…]

18 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:23:23pm

re: #16 Killgore Trout

Well, on the bright side at least it’s a rational and well thought out plan. At least it’s not batshit insane conspiracies about Jewish mind control. We’ll see how this pans out but the union busting doesn’t seem to be terribly popular.
Poll: 61% oppose limiting union bargaining power

Republicans are free to pursue an anti-union agenda and if voter care enough they’ll vote them out.

Well, that’s my concern, though. 61% may oppose it, but how strongly? Enough to go out and vote against the GOP because of it? Or will they just shrug and sit around watching TV? I mean, lack of caring is largely why we’re dealing with this mess to start with.

19 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:24:24pm

re: #16 Killgore Trout

Well, on the bright side at least it’s a rational and well thought out plan. At least it’s not batshit insane conspiracies about Jewish mind control. We’ll see how this pans out but the union busting doesn’t seem to be terribly popular.
Poll: 61% oppose limiting union bargaining power

Republicans are free to pursue an anti-union agenda and if voter care enough they’ll vote them out.

I find it interesting how Maddow seems to find no fault with unions or union pensions, as if unions were pure.

I’m no supporter of Walker’s agenda but to place the blame solely on ‘Republicans’ is absurd. The voters of Wisconsin knew Walkers agenda and voted him into office.

Clearly, there was a reason that happened.

20 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:25:22pm

re: #19 researchok

Are unions attempting to take away the state’s right to bargain with them?

21 Stan the Demanded Plan  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:25:42pm

re: #19 researchok

I find it interesting how Maddow seems to find no fault with unions or union pensions, as if unions were pure.

I’m no supporter of Walker’s agenda but to place the blame solely on ‘Republicans’ is absurd. The voters of Wisconsin knew Walkers agenda and voted him into office.

Clearly, there was a reason that happened.

There’s been digging into his election platform and nowhere did he ever mention doing away with collective bargaining.

22 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:27:11pm

re: #18 Simply Sarah

Well, that’s my concern, though. 61% may oppose it, but how strongly? Enough to go out and vote against the GOP because of it? Or will they just shrug and sit around watching TV? I mean, lack of caring is largely why we’re dealing with this mess to start with.

Agreed. The amount of passion is important.

23 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:27:40pm

re: #19 researchok

I find it interesting how Maddow seems to find no fault with unions or union pensions, as if unions were pure.

I’m no supporter of Walker’s agenda but to place the blame solely on ‘Republicans’ is absurd. The voters of Wisconsin knew Walkers agenda and voted him into office.

Clearly, there was a reason that happened.

Bullshit. He never said he planned to take away bargaining rights.

24 Velvet Elvis  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:27:49pm

re: #16 Killgore Trout


Republicans are free to pursue an anti-union agenda and if voter care enough they’ll vote them out.

The Milwaukee area is one of the most pro-union locales of the country. It’s just a big state.

25 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:27:57pm

re: #21 Stanley Sea

There’s been digging into his election platform and nowhere did he ever mention doing away with collective bargaining.

That isn’t so clear.

He is only against collective bargaining for benefits but preserves collective bargaining for salaries (I happen to disagree with that convoluted and silly policy. Collective bargaining cannot be subdivided).

26 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:30:18pm

re: #25 researchok

When did he campaign on taking away collective bargaining?

27 Idle Drifter  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:30:40pm

The Somali Pirates have just killed the hostages!

28 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:31:43pm

re: #26 recusancy

When did he campaign on taking away collective bargaining?

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

29 Idle Drifter  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:31:45pm

[Link: www.voanews.com…]

Here’s the link.

30 Idle Drifter  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:32:15pm

Time for me to head back to work. BBL.

31 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:33:05pm

re: #28 researchok

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

Right you are. And taking away collective bargaining doesn’t effect the budget at all.

32 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:33:12pm

re: #19 researchok

I find it interesting how Maddow seems to find no fault with unions or union pensions, as if unions were pure.

I’m no supporter of Walker’s agenda but to place the blame solely on ‘Republicans’ is absurd. The voters of Wisconsin knew Walkers agenda and voted him into office.

Clearly, there was a reason that happened.

How do you know it was unions?

Also at what point did it become a sin in America to want to get paid as much as possible for doing your job? I thought that was the foundation of capitalism….

33 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:34:50pm

Besides, wasn’t the whole rallying cry from the GOP the last two years all about how the national Democrats and Obama overstepped themselves in assuming that just because they won in the 2008 elections, that didn’t give them the right to go and do exactly what they had campaigned on (OK, they may have worded it somewhat differently…)?

34 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:35:58pm

re: #28 researchok

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

Maybe he should of told us how he planned to cut down the debt ahead of time then!

35 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:35:58pm

Trickle down economics at work.

Over-compensate the rich plutocrats and screw the middle class.

36 SteveMcG  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:36:22pm

I think the governor thought he could divide the union vote by turning public opinion against public employees. (Division works well for Republicans) There has been a sustained effort around the country to make unions the scapegoats for latest threat to the Union. In NJ for example kids would learn so much more if it weren’t for tenure. I’m not a fan of unions. (Disclosure: I’m on the management side) I was able to convince my employees that joining the Teamsters wasn’t a good idea. But the threat is always out there if I decide to become a real asshole. I think a good argument that I’ve heard only once is that public sector unions may help keep a handle on patronage jobs. I heard that in the NJ debate, that tenure protects teachers and students from some local school boards that may decide they want more creationism, for example. This type of argument might work well in WI, because I read that part of the governor’s new budget includes plans to sell assets on a no-bid basis.

37 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:36:26pm

re: #28 researchok

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

Then the voters didn’t know that this was part of his agenda, right?

So when you said:

The voters of Wisconsin knew Walkers agenda and voted him into office.

It’s not really so apropos?

38 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:36:33pm

re: #32 jamesfirecat

How do you know it was unions?

Also at what point did it become a sin in America to want to get paid as much as possible for doing your job? I thought that was the foundation of capitalism…

I agree with you re salary and income. We all ought to get as much as we can.

The issue is really more about benefits, pensions and publicly funded long term legacy costs.

See this for Walkers position.

39 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:37:19pm

re: #37 Obdicut

Then the voters didn’t know that this was part of his agenda, right?

So when you said:

It’s not really so apropos?

Yes, he said he would take on the unions- and as has been made clear, he has done it before.

40 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:37:57pm

re: #39 researchok

Don’t you think ‘take on’ would be more easily interpreted as ‘negotiate strongly with’, not ‘try to union-bust like it’s 1921’?

41 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:38:12pm

98 for me. 2 for you.

42 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:38:17pm

re: #28 researchok

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

Wisconsin didn’t have a budget deficit until Walker got into office. His firsts actions in office was to lower taxes which suddenly created a budget problem. The problem wasn’t the unions, it was a “bad” decision by Walker.

43 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:39:01pm

re: #38 researchok

I agree with you re salary and income. We all ought to get as much as we can.

The issue is really more about benefits, pensions and publicly funded long term legacy costs.

See this for Walkers position.


[Video]

Give me the short version I don’t trust a word out of the man’s mouth.

Either way it still amounts to how much the person gets paid doesn’t it? Just the back end pay rather than the front end so to speak…

44 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:39:35pm

re: #40 Obdicut

Don’t you think ‘take on’ would be more easily interpreted as ‘negotiate strongly with’, not ‘try to union-bust like it’s 1921’?

I don’t agree with Walkers position at all, in terms of his union busting.

I do believe he did the right thing in getting critical and necessary concessions from the unions re benefits.

He lost me with all his union busting talk.

45 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:39:39pm

re: #40 Obdicut

Don’t you think ‘take on’ would be more easily interpreted as ‘negotiate strongly with’, not ‘try to union-bust like it’s 1921’?

I think it’s pretty clear that “take on” means “murder in their sleep”.

46 SteveMcG  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:39:53pm

re: #38 researchok

It takes two to negotiate. The state negotiators (and this probably happens in many states) probably didn’t try hard enough to contain labor costs, but it wasn’t their money they were giving to the workers.

47 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:39:58pm

re: #39 researchok

Yes, he said he would take on the unions- and as has been made clear, he has done it before.

There’s a difference between “take on” and “destroy”

You can “take on” big business by busting trusts, without nationalizing them in the process and taking us right to the other extreme side of the spectrum….

48 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:40:04pm

re: #41 Gus 802

98 for me. 2 for you.

That much for you??
//

49 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:40:07pm

re: #42 andres

No, this isn’t strictly true. Wisconsin had a budget deficit if all actual obligations were totaled.

It is also a red herring whether or not there was a deficit. The busting of the unions is bad no matter how high the deficit is. It’s not going to help the deficit in any significant manner.

One of the weird things is the way that people seem to think of money paid out to pensions as vanishing into the ether, rather than, you know, being used by retired workers to buy stuff.

50 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:40:15pm

re: #39 researchok

Yes, he said he would take on the unions- and as has been made clear, he has done it before.

Did he talk about how no bid contracts to his campaign contributers was going to help with the budget?

51 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:40:33pm

re: #47 jamesfirecat

There’s a difference between “take on” and “destroy”

You can “take on” big business by busting trusts, without nationalizing them in the process and taking us right to the other extreme side of the spectrum…

As I said, I agree. I am in no way in favor of union busting.

52 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:40:55pm

re: #51 researchok

As I said, I agree. I am in no way in favor of union busting.

So you are against Walker then?

53 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:41:44pm

re: #50 recusancy

Did he talk about how no bid contracts to his campaign contributers was going to help with the budget?

Please.

We can also talk about union corruption and union pensions in the six figures and go in circles all day.

54 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:42:24pm

re: #52 recusancy

So you are against Walker then?

Yes, I ceased to support him when he turned down the concessions in favor of union busting.

55 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:42:25pm
56 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:42:26pm

re: #51 researchok

As I said, I agree. I am in no way in favor of union busting.

But you can’t claim he warned people about it ahead of time if all he said was that he’d “take on unions” regardless of if you agree with him or not…

Saying “Take on unions” = “I intend to destroy the sole function that unions were created to provide” is a crazy large stretch…

57 SteveMcG  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:42:55pm

You could make the argument that states (and many corporations) have bargained in bad faith by underfunding pension obligations.

