Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
disco

More fox lols

Recommended Posts

This.

 

Gotta agree.

 

It's an extreme legislative tactic. Using one comes with a price, usually paid for in PR. They're paying that price.

 

Nevertheless, perfectly legal. Or if not legal by WI law, there's not much that can be done to them as long as they're outside the jurisdiction.

 

Now, what would be interesting is whether there's anything in the WI law that they are risking. Something like 'dereliction of duty' or 'failure to faithfully execute the obligations of office'. And whether the other side would be willing to suffer the PR penalty for using it.

 

 

Back to the teachers... at what point can they be fired for not doing their job? Reagan did it to the Air Traffic Controllers; If I were a parent in Wisconsin, I'd be right pissed that my tax dollars are being spent so teachers can fake being sick to protest so they can (eventually) take more of my tax dollars.

 

What will a teacher that's been 'sick' all week do when a student comes in with an obviously faked note after ditching class for several days? Moralize how it's OK for teachers to skip work, but students can't skip class? Yeah, that'll go over well. Good luck with retaining any modicum of respect from your students.

 

Or maybe just 140,000 teachers should be fired; I think that's the number of government employees that'll have to be laid off if the budget cuts aren't passed. Teachers and their unions are holding up the process; might as well make them pay the price for getting what they want. Seemed to work for Gov. Christie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was definitely bated and that did really kill the quotes. Also, it wasn't just yahoo that twisted the story. The information Walker did volunteer really made me dislike the guy. The way he constantly said things like putting pressure on the democrats by sending more and more letters of notice to people. These are people and this is their lively hood. I mean, what an ass hole. The fact that he's not open to compromise or to discuss matters makes me wish that he would have opted for a lobotomy over the governor position. It would have fit him better.

 

And thus you are siding against the people who voted for this senate. They were voted in, live with it, whatever legislation they pass, they were elected to pass it. If the voters don't like it, they won't vote them in.

 

I don't understand what the problem is with pressuring the other side to turn up and vote on legislation. Yay, nay, or delay, but don't run away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's really funny is how the governor thinks absolutely nothing of those who are protesting, and said that if the democrats come back, he can pass any bill his party pleases because once they've sat the congress is technically in session.

 

Also, shouldn't every rational person be a little worried that a governor takes a phone call from someone identifying themselves as one of the Koch brothers? Seriously?

 

What's wrong with any of this? He doesn't agree with the people protesting. Just because people protest something doesn't mean you should immediately bend to their will, agree with them, or even listen to them.

 

And why should anyone be worried that he took a call from a Koch brother? They contributed to his campaign, he was being polite and not pissing off a supporter, even if the guy sounded a bit off the wall bonkers (see, baseball bat).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta agree.

 

It's an extreme legislative tactic. Using one comes with a price, usually paid for in PR. They're paying that price.

 

Nevertheless, perfectly legal. Or if not legal by WI law, there's not much that can be done to them as long as they're outside the jurisdiction.

 

Now, what would be interesting is whether there's anything in the WI law that they are risking. Something like 'dereliction of duty' or 'failure to faithfully execute the obligations of office'. And whether the other side would be willing to suffer the PR penalty for using it.

To be perfectly honest, I think that this is a better system then the filibuster. You can't do ANYTHING unless a compromise is reached or one side caves, so it's more of a last-ditch parliamentary maneuver. It changes the game from "You need 60% to pass this" to "You need 50% to pass this unless you're really really overreaching and the other side is willing to draw a line in the sand; then you need 60%".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And thus you are siding against the people who voted for this senate. They were voted in, live with it, whatever legislation they pass, they were elected to pass it. If the voters don't like it, they won't vote them in.

 

I don't understand what the problem is with pressuring the other side to turn up and vote on legislation. Yay, nay, or delay, but don't run away.

