Let the chaos in Wisconsin be a reminder why we should not put those w/o a college degree into power.

Wut? wrote:

I bet if you were to poll everyone and make them choose, more people in this country would support Walker. However, most of these people do not have as big of a personal stake in the pension/union controversy, and thus do not act as passionately. This explains why more teachers/union workers are there. The people that show up for protests like the one in Madison will generally be personally affected or are just hippies that want something to yell about.

Besides, even if more people were to support ridiculous public benefits and irresponsible spending, that still wouldn't make it right.

.

What a gutless fool you are. Every worker should have decent pensions and decent healthcare coverage. The US taxpayer gives trillions on WMDs and privatized services that used to be done by the govt for one third cost, that further enriches the uber rich who pay next to nothing in taxes, and you cheer those same uber rich on as they come after the pensions and the right to unionize of public workers.

Your stupidity is surpassed only by your cowardice. You disgust me and all tru Americans

Amen. Private sector workers are asking the wrong questions. Tenure isn't about job security - it's about providing workers with due process before they're let go. While the CEOs pull in millions and billions for themselves, they cut the salaries, health benefits, require higher employee contributions, and have eliminated pensions for the workers that make their businesses work.

Instead of asking, "why do public sector workers have tenure, pensions, quality health benefits, etc," the question should be, "why don't I?" The fact that you have executives in this country making millions of dollars a year while the underlings struggle to make ends meet and plan their own retirement is shameful. What's even more shameful is that the struggling workers in this country have been convinced that voting republican is in their best interest, and that public sector workers are to blame for the country's financial problems.

I love this thread!

Spare me. I don't believe the state of Wisconsin has a CEO. This is about government working for the citizens, not wasting taxpayer money on ill-conceived programs and benefits. Private companies are free to do what they want, but our government spends way too much across the board, and I think its only fair that teachers contribute more than 6% to their OWN pensions. Give me a break.

Say what you want about Scott Walker, but at least he's sticking to his promises and trying to be fiscally responsible. BTW, I like how you were able to use 2 handles, UncleB.

FOne wrote:

I love this thread!

What, are you proud of your trolling?

I'm going to try to explain this so that you understand. Not every business can afford to give its employees huge salaries, awesome health benefits, and large pension plans. I am sure many would like to, but it is simply not feasible. Yet, many people still get by without all of these things and still manage to enjoy life. I know you'll spew some BS line about republicans lying to secure votes, but the fact is that the average person understands that such unsustainable benefits cannot be supported. Contrary to popular belief, not every business owner makes millions of dollars.

Now, do some executives get paid excessively? Yes. However, these people usually work in enormously large companies, so even if they were to cut their salaries, it may or may not help the average worker. Now I'm not saying its right, but the practices of "evil" corporations must not be too terrible, or they would have a pretty hard time attracting workers.

Yes!

The union is willing to make SIGNIFICANT concessions and give backs in terms of pensions and healthcare. But what they are fighting for is the right to keep collective bargaining. So debate is not about salary/pensions/healthcare.Also public workers do NOT have huge salaries, awesome health benefits, and large pension plans. They have significantly reduced salaries (versus what they could get in the private sectors).

My wife is a professor in the U of WI system, and if this goes through (which it probably will), her takehome pay will be reduced 10-20% (or so she has been told). Her salary won't change, but she'll be increasing the amount she contributes to her retirement and toward her health care premiums. It's a bummer, but in reality, I think this might be more in line with what non-union folks are required to pay.

This bill also creates a law that says the MAX raise a state employee in Wisconsin can get is the inflation rate, as dermined by the CPI, unless there is a public referendum where the public votes to give a raise over the inflation rate.

The bill prevents employees from negotiating on anything other than base salary (which by law can't go over the inflation rate). A prison guard could not negotiate over SAFETY issues in the prison, boiler operators could not negotiate over safety issues. This is a huge problem.

Many doctors at the University Hospital, associated with the U. of WI are state employees. This is one of the best hospitals in the world involving research in genetics. These doctors would have their pay limited to the inflation rate. These are people that could leave and go anywhere, and they will.

