j_b Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Both sides realize that collective bargaining rights are the means by which public sector employees extract excess pay and benefits from the public treasury, and by which democrats fund their re-elections campaigns via taxes that get recycled back to them through mandatory automatic deductions from public sector union payrolls. Take away public sector bargaining rights and the central mechanism that both sets of beneficiaries rely upon goes away. Great for taxpayers and everyone with a stake in cost-effective delivery of state services, bad for public sector employees and the party that depends on them. Whole tax-funded patronage network goes away. Everyone knows the deal on both sides of the aisle, so it's no surprise that they're pulling out all of the stops to keep the gravy train rolling. If nothing else, at least it's now clear exactly who stands for what, and why. Liar! public workers aren't earning ("extracting") more than private sector workers for equivalent skill despite your drivel about their occupations not being as vital as private sector jobs (what a pathetic moron!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Which amendment covers a "sick-out"? what word in the "right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances" do you need assistance with? I'm sure some people here would like to see teachers protest only on weekends and holidays. Fallow along (both of you), demonstrating without arrest is a first amendment right...Sick-Out is lying to your employer in order to shut the system down (creating leverage). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Sick out? Is that like when you see Pamela Anderson naked? OOOOH GROSS, SICK ME OUT! HepC-Out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 There is a kernel of truth in Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s claim of a “budget shortfall” of $137 million. But Walker, a Republican, failed to tell the state that less than two weeks into his term as governor, he, with his swollen Republican majorities in the Wisconsin Legislature, pushed through $117 million in tax breaks for business allies of the GOP. There is your crisis. JayB is so concerned about someone extracting money from public coffers that he isn't even going to mention tax breaks for cronies of the GOP that caused the "shortfall" that Walker claims he wants to address. JayB, as usual, much prefers falsely demonizing public workers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 True but I get to pick who and what I vote for and I rarely vote yes for bond measures. Since I get a firsthand view of whats getting taught to our/my kids I think we're all in trouble. Its good to know that you think our public education is something worth bragging about, let alone paying more for. right, war is peace and paying teachers less will improve education. Did you fall on your head as a child? I didn't say paying teachers less would improve public education. Our education system is broken but it isn't because teachers make too much. However, I don't think paying them less would net a worse education system. And by "Less" I mean letting them contribute to their pension and paying for at least part of their health insurance, not the scorched earth, wage slashing, Kochtopus type shit you've been spouting. What's amusing is that all this angst is because the Wisconsin's Governor asked the state employee union to comprise and pay into their pension fund and contribute to insurance in order to avoid lay-offs. As I understand it they were asked to contribute 7 or 8 percent. Tragic, that would have sent those poor employees straight to the bread lines for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 cut the crap. Public employees in WI have already said they agreed to make the concessions wanted on pension and whatnot. The only sticky point is collective bargaining, which clearly shows that this is about busting unions. Nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 As I understand it they were asked to contribute 7 or 8 percent. Tragic, that would have sent those poor employees straight to the bread lines for sure. Your response to an 8% pay cut would be "cum on face"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 As I understand it they were asked to contribute 7 or 8 percent. Tragic, that would have sent those poor employees straight to the bread lines for sure. Your response to an 8% pay cut would be "cum on face"? When the economy tanked I lost about 25% of my income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 cut the crap. Public employees in WI have already said they agreed to make the concessions wanted on pension and whatnot. The only sticky point is collective bargaining, which clearly shows that this is about busting unions. Nothing more. Sure they did, after they refused and the legislation was written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Huh, Jay_B isn't concerned about selling assets on the cheap to friends. We do, indeed, know who stands for what. If the blurb is true that's definitely bad policy with a significant potential for ripping off taxpayers by selling public assets to cronies on the cheap. The democrats should return so that they can cast votes against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Huh, Jay_B isn't concerned about selling assets on the cheap to friends. We do, indeed, know who stands for what. If the blurb is true that's definitely bad policy with a significant potential for ripping off taxpayers by selling public assets to cronies on the cheap. The democrats should return so that they can cast votes against it. If its true then the biggest thinker in the Democrat camp works at the Gin and Taco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 When the economy tanked I lost about 25% of my income. Prostitutions tough now, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 If the blurb is true that's definitely bad policy with a significant potential for ripping off taxpayers by selling public assets to cronies on the cheap. The democrats should return so that they can cast votes against it yup, your colors shine through. nothing so bad partisan hackery can't shine through Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 If the blurb is true that's definitely bad policy with a significant potential for ripping off taxpayers by selling public assets to cronies on the cheap. The democrats should return so that they can cast votes against it yup, your colors shine through. nothing so bad partisan hackery can't shine through That's why I'm happy that I can rely on you for dispassionate analysis devoid of any ideological distortions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 If the blurb is true that's definitely bad policy with a significant potential for ripping off taxpayers by selling public assets to cronies on the cheap. The democrats should return so that they can cast votes against it yup, your colors shine through. nothing so bad partisan hackery can't shine through That's why I'm happy that I can rely on you for dispassionate analysis devoid of any ideological distortions. that's what we have economists for /sarcasm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 that's what we have economists for i thought it was to make meteorologists look good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 that's what we have economists for i thought it was to make meteorologists look good? From Beowolf to John Kenneth Galbraith...I raise a glass to your erudition sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 "Americans strongly oppose laws taking away the collective bargaining power of public employee unions, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. The poll found 61% would oppose a law in their state similar to such a proposal in Wisconsin, compared with 33% who would favor such a law." http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-02-22-poll-public-unions-wisconsin_N.htm Not that regressives care about what most Americans feel. Note that similar %s exist on almost every single issue in favor of progressive policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 More tyranny of the minority: "Today, Governor Scott Walker signed Special Session Assembly Bill 5 which requires a 2/3s vote to pass tax rate increases on the income, sales or franchise taxes." Why are regressives such authoritarians? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 that's what we have economists for i thought it was to make meteorologists look good? The blonde on TV right now looks better than any economist I've ever met Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 The Idiocracy that is the Right doesn't seem to realize that by opposing public school's its cutting off one of the two foundations of a fully employed workforce: baby sitting services (the other being surplus food). Everyone needs to pay for these babysitting stations; they absorb those who would otherwise cling to the ankles of the productive worker. The Right's wealth depends, of course, on this amortized service. Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or10 months a year! It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - babysit! We can get that for less than minimum wage. That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan-- that equals 6 1/2 hours). Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET'S SEE.... That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries). What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute -- there's something wrong here! There sure is! The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student--a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Larry Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Pope, your also forgot to blame the poor performance of the students on the teacher--it's not the parents fault they are failing; is it? Edited February 23, 2011 by Lucky Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Those damn "highly paid teachers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 It ain't about the budget, but you knew that. FOX's 'liar' theme has been particularly entertaining to watch parroted here so accurately. Unions vote Dem duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 out of curiosity, i read the wiki-blurb on "collective bargaining" - what does the Great Group Brain make of this snippet: "The right to collectively bargain is recognized through international human rights conventions. Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights identifies the ability to organize trade unions as a fundamental human right. Item 2(a) of the International Labour Organization's Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work defines the "freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining" as an essential right of workers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.