Wisconsin State Employees & Budget Cuts

[Phatscotty]

Oh, unions donate to democrats? Thanks for that. I didn't know that.

But you can understand why a lot of independents and conservatives in those unions who pay those dues have a problem right?

That's what happens in groups. Not everyone always gets what they want.

sure, but it can, and it is, being fixed. More people can now get what they want.

In WI? Not according to polls. Of course, the right wing has a long history of claiming it is in the majority when it isn't.

Actually, this reality was just re-affirmed by Wisconsin voters. If a majority was against Scott Walker and Republicans, they had an opportunity to prove it in the recent supreme court election, Klossenburg vs. Prosser. The republican was re-elected.

Despite critical mass mobilization by the union machine hand in hand with 3 weeks of media bombardment across the nation and I think Ed Schultz camped out in WI for an entire week.

And here is the reaction from the public unions, who are placing anti-Walker stickers on products made by businesses they believe support the law that severely limits the collective bargaining power of most state workers. What next? Is the union cashier gonna make a signal to the bag boy that your grocery cart is full of items with these stickers on them? Are the union bag boys going to start beating people up after they help load the groceries into the car? They are only one step away from these tactics now.

They are up front about their tactics to hurt opposers pocketbooks, if that doesn't work it will turn to physical harm.

[Phatscotty]

Keeping Score.

The WI Supreme Court has upheld Walkers reforms as Constitutional, and the guy who said he would stand by Walkers reforms was elected Democratically to a 10 year term.

[PLAYER57832]

Keeping Score.

The WI Supreme Court has upheld Walkers reforms as Constitutional, and the guy who said he would stand by Walkers reforms was elected Democratically to a 10 year term.

And you think this means something other than partisan politics at work?

[patches70]

Well, let partisan politics be set to the side and look objectively at the results of the Union curbs put in place.

Those who said it would be a disaster should really read this-


http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ ... l-district


Explain that Union lovers.....

[Night Strike]

Well, let partisan politics be set to the side and look objectively at the results of the Union curbs put in place.

Those who said it would be a disaster should really read this-


http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ ... l-district


Explain that Union lovers.....

I especially like the part about what happened after their 1 insurance vendor stopped being the only one they could negotiate with. Yet people will think the prices will suddenly start being cheaper when the government is the only provider.

[GreecePwns]

Like, you know, when it has everywhere else.

[Phatscotty]

Keeping Score.

The WI Supreme Court has upheld Walkers reforms as Constitutional, and the guy who said he would stand by Walkers reforms was elected Democratically to a 10 year term.

And you think this means something other than partisan politics at work?

How about democracy at work? Did you miss the words "democratically elected"? I think you did. The people chose.

[Woodruff]

Well, let partisan politics be set to the side and look objectively at the results of the Union curbs put in place.
Those who said it would be a disaster should really read this-
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ ... l-district
Explain that Union lovers.....

I'm really not at all a "union lover". However, one particular paragraph caught my eye:

"Then there are work rules. "In the collective bargaining agreement, high school teachers only had to teach five periods a day, out of seven," says Arnoldussen. "Now, they're going to teach six." In addition, the collective bargaining agreement specified that teachers had to be in the school 37 1/2 hours a week. Now, it will be 40 hours."

Sounds to me like the union was able to work out unreasonable work situations with the school boards. For those of you that want to lay it all on the union, that's just stupid...it takes two to make the agreement, the union and the school board. BOTH would have been responsible for the teachers working only five periods a day (I've never heard of this anywhere I've worked or where my kids went to school) and if I were able to ONLY work 40 hours as a teacher, I'd be freaking thrilled (my current position has me working from 7am-4pm, not including all of the out-of-school-hours-stuff that AFJROTC does).

[Phatscotty]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not abuse their power for unfair advantages

[Woodruff]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not use their power for unfair advantages

I thought you were in favor of the free market, Phatscotty? I thought if the school boards are willing to pay the unions, then that's what the unions are worth? Why the change in tune in that regard?

[AAFitz]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not use their power for unfair advantages

I thought you were in favor of the free market, Phatscotty? I thought if the school boards are willing to pay the unions, then that's what the unions are worth? Why the change in tune in that regard?

Because what most are aiming for with their spewing of freemarket rhetoric, is that they want labor to essentially be free. Fools have simply misunderstood their objectives, and think it will somehow be better for them, when all safeguards are removed.

[PLAYER57832]

Not just free labor, but labor free of all those onerous safety regulations, benefit requirements, etc.

Its funny how folks who claim to have studied the freedom of American somehow manage to skip over the incredible sacrafice, danger and risk so many endured to give us what is taken for granted. We did not just "magically" get the 40 hour workweek, weekends, 8 hour workdays, healthcare vacations, sick pay, social security or even serious restrictions on child labor anything else we have. We ONLY got it through serious and intense battles. People literally faught hard, many DIED, many suffered other serious reprocusion

Yet... today, so many are happy to just give up on all that in favor of this supposed "free market", because they THINK they have been promised a couple more dollars. They quote history, but don't seem to have studied it.. at all!

