Public Unions Have to Go

You all knew that I wasn’t going to sit on the sidelines while this whole thing went down and be silent, right? Tonight I write to weigh in on the struggles going on in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana. The bottom line is that the governments in those states are making a stand against the public unions. Of course, the unions are panicking. Facing already dwindling membership in the private sector unions, the public sector unions are kind of where they figured they were safe. But they aren’t. And they shouldn’t be. Look, I don’t have a problem with the concept of a union. But I sure have a problem with what the big unions have become. They are no longer a tool for the protection of vulnerable employees (nor do they need to be). They have become a drain on the American economy and they do more harm than good in many cases. And in order to gain support, they are simply liars about what the situations are and what the consequences are without them. It is time to set the record straight and talk about why the public unions should simply go away…

Public unions are a menace to our economy at this point. Imagine a world of Jurassic Park. We go to the union bosses display and they are no where to be seen. We can hear them roaring in the wilderness out there. So we look away and go about trying to fix the country. But we begin to attack their power source, collective bargaining and forced dues collections, and suddenly we look up and the goat is gone. Nothing but a chain remains. And we become aware of how powerful and dangerous they really are. But they are just one part of the scenery. We also have the Raptors, union protest organizers. Cunning and deceptive. And despite what some will claim, generally violent. Meanwhile the big old Brachiosaurs (the American public) just continue lumbering around looking for leaves and sneezing on unsuspecting little girls.

Wait, does my reference to a movie immediately discount everything I am about to say? Just checking.

Public unions served a purpose at one time. I guess I am OK with that statement. But there is no issue in America that is as clear an indicator of the fact that masses of people will support something simply because their political leadership tells them to. Answer me this, public union supporters: Why exactly are the public unions necessary? To protect the workers from their employers? That is the claim. We need public unions to ensure that the employers don’t take advantage of the workers. Without the unions and collective bargaining, the workers will get screwed over. They will remain underpaid, overworked, and will pay entirely too much for health care coverage and pension benefits. The employers are evil, evil men and the unions are just there to protect public workers from the evil men.

Problem is, the evil men in question… is the government. The same government that the left would have us believe we need massive amounts more of in order to protect the citizens. How does that make any sense? The left would have you believe that government is a benevolent entity. That is why we must entrust them with our health care and our tax money and our environment and our everything. The government is looking out for our best interests. That is why we need more of it. That is the message from the left. Unless you work for the government. Then the government is an evil corporation, waiting to spring its trap on unsuspecting workers. The citizens that the government employs need protection from government. Government is good to the citizens, but bad to its employees. The same people who are looking to screw the workers are looking to save the masses! Am I the only one who sees the massive disconnect here? So which is it? Do we need more government to protect us from corporations or more unions to protect us from government?

And if a free market solution, unions, are the answer to our problems, why do those who support the unions appear to be so opposed to the free market?

Public sector unions were, for the most part, illegal until the 1950’s. Ironically, the first state to legalize collective bargaining for public sector employees was Wisconsin, in 1959. So it is somewhat fitting that Wisconsin was the first site of a battle to reduce the collective bargaining power of public unions. In 2009, public unions for the first time had more members than private sector unions.

At the core of this debate is the idea of collective bargaining. The ability of unions to garner better deals for its members by bargaining as a group rather than individuals. In the private sector, I can almost be OK with such a concept. After all, we know there are some crooked corporations out there (although I maintain they are the exception rather than the rule). In today’s information age, I question the need of even private sector unions. But since government wants to protect the corporations, I can live with unions being the counter-balance for the workers. But the public unions are something I simply do not support for a plethora of reasons.

First and foremost, I feel that the public unions are a drain on the economy with far too much ability to cost the taxpayers significant amounts of money with no recourse. Studies have shown that public sector union members earn as much as 40% more than their private sector counterparts. That is a gigantic difference for doing roughly the same job. And it shows what the powerful public unions have done. The kicker is that it is you and I, the taxpayer, footing the bill for this. But we cannot really do anything to stop it. The taxpayer, you see, has zero ability to rein in public unions. And they have zero ability to do anything about the consequences of public unions until the responsible parties are no longer around. That is the reality of what has happened in Wisconsin.

Public unions make outrageous demands of the politicians who employ them. The politicians know that they cannot agree to lavish wage hikes as this will immediately increase taxes and cause the taxpayers to put that politician out of office the next election cycle. So instead the politicians agrees to lavish pension benefits instead. These are not implemented immediately so there is no immediate tax hike associated with them. And twenty years from now when the tax hikes happen so that we can pay for these pensions, the guilty party is no longer in office. Taxes go up and the taxpayer has zero recourse. They can’t vote out the person responsible.

So a new politician is in place saddled with finding a way to pay for all this nonsense. Their budget is out of whack and they look around and see that the things the union bargained for with the last guy are one of the drivers of all the red ink on the state balance sheet. They move to start restoring the fiscal integrity of the state and the unions lose their frackin mind. Union bosses make outrageous claims and refuse to recognize any realities. Don’t get me wrong, I understand the union bosses. It is their job to represent the workers in the union. It isn’t their job to worry about state balance sheets or to care whether Joe the plumber has to pay higher taxes. I cannot fault the union bosses for doing what they were hired to do. I will never forget an eye-opening statement from the head of the American Federation of Teachers, Albert Shanker: “When school children start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of school children.”  (Shanker was also a member of the Young People’s Socialist League and had another interesting quote: “a lot of people who have been hired as teachers are basically not competent”) It tells us all we need to know about how unions see the rest of the public outside of its members.

That is where we are in Wisconsin. Governor Walker is tasked with balancing the budget which includes dealing with the deals that his predecessors made with the public unions. He has attempted to force the unions to acquiesce to a deal that is slightly BETTER than the deal that all federal union employees currently operate under. Yet the unions would have us believe Wisconsin is attempting to force public workers into homeless shelters.

I think that it is high time that the state governments begin to push back and eliminate the public union’s influence. That one of the most fought against ideas is the elimination of automatic dues collection says a ton about where the unions stand at this point. They are petrified of even having a situation evolve where its own members see every paycheck what they are paying and have to make a choice as to whether to pay it or not. I would think if the unions were so beneficial to its members that this wouldn’t be something they would worry about.

Don’t get me wrong, I am no fan of the Republicans either. They are not willing to go far enough to get our country back to where it needs to be economically. If it were up to me we wouldn’t bee looking to slash a percentage of discretionary spending (and discretionary spending only equates to roughly $500 Billion of the federal governments massive 3-4 Trillion dollar budget each year). I would prefer that we look at slashing 50% of the ENTIRE budget. That means entitlement programs and all. But the petty Republicans are not going to be looking at doing that anytime soon. But I digress.

The reality is that public unions have stifled the economy in many states as the states attempt to meet their demands and now face paying for unfunded pensions and benefits. Couple that with the fact that in the public sector, workers don’t face the prospect of losing their job to competition and it becomes more clear that the public unions must be busted. What they have resulted in are economic problems, reduced productivity, and the inability of public leadership to make changes that increase effectiveness or, in some cases, basic competency.

Private sector unions have seen a drastic decline over the last 20 years. Where unions in the private sector once held 30% of the workforce, they now only have 7%. Even in the union “heavy” area of manufacturing, union membership has dropped from 40% to roughly 15%. The private sector unions are struggling for existence because they are now being recognized as both unnecessary and burdensome. That leaves the public sector unions as the last bastion of hope for all those who would have us believe that unions are a necessary thing for the workers of America. With any luck, we will soon see similar results in the ranks of public sector unions. They have for quite some time been little more than a drain on the system, while simultaneously being an instant source of revenue for Democrat politicians (98% of public union money goes to Democrats).

I am interested in hearing the comments from those who would seek to preserve the public unions. Much as I am always interested in hearing the arguments to preserve unions at all. But please don’t bother with pointing out what working conditions were in 1910 as your evidence for the continued existence of unions. This is the information age and those things can’t be hidden in the outlying areas like they were then. And don’t tell me that we need them to protect workers from the government that employs them. Or do tell me that, and then explain to me why I should be turning anything else over to a government that we have to protect workers from. Because if we cannot trust government to take care of its employees, do you really think they are going to work to take care of the rest of us?

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Since government is a tool of the 2%’s, anyone who is not a 2% requires a voice. Unions provide that voice. Have they become corrupt? No more or less corrupt than those who corrupted them (whether for political support or otherwise). Do they need to bargain fairly? They offered to do so in WI and were rebuffed. The biggest reason unions have dwindled in America is the loss of American manufacturing. As for public unions, teachers, nurses, correction officers, etc. in WI didn’t bankrupt that state. Tax breaks did (enacted by Walker soon as he took office). Unions have been abandoned by the Democratic Party because the Democratic Party is no more than a pubic hair to the left of the Republican Party. They (Obama) fought harder to gift Wall Street $700 billion than it did to protect unions. It is just another extension of the power the 2%’s wield over workers. Workers need to organize nationally … or revolt outright. The inequities between those who own the means of production and the ones actually “earning” their profits is disagraceful, immoral and evil (so take that BF).

    Scroll down my blog for my attack on Obama and Trumka (two very corrupt “leaders” doing their best for the 2%’s to maintain their slave hold on the rest of us).

    http://temporaryknucksline.blogspot.com/2011/03/johnny-porno-reading-rigoletto-lola-new.html

    Putting on my construction helmet for the bricks yo’ll about to throw …

    • Nah, no use to throw bricks, my Plutonian Rebel friend….your obsession with the so called 2% is becoming time worn and a non issue but I understand your position. Wanna a beer? I will drink with you. ( Except I have to have a Dr Pepper. I do not drink alcohol due to Agent Orange poisoning ). But I did issue you a challenge in my answer to USW. Hope you take me up on it….all in friendly interest of course.

      • Dr. Pepper’s on me, Colonel. Mine has to be diet … oy vey.

        I think I answered some of it below. My obsession with the 2%’s is genuine (and obvious, I agree). I do not believe anyone can earn the kind of disparities in income that currently exist under our system (capitalism). That is my belief. Greed is not good (in my opinion). No one “needs” to earn $2.4 million an hour (managing a hedge fund). That is immoral and evil when compared to people actually “working” (whether sweeping the floors or lifting sheetrock all day). I do not believe in the BF/Ayn Rand paradigm that promotes greed. It doesn’t work (unless you were fortunate enough to either be born into wealth or had the opportunities to obtain it). I know there are instances of people who climb the social/economic ladder by hard work, but once they attain their “achievement”, they are no longer “earning” the bulk of their profits (other are doing that for them). This is my view and I know it’s abhorrent to most here, but the consensus on free markets here is pretty abhorrent to me.

        Say when on those Dr. Peppers … and if you’re ever on this side of Pluto (the planet, not the political spectrum), dinner at casa Stella (I make some mean eye-talian food).

        • Casa Stella sounds good…that gives me a captive audience but for a nice dinner…no politic or eligious discussions and I leave the raptors outside. They are not house broken. Know how hard it is to house break a Raptor? Very touchy proposition.

    • Richmond Spitfire says:

      Hi Charlie,

      Of course, I’m not in WI, but if I were, I would desire, no, INSIST that I get tax breaks, or better yet, massive reductions in taxes overall. What is wrong with that? (yeap…got my hardhat on too for the 2% granite boulders you’ll lob back).

      Why, should I, as a taxpayer, be held hostage to fund PENSIONS that are MUCH, MUCH better than my own (and believe me, as a non-union worker in the Corporation, I have a darn good benefit package)?

      I truly don’t have a beef with a person who earns a fair and sustainable wage as long as said person is competent in performing their job. I lived in PA for about a year in 1986 — I knew alot of “privatized” union workers and believe me, alot of them were mediocre in competence and being paid huge wages for jobs that they shouldn’t have been paid such huge wages for. For example…in 1986, I knew a woman who was working as a general laborer in the Steel Factory (ARMCO). Her job entailed menial tasks such as sweeping the floor and cleaning the facility. That year, she made $38,000. Doesn’t seem like a great deal now, but it was a great deal in 1986. How on earth can a company realize a profit when they are paying $19/hr to a person to sweep floors??????????

      I also remember, that your chances of getting hired at a union job were slim to none unless you “knew” someone or were “related” to someone…Phew…major cronyism!

      Unions (Private) ARE the reason that America has lost most of its manufacturing to overseas or near-shore workers; which has tremendously helped to this economic state that we are in — it all converged to be a ‘perfect storm’. I bet that there are a bunch of out-of-work manufacturing workers from the ’80’s and ’90’s kicking themselves in the butts for what they did (that is, if they have enough common sense to figure it out).

      This whole UNION business is totally out-of-control.

      Best Regards and well wishes,
      RS

      • How on earth can a company realize a profit when they are paying $19/hr to a person to sweep floors??????????

        Why doesn’t it bother you that the CEO of the same corporation might take home as much as $1 million, then give himself another $1 million in bonus? Why aren’t you as outraged at Wall Street for how they used gov’t. I’m not talking about the lip-service here at SUFA to the bailouts (when I already proved BF (at least) was fine and dandy with those bailouts). $700 billion is somehow less than what the WI public worker unions asked for (after ceding to the Gov’s demands). Why doesn’t it bother you that your tax dollars went to provide record bonuses to CEO’s who bankrupted the economy? I don’t get it. It seems most here are more than content getting screwed by the 2%’s (actually defend them) when they are the ONLY ones doing fine and dandy through all of this mess.

        I also remember, that your chances of getting hired at a union job were slim to none unless you “knew” someone or were “related” to someone…Phew…major cronyism!

        I was a union member for 10 years and you’re exactly right. So, why not reform unions and the political system so they can’t be as easily corrupted? Why not mandate that pols and union officials earn no more than the workers they represent (and talk about sweet heart benefits–see what Congress gets for one term of service–lifetime health and a pension). And please don’t forget it is the pols who play a major role in corrupting unions (as do all the lobbyists of big business in DC), so let’s try and be a little fair in this. I’m all for reforming unions (public and private) … no more tenure, etc., but … let’s not forget they aren’t rich people we’re dealing with.

        Unions (Private) ARE the reason that America has lost most of its manufacturing to overseas or near-shore workers; which has tremendously helped to this economic state that we are in — it all converged to be a ‘perfect storm’. I bet that there are a bunch of out-of-work manufacturing workers from the ’80′s and ’90′s kicking themselves in the butts for what they did (that is, if they have enough common sense to figure it out).

        Oh, so it has nothing to do with big business seeking bigger profits from an overseas workforce? It’s only union jobs that were outsourced? Buddy, I just lost 2 jobs to outsourcing. TWO. I can’t find work anymore in my industry and trust me, there’s no unions in word processing. Explain that one away. Why not just keep taking down the workforce by offering jobs to the lowest bidder (sarcasm intended). Then the owners can “earn” even more profit!

        USW mentioned wrote this: After all, we know there are some crooked corporations out there (although I maintain they are the exception rather than the rule).

        I guess what Goldman Sachs did (one of the largest of the culprits, if not the largest) doesn’t qualify as corrupt, huh? How about AIG? Enron ring a bell? Are yous kidding me?