58 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:43:04pm

re: #55 Gus 802

Capitalism 101

I prefer the Dilbert one…. “All in favor of doubling my pay please “Bah” like sheep…”

59 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:43:29pm

re: #57 SteveMcG

Yep. In many cases, these pensions are there because the unions forwent pay raises.

And now they’re getting blamed for being greedy.

60 SilentAlfa  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:43:31pm

re: #39 researchok

Yes, he said he would take on the unions-

only the unions that have liberals in the anyways. this has nothing to do with ‘balancing the budget’ and everything to do with politics, else he would have fucked over the firefighters and police, too

61 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:43:39pm

re: #53 researchok

Please.

We can also talk about union corruption and union pensions in the six figures and go in circles all day.

So you are admitting that Walker is corrupt?

62 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:43:44pm

re: #56 jamesfirecat

But you can’t claim he warned people about it ahead of time if all he said was that he’d “take on unions” regardless of if you agree with him or not…

Saying “Take on unions” = “I intend to destroy the sole function that unions were created to provide” is a crazy large stretch…

Voters in Wisconsin knew he would go after union legacy costs- which I have no problem with. It’s the union busting that I am against.

63 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:44:19pm
64 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:44:22pm

re: #61 recusancy

So you are admitting that Walker is corrupt?

No, I’m saying he’s an ass and an SOB.

65 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:44:56pm

re: #64 researchok

No, I’m saying he’s an ass and an SOB.

I think we can agree on that. :-)

66 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:45:18pm

re: #64 researchok

No, I’m saying he’s an ass and an SOB.

Ahh.. The unions are corrupt but not him even though you just made the “they do it too” argument.

67 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:45:32pm

What is the meaning of life?

To serve man Wall Street.

68 CuriousLurker  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:46:22pm

OT - Breaking:

RABAT Feb 22 (Reuters) - Libya’s Interior Minister Abdel Fattah Younes al Abidi has announced his defection and support for the “February 17 revolution”, news channel Al Jazeera reported on Tuesday.

@SultanAlQassemi Sultan Al Qassemi
Mustafa Abdul Jalil: The resignation of the Interior Minister is much bigger news than mine because he was a very close friend of Gaddafi

@SultanAlQassemi Sultan Al Qassemi
Al Hurra now speaking to Abdul Fatah Younis the resigned Interior Minister.

@SultanAlQassemi Sultan Al Qassemi
Resigned Interior Minister Abdul Fattah Younis: Gaddafi’s men came to shoot me but the bullets missed me. #Libya

@SultanAlQassemi Sultan Al Qassemi
Abdul Fattah Younis: I am not a traitor. I was a close friend. I was surprised by what Gaddafi did. I stood by him for many years #Libya

@SultanAlQassemi Sultan Al Qassemi
Abdul Fattah Younis: Gaddafi is a stubborn man but its finished. Everything is collapsing now. I am sad for all what has happened. #Libya

69 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:47:28pm

Complain about unions, pensions, collective bargaining and fiscal debt yet blow off the missing BILLIONS in Iraq.

70 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:47:46pm

re: #49 Obdicut

Unions would sometimes have the advantage over taxpayers, as the public sector unions have a stronger bargaining position than the taxpayers do. Where unions are able to negotiate pensions that can be way beyond public sector pensions, taxpayers can be asked to fill in the difference.

Unions can sometimes garner excessive influence with the candidates they support with campaign contributions. That can be in principle like energy and GOP candidates. An imbalance of influence.

How would this kind of imbalance best be addressed fairly?

71 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:48:43pm

Bear Stearns

72 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:48:46pm

re: #62 researchok

Voters in Wisconsin knew he would go after union legacy costs- which I have no problem with. It’s the union busting that I am against.

Yes, what he’s doing now (trying to bust Unions) is not what he campagined on… so you have no right to claim that he warned people about this or that people elected him to do this….

73 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:49:21pm

re: #69 Gus 802

You are just confusing the issue with a red herring as wide as Iraq. State budgets are hardly effected by Iraq war spending.

74 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:49:41pm

re: #70 Rightwingconspirator

Unions would sometimes have the advantage over taxpayers, as the public sector unions have a stronger bargaining position than the taxpayers do. Where unions are able to negotiate pensions that can be way beyond public sector pensions, taxpayers can be asked to fill in the difference.

Unions can sometimes garner excessive influence with the candidates they support with campaign contributions. That can be in principle like energy and GOP candidates. An imbalance of influence.

How would this kind of imbalance best be addressed fairly?

I’m pretty sure there are more taxpayers then public sector union members.

75 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:50:20pm

re: #55 Gus 802

Capitalism 101

It would almost be funny if that wasn’t, quite literally, how things really work. Yeah, a real winner of a system we have right now.

76 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:50:21pm

re: #74 recusancy

How does that address the imbalance on influence? Taxpayers hardly vote as a block.

77 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:50:43pm

re: #76 Rightwingconspirator

How does that address the imbalance on influence? Taxpayers hardly vote as a block.

Union members hardly vote as a block.

78 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:50:59pm

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

You are just confusing the issue with a red herring as wide as Iraq. State budgets are hardly effected by Iraq war spending.

It’s not confusing. It’s a philosophical question. It’s a moral question. It’s a moral issue. And yes, state budgets are effected by war spending because that money is transferred from the states (peoples) hands to the federal government and the DOD.

79 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:51:29pm

re: #77 recusancy


How does that help establish a fair balance?

80 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:52:26pm

re: #78 Gus 802

The states have their taxes, the Feds theirs. It’s still a red herring for Wisconsin, and California.

81 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:52:35pm

re: #72 jamesfirecat

Yes, what he’s doing now (trying to bust Unions) is not what he campagined on… so you have no right to claim that he warned people about this or that people elected him to do this…

Well,I don’t necessarily agree. He did campaign on reining in the budget, no details. He got elected.

Obama campaigned in no small measure on health care reform- no details. He got elected.

Both ended up with a whole lot of unhappy people when the details were made known and both have now agreed to negotiate their positions.

Democracy is messy.

82 blueraven  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:52:51pm

re: #62 researchok

Voters in Wisconsin knew he would go after union legacy costs- which I have no problem with. It’s the union busting that I am against.

Yes they knew he would go after legacy cost and that point has been conceded…by the unions. They accept the cuts. So why wont he agree to this now?

83 Lidane  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:52:58pm

re: #28 researchok

Why would he have to campaign on that? The principal issue was the budget debt.

Campaigning on reducing the debt =/= admitting that you’re going to strip the unions who you don’t like of their bargaining power.

84 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:53:14pm

re: #70 Rightwingconspirator

Unions would sometimes have the advantage over taxpayers, as the public sector unions have a stronger bargaining position than the taxpayers do. Where unions are able to negotiate pensions that can be way beyond public sector pensions, taxpayers can be asked to fill in the difference.

Unions can sometimes garner excessive influence with the candidates they support with campaign contributions. That can be in principle like energy and GOP candidates. An imbalance of influence.

How would this kind of imbalance best be addressed fairly?

And corporations can sometimes garner excessive influence with the candidate they support with campaign contributions.

What are we doing to stop them from doing this?

(Remembers Citizen’s United)

F***!

85 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:53:15pm

re: #80 Rightwingconspirator

The states have their taxes, the Feds theirs. It’s still a red herring for Wisconsin, and California.

It’s not a red herring. It’s about priorities.

86 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:53:31pm

re: #79 Rightwingconspirator

How does that help establish a fair balance?

It already is a fair balance. It’s the one entity that gives money to liberal candidates. When competing against the Chamber of Commerce and the multitude of corporations it is a fair balance.

87 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:53:59pm

re: #82 blueraven

Yes they knew he would go after legacy cost and that point has been conceded…by the unions. They accept the cuts. So why wont he agree to this now?

Because as I said, he’s an ass.

I do not agree with his union busting attempts at all.

88 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:54:22pm

re: #81 researchok

Well,I don’t necessarily agree. He did campaign on reining in the budget, no details. He got elected.

Obama campaigned in no small measure on health care reform- no details. He got elected.

Both ended up with a whole lot of unhappy people when the details were made known and both have now agreed to negotiate their positions.

Democracy is messy.

Obama’s health care plan was hodge podge because he could only sign what congress would pass…. who forced Mr. Walker to go from just taking on the Unions to breaking their rights to collective bargening?

89 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:54:26pm

re: #81 researchok

Well,I don’t necessarily agree. He did campaign on reining in the budget, no details. He got elected.

Obama campaigned in no small measure on health care reform- no details. He got elected.

Both ended up with a whole lot of unhappy people when the details were made known and both have now agreed to negotiate their positions.

Democracy is messy.

No details on healthcare??? He had a full plan written up during the primaries. What passed was much weaker then what he campaigned on.

90 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:54:51pm

re: #84 jamesfirecat

One issue at a time, lest we just meme this to death.

91 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:55:17pm

re: #85 Gus 802

And unconnected to the issue at hand.

92 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:55:19pm
93 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:55:53pm

re: #91 Rightwingconspirator

And unconnected to the issue at hand.

Maybe to you it is but not for me.

Priorities. And the GOP has them upsidedown.

94 wrenchwench  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:56:00pm
95 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:56:23pm

re: #86 recusancy

It already is a fair balance. It’s the one entity that gives money to liberal candidates. When competing against the Chamber of Commerce and the multitude of corporations it is a fair balance.

Well, clearly that doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinion of all union members. A large percentage of them have voted Republican for quite a while now.

Would you be in favor of allowing union members to direct where their campaign contributions went?

96 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:57:00pm

re: #89 recusancy

No details on healthcare??? He had a full plan written up during the primaries. What passed was much weaker then what he campaigned on.

Right- and we ended up with ‘you’ll have to pass it to know what’s in it.’

97 darthstar  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:57:04pm

re: #92 Gus 802

Breaking…

Anti-illegal immigration activist Shawna Forde gets the death penalty.