Of course I'm siding against those that voted for this senate! When I vote, I look for someone who will weigh both sides of an issue and make an educated decision. I don't vote for someone who blindly goes in with the eye on the prize, missing any sort of compromise that could be made along the way. As for this WI bull shit, it pisses me off that the republicans are up for debate. It also pisses me off that their policy is taking away someone's right to debate. However, I see this argument as basically fucking over the Republicans. At the next election, the democrats will overwhelm the republicans and will once again allow collective bargaining. I see all republicans currently sitting in the WI senate out of a job. As for Walker, there isn't a chance in hell that he'll be in office again (unless of course he moves to Alaska, where they'll elect anyone).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be perfectly honest, I think that this is a better system then the filibuster. You can't do ANYTHING unless a compromise is reached or one side caves, so it's more of a last-ditch parliamentary maneuver. It changes the game from "You need 60% to pass this" to "You need 50% to pass this unless you're really really overreaching and the other side is willing to draw a line in the sand; then you need 60%".

 

Except you can get a bill past a filibuster using special rules, referred to as the nuclear option. That requires 50%.

 

But no one will do it because everyone wants to keep it, they like the rule. But if they felt it was being abused, like stopping a session completely, they would invoke the option.

 

Also, you can run a bill through the house and pass it without amending it with just 50%. There are ways around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I'm siding against those that voted for this senate! When I vote, I look for someone who will weigh both sides of an issue and make an educated decision. I don't vote for someone who blindly goes in with the eye on the prize, missing any sort of compromise that could be made along the way. As for this WI bull shit, it pisses me off that the republicans are up for debate. It also pisses me off that their policy is taking away someone's right to debate. However, I see this argument as basically fucking over the Republicans. At the next election, the democrats will overwhelm the republicans and will once again allow collective bargaining. I see all republicans currently sitting in the WI senate out of a job. As for Walker, there isn't a chance in hell that he'll be in office again (unless of course he moves to Alaska, where they'll elect anyone).

 

Weak. He ran on a specific campaign. Now that he's doing it, you are saying the people voted him in to not do what he said? This guy isn't blindly doing anything, he told everyone what he was doing, said "vote for me, I'll do this" and he's doing it. Their policy is about government collective bargaining, not about debate.

 

And you feel sorry that the Republicans are pushing through strong agenda? Did you feel sorry that the Democrats pushed through the health care bill? Because that's essentially the same thing. They pushed through something, while encouraging as little debate as possible. "We must pass this bill so we can begin understanding what it actually means." Brilliant Nanci, Brilliant.

 

What if Walker does get elected again? If this is the case, that the Reps overextend their call and pass unpopular or unwanted legislation, then good, that's the fucking system. They will get moved out and replaced by someone more moderate or even liberal. If not, it's what the people wanted.

 

I honestly wouldn't be shocked if Walker get's re-elected, Wisconsin has a long history of fiscal reformers. Look at what they did to welfare and other benefits. They knifed em and haven't looked back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/27/us-wisconsin-protests-idUSTRE71O4F420110227

 

In an update, this now has the record for biggest protest in Madison since the Vietnam War. Pretty awesome. There is also serious talk in the school system of shutting the entire thing down in protest, which would be terrible for the students but a hilarious fuck you to the republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.reuters.c...E71O4F420110227

 

In an update, this now has the record for biggest protest in Madison since the Vietnam War. Pretty awesome. There is also serious talk in the school system of shutting the entire thing down in protest, which would be terrible for the students but a hilarious fuck you to the republicans.

 

I think that would be a serious PR disaster for the teachers. They would lose any public good will that they have. They'd be giving the governor the political and public relations clout to do what Reagan did to the Air Traffic Controllers - give them a deadline to get back to work, or get fired.

 

At least one democratic senator, no longer able to back teachers who aren't teaching, would return from self-imposed exile, and that would be the end of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unions have already won this fight, the public at large supports them by a 2:1 margin. It would be to their advantage to keep carrying on the fight because they have so much political capital right now. Also I couldn't blame teachers if they decided to quit working in protest over a massive cut of their compensation. If you had a job which had guaranteed perks and they were suddenly removed, would you talk yourself into keeping it out of some moral purpose or would you do what you could to keep those benefits? Acts like the ones Walker are proposing are why unions exist in the first place, its to give the workers some kind of leverage with their employer. And that leverage, in part, consists of the ability to stage a mass walk-off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unions have already won this fight, the public at large supports them by a 2:1 margin.