[Augustus Maximus]

Unions were an extremely necessary association when they were first formed. They did do a great deal to make working in the United States a great deal better. The bad thing about Unions today is that they seem to have lost their way. It appears that they have forgotten the core mission of a union is to protect the worker, both short term and long term. Too often they take positions that ignore the long term implications. Often it also seems that they really don't look out for the membership, but for their own ends. Because of this they have fallen out of favour, and are a target, sometimes legitimately.

[PLAYER57832]

Unions were an extremely necessary association when they were first formed. They did do a great deal to make working in the United States a great deal better. The bad thing about Unions today is that they seem to have lost their way. It appears that they have forgotten the core mission of a union is to protect the worker, both short term and long term. Too often they take positions that ignore the long term implications. Often it also seems that they really don't look out for the membership, but for their own ends. Because of this they have fallen out of favour, and are a target, sometimes legitimately.

This is not just about unions. In fact, unions today can be as much a part of the "establishment" and are just one other self-serving group.

That said, the union busting moves like the one above are harmful, and absolutely one more symptom of the move BACK toward a system where we have only the wealthy and those who barely get by.. or who do not get by at all.

What disturbs me is how many people don't seem to recognize that we are sliding backward, most particularly the Tea Partiers, who for all their claims of being against big business, are really just feeding into the big guys hands with their "no new taxes.. cut all benefits" stances.

The saddest part is we have pretty much already lost the battle and nothing makes that more clear than the citizen's united ruling.

[Night Strike]

That said, the union busting moves like the one above are harmful, and absolutely one more symptom of the move BACK toward a system where we have only the wealthy and those who barely get by.. or who do not get by at all.

Where is the union busting?? All I've seen is governments saying the PUBLIC unions can no longer have the power to negotiate insanely good (and virtually free to them) benefits. The government isn't trying to completely dissolve the PUBLIC unions (although they probably should). For all the benefits you tout about unions, how many of them were achieved through the actions of PUBLIC unions? I'm venturing to say very few, if any at all. Yet for some reason you think they are the exact same as private unions and should get the freedom to do whatever the hell they want to do. Even if it means bankrupting governments.

[PLAYER57832]

That said, the union busting moves like the one above are harmful, and absolutely one more symptom of the move BACK toward a system where we have only the wealthy and those who barely get by.. or who do not get by at all.

Where is the union busting?? All I've seen is governments saying the PUBLIC unions can no longer have the power to negotiate insanely good (and virtually free to them) benefits. The government isn't trying to completely dissolve the PUBLIC unions (although they probably should). .

I see, and you truly believe your words make sense?
You might try a class in critical thinking. Attacking unions in any form is how union busting works.

For all the benefits you tout about unions, how many of them were achieved through the actions of PUBLIC unions? I'm venturing to say very few, if any at all.

Distinguishing between "public" and "private" the way you do is nonsense. There is a distinction, but not the one you claim. Per the benfits? You may be surprised to know that many thing you take for granted in a private job.. particulalry concerning free speech, but also other areas are not enjoyed by public workers.. or were not until unions came into play.

Yet for some reason you think they are the exact same as private unions and should get the freedom to do whatever the hell they want to do. Even if it means bankrupting governments

Its not teachers and policemen wanting a decent standard of living who are driving the government bankrupt, its the many large businesses that are not held accountable for the damage they cause to society. You can begin with creating tons of trash with absolutely no responsibility for seeing that there is a place to put it to emitting pollution that they don't even have to track, never mind prove safe or truly cut down.. and wind up with various individual issues regarding worker safety, hours, etc. The idea of the 40 hour workweek is already a joke for most workers. So is sick pay and any real vacation time. Healthcare coverage doesn't belong in employment anyway, but the fact that businesses are allowed to just not cover so many people (part-timers, temporary workers, those who hire only a few workers, etc.) is yet one more symptom of the failure of the current american system to provide for the real workers of this country.

[Phatscotty]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not use their power for unfair advantages

I thought you were in favor of the free market, Phatscotty? I thought if the school boards are willing to pay the unions, then that's what the unions are worth? Why the change in tune in that regard?

I ♥ free market

[Phatscotty]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not use their power for unfair advantages

I thought you were in favor of the free market, Phatscotty? I thought if the school boards are willing to pay the unions, then that's what the unions are worth? Why the change in tune in that regard?

Because what most are aiming for with their spewing of freemarket rhetoric, is that they want labor to essentially be free. Fools have simply misunderstood their objectives, and think it will somehow be better for them, when all safeguards are removed.

The unions went too far and the state budget needed to be balanced.

As a result, Wisconsin has went for the 48th best state to do business in to the 24th in just 1 year.

[Phatscotty]

It's working. Milwuakee is set to have a surplus. AAA

Despite early criticism from city officials, new figures show Milwaukee will gain more than it will lose next year from the state's controversial budget and budget-repair legislation.