I’m not a big fan of the Death Penalty, but in this case I’m willing to look the other way.

98 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:57:17pm

The answer is right in front of us.

End the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

99 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:57:30pm

re: #95 researchok

Well, clearly that doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinion of all union members. A large percentage of them have voted Republican for quite a while now.

Would you be in favor of allowing union members to direct where their campaign contributions went?

Would you be in favor of allowing employees to direct where their campaign contributions went?

100 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:57:41pm

re: #70 Rightwingconspirator

Unions would sometimes have the advantage over taxpayers, as the public sector unions have a stronger bargaining position than the taxpayers do. Where unions are able to negotiate pensions that can be way beyond public sector pensions, taxpayers can be asked to fill in the difference.

Again: Very, very often, these pensions were negotiated in lieu of pay comparable to the private sector.

Unions can sometimes garner excessive influence with the candidates they support with campaign contributions. That can be in principle like energy and GOP candidates. An imbalance of influence.


How would this kind of imbalance best be addressed fairly?

Campaign finance reform.

101 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:58:57pm

re: #95 researchok

Well, clearly that doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinion of all union members. A large percentage of them have voted Republican for quite a while now.

Would you be in favor of allowing union members to direct where their campaign contributions went?

You’re making my point for me. You’re admitting that union members don’t vote in a block. They can give money to any candidate they wish. When you’re part of a union the union acts in what it sees as it’s best interest. So the union’s money will go towards that. I don’t get to choose where my tax dollars go when I pay the dues for living in this American union.

102 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:59:05pm

re: #99 Simply Sarah

Would you be in favor of allowing employees to direct where their campaign contributions went?

Yup, I would.

Absolutely.

103 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:59:23pm

re: #69 Gus 802

Complain about unions, pensions, collective bargaining and fiscal debt yet blow off the missing BILLIONS in Iraq.

Eric’s got ‘em. Or did. Probably spent it all up by now, as it’s surprisingly expensive to avoid all accountability.

104 engineer cat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:59:33pm

re: #96 researchok

Right- and we ended up with ‘you’ll have to pass it to know what’s in it.’

there were very good summaries of the major features of the bill published in all major news outlets for months before and after it was passed

i have a copy of the complete bill as a pdf on my hard drive

105 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 12:59:55pm

re: #95 researchok

Well, clearly that doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinion of all union members. A large percentage of them have voted Republican for quite a while now.

Would you be in favor of allowing union members to direct where their campaign contributions went?

Would you be in favor of allow the employees/members of a corporation to direct where their campaign contributions went?

106 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:00:49pm

re: #101 recusancy

You’re making my point for me. You’re admitting that union members don’t vote in a block. They can give money to any candidate they wish. When you’re part of a union the union acts in what it sees as it’s best interest. So the union’s money will go towards that. I don’t get to choose where my tax dollars go when I pay the dues for living in this American union.

Absolutely.

Let’s give union members the choice to where the member money the union spends is directed.

107 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:00:55pm

re: #103 negativ

Eric’s got ‘em. Or did. Probably spent it all up by now, as it’s surprisingly expensive to avoid all accountability.

Look the other way!

Fiscal accountability for thee but not for me (and all of my other pet causes).

108 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:00:55pm

re: #105 jamesfirecat

Would you be in favor of allow the employees/members of a corporation to direct where their campaign contributions went?

Don’t make that argument. It’s a bad argument. You don’t pay dues to the corporation.

109 blueraven  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:01:14pm

re: #102 researchok

Yup, I would.

Absolutely.

Then Citizens United offends you?

110 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:01:45pm

Corporations are people too!

Unions? Not so much.

//

111 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:01:53pm

re: #105 jamesfirecat

Would you be in favor of allow the employees/members of a corporation to direct where their campaign contributions went?

Yup.

Absolutely. If money is collected from them to support candidates the workers ought to have every right to designate how that money is spent.

112 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:01:55pm

re: #106 researchok

Absolutely.

Let’s give union members the choice to where the member money the union spends is directed.

Then lets also give tax payers the choice to where our tax money is directed.

113 Simply Sarah  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:02:04pm

re: #109 blueraven

Then Citizens United offends you?

To be fair, Citizens United offended the vast majority of people.

114 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:02:30pm

re: #111 researchok

Yup.

Absolutely. If money is collected from them to support candidates the workers ought to have every right to designate how that money is spent.

Then I appreciate the even handedness with which you approach the issue. (non sarcasm)

115 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:02:49pm

re: #109 blueraven

Then Citizens United offends you?

Are the donations mandated or voluntary?

116 treasured people  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:03:05pm

freedom comes to the Middle East

117 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:03:40pm

re: #60 SilentAlfa

only the unions that have liberals in the anyways. this has nothing to do with ‘balancing the budget’ and everything to do with politics, else he would have fucked over the firefighters and police, too

He has been clear form the start that the Police and Firefighter exemption is a public safety issue ONLY.

And before you say that they are exempt because they endorsed him, that has been proven false.

There are 314 fire and police unions in the state. Four of them endorsed Walker. All the rest endorsed the Democrat.

[Link: politifact.com…]

118 blueraven  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:04:15pm

re: #115 researchok

Are the donations mandated or voluntary?

I dont think the people who work for the corporations have much of a say in the matter, do you?

119 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:04:18pm

re: #114 jamesfirecat

Then I appreciate the even handedness with which you approach the issue. (non sarcasm)

Thanks. I think consistency is one of the things missing from all political debate nowadays. Further, I believe consistency is a moral issue as well.

If we were more consistent we would have better government, better politicians, etc.

120 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:04:29pm

re: #117 Buck

He has been clear form the start that the Police and Firefighter exemption is a public safety issue ONLY.

And before you say that they are exempt because they endorsed him, that has been proven false.

There are 314 fire and police unions in the state. Four of them endorsed Walker. All the rest endorsed the Democrat.

[Link: politifact.com…]

Public safety is an issue but not education. Gotcha.

121 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:05:16pm

re: #119 researchok

Thanks. I think consistency is one of the things missing from all political debate nowadays. Further, I believe consistency is a moral issue as well.

If we were more consistent we would have better government, better politicians, etc.

I’m mandated to pay taxes. Should I get to choose where my money is spent?

122 engineer cat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:05:47pm

re: #108 recusancy

Don’t make that argument. It’s a bad argument. You don’t pay dues to the corporation.

that’s because the corporation, your employers, are not doing a job for you of representing you in negotiations with your employers

123 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:06:04pm

re: #117 Buck

He has been clear form the start that the Police and Firefighter exemption is a public safety issue ONLY.

And before you say that they are exempt because they endorsed him, that has been proven false.

There are 314 fire and police unions in the state. Four of them endorsed Walker. All the rest endorsed the Democrat.

[Link: politifact.com…]

Can you explain to us how those jobs no longer being unionized would endager public saftey?

124 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:06:15pm

re: #118 blueraven

I dont think the people who work for the corporations have much of a say in the matter, do you?

Nor do I believe corporations, as a rule, collect money from employees to spend on political campaigns.

When it does happen, I do believe the employees should have a say as to where their money is directed.

125 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:06:16pm

I’m sensing a very strong troll smell.

126 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:06:32pm

Let’s make it simple: Every declared candidate may receive money from one PAC/Party. Every citizen may make one contribution to local, state, and national candidates PAC/Party, not to exceed $5.00.

127 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:06:36pm

re: #120 recusancy

Public safety is an issue but not education. Gotcha.

Right. There is a line drawn at essential services. You may not like where that line goes, but it has to go somewhere.

128 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:07:15pm

re: #121 recusancy

I’m mandated to pay taxes. Should I get to choose where my money is spent?

No. Government is very different than unions in that unions serve a specific constituency. Government serves us all.

129 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:07:26pm

We can’t have financial regulations that would impact the same financial firms and practices that created the financial meltdown of 2008! Let’s go after unions and working people instead. — GOP 2011

130 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:07:50pm

re: #123 jamesfirecat

Can you explain to us how those jobs no longer being unionized would endager public saftey?

What are you talking about? Can you explain how you don’t consider police and firefighters to be public safety essential services?

131 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:08:08pm

re: #126 Decatur Deb

Let’s make it simple: Every declared candidate may receive money from one PAC/Party. Every citizen may make one contribution to local, state, and national candidates PAC/Party, not to exceed $5.00.

Works for me.

Campaign finance nowadays is a travesty.

132 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:08:59pm

re: #130 Buck

What are you talking about? Can you explain how you don’t consider police and firefighters to be public safety essential services?

I consider them to be essential services yes.

Can you explain to me why they need to be unionized or else they wouldn’t provide us with this service?

133 blueraven  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:10:09pm

re: #124 researchok

Nor do I believe corporations, as a rule, collect money from employees to spend on political campaigns.

When it does happen, I do believe the employees should have a say as to where their money is directed.

I am sure the profit sharing or other perks are affected. It is the bottom line, so yes, in effect they do pay for contributions.

134 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:10:15pm

re: #131 researchok

Works for me.

Campaign finance nowadays is a travesty.

Campaign finance is essentially money laundering. Citizens United will help advance the money laundering by hiding the paper trail even more.

135 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:10:31pm

re: #132 jamesfirecat

I consider them to be essential services yes.

Can you explain to me why they need to be unionized or else they wouldn’t provide us with this service?

They are already unionized, and he does not think it wise to possibly cause an interruption of service. Do you realized the teachers have been out of school for days?

136 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:10:44pm

re: #128 researchok

No. Government is very different than unions in that unions serve a specific constituency. Government serves us all.

Government serves the specific constituency of Americans. It’s the same thing just larger scale.

137 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:11:35pm

re: #133 blueraven

I am sure the profit sharing or other perks are affected. It is the bottom line, so yes, in effect they do pay for contributions.

How are they affected? I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

Please explain.

138 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:12:16pm

re: #136 recusancy

Government serves the specific constituency of Americans. It’s the same thing just larger scale.

No, government is mandated to serve all Americans.

Unions are mandated to serve their members.