 

If you listen to the AFL-CIO President, maybe.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/260905/organized-labor-vs-public-opinion-michael-g-franc?page=1

 

 

If you had a job which had guaranteed perks and they were suddenly removed, would you talk yourself into keeping it out of some moral purpose or would you do what you could to keep those benefits?

 

Welcome to the real world, in which non-government employees in the US were faced with just exactly that sort of choice within the past three years, if they weren't laid off outright. Why should the tax-eaters keep getting pay raises and Cadillac benefits plans when everybody else is getting pay cuts, and worse benefits packages that cost more?

 

 

 

Acts like the ones Walker are proposing are why unions exist in the first place, its to give the workers some kind of leverage with their employer. And that leverage, in part, consists of the ability to stage a mass walk-off.

 

 

So, you admit that you care more about the teachers than you do about the students? nice.

 

If a job is so important 'the government should do it', then it's important enough that to take it you lose the right to stage massive walk-outs. Don't like it? get a job from somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you listen to the AFL-CIO President, maybe.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/260905/organized-labor-vs-public-opinion-michael-g-franc?page=1

 

Welcome to the real world, in which non-government employees in the US were faced with just exactly that sort of choice within the past three years, if they weren't laid off outright. Why should the tax-eaters keep getting pay raises and Cadillac benefits plans when everybody else is getting pay cuts, and worse benefits packages that cost more?

 

So, you admit that you care more about the teachers than you do about the students? nice.

 

If a job is so important 'the government should do it', then it's important enough that to take it you lose the right to stage massive walk-outs. Don't like it? get a job from somewhere else.

 

Teachers have to put food on the table just as much as people in the "Real World." Are you saying that students are more important than their teachers? Aren't they worth the same? The protesters agreed to all of the cuts except for the loss of freedom of speech collective bargaining. Just because your employer is the government, doesn't mean that you have to allow your employer to shit on your chest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unions have already won this fight, the public at large supports them by a 2:1 margin. It would be to their advantage to keep carrying on the fight because they have so much political capital right now. Also I couldn't blame teachers if they decided to quit working in protest over a massive cut of their compensation. If you had a job which had guaranteed perks and they were suddenly removed, would you talk yourself into keeping it out of some moral purpose or would you do what you could to keep those benefits? Acts like the ones Walker are proposing are why unions exist in the first place, its to give the workers some kind of leverage with their employer. And that leverage, in part, consists of the ability to stage a mass walk-off.

 

Unions began because of terrible, horrendous work conditions and terrible, below poverty pay, and genuine desire for a voice.

 

Unions have turned into more than just leverage, they are a political machine in themselves that have evolved into a monster that sucks every last penny out of the system. Especially a "not for profit" system like the school that is already facing massive budget shortfalls.

 

Unions made sure the Triangle Factory Fire didn't happen twice. Safety regulations, minimum wage, maximum hours. These teachers unions we see now aren't worried about that, they have shifted to worrying about 28 or 29 holidays.

 

Unions and employees have had far too much leverage recently, but there was no issue when the economy was booming, it was fine for everyone to ask for more and more. Now we've dipped, there is no more money coming in, and some unions have been caught reaching too deep into the piggy banks. See the car industry, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unions began because of terrible, horrendous work conditions and terrible, below poverty pay, and genuine desire for a voice.

 

Unions have turned into more than just leverage, they are a political machine in themselves that have evolved into a monster that sucks every last penny out of the system. Especially a "not for profit" system like the school that is already facing massive budget shortfalls.

 

Unions made sure the Triangle Factory Fire didn't happen twice. Safety regulations, minimum wage, maximum hours. These teachers unions we see now aren't worried about that, they have shifted to worrying about 28 or 29 holidays.

