Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
disco

More fox lols

Recommended Posts

Sure, there are some union excesses. I'd be surprised if they exist in the teacher's union, but yeah, there are some excesses. That doesn't mean unions shouldn't exist, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Glad to see you learned something from the discussion we had earlier. :P

 

And honestly, your counter-arguments are not very good. I'm not even sure they are related to the actual argument. All I could see is that you just called everything stupid and used some kind of hypothetical or something non-related counter. And I don't even think most people are making the arguments you claim. They seem to be the arguments you want people to make so that you can just call them stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you learned something from the discussion we had earlier. :P

 

And honestly, your counter-arguments are not very good. I'm not even sure they are related to the actual argument. All I could see is that you just called everything stupid and used some kind of hypothetical or something non-related counter. And I don't even think most people are making the arguments you claim. They seem to be the arguments you want people to make so that you can just call them stupid.

 

This times 10.

 

I hope you can clearly see how that is exactly related to this...

 

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.

 

You are basically building strawmen, linking it to a corresponding viewpoint that is only related because you mentioned it, and then calling it stupid.

 

What you are completing ignoring is the comparison to other sectors of work. You say teachers need this leverage that most people don't have. Why? Can you name any sector in the US that is struggling because they don't have collective bargaining? Go on, have a really good think about this. Is there a sector of work, public or corporate, that is getting shafted?

 

Unions are self sustaining entities instead of entities required out of some group need. Often, the purpose of a union is to keep the union together rather than ensure the jobs are competitive.

 

Part of the reason WI is in trouble is because unions have demanded, and won, above average benefits for teachers.

 

No one is saying teachers are Charlie Sheen snorting coke out of hooker's asses, but they certainly aren't impoverished. I would put a teachers salary in the middle to upper middle class range. Add in a summer job and it's easily upper middle class income.

 

Also, there should be *zero* tolerances for sub-par teachers. Unions have been forcing bad teachers down school districts for years. You can't get rid of a bad teacher once they are tenured unless they do something so terrible... Then you have to pay for their jail cell.

 

I had 2 teachers, both married, air their dirty laundry at school. The husband of the woman came into work, they had a heated exchange, cussing, swearing etc etc. They had a domestic in a classroom. They couldn't fire the teacher (by the way, she was smokin hot). You do that at any other job and you're sacked, rightfully so, on the spot. You might as well pack up your shit.

 

Finally, the $120 million people are ballyhooing about, saying that because they made this "tax cut" they can't possibly want to balance the budget elsewhere... Total joke. The purpose of the $120 million (I heard it was $80 million, but who cares between 80 and 120) was to provide business incentive for corporations to create new jobs in WI. It's not like they are just patting their billionaire friends on the back and saying "thank you!" There is a clear purpose to it. You may not agree with the philosophy of lower corporate tax=more jobs=more taxes=profit for state... But that's a fairly standard Republican idea. Tax lass and get the gears moving.

 

Another Republican strong point (well, sorta) is small government. Reducing public education in any way possible is pretty much number 1 priority for Republicans in WI right now, I hope they do what their agenda aims for. Then WI can decide if it's what they want, and vote for them or against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

they're laying off the rank and file workers though. they're going to cut a thousand teaching jobs in Austin but they don't talk about cutting any administrative jobs at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. As long as a union does what it is supposed to do, there are no problems.

 

Sure, there are problems. But that doesn't mean the unions shouldn't exist.

 

Fahr, you've always been a right-wing troll. Cyrus I know less about but am gathering the same impression of. Cat, I've liked our discussions, but with this one I'd like to see a more detailed response from you. Sure, I simplified people's responses, but those are the 4 most common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, there are problems. But that doesn't mean the unions shouldn't exist.

 

Fahr, you've always been a right-wing troll. Cyrus I know less about but am gathering the same impression of. Cat, I've liked our discussions, but with this one I'd like to see a more detailed response from you. Sure, I simplified people's responses, but those are the 4 most common.

