Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers


cr8f

Recommended Posts

I live in MN and the same argument has been brewing here.

The simplicity of it is this ...

The Public Service workers have significantly benefited from union negotiation over the years.

The Governor comes in and essentially points to how out-of-line the public sector is from the sacrafices being made in the private sector ... and pulls the plug.

By doing so, the governor is essentially by-passing the negotiating rights of the union. So the fight is manipulated in the media frenzy (driven by the union) as the governor is a union buster.

I say ... so be it.

Personally, I think teachers are underpaid, but believe they should be paid by performance.

Time and time again I see a union argue against any form of employee accountability. That's ridiculous. I see how the union is driven by "me first" arguments while school districts are in debt and\or failing. Again, counter productive and unrealistic. Unions were once upon a time created to assure "fair pay for fair work", of which I am in complete agreement nd understand the origin. But, generally speaking, unions have become a choke hold on many businesses and communities.

Now in Wisconsin, half of the protestors don't even understand what they are protesting. Go to the Madison news channel websites and watch some of the videos.

And the state senators who have spoken from an "undisclosed location", sissies. I mean seriously, that is no different than the Republican walk out of Congress during the Clinton fiasco. "We're not getting our wau so we are leaving." What a lame political move, regardless of who pulls it. Be heard. They know they are violting their own oath of office .... so they go in to hiding?

I watch how we as a country conduct ourselves and feel like I am swirling around the bowl and heading for the drain. I an era of "reality TV", why are we as a society unable to discuss and solve things realistically? Wait. My bad. I am confusing that with logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Punishing educators seems like probably the worst message you could send as a state and a country IMO.

:thumbup:

This really bothers me too, over and above all other issues related to this matter.

There's been a lot of attacks on teachers lately. Here in the FFA, LHUCKS started a thread for that purpose a few months back. I have very little respect for him, but what shocked me was the number of people who agreed with him on that issue.

Personally, I believe that teachers are one of the few instances of a public employee who should be paid more than they are currently: a lot more. I would like to see teaching become a sought after profession, with pay equivalent to that of a good doctor. $200,000- $300,000 per year. I would seek to balance the budget in other areas. Teaching would be the LAST place I would go after.

Ok, that is just nucking futs.
Why? And please don't respond that we can't afford it. I already know that. I'm writing what I would like to see, not what is realistic based on economics. Why is it nuts to want a society where teachers receive elite level benefits?
Because there are simply too many children for this to ever become a reality. In small town Wisconsin you can buy a decent home for around 70k. To be deserving of that kind of pay you better be generating plenty of income or saving lives, something teachers just can't do. The pay of teachers has to be in line with the rest of society. Most young people fresh out of college at least in my area are taking starting jobs of <40k. My understanding is that teachers start at slightly more than this, which is reasonable because they usually need at least an extra year of college. Teaching is a very hard skill to learn, one can only become a good educator with experience. I know from experience that most teachers suck for at least their first year on the job.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine what the press and Democratic reaction would be if Big Oil started blocking the Capitol building, screaming at politicians, beating drums, and going to their houses to threaten them?

Why would they do this?
Could be for any number of reasons. There's been talk of eliminating certain tax breaks they receive. Or raising gas taxes. That would be a reason for them to be upset.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for.

Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.

:thumbup:

Sorry, the irony was way too thick there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in MN and the same argument has been brewing here.The simplicity of it is this ... The Public Service workers have significantly benefited from union negotiation over the years. The Governor comes in and essentially points to how out-of-line the public sector is from the sacrafices being made in the private sector ... and pulls the plug. By doing so, the governor is essentially by-passing the negotiating rights of the union. So the fight is manipulated in the media frenzy (driven by the union) as the governor is a union buster. I say ... so be it.Personally, I think teachers are underpaid, but believe they should be paid by performance. Time and time again I see a union argue against any form of employee accountability. That's ridiculous. I see how the union is driven by "me first" arguments while school districts are in debt and\or failing. Again, counter productive and unrealistic. Unions were once upon a time created to assure "fair pay for fair work", of which I am in complete agreement nd understand the origin. But, generally speaking, unions have become a choke hold on many businesses and communities.Now in Wisconsin, half of the protestors don't even understand what they are protesting. Go to the Madison news channel websites and watch some of the videos.And the state senators who have spoken from an "undisclosed location", sissies. I mean seriously, that is no different than the Republican walk out of Congress during the Clinton fiasco. "We're not getting our wau so we are leaving." What a lame political move, regardless of who pulls it. Be heard. They know they are violting their own oath of office .... so they go in to hiding?I watch how we as a country conduct ourselves and feel like I am swirling around the bowl and heading for the drain. I an era of "reality TV", why are we as a society unable to discuss and solve things realistically? Wait. My bad. I am confusing that with logic.

