Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Union Busting in Wisconsin


Jonsa

Recommended Posts

BOO!

Hey, here's a novel idea what about RAISING TAXES as a way to get out of our debt crisis, especially those that can easily afford to contribute a little more for the benefit of the country or state?

Scared?

No...raising taxes will not offset all of the structural and growing debt. Wisconsin (and many other states) cannot tax themselves out of a hole that grows larger every day. Entitlements must be curtailed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No...raising taxes will not offset all of the structural and growing debt. Wisconsin (and many other states) cannot tax themselves out of a hole that grows larger every day. Entitlements must be curtailed.

:D What's the population of Wisconsin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D What's the population of Wisconsin?

About 5.7 million.

Wisconsin is looking at underperforming retirement portfolios and reduced contributions because of state budget constraints. It has already blown through "free" Obama money, state reserves, and is now forced to balance the budget, as required by law.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah the nirvana of a free market economy.

No reason to make sweatshops illegal in a free market economy is there. there's plenty of other jobs that workers could get. And naturally when all those sweatshops lose their employees to better paying, safer jobs the sweat shop owners will change their ways, cause that's how a free market works.

There's a reason communism failed - it is a political system that completely ignored human nature.

so why not have an economic system that exploits all the most wonderful aspects of human nature like greed, dominance, territoriality, etc. That's gotta be successful for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Many people wind up working in unionized positions because it comes part and parcel with the job they've applied for."

Exactly and when one accepts employment is such an enterprise one must accept this as a condition of employment.

Your comments about public sector unions is patently absurd and lacks a factual basis.

In a centrally-planned, highly-controlled economy like ours, jobs are becoming more scarce meaning you take one when you can find it...regardless of whether it's a unionized job or not.

In a free market, without government interference, there'd be an abundance of jobs so then maybe you would have the luxury of being so picky as to whether or not you'd like to join a union.

What have I said about public sector unions is "patently absurd"? Please explain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://thedailybeast/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-20/wisconsin-union-fight-is-really-a-15-state-gop-power-grab/?cid=hp:mainpromo5

The Ohio governor gave it away yesterday...In the face of being asked,on CNN,why he was demanding public sector workers give up their collective bargaining rights after they admitted they were prepared to discuss financials....He replied this way...

1.Managers need to be able to manage...

(I suspect this is corporate code for "We need to be able to control our workforces!")

2.We have lost alot of jobs to the Southeast and the Mid-West(most,if not all are RTW states) and we need to be able to compete!

(He hit 1 of the 3 free marketeer buzzwords with that one..He forgot "productivity" and"freedom"...I suspect they'll follow shortly)

This spectacular humanitarian of the year candidate wants to have his working populous end up competing with this...

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/legislativealert/stateissues/work

I guess competing with places like West Virginia (RTW mine disaster).the Gulf States(RTW oil spill disaster),and Kentucky (mine disaster)..All of this in the last 12 months!!...Is a good thing!!!

The free marketeering race to the bottom continues...

'Cause it's all about "the freedom"...

(see shareholder value)

Your rant against freedom doesn't hold water because you speak as if we already have a free market economy here in Canada or in the US. We don't, and they don't.

We have a mixed economy...a welfare-state...freedom is the solution, not the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your rant against freedom doesn't hold water because you speak as if we already have a free market economy here in Canada or in the US. We don't, and they don't.

We have a mixed economy...a welfare-state...freedom is the solution, not the problem.

I note you would rather dismiss than engage...

Not shocking because I've dealt with your kind before...

Kudos for hitting the "freedom" canard,though!

Gerry Nichols just called...

He said to stop impersonating him...

Edited by Jack Weber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No facts to back up what, exactly?

The larger the government, the less free are its constituents...that's logic.

Civil servants threatening to walk out from providing an essential service (in this case educating children) is a form of extortion - and it's taxpayers who have to 'pay up or else'.

When does the cycle end?

It doesn't...every time a union signs a new contract it expects a bump in pay and/or benefits. In the private sector, that's fine...in the public sector...when everyone including the government is broke?

It's unsustainable and must be stopped.

Do you really need a textbook to help you understand this?

I don't recall any public servants threatening to walkout in this particular case. As I have mentioned previously there is a process laid out in The Wisconsin Labour Code and you would be well advised to read it.

I believe you have been challenged on several occasions to provide the necessary proof regarding your strawman argument on sustainability. I don't recall you producing such information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. So they choose that job.

Right, because in the current economy they have so many other job opportunities busting down their door? You take the work where you can get it today...very few have the luxury of picking and choosing union-job or non-union job...when you're in debt up to your eyeballs, a job's a job.

This is akin to telling people "if they don't like it, they can work elsewhere"... which I hear all the time. However it makes more sense at the beginning of a career, rather than part way through - especially when the employer is changing contracts that they have agreed to.