 

I'm not a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, there are problems. But that doesn't mean the unions shouldn't exist.

 

Fahr, you've always been a right-wing troll. Cyrus I know less about but am gathering the same impression of. Cat, I've liked our discussions, but with this one I'd like to see a more detailed response from you. Sure, I simplified people's responses, but those are the 4 most common.

 

You seriously think you simplified other people's responses? That wasn't simplifying anything, that was completely ignoring the point of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, teachers, ARE NOT THE FUCKING PROBLEM.

 

This whole debate is ridiculous because teachers do not make that much money. Personally I think the only problem with teachers is that there is very little meritocracy going on in the educational department.

 

But the real issues:

 

We have a HUGE military budget. A HUGE social security budget. A HUGE medicaid/medicare budget. These three things are like 90% of our budget.

 

And you guys are discussing this tiny portion of the budget that does not even matter. THAT is the problem in our current political environment, the real issues aren't being discussed.

 

Isn't education a state issue anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, teachers, ARE NOT THE FUCKING PROBLEM.

 

This whole debate is ridiculous because teachers do not make that much money. Personally I think the only problem with teachers is that there is very little meritocracy going on in the educational department.

 

But the real issues:

 

We have a HUGE military budget. A HUGE social security budget. A HUGE medicaid/medicare budget. These three things are like 90% of our budget.

 

And you guys are discussing this tiny portion of the budget that does not even matter. THAT is the problem in our current political environment, the real issues aren't being discussed.

 

Isn't education a state issue anyways?

Aren't we discussing state issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, teachers, ARE NOT THE FUCKING PROBLEM.

 

This whole debate is ridiculous because teachers do not make that much money.

 

Pay attention; In WI, they make more than most of the rest of the state's workers.

 

Personally I think the only problem with teachers is that there is very little meritocracy going on in the educational department.

 

On this, we agree. And unions are part of why this problem exists.

 

But the real issues:

 

We have a HUGE military budget. A HUGE social security budget. A HUGE medicaid/medicare budget. These three things are like 90% of our budget.

 

Military spending takes up half of the percentage of the budget it did 10 years ago. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are the big killers, but a majority of Americans don't want to see them cut. Bad things are going to happen in 10 years or so if they aren't cut, but most people don't think 10 weeks into the future, so they could give a shit about people your age as long as they get their social security check and mostly free health care

 

 

And you guys are discussing this tiny portion of the budget that does not even matter. THAT is the problem in our current political environment, the real issues aren't being discussed.

 

It's not the particular issue; it's the underlying political philosophies behind them that are important; those can be extrapolated to the larger picture.

 

 

 

Isn't education a state issue anyways?

 

Only that it were. Who wants to abolish the Department of Education?

 

 

 

Funny thing is, the elimination of collective bargaining, while it isn't important for this year's budget, is critically important for the state's long-term health. Sure, they had to cut something like 137million from the budget this year, but in the next two years, they have to cut something like 3.6 billion. If the teachers' union can come back two years from now and extort their Cadillac health care and retirements packages back, then all the cost-cutting that was done now will be wasted effort.

 

But ignore the points I make with you know, facts. Because according to disco, I'm just a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Comparing teacher salaries to other Wisconsin public-sector employees is retarded. "Teachers make more than janitors, or the guys who drive the salt trucks" does not prove that teachers are overpaid. According to estimates I've read, WI teachers are paid 2% less than the national average - so they're not overpaid.

 

2. "Cadillac healthcare" - boo motherfucking hoo. Their healthcare is better than yours. Does that mean they shouldn't have it, or does it really mean your healthcare is shit? Shouldn't they have some perks for making such shit money? It's not like people want to be teachers for the income or the perks, anyway - despite what idiots think. It is utterly hilarious that people are arguing this as if teachers are lazy overpaid fucktards who took their jobs for the paycheck and then phone in every day just so they can get free botox. Anyone with a brain knows that teachers, if anything, are very underpaid for the service they provide to our society - yet now, amazingly, is the time to remove that pay! Herp a derp!