You make a number of excellent points, especially about merit pay. Obama came to office talking about merit pay, but has been silent about it ever since. I also think we can all agree that the pensions are going to have to be renegotiated in most states or we're all screwed, and that means the unions are going to have to be fought and defeated.And yet...I am uncomfortable with removing the power of the unions to have collective bargaining. Like you, I think teachers are underpaid and I have my doubts that this sort of solution will solve that problem; I think it will make it worse. I also think that the teachers and other public union employees understand this and that's what they are fighting here so strongly- not the immediate pay cuts. I would much prefer negotiating both immediate pay cuts and a long term way to establish merit pay for teachers through collective bargaining rather than trying to remove it. Edited by timschochet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
Not if they are correct that the cut is too drastic. Altering terms of employment significantly enough to impact the state's ability to hire or retain quality teachers does far more harm to the kids than a couple days of missed school. It all depends who you think is in the right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are these people mad? They lost some elections that allowed this to happen. Either get more votes, or move. There are 49 other states in this country.

I don't think you really understand what's going on here. it has nothing to do with elections and who lost and whether someone can just leave.

There's a collective bargaining agreement currently in place. The state negotiated it with public employees. Both parties agreed to the terms. And people who accepted jobs or continued at jobs any time since the formation of that agreement did so based in part on the terms of the CBA. However, the state has now decided that it doesn't like the agreement that was negotiated. And because they're the state, they are seeking to enact an "emergency measure" that would unilaterally nullify the agreement that both parties agreed to, despite the fact that any other labor agreement would be binding on both parties (and this agreement is binding on the public employees). The government is basically saying that because it makes the law, it is above the law with respect to the binding nature of a contract. Anyone who is opposed to "big government" should be absolutely outraged by this.

Well, everyone is against "big government" except the stuff that they like. :angry: If the new government officials want to cut the budget, then why can't they? Is there a court that states they can't? I didn't read anything in your 2nd paragraph that explains to me why this isn't about lost elections. Help me understand the connection.
Because they're not just cutting the budget, they're breaching a contract. I honestly don't know enough about the details, (government contract law generally, what the "emergency power" cited by the governor does, etc.) to answer exactly why or how they can do this. All I know is that a private entity couldn't do this. That's why, for example, the NFL owners have to wait until March 3 to commence the lockout- that's when their previously negotiated agreement with the players' union expires. But because the government is one of the parties here, the rules essentially don't apply to them as far as I can tell. I haven't really looked into this in much detail. Mostly when I read about this I just thank God I don't live in Wisconsin.

The government is also exercising its heavy hand to tell public employees that they can't negotiate collectively in the future- which is obviously their right as the employer, just as any other private employer could refuse to hire union employees. But it leaves a funny taste in some mouths, just as it does when private employers do it.

Okay then. So why is this not about lost elections? Seems like it is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
Not really, not in proportion to the extra amount of time they put in on a regular basis over the past few years. A few days one way or another is not going to make a big deal. And when I compare it to all the extra unpaid overttime these people spend working with individual students, spending their own money on class projects and supplies, etc. I am hard put to describe them in such a negative manner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last election 7 out of the top spenders after Citizens United were right wing, the other 3 in the top 10 were unions(#5, #6 and #9).

If they can stop unions the republican backers are the only big spenders-that's what this is about.