 

Unions and employees have had far too much leverage recently, but there was no issue when the economy was booming, it was fine for everyone to ask for more and more. Now we've dipped, there is no more money coming in, and some unions have been caught reaching too deep into the piggy banks. See the car industry, for example.

Sooo... teachers shouldn't have a voice when each one is dealing with 30 students and the town plans on closing another school, thereby increasing class sizes to 35? Sorry Billy, you need to stand in the corner because there are no more desks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teachers have to put food on the table just as much as people in the "Real World." Are you saying that students are more important than their teachers? Aren't they worth the same? The protesters agreed to all of the cuts except for the loss of freedom of speech collective bargaining. Just because your employer is the government, doesn't mean that you have to allow your employer to shit on your chest.

 

You are comparing freedom of speech to this collective bargaining? I would say collective bargaining is closer to extortion then freedom of speech. It mostly is aimed at non-wage bargaining rights. People comparing collective bargaining rights to freedom of speech are just playing the fear card.

 

Have you seen some of the current benefits state employees of WI have?

 

They pay 0% to their pension, yet receive 5% towards of their wages towards pension. On top of that, their health care has been virtually untouched for a very long time, despite other states reforming recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are comparing freedom of speech to this collective bargaining? I would say collective bargaining is closer to extortion then freedom of speech. It mostly is aimed at non-wage bargaining rights. People comparing collective bargaining rights to freedom of speech are just playing the fear card.

 

Have you seen some of the current benefits state employees of WI have?

 

They pay 0% to their pension, yet receive 5% towards of their wages towards pension. On top of that, their health care has been virtually untouched for a very long time, despite other states reforming recently.

Again... You're arguing benefits and not collective bargaining rights.

 

Here's a far-fetched scenario...

 

Every teacher makes 300k per year salary. When they retire, the government will pays them the same salary for the rest of their lives.

 

The government decides to cut their salary to 25k per year and cut all of the benefits to 0.

 

The teachers complain and nobody listens. Why? Because each is arguing individually and therefore really don't have a voice.

 

You're argument basically states: Who the hell cares, they were making a lot of money and were well off. My argument is: they really should be represented better in order to keep something like this from happening in the first place.

 

Scenario number two...

Every teacher makes 25k per year salary. When they retire, the government gives them a fancy gift-basket and a gift-card to disco's restaurant.

 

The government decides to cut their salary to 15k per year and provide them with no gift basket when they retire (they still get the gift-certificate).

 

The teachers complain and nobody listens. Why? Because each is arguing individually and therefore really don't have a voice.

 

You're argument: Who the hell cares, they were making a lot of money and were well off. My argument is: they really should be represented better in order to keep something like this from happening in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh almighty, what would the world do without unions to support them and carry their voice?

 

Hi, the economy is in the toilet right now and the state is billions in debt but we all want more money. Listen to us or watch us cripple the education system of the state by not working. This whole situation is a sad parody of a mom in walmart who's children band together to cry and whine on the floor because she can't afford to buy them candy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to the real world, in which non-government employees in the US were faced with just exactly that sort of choice within the past three years, if they weren't laid off outright. Why should the tax-eaters keep getting pay raises and Cadillac benefits plans when everybody else is getting pay cuts, and worse benefits packages that cost more?
State & local employees are getting laid off, and they're getting furloughed left and right. Benefits are getting cut across the board.

 

So I guess the question is how are you enjoying the weather in Mexico, because you're certainly not talking about the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again... You're arguing benefits and not collective bargaining rights.

 

Here's a far-fetched scenario...

 

 

 

You're argument basically states: Who the hell cares, they were making a lot of money and were well off. My argument is: they really should be represented better in order to keep something like this from happening in the first place.

 

Scenario number two...

 

 

You're argument: Who the hell cares, they were making a lot of money and were well off. My argument is: they really should be represented better in order to keep something like this from happening in the first place.