139 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:12:33pm

re: #133 blueraven

I am sure the profit sharing or other perks are affected. It is the bottom line, so yes, in effect they do pay for contributions.

That’s a losing argument. Please don’t make it.

140 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:12:41pm

re: #135 Buck

They are already unionized, and he does not think it wise to possibly cause an interruption of service. Do you realized the teachers have been out of school for days?

Yes I do know that.

I honestly don’t care, I don’t think anyone should ever feel ashamed for taking time off from their work to protests attempts to curtail their rights (in this case the right to assemble)

So in other words the reason he didn’t target police officers and fire fighters is that he was afraid they would stop working and protest…

Do I have that right?

141 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:13:27pm

re: #100 Obdicut

Overtime often makes up for salary shortcomings in union contracts. As sometimes do way better benefits, for a fair deal in the end anyway. Stats are in the eye of the beholder there.

But I sure do agree with you on campaign finance reform.

142 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:14:06pm

re: #134 Gus 802

Campaign finance is essentially money laundering. Citizens United will help advance the money laundering by hiding the paper trail even more.

Yeah, it really is like the mob goes legit.

From bags of cash to political non profits.

Our world.

143 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:14:46pm

re: #142 researchok

Yeah, it really is like the mob goes legit.

From bags of cash to political non profits.

Our world.

///Never before has crime been so organized!

144 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:15:15pm

re: #138 researchok

No, government is mandated to serve all Americans.

Unions are mandated to serve their members.

Yes. And if union dues were spread out over all kinds of pet projects and candidates per each member’s choice it wouldn’t be a very effective union. Union members can vote on a number of things, one being who their leadership is and who’s making those decisions. It’s a democratic republic on a much smaller scale.

145 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:15:51pm

re: #97 darthstar

I’m not a big fan of the Death Penalty, but in this case I’m willing to look the other way.

I think it’d be much better to throw her in general [prison] population and let her explain herself to her new MS-13 and Los Zetas-affiliated neighbors.

146 blueraven  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:15:57pm

re: #139 recusancy

That’s a losing argument. Please don’t make it.

Meh…I dont know much about corporate structure so I will bow out. But it just seems contradictory that what is good for corporations is bad for unions.

147 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:16:15pm

re: #141 Rightwingconspirator

Overtime often makes up for salary shortcomings in union contracts

I’m talking about public sector employees getting paid less than private sector employees. I don’t see how overtime would make up for that.

As sometimes do way better benefits, for a fair deal in the end anyway.

Sure. Which is basically what i said: most public jobs sacrifice salary for job security, pensions, and other benefits.

And now we’re trying to screw them out of those.


But I sure do agree with you on campaign finance reform.

Good. Unfortunately, Citizen’s United is going to be hard, hard, hard thing to fight back against.

148 Jadespring  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:16:35pm

[Link: www.time.com…]

There’s been virtually no reliable information coming out of Tripoli, but a source close to the Gaddafi regime I did manage to get hold of told me the already terrible situation in Libya will get much worse. Among other things, Gaddafi has ordered security services to start sabotaging oil facilities. They will start by blowing up several oil pipelines, cutting off flow to Mediterranean ports. The sabotage, according to the insider, is meant to serve as a message to Libya’s rebellious tribes: It’s either me or chaos.

Two weeks ago this same man had told me the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt would never touch Libya. Gaddafi, he said, had a tight lock on all of the major tribes, the same ones that have kept him in power for the past 41 years. The man of course turned out to be wrong, and everything he now has to say about Gaddafi’s intentions needs to be taken in that context.

——-
can only count on the loyalty of his tribe, the Qadhadhfa. And as for the army, as of Monday he only has the loyalty of approximately 5,000 troops…regular Libyan army is 45,000.
——-
said that Gaddafi has told people around him that he knows he cannot retake Libya with the forces he has. But what he can do is make the rebellious tribes and army officers regret their disloyalty, turning Libya into another Somalia

———————
Gaddafi ordered the release from prison of the country’s Islamic militant prisoners, hoping they will act on their own to sow chaos across Libya. Gaddafi envisages them attacking foreigners and rebellious tribes.


149 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:16:53pm

I don’t care about politics man; it’s too depressing. I’m more interested in keeping up with the Kardashians and what Snooki is doing. — Typical American

150 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:19:13pm

re: #117 Buck

He has been clear form the start that the Police and Firefighter exemption is a public safety issue ONLY.

And before you say that they are exempt because they endorsed him, that has been proven false.

There are 314 fire and police unions in the state. Four of them endorsed Walker. All the rest endorsed the Democrat.

[Link: politifact.com…]

Corrections officer unions are not exempt from the union busting.
Are they not essential to public safety?

151 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:19:20pm

re: #147 Obdicut

I’m talking about public sector employees getting paid less than private sector employees. I don’t see how overtime would make up for that.

Sure. Which is basically what i said: most public jobs sacrifice salary for job security, pensions, and other benefits.

And now we’re trying to screw them out of those.

Good. Unfortunately, Citizen’s United is going to be hard, hard, hard thing to fight back against.

Citizens United won’t become an issue with the right UNTIL the unions start taking advantage of it. Once that happens then you’ll see a change in heart. And for those that don’t know Citizens United is a right wing group.

152 Jadespring  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:19:57pm

re: #148 Jadespring

Oops didn’t notice this was an article…. upstairs.

153 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:23:00pm

Republicans on FEC want firms to be able to raise money for candidates

The fallout from the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission keeps coming.

The case loosened restrictions on corporations that do political campaigning with the proviso that they do it without working with candidates. But in a little-noticed document, three FEC commissioners have said they think corporations should be allowed to raise money directly for candidates.

As it is now, corporations are prohibited from helping candidates raise money. The furthest they can go is allowing a candidate to hold fundraisers on their property, and even then, the campaign must pay for the space in advance. But the three commissioners, all Republicans, said those prohibitions are “at best suspect” in light of Citizens United’s protection of free speech for corporations…

154 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:23:13pm

re: #140 jamesfirecat

Yes I do know that.

I honestly don’t care, I don’t think anyone should ever feel ashamed for taking time off from their work to protests attempts to curtail their rights (in this case the right to assemble)

So in other words the reason he didn’t target police officers and fire fighters is that he was afraid they would stop working and protest…

Do I have that right?

I take him at his word. The governor told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the charge that he was exempting police and firefighters for political reasons was “ridiculous.” He said he didn’t recommend changing the rules for police officers and firefighters because he didn’t want public safety work disrupted.

Now that seems really simple to me. If you don’t understand it, I really don’t think anyone make it any clearer.

155 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:23:14pm

United States of Coca Cola

156 researchok  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:24:15pm

re: #144 recusancy

Yes. And if union dues were spread out over all kinds of pet projects and candidates per each member’s choice it wouldn’t be a very effective union. Union members can vote on a number of things, one being who their leadership is and who’s making those decisions. It’s a democratic republic on a much smaller scale.

How is it democratic if I am mandated to give you money and have no so in how I want my campaign donations directed?

157 Gus  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:24:49pm

Later

158 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:25:02pm

re: #148 Jadespring


can only count on the loyalty of his tribe, the Qadhadhfa. And as for the army, as of Monday he only has the loyalty of approximately 5,000 troops…regular Libyan army is 45,000.

Hey, look. Yet another new way to spell his name!

Qadhadhfi, etc.

159 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:25:22pm

re: #156 researchok

How is it democratic if I am mandated to give you money and have no so in how I want my campaign donations directed?

Don’t belong to the union then. Taxes are mandated. I’m pretty sure we’re still a democracy.

160 Interesting Times  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:26:08pm
161 Stan the Demanded Plan  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:26:09pm

RT @evale72:

Citizens prebuttal begins with firefighter standing in solidarity w/public workers. [Link: yfrog.com…] #wiunion #notmywi

162 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:26:56pm

re: #147 Obdicut

Employment, salaries and benefits fell for the vast majority of working people. Unions have some strong protections against that sort of thing. What happens to the rest of us will happen to the union workers too. Just delayed. I’m not arguing for union busting. The gov should have accepted the concessions and dropped the collective bargaining war.

But I’m not pretending the shoe is never on the other foot either. Watch California.

163 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:27:56pm

re: #162 Rightwingconspirator

Employment, salaries and benefits fell for the vast majority of working people. Unions have some strong protections against that sort of thing. What happens to the rest of us will happen to the union workers too. Just delayed. I’m not arguing for union busting. The gov should have accepted the concessions and dropped the collective bargaining war.

But I’m not pretending the shoe is never on the other foot either. Watch California.

California is in trouble because of the rules in how they can raise taxes.

164 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:32:05pm

re: #163 recusancy

Oh if only it were so simple. California revenues are (long term) almost always adequate or more. But somehow, spending goes up at least as much every time. Increasing revenues (by whatever means or cause) result in increased spending. Feedback loop.

165 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:34:22pm

re: #154 Buck

I take him at his word. The governor told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the charge that he was exempting police and firefighters for political reasons was “ridiculous.” He said he didn’t recommend changing the rules for police officers and firefighters because he didn’t want public safety work disrupted.

Now that seems really simple to me. If you don’t understand it, I really don’t think anyone make it any clearer.

Well then it is a shame that

He failed

Maybe he should have realized that any attack on unions would inevitably lead to fire fighters and police union members joining the protest even if they aren’t directly affected…

166 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:35:17pm

How can you make the comment about the Republicans attacking a Democratic power base without making the logical point that there is something wrong with the way the unions pay into Democratic coffers, get their increases in pay and benefits when these people are elected, specifically by taking that money from the citizens. That’s a huge conflict of interest and amounts to a huge payola scam. Public Sector unions are huge political players, and get to basically influence elections to decide who their bosses and what their compensation packages will be. How is it not scandalous that there is this huge conflict of interest, and even by removing collective bargaining, they still get a special set of protections that we non-government employees don’t get, namely Civil Service protections.