Minnesota is in a lot worse shape than we are economically but this is spreading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
:angry: Something that guys like Tim forget is that the educational system in depressed urban areas like Milwaukee provide benefits to poorer children that go above education. They provide these children with hot meals and health care that they possibly wouldn't otherwise receive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay then. So why is this not about lost elections? Seems like it is.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking at all. "You lost, get over it" is a ridiculous argument no matter what the context. No matter what happens in an election people are always free to act in their own self-interest. Do you think Obama's victory in 2008 meant that the wealthy and others who oppose tax increases of all kinds should have just shut up and accepted his proposal for tax increases on those making over $200,000? Edited by TobiasFunke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
Not really, not in proportion to the extra amount of time they put in on a regular basis over the past few years. A few days one way or another is not going to make a big deal. And when I compare it to all the extra unpaid overttime these people spend working with individual students, spending their own money on class projects and supplies, etc. I am hard put to describe them in such a negative manner.
Gotcha. So people should feel free to ignore their work rules, as long as they can justify it in their own minds.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
:popcorn: Something that guys like Tim forget is that the educational system in depressed urban areas like Milwaukee provide benefits to poorer children that go above education. They provide these children with hot meals and health care that they possibly wouldn't otherwise receive.
Are you suggesting that by calling in sick the teachers are selfishly preventing these kids from getting hot meals?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
:popcorn: Something that guys like Tim forget is that the educational system in depressed urban areas like Milwaukee provide benefits to poorer children that go above education. They provide these children with hot meals and health care that they possibly wouldn't otherwise receive.
Are you suggesting that by calling in sick the teachers are selfishly preventing these kids from getting hot meals?
Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
:popcorn: Something that guys like Tim forget is that the educational system in depressed urban areas like Milwaukee provide benefits to poorer children that go above education. They provide these children with hot meals and health care that they possibly wouldn't otherwise receive.
Are you suggesting that by calling in sick the teachers are selfishly preventing these kids from getting hot meals?
If they cancel school because the teachers don't want to show up where do the kids that need hot meals get those meals?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on the teachers who have chosen to turn their backs on the children they proport to care so much about. Turns out kids take a back seat to teacher perks and benefits in the end.

I don't think this fair at all. Shame on you for generalizing about what these teachers are asking for. Everything I read about Wisconsin teachers is that they are exemplary, and their sacrifices already on behalf of their students are unbelievable. They may be on the wrong side of this fight (still not sure about that) but you're creating a very distorted picture of them in order to satisy your own partisan beliefs.
Calling in "sick" three days in a row isn't turning their backs on the kids?
Not really, not in proportion to the extra amount of time they put in on a regular basis over the past few years. A few days one way or another is not going to make a big deal. And when I compare it to all the extra unpaid overttime these people spend working with individual students, spending their own money on class projects and supplies, etc. I am hard put to describe them in such a negative manner.
Gotcha. So people should feel free to ignore their work rules, as long as they can justify it in their own minds.
I didn't say that. My answer to your question is no. I think that, legally, the teachers are in the wrong here. And they probably are ethically as well. I don't think I would do what they have chosen to do here. But that's a far cry from accusing them of not caring about their students. That's an over the top, shameful criticism IMO, and it flies in the face of the facts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.

I haven't heard or read anything about that. I'd be awfully surprised if this were actually the case. But if it is the case, then its awful. As I wrote earlier, I don't approve of the teachers staying home, and this would be an unintended consequence which I'm sure they did not consider. But it's completely over the top to claim that they don't care about their students. That is just wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotcha. So people should feel free to ignore their work rules, as long as they can justify it in their own minds.

I didn't say that. My answer to your question is no. I think that, legally, the teachers are in the wrong here. And they probably are ethically as well. I don't think I would do what they have chosen to do here. But that's a far cry from accusing them of not caring about their students. That's an over the top, shameful criticism IMO, and it flies in the face of the facts.
Meh, I think that's quibbling over semantics. I would perhaps word it differently than Statorama, maybe something along the lines of "The teachers who are calling in sick are, in this instance, prioritizing their own battles over the needs of their students, despite professing to do the exact opposite."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.

