Scott Walker won the Wisconsin recall election

No more Quantitaive Easing wrote:

There isn't enough money in CalSTRS to meet all of the obligations and Governor Brown will not contribute any more money to it. Thus, the payouts will have to be lowered to existing retirees, and other massive adjustments will have to be made. The State of New York, Illinois, Texas, etc. face the same challenges.

What's really appalling is that the states have continually raided the pension funds for money for other projects. Then when the money isn't there to fund benefits, it's the greedy pensioners or the union's fault.

San Diego is cutting pensions after years of mis-management of the pension fund. Back in the mid-late 1990s, the Republican mayor (Susan Golding) pushed pension money into a convention center project that was desired so the city could host the Republican National Convention. Her successor (also a Republican) vastly underfunded the system and resigned under pressure due to his financial mis-management.

For more details on that mess, see:

Walker was the incumbent who outspent the Milwaukee mayor 8-1 in a recall election. Of course he was going to win. Politics in this country is coin-operated.

orbitboy wrote:

Walker was the incumbent who outspent the Milwaukee mayor 8-1 in a recall election. Of course he was going to win. Politics in this country is coin-operated.

Like Obama last election, yes?

efasd wrote:

orbitboy wrote:

Walker was the incumbent who outspent the Milwaukee mayor 8-1 in a recall election. Of course he was going to win. Politics in this country is coin-operated.

Like Obama last election, yes?

Absolutely just like Obama, both sides can do it. And neither of them have your interests in mind. There is a very big mismatch in what voters would want on the incentives for our politicians.

orbitboy wrote:

Walker was the incumbent who outspent the Milwaukee mayor 8-1 in a recall election. Of course he was going to win. Politics in this country is coin-operated.

First it was 7-1 now 8-1 the real number when you add in all the spending is 2-1 as reported by the Washington Post.

Wisconsin was broke, walker was elected under the promise to balance the budget and cut the liabilities of the state. He did that. Unions threw a hissyfit because they have to kick in their own dime for their own benefits. Boo freaking hoo. Schools hired more teachers, budgets and local taxes went down, the state went from deficit to surplus. Liberals can't have that. Public union workers are special and they deserve extra benefits that private sector workers don't get. why you ask? Because - shut up. The people have spoken again. That is what democracy looks like. Even if it is a respresenative republic.

2-1 margin on money spent on the airwaves, per Washington Post, but outside money contributing to the total of $30.5 million from Republicans to the Democrats $3.9 million. You can say whatever you want on campaign financing, but outside money is outside money. Wisconites are now beholden to these contributors, who have purchased an election for their own purposes, whatever that may be, we'll find out. How would you feel if the same happened in your local jurisdiction, for the opposition party on local or state matters affecting you directly, but are influenced by rich contributors from outside your state? Not exactly how the founding fathers pictured in when they drew up the ole constitution and later Tenth Amendment, I would presume.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/scott-walker/2012/06/05/gJQAockFHV_blog.html

Remind me again how much the Unions contributed to the initial recall petition and the recall election?

Scott Walker is da man

Well, I guess most Cheeseheads are stupid enough to be persuaded by soundbite television then and probably shouldn't even have the right to vote if that's the case. The most glaring statistic is the percentage of union members who voted for Walker. Says it all. There was a time for unions, and they are still necessary for dangerous industries, but the gravy days are long gone, and workers have many more protections afforded them than a century ago.

As for pensions, public employees in states like CA were able to work overtime, do pension spiking, and retire in their 50s. Many made a lot of money on their houses too. The pensions were based on flawed actuarial assumptions to begin with, and the state is still allowing accounting shenanigans that assume unreasonable IRR. That's one of the primary reasons CA is circling the drain. Meanwhile, those same "retired" people are fleeing the state in droves to more capital-friendly destinations.

Some of you talk about Sweden. Guess what - when economic times are bad, pension benefits get cut in tandem, and when times are good, they get a "raise." CA, IL, NY, and NJ spent like drunken sailors (no offense to sailors) during "Tulip Mania," and now they need to rein in spending. Simple as that. There is NO money. Many municipalities and cities are bankrupt - states too when we get right down to it. The CINN states are our PIIGS.

This is not the 1% vs the 99% as per soundbite TV. It's the Boomers and their parents versus their children and grandchildren. That's the class war. The sooner the Boomers realize they lived through the greatest period of prosperity ever based on over leverage, the sooner they'll show a little humility and suck it up. And the sooner we realize that capital is far more mobile than labor, the much better off we'll be.

Meanwhile, the Fed will continue to undermine the middle class...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577452793597495290.html

I guess the difference is, a particular union has an in-state presence, and a local chapter repesenting and constituted by local Wisconsites. Thus, union monetary support is tied to a Wisconsin entity and Wisconsin constituent. On the other hand, Walker's political donations have been provided by at least 4 out-of-state billionaires, such as Sheldon Adelson and David and Charles Koch, according to public information reported in the Chicago Tribune, NY Times et al.

I really don't want to get into a pissing contest over this. To me, it's a matter of principal related to a local issue, not a debate over how everyone does it, so the Republicans won this one, but the Democrats won that one. I think it's wrong on both sides, no matter which political party does it.

Dems like to think they are there for the little guy but imagine how much good they could have done if instead of spending massive amounts of money recalling and campaigning against Walker, they could have funded several charities to give money to the under privileged they act like they love so much.

Sagarin wrote:

Well, I guess most Cheeseheads are stupid enough to be persuaded by soundbite television then and probably shouldn't even have the right to vote if that's the case.

Don't forget that we voted for him in 2010 when he spent much much less on his campaign. Walker has been leading polls since 2007. It's not like he suddenly put a bunch of advertisements on TV & he suddenly became popular. He won the 2010 governor election by almost 7 points. Compared to Barrett, we were & are pleased with his statements regarding less taxes, and like you said, his plan to cut the wealthy state employee benefits. Our state's hurting financially & needed a change. Do you have a better plan?

forward! wrote:

Sagarin wrote:

Well, I guess most Cheeseheads are stupid enough to be persuaded by soundbite television then and probably shouldn't even have the right to vote if that's the case.

Don't forget that we voted for him in 2010 when he spent much much less on his campaign. Walker has been leading polls since 2007. It's not like he suddenly put a bunch of advertisements on TV & he suddenly became popular. He won the 2010 governor election by almost 7 points. Compared to Barrett, we were & are pleased with his statements regarding less taxes, and like you said, his plan to cut the wealthy state employee benefits. Our state's hurting financially & needed a change. Do you have a better plan?

Um, sarcasm not your strong suit? I'm with you on this. Did you not read my post or the link I included, which someone else has since posted on another thread? I was responding to the general rants of uber-liberal automatons.