        • Charlie asks: “Why doesn’t it bother you that your tax dollars went to provide record bonuses to CEO’s who bankrupted the economy?”

          D13, the unknowing Colonel responds: ” It bothers the hell out of me and I did what I coud do and we are electing people in Texas that do not think like that (we hope). I abhor the companies that took the bailout money and pumped their balance sheet and got rid of their bad loans to another government agency that is tax supported. That was stinky bullshit and I admit it and hate it. (Can I have some Toscana Soup at Casa Stella, now?)

    • Truthseeker says:

      I am trying to understand how you come up with your conclusions. As USW has pointed out, this is the Information Age. There are far more independant workers and self-employed workers than what existed 10 years ago. It is FAR easier to quit a job and create your own versus having to be a “slave to wages” person.

      And you know very well that 2 evils do not make a write. Pointing out that Unions are currupt but so are the Politicians does not gain you any ground. You forget that TAXPAYERS are funding the Public Unions. Not Politicians.

      I find it funny that you think that a JUST passed but not ENACTED law by WI somehow bankrupted the state. Those laws do not take place until the end of the year. Where are you getting your facts? Tax breaks has shown over history to increase buisness for EVERYBODY and also increase revenues for Government. Taxes stifle productivity.

      You also forget that 2% of the wealthiest spend money which in turn creates jobs. If there is no demand, there are no jobs. You better believe that if they stopped spending money and donating to Chartiy, there would be a huge impact to the economy and to the poor.

      You also seem to forget that we are in a Global world. You can now create your own e-commerce website selling goods made in China. There goes your theory about inequalities between who owns the means of production and the ones actually “earning” their profits. You also seem to take out the fact the it takes SIGNIFICANT investment to even get a company started that does produce goods. How Naive can you be?
      Talking about being narrow sighted.

      • It is FAR easier to quit a job and create your own versus having to be a “slave to wages” person.

        So, what, the effectively 20% of those unemployed today are just slackers? I worked 6&7 days a week (shifting between nights weekdays and days weekends) and lost both jobs to outsourcing over a 3 year period. My industry has been effectively outsourced; salaries dropped 15-20K across the board while those we worked for (investment banks/law firms) rose absurdly (the correlations between the lower union membership and the disparity in incomes; 2%’s vs the rest of us) isn’t a coincidence.

        Have to get some writing done … more later.

    • USWeapon says:

      C’mon Charlie. Even you can’t believe what you are saying here. Tax breaks enacted by Scott Walker bankrupted the state of Wisconsin? Christ, he has only been in office for 3 months!

      You also put forth a common falsehood in terms of union membership. The claim that union membership is down because of manufacturing jobs going overseas. That doesn’t hold true, first of all when we look at percentages. 20 years ago 40% of manufacturing workers belonged to unions. Today only 15% do. That isn’t about manufacturing going overseas. That is a result of people choosing not to be a member. And I would say that one of the primary reasons that manufacturing has gone overseas is BECAUSE of the unions (with a healthy does of too much government regulation and taxation thrown in to boot).

      You are reaching, and in my opinion, relying too much on the union talking points. They don’t square up with reality.

      I will leave my discussion of the “2%ers” for another day.

      Hope you and the Mrs are doing well sir.

      USW

      • Hope you guys are doing well, also. Hi to the Mrs. We may be neighbors in a few years (socialism south)?

        USW said: And I would say that one of the primary reasons that manufacturing has gone overseas is BECAUSE of the unions (with a healthy does of too much government regulation and taxation thrown in to boot).

        Most outsourcing today are non-union jobs. Mine, included. (just lost my 2nd job to outsorucing and am now effectively unemployed and should I find another opening, it will be at 15-20K less than what I was making; my jobs weren’t replaced–just sent to India). Why the wife went and became an RN and I’m headed back to school for a masters so I can teach.

        Unions are being vilified for no other good reason than to deflect where the real blame belongs (the disparity in incomes–the dramatic increase over those same time spans that union membership decreased–how much more wealth is controlled by the top 2%.

        I know about the corruption; remember I was a member and I agree with a lot that needs reforming (not destroying). No more tenure for teachers is more than fine with me, but … let’s not claim teachers and the like bankrupted the state (Wisconsin, in fact, had a surplus when Walker became Gov.; he immediately issued tax breaks that produced a deficit. The unions caved and accepted his proposal. It is union busting and for what? It sounds to me (from what I get here at SUFA) as if all employers should just bid out jobs to the lowest takers and increase profits for the owners. Statistically, we’re getting there (the disparity between 2%’s and workers).

        That is evil … immoral … and makes us slaves to wages.

    • Charlie,

      The inequities between those who own the means of production and the ones actually “earning” their profits is disagraceful, immoral and evil (so take that BF).

      As you are economically and socially ignorant I expect you would be terribly confused here.

      The works got their money – they traded their time and effort for profit right now – that is what a “wage earner” does. He does not want to wait around until the product is sold to get paid.

      The owner does exactly that – pay out those that want to be paid right now and is willing to wait until the product is sold before he sees his “profit”.

      But because you very confused, you want to screw around with this – that is reward short term time preferences with the profits earned by those that delay their satisfaction.

      If your system ever got in place, the economy would implode.

      • If your system ever got in place, the economy would implode.

        Except it doesn’t and hasn’t or there would be ANY socialist economies anywhere.

        Yours works for those who with advantage (whether earned advantage or otherwise). There is NO agreement for the majority of workers to accept wages; they do so out of need; what capitalists need (that advantage) to “earn” their profits.

        I’m amazed at how economically and socially ignorant you really are, BF. Stunning, really.

        What you promote is immoral and evil and democracy will sooner or later take it down.

        And that is a beautiful thing …

    • Hello Chuck, Or should I just call you the “Hammer & Sickle Guy”?

      You like Communism so much but you say to “reform” the unions? You just will never figure it out that unions are about the biggest display of Communism outside Communist China in the world today!

      In case you haven’t noticed yet – and I doubt that you ever will – Something that is run by a dictator can never be reformed. Case in point; AFL-CIO (maybe a better example is Libya since both are run by a corrupt dictator).

      Question; If Capitalism is soooooo evil, then how did we become (at one time in our recent past) the richest and most technologically advanced nation on this planet? (we lost that edge with the implementation of Obama’s “idiocracy” that has displaced freedom and democracy in this country).

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Charlie,

      Wisconsin was broke LONG BEFORE Walker took office, so your claim that the tax breaks he enacted upon taking office are the reason the state is broke are just flat wrong.

      Also, the government is SUPPOSED to be a tool of ALL OF THE PEOPLE. Your admission that it is a tool of the 2%’s is a flat-out admission that it is working NOWHERE NEAR as intended by the people who originally designed it.

      Finally, even some VERY prominent past Democrats (FDR, JFK, and several others) fully realized that you cannot have unions with collective bargaining rights running the government bureaucracy. Government workers are paid for by the taxes of the people (or at least that was the original intent, and is still true for State and Local Governments). In a “free” society, you cannot have workers with bargaining “rights” to bargain AGAINST the taxpayers, who are the ones who fund the government. If even FDR and JFK realized that “public employee unions” were anathema to America, that speaks volumes.

      So, thing #1, go back and actually look at WHEN Wisconsin went broke, and WHY Wisconsin went broke, so you can get it right. State Taxes in Wisconsin approach 10%, while State Taxes in Indiana are 3.5%, and the economies of the two States are relatively similar. Wisconsin, with nearly 10% State Taxation is broke. Indiana, with 3.5% State Taxation still has a surplus (although not nearly as large of a surplus as it had before the “great recession”, but a surplus nonetheless.

      When Mitch Daniels took office (6 years ago) he banned two of the unions that “represented” State Employees. This was done without much fanfare, without much reaction, and without much “suffering” on the part of State Government employees. State Government employees in Indiana still make decent wages, and still have far better benefits than their private counterparts, in spite of the fact that the majority of them are no longer allowed to unionize.

      The reason that Indiana is having such difficulty with our Democratic State Representatives right now, is that Daniels is trying to “break” the remaining unions that represent public workers (including teachers), and the Teachers Union is (of course) a giant “sacred cow”.

      The fact that you realize that Obama is only interested in the 2%s is correct, he is no different from any other President in modern times in that respect, which makes him yet another shining example that our government has strayed FAR OH VERY FAR INDEED from how it was originally designed to operate.

  2. Good Morning, USW. You wanted to hear from those that wish to preserve public unions so I guess there is not too much to say. I, like you, get tired of all the rhetoric of sweat shops, child labor, management hit squads, etc. The labor movement, as it is called, had its place and had its day. I find it very hypocritical to hear from the left that the “progressive” movement is a work in progress and we must forget the past to get to the future…and in the same breath, bring up the past to prove their point of keeping something that should go the way of the dinosaur. That is hypocrisy at its finest and these arguments lose me pretty fast. The left constantly cries about hate speech and scare tactics that the right does and then in the same breath uses hate speech and scare tactics to prove their point . ( Example: Without unions, we will have child labor and sweat shops all over again). All clear thinking people will debunk this as hogwash.

    Lest we forget, labor unions began in the private sector not the public sector and later expanded to the public sector. Now, the issue of all of this in Wisconsin, is not an attack on labor unions in the private sector, it is a rightful “assault” on the control that labor unions have in the public sector. They scream collective bargaining when there is NO collective bargaining. In fact, there is no bargaining at all. In the private sector, it is real easy to lay out a balance sheet and show the effects of raising prices and raising costs to the company. In the public sector as you have pointed out, there is no accountability and there is no competition. I will also be the first to admit, that in the collective bargaining arena, it takes two sides to agree. In the private sector, comapanies have a responsibility to whom? Themselves and their stock, if publicly traded and their competition. In the public sector, the government has a responsibility to whom? No one and let’s not kid each other, they do not have a responsibility to the taxpayer, even though it will be claimed that they do. We all know his to be a pile of crap.

    The biggest issue that I see and the biggest pariah to any state is the issue of closed shop versus open shop and the right to work. I would like to hear from the left on the issue of the right to work? Why is it ok to “force” someone to pay the equivalent of union dues if they do not wish it or have a rule that you MUST join the union in order to get and keep work. It is no secret that the states that have the greatest growth and the lowest unemployment are open shop right to work states.

    President Reagan got it right back in the 80’s. He fired the air traffic controllers and rightly so. The governor of the State of Wisonsin needs to have the same set of cast iron balls that Reagan had.

    However, in collective bargaining, it still takes TWO sides to agree to something and the chicken shit politicians that sold their souls to the unions for a vote and money should be the ones fired and their pensions taken away. I would like to hear from the left the justification of raising taxes to keep these golden parachute pensions going. Please do not compare the private sector issue to the public sector because that is like comparing roses to bullshit.

    It is my opinion, that collective bargaining belongs in the private sector. It does not, with any justification, belong in the public sector where the real bosses, the taxpayer, has no jurisdiction and no say so excpet the ballot box. The State governors that are fighting the closed shop issue and the right to work issue are correct. All contracts and public employees must fall within the budget and if the money is not there, you do not raise taxes….. you fit within the budget. I think that California, Illinios, New York, New Jersy, etc., can testify to what higher taxes are doing to their states.

    So, in the issue of collective bargaining in the public sector, someone from the left please justify two issues for me. Justify closed shop status and justify the refusal of the right to work.

    Good article, USW.

    • D13

      Good morning Colonel. I hope you had a great weekend.

      Point of order my Texican friend:

      “In the public sector, the government has a responsibility to whom? No one and let’s not kid each other, they do not have a responsibility to the taxpayer, even though it will be claimed that they do. We all know his to be a pile of crap. ”

      Remember that in the Law of Politics, Law #1 is that those you MOST represent are the ones who DONATE large amounts of money AND who WORK for your election.

      So you see, the public employee unions who donate almost exclusively to the Democratic Party are sitting across the table negotiating with the Democrats they helped elect.

      Public Employee Unions are immoral.

      I can not put it any simpler than that.

      Calves are starting to drop. Some got lucky and fell between storms, others not so much. Another bitter cold snap here could hurt big time. Hope the hills of Oklahoma are warmer.

      Best to you and your family.

      • Yo JAC….yeah…that sentence needs to be expounded upon..but you corrected it. THat is what I meant to say…thank you.

        Calf drop is horrible in storms….we are expecting a 72% calf drop this spring (out of 3778 momma cows). Not a bad calf drop but could be better. Our pastures are a little big and the bulls just do not get around to all of them. But we are watching closely….we lost 27 calves when the last storm blew through…temps got to 22 below in the Arbuckles.

    • I can atest to what taxes are doing in CA. Gov. MoonBeam is asking us to continue the temporary tax increase for another 5 years. If that gets on the ballot there will be a continuous run of union ads to support it as there was 2 years ago to implement the temporary tax increase. Unions, esp. the teacher’s union, run continuous ads for more money year around. The amount of money spent is staggering. Often they call for pressure to be put on the Rebubs to cave into the spending habits of the Dems. We need drastic restructuring of the state government here with elimination of overlapping responsibilities and elimination of many functions altogether. I hope Brown’s request for taxes gets voted down. We need to force the issue as in WI.

  3. I have seen unions actions being job killers, which is the popular view in the south. Most people would rather have a job than see unions drive companies away. Why is there a “rust belt”? Companies have been shifting to non-union areas, or to a different country, because of unreasonable union demands. GM passing $3,000 per vehicle to pay union mandated benefits was not sustainable. I wonder what it cost per kid for teacher benefits?

    “That one of the most fought against ideas is the elimination of automatic dues collection says a ton about where the unions stand at this point. ”

    Sure does, if members will not pay their dues without it being withheld from their paycheck. It’s set up so they cannot not pay their dues. Kinda takes the volunteer out of voluntary.

  4. I have seen unions actions being job killers, which is the popular view in the south.

    The south needs to open its eyes … most of the jobs being outsourced today are NOT union jobs.

    So much for that argument.

    • Charlie,

      Funny thing, you never hear about someone retiring and moving to the north? Is NY going to have to ship it’s students to NJ for the savings in expenses?

      “The south needs to open its eyes … most of the jobs being outsourced today are NOT union jobs. ” Someone needs to open their eyes….”Who is John Galt?”

      Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/03/06/nyt-if-public-employee-costs-arent-reined-new-york-wont-be-able-provi#ixzz1FvSyd6Uz

      At a time when public school students are being forced into ever more crowded classrooms, and poor families will lose state medical benefits, New York State is paying 10 times more for state employees’ pensions than it did just a decade ago.

      That huge increase is largely because of Albany’s outsized generosity to the state’s powerful employees’ unions in the early years of the last decade, made worse when the recession pushed down pension fund earnings, forcing the state to make up the difference.

      Although taxpayers are on the hook for the recession’s costs, most state employees pay only 3 percent of their salaries to their pensions, half the level of most state employees elsewhere. Their health insurance payments are about half those in the private sector.

      In all, the salaries and benefits of state employees add up to $18.5 billion, or a fifth of New York’s operating budget. Unless those costs are reined in, New York will find itself unable to provide even essential services.