I haven't heard or read anything about that. I'd be awfully surprised if this were actually the case. But if it is the case, then its awful. As I wrote earlier, I don't approve of the teachers staying home, and this would be an unintended consequence which I'm sure they did not consider. But it's completely over the top to claim that they don't care about their students. That is just wrong.
If it is true, it's a consequence they surely realized.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cameraman catches up with runaway senators :goodposting::thumbup:

edit to add: Good point from the comments section of that link

Here's what I'm wondering. They need 20 senators to vote on a budget bill, but can't they vote on other bills with a simple majority? So the Democrats won't come back? Start passing voter ID, concealed carry, right to work, etc. See how fast they come back.

Edited by Statorama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.

I haven't heard or read anything about that. I'd be awfully surprised if this were actually the case. But if it is the case, then its awful. As I wrote earlier, I don't approve of the teachers staying home, and this would be an unintended consequence which I'm sure they did not consider. But it's completely over the top to claim that they don't care about their students. That is just wrong.
Are you that naive that you don't understand the conditions some of these kids live in?If they cared about the students they would be in school. Sitting home won't accomplish anything for them and puts them at risk of getting fired or layed off. Edited by Eric Stratton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a cynic, but I think this chart speaks volumes:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.ph...010&party=A

Top 20 spending PACs for 2009-2010

American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $2,316,000 DEMS 99% REPS 0%

American Federation of Teachers $2,302,250 DEMS 99% REPS 0%

The only 2 with zero political influence with Republicans.

Much like the demonizing and the killing of ACORN because they effectively organized the poor to vote Democratic, I don't think it's any mystery why all of a sudden Republican governors are aiming their guns at these two unions in particular.

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.

I haven't heard or read anything about that. I'd be awfully surprised if this were actually the case. But if it is the case, then its awful. As I wrote earlier, I don't approve of the teachers staying home, and this would be an unintended consequence which I'm sure they did not consider. But it's completely over the top to claim that they don't care about their students. That is just wrong.
In D.C. there's so many poor kids that get their nutrition from subsidized/free school lunches that when there's snow, D.C. schools remain open if at all possible, even when every other school district and office in the area is shut down. It's really sad, but it's absolutely true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. In some cases, it might be the only hot, nutritious meal they receive all day.

I haven't heard or read anything about that. I'd be awfully surprised if this were actually the case. But if it is the case, then its awful. As I wrote earlier, I don't approve of the teachers staying home, and this would be an unintended consequence which I'm sure they did not consider. But it's completely over the top to claim that they don't care about their students. That is just wrong.
In D.C. there's so many poor kids that get their nutrition from subsidized/free school lunches that when there's snow, D.C. schools remain open if at all possible, even when every other school district and office in the area is shut down. It's really sad, but it's absolutely true.
:goodposting:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

:goodposting:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a cynic, but I think this chart speaks volumes:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.ph...010&party=A

Top 20 spending PACs for 2009-2010

American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $2,316,000 DEMS 99% REPS 0%

American Federation of Teachers $2,302,250 DEMS 99% REPS 0%

The only 2 with zero political influence with Republicans.

Much like the demonizing and the killing of ACORN because they effectively organized the poor to vote Democratic, I don't think it's any mystery why all of a sudden Republican governors are aiming their guns at these two unions in particular.

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

:golfclap:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear for my property taxes next year.I heard 20-40% increase based on school funding cuts. That would be insane. Im pretty sure that would get everyone on board against this.

