Public Employees Protesting WI Governor

[maxiep]

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/even-f...rgaining-for-public-servants/?singlepage=true

 

[maxiep]

Don't play dumb. You know very well how many record breaking times the Republicans didn't allow legislation to be debated on the Senate floor in the last Congress (08 - 10).

Its strategy.

Its funny to see how up in arms Republicans are at how Democrats are protesting this bill, and the political moves the Democrats are making to not let this bill pass. Sounds extremely familiar. Seems like this happened recently.

Same shit. Different party. The two party system is shit. Both parties are shit. I love to see how PapaG, Maxiep, and BlazerBoy staunchly defend the Republican party. It is actually quite interesting to see how everyone on this forum spins current events in the spectrum of their political views, and aggressively attacks people who don't agree.

I'm waiting for you to educate me.

 

[Ed O]

Seems to me they are both within the rules of the game. Play on.

Really? You think that's within the rules of the game?

Wow. OK.

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

Really? You think that's within the rules of the game?

Wow. OK.

Ed O.

You think it's not? Please state why. Is it illegal? Is it against Wisconsin senate rules?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

See, you quoting this is exactly the kind of shallow, gut-instinct thinking I'm talking about. You just had to read a few paragraphs down into that very same article to get into the actual benchmarking that I'm talking about, and suddenly it starts sounding like Wisconsin is actually performing pretty typical among its neighbors and better than the majority of the country in its education system. But you didn't do that, because the benchmarking didn't fit in with your storyline. But I'll do it for you:

Even here, though, I find this article depressingly limited. A really productive analysis doesn't just measure one mediocre state (Wisconsin) against other mediocre states (Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa). What does Massachuselts spend on their teachers vs reading proficiency? They have some of the most literate kids in the country, so it's worth knowing. What does Arkansas?

It is interesting because of two factors:
1) It's Wisconsin.
2) It's really expensive with not favorable results.

I don't think the issue is the amount of money at all, it's a no-win proposition.

A winning proposition is "here's excellence, more money is even greater excellence."

I'm quite sure there's enough money to produce excellence.

 

[Ed O]

You think it's not? Please state why. Is it illegal? Is it against Wisconsin senate rules?

I think that they are failing to show up for work. They are not performing their job.

They are, literally, fleeing from the state that they are representing.

It's embarrassing and wrong and pathetic, to boot.

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

I think that they are failing to show up for work. They are not performing their job.

They are, literally, fleeing from the state that they are representing.

It's embarrassing and wrong and pathetic, to boot.

Ed O.

Your last line is merely an opinion, and the first two lines are not against the rules as far as I can see. There are no mandatory attendance rules in legislatures, so far as I know.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Too bad the US congress shows up for work.

 

[barfo]

the US congress shows up for work.

What's your evidence for that assertion?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

What's your evidence for that assertion?

barfo

This

 

[Ed O]

Your last line is merely an opinion, and the first two lines are not against the rules as far as I can see. There are no mandatory attendance rules in legislatures, so far as I know.

I do not believe that anything that is not against the rules is acceptable... it's definitely not the same as doing something that is within the rules.

But if you don't think that showing up for work is part of the job, then there's really not going to be any reasoning with you.

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

I do not believe that anything that is not against the rules is acceptable... it's definitely not the same as doing something that is within the rules.

Something is either against the rules, or it is within the rules. There isn't any gray area, unless the rules are not clearly defined. I think they are clearly defined in this case.
Whether it is acceptable (to you?) isn't terribly relevant to the question of whether it is against the rules or not.

But if you don't think that showing up for work is part of the job, then there's really not going to be any reasoning with you.

Ed O.

I think what I said was that it was within the rules, and there are no mandatory attendance rules for legislators. Your disapproval of those facts don't make them non-facts.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

I'm quite sure there's enough money to produce excellence.

More than enough.

2% of the population literally have hordes of it.

 

[MARIS61]

And once again, you've hit upon the salient issue: The two people negotiating were on the same side of the table. The policitians that negotiated that deal and the teachers' union were in bed together.

Your evidence of such a dubious arrangement?

 

[jlprk]

I'm not going to read 254 posts, so I'll summarize where this thread should be.

There is a period before every election called the "campaign." This is when candidates disclose the issues important to them, and their agendas if elected. Voters use this information to make informed choices. Without this information, it's a sham democracy, and why waste time with elections.

The Radical Right (basically rich conservatives trying to increase their own profits, a few loudmouths they pay to speak for them, and the suckers who fall for their rhetoric) has always wanted to destroy Unions, because Unions transfer wealth from the Top 2% to the rest of us. But the Radical Right can't win elections over the vast majority of voters, if they honestly disclose their Radical thoughts during election campaigns. (The same secret agenda is in place to destroy Social Security.) So they lie during campaigns that they don't dream of destroying our standard of living and the American Way of Life.