 

Or, we can base our hypothetical closer to reality.

 

And let's be clear, the collective bargaining rights are not about wages, they are benefits. Go read about it more if you don't believe me.

 

 

Scenario number Not So Fake and biased.

 

Every teacher makes 42k a year. When they retire, their pension fund has nearly 63k invested over the course of 30 years. This will be around 300k retirement fund, obviously inflation impacted. Each is not arguing individually, but they don't have a stranglehold over the benefits portion, which they are currently contributing nothing towards. They still have their collective bargaining voice for their 42k a year salary, and they still have their benefits, it just costs them a competitive price because they no longer can use it as pawn in labor talks.

 

My argument hasn't been anything near what you summarized. My point has been they have had a very hard stranglehold on benefits and they are quite competitive salary wise. They are a big reason why the state is in debt, the number one expense is education. It's natural that the number 1 expenditure is being reduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're argument: Who the hell cares, they were making a lot of money and were well off. My argument is: they really should be represented better in order to keep something like this from happening in the first place.

 

My argument: Why should teachers get special extortion bargaining rights that 70% of Americans don't have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My argument: Why should teachers get special extortion bargaining rights that 70% of Americans don't have?
Most private sector workers have the right to collectively bargin. If they choose not to unionize, that doesn't mean that they don't have the right, just that they're not exercising it. You can argue that corporations have become adept at union-busting, and that attempts to unionize usually get people put out of a job, but you can get fired for saying things which are constitutionally protected speech, so what's the difference?

 

You could easily extend your argument to other rights which are not exercised. For example, why should you have the right to carry firearms when 70% of Americans don't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm for any organization which helps individuals have leverage over massive employers, and that usually includes unions. The arguments put forth against the teachers are all shit. Allow me to summarize:

 

1. They have collective bargaining rights, but I don't. If I can't have them, they shouldn't either. This argument is stupid because its patently stupid. I don't have two porn stars living in my mansion with me, therefore Charlie Sheen shouldn't either.

2. Teachers live a life of luxury and ease, leeching off the system and causing trillions of dollars in economic drain while sucking at their jobs. They are sucking the world dry and get awesome healthcare, and that makes me jealous because my shitty employer doesn't have good healthcare coverage. This argument is stupid because they agreed to every concession requested, except the collective bargaining.

3. Unions today are not defeating child labor, so there's no reason for them to exist. This argument is stupid because it severely underestimates the usefulness of having a bulwark against massive employers.

4. Wisconsin has a deficit, and teachers / other unions are a giant cause of it. This one is particularly stupid because Wisconsin's GAO said they were fine, and the governor passed a $120 million bill within his first few weeks of which part was a large tax break. Furthermore, if the concern was the deficit, there would be no reason to attack collective bargaining - the concessions have already been agreed to. There would also be other measures beyond "In order to save the state's bottom line, I'm going to fuck the education system hard up the ass." They'd raise taxes, or cut spending in other places, you know, do the things required to balance a budget.

 

This debate is really indicative of what's wrong with political debates in general in this country. Nobody agrees on the same set of facts, and as a result the conclusions drawn are wildly different.

 

And fahr, 60% of americans oppose limiting collective bargaining of public-sector unions.

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/03/01/134162234/unions-draw-huge-support-in-survey

 

And that's from an actual news organization.

 

I'm not really a conspiracy theorist, but I would not be surprised if the Koch brothers are heavily involved in some form or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reformat the unions so that the people at the top are actually working for the union, and not renting out whores for the big union meetings in expensive hotels. Think I'm kidding? Shit like this has happened in a lot of unions across the US. How is it related to the actual topic? Easy, union dues go up which mean employers have to pay more. And thanks to that comfy lifestyle of the top people, they have to keep pushing for those pay raises and fake positions like the old mafia. Trim the fat and save some money, though it won't fix the problem, just alleviate it to find the root.

 

My wife is union btw, and I see it at her work too, and so doesn't she.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×