I'm not too sure about that. In a very oversimplified way, the three choices are:1) Cut spending, by lowering total compensation to public employees2) Raise state level taxes3) Cut spending, by lowering state aid to localities, resulting in increased property taxesSo the choice to the taxpayer is higher income taxes, higher property taxes, or lower government spending. Why would higher property taxes encourage the taxpayer to instead be in favor of higher income taxes?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :shrug: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever agreed more with some of the FBG lefties than I have in this thread

:goodposting:
Well when you both understand what's actually happening maybe you will........Nah, you're lefties, never mind.
Even the guy with "Romney Republican" in his sig?
Actions speak louder than a sig. That and obviously he doesn't understand the scope of what's happening. Edited by Mr.Pack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever agreed more with some of the FBG lefties than I have in this thread

:rolleyes:
Well when you both understand what's actually happening maybe you will........Nah, you're lefties, never mind.
Even the guy with "Romney Republican" in his sig?
Actions speak louder than a sig. That and obviously he doesn't understand the scope of what's happening.
People must fall within the spectrum of your opinion? OK.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another story out today

A Jan. 31 memo from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimates the state will actually finish the fiscal year on June 30 with a $56 million surplus. That is $54 million more than state administrators estimated and far more than the $137 million in red ink that Darling and Vos refer to.

Neither Vos, R-Rochester, nor Darling, R-River Hills, responded to requests for comment for this report, but those accounting differences have Democrats claiming Republicans are overstating the depth of the problem to push a hard-right agenda and break public worker unions.

"In our conversations with the non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, it has become blatantly evident Governor Walker has manifested this fiscal crisis as a Trojan horse in order to enact unfair public policy in the name of fixing the budget," says state Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Madison.

Scot Ross of the left-leaning group One Wisconsin Now went a step further, calling the Walker plan a "handout in special interest spending to his corporate pals."

Ross was referring to $117.2 million in tax breaks approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature in January. Those items making health savings accounts tax deductible, tax deductions for businesses that relocate and tax exclusions for hiring new employees.

Ross and others have said those tax breaks alone have created the shortfall through the end of this budget cycle that Darling and Vos have cited. But the $117.2 million figure cited by the Fiscal Bureau refers to the cost of those tax breaks over the next 2.5 years, not just the next few months.

Going forward, it is clear Wisconsin has some serious budget issues to face. Estimates say the state is facing anywhere from a $3.1 billion to $3.6 billion deficit in the upcoming two-year budget cycle.

That amount represents about 13 percent of total annual state spending, according to Andrew Reschovsky, professor of public affairs and applied economics at UW-Madison.

"The short answer is that we are arguably in a crisis ... but the crisis is the large size of the fiscal 2012 and 2013 budget gap, not the 2011 gap, which is relatively modest," he says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :goodposting: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.
I get the other side of this. I own my own business so I really have no experience with unions or even the hiring of union employees other than contractors I choose to hire. But I do know contracts, and when I agree to a bad one it's my responsibility. I wish I could just say "sorry, I screwed up and I can't honor my contract because it will hurt me financially" without legal ramifications. Isn't there some responsibility in negotiating good contracts on the State side? Again, I don't know what the facts are in WI or NJ for that matter in regards to their CBA with the groups in question, but who exactly is agreeing to these contracts if they are bad deals for the States? And if they are bad deals, why not go back an re-negotiate them at the time to renegotiate them? When I write a contract I'm legally bound to it.Another question that I don't know the answer to is that if a State claims it's bankrupt, why not go bankrupt? That would solve the problem of owing money they don't have, right?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear for my property taxes next year.I heard 20-40% increase based on school funding cuts. That would be insane. Im pretty sure that would get everyone on board against this.

I'm not too sure about that. In a very oversimplified way, the three choices are:1) Cut spending, by lowering total compensation to public employees2) Raise state level taxes3) Cut spending, by lowering state aid to localities, resulting in increased property taxesSo the choice to the taxpayer is higher income taxes, higher property taxes, or lower government spending. Why would higher property taxes encourage the taxpayer to instead be in favor of higher income taxes?
Yikes.Athletics, Music, Art, Drama, etc. are being cut from school districts everywhere. Class sizes continue to grow and Education funding gets cut by states as it is. Even raising taxes doesn't guarantee more money is going to Education. Cuts\Funding and ACCOUNTABILITY has to be targeted.Yes, I am one who believes the unions have over-stepped and need a reality check. How that is done or if this is the best\only way, I'd need a whole lot more real and factual information.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.

Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.

Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :lmao: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.

This has everything to do with worker's rights and their ability to collectively bargain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I have seen such a anti-liberal article in a newspaper.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/116434554.html

Democrats in the state Senate threw a temper tantrum Thursday - essentially they took their ball and went home.

Actually, they didn't go home. They apparently went to Illinois, just out of reach of their obligations.

By boycotting an expected vote on Gov. Scott Walker's budget repair bill, they were able to prevent action on the measure. Twenty senators are required for a quorum; the Republicans have only 19.

The Walker plan is deeply divisive. We're not supportive of some aspects of the bill, either, including those that will make it nearly impossible for unions to negotiate. And we think that police and firefighter unions should not be excluded as they are now. But public worker benefits need to be reined in, and Walker is right to target them.

State Sen. Lena Taylor (D-Milwaukee), apparently with plenty of time on her hands Thursday afternoon, posted on her Facebook page, "brb," slang for "be right back." Too bad she and her colleagues weren't.

One leading Democrat - Obama was his name, as we recall - put it well after winning the White House in 2008: "Elections have consequences," he told Republicans at the time. Indeed they do. The Democrats' childish prank mocks the democratic process.

Meanwhile, some Wisconsin teachers decided to make a mockery of their own profession by penalizing their students after an irresponsible call to action by Mary Bell, the chief of the state teachers union.

"On Thursday and Friday, we are asking Wisconsinites to come to Madison," Bell, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, said Wednesday. She then claimed disingenuously that she wasn't telling the union's 98,000 teachers to walk off their jobs.

Unfortunately, that's what many of them did. There were no classes in Madison schools. Port Washington High School had to close. The same was true at other schools around the state. Do these teachers care more about their jobs than their kids? We wonder.

Both Senate Democrats and teachers should get over their snits and get back to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :lmao: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.
From what I've read about Christie, he has much bigger balls and much more integrity than our new governor in Wisconsin. I agree with the sentiment and the theory behind these actions, the problem I have is that Walker's approach features two major problems that separate him from Christie (or what I know of Christie) in my opinion. First, Walker is ramming his legislation through ambush-style, on approximately 4 days notice for a 150 page bill than makes major changes to the employment status of thousands of people. He wants no discussion, explanation or debate. This legislation will have a dramatic effect on Wisconsin that goes well beyond the pay rates of teachers, which is where the focus seems to be at the moment. Rather than facing his opponents and the public (as Christie is apparently doing), Walker wants to force his legislation through without having to actually discuss it, explain it or defend it publicly. Second, Walker is exempting policy and fire unions (which I've noted I consider to be no better than the WEA, if not worse), a move that seems to be an overt act of political pandering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :shrug: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.
I get the other side of this. I own my own business so I really have no experience with unions or even the hiring of union employees other than contractors I choose to hire. But I do know contracts, and when I agree to a bad one it's my responsibility. I wish I could just say "sorry, I screwed up and I can't honor my contract because it will hurt me financially" without legal ramifications. Isn't there some responsibility in negotiating good contracts on the State side? Again, I don't know what the facts are in WI or NJ for that matter in regards to their CBA with the groups in question, but who exactly is agreeing to these contracts if they are bad deals for the States? And if they are bad deals, why not go back an re-negotiate them at the time to renegotiate them? When I write a contract I'm legally bound to it.Another question that I don't know the answer to is that if a State claims it's bankrupt, why not go bankrupt? That would solve the problem of owing money they don't have, right?
Well, that's one of the problems - political officials and their appointed secretaries and managers make the promises in the past without any reasonable belief that it will all be paid for. Again - another difference between the private sector and the public sector. Governor for 8 years comes up with pension system that won't have issues for 30 years - what does he care? Well, we are at that 30 year mark for NJ and our Governor is the guy now telling the truth. And it's really very simple for us - what we are doing now is actually saving the system long term with bitter pills now so that there are pensions for people previously promised them. The promises were backed up with lies and misinformation but we have to honor them as best we can.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever agreed more with some of the FBG lefties than I have in this thread

:shrug:
Well when you both understand what's actually happening maybe you will........Nah, you're lefties, never mind.
Actions speak louder than a sig. That and obviously he doesn't understand the scope of what's happening.
People must fall within the spectrum of your opinion? OK.
I don't think I said anything remotely close to that. :lmao:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I also agree with the thought that elections matter. Unfortunately for regular working people, in large part to the Supreme Court over reach on Citizens United, their ability to organize and have a political voice to combat immense corporate interests is being stripped away. Union busting is a corporate tool to remove dissent, organization and to crush political opposition.