167 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:37:04pm

re: #166 robdouth

See corporations and their influence on the GOP.
9_9

168 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:37:52pm

re: #166 robdouth

How can you make the comment about the Republicans attacking a Democratic power base without making the logical point that there is something wrong with the way the unions pay into Democratic coffers, get their increases in pay and benefits when these people are elected, specifically by taking that money from the citizens. That’s a huge conflict of interest and amounts to a huge payola scam. Public Sector unions are huge political players, and get to basically influence elections to decide who their bosses and what their compensation packages will be. How is it not scandalous that there is this huge conflict of interest, and even by removing collective bargaining, they still get a special set of protections that we non-government employees don’t get, namely Civil Service protections.

How do you feel about the citizens united ruling?

169 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:37:59pm

re: #1 jamesfirecat

I believe that Dark argued this a few days ago, an he saw it as a feature not a bug…

DF scares me sometimes…

he just wants one party rule! What could be wrong with that? :D

170 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:38:36pm

re: #165 jamesfirecat

Well then it is a shame that

He failed

Maybe he should have realized that any attack on unions would inevitably lead to fire fighters and police union members joining the protest even if they aren’t directly affected…

Fine, when you are gov you will do it differently. I am just trying to point out that it is NOT politics. His intention was clear, and he was NOT endorsed by them.

He sees this as budget related, and has acted that way from the start. If the democrats and unions want to protest, that is fine (I suppose), but acting within the law seems to me to be a better idea.

171 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:38:54pm

re: #159 recusancy

that’s the point of having to relicense the unions each year. You say, “just don’t join a union” so basically you are saying, “Just don’t choose to be a teacher, fire-fighter, police officer, or civil servant” because in order to do so, you have to join a union. Once the union is in, not matter how unpopular, it’s virtually impossible to get rid of them. Allowing workers to opt out of the union is at least a fair compromise, especially since they spend a lot of those dues on political causes that members may disagree with. How is it fair to give the unions a monopoly over a handful of careers and make it to where if you want to engage in those careers, you have to be a member of the union?

172 Political Atheist  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:39:53pm

Gotta go earn some of my non union pay

173 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:40:02pm

re: #170 Buck

Fine, when you are gov you will do it differently. I am just trying to point out that it is NOT politics. His intention was clear, and he was NOT endorsed by them.

He sees this as budget related, and has acted that way from the start. If the democrats and unions want to protest, that is fine (I suppose), but acting within the law seems to me to be a better idea.

How is protesting not “within the law”?

174 recusancy  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:40:32pm

re: #171 robdouth

Yeah. And if I want to live in america I have to join that union as well by paying my dues (taxes).

175 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:40:54pm

re: #170 Buck

Fine, when you are gov you will do it differently. I am just trying to point out that it is NOT politics. His intention was clear, and he was NOT endorsed by them.

He sees this as budget related, and has acted that way from the start. If the democrats and unions want to protest, that is fine (I suppose), but acting within the law seems to me to be a better idea.

Who is not acting within the law?

176 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:41:26pm

re: #53 researchok

Please.

We can also talk about union corruption and union pensions in the six figures and go in circles all day.

Sure, but the point is that the Gov is putting forth a hard right agenda that includes things he did NOT campaign on. No bid contracts, eliminating collective bargaining, except for the police and firefighters who supported him.

If the deficit is all important to the Gov, why is he cutting taxes for those over 300k while asking people who make far less to sacrifice for the good of the state? That’s not the way to balance a budget quickly.

177 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:41:31pm

re: #170 Buck

Fine, when you are gov you will do it differently. I am just trying to point out that it is NOT politics. His intention was clear, and he was NOT endorsed by them.

He sees this as budget related, and has acted that way from the start. If the democrats and unions want to protest, that is fine (I suppose), but acting within the law seems to me to be a better idea.

I got several Brooklyn Bridges to sell you.

178 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:41:49pm

re: #100 Obdicut

Again: Very, very often, these pensions were negotiated in lieu of pay comparable to the private sector.

No right winger really wants to talk about this, do they?

179 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:41:54pm

re: #173 jamesfirecat

How is protesting not “within the law”?

Do you really think that the word “illegal” when applied to a strike still means it is legal?

There are rules and laws that apply to BOTH sides of an agreement. Walking off the job when you are NOT in a legal position to strike is ….. illegal.

180 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:42:30pm

re: #167 Varek Raith


Exactly my point. I will join you in complaining about the influence of corporations on the GOP, but you show your ignorance, because corporations are not monolithically republican. They are split in their donations between Republican and Democrat. The public-sector unions are 90+% in the camp of Democrats, and actively campaign for increased public spending specifically because it financially benefits them.

The difference between us is that I will condemn those influences on both parties, but you seem to imploy that corporate influence on GOP (let’s be generous and say 60% of corporate donations go to Republicans, when it’s closer to 50-50), but you won’t agree that near unanimous support of one party which pays you back with wage and benefit increases so that your compensation package is better than private workers doesn’t amount to the worst kind of special interest kickbacks?

181 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:42:30pm

re: #172 Rightwingconspirator

Gotta go earn some of my non union pay

I’m non-union! I run my own business.

I also work a lot more than would be allowed under labor laws ;-)

182 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:42:52pm

re: #179 Buck

Do you really think that the word “illegal” when applied to a strike still means it is legal?

There are rules and laws that apply to BOTH sides of an agreement. Walking off the job when you are NOT in a legal position to strike is … illegal.

Can you show me a link to how the current strike is illegal?

183 leftynyc  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:43:24pm

re: #97 darthstar

I’m not a big fan of the Death Penalty, but in this case I’m willing to look the other way.


Same here Darthstar. I saw it and my very first instinct was “good”. My second one was to shake my head at what I had just said.

184 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:43:50pm

re: #180 robdouth

Exactly my point. I will join you in complaining about the influence of corporations on the GOP, but you show your ignorance, because corporations are not monolithically republican. They are split in their donations between Republican and Democrat. The public-sector unions are 90+% in the camp of Democrats, and actively campaign for increased public spending specifically because it financially benefits them.

The difference between us is that I will condemn those influences on both parties, but you seem to imploy that corporate influence on GOP (let’s be generous and say 60% of corporate donations go to Republicans, when it’s closer to 50-50), but you won’t agree that near unanimous support of one party which pays you back with wage and benefit increases so that your compensation package is better than private workers doesn’t amount to the worst kind of special interest kickbacks?


uh hahaha the public sector unions are Democrat because the Republicans are always actively trying to A) demonize them and scapegoat them as BIGGG GGGOVERNMENT B) take away their jobs or C) take away their benefits.

it’s called survival, dude.

185 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:44:33pm

re: #178 WindUpBird

Actually when studies are showing that the entire compensation package far outpaces private sector employees, I’m very willing to talk about it. Also take every pro-union article about this, and at least acknowledge that when they try to talk numbers, they never include the unfunded portion of the retirement because then even they might blush.

186 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:45:01pm

Why won’t those public sector unions vote for Republicans? Whywhywhy?

I MEAN, WE’RE ONLY TRYING TO FUCK THEM UP THE ASS RIGHT NOW!

WHY DON’T THEY LOVE US?!?!?!

187 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:45:42pm

re: #185 robdouth

Actually when studies are showing that the entire compensation package far outpaces private sector employees, I’m very willing to talk about it. Also take every pro-union article about this, and at least acknowledge that when they try to talk numbers, they never include the unfunded portion of the retirement because then even they might blush.

links please.

And private sector what, compared to public sector what.

188 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:45:50pm

re: #185 robdouth

Actually when studies are showing that the entire compensation package far outpaces private sector employees, I’m very willing to talk about it. Also take every pro-union article about this, and at least acknowledge that when they try to talk numbers, they never include the unfunded portion of the retirement because then even they might blush.

Is it the fault of the union of the people that they signed the contract with that the state doesn’t have the money to pay for the retirements they promised would be provided in a contract?

189 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:46:54pm

re: #185 robdouth

Bullshit.

[Link: www.epi.org…]

190 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:47:09pm

re: #185 robdouth

This is about

union.

busting.

dude.

It’s a political strategy. That’s what it is. Anything else is bullshite.

191 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:47:47pm

re: #188 jamesfirecat

Is it the fault of the union of the people that they signed the contract with that the state doesn’t have the money to pay for the retirements they promised would be provided in a contract?

Nothing is more American than defaulting on your financial obligations!

192 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:48:34pm

re: #184 WindUpBird


Using that twisted logic then all corporations would only donate to Republicans if everyone is dominated by this “survival” (read rational self-interest) motive. The fact is that corporations split the pie pretty damn close to down the middle, becuase it’s not just Republicans that give kickbacks to corporations.

Using charged language like “survival” when you are talking about the survival of the union itself, not the members doesnt’ change the facts.

193 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:48:44pm

re: #189 iossarian

Bullshit.

[Link: www.epi.org…]

Image: h99121_500.jpg

194 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:48:56pm

I mean, why do those teacher unions hate republicans so much?

I mean, they should be thankful for being called out for their indoctrination of our good Christian White Children, THEIR SCHEMING TRICKSY TEACHINGS OF EVILUTION

WHY DON’T THEY LOVE US?!?

195 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:49:27pm

re: #178 WindUpBird

No right winger really wants to talk about this, do they?

Not really, they just want unions to shut up and eventually disappear. It’s all about building metaphorical bridges back to the 19th century.

Obama negotiated with Republicans for months over health care. Then he compromised by giving up on the public option. For this, he was accused of “ramming this legislation down our throats.” If so, how would one describe the Gov’s actions, wherein he didn’t even bother to negotiate with Dems or union leaders, and refuses to make any compromises?

196 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:49:36pm

Follow the whole “Doctors notes” story at all? The teachers are calling in sick in order to protest. They are NOT in a legal position to strike, and that is why they are not actually striking. They are just not showing up for work until they get what they want.

Are they really sick? No. Now I agree that for now they do seem to be in a gray area, BUT at some point a judge will have to make a ruling. Is this a “concerted work stoppage by municipal employees, any concerted interruption of operation of services, or any concerted refusal to work or perform normal duties for the purpose of enforcing demands on a municipal employer?” If it is, then it is a strike, and state law prohibits public school teachers from striking.

Until then you can look the other way if you wish.