      • In all, the salaries and benefits of state employees add up to $18.5 billion,

        And TIME reported a few weeks ago that ONE hedge fund manager was earing $2.4 million PER HOUR.

        Are you kidding me? He pushed a piece of paper, signed something and then tapped his keyboard a few times and $2.4 an hour? Is that really “earning” his way? And you want to demonize the poor SOB’s trying to make a living.

        Keep defending the 2%’s … see how much they support you when a depression hits. That’s when they’ll flee the country, my friend. Their money is gone at the touch of a button already, but physically they’ll leave you waving your flags in their private jet exhaust.

        • USWeapon says:

          OK…. first I want a source for someone making 2.4 million an hour. And then I will point out that some ridiculous anamoly isn’t really an argument that will win folks to your cause.

        • Excuse me Charlie,

          “New York State is paying 10 times more for state employees’ pensions than it did just a decade ago.” So this is OK? In ten more years it will be $185 billion. Nothing to worry about.

          “ONE hedge fund manager was earning $2.4 million PER HOUR. ” So you can’t defend your position, instead attack someone else. OK, have it your way, take all his money. You still have not addressed the issue, unrestrained spending. And hedge-guy has fled after your mob robbed him. Goldman Sachs relocated to Switzerland, doing business same as always. They have a small office in Texas to funnel campaign donations thru.

          And now that you have run out of other peoples money, you still have to pay off that hungry union. Sorry your taxes are going up another 12%. And just what is it you are defending?

          http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/rubber_room_dirty_old_man_t4OA6Bw25idPYynCnVJHyO

          Yep, keep taking that baby’s candy.

    • Charlie…you say “The south needs to open its eyes … most of the jobs being outsourced today are NOT union jobs.”

      Could it be that most of the Union jobs have already been outsourced? Mine surely was…in 1985.

      • Terry, if just 7% of jobs in America are union today and just 30-40% at the height of union power, something smells rotten in Denmark. White collar positions are NOT union positions and they are the ones fleeing the states in bunches these days. Some capitalists are going so far as outsourcing out of major cities to states where they can get away with saving $20K on a normally $60K salary (i.e., New York to Virigina) for the same job because of the increase in profits that are already absurdly high. So, by keeping the jobs in the states, they are technically not outsourcing; just displacing workers (workers vs. workers–neat trick). How can you not see the unfairness in how workers are treated in this system?

        When Newsweek put out an article last year claiming that real estate is no longer the American dream because young couples are now renting so they can move with their jobs, it said a lot more about the disparity in incomes than it did about the foundation of (sarah palin quote) “this great land of ours”.

        It’s immoral … evil … and undemocratic.

        • I don’t agree. If a business owner moves his business to another state to avoid the staggering wages that a union imposes upon him (and higher taxes some states impose), I consider it smart business. I do believe that businesses are in business to make a profit. If unions and states impact that objective negatively, then moving is smart business. Just because a business started in a particular state or area, does not mean that they are bound by any presumption to remain there. Of course, this is my opinion.

    • USWeapon says:

      Correct…. The vast majority of union jobs were outsourced a long time ago. That explains why they are not being outsource today. What is left CAN’T be outsourced (police, fire, teachers, etc.). And in the private sector, there are few union members left to outsource (as mentioned previously, only 15% of manufacturing is any longer unionized). You can’t outsource what is no longer there.

      So much for that argument.

      • Outsourcing was being used for another example (white collar outsourcing of jobs that have nothing to do with unions — jobs considered middle class– gone).

        All the more reason for unions if their numbers are so declined (public workers); or they are at the mercy (like the rest of the workforce in a capitalist system) of those above them. Taxpayers don’t seem to take the same issue across the board as many of you do here. You’re a strong voice for greed, but I don’t think it’s catching as more and more other middle class workers feeling the straing of disparities of income struggle to survive. Beating everybody down (taking their collective bargaining, pensions, heatlhcare, etc. away or their net income) only heightens the problem in the long run. Outside of lip service, do you complain with the same vigor about Congressman and their lifetime pensions/healthcare for serving a single term? Do you take issue with the CEO who “earns” multi million bonuses (often for bankrupting his company)? Seems to me you guys are fighting the wrong battle.

    • Rust, rust babay!

      Republican Reps. Mike Turner of Ohio and Dan Burton of Indiana are asking House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, California Republican, to dig into the Obama administration’s decision to cut more than 20,000 private-sector workers’ pensions and eliminate their health and life insurance plans during the General Motors (GM) bailout in 2009.

      A spokesman for Issa’s committee told The Daily Caller the committee “remains interested” and is “looking forward” to findings from an ongoing Government Accountability Office investigation, which is expected to come out within the next couple of months. What Turner and Burton are saying happened during the GM bailout is that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner decided to cut pensions for salaried non-union employees at Delphi, a GM spinoff, to expedite GM’s emergence from bankruptcy. The problem with that, according to the congressmen, is that Geithner decided to fully fund the pensions of union workers involved in the process – including workers associated with United Auto Workers, Steelworkers and the IUE-CWA.

      “This is a terrible injustice. This is a political decision, not a legal or financial decision,” Turner said in a phone interview with TheDC. “There were people who were penalized and people were chosen as winners and losers. The White House, the administration and the Auto Task Force (ATF) decided who were going to receive their pensions and who were not.”

      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/07/house-oversight-committee-likely-to-investigate-why-white-house-treated-non-union-employees-worse-than-union-employees-after-gm-bailout/#ixzz1Fva3pYfw

  5. A related topic…..for you, Charlie. Your man, Obama, has just signed another 174 waivers to the mandated health care….that is 1,144 waivers………..92% of them to unions…with the SEIU getting a majority of the new waivers. Want to know why people get upset? This is why. You should be very upset at this. It is directly related to how people feel about unions.

    • USWeapon says:

      Excellent correlation Colonel! Indeed, the reason why the public unions will end up getting so little support from the general public is precisely things such as this. We see them getting sweetheart deals from government, in this case from the top cahuna himself. Then they attempt to make us feel sorry for them that their benefits may be cut. The special treatment given to unions, primarily because of the size of their political donations, have caused them to be ostracized from the general public. And rightly so.

    • Colonel, now you know he’s not my man. I can’t stand Obama … way too right wing for me, brother. And you guys should be cheering him on … because of all that Tea Party influence, he’ll be your president the next four years after 2012. Yous need to thank Sara …

      As for the “bone he’s throwing unions” after turning his back on those in WI, you must forget that I’m for Universal health care, not Obamacare …

      And I agree that union member should be pissed at their union leaders (not that non-union workers should be pissed). the leadership is every bit as corrupt as Government Goldman.

  6. Bottom Line says:

    If your boss isn’t treating you right, approach him/her and address the problem.

    If it doesn’t get resolved, find employment elsewhere.

    Real simple.

    I still cannot see the use for a union. For me, a union equates to just another useless deduction from my paycheck.

    Every time I’ve been at a job interview where I’m told about a union and/or dues, my first question is whether or not I can opt out. If the answer is no, I immediately ask if my paycheck will include reimbursement for union dues in addition to my regular pay. If the answer is no, I walk.

    The bottom line is X pay for X amount of work. Either it’s worth it or it isn’t. Everything else is secondary.

    Don’t take money from my check to pay for someone to represent me. I’ll represent myself.

    Don’t give me $500.00 worth of benefits per month, give me $500.00/month.

    …or don’t…

    I’ll just find a job where I don’t have a bunch of useless deductions.

    • USWeapon says:

      BL,

      Unfortunately, your mindset, which focuses on your own ability to provide for yourself when it comes to retirement and health care, is something that the majority of Americans no longer possess. Until the idea of personal responsibility makes a comeback in the USA, you will remain a minority.

      USW

      • Bottom Line says:

        USW – “Unfortunately, your mindset, which focuses on your own ability to provide for yourself when it comes to retirement and health care, is something that the majority of Americans no longer possess.”

        BL – I suppose my approach to benefits and unions is as much about practicality as it is about responsibility.

        Unions – I have no need for a union. Why should I pay for something I don’t need.

        Benefits – A living wage takes precedence. Ya gotta pay the bills. There are a lot of companies that expect workers to be happy with their sub-par wages because they offer excellent benefits. Can I pay my landlord with a discount on health insurance? Will the grocer give me free food because I have a good dental plan?

        I don’t work for non-negotiable BS…unless it is in addition to a reasonable wage. They might as well be offering me discount dildo coupons.

        As far as retirement goes, I’m up a creek unless I find some way to increase my income ten fold. When I stop working, I starve and go homeless.

        USW – ” Until the idea of personal responsibility makes a comeback in the USA, you will remain a minority.”

        BL – I’m in the minority alright. Boy are we in a heap of it.

        I think my mindset comes from a lack of options. What I mean is that I have been forced to be responsible as a means of survival.

        Most people don’t have the same push/motivation as I do.

        Life is fickle, especially when you’re poor.
        I’ve been poor my whole life. Only once has my annual income exceeded the poverty mark. In my world, being the least bit irresponsible with your finances could put you on the streets. You BETTER be responsible. You learn to make it count. You learn to prioritize. You learn to do without. You learn what’s REALLY important. You learn that people buy a lot of useless shit.

        Maybe people would be more responsible and self reliant if they didn’t have so many safety net type options.

      • The majority of Americans do not have the means to provide for themselves when it comes to retirement and health care … the rug is constantly pulled out from under them by those with the means to control things (2%’s). Bailouts, baby, bailouts … 401K’s took massive hits … healthcare costs continue to rise (thanks capitalism) …

        But health will eventually move toward a socialized paradigm (and not this weak crap Obamacare). That’s just a matter of time. It’ll be one more bone the 2%’s permit from fear of a revolution.

        • Charlie,

          healthcare costs continue to rise (thanks capitalism)

          Utter ignorance.

          Capitalism is why your computer today is more powerful and cheaper than 10 years ago.

          The reason health care is constantly becoming expensive is because of the Socialism methodology and its consequences.

          If you force others to pay for a good of someone else, the consequences are:
          (1) the former group spends a large effort protecting themselves from the latter group, which significant lowers their productivity.

          (2) the latter group, with no effort, has a gain. There is no reason for them to increase their productivity at all, since -to them- they got something for nothing

          (3) the good, being subsidized, has a price far lower than its value – thus, it will be consumed to exhaustion.

          (4) a good that becomes more and more scarce will exhibit one or both of these things: (a) increases in price (b) disappears from the market place ie: a shortage

          Your Socialist program is doing exactly what it will, whether you like it or not.

    • If it doesn’t get resolved, find employment elsewhere. Real simple.

      This must be what BF calls the “agreement” between the owners of the means of production and the workers who earn them all their profits.

      • Charlie,

        Yes, it is.

        Charlie, to you, voluntary agreement means that everyone must say “yes” to someone else’s demand.

        You cannot understand that “no” is just as valid.

        I do not need to agree to every bizarre demand you make of me just because you demand it.

      • Bottom Line says:

        Charlie,

        There IS another way to get what you want, without leveraging against your boss/company or stealing.

        You don’t HAVE TO work for someone that doesn’t compensate you properly.

        Win/Win is a mutually agreeable and beneficial situation. If it is not a win/win, or at least a win in your favor, then don’t agree to it. If it becomes non-beneficial to you, …stop.

        If it’s not worth it, …don’t.

        Real simple.

        • I own a factory and there are 1,000 men out of work and 20 jobs. I tell them I’ll pay $1.02 an hour. 900 tell me to take a hike but the remaining 900 still “need” to work. I tell them the wage just dropped to $1.00 an hour. Another 10 walk. The remaining 90 still “need” the job.

          See where I’m going or do you still refuse to see? It is inequity at its height … as well as the fact that I might have inherited the factory (nothing to do with “earning it” by the “sweat of my brow”) … Gramps worked hard, paid off a few pols and gave it to dad, who worked even harder, paid off a few pols and handed it to me. Unions were busted and I was left to “earn” my profit (and expand my business). Lots of people out of work, people who need to survive, I keep dropping their potential wages … my profit goes up (i’m a good businessman) … but somehow they “agree” to earn $.90 an hour.

          In the deathcamps in Poland some prisoners “agreed” to kill other prisoners in a similar manner.

          • Bottom Line says:

            Charlie,

            You don’t HAVE TO work for someone that doesn’t compensate you properly.

            Humor me for a minute while I indulge in a free market hypothetical with your factory…

            Standard wage for a skilled widget maker ranges from about $1.30 – $1.55/hr.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ pays unusually low wage of $.90 – $1.02/hr.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ doesn’t allow very much for wages in it’s budget, therefore it doesn’t acquire quality skilled employees, and it has a high turnover rate as most employees settle for the low wage as a “for now it’s better than unemployment, but I’ll continue looking for better pay” approach.

            This leads to an assortment of issues related to efficiency of the training budget, widget quality, productivity, general efficiency, drop in sales, etc…

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ has such a high turnover rate that it is now wasting money on company orientation/company training because it’s inexperienced employees leave before the training expenditure is cost effective/justified. The company budget suffers.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ has a hard time finding good widget makers that will agree to a lesser-than wage. They have to spend money to expand their efforts, like hire employment services and expand their job advertisements. The company budget suffers.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ won’t pay the wages that qualified skilled workers demand. Their product quality suffers. Malfunctioning and low life expectancy widgets become more common. Sales suffer.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ won’t pay much, resulting in a workforce that does not value their position much, which results in a lack of pride, care, and motivation in everything they do, resulting in a generally inefficient operation, resulting in higher expenditure for man hours, maintenance, etc… The company budget suffers.

            …just to name a few problems.

            Of the 900 people that told ‘Stella Widget Company’ to “take a hike”, a couple dozen of them put their heads together, acquired loans, and started ‘Acme Widgets Inc.’, and ‘Super Widgets Ltd.’ Starting pay – $1.35-1.40/hr., depending on qualifications and experience.

            ‘Acme Widgets Inc.’, and ‘Super Widgets Ltd.’ hire 200 of the 900 and start making quality widgets rather efficiently. Within a decade, they’ve established themselves, paid off their loans, hired 300 more people, and are now rapidly expanding and taking enough of the market to present well known long established ‘Stella Widget Company’ with fierce competition. They’re selling a lot of widgets.

            This makes things harder for ‘Stella Widget Company’. ‘Stella Widget Company’ is stubborn and won’t acknowledge issues associated with low wages. It makes futile attempts to increase profit in every way but identifying and fixing the root of the problem. It’s problems are exacerbated. It’s begins to falter.

            Meanwhile, ‘Acme Widgets Inc.’, and ‘Super Widgets Ltd.’ are experiencing exponential growth because they’ve made a lot of good decisions, including keeping a happy, qualified, efficient work force.

            ‘Acme Widgets Inc.’, and ‘Super Widgets Ltd.’ are now taking the majority of the market, and decide to merge.

            ‘The Acme Super Widgets Corporation.’ is born.

            ‘Stella Widget Company’ can no longer sustain to compete. It does not have room in it’s tight budget for competitive costumer service, warranties, delivery, etc…It cannot meet the bottom line and files bankruptcy. Charlie retires with enough money to live on in relative comfort and peacefully dies in his sleep of natural causes at a ripe old age of 107.

            Executives of ‘The Acme Super Widgets Corporation’ live wealthy and also die of natural causes at ripe old ages.

            Sons and daughters of executives of ‘The Acme Super Widgets Corporation’ inherit billion dollar corporation/family fortune and live well, reproduce, give to charity, die of ripe old age, leave inheritance, etc…

            Charlie’s son, the educated, extremely talented master widget maker, lands a good paying management position at ‘The Acme Super Widgets Corporation’…retires rather comfortably, dies naturally at a ripe old age, leaves children with solid foundation to succeed.

            Charlie’s grandchildren start a family business and build the very successful ‘Stella-Tech Widget Corporation’…

            Which within a generation, grows and merges with multifaceted multi-national conglomerate ‘The Acme Group’.

            Charlie’s great grand-children inherit a billion dollar corporation/family fortune and live well, reproduce, give to charity, die of ripe old age, leave inheritance, etc…

            ‘Acme Widgets Inc.’, ‘Super Widgets Ltd.’, ‘The Acme Super Widgets Corporation.’ ‘Stella-Tech Widget Corporation’, and ‘The Acme Group’ and all of the combined total of all money made and spent by employees and associates and all the research put into of widget tech throughout it’s/their history, ect… create residual wealth and technological advancement,… making a significant contribution to society.

            🙂

            • Hey, I like that.

              I think there are way too many assumptions in it (what rational thinking depends on, it seems) but if that’s the guarantee, I’d have to consider it.

  7. Re; Samuel Gompers, founder of the AFL

    from the Wiki……..

    Laurrell took Gompers under his wing, challenging his more simplistic ideas and urging Gompers to put his faith in the organized economic movement of trade unionism rather than the socialist political movement.

    Gompers later recalled:

    “I remember asking Laurrell whether in his opinion I ought to keep in touch with the Socialist movement. He replied, ‘Go to their meetings by all means, listen to what they have to say and understand them, but do not join the Party.’ I never did, though it was my habit to attend their Saturday evening meetings. There were often good speakers present and the discussions were stimulating. * * *

    “Time and again, under the lure of new ideas, I went to Laurrell with glowing enthusiasm. Laurrel would gently say, ‘Study your union card, Sam, and if the idea doesn’t square with that, it ain’t true.’ My trade union card came to be my standard in all new problems.”[14]

    Gompers complained that the socialist movement had been captured by Lassallean advocates of “political party action” rather than the “militant economic program of Marx.”[15] He warned delegates to the 1900 annual convention that when men became enthusiastic about socialism, “they usually lost interest in their union.”[16]

    Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……..socialist political movements weren’t “effective” enough at sticking with Marx. So use the Union movement instead. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm…………..yes I see. 🙂 🙂

  8. Unions, in of themselves, are neither a “good” nor a “bad” if they are voluntary associations of workers organizing in a free market

    But Unions today are not voluntary associations of workers nor do Unions today support a free market. Hence, they are doomed and good riddance.

    Unfortunately, your mindset, which focuses on your own ability to provide for yourself when it comes to retirement and health care, is something that the majority of Americans no longer possess. Until the idea of personal responsibility makes a comeback in the USA, you will remain a minority.

    This is a very complex issue and one borne of the tax system.

    With the graduated tax system, wage increases became a deterrent – a company could not attract top people because it simply couldn’t pay them enough.

    To satisfy the take home requirement of the earner, the payment -which most went into the pockets of government – were incrementally higher.

    Thus, came the modern era of “benefits”. These could be applied to the earners without invoking increases in tax rates

    Now we have a few generation of workers who assume jobs come with benefits external to their earning rate – that is “a freebee”. The problem is self-responsibility and self-understanding that it is not free, that it is part of your earning and as a worker you have to earn your benefits like you have to earn your salary.

  9. From Charlie earlier:

    A successful capitalist system is at best, equally a pipe dream … or you wouldn’t have the disparity we have now

    The problem with Charlie’s idea: that there must be equality in resources to all people regardless of their talent or effort.

    This is one of the greatest lies the Socialists offer – that no matter your talent or effort, you get the same stuff as everyone else.

    • Not at all, BF … you can still structure rewards based on effort and talent … you just don’t get to be king anymore.

      • Charlie,

        Go for it!

        Let’s here your about your objective measure of talent and effort for you to build some sort of social system about it.

        Are you saying that you know what I think is a talent?

        Are you saying that you know what I think is valuable??

        • The people get to decide, BF … you know, that’s what is absolutely giving you the hershey squirts; the idea that democracy would have a say in the economic system is terrifying to those who opt for the immorality of hording, the evil of capitalism, the dictitorial nature of owner vs. worker.

          You, sir, are the savage!

          I have to say, I like that spin on your spin.

          • I see, we are going to have a national election to determine what is “talent” and what is “value” for each type of labor within each type of business for the entire country.

            BRILLIANT

            Why didn’t I think of that………. 😦

  10. From Charlie earlier:

    Colonel, the capitalist system will not let the cooperative thrive; over time it will crush it via monopoly and or laws through its gov’t (and I think we all agree the 2%’s own the gov’t). It is the nature of capitalism to expand and crush competition (leaving the workers under foot).

    Capitalism at is basic operation is cooperation and only those that are ignorant of what Capitalism is could claim otherwise.

    It is a matter of keen cooperation to offer capital to an enterprise for that enterprise to use to buy goods and services for it to produce other goods.

    Monopolies cannot exist in a free market – they can only exist by writ of government. Charlie wants government – the cause of monopolies – to stop monopolies. Only people like Charlie could be so confused to call on the problem to solve the problem.

    • Capitalism dictates growth (greed). Only BF can hate government, yet cheer on the bailout for those who already have (vs. the have nots). Capitalism is a GUARANTEE of monopoly. A GUARANTEE. The nirvana you attempt to paint via the free market is no less idealism than is socialism. Both have corruption built into the system. Socialism treats more people more fairly. Capitalism favors the few over the many. END of STORY.

      • Charlie

        Capitalism dictates growth (greed).

        What a bizarre statement!

        All life grows or it dies.

        Charlie wants people to die.

        Only BF can hate government, yet cheer on the bailout for those who already have (vs. the have nots).

        You can lie all you want, but it won’t be true.

        Capitalism is a GUARANTEE of monopoly.

        Prove what is impossible, Charlie.

        The only way a monopoly can exist is if the government prevents entry of other player by FORCE

        Only government can make a monopoly, Charlie.

        Socialism treats more people more fairly.

        Socialism in wholly immoral as it justifies theft.

        It teaches people that stealing is a better means of obtaining resources then earning.

        Capitalism favors the few over the many.

        Each person is free to achieve whatever they want – and that means they are also free to NOT require the same physical wants as someone else.

        Charlie believes he can make that decision for other people.

        • You’re a liar face, BF. 🙂

          No, seriously.

          But forget that for now … I understand you have to protect your guise as someone opposed to all forms of Gov’t while secretly contributing to the Republican Party. No problem here.

          Only gov’t can make a monopoly? What a joke. Anti-trust was what, a thought after a night of peyote?

          Socialism will come to pass whether you like it or not … not in my lifetime, but it is inevitable. The common welfare in that great document from way back in the day … no mention of capitalism at all … just the common welfare. We want American back!

          • USWeapon says:

            Did I miss something somewhere? I have now seen you on several occasions over the last week or so claim that BF supported the government bailing out big banks and wall street. When did he switch to supporting that? I can’t recall seeing him do so, although admittedly I can no longer claim I find time to read every single comment.

            • That goes way back, USW. It was initially me poking sarcastic fun at the geniuses who bankrupted GM; he claims it was the unions; I say at the least it was 50-50 with management. Then I made fun of the other “geniuse bankers” on Wall Street who bankrupted the country (BF felt my use of geniuses was offensive so he asked me “genius charlie” what I would have done better in the GM situation. I told him if I were management I would have laid my cards on the table and said take it or leave it. BF then refuted (mighty happily). Great, Charlie, there goes 10% of the economy. From which I can only surmise he was all for the bailout since that’s what happened instead. He also insisted that the genuises on Wall Street were our best and brightest and couldn’t fail because of it. I said any asshole running a lemonaide stand could’ve bankrupted the country, certainly done no worse than the best and brightest. Recently he likes to say, “but it turned all right for those geniuses didn’t it?” … once again proving he was fine with the rich “taking/stealing” from the taxpayer via the government (he disdains so much) after all.

              He’s exposed … he doesn’t get to walk that one back … ever.

            • He didn’t.

              But as you can see by Charlie’s explanation, Charlie didn’t understand the discussion.

  11. A challenge to the left. I will become a union advocate….as soon as you give me the “right to work” and “open shop”. No one on the left has answered my question above. I will post it again in case some forgot..

    “So, in the issue of collective bargaining in the public sector, someone from the left please justify two issues for me. Justify closed shop status and justify the refusal of the right to work.”

    So……….here is your chance to have a convert.

  12. Charlie,

    The people get to decide, BF

    I have 5 people here who have decided that your book royalties belong to me.

    Fork it over, buddy.

    …and that is proof your vision of the world is perverse and sick. You want to keep all of yours, and decide for other people what they want to keep.

    the idea that democracy would have a say in the economic system is terrifying to those who opt for the immorality of hording, the evil of capitalism, the dictitorial nature of owner vs. worker.

    Democracy is rule by a mob and it is terrifying.

    There is no responsibility and it is married to a belief that all things are justified. That makes it the greatest risk for the greatest horrors delivered upon mankind.

    And it is no surprise to me you support it.

    • Democracy is rule by a mob and it is terrifying.

      Finally, thank you, BF. The world should be run on the dictates of one Ayn Rand. No thanks, pal.

      And I have no problem with royalties going anywhere so long as that concept is enacted across the board — why would I have a problem with that? What you offer is greed; immoral and evil greed.

      And one whacky broad (Ayn Rand) … we’ll take fairness and that socialist bride of the eye-talian guy (a true hottie).

      • Charlie,

        Finally, thank you, BF. The world should be run on the dictates of one Ayn Rand. No thanks, pal.

        The world does not need “anyone” to run it, Charlie.

        One day you will understand this Universal truth.

        And I have no problem with royalties going anywhere so long as that concept is enacted across the board — why would I have a problem with that? What you offer is greed; immoral and evil greed.

        Exactly. You will not agree to what you demand of others.

        Greed is not immoral, Charlie.

        What you have –envy– is evil.

        Greed is wanting more than you have.
        Envy is wanting what you neighbor has.

        Greed leads to productivity.
        Envy leads to theft.

        • How is it envy if we all have an equitable distribution? Oh, no, I’m only kidding. I don’t really want you to type up another diatribe of nonsense.

          Greed is evil. Just repeat that to yourself a few thousand times and you might start to get it. Greed is evil …

          • Charlie,

            Greed is evil. Just repeat that to yourself a few thousand times and you might start to get it. Greed is evil …

            You want more than you did yesterday.
            This is greed.
            You have defined your growth as evil.
            And you wonder why you come off so confused and contradicted.

            How is it envy if we all have an equitable distribution?

            Because you demand what your neighbor has. You do not want to earn it, you want to steal it. This is evil.

            And equitable distribution of evil does not make it good, Charlie. It makes it a great and terrible evil inflicted on everyone

            • Only if you look at the few unfairly/inappropriately holding all the wealth over the masses is it what you like to spin it as. We (the many) see it as a fair and equitable redistribution of wealth. I keep telling you (but you refuse to acknowledge it) that no one person can possibly earn (for example) $2.4 million an hour … impossible without it coming on the backs of the many.

        • The world does not need “anyone” to run it, Charlie.

          But democracy is terrifying so … what, it just runs? You don’t see the inequity in $2.4 million per hours vs. 32K a year so that makes it an “agreement” to work.

          Oy vey … that is greed, pure and simple and the $32K is the slave to his wage (because if he doesn’t take the job he has none). The crumbs thrown from above is preferable to you vs. democracy. Nice planet you live on.

        • USWeapon says:

          From BF: “Envy leads to theft.”

          Theft leads to anger.
          Anger leads to hate.
          Hate leads to the Dark Side.

          Confused, Charlie is, about the effects of his preferred path.

          • It’s only envy if one truly envies. When one is willing to share (the moral side of the argument), one probably isn’t very envious (how’s that for logic?).

            One who covets is greedy … simple enough.

            Greed is immoral. Greed, ultimately, is evil.

            I’m starting to like this Ayn Rand bullshit …

            • Charlie,

              One who covets what others have is evil.

              Me wanting an apple on a tree is greed.
              Me wanting your apple is envy.

              You are a man of great envy.

  13. Charlie,

    But forget that for now … I understand you have to protect your guise as someone opposed to all forms of Gov’t while secretly contributing to the Republican Party. No problem here.

    Lies on my behalf are still lies, Charlie.

    Only gov’t can make a monopoly? What a joke. Anti-trust was what, a thought after a night of peyote?

    Check your history, Charlie, and get back to me about when, why, and who is subject to Anti-trust legislation.

    As always – your understanding is so superficial, and you consistently make the same errors over and over again.

    Socialism will come to pass whether you like it or not … not in my lifetime, but it is inevitable.

    Socialism always dissolves into massive economic disaster and confusion.

    This has already been proven. It has many reasons, with the primary one being it has no way to make a price calculation.

    But since the proof is economic, and you know nothing of economics, you will not understand this at all, and will continue to promote disaster after disaster.

  14. Charlie,

    The world does not need “anyone” to run it, Charlie.

    But democracy is terrifying so … what, it just runs?

    What are you talking about???

    Democracy is a mob deciding that the minority are victims.

    You don’t see the inequity in $2.4 million per hours vs. 32K a year so that makes it an “agreement” to work.

    Nope.

    In your system, though I am a far better poker player than you, and win all your money – you demand that I have to give it back “so that we are equal”.

    To you this is fair.

    Nice planet you live on.

    Yes, it is beautiful.

    • ROTFLMAO………………………..

      I see your allocation of PATIENCE for the month is being consumed rapidly.

      Oh God my side hurts from laughing so hard.

      Best wishes my friend.

    • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

      As a word of support, I’m Canadian and you know how we are here!
      Most Canadians would classify Charlie’s universe as an absolute asylum; we’d also give Charlie plenty of free “medication” to help him through.
      Not even the “communist” NDP party in Canada would dare propose such an idea, and they ARE the lunatic fringe.

      For what it’s worth.

      • I wasn’t speaking to Canada anyway. No problem. You’re a bunch of wannabe Americans … or French, I’m always confused about that.

        • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

          Wannabe Americans?

          Guess again.

          We’re only about 20% French; they’re just the loudest complainers!

        • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

          By the way, when even Canadians truly dislike your view of social equalization….you’ve already lost.

    • In your system, though I am a far better poker player than you, and win all your money – you demand that I have to give it back

      It has nothing to do with talent, BF. When someone starts at an unfair advantage from pot luck/birth, etc., there is an inequity built into the formula that cannot necessarily be overcome by hard work/talent or anything else. As I said before (and you quoted out of context like usual … or completely went scared silly over the idea of democracy), there could exist structured wages based on effort/talent, etc., decided by democratic means rather than I have all the marbles so you play by my rules or else (which is exactly what we have now and it stinks). Again, nothing to do with envy, my friend, just an absurd inbalance built in by capitalism that cannot be fairly adjusted over time–only a more unfairly widened gap is the result.

      • Charlie,

        It has nothing to do with talent, BF.

        Of course it does!

        You do not understand talent.

        I am smarter than you. Does this mean if I use my smarts to make a better living then you, I have to give you half of it because you are dumber than a brick?

        I am more moral than you. Does this mean – because no one wants to deal with the immoral you – and thus, they want to trade with me, I have to give you half of it because you are an immoral man?

        When someone starts at an unfair advantage from pot luck/birth, etc., there is an inequity built into the formula that cannot necessarily be overcome by hard work/talent or anything else.

        You cannot measure fair.
        You cannot measure luck.
        You cannot measure planning and preparedness meeting opportunity.

        Since you have neither planned, nor prepare you believe those that do “must be lucky”.

        Your world view seriously distorts your understanding.

        As I said before (and you quoted out of context like usual … or completely went scared silly over the idea of democracy),

        Democracy is the very worse political system devised. It has been the maker of the greatest atrocities of man upon man.

        there could exist structured wages based on effort/talent, etc., decided by democratic means

        So JAC is right.

        You want everybody put to a vote.

        Egads.

        The reason I engage you, Charlie, is because every comment you make demonstrates the depth and perversity of your core philosophy.

        I am not trying to change you.

        I am warning everyone about you.

    • Democracy is a mob deciding that the minority are victims.

      Only if you’re a 2%, my brother. How convenient for you. If it ever truly takes hold in America, socialism is in and capitalism is history (and good riddance).

      Now, I have to get back to writing. I’m tired … rough day at the gym today.

      And of course you don’t have a problem with someone making $2.4 million an hour. You’re a capitalist. We say take that greedy SOB’s money and distribute it to those who need it. Let him “earn” what everybody else earns; what is possible. $2.4 million an hour is nothing more than evil greed. Nobody needs it. Nobody.

      • Charlie,

        And of course you don’t have a problem with someone making $2.4 million an hour. You’re a capitalist. We say take that greedy SOB’s money and distribute it to those who need it.

        Stealing my money and giving it to those that did not earn it only trains people to do nothing and expect something.

        Yours is a immoral, socially destructive pogram. It is unsustainable. It is evil for you require violence to steal the wealth and it is tyrannical because you believe you know what is fair for other people

        Let him “earn” what everybody else earns;

        Then you will suffer.

        Other people have given this man a million an hour. They did not need Charlie to tell them to do this or not

        It was their money, and they felt that this man was worth it.

        What Charlie thinks about this man is wholly irrelevant.

        It was not Charlie’s money.

        These people do not believe Charlie was worth a million an hour.

  15. Well it’s about damn time you got on to the WI situation USW! 😀

    It’s exhausting, it’s emotional, it’s very frustrating, it doesn’t appear to be coming to an end anytime soon.

    The closest thing the taxpayer has to a seat at the public union collective bargaining table is our vote. We finally, finally, did that in November and flipped both houses and the governor’s office and what do we get? A bunch of ethically challenged dem senators who decided to turn fugitive to allow for any unfinished union contracts to get signed.

    I’ve posted much already, but one area that has been most disheartening to me is just how dumb some teachers are. We are in challenging times financially and Walker is not willing to push the responsibility down the road to future generations, but deal with it now. I agree with this approach as I’d rather we take the hits now in the hopes that as a state, we can then right ourselves for a better tomorrow. The budget that has come out has significant cuts in spending all across the board. His buget repair bill and reducing PU (hey I like that acronym!) collective bargaining was so that when this budget hits each level of government, those in charge have some options at hand to make fiscal decisions.

    Again, this budget has big time cuts in many areas. I fully expect services to be cut (municipal wise) and changes to be made in our education system…..FINALLY! Will we have to pay $500 for our son to play football next year? Perhaps. We get it and our ready for it.

    But the teachers? I don’t know if they are really such non-logical thinkers or just need to play the game for the sake of protecting their interests, but the comments I hear from this group are ignorant at best. All options should be on the table – collaborations with area districts, collaborations with home schoolers, more online classes, elimination of classes that no longer serve a purpose (French language? – really, why? Who amongst grads uses this?)

    I realize I’m throwing a large group of people into one pot and that’s not (probably) fair, but it is amazing what this union mentally has done to some, what I assume, were one time creative thinkers.

  16. BF! Walk away~

    No one can persuade another to change. Each of us guards a gate of change that can only be opened from the inside. We cannot open the gate of another, either by argument or emotional appeal ~
    Marilyn Ferguson

    Charlie is guarding his “gate of change” tightly. Save your energies.

    • “everyone is looking for a solution……..”

      Homeschooling Rocks!

    • Love it! What a concept, to evaluate the success or failure and do something about it.

      For once it is about the kids.

      And the dems, unions will be out screaming “unfair” momentarily.

  17. SUFA

    I was going to hold this off for a separate discussion but it is probably time to lay it out there.

    How many have been wondering WHY the unions claim they have a RIGHT to collective bargaining? Obviously the concept simply doesn’t fit with our AMERICAN view of unalienable rights so how did this view come to pass and who was responsible?

    Heh, heh, heh.. Ya’l goin ta love this one..

    This of course also fits our prior discussions about “conspiracies” to change the world into the socialist utopia. From Da Wiki one more time……………………..

    “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (10 December 1948 at Palais de Chaillot, Paris). The Declaration arose directly from the experience of the Second World War and represents the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled. It consists of 30 articles which have been elaborated in subsequent international treaties, regional human rights instruments, national constitutions and laws. The International Bill of Human Rights consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols. In 1966 the General Assembly adopted the two detailed Covenants, which complete the International Bill of Human Rights; and in 1976, after the Covenants had been ratified by a sufficient number of individual nations, the Bill took on the force of international law.[1]

    The following reproduces the articles of the Declaration which set out the specific human rights that are recognized in the Declaration.

    Article 1
    All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

    Article 2
    Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

    Article 3
    Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person.

    Article 4
    No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

    Article 5
    No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

    Article 6
    Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

    Article 7
    All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

    Article 8
    Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

    Article 9
    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

    Article 10
    Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

    Article 11
    1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
    2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

    Article 12
    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

    Article 13
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
    2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

    Article 14
    1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
    2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

    Article 15
    1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
    2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

    Article 16
    1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
    2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
    3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

    Article 17
    1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
    2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

    Article 18
    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

    Article 19
    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

    Article 20
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

    Article 21
    1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
    2. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
    3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

    Article 22
    Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

    Article 23
    1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
    2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
    3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
    4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

    Article 24
    Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

    Article 25
    1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
    2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

    Article 26
    1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
    2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
    3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

    Article 27
    1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
    2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

    Article 28
    Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

    Article 29
    1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
    2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
    3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

    Article 30
    Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.”

    And if you don’t think left wingers wrote this stuff just notice the glaring number of CONTRADICTIONS embedded within the rights list.

  18. Charlie,

    That goes way back, USW. It was initially me poking sarcastic fun at the geniuses who bankrupted GM; he claims it was the unions; I say at the least it was 50-50 with management.

    I made the point that the “geniuses” were forced into a no-win.

    Either the Unions went on strike and collapsed GM or GM gave on their demands for the health insurance. If they choose the latter, the day of reckoning would happen 10-15 years or so later. GM management had 15 years for the US economy to tank so they could threaten the US government with the massive layoffs at a time when massive layoffs could not be sustained. They could have been sustained 15 years ago.

    Therefore, in the highstakes game – the GM guys were brilliant.

    Then I made fun of the other “geniuse bankers” on Wall Street who bankrupted the country

    Wall street did not bankrupt the country – hence your confusion.

    told him if I were management I would have laid my cards on the table and said take it or leave it.

    And I stated that then you would be responsible for the largest strike and subsequent bankruptcy in US history – which would never had happened. Charlie would have been tossed out management.

    From which I can only surmise he was all for the bailout since that’s what happened instead.

    And this is the basis of your lie.
    ..you surmise..

    You guess. And this is the extent of your proof.

    Cripes.

    He also insisted that the genuises on Wall Street were our best and brightest and couldn’t fail because of it.

    They didn’t, did they?

    I said any asshole running a lemonaide stand could’ve bankrupted the country, certainly done no worse than the best and brightest.

    Your arse doesn’t make millions of dollars, and no – you could not have done what they did, you are not anywhere in their league of stakesmanship and high risk finance.

    Recently he likes to say, “but it turned all right for those geniuses didn’t it?” … once again proving he was fine with the rich “taking/stealing” from the taxpayer via the government (he disdains so much) after all.

    That’s your proof? The fact that they did turn out right is your proof that I said something you made up in your head????

    You are one muddled mind.

  19. Charlie

    Only if you look at the few unfairly/inappropriately holding all the wealth over the masses is it what you like to spin it as.

    What right do you have to determine what is “inappropriate” amount of money in my wallet?

    Why do YOU get to determine this for other people, but you will not allow other people determine this for YOU?

    You are an ego-centric person – what is good for you, right now, is a good. And that is all you measure.

    Hence, your advice is very dangerous to other people.

    I keep telling you (but you refuse to acknowledge it) that no one person can possibly earn (for example) $2.4 million an hour … impossible without it coming on the backs of the many.

    Why can’t he?

    The “backs” of others have already been paid their money.

    That’s how it works, Charlie.

    If I hire you to make me a machine and you sell it to me for $10,000, and with that machine I make $100 million, why do you believe you have a right to my $100 million??

    • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

      Let’s present this to our resident socialist for comment.

      Why not have governor Walker take 50% of the pension fund of the public employees union and “redistribute” it to the private sector employees?

      That would be fair right?
      The union would be all for this, am I correct?
      I think they may protest even harder though

      • oooohhhh, DCU – Now I might buy into this redistribution concept.

        But wait, it’s my (taxpayer) money, so he would be giving me back my own money. Like when people feel so good about getting a tax refund! What?

      • Again, you guys kill me (all 12 or 15 or 18 of you–what an army!).

        This has become too boring for words. BF is your master; greed is his master. Trying to shovel shit is his game (and certainly too many here catch it way too willingly).

        He was for the bailouts but hates government (very logical–what an unconfused mind that is).

        SUFS (stand up for socialism) … cool, I likes it.

        • Charlie,

          You are displaying signs of insanity.

          • You’ve given me an idea – could Charlie Stella really be Charlie Sheen?

            • gmanfortruth says:

              No Way! He could be Michael Moore though. You know how authors use fake names!

            • IlliterateVagrant says:

              Charlie Stella IS CHARLIE SHEEN

              He is the only one “winning” amongst a greedy capitalist shit-eating community of “trolls.” Maybe if I invited hookers over for a crack party, Marxist Socialism would start to seem like a good idea.

  20. USW….off topic but you gotta love it. I just got off a conference call with a representative from the infamous Homeland Defense Department very irate that Texas is refusing to use non lethal force on the border in the form of rubber bullets and the bean bag (round). H was saying that the border patrol has been directed to use the non lethal projectiles and that if the Texas National Guard and its private security did not change over that Federal funding would be eliminated for crime fighting activities…… I laughed loudly and asked if that meant that the Federal Government would then be out of our business where we could get something done….for some reason, he did not think that very funny. He asked who made that comment (there were 18 of us on this conference call) and I could not resist shades of the Dirty Dozen and proudly answered D13. He did not think that funny either. ( I guess that as a comedian I would not fare well ). Anyway, the governor’s representative told him to take the Federal funds and put it where the sun does not shine (not in those exact terms, of course) and that we would continue our current course and not to waste money on non lethal projectiles. So…..no rubber bullets or bean bags for us……and probably no Federal funding but who cares…..as to my comedian career…..it was finished before it got started. Thought you woulp appreciate the avoidance of a SNAFU from the guv – ment.

    • Good for you and Texas!!!!! Not taking Federal money-as hard as it may be sometimes-is the answer.

    • When I first heard that beanbag story, I have to admit I wondered if we would have a SUFA posting on, “can beanbags kill?”

      Nice job D13!

      • Well, the bean bag travels about 300 ft per sec…..for about 90 yards. It can smart but it is not a deterrent….unless you aim for the head…..

    • Colonel, Texas may well be the model more states end up following – regardless of how painful it is.

      Good luck to you and the “revolutionaries” of Texas. 🙂

  21. Note:
    The federal government posted its largest monthly deficit in history in February at $223 billion, according to preliminary numbers the Congressional Budget Office released Monday morning.

    That figure tops last February’s record of $220.9 billion, and marks the 29th straight month the government has run in the red — a modern record

  22. Charlie,
    So the govt works for the 2%. I do not disagree, you can follow the money and see that. Perhaps not all of the 2% are involved in such a conspiracy, but certainly some are. This, however, raises some questions:
    1) Why should the government or any of its actions and policies be trusted if they are simply an arm of suppression wielded by the 2%?
    2) Why would you support public sector unions, which are workers carrying out the tasks of the government, which is controlled by the 2%? Would you not want to reduce the cost and power of this arm of suppression?

    • Jon…..quit it. You are being logical….the air is thin on Pluto and Charlie is adapting to his new life there….so cut him a little slack. Plutonians and logic are strange bedfellows.

      • Bamadad says:

        D13
        Here is another article on straw gun purchases going to Mexico. Have you heard anything else? This story even talks about a dead agent killed with a straw purchased gun.

        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110307/pl_afp/usmexicocrimegunsdiplomacy

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Here’s what I know of Operation Gunrunner. An agent was killed by a weapon(s) that the ATF were ordered to let be sold. THis fake investigation put ATF agents, aligned with gundealers who were cooperating, filming the transactions, with directives to let the guns go out the door. After the Officer was killed, A ATF (or border Patrol) agent blew the whistle on CBS News.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Sorry, wrong Ops name, it’s called fast and furious. Here are the details:

            http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2976/

          • gmanfortruth says:

            BREAKING NEWS: CBS News to air 2nd ‘Project Gunwalker’ segment and Grassley writes Holder again
            Be sure and tune into the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric tonight at 6:30 pm. And tell everyone you know.

            “An ATF agent tells CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson that he was ordered to sit by and watch guns get into the hands of criminals in Mexico,” CBS News reports.

            See the sidebar video for a preview of what we’ll see tonight, in what Attkisson says will be an “extraordinary follow up” to her first report which aired on Feb. 23.

            “We will hear from an insider,” she says, “who is telling us on the record and on camera, how it worked that thousands of guns were allowed to go in the hands of suspected criminals with ATF knowing that they would turn up in drug cartels in Mexico where they’d be used in crimes.”

            http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

    • Why should the government or any of its actions and policies be trusted if they are simply an arm of suppression wielded by the 2%

      This is where you guys get almost as boring as BF, but you have to pat yourselves on the back, I understand that.

      One would assume the gov’t would be replaced, oh logical one, in a socialist society. And without 2%’s to buy them back, the process of corruption would AT LEAST be lessed somewhat. But yous keep on trucking …

      Your 2nd questions is almost as ignorant as your first. Again, in case you still don’t get it, it would be a new government without all the inbred corruption capitalism fosters.

      • Charlie,

        e process of corruption would AT LEAST be lessed somewhat

        LoL!

        It sure would be – just like in Russia and China and Korea.

        Instead of corruption, you have men who believe slaughtering a few million of their own people is the solution!!!

        This is so common in Socialist/Communist societies because violent force is wholly necessary to steal goods from one part of society to give to another.

      • Not patting myself on the back, just questioning your thinking. I certainly would not mind having a whole new government.

        So, how would this come about? Revolution? Obviously we could not do it by just adding regulations via the existing bunch and somehow think they will do it correctly or suddenly give up power. So, how do you put in your new government and simultaneously take the wealth of the 2% and spread it around?

        Our current system certainly does foster corruption, I just don’t agree that the current system is capitalist, and I think that the government intrusion is the problem, not the freedom aspects. Still, we do agree that the current system is corrupt, so that is something.

        So, what say you? How do you create this socialist society?

  23. A little off topic but not really. A good look into the corruptive, coercive, destructive nature of lefty academic institutions, the politicians that control them. This is all just unbelievable. Anyone live out that way that can shed more light on it? (also note on last paragraph the work on opposing manmade global warming….hmmmmm).

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=271753

    • JAC you said you were heading west…Oregon? Anywhere near this?

      • Kathy

        Right smack in the middle of it.

        Although I’ll be in Portland not Corvallis, which is where OSU is located.

        Want to know the funny part in this article?

        OSU is the “conservative” university in Oregon.

        University of Oregon, in Eugene is supposed to be the hard core lefty school.

        I will be surrounded by both public and private universities that drip Progressive and that is “P” progressive, not “p”.

        • 😦

          My sympathies.

          • Thank You.

            I appreciate it very, very much.

            I will be looking to you all to keep me sane these next few years.

            I sent the story off to some folks I know over there to see what we can find out. Will let you know when response arrives.

            • My sympathies too JAC..still have a porch and chair with your name on it in south central Michigan, room for your family and dogs to boot! You just have to supply the employment!

              Just think..Portland can’t be as left as DC which was your other option..and at least there are still mountains & trees, just keep the umbrella handy! Then just live in denial til you can break free again.. SIMPLE 🙂

            • gmanfortruth says:

              JAC, The traffic is horrible. And it seem to stay that way all day and into the night. Wear a helmet and your seatbelt, Liberals stink at driving (no surprise there).

  24. 🙂 for comments (or I should say to “watch” the Charlie Stella Show with special rebuttal guest Black Flag).

  25. This is the kind of crap I don’t understand. The dems want to discuss this? Sure come on back and it can be discussed on the floor of the senate, as in debate, amendments, legislative process. The stuff you ran away from. And the governor is being unreasonable? These idiots want to save face and now it’s on the governor to do that? I do understand their need for security as the left will be vicious with them when they do return. But otherwise? You got no leg to stand on buddy!

    Wis. gov. rebuffs Democrats’ request for meeting
    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7460956.html

    • Kathy

      The lefty sites are all a buzz about their planned “recall” of the Governor and any R who voted for this bill.

      So what say you about its REAL chances?

      All they can talk about is that the Gov’s polling data is in the tank………blah, blah, blah.

    • I honestly have not seen any waffling on the right at all. I do think there are some “save face” issues and legitimate security issues for the fugitives once they come back. This Cullen has been mentioned a few times as wanting to figure out a way and has used the PG senator and the 83 year old as excuses too (probably very legitimate ones). Can’t imagine being on the lam in either case.

      There are some other issues in the bill that I heard could be modified, but nothing pertaining to collective bargaining was on the table. No sunsetting (bring back in 2 years time) etc.

      I do know of a couple unfinished contracts that have now been pushed through and a couple others that are still trying, but I wouldn’t think they’d continue to hide out waiting for every last one.

      • The polls, as usual, don’t mean much. The questioning/methods have been squashed in many of them, like polling heavy in households with union members, etc.

      • Here’s Walker address from today (he gives one almost daily). This is actually the most “mad” I’ve seen him and I like that his is calling out this Miller guy and getting the real story out there.

        So do the leaders of a caucus really have that much power? What would happen if someone just decided, screw this guy, I’m outta here?

  26. gmanfortruth says:

    Michael Moore Quote ““First and foremost, I am a socialist because I disagree with the Founding Fathers’ ideas on morality and the Rule of Law. It is important that we have a centralized government that redistributes all the wealth. The State needs to have the power to take some of the wealth away from those the State decides have too much of it.”

    Sound familiar!

    • I wonder if that includes his own wealth – he says he’s a multi-millionaire?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Of Course it would! Wonder what he would think of his grand plan when his no-longer rich ass is a Wal-Mart shelf stocker!

        • gmanfortruth says:

          It would really be funny if he found out his wealth was partailly paid to his boss at Wal-Mart!! HAAHAAHAA!

          • He’d have to give up that million dollar place in Manhattan, and his million+ dollar vacation home in Michigan, the private school his kid attend (who could get an average American education in public school), etc.

            Bet then he’d talk about how some had to be ‘exempt’ for the good of the country (in which group he would place himself). The ‘new’ socialist 2% (which would give 2% for Charlie to continue railing against. 😉 ).

            • gmanfortruth says:

              In other words, nothing changes! It stays the same, just like our Socialist President and his waivers for ObamaCare. Same 2%, different, more oppressive government. Great Idea!?! 🙄

    • USWeapon says:

      Telling statement. He disagrees with the “Rule of Law”. A sure sign that he doesn’t understand the Rule of Law one bit. Perhaps another article topic…. The rule of law as put forth by Hayek. I think that would be an excellent topic!

  27. Ray Hawkins says:

    @USW – sorry for my tardy response – was on the road all day returning from a weekend wedding in Virginia.

    I’ll offer that I was somewhat disappointed in your article. I was hoping for a well-placed logical argument from which both facts and examples would flow and help a centrist like me see your point of view.

    You offered some “feelings” on things (“I feel that the public unions are a drain on the economy with far too much ability to cost the taxpayers significant amounts of money with no recourse”) followed by generalizations of studies that propose to show something that other surveys somehow cannot or will not (this whole nonsense of “union workers” [in general] earn x % more than private counterparts).

    This whole conversation I find fascinating when I read stories on SUFA of how we celebrate and embrace the person who can slog through hellacious hours at the work place, hinting so slightly (or not) at not having time for this or that (which may be family-time, a hobby, working out, whatever); but then bemoaning (thanks JAC) the decline in morals/values in this country, the decline of the “family”, etc.

    With that in mind….an example

    Years ago, the County where I live saw several HHS-type County government departments unionize (e.g. Department of Children, Youth and Families). Many of these folks provide first line services to people in need. Example – big car wreck on the local highway – Mom and Dad die, kids live. Distant relatives exist but live on West Coast. Who does intake with the kids and find/give them a warm bed to sleep in, food, shoulder to cry on, etc? County CYF – that’s who.

    This County runs mostly GOP – the three Commishes are usually 2 GOP and 1 Dem. Budget has always been tight, credit rating always very good. They don’t “seem” to piss away money here. Not many were real happy about the union process. It not a 100% majority for the Departments that went that way. One of the major issues was over work week length. Standard work week for a County worker is 40 hours. Period. Informally, most all had a comp policy – you work overtime this week then you can bank x% of that time as comp time. Smart managers therefore run efficient operations so they don’t screw themselves with a workforce accumulating excessive comp time. Anyway – this didn’t apply in places like CYF – since these were often “caseworkers” their schedules were seen to vary too much and therefore there was no way for these folks not to work a 40 hr week (in practice, many of these folks were audited to be working easily 50+ hours per week). Top on that with ratio often being off (more cases than the caseworkers could ever logistically handle/manage), and there was a serious issue that needed to be addressed.

    Once all the bullshit rhetoric was removed both sides were able to collectively bargain to a contract that was fair from the perspective of what an average County employee could expect. They worked out a system to incorporate better work rules, a more standard work week, and the ability to stay closer to ratio and acknowledge/incorporate comp time. CYF employee are not rich by any stretch. A caseworker in the first 1-5 years w/o a Master’s must still work a second job or hope to have a well paid spouse to make ends meet. But at least there is a more fundamental fairness in place.

    With that in mind I cannot agree with what you have offered USW. Our County CYF does a helluva job with limited resources. They (and the others unionized) have NOT bankrupted our County nor will they ever. They have forced “management” to manage more effectively and professionally.

    I look forward to your response (perhaps you can use our former H.S. as a case study? Explain to the readership our former teachers should not have been unionized and how by them being unionized the things described herein have been proven as true?).

    Here is an article to get ya started:

    http://www.therecordherald.com/news/x678656670/Contract-talks-between-Waynesboro-Area-School-Board-and-teachers-union-dont-result-in-progress

    😉

    • Ray, based on what I have seen across the country I would say that your example is the exception. Anecdotal evidence does not disprove the general trend.

      It does, however, solidify the point that unions are not automatically evil. If they operate properly they are fine. Also, if the public sector actually stayed on a tight budget and remained fiscally responsible, then the negative effects of a public sector union is not really felt. They either do not get what they want, or the efficiency has to be up in order to meet their demands.

      The trend of handing out pensions and other benefits that are paid for later is definitely an issue tho. Perhaps the union in your county did not push for those things, or else the real bankrupting is being caused by other things and the union issues are a scapegoat for those who want to continue with the waste and the perks and the pork, so they put the squeeze on the unions thinking that people will cave, and if they dont at least the blame wont be on the wasteful politicians.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @Jon Smith

        There really isn’t anything backloaded at our County level. I’ll note an important distinction – this County does have a pension system – as far back as I am aware (mid 90s I think) they switched to a 401K system. The move ruffled a lot of feathers and this was pre-union.

        I did find your first comment odd – I haven’t read or looked at any comprehensive studies that examine unions from vertical (e.g. a teacher’s union) or horizontal perspectives (cross sectional impact on healthcare costs or bond ratings) – I am suspicious that not many here at SUFA have either and most of the opining is based also on anecdotal evidence or a loose collection of stuff read elsewhere. Nothing I have read on this article and responses is feeling as objective as it could be.

        And FTR – I could easily also write about very local situations where unions are really really really bad. Tis true they are mostly the private sector trade unions that exponentially increase the cost of doing business in Philadelphia. Not sure at all of any public-side unions.

    • USWeapon says:

      Sorry to disappoint, Ray. Just call it the way I see it.

      I am a little unsure of what you were looking for in terms of my not “generalizing” studies. I read a synopsis of a study that concluded with the numbers I offered. What more were you looking for other than that? Opposing studies? Different results?

      On the other hand, I think I laid out a clear picture of what I don’t like about the public union picture. Primarily, the fact that they control politicians who make a deal for increased benefits some time in the future that the taxpayer has no recourse in dealing with. The only answer in the end is some guy 20 years ago made this deal so we have to raise your taxes. That is an issue for me.

      Thanks for the excellent example of the other side of the coin in your area. I heartily applaud what was done there in terms of a fair and equitable deal being achieved. I have not looked deeper into the particulars of what you are talking about, but when was this compromise brokered? Did the deal include back end loading like so many of the public unions have gotten? That is a serious inquiry as I really don’t know.

      While it is an excellent example of how things CAN go, it isn’t necessarily exemplary of public unions as a whole. More representative of the perils of public unions would be the situations in states such as California, New York, Ohio, Wisconsin, etc. Back end loaded Collective Bargaining agreements have rendered those states cash poor. AS a worst case scenario we have Calpers in California as the poster child for the damage a public union can do to a state’s ability to fund itself. The reality, from my point of view, is that the public unions are not necessary to accomplish what needs accomplishing. On the contrary, they are wielding an excessive amount of power that is damaging to state budgets in the long run.

      I am glad you brought up our hometown as it is a good example. The sticking point mentioned in the article is that the teachers will not accept getting no raise over the three years in question. My last company gave no raises for the last two years. My current company is giving no raises this year. It seems to me that the rest of the working world is accepting these realities and working through them, but the teachers there refuse to do so. The school board came right out and said they cannot afford the raises. The teachers say we get raises or we strike. Mentioned in the article but not expounded on were benefits, which I assume take the form of pensions and health care. Again, I am willing to bet, although I could be wrong, that the teachers are being offered a deal that is better than many private workers get, much like what is happening in Wisconsin. Yet that isn’t good enough. The public union demands a better deal than the rest of us get. How is this an argument FOR public unions? Perhaps I am misunderstanding?

      I am sure that my article didn’t go far enough in explaining what I think. But I figure I am willing to expound and answer questions in the discussion to do so. So what is it that you want to know? I think I am pretty open to all ideas, including learning more about what happened with CYF in Philly.

      USW

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @USW – answering in different threads here…..

        CYF in my County does not have much backloaded at all. An important distinction is that this is not a pension County. Everything is 401 and has been for some time. Anyone still on a pension system should have their heads examined – they are unsustainable and rob the individual of investment freedom. The preponderance of the issues were work-related. But here is the kicker – I am certain that had better management been in place the Union push would have never succeeded. I can validate today that the unionized social services employees in this County are NOT getting rich. They have better working conditions and everyone is relatively happy.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @USW – I wasn’t trying to smack you down on the article – merely was hopeful I’d see something with more substance and objectivity than what was offered.

        If a major issue is benefit backloading then let’s look at something empirical and assess whether that is really true or not – us simply saying we feel that is true or believe it is true without something substantive to back it up makes it feel empty. If that is really the case then I for one really want to know that – it would significantly impact how I perceive public-sector unions.

        Please understand that I am no shill for public unions. I believe the utility for union is far different and more narrow now than ever. My ears do perk up when I hear a Chris Christie say, effectively, “bring on the unions, I LOVE collective bargaining” (oddly, more and more I am liking this guy. He at least has the nads to address damn near anything).

        So when I read an article that blames the Unions for any budget mess I get very skeptical. Extreme steps for remediation, imho, tend to result in equally severe responses either in short or long term.

        So anyway – if the article remains “as is” then so be it. It just didn’t go far enough to offer compelling evidence to sway I think.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @USW – last response (whew!)

        Hometown – I was hoping there’d be more to the article to help us on the outside looking in. A few things I’d add commentary-wise……

        (1) Their wages are “said” to lag behind many others locally (don’t know if that is true or not)

        (2) I don’t often travel through that neck of the woods – but I can describe the area as having grown like a weed with a lot of nice, big houses. I’m having trouble believing the tax base is not there. I can believe it if they haven’t managed that base well. For years there was a stink that many of the grand old homes in the Borough were taxed at an assessment that was last updated in maybe the McKinley administration – many of these home had newer younger families in them (often descendants of the original owners) while other families that moved into newer construction outside the borough were slammed with pretty hard assessment rates and tax bills.

        (3) I was hoping you’d reflect more on your experience there and whether the aspect of your teacher’s being unionized affect your education, the economic well being of your family, etc. My perception was always that we have a “decent” or “good” education and that the taxes we paid into that did not place us in a disadvantaged state, nor bankrupt the area.

        Thanks!

    • Ray

      Your welcome.

      Centrist?????????????? Hahahahahahah, that was a good one.

  28. Someone is going to have to explain to this dumb old Colonel why Obama is on the verge of using US militqry to enforce a no fly zone designed to shoot down Libyan aircraft fighting the rebels.

    The leftist and the media crucified Bush for going into Iraq. Where are they now that we are about to get involved in another country’s civl war? Why isn’t Obama being blasted for this? Libya is not our concern…….or is it the oil? Hmmmmmmm….so, the left said Bush manufactured a reason to go into Iraq becauce of oil……and now Obama and Libya…..because of oil……what is the difference?

    • USWeapon says:

      You can bet that this will become an article topic for either myself or one of the writers here at SUFA! Perhaps you Colonel?

      I will say up front that I completely oppose the use of our military in Libya. I simply can’t fathom the disparity between the way Bush was crucified for what he did while nothing is being said about this situation, either. Baffling. But then again we know full well that the MSM has a way of explaining away all their inconsistencies and false rhetoric.

      • good idea but I will finish that other one I have started. I am leaving today for the border but will be back in a couple of days. Fare well all…until then….this is the Colonel signing off.

      • Oops…one other thing…….it seems that MR Hope and Change is…….what is this I see…..re-opening the trials at GITMO? Hmmmm….let’s see….going into Libya for oil..opening the trials at GITMO……..protecting his union cronies……all the things that Bush did……interesting.

        Now signing off.

      • Europe has as many people and is nearly economically as large as the US. Why is it always US that must get involved in these things? Most of the Gaddafi’s oil goes to Europe. Let Europe fight over it. We can drill for our own.

        • T-Ray

          Because there is an election coming up.

          Heaven forbid the Pres should do what he said and take the political consequences.

          This is NOT about oil in my opinion. His “consideration of military options” is very consistent with the Left Wings view of international intervention.

          We kill people when others are being killed by a Govt that is not ours, if it suits our view of democratization of the world. Whether our national interest is involved is irrelevant.

          Look at the number on the left that were howling about our need to get mixed up in African civil wars to stop the blood shed. But doing the same in Iraq and Afghanistan was immoral.

          They are a walking, talking, breathing CONTRADICTION.

          I must say, I think Russia may be the only country left with a rational “public” foreign policy. They said hell no to the no-fly zone. Please note I said “public” as in visible. We all know they have two sets of policies. The one we see and the real one.

  29. gmanfortruth says:

    For those who need a good read when things are slow, plainlyspoken calls out the Southern Poverty Law Center.

    http://gmanfortruth.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/fighting-extremism-if-its-the-right-kind/

  30. Charlie

    Except it doesn’t and hasn’t or there would be ANY socialist economies anywhere.

    Gee.
    Russia, China and N. Korea seem to be great examples.

    Implode does not happen over night, but all socialist nations are in serious economic trouble.

    Yours works for those who with advantage (whether earned advantage or otherwise).

    There is no such thing as an overreaching advantage

    Everyone has a talent and if left free to pursue it, can turn it into a living.

    There is NO agreement for the majority of workers to accept wages;

    Of course they do!

    Again, your problem: ego-centric.
    Because you have to work to live, you believe yourself a slave.

    You forget you have a brain. You can leave

    they do so out of need

    Fulfillment of a need is a subjective.
    I can eat an apple or a burger to satisfying my “need” of food.

    You confuse a need, say “shelter”, to being “forced” to rent or buy the house you live in – a subjective fulfillment of a need.

    Are you saying this too?
    That the house you live in makes you a slave too??

    That’s a common misunderstanding – that because you have needs, any particular fulfillment is also a need!

    I’m amazed at how economically and socially ignorant you really are, BF. Stunning, really.

    I am learned economically.
    I do not argue that theft is a “good thing” as you do.

    You must test your understanding both of economics and moral behavior at your door for it is failing.

    What you promote is immoral and evil and democracy will sooner or later take it down.

    You do not know what is immoral for you are an advocate of theft.

    • Gee. Russia, China and N. Korea seem to be great examples.

      Gee, once again you pull facts out of your arse. France stands as one of the world’s leading economic powers, possessing large agricultural, industrial and service sectors. France operates a mixed economy that combines capitalist and socialist characteristics. Capitalism involves private ownership of capital and other means of production. Under socialism, the government directs economic activity and owns all or part of most industries. Despite extensive reforms over the years that have reduced government intervention in the economy, the French government still exercises great control over the economy, owning shares in many of the country’s largest companies.

      Implode does not happen overnight, but all socialist nations are in serious economic trouble.

      As if America is in better shape. You really are delusional.

      There is no such thing as an overreaching advantage. Everyone has a talent and if left free to pursue it, can turn it into a living. There is NO agreement for the majority of workers to accept wages; Of course they do! Again, your problem: ego-centric. Because you have to work to live, you believe yourself a slave. You forget you have a brain.

      And you must be missing yours (brain). Those struggling to survive who take on jobs that barely (or do not) pay enough to eat/shelter, etc. are forced into their labor (you putz).

      Fulfillment of a need is a subjective.
      I can eat an apple or a burger to satisfying my “need” of food.

      My man, the semantics expert. When your “need” is defined by survival, you take what you can get (no agreement at all). Thus, you are “forced” (something you whackos on the extreme right seem awfully comfortable with). Fortunately, there are more of us than you … so over time, you lose (contrary to your belief capitalism will win out).

      You confuse a need, say “shelter”, to being “forced” to rent or buy the house you live in – a subjective fulfillment of a need.

      No, this is your attempt to be clever amongst your sycophants. Survival requires food and shelter, etc., what you’d like to dole out the way a King used to. For all your talk about your hatred of government (as I pointed out to USW yesterday when you lied (yet again), you seem very content to approve of the bailouts of the Wall Street geniuses; the kings won that round).

      I’m amazed at how economically and socially ignorant you really are, BF. Stunning, really.

      BF, I’m not so stunned at you as I am at those who act as your sycophants here. Then again, lemmings come in all forms, sizes and on both sides of the political aisle.

      I am learned economically. I do not argue that theft is a “good thing” as you do.

      What you are is very full of yourself (and something else). You are a defender of greed at all costs (whether the government works on your behalf or not). You promote an economic policy that creates slaves of wages because it suits your greed; nothing more than that.

      You must test your understanding both of economics and moral behavior at your door for it is failing.

      My morals are in fine order, oh, great black flag. There’s nothing evil in sharing. There’s nothing immoral in the greater good. Democracy is not tyranny. It’s all a beautiful thing.

      You do not know what is immoral for you are an advocate of theft.

      Ever hear that saying: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck? Well, buddy, you are greed incarnate; Immorality incarnate and … of course, you’re favorite — evil incarnate.

      Now, start typing … again. Time to convince yourself otherwise.

  31. Ray Hawkins

    Some things don’t need a bunch of data to understand and judge conceptually.

    Public Unions is one of those things. Data may be needed if you want to debate a particular minute issue, such as whether union A is making more than the avg non-union worker.

    But that is irrelevant to the broader concepts and realities of what they are and what their affect is on the local, state and federal economy.

    Public Unions are PART of the Govt. Their employers are PART of the Govt. The politicians who write the rules enabling the unions and the employers are PART of the Govt. So when they all sit down to bargain, the Govt is negotiating with itself AGAINST the taxpayers who are NOT Govt.

    Public Unions are a mechanism that by their very nature increase and enforce theft by the Govt.

    Public Unions, being part of govt contribute to the Govt’s drain on the economy. They do not produce wealth and by definition must use the wealth of others to produce goods/services for which no “accurate value” has been determined.

    The magnitude of this distortion increases as you centralize govt., and the same holds for public unions.

    Thus, a public union that is tied only to a local govt entity does not create the same distortions in value as a public union sanctioned and empowered at the state level.

    Which is why unions of all types are always trying to centralize power at the higher levels. It creates massive leverage and eliminates economic controls based on value and ability to pay.

    Govt is a monopoly. Public employee unions are a monopoly on the monopoly. The control and impact is incestuous.

    The actual impact of public unions then goes to the power they are allowed to have. There are two. STRIKE and POLITICAL ACTION.

    Remove these two coercive forms of power from the monopoly and you might make the public employee union a reasonable and acceptable, well at least tolerable entity.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @JAC – not certain I agree with this approach…..

      I believe the simple problem is that due to a lack of leadership in government – we have refused to say “no” when we should – we ok additional/expanded/sustained/never-to-die services without truly explaining to people what this will cost and requiring same to be funded w/o backloading cost to have “someone else” deal with it. In the end we place the execution/operations of such on a stretched-thin & ill-managed public sector workforce who see their only means of securing themselves as organizing into collective units to bargain as one.

      If we had more leadership in public sector we’d have more of a backbone to say “no”. A well managed fairly compensated public sector workforce would have little need to organize and would still be competitive.

      Or so I hope.

      • “lack of leadership in government “?

        It’s bargaining with two sides of the same coin. Government says we’ll give you what you want, you continue to pay us back and get us elected. We’ll try to keep the taxpayer at bay so they aren’t privy to our deal. And if the taxpayer finds out, we’ll just scream, “it’s for the kids” or “it’s the police, the firemen, do you know how crime will increase?”

      • Ray

        Remove the power to STRIKE and to be POLITICALLY ACTIVE, namely donations and lobbying, and you will regain “leadership in the public sector”.

        But in the name of JUSTICE you would have to do the same to everyone.

        By the way, did you know the Federal Law exempts the Unions from the Anti Trust Laws?

  32. Charlie,

    You have these two goals to achieve before you can “pull” rational and reasoned people to your Dark side.

    (Irrational people in support of anything are of no concern for anyone – who needs irrational people except if you want to kill millions?)

    (1) Provide a cohesive economic argument on how Socialism can distribute goods without a pricing model. (Hint: you need to learn why “pricing mechanisms” are required in any economy)

    (2) Provide a cohesive moral argument on how theft can be justified by one man and not another. (Hint: you will have to leave your typical ego-centric world view to accomplish this)

    • You have these two goals to achieve before you can “pull” rational and reasoned people to your Dark side.

      “Pulling” rational and reasoned people such as yourself, oh, great God of greed, to see the light of greater good are not my concern. One cannot reason with the greedy; they are driven by their passion (to covet). Fortunately, they are few enough to ignore (far more than the 18 or so people I notice here day to day). Sometimes it’s just fun to screw with you, BF … mostly because you’re so full of yourself. You entertain me.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Charlie, You seem to be coveting something that is not yours. Yet, you want to isolate BF, who does not covet what is not his. Your arguement lacks merit.

        • Gman, there’s no arguing with most in here. You have all the answers to the great questions of life. It’s why there are sooooo many of you (sarcasm intended). Arguing, discussing with “some” of you is as pointless as spitting into a hurricane;why I choose to have fun instead. Socialism is sharing. You need to call it taking. We don’t agree, never will. Let it go already …

      • Charlie,

        The lack of any cohesive argument other than another irrational rant is telling.

  33. Ray Hawkins, et al.

    While I previously made the case that data is not required I did stumble upon this story at HP titled: Government Worker Benefits See Political Battles Playing Out In State Capitals.

    Following is an excerpt that presents some “general” information you may find interesting.

    “St. John’s Gregory says the rest of the benefits are deferred compensation promised to workers instead of better salaries.
    National data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms that public-sector workers do better when it comes to pensions and benefits.
    As of last September, professional and management workers in the private sector were making $34.91 in hourly salary; public sector professionals made $33.17 an hour.
    The government entities spent 1.7 times as much on health care per employee-hour worked and nearly twice as much on retirement costs. Public-sector workers – who are more often represented by unions – are far more likely to have defined-benefit pensions with promises to pay for the retirees’ whole lives.
    Olivia Mitchell, a professor of insurance and risk management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, says the data isn’t perfect. It doesn’t compare workers with the same education or experience levels, and it covers a broad range of jobs. Also, she said, it doesn’t take into account that about one-fourth of public workers aren’t covered by Social Security.
    There’s one clear downside for the public employees: “We also know that the public-sector pensions are in deep trouble financially,” Mitchell said, pointing to studies that suggest that they’re underfunded by a total of $3 trillion, largely because governments have skipped payments. “Exactly what will be done about that, nobody knows.”
    Unchanged, those retirement systems could eventually stop paying entirely.
    “One way or another, if we don’t make changes, the government will collapse,” said Abel Stewart, of Toledo, Ohio.”

    For the rest of the story go here:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/08/government-worker-benefit_n_832777.html

    And some interesting quotes provided by a commentor on the story:

    “Particula¬rly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organizati¬on of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people … This obligation is paramount … A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent … to prevent or obstruct … Government … Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government … is unthinkabl¬e and intolerabl¬e.”

    FDR

    “Meticulou¬s attention should be paid to the special relationsh¬ips and obligation¬s of public servants to the public itself and to the government¬. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining¬, as usually understood¬, cannot be transplant¬ed into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmount¬able limitation¬s … The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for … officials … to bind the employer … The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representa¬tives …

    FDR

    I do have one general comment on the main article’s point. Namely that the “envy” of private sector for public sector benefits is growing and contributing to the efforts to pare back public union power.

    I find it ironic but expected that after decades of working so hard to pit one segment of our society against another based on envy, that the same emotion is now exploding in the face of those who so diligently planted it in the national psyche.

    What was that saying………….. If you beat a man with a stick you give him the moral authority to beat you, once he gets hold of the stick.

    Or…………what goes around comes around.

    Or………..do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    Boy this is fun.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Maybe this is the beginning of the war against the Liberal/Progressive Agenda. Ohio’s law will pass. At least the dems there didn’t run away like cowards. Wisconsins law, that will pass eventually, isn’t just about State workers, but will also help municipalities in dealing with their budget woes.

      What nobody is really paying attention to is the unfunded retirement plans. As the baby boomers retire in mass over the next few years, the theft, by government, of the wealth will become very evident, to the detriment of the retirees.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @JAC – thanks for the posting…..and yes I do think data is important – it helps everyone see a clearer picture of how comparisons match up. I don’t think the data above needs to be perfect either…..

      What should be cautionary is what the hell is going to happen when the rubber hits the road with respect to pensions and unfunded benefits? Lawsuits? Former public workers left with nothing because they planned on retiring to a pension that may get yanked?

      Again – I cannot understand why there are still these longer term benefits plans – it is irresponsible of union leadership AND the membership to ignore basic fiscal and economic realities.

      I’ve no problems with collective bargaining over fundamental work issues and basic competitiveness with respect to base compensation. What I have a problem with are blind tactics that in the end place all the parties at risk.

      • Ray:

        “Again – I cannot understand why there are still these longer term benefits plans – it is irresponsible of union leadership AND the membership to ignore basic fiscal and economic realities.”

        “I’ve no problems with collective bargaining over fundamental work issues and basic competitiveness with respect to base compensation. What I have a problem with are blind tactics that in the end place all the parties at risk.”

        YEAH! You get it! That is exactly the where we are in WI. Gov Walker is only restricting collective bargaining to benefits, not wages, not working conditions, etc. Where, why and how you ever thought union leadership would be responsible and let their members know (I’m convinced the membership never thinks through things on their own) that what they are asking for is non-sustainable.

        When now presented with these facts of unfunded pensions, they just look at you dumbfounded and say, “raise taxes”. It is the only possible solution to them.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          @Kathy – damn – are we close to agreeing on something? 😉

          More food for thought – private sector job I had a few years back – everyone met up with senior leadership where they explained very matter of factly the crisis we were in. Raises and bonuses that year were dumped so we could keep everyone gainfully employed. Everyone understood and because they came to the table open minded and listened to what was happening.

          To be fair I have not followed the WI situation recently – felt there was too much rhetoric for me to feel well informed and objective. I hope they get it figured out and move on.

          I also eagerly wait to see how the NJ Governor handles the Unions. He is even more of a no-b.s. guy (at least that is perception).

      • Ray

        Data is important only when you are debating details. Such as to how a program, like public pensions, should be structured. It is not necessary when discussing whether such a program should exist at all, like public unions.

        That is why the public debate is so frustrating. Each side moves the target as soon as the other becomes focused on the one they presented yesterday. From concepts to details then back again. If you look closely at the Wisconsin debate you will see this happening from day one. I give the prize to the Dems so far. They have done a better job of “framing” and “moving” the debate so as to keep the Republicans off balance.

        Regarding “Collective Bargaining”. By definition this should not be an issue. The problem stems from consolidation of the bargaining power. Namely at the STATE level vs. LOCAL level.

        Unions, thanks to Govt protection, can burden the entire state over issue unique to a city/town or county. All in the name of “Solidarity”.

        This is what it appears the Gov and Legis. of Wisconsin is trying to deal with. And it seems by your comment you are pretty much in agreement.

        As for Govt workers being spread think and underpaid. That would entirely depend on WHICH Govt workers. The generality certainly doesn’t apply at a large scale. Just consider whether there has ever been a shortage of applicants for Govt jobs at any level.

        In my 30+ years of dealing with Govt I can only think of a few very high skilled jobs where recruitment was tough. And in these cases the Govt was allowed to increase base pay commensurate with, or exceeding the private sector.

        Another general truth, I say general because there are exceptions at the detail level. In Good times the Govt employees look like they are getting worse than their peers. During bad times they look like they are living high on the hog.

        In my experience, over the long run they are doing quite well, but they also suffer similar setbacks to the private sector. Their pay scale does not keep up with inflation anymore than the private sector. But it does come closer for the vast majority of occupations.

        OK, just realized I am wandering far off topic. So will stop here for now.

      • Ray

        One thing I almost forgot. In response to your question:

        “Again – I cannot understand why there are still these longer term benefits plans –”

        The reason they exist is because the socialist/progressive movements have had a goal of federalizing medical care and retirement pensions for the last 100 years. It is a political goal that worked its way into the labor union movement and then Govt itself as the “mixed economy” paradigm took hold.

        You will find discussion of these two goals in most historical and modern writings on the two subjects by “liberal” or “progressive” opinion leaders.

        The movement to 401K’s came from a push by the Republicans, starting during Reagan’s term. The hard core left hates it and is still trying to undermine this. They would prefer a Social Security System to replace all private retirement accounts.

        This is all propped up by the general belief that by “increasing the pool” of contributors we somehow “reduce costs” to each individual. Notice this same argument was used openly in the health care reform debates. It is an underlying belief that is used to rationalize centralization of power at the Federal level.

  34. Charlie

    Gee, once again you pull facts out of your arse. France stands as one of the world’s leading economic powers, possessing large agricultural, industrial and service sectors.

    France has been in the throes of economic chaos as the government has been forced to cut back pensions and working hours – causing strikes and riots.

    France on strike
    Weeks of strikes, protests and demonstrations have brought much of France to a standstill as workers, students and others voice their strong opposition to a government proposal to raise the age for a minimum pension from 60 to 62. A quarter of the nation’s gas stations were out of fuel, hundreds of flights were canceled, long lines formed at gas stations and train services in many regions were cut in half. Protesters blockaded Marseille’s airport,

    Implode does not happen overnight, but all socialist nations are in serious economic trouble.

    As if America is in better shape. You really are delusional.

    You hold serious, broad misunderstanding.

    You believe USA is not a socialist country. It is a socialist country – that is, a government-run economy.

    And you must be missing yours (brain). Those struggling to survive who take on jobs that barely (or do not) pay enough to eat/shelter, etc. are forced into their labor (you putz).

    No one is forced. You can accept or you can go elsewhere.

    Charlie, your actions create consequences.
    You do not like your consequences, but you refuse to change your actions.
    The fault is yours, not of the consequences.

    My man, the semantics expert.

    It is not a matter of semantics. It is a matter of choice.

    Understanding this difference is vital – and because you are very confused here, you continue to offer very dangerous ideas.

    When your “need” is defined by survival, you take what you can get (no agreement at all).

    Indeed, you are a Barbarian – that you take what you need.

    You are unable to fit in civilization while holding on to Barbarian ideas.

    Thus, you demand the rest of us should become Barbarians.

    Thus, you are “forced” (something you whackos on the extreme right seem awfully comfortable with). Fortunately, there are more of us than you … so over time, you lose (contrary to your belief capitalism will win out).

    Fortunately, there are not more of you. You are in a radical minority – which is why civilization continues.

    However, you do pose a serious threat to the rest of us, for if your irrational belief and system does get more than a foot hold, it will end civilization.

    Survival requires food and shelter, etc.

    That is what I said.
    How you choose to fulfill this is your choice.

    You wish to confuse this fulfillment as a need, that is: because you eat an apple to fill your hunger, you demand a right to anyone’s apple. You do not understand that you can buy an orange instead of stealing other people’s apples.

    (as I pointed out to USW yesterday when you lied (yet again),

    Sorry, Charlie. Your irrational review of the past dialogue easily demonstrations your idiocy in this matter.

    you seem very content to approve of the bailouts of the Wall Street geniuses;

    You continue to proclaim lies. I made no such approval. You have some serious mental issues here.

    I am learned economically. I do not argue that theft is a “good thing” as you do.

    What you are is very full of yourself (and something else).

    No, I am learned – you are not.
    I speak from knowledge – you from ignorance.
    I know theft is immoral and evil – you promote it.

    You are a defender of greed at all costs

    That is your irrational mindset.
    I have already defined greed.
    I have never said “at all costs” – that is your mind-tornado.

    My morals are in fine order, oh, great black flag.

    You advocate massive theft. You are not in fine order whatsoever.

    There’s nothing evil in sharing.

    Sharing is not evil because it is voluntary. When I share my supper with friends, it is my choice – not theirs.

    You are evil because you do not advocate sharing.
    You advocate stealing.

  35. Ray,

    I believe the simple problem is that due to a lack of leadership in government

    Issue #1: Belief that government provides “leadership”.

    – we

    Who is this “we” you speak of?

    If you are inferring the voters, please tell me when any Public Union contract was ever provided to the voters for a vote.

    Thus, this “we” does not exist.

    additional/expanded/sustained/never-to-die services without truly explaining to people what this will cost and requiring same to be funded w/o backloading cost to have “someone else” deal with it.

    But that is the political process.

    Would you -as a politician – push your State into a strike by Public Workers, shutting down many “public” works?

    Would you risk losing an election over this, especially if you avoid the strike the consequences of your agreement comes due many years later when you will not be there

    Thus, your demand here borders the impossible.
    No politician will suffer political risk by invoking a strike to solve a problem for some politician in the future.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      I was speaking operationally BF – I am not asking government in this sense to provide leadership on “something” – merely pointing out that within government there is a lack of leadership.

      As to the “we” – in our County we the voters do not desire to vote on a contract. We have said as much by placing the burden on the 3 commissioners we elect and hold very much accountable to do so. It works. It always has.

  36. Charlie,

    Socialism is sharing. You need to call it taking.

    Now you are advocating for mis-defining words so to manufacture your society.

    Sharing is not taking by force. No matter how much you rant, yours is a philosophy of violence – you steal what you want.

    We don’t agree, never will. Let it go already …

    Barbarians will always advocate for barbarian measures.

    You have all the answers to the great questions of life.

    No, you do.
    We advocate that because we do not have all the answers, we leave every man free to choose his own.

    You do not want men to have such a choice, and you demand to make those choices for men.

    We don’t agree, never will. Let it go already …

    • Barbarians will always advocate for barbarian measures.

      Sharing is barbarianism. Ooofah.

      Let me know if I got this right:

      We don’t agree, never will. Let it go already …

  37. Charlie

    paranoid as his fear of democracy

    My discourse on democracy is well documented.

    It is mob rule, and as such, evil.

    It is worse because of its nature:
    -no one has responsibility, and men free from responsibility tend toward atrocity.
    -it holds unlimited self-justification – majority “rules”.

    With no responsibility for action with any justification one wishes, the greatest evil of man upon men is inevitable.

    • Wow, you really are obsessed. Take a break. Smoke a joint. Chill out. The world isn’t out to get you (or your things). I think if we took over we’d figure out a way to leave you alone on some island so you could have everything to yourself. We’ll even throw in a laptop so you can take care of that ego of yours 24/7.

      Your discourse on democracy … is pretty insane considering your answer is an idealistic society where no government is necessary (unless, of course, there’s a bailout for big bucks). Right, the peyote again.

      When you say learned in economics, should we pronounce it learned or learn-ed?

      • Charlie

        Wow, you really are obsessed.

        It’s called “understanding” – which you have a difficult time achieving.

        I think if we took over we’d figure out a way to leave you alone on some island so you could have everything to yourself. We’ll even throw in a laptop so you can take care of that ego of yours 24/7.

        I am not interested in living on an island, nor do I need anything from you.

        Just leave me alone with what I own – but I know you can’t do that.

        Your discourse on democracy … is pretty insane

        Do you disagree with my points? If so, provide argument instead of this irrational fluff you believe represents a response.

        You come off as a very irrational man, Charlie – you are demonstrating powerful the danger of your philosophy – it is wholly based on irrationality.

        • Your discourse on democracy …

          My bad, I meant this sarcastically … as in who cares? Your discourse. You take yourself too seriously.

          Democracy (whether you posit it as mob rule or otherwise) is the fairest of the options. Your option, which is each man standing on his own, is a guarantee for might over right. A guarantee, nothing less than that. Rather than return to your original irrationality arguments about man being inherently greedy and thus a company of men (social contract, etc.) being irrational … why not deal in what is (reality)? rather than idealistic nonsense that does not apply.

          Man engages daily in cooperation; some of it of his own accord; some of it rammed down his throat (based on a need to survive). For certain situations, man has to cooperate (and mostly for the betterment of the greater good–armies, police, sanitation, etc.). You, of course, see that is being forced (because you live in a fantasy world). Yet it is a fact. There is a government, there are police and sanitation, etc., and they’ve been around now for a pretty long time (elsewhere and here, in one form or other).

          So the world exists (as it is) irrationally … gee, how to we get it to where you want it, BF? Right, we don’t. The same way a paradise of socialism can’t exist, your idea is even more idealistic because it doesn’t happen … anywhere but inside your head.

          Okay, time to watch a good foreign movie … one of those socialist things, you know …

  38. gmanfortruth says:

    Small hijack. Saudi Arabia’s `Day of Rage’ Lures Record Bets on $200 Oil: Chart of Day
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-07/saudi-arabia-s-day-of-rage-lures-record-bets-on-200-oil-chart-of-day.html

    Any comments?

    • Yeah, they’re rigging the game ahead of time. $200/barrel for June 1st purchase guarantees $150+/barrel for the Memorial day holiday travel. Say hello to $5/gal before then. $6/gal before summer is over.

  39. This union money and power is really, really a big deal. This is now being broadcast:

    “the Obama team has some high profile Chicago guys working for them on organizing a recall effort to displace 3 WI Republican Senators and give the majority back to the Dems….and that the Dems plan on staying in IL until this is accomplished.”

    Now, recall efforts are not simple to do, so I have no idea if this can be done in a timely manor (likewise for the several that are being undertaken for fugitive dems). In hindsight, I wish they would’ve just handled it by separating the budget part from the collective bargaining part and be done with it. I think Walker honestly thought he’d take the high road and gain public relation points for letting the legislature process take its course. Instead you apparently need to roll in the mud to try to think like a dem.

  40. Charlie

    My bad, I meant this sarcastically … as in who cares? Your discourse.

    I care, because I have children.

    Democracy (whether you posit it as mob rule or otherwise) is the fairest of the options.

    Fairness is subjective and is irrational if attempted to be applied upon other people.

    Thus, if Democracy is “fair”, it is entirely irrational.

    Any social system which is irrational is doomed.

    Your option, which is each man standing on his own, is a guarantee for might over right.

    That is not “my” option.

    My position: Every man has the right to be free from the imposition of others

    I do not measure whether a man is individual or organized in groups of voluntary association – his freedom and rights do not change.

    As I’ve said about you before, you do not understand even the simplest of concepts.

    why not deal in what is (reality)? rather than idealistic nonsense that does not apply.

    Ideas have power.
    First an idea, then comes action.

    If your ideas are bad -(such as Socialism) – the outcomes of action upon those ideas will be bad.

    Man engages daily in cooperation; some of it of his own accord; some of it rammed down his throat (based on a need to survive).

    And you believe you know what is “good” to ram down the throats of others.

    Indeed, you are barbaric.

    Yet it is a fact. There is a government, there are police and sanitation, etc., and they’ve been around now for a pretty long time (elsewhere and here, in one form or other).

    The past does not equal the future.

    If men held your position, we would never progress.

    • I care, because I have children.

      Already brainwashed, no doubt.

      his freedom and rights do not change.

      So long as he’s willing to live at the peril of others. Which, sorry to say, seems just a little self-defeating if he’s determined to in live via greed. (talk about simplicity).

      Ideas have power. First an idea, then comes action.

      We agree … and the idea of socialism requires the action of the many to help one another. The idea of capitalism requires the few to benefit from the many. Trust me, your position is the evil, immoral one and the many will ultimately win.

      If your ideas are bad -(such as Socialism) – the outcomes of action upon those ideas will be bad.

      If your ideas are bad (such as capitalism) – the outcomes of action upon those ideas will be bad. I agree.

      And you believe you know what is “good” to ram down the throats of others. Indeed, you are barbaric.

      There you go again … a democratically decided “greater good” prevails. Yep, by that whackjob standard, we are indeed barbaric (as we gain the greater good for the many).

      The past does not equal the future. If men held your position, we would never progress.

      So, you agree men have lived together in cooperation over time, yet they can’t progress. Now who’s being irrational (and a numbskull)?

      It works, therefore it can’t work … okay, I get it, you’re