 

3. Eliminating collective bargaining would save the state money, sure - because they would stop paying teachers the same amount of money. But what effect will that have on the education system? So we can't cut welfare, social security, etc - but we can give up on our already-bad education system? Furthermore, you're an idiot if you think changing that one thing would fix Wisconsin's budget.

 

4. You cannot ignore that 7 of the top 10 individual contributors to political campaigns are republican, and the remaining 3 are unions, one of which is the teacher's union. This, along with other efforts in other states, could easily be a rather blatant attempt to shut off campaign contributions by republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. You cannot ignore that 7 of the top 10 individual contributors to political campaigns are republican, and the remaining 3 are unions, one of which is the teacher's union. This, along with other efforts in other states, could easily be a rather blatant attempt to shut off campaign contributions by republicans.

 

Can't ignore that the teacher's union in WI is the #1 political contributor, paying out more than the #2 and #3 contributors combined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't ignore that the teacher's union in WI is the #1 political contributor, paying out more than the #2 and #3 contributors combined.

 

... which is paid for through union dues, which is paid for by the teachers' salaries, which is paid for by the government, which is paid for by the taxpayers. So, essentially, the Democrats have set themselves up with a sweet, never-ending and ever-increasing campaign fund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... which is paid for through union dues, which is paid for by the teachers' salaries, which is paid for by the government, which is paid for by the taxpayers. So, essentially, the Democrats have set themselves up with a sweet, never-ending and ever-increasing campaign fund.
Only corporations should be allowed to influence politics by aggregating money and then contributing to politicians who will in turn deliver taxpayer subsidies to them. When teachers do it it's wrong.

 

This thread is stupid and even the normally-sane people have been influenced by Nate & disco's retardation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only corporations should be allowed to influence politics by aggregating money and then contributing to politicians who will in turn deliver taxpayer subsidies to them. When teachers do it it's wrong.

 

This thread is stupid and even the normally-sane people have been influenced by Nate & disco's retardation.

 

I disagree with the subsidies. If a corporation can't make it on its own, it shouldn't do business. Additionally, if I understand how this works, the government picks and chooses which companies get subsidies, which is favoritism. Obviously, that's unethical in lots of ways. The government should not favor one corporation over another. If it wants to provide subsidies, it should provide to all.

 

Outside of that, what the corporation does with the money it makes on its own should be that corporation's business.

 

The teachers aren't the problem. The union bosses and politicians who make deals with each other are. After all, the unions don't exist without the corporation/governmental agency allowing it. So, in a manner of speaking, government unions don't exist except for subsidies from the government, since they wouldn't be able to survive without them and no one in a union state can work for the government without being part of the union.

 

The teachers are simply pawns in the game, used quite effectively in this discussion to distract from the real issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Outside of that, what the corporation does with the money it makes on its own should be that corporation's business.

 

The teachers aren't the problem. The union bosses and politicians who make deals with each other are. After all, the unions don't exist without the corporation/governmental agency allowing it. So, in a manner of speaking, government unions don't exist except for subsidies from the government, since they wouldn't be able to survive without them and no one in a union state can work for the government without being part of the union.

 

The teachers are simply pawns in the game, used quite effectively in this discussion to distract from the real issue.

What corporations do with the money that they make is their business. Fine.

 

However, what state employees do with the money that they make is not their business. It's the state's business, because it was public money. Fine.

 

So who's business is it when corporations make money by doing contract work for the government? How about state employees paying for things that are morally objectionable with their publicly-funded salaries? I don't want someone paying for their abortion with our taxpayer money; I think it'd be perfectly reasonable to force state employees to prove that their abortion was being funded by something other then their salary.