[Link: www.google.com…]

197 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:49:37pm

re: #188 jamesfirecat

Is it the fault of the union of the people that they signed the contract with that the state doesn’t have the money to pay for the retirements they promised would be provided in a contract?

In Robdouth’s world, it’s Chevy’s fault I can’t afford my Camaro payments :D

AWESOME!

198 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:50:17pm

re: #196 Buck

hahahahaha yes, wring your hands at the teachers, dude oh shit, it’s the teachers!

JAIL THOSE BITCHES, TOUGH GUY

199 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:50:56pm

re: #188 jamesfirecat

No but that wasn’t the argument. You are shifting the goalposts, because I was responding to the argument that these poor lowly civil servants take less pay, when in actuality they take far more compensation and have far greater job security, so if you look stupidly at just wages, you ignore the fact that the buying power of those smaller wages can be much better if you don’t have to pay a damn thing for healthcare, and get basically free retirement without paying much of anything, whereas the rest may get matching or 50% matching to what we put in.

200 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:50:56pm

re: #196 Buck

Follow the whole “Doctors notes” story at all? The teachers are calling in sick in order to protest. They are NOT in a legal position to strike, and that is why they are not actually striking. They are just not showing up for work until they get what they want.

Are they really sick? No. Now I agree that for now they do seem to be in a gray area, BUT at some point a judge will have to make a ruling. Is this a “concerted work stoppage by municipal employees, any concerted interruption of operation of services, or any concerted refusal to work or perform normal duties for the purpose of enforcing demands on a municipal employer?” If it is, then it is a strike, and state law prohibits public school teachers from striking.

Until then you can look the other way if you wish.

[Link: www.google.com…]

Then you’re right I do think we should be working to change the system.

Why the f*** are they not allowed to strike while people work to break their union?

201 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:51:01pm

re: #188 jamesfirecat

Is it the fault of the union of the people that they signed the contract with that the state doesn’t have the money to pay for the retirements they promised would be provided in a contract?

They can have a choice…. layoffs or changes to the agreements.

Both happen all the time.

202 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:51:18pm

re: #197 WindUpBird

In Robdouth’s world, it’s Chevy’s fault I can’t afford my Camaro payments :D

AWESOME!

Does this apply to Aston Martin????
:)

203 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:51:55pm

re: #199 robdouth

Again, bullshit. Did you even look at the link I posted above?

Public sector employees make less in total compensation, in large part because historically they have traded compensation for job security.

204 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:52:02pm

re: #201 Buck

They can have a choice… layoffs or changes to the agreements.

Both happen all the time.

What does the government give them in exchange for the fact that they’re so broke that they can’t live up to their end of the bargin?

205 compound idaho  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:52:07pm

re: #178 WindUpBird

No right winger really wants to talk about this, do they?

Public school teachers make more than their private school counterparts.

[Link: nces.ed.gov…]
Public school teachers $49,630
Private school teachers $36,250

206 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:52:27pm

re: #195 palomino

This comment shows a complete ignorance of the mindset of those who differ from you. That’s you projecting an evil intent on someone you disagree with. It’s basic rhetoric 101. It also completely destroys your credibility when you automatically imply evil intent to those who disagree with you.

207 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:52:33pm

re: #185 robdouth

Actually when studies are showing that the entire compensation package far outpaces private sector employees, I’m very willing to talk about it. Also take every pro-union article about this, and at least acknowledge that when they try to talk numbers, they never include the unfunded portion of the retirement because then even they might blush.

Far outpaces? FAR? I think some of us would like that link. Thanks in advance.

208 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:53:24pm

re: #201 Buck

They can have a choice… layoffs or changes to the agreements.

Both happen all the time.

They happen when one side has more power and remakes the agreement in a way more favorable to itself.

What is going on in Wisconsin (and elsewhere) right now, is figuring out which side has more power.

209 Four More Tears  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:53:47pm

It’s amazing to me that so many Republicans are just fine with the government taking this power away from their employees.

210 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:53:48pm

the doctor’s note story is such a talking point right now that Phil Hendrie’s show, which SATIRIZES conservative talk radio, was having some fun with it

This story jumped the shark, then landed in the comedians’ camp, it’s probably already being Onionized as we speak

Times like this I always wish SanFranciscoZionist was here to tell you how many hours teachers ACTUALLY work as opposed to what they’re contracted to work. Hint, first one’s higher than the second.

I notice these haterfests for teachers and the ebil ebil tricksy teachers unions tend to dry up and blow away when a real teacher enters the thread, because it’s no contest, teacher wins against mindless talking points

211 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:53:54pm

re: #200 jamesfirecat

Then you’re right I do think we should be working to change the system.

Why the f*** are they not allowed to strike while people work to break their union?

Because it is illegal. The school year is already short, and it is wrong to make the students miss days of the school year to work this stuff out.

You might see the “not allowed to strike” as being to unbalanced in favor of the government. Others would say that striking during the school year would make it unbalanced in favor of the teachers.

212 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:54:50pm

re: #190 WindUpBird

That’s a stupid statement because all actions by politicians are political moves. So what. It’s called politicking and they’re called politicians for a reason. Just labeling it that isn’t some profound insight.

213 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:54:56pm

re: #211 Buck

Because it is illegal. The school year is already short, and it is wrong to make the students miss days of the school year to work this stuff out.

You might see the “not allowed to strike” as being to unbalanced in favor of the government. Others would say that striking during the school year would make it unbalanced in favor of the teachers.

I think that they should have an emergency chance to strike if at any point the government tries to dissolve their union.

Seems only fair doesn’t it Buck?

214 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:55:00pm

re: #204 jamesfirecat

What does the government give them in exchange for the fact that they’re so broke that they can’t live up to their end of the bargin?

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

215 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:55:01pm

re: #205 compound idaho

It’s true, public teachers make more than private. They’re one of the few public employees that’s true of.

That’s because public schools have to take everyone, and private schools get to pick their students, and their students have parental commitment behind them.

216 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:55:08pm

re: #210 WindUpBird

the doctor’s note story is such a talking point right now that Phil Hendrie’s show, which SATIRIZES conservative talk radio, was having some fun with it

This story jumped the shark, then landed in the comedians’ camp, it’s probably already being Onionized as we speak

Times like this I always wish SanFranciscoZionist was here to tell you how many hours teachers ACTUALLY work as opposed to what they’re contracted to work. Hint, first one’s higher than the second.

I notice these haterfests for teachers and the ebil ebil tricksy teachers unions tend to dry up and blow away when a real teacher enters the thread, because it’s no contest, teacher wins against mindless talking points

My mom is a speech language pathologist for the county schools. She works 8+ hours, but is paid for only 6 and a half of those.

217 Girth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:55:09pm

re: #196 Buck

Follow the whole “Doctors notes” story at all? The teachers are calling in sick in order to protest. They are NOT in a legal position to strike, and that is why they are not actually striking. They are just not showing up for work until they get what they want.

Are they really sick? No. Now I agree that for now they do seem to be in a gray area, BUT at some point a judge will have to make a ruling. Is this a “concerted work stoppage by municipal employees, any concerted interruption of operation of services, or any concerted refusal to work or perform normal duties for the purpose of enforcing demands on a municipal employer?” If it is, then it is a strike, and state law prohibits public school teachers from striking.

Until then you can look the other way if you wish.

[Link: www.google.com…]

Clearly the fact that you can google ‘teachers+illegal+strike’ and get results means that the Wisconsin teachers are illegally striking.

218 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:55:52pm

re: #213 jamesfirecat

I think that they should have an emergency chance to strike if at any point the government tries to dissolve their union.

Seems only fair doesn’t it Buck?

re: #217 Girth

Clearly the fact that you can google ‘teachers+illegal+strike’ and get results means that the Wisconsin teachers are illegally striking.

No, it is comments on the subject. Most of the posts said they weren’t (according to the teachers union reps).

219 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:56:33pm

re: #214 Buck

AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

Really?

What is this year’s sacrifice on behalf of Goldman Sachs?

220 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:56:44pm

re: #214 Buck

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

They are still giving up something and getting nothing back for it, because the government fucked up and thus can’t live up to its contract….

What would be the response of a corporations employees if they tried to do something like that?

(I’ve got no idea so please tell me)

221 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:57:22pm

re: #209 JasonA

It’s amazing to me that so many Republicans are just fine with the government taking this power away from their employees.

Well, they’re on the other side! That’s how this shit works :D That’s how this shit ALWAYS WORKS

if you work for the government and you’re not military, fire, or police, you’re the ENEMIEEEEEEEE

222 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:57:23pm

re: #213 jamesfirecat

I think that they should have an emergency chance to strike if at any point the government tries to dissolve their union.

Seems only fair doesn’t it Buck?

Fine…. Tell you what, can you find any links to show that this is about DISSOLVING the union? You know how you like me to back up everything I say with a link. Well please read the bill and show me where it actually says dissolve.

223 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:57:31pm

re: #218 Buck

re: #217 Girth

No, it is comments on the subject. Most of the posts said they weren’t (according to the teachers union reps).

Your response has nothing to do with my question of isn’t it fair that they be allowed an emergency strike in defense of their union?

Since otherwise it would be too late for a strike to really mean anything….

224 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:57:37pm

re: #214 Buck

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

Then you support ending welfare to corporations through tax breaks and loopholes?

225 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:58:04pm

re: #222 Buck

Fine… Tell you what, can you find any links to show that this is about DISSOLVING the union? You know how you like me to back up everything I say with a link. Well please read the bill and show me where it actually says dissolve.

If you take away the right to collectively bargin, what is the point in having a union?

226 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:58:09pm

re: #224 Varek Raith

Then you support ending welfare to corporations through tax breaks and loopholes?

And of course ending the upper-income tax breaks.

227 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:58:43pm

re: #220 jamesfirecat

They are still giving up something and getting nothing back for it, because the government fucked up and thus can’t live up to its contract…

What would be the response of a corporations employees if they tried to do something like that?

(I’ve got no idea so please tell me)

It happens all the time. Remember when the Obama administration tried to restrict the bonuses of companies that took public bailouts?