The city projects it will save at least $25 million a year - and potentially as much as $36 million in 2012 - from health care benefit changes it didn't have to negotiate with unions, as a result of provisions in the 2009-'11 budget-repair measure that ended most collective bargaining for most public employees.

That saving would be partly offset by about $14 million in cuts in state aid to the city in the 2011-'13 state budget, down from earlier estimates of more than $17 million.

As a result, the city would come out with a net gain of at least $11 million for its 2012 budget, slicing into the "structural deficit" created by costs rising faster than revenue, and reducing the spending cuts that Mayor Tom Barrett and the Common Council must impose.

That outlook contrasts sharply with Barrett's initial comments in March, after Gov. Scott Walker and the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau released figures on the extent of the aid cuts in Walker's budget.

At that time, Barrett said the combination of aid cuts, rising expenses, a property tax levy freeze and exempting public safety workers from health care and pension benefit changes "just makes our structural deficit explode."

Barrett now says the health care benefit changes are a major factor in helping the city balance its budget. But the Democratic mayor isn't giving the credit to Walker, the Republican who defeated him in November's gubernatorial election.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 69673.html

[Woodruff]

That said, the union busting moves like the one above are harmful, and absolutely one more symptom of the move BACK toward a system where we have only the wealthy and those who barely get by.. or who do not get by at all.

Where is the union busting?? All I've seen is governments saying the PUBLIC unions can no longer have the power to negotiate insanely good (and virtually free to them) benefits.

The level of the benefits is just your opinion, but aside from that...you don't believe that's a case of union busting? Really?

[Woodruff]

Luckily in those agreements, the powerful unions do not use their power for unfair advantages

I thought you were in favor of the free market, Phatscotty? I thought if the school boards are willing to pay the unions, then that's what the unions are worth? Why the change in tune in that regard?

I ♥ free market

Always wanting to have his cake and eat it too...

[Woodruff]

It's working. Milwuakee is set to have a surplus. AAA

Despite early criticism from city officials, new figures show Milwaukee will gain more than it will lose next year from the state's controversial budget and budget-repair legislation.

The city projects it will save at least $25 million a year - and potentially as much as $36 million in 2012 - from health care benefit changes it didn't have to negotiate with unions, as a result of provisions in the 2009-'11 budget-repair measure that ended most collective bargaining for most public employees.

That saving would be partly offset by about $14 million in cuts in state aid to the city in the 2011-'13 state budget, down from earlier estimates of more than $17 million.

As a result, the city would come out with a net gain of at least $11 million for its 2012 budget, slicing into the "structural deficit" created by costs rising faster than revenue, and reducing the spending cuts that Mayor Tom Barrett and the Common Council must impose.

That outlook contrasts sharply with Barrett's initial comments in March, after Gov. Scott Walker and the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau released figures on the extent of the aid cuts in Walker's budget.

At that time, Barrett said the combination of aid cuts, rising expenses, a property tax levy freeze and exempting public safety workers from health care and pension benefit changes "just makes our structural deficit explode."

Barrett now says the health care benefit changes are a major factor in helping the city balance its budget. But the Democratic mayor isn't giving the credit to Walker, the Republican who defeated him in November's gubernatorial election.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 69673.html

A fine example of the free market failing and a dissolving of the free market working.

[Night Strike]

Republicans held 4 of their 6 seats in their recall elections to retain the majority in the Wisconsin state senate. Next week 2 Democrats will try to hold their seats from recall.

[rockfist]

This has to be a disappointment for the Big Labor groups that poured tens of millions of dollars into these campaigns. Their base was as ginned up as it could ever get, they spent tens of millions and came up short. Although they will spin it as a victory since these were Republican districts.

The Wisconsin State elections in 2012 will be a sideshow. If the national economy rebounds the left may have a last chance to reverse the Walker agenda in 2012. If it does not, the President may make it impossible.

After this with public union dues being voluntary in WI, Big Labor funds will start to dry up in Wisconsin. I expect on the national level in 2012 that the left will have more money than the right, and that should spill over into WI due to the President's fund raising ability, but I think ultimately the national economy will be more important in 2012 than funds.

[Phatscotty]

This has to be a disappointment for the Big Labor groups that poured tens of millions of dollars into these campaigns. Their base was as ginned up as it could ever get, they spent tens of millions and came up short. Although they will spin it as a victory since these were Republican districts.

The Wisconsin State elections in 2012 will be a sideshow. If the national economy rebounds the left may have a last chance to reverse the Walker agenda in 2012. If it does not, the President may make it impossible.

After this with public union dues being voluntary in WI, Big Labor funds will start to dry up in Wisconsin. I expect on the national level in 2012 that the left will have more money than the right, and that should spill over into WI due to the President's fund raising ability, but I think ultimately the national economy will be more important in 2012 than funds.

Despite the 10's of millions of out of state dollars and from special interest groups, as well as live MSNBC coverage, I still heard many people on MSNBC and in the democrat crowd last night say "this is a battle between money and people"