 

If you don't want public unions because you don't like unions, fine. Trying to justify it because it's public money is not something that's going to work well because there are so many other things that you could use the same justification for. Either you end up being hypocritical by drawing arbitrary distinctions about what is and isn't acceptable, or you're arguing that public employees should not have the same general rights as private employees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you're saying and you bring up some good points- none of which I disagree with.

 

I think, however, that what any employee (gov't or otherwise) does with their money is their business. I don't think anyone should be allowed to tell anyone else what they can or can't do with their money, inside of the limits of the law, of course. But that's why this is so tricky.

 

And to be clear, I don't dislike the idea of unions. I dislike the constant, inevitable, inexorable conflict of interest (and eventual corruption) that exists for unions that pertain to government workers. Additionally, in union states, it is impossible to work for the government and not be in the union, which, IMO, is a discrimination problem. But, as you can guess where I'm going with this, we run into the problem that employees should be allowed to spend their money any way they please and their money goes to the unions, albeit in a forcible manner. It's not "fair" to regulate how the employee spends their money, so the unions can continue to take their dues with impunity and continue to gain more and more power, all the while promoting their party of choice with the money they "freely" receive from the government workers. It's almost like using a loophole to use state money to fund a campaign- well, that's exactly what it is. Again, it's a conflict of interest and shouldn't happen in that manner with any union and any party.

 

Personally, I think the best compromise would be to let the employees keep the unions, but disallow unions from contributing in any way to any campaign, much like corporations have been penalized for and been banned from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, teachers, ARE NOT THE FUCKING PROBLEM.

 

This whole debate is ridiculous because teachers do not make that much money. Personally I think the only problem with teachers is that there is very little meritocracy going on in the educational department.

 

But the real issues:

 

We have a HUGE military budget. A HUGE social security budget. A HUGE medicaid/medicare budget. These three things are like 90% of our budget.

 

And you guys are discussing this tiny portion of the budget that does not even matter. THAT is the problem in our current political environment, the real issues aren't being discussed.

 

Isn't education a state issue anyways?

 

Education is by far the biggest state expense.

 

Budget of WI

 

$18 Billion budget, 6.4 billion is spent on education. The next closest is 1.4 billion on health care.

 

Since this is a state issue, we are talking about the single most expensive budget cost of *any* state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Comparing teacher salaries to other Wisconsin public-sector employees is retarded. "Teachers make more than janitors, or the guys who drive the salt trucks" does not prove that teachers are overpaid. According to estimates I've read, WI teachers are paid 2% less than the national average - so they're not overpaid.

 

2. "Cadillac healthcare" - boo motherfucking hoo. Their healthcare is better than yours. Does that mean they shouldn't have it, or does it really mean your healthcare is shit? Shouldn't they have some perks for making such shit money? It's not like people want to be teachers for the income or the perks, anyway - despite what idiots think. It is utterly hilarious that people are arguing this as if teachers are lazy overpaid fucktards who took their jobs for the paycheck and then phone in every day just so they can get free botox. Anyone with a brain knows that teachers, if anything, are very underpaid for the service they provide to our society - yet now, amazingly, is the time to remove that pay! Herp a derp!

 

3. Eliminating collective bargaining would save the state money, sure - because they would stop paying teachers the same amount of money. But what effect will that have on the education system? So we can't cut welfare, social security, etc - but we can give up on our already-bad education system? Furthermore, you're an idiot if you think changing that one thing would fix Wisconsin's budget.

 

4. You cannot ignore that 7 of the top 10 individual contributors to political campaigns are republican, and the remaining 3 are unions, one of which is the teacher's union. This, along with other efforts in other states, could easily be a rather blatant attempt to shut off campaign contributions by republicans.

 

Actually, looking at my budget numbers, education might be the only way Wisconsin *CAN* balance their budget for the next 2 years. Even completely eliminating health care wouldn't or state defense would account for the shortfall of 3.6 billion.

 

Education needs to change in Wisconsin if they are to avoid this 3.6 billion shortfall. There are no questions about it.

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  

×