228 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:58:51pm

re: #207 palomino

[Link: www.usatoday.com…]

And you’re welcome. Not only do salaries outpace private sector, but…

From the article:

“These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.”

So not only more wages, but also 4 times the benefits. Is that enough for far? Also that took 2 seconds to search on google, and I’m hoping that USA Today isn’t too far right wing to be acceptable as a source.

The argument from the Union shil contacted for the piece: It’s apples and oranges because federal accountants do more complex work. So much more complex that they are entitled to more pay and 4 times more benefits. Must be fucking rocket science accounting.

229 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:58:58pm

re: #181 WindUpBird

I’m non-union! I run my own business.

I also work a lot more than would be allowed under labor laws ;-)

No, you’d just have to pay yourself better.

230 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:59:38pm

re: #225 jamesfirecat

If you take away the right to collectively bargin, what is the point in having a union?

Not true at all. Take away the binding arbitration and you can still have a union.

231 Obdicut  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 1:59:59pm

re: #228 robdouth

Compare the work, not the job titles.

232 Varek Raith  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:00:59pm

re: #231 Obdicut

Compare the work, not the job titles.

I’m a shelf management technician.
PAY ME MOAR!
;)

233 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:01:47pm

re: #206 robdouth

This comment shows a complete ignorance of the mindset of those who differ from you. That’s you projecting an evil intent on someone you disagree with. It’s basic rhetoric 101. It also completely destroys your credibility when you automatically imply evil intent to those who disagree with you.

You know nothing of the past century of American political history if you think the GOP hasn’t been openly hostile to unions. Indeed, they’ve been quite successful at eroding their power and numbers.

Where did I say the word, or even imply, evil? I strongly disagree with the gop, as I made clear, but didn’t call anyone evil; I used harsh rhetoric, so what? And leave the half-assed armchair psychology to someone who might find it compelling, like a dense college freshman.

234 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:01:54pm

re: #214 Buck

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

Are you willing to sacrifice your rights? After the hell our grandparents and many ancestors went to get them?

Sacrificing wages is one thing, kinda understandable. Sure, public workers with better education are already sacrificing more, but I kinda get it. Sacrificing your rights is not. Not after much blood has been spilled over getting them in the first place.

235 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:01:57pm

re: #228 robdouth

That article notoriously used job description as the sole independent variable, if I remember correctly. That is useless - you’re potentially comparing a guy who does people’s taxes in Podunk, OH (no offense, Podunkian lizards) to a guy signing off on GE’s end-of-year filing.

You have to at least throw in things like education, years of experience and so on, if you want to have any kind of accurate comparison.

236 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:02:00pm

re: #231 Obdicut

In other words, deny numbers you don’t agree with, and post instead those numbers from AFSCME, because they are more accurate? I work as a financial analyst with a number of accountants. I can’t imagine complexity that earns them almost 80% more in compensation.

237 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:02:12pm

it occurs to me I would not remotely be as successful or set up as I am without public school teachers, who really helped hook me up with the accelerated programs I get accepted to, not to mention all the programming and art classes that were still healthy, because it was a well funded district with some liberal presence

Maybe that’s why I hate conservatives who advocate taking away their power so much!

238 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:03:34pm

re: #229 Decatur Deb

No, you’d just have to pay yourself better.

I thought about doing that, I decided I’d rather have a computer that worked *_*

I’m eventually moving back to my former state of “guy whose computer is worth more than his car”, and that ain’t because my computer is some $15,000 workstation :D

239 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:03:37pm

re: #236 robdouth

In other words, deny numbers you don’t agree with, and post instead those numbers from AFSCME, because they are more accurate? I work as a financial analyst with a number of accountants. I can’t imagine complexity that earns them almost 80% more in compensation.

Quick question: what percentage of accountants in the public and private sectors do you imagine make less than $60K a year?

240 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:03:40pm

re: #214 Buck

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

Fair enough. But who is this “everyone who has to sacrifice equally?”

241 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:04:30pm

re: #236 robdouth

In other words, deny numbers you don’t agree with, and post instead those numbers from AFSCME, because they are more accurate? I work as a financial analyst with a number of accountants. I can’t imagine complexity that earns them almost 80% more in compensation.

Ask a nurse how much job title matters to the actual workload.

242 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:04:58pm

re: #240 palomino

Fair enough. But who is this “everyone who has to sacrifice equally?”

All of the teachers, and the other public service works covered by this bill.

243 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:05:05pm

re: #214 Buck

You make it sound like they will be made slaves and get no pay at all.

The difference is very small. AND everyone has to sacrifice equally.

ahahahahahaha

ahahaha

hahaha


heehee

hoo hoo hoo oh that’s rich

244 Decatur Deb  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:05:26pm

re: #238 WindUpBird

I thought about doing that, I decided I’d rather have a computer that worked *_*

I’m eventually moving back to my former state of “guy whose computer is worth more than his car”, and that ain’t because my computer is some $15,000 workstation :D

Your company is ripping off worker pay to provide for capital investment. You should picket yourself.

245 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:05:50pm

re: #237 WindUpBird

re: #241 WindUpBird

I’m aware that a nurse in ICU makes more than a nurse in Telemetry, the financial analysis I do professionally, is at a hospital.

246 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:05:59pm

re: #242 Buck

All of the teachers, and the other public service works covered by this bill.

How about the people of Wisconsin, who elected the politicians who signed the original contracts with the public sector employees?

What do they sacrifice?

247 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:06:26pm

re: #234 andres

Are you willing to sacrifice your rights? After the hell our grandparents and many ancestors went to get them?

Sacrificing wages is one thing, kinda understandable. Sure, public workers with better education are already sacrificing more, but I kinda get it. Sacrificing your rights is not. Not after much blood has been spilled over getting them in the first place.

In my opinion you exaggerate the effects of the bill as it is now written.

248 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:07:16pm

re: #242 Buck

All of the teachers, and the other public service works covered by this bill.

so “everyone” means simply everyone whose power Walker wants to eliminate. They have to sacrifice equally to get out from under a made-up bullshit crisis engineered by the Governor for this purpose?


How’s that Jim Jones brand cocktail mixer taste?

249 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:07:43pm

re: #245 robdouth

re: #241 WindUpBird

I’m aware that a nurse in ICU makes more than a nurse in Telemetry, the financial analysis I do professionally, is at a hospital.

So you know that job title is a poor predictor of salary.

Why, then, would you hold up an article that only used job title as a predictor of salary, to support your public vs. private pay discrepancy claim?

250 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:08:20pm

re: #244 Decatur Deb

Your company is ripping off worker pay to provide for capital investment. You should picket yourself.

That’s really a personal matter whether I picket myself in the privacy of my own home :D

pay aint great around here but the perks really are awesome. Also no drug testing

251 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:08:55pm

re: #228 robdouth

[Link: www.usatoday.com…]

And you’re welcome. Not only do salaries outpace private sector, but…

From the article:

“These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.”

So not only more wages, but also 4 times the benefits. Is that enough for far? Also that took 2 seconds to search on google, and I’m hoping that USA Today isn’t too far right wing to be acceptable as a source.

The argument from the Union shil contacted for the piece: It’s apples and oranges because federal accountants do more complex work. So much more complex that they are entitled to more pay and 4 times more benefits. Must be fucking rocket science accounting.

Uhh, we’re talking about STATE employees in WI. The article you cite is exclusively about federal employees, until the very end when it says this:

State and local. State government employees had an average salary of $47,231 in 2008, about 5% less than comparable jobs in the private sector. City and county workers earned an average of $43,589, about 2% more than private workers in similar jobs.

Again, how does that FAR outpace the private sector?

252 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:10:41pm

re: #246 iossarian

How about the people of Wisconsin, who elected the politicians who signed the original contracts with the public sector employees?

What do they sacrifice?

I suppose you don’t think that staring at an 8 billion dollar hole needs to have any action taken. Also there are going to be OTHER changes. This bill does not cover the shortfall by itself. After this bill there are going to be other changes to the state budget, and everyone will be effected.

Again, changes to agreements take place all the time. This isn’t like tearing up the bill of rights and starting over.

253 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:04pm

re: #245 robdouth

re: #241 WindUpBird

I’m aware that a nurse in ICU makes more than a nurse in Telemetry, the financial analysis I do professionally, is at a hospital.

No, a nurse in the exact same field, with the exact same duties will get paid differently and have different workloads depending on whether they’re the only person on the unit, how much experience they have, and the size of the facility. Hospitals pay more. Smaller facilities pay less.

So many factors!

254 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:11pm

re: #242 Buck

All of the teachers, and the other public service works covered by this bill.

Semi-tangent question: how much does a WI Senator gets paid, compared to the state average? PR Senators get around $120k per year with compensations. Average income in PR: $17.5k (source). Wisconsin is in the $49k.

255 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:23pm

re: #253 WindUpBird

only nurse on the unit, rather

256 engineer cat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:46pm

where was “everyone sacrificing equally” this december when the bush tax break for people making over $250k/yr was extended?

it was a brutally expensive extension, and we will all be paying interest on the money borrowed to cover it

257 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:49pm

re: #252 Buck

I suppose you don’t think that staring at an 8 billion dollar hole needs to have any action taken.

I think they should put up taxes, especially on higher income brackets.

Is that in Walker’s plan?

258 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:11:49pm

re: #248 WindUpBird

so “everyone” means simply everyone whose power Walker wants to eliminate. They have to sacrifice equally to get out from under a made-up bullshit crisis engineered by the Governor for this purpose?

How’s that Jim Jones brand cocktail mixer taste?

That is silly. There are going to be other money saving changes to the state budget as well. Everyone is going to be effected.

259 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:12:15pm

re: #258 Buck

That is silly. There are going to be other money saving changes to the state budget as well. Everyone is going to be effected.

I feel like I’m talking to a tape recorder

260 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:12:42pm

re: #256 engineer dog

where was “everyone sacrificing equally” this december when the bush tax break for people making over $250k/yr was extended?

it was a brutally expensive extension, and we will all be paying interest on the money borrowed to cover it

No, it’s “everyone who’s the enemy” sacrificing equally

261 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:12:47pm

re: #249 iossarian

That was the first article I picked in a 2 second google search. There are tons of other articles. The only criticism of the study is from the union shill and automatically he is right, and everyone else in the article is wrong.