What makes more sense at the beginning of a career?

Forget changing contracts for public sector unions...get rid of those unions altogether...thus nullifying any contracts with same.

I have already shown you why they do - this very situation. Do you have anything to say to that ?

The situation in Wisconsin? Civil servants being told there'll be no more collective bargaining because the state is broke and cannot afford continual raises in pay and better benefits at the expense of all WI taxpayers...that situation? That entire mess highlights the problem with expecting the government to provide education. Government's involvement in education means robbing Peter to pay Paul...it is unsustainable, and as we're seeing it doesn't work. You cannot get blood from a stone...broke is broke.

If you don't like the tax system, move elsewhere. Or, better yet, work towards changing it democratically.

Already working on changing it. Me move? It isn't going to come to that, freedom will win in the end. It's the socialists that will wind up migrating to a more Statist environment.

The system requires that you pay. Whether or not you think that is fair (it is) it's still MORE fair than changing a contract after it has been signed.

It's not about fairness...that's completely subjective. It's about what makes sense and what doesn't...about what is efficient, and what creates waste. It's about living in a society driven by logic or a distinct lack thereof.

Signed contract or not...the entire idea of civil servants being allowed to collectively bargain invites the kind of inefficiency, wasteful spending, and conflict we're seeing now. It doesn't have to be this way, nor logically should it be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Right, because in the current economy they have so many other job opportunities busting down their door? You take the work where you can get it today...very few have the luxury of picking and choosing union-job or non-union job...when you're in debt up to your eyeballs, a job's a job."

Are you in debt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Right, because in the current economy they have so many other job opportunities busting down their door? You take the work where you can get it today...very few have the luxury of picking and choosing union-job or non-union job...when you're in debt up to your eyeballs, a job's a job."

Are you in debt?

He probably lost a grievance hearing he filed for "timekeeping"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further to your catchphrase above: can you please provide an economic rationale for how this mess came about ? We're still waiting to see numbers on what is ostensibly an economic issue. ( It isn't. )

This mess in Wisconsin is indicative of a greater philosophical debate whose time has apparently come.

The seeds for this fight in WI were sown years ago when it was decided that government must provide what's now known as "public education". Public education requires all taxpayers to pay for all costs contained therein...so when teachers become part of a union, and the wages continually go up with each management v. union "compromise", taxpayers feel the pinch.

A government already requiring debt to operate, and in the US where most of the population is highly indebted, it's become harder and harder to make ends meet i.e. pay all of the civil servants under its charge. Given that WI is in the red, it makes no sense to make the problem worse, or kick the can down to the road for a future generation to suffer so that a union can continue to "bargain" for more and more. The entire premise of continual raises in the public sector is unsustainable, especially when the public sector is dead flat broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This mess in Wisconsin is indicative of a greater philosophical debate whose time has apparently come.

The seeds for this fight in WI were sown years ago when it was decided that government must provide what's now known as "public education". Public education requires all taxpayers to pay for all costs contained therein...so when teachers become part of a union, and the wages continually go up with each management v. union "compromise", taxpayers feel the pinch.

A government already requiring debt to operate, and in the US where most of the population is highly indebted, it's become harder and harder to make ends meet i.e. pay all of the civil servants under its charge. Given that WI is in the red, it makes no sense to make the problem worse, or kick the can down to the road for a future generation to suffer so that a union can continue to "bargain" for more and more. The entire premise of continual raises in the public sector is unsustainable, especially when the public sector is dead flat broke.

I am wondering if you could answer my question.

I will repeat the question.

Are you currently in debt?

If so how much do you owe?

What assets and liabilities do you currently have?

Edited by pinko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This mess in Wisconsin is indicative of a greater philosophical debate whose time has apparently come.

The seeds for this fight in WI were sown years ago when it was decided that government must provide what's now known as "public education". Public education requires all taxpayers to pay for all costs contained therein...so when teachers become part of a union, and the wages continually go up with each management v. union "compromise", taxpayers feel the pinch.

A government already requiring debt to operate, and in the US where most of the population is highly indebted, it's become harder and harder to make ends meet i.e. pay all of the civil servants under its charge. Given that WI is in the red, it makes no sense to make the problem worse, or kick the can down to the road for a future generation to suffer so that a union can continue to "bargain" for more and more. The entire premise of continual raises in the public sector is unsustainable, especially when the public sector is dead flat broke.

Wrong...

That's far to focused...

It might be issue at the moment,but's a much larger one,if the Mother Jones article about who is backing Mr.Walker is even remotely true...

The Koch Bros. and there COLLECTIVE free market proponent groups like the CATO Institute (there's at least 3 or 4 other ones)..

I doubt that going after collective bargianing rights AFTER the union has said they will discuss financials has anything to do with a budget crisis.This fight is ideological,but it's not just about the public sector unions at all....

Edited by Jack Weber
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...