Some coward in Minnesota has now run for Governor. During his deceptive campaign, he covertly withheld any mention of his fantasy, Union destruction. Keeping his Radical agenda secret from the suckers voting for him, of course, is the only way he could have won. Like a rat in a dark basement, he fearfully waited until the first month after his inauguration. Only then did the coward shock his State with a Nazi-like Blitzkrieg attack on everyone's moderate sensibilities.

Apparently he had secretly planned this with other cowards, the Republican legislators, who like him, hid their agendas long in advance, in order to fool suckers into voting for them. So it is not debatable that this was a conspiracy to get elected. Lying to fools is the only way the Radical Right can win elections.

This Governor will shortly be recalled from office by the voters, so he knows he has to work fast to please his biggest contributor, a Koch. Contributor Koch financed his election in order to increase Koch's own profits by decreasing Koch's own taxes. Koch pays people to cloak his selfish motives in a fake ideology which makes no sense if the goal is to improve the lives of the Bottom 98%. The meaningless Radical Right ideological babble makes a lot of sense if the goal is to improve the lives of the Top 2%.

 

[Natebishop3]

This will never happen in Oregon. Might as well move, honestly. I fully expect to move once I'm done with school. This state is slowly dying.

 

[jlprk]

A banana republic is my definition of "slowly dying," waiting for revolution. Its wealth is focused in its Top 2%. The other 98% are basically slaves in the fields.

The opposite is a country that is alive to the maximum, with its wealth spread around.

This assumes we're discussing what's best for a country as a whole, not what will maximize your own selfish profits over everyone else. If that's the goal, then you should move to that Deep South banana republic. Plan to spend a lot for security, though.

Anyway, the point of my post was to say that the time to argue over any issue, especially one as radical as getting rid of unions, was what the campaign was supposed to be.

 

[jlprk]

Get this: I'm not diehard Union. I think many government employees are overpaid! Including most Federal ones. I also think most of the richest Americans are overpaid, especially in comparison to the richest in, say, Japan.

As China and other competitors expand (Russia won't stay down for long), it will take real dialogue in the U.S. between economic classes, not surprise tricks, to apportion our declining wealth, which was a temporary gift after WW2 from the defeated Europe and Orient, meant to last less than a century.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

This will never happen in Oregon. Might as well move, honestly. I fully expect to move once I'm done with school. This state is slowly dying.

This is very true. I'm native Oregon born and the decay in this state has been shocking. Very sad. I have no ax to grind with unions, but I think I can say with full certainty that the Public Employees Union (of which I was a member for over 3 years) has more say in this state than any other special interest group. And when special interest groups on either side basically run the show it leads to one screwed up state.

As to Wisconsin, the gov has every right to call for cuts of various sorts to state employees and initiate those changes, but to take away collective bargaining rights is flat out wrong.

 

[jlprk]

When I first heard the news, I was impressed. I thought, I never thought I'd see a Republican governor take down all unions equally, including the conservative police unions. All Republicans I've seen have wanted to cut only liberal programs, not all government across the board, including police, military, and spies.

After about 10 minutes I heard that he was exempting police and firefighter unions. I stopped being impressed. Just another attempt to cut only the other side's stuff.

Instead of cutting only the poor (social security) or only those fighting for their lives (medicare) or only the middle class (unions), a consensus will be reached on government downscaling only if the rich are included (Bush tax cuts end).

I don't know that an agreement would be reached, but I know that it sure won't be if the deal is one-sided.

 

[agoo]

Ridiculous left wing hacks, Rachel Maddow, Shepard Smith, and Juan Williams agree...this is a political game that has nothing to do with any sort of budget crisis in Wisconsin.

 

[maxiep]

There are times when the system has to be tweaked, and times when it has to be remade. This time it's one of the latter. We can no longer afford the government that exists. There's no amount of tweaking, no tax increase that will fund the pensions and health care of all these government employees. We can debate all we wish and try to nibble around the edges, but the central truth remains.

I understand that change is difficult for people. There's a grieving process. Right now, government workers are in denial. Soon there will be layoffs that focus all the pain on a few instead of spreading it around and making it more managable. Later, these pensions will force the states to default on their bonds and look to a bailout from the Federal Government; it won't come. The Federal Government is in worse financial shape than the states. Then the pensions will disappear and the promises made will not be fulfilled; the well will be dry. At that point, the unions will have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[jlprk]

Soon there will be layoffs

It's like saying, the cost of dissension is high, so let's take away the freedom of speech. Otherwise we'll have to lay some people off.

Union members answer, go ahead. It's far more important to retain the right to talk (bargain). You can find a lower-paying job than what you had, but you can't replace a right once it's legislated out of existence.

Threatening laborers with job loss for some of them, fails to scare them into surrendering their negotiating rights.

Ridiculous left wing hacks, Rachel Maddow, Shepard Smith, and Juan Williams agree...this is a political game that has nothing to do with any sort of budget crisis in Wisconsin.

I read that the Wisconsin budget was balanced till the new Governor pushed through a $140M bill to help his rich campaign contributors. Then he used the tiny $140M deficit as reason to destroy the unions.