I've dealt with this topic in the Chris Christie thread. There is a significant difference between private sector unions and public sectors unions. When the public pays the bill through tax monies taken by the government by force, the foundation of the dispute is different. I wouldn't even call this union busting as the term implies what happened in the private sector. We have a different animal here with state and municipal workers. Now, I am not from this state so I have no idea what the real truth is about all the stuff being floated around, but I do live in NJ and know exactly whats going on here.Public unions need to realize the difference and work with the system the states have at this point or, in my opinion, they need to be dissolved and/or destroyed. It has nothing to do with worker's rights and everything to do with the police power and taxing power of the government and how those powers are used to take money from taxpayers to give to public employees. The states that are having this fight - NJ for one - are going to go bankrupt if something doesn't change. When the debt hole to be solved is the size of over 1/3 of the total actual budget and the pension systems are underfunded for prior promises - like NJ - it has to be made up somewhere. Higher and higher taxes cost our state billions and didn't do anything. Bonding to pay for salaries makes the problem worse. The only true fix is to stop the madness.Gov. Christie had a discussion with a cop and I posted the link in that thread. The cop was upset that his last raise, because of the new laws passed including caps on local spending and pension steps and raises including having to now pay for some portion of medical benefits resulted in him only getting a $4 raise in his last check. The answer by Christie was simple and easy - the room was filled with taxpayers of whom 10% are unemployed and others who haven't seen a raise in years. Be happy you still have a check and work with us to fix the system so that you actually ahve a pension in 20 years and not a bankrupt system that can't pay anything leaving you out to dry. :shrug: The choice is up to the unions in NJ - it's going to be a choice most states force at some point because they won't have a choice if they are anywhere near as screwed up as we were for the past 20 years.
From what I've read about Christie, he has much bigger balls and much more integrity than our new governor in Wisconsin. I agree with the sentiment and the theory behind these actions, the problem I have is that Walker's approach features two major problems that separate him from Christie (or what I know of Christie) in my opinion. First, Walker is ramming his legislation through ambush-style, on approximately 4 days notice for a 150 page bill than makes major changes to the employment status of thousands of people. He wants no discussion, explanation or debate. This legislation will have a dramatic effect on Wisconsin that goes well beyond the pay rates of teachers, which is where the focus seems to be at the moment. Rather than facing his opponents and the public (as Christie is apparently doing), Walker wants to force his legislation through without having to actually discuss it, explain it or defend it publicly. Second, Walker is exempting policy and fire unions (which I've noted I consider to be no better than the WEA, if not worse), a move that seems to be an overt act of political pandering.
Agreed they are not similar. Gov. Christie has held more town hall meetings since he's been governor than I think Corzine did his entire time in office. He goes on radio every week and takes callers questions. His town halls are not always supporters and many times they are filled with opponents. He has gone to schools that let him come to talk directly to teachers and students. He hasn't shied away from a single question and has been open about everything in the debate since he dropped his first budget last year.Ramming stuff like this through without debate is a major problem, of course. But Christie actually did have to do that. After he took office on the heels of meetings with Corzine and the transition teams where he was told that he was given a budget surplus for the rest of FY10 (a joke of epic proportions) he was informed that NJ wouldn't meet payroll by March. So he used the executive authority to impound all discretionary spending and stop all program spending not already used to ensure the state actually had money to make payroll. So, there are times when executive action is necessary. I don't know enough about this state to know if it's warranted there - although ramming any massive legislation through in 4 days is usually a bad idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...