[Link: innovationandgrowth.wordpress.com…]

Here’s another one showing that at least the weak argument of public sector employees taking less pay is not true, but damn do they rake in the benefits that they don’t have to pay into barely at all, and subsidized fully by the rest of us.

262 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:12:48pm

re: #252 Buck

I suppose you don’t think that staring at an 8 billion dollar hole needs to have any action taken. Also there are going to be OTHER changes. This bill does not cover the shortfall by itself. After this bill there are going to be other changes to the state budget, and everyone will be effected.

Again, changes to agreements take place all the time. This isn’t like tearing up the bill of rights and starting over.

Are you willing to answer this, or you just plan on ignoring it?

263 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:13:31pm

re: #252 Buck

I suppose you don’t think that staring at an 8 billion dollar hole needs to have any action taken. Also there are going to be OTHER changes. This bill does not cover the shortfall by itself. After this bill there are going to be other changes to the state budget, and everyone will be effected.

Again, changes to agreements take place all the time. This isn’t like tearing up the bill of rights and starting over.

If the Gov were really serious about balancing the budget, wouldn’t he have refused to rescind tax increases on those above 300k?

Mitch Daniels caught some grief for tax hikes in IN, but, as part of an overall approach to deficit reduction, he was pretty successful.

264 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:14:32pm

re: #262 andres

Are you willing to answer this, or you just plan on ignoring it?

I did here.

I suppose you just didn’t like the answer.

265 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:14:42pm

re: #251 palomino

Given the 400% greater benefits, I’d say that is the part that far outpaces, considering the wage difference is much smaller than the gargantuan gap between benefits packages, which is a dishonest way to up compensation because those great retirement plans don’t look like they cause problems for the budget today, because union shills and dem politicians can just ignore unfunded liability in their budget analysis.

266 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:16:14pm

re: #261 robdouth

OK, so instead of actually responding to my criticism (that job description is a terrible predictor of pay, which you acknowledge), you dodge it. And now you have a chart that shows that public sector benefits are better than those in the private sector, which is true but irrelevant, since total compensation is still lower in the public sector, when you factor in such useful variables as level of education, years of experience, and so on:

[Link: www.epi.org…]

267 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:16:57pm

re: #264 Buck

I did here.

I suppose you just didn’t like the answer.

So, you are willing to sacrifice your rights? Pray tell me, which rights are you willing to sacrifice?

268 compound idaho  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:17:54pm

re: #250 WindUpBird

That’s really a personal matter whether I picket myself in the privacy of my own home :D

pay aint great around here but the perks really are awesome. Also no drug testing

I do contract work that sometimes requires that my business have a drug testing program for me and my employee. Weird thing is that they require I have a testing program and policy for positive tests etc., but they insist on not being made aware of any results. Must be some privacy/liability thing going on. Never thought is was worth the money to ask my attorney about it.

269 iossarian  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:19:01pm

Got to go…

270 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:20:05pm

re: #263 palomino

If the Gov were really serious about balancing the budget, wouldn’t he have refused to rescind tax increases on those above 300k?

Mitch Daniels caught some grief for tax hikes in IN, but, as part of an overall approach to deficit reduction, he was pretty successful.

Not sure exactly what you are referring to. Could it be the tax cuts proposed that will cost the state a projected $140 million in tax revenue?

If so then you should know they are not proposed until the next two-year budget, from July 2011 to June 2013. So the cuts are not even in effect yet, and therefore not be part of the current budget problem.

271 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:22:49pm

re: #265 robdouth

Given the 400% greater benefits, I’d say that is the part that far outpaces, considering the wage difference is much smaller than the gargantuan gap between benefits packages, which is a dishonest way to up compensation because those great retirement plans don’t look like they cause problems for the budget today, because union shills and dem politicians can just ignore unfunded liability in their budget analysis.

You make a good point, but your use of the word “shill” invalidates everything, as you are projecting an evil intent on people you disagree with.

You may be right about x’s and o’s here, but my larger point was about the gop essentially going to the mattresses against the unions, as if unions were generally filled with thugs and leeches, not working/middle class people trying to support their families. (If you don’t think the GOP has been trying to demonize unions in general, you haven’t been paying attention.) And the WI Gov’s actions are an extreme example of this: no attempt to negotiate with Dems in state legislature or the unions themselves. As opposed to HCR, this is the real “ramming legislation down our throats.”

272 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:22:50pm

re: #267 andres

So, you are willing to sacrifice your rights? Pray tell me, which rights are you willing to sacrifice?

I was very clear, and you just make up my answer to suit yourself. I do not think this is about “Rights” in the same way as you obviously interpret it.

273 palomino  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:24:10pm

re: #270 Buck

Not sure exactly what you are referring to. Could it be the tax cuts proposed that will cost the state a projected $140 million in tax revenue?

If so then you should know they are not proposed until the next two-year budget, from July 2011 to June 2013. So the cuts are not even in effect yet, and therefore not be part of the current budget problem.

Oh, that’s a relief…they will be part of next year’s budget problem.

274 andres  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:27:53pm

re: #272 Buck

I was very clear, and you just make up my answer to suit yourself. I do not think this is about “Rights” in the same way as you obviously interpret it.

So, the right to bargain collectively isn’t a right?

275 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:31:04pm

re: #268 compound idaho

I do contract work that sometimes requires that my business have a drug testing program for me and my employee. Weird thing is that they require I have a testing program and policy for positive tests etc., but they insist on not being made aware of any results. Must be some privacy/liability thing going on. Never thought is was worth the money to ask my attorney about it.

yeah, I am baffled by that stuff, my father is a workman’s comp lawyer

276 compound idaho  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:35:18pm

re: #275 WindUpBird

yeah, I am baffled by that stuff, my father is a workman’s comp lawyer


In an unusual case I had to pee in a cup for the customer (commercial nuke plant). It was Monday morning after the Superbowl. I was quickly counting beers, hours, body weight, trying to do the math ………… I passed.

277 Steve Dutch  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:40:12pm

Isn’t attacking corporate election spending an attempt to do exactly the same thing to Republicans?

Nobody asks why money should matter at all. I don’t need ads to inform me on the issues. The problem is really lazy, uninformed voters who allow themselves to be manipulated by ads.

And if Democrats really represent The People, why should unions matter at all? Surely The People must know who their friends are.

278 robdouth  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:46:37pm

re: #271 palomino

No Shill is someone who works tirelessly for a cause.

How is that invalidating?

279 Stan the Demanded Plan  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:49:11pm

re: #259 WindUpBird

I feel like I’m talking to a tape recorder

It’s like nothing is ever learned. I’ve taken the time & read all the articles on how the budget shortfall was created by Walker.

But no! There is a BUDGET SHORTFALL, and the teachers & other public workers must sacrifice.

So damn tiring, and actually hateful.

280 jordash1212  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 3:26:16pm

I posted this yesterday.

281 Funky_Gibbon  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 3:36:27pm

It sounds like the right-wing in the US is trying to do much the same thing as the right-wing in the UK is and using the recession/deficit as an excuse to launch ideological attacks on anything they’ve always hated and to transform society into their personal vision of heaven regardless of who is hurt.

282 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 3:51:50pm

re: #274 andres

So, the right to bargain collectively isn’t a right?

Does anyone really think that the state is planning to “bargain” with each state employee individually? Or MAYBE when people refer to changes to the collective agreement, they mean just that?

Has anyone here read the actual bill? Or do we just accept the shorthand we are being handed?

FOR EXAMPLE ONLY: IF the state can link public sector wages to inflation and take ONLY that negotiation out of the UNION/STATE bargaining, it might just help with a budget (and taxes) that can also be linked to inflation.

Yes, they also would like to make each employee pay for more of their benefits.

The way you are talking you would think the plan is to take the union leaders out and shoot them.

283 jamesfirecat  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 3:55:37pm

re: #282 Buck

The way you are talking you would think the plan is to take the union leaders out and shoot them.

Too many actual union leaders have suffered similar fates for you to make such comments even in jest.

284 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 6:53:47pm

re: #283 jamesfirecat

Too many actual union leaders have suffered similar fates for you to make such comments even in jest.


Really you can name MANY union leaders who were assassinated by the State government? Incredible.

Fine if you think that is in the bill, then I have nothing I can talk about.

I have been part of negotiating collective bargaining agreements in the past, and I can tell you EVERY TIME there were rules and limits for both sides. The impression that this bill outlaws collective bargaining, instead of placing further limits on them is simply inaccurate and misleading.

285 Buck  Tue, Feb 22, 2011 11:05:31pm

re: #279 Stanley Sea

It’s like nothing is ever learned. I’ve taken the time & read all the articles on how the budget shortfall was created by Walker.

Seriously? The budget shortfall was created by Walker? There was no budget shortfall, and then he became governor…. then like a month later there was a $140 million dollar shortfall, and a $3 billion dollar state debt…

the budget shortfall was created by Walker….

Sheesh

286 garhighway  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 6:00:03am

re: #285 Buck

Seriously? The budget shortfall was created by Walker? There was no budget shortfall, and then he became governor… then like a month later there was a $140 million dollar shortfall, and a $3 billion dollar state debt…

the budget shortfall was created by Walker…

Sheesh

Didn’t Walker shepherd through a tax cut that resulted in the current deficit?

I’ve read that here several times. Did those posters misrepresent what happened?

And if they didn’t, would you agree that such a tax cut might have something to do with Wisconsin’s current budget woes?

287 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 6:45:35am

re: #286 garhighway

I’ve read that here several times. Did those posters misrepresent what happened?

Yes. The tax cut is for the coming year, not the present one, and there would have been a deficit even without the tax cut, if all the actual obligations of the state were added up.

The amount of the deficit is a red herring. The union-busting is a bad goddamn idea, and will not save money in the long run.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
54 minutes ago
Views: 39 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0