 

[MrJayremmie]

I think there's a difference between a party fleeing the state and a party using existing rules of procedure.

Do you think that they're the same?

Ed O.

Same ends.

 

[MrJayremmie]

Shep Smith has always been the best thing on Fox by a long shot. Maybe if you mute Megyn Kelly and just stare at her its close.

 

[maxiep]

It's like saying, the cost of dissension is high, so let's take away the freedom of speech. Otherwise we'll have to lay some people off.

Union members answer, go ahead. It's far more important to retain the right to talk (bargain). You can find a lower-paying job than what you had, but you can't replace a right once it's legislated out of existence.

Threatening laborers with job loss for some of them, fails to scare them into surrendering their negotiating rights.



I read that the Wisconsin budget was balanced till the new Governor pushed through a $140M bill to help his rich campaign contributors. Then he used the tiny $140M deficit as reason to destroy the unions.

The problem with being a gimmick poster is that you'll never be taken seriously. Now is one of those times.

 

[maxiep]

Same ends.

And the ends justify the means? Because the problem with this tactic is once it's used, it can be justifiably be used to stop all kinds of things with which you may agree. Kind of like the technicality used to pass Obamacare. What happens when that tactic is used to pass something like privitization of Social Security?

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Klinky]

The problem with being a gimmick poster is that you'll never be taken seriously. Now is one of those times.

I know, because political debate on an Internet sports forum is one of the most respected & highly regarded forms of intellectual discourse. Not being taken seriously on one might very well ruin careers and/or cause miscarriages(even in men) from the shame.

Goodness me sir, doth we have a "gimmicky poster" on these boards? Such strong words, yet put forth so elegantly! Doesn't sound like a personal attack at all good chap.

I do believe there are enough questions surrounding the Governor's desire to crush the union, as well as letting his Koch Industry pals in on no-bid sales of public power plants, that it should merit some debate. At least the stand off is bringing to light some of the icky background info on the Governor.

 

[maxiep]

I know, because political debate on an Internet sports forum is one of the most respected & highly regarded forms of intellectual discourse. Not being taken seriously on one might very well ruin careers and/or cause miscarriages(even in men) from the shame.

Goodness me sir, doth we have a "gimmicky poster" on these boards? Such strong words, yet put forth so elegantly! Doesn't sound like a personal attack at all good chap.

Thanks for your opinion. There are actually those of us who from time to time engaging in a conversation about real ideas. People are free to post anyway they'd like; I'm also free to take people seriously or not.

I do believe there are enough questions surrounding the Governor's desire to crush the union, as well as letting his Koch Industry pals in on no-bid sales of public power plants, that it should merit some debate. At least the stand off is bringing to light some of the icky background info on the Governor.

I think debate is good. So where are the Democratic members of the WI Senate to make these points? The people of Wisconsin spoke loudly and clearly in their vote this past November. I find it ironic that the party with the root word "democracy" are the ones seemingly afraid of it.

 

[PapaG]

I'm not going to read 254 posts, so I'll summarize where this thread should be.

There is a period before every election called the "campaign." This is when candidates disclose the issues important to them, and their agendas if elected. Voters use this information to make informed choices. Without this information, it's a sham democracy, and why waste time with elections.

The Radical Right (basically rich conservatives trying to increase their own profits, a few loudmouths they pay to speak for them, and the suckers who fall for their rhetoric) has always wanted to destroy Unions, because Unions transfer wealth from the Top 2% to the rest of us. But the Radical Right can't win elections over the vast majority of voters, if they honestly disclose their Radical thoughts during election campaigns. (The same secret agenda is in place to destroy Social Security.) So they lie during campaigns that they don't dream of destroying our standard of living and the American Way of Life.

Some coward in Minnesota has now run for Governor. During his deceptive campaign, he covertly withheld any mention of his fantasy, Union destruction. Keeping his Radical agenda secret from the suckers voting for him, of course, is the only way he could have won. Like a rat in a dark basement, he fearfully waited until the first month after his inauguration. Only then did the coward shock his State with a Nazi-like Blitzkrieg attack on everyone's moderate sensibilities.

Apparently he had secretly planned this with other cowards, the Republican legislators, who like him, hid their agendas long in advance, in order to fool suckers into voting for them. So it is not debatable that this was a conspiracy to get elected. Lying to fools is the only way the Radical Right can win elections.

This Governor will shortly be recalled from office by the voters, so he knows he has to work fast to please his biggest contributor, a Koch. Contributor Koch financed his election in order to increase Koch's own profits by decreasing Koch's own taxes. Koch pays people to cloak his selfish motives in a fake ideology which makes no sense if the goal is to improve the lives of the Bottom 98%. The meaningless Radical Right ideological babble makes a lot of sense if the goal is to improve the lives of the Top 2%.

Minnesota, Wisconsin, whatever! A bunch of bullshit in this post anyhow.