From 2004-09 there was a 75% turnover for prosecutors in Wisconsin due to low pay. Capping compensation and telling workers they will never get ahead will have a devestating impact on this state.

Virtually every state worker in Wisconsin took furloughs last year that amounted to about a 5% pay cut for 2010.

Even now the unions have all said they will agree to the proposed added cuts, the fight is over the right to collective bargaining and the pay limits imposed in the law.

hdafdew

I like the way Scott Walker thinks.

See's the problem - Wisconsin is broke. Solution - identify the biggest spender & cut it NOW. Too many people & organizations piss around while they're falling further & further in debt.

A true intellectual.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the union had agreed to the financial concessions in exchange for keeping their right to collective bargaining, and that Walker had rejected this offer.

You are almost correct. The Gov rejected the offer from the Teachers and Civil Servants, but has all along allowed Police & Fire Unions to have Cadillac benefits and Collective Bargaining.

The linked Washington Post article was atypically candid about what motivated the Obama administration's veto:

Although U.S. officials have consistently criticized the settlement policy, a vote in favor of the resolution would have angered Israel and its U.S. supporters, including Republican lawmakers, who had urged the Obama administration to stand with Israel at all costs.

"Stand with Israel at all costs" is exactly what "its U.S. supporters" demand, and as usual, it's exactly what the U.S. Government just did. And the "cost" to the U.S. is extremely high. It's certainly true that little would have changed had this passed: the Israelis aren't exactly shy about violating U.N. resolutions. But by standing alone against the rest of the world in stopping it, the U.S. has -- once again -- incurred grave damage for the sake of Israel. As The Post put it, the veto "isolated the United States on a crucial Middle East matter at a time of political upheaval in the region." There is zero strategic benefit to the U.S. in blocking this resolution (unless one assumes that the U.S. desires settlement growth to continue). But at one of the most critical times in that region in more than a century, the U.S. openly subverts the world consensus to protect the Israelis from censure over blatantly illegal acts -- all to avoid angering "its supporters" in the U.S.

Remember, though: talking about the power of the Israel Lobby and the way it causes the U.S. to sacrifice its own interests for this foreign country is strictly prohibited and a sure sign of deep malice. And the only possible reason why Muslims in that region might harbor hostility toward the U.S. is because of primitive, crazed religious fanaticism and a contempt for Our Freedoms.

thank you, again, uncleb, for proving that for you, no matter what the issue, no matter how complicated the moving parts, it all comes down to israel.

Get Real - Your anger is misplaced. The bankers have been skimming money off of the top for years, adding no value to the economy and just caused the largest economic crisis in 80 years. How have they been affected? They are still getting insane bonuses and are laughing their asses off as they see all the working people fighting each other for the leftover scraps.Unions aren't perfect, but name another institution that stands up for working people. If you think it's the government, well that's getting undercut as we speak.

Get Real wrote:

I'm from Wisconsin and am working in the private sector. We have taken consessions in pay and benefits for many years now and have down sized several times (which gives me more responsibilities with less pay) but the public sector has not. I'm tired of funding the public sector since they have not made the same tough choices that we have in the private sector. Now is the time to get real.

This has nothing to do with college degrees (I could argue that the folks with college degrees got us into this pickle), it's more about weather folks have a backbone to make tough decisions or not and be willing to share the pain.

Do teachers in Wisconsin really not pay into their retirement and get 100% insurance benefits? Here in Missouri, we pay 14% of our paycheck into our retirement, and most school districts make us pay for benefits after we retire. We certainly aren't getting our pension for free.

thomyorkeownsyou wrote:

Do teachers in Wisconsin really not pay into their retirement and get 100% insurance benefits? Here in Missouri, we pay 14% of our paycheck into our retirement, and most school districts make us pay for benefits after we retire. We certainly aren't getting our pension for free.

right, except you get to retire after 30 years at full pension. Private workers retiring at age 57? Hah.

14% match? Most private matches are 3%, if they exist. And they usually don't. Do you know how massive a 14% match is?

No system that retires people at 57 and then pays a pension for 30 years is going to survive. So you better start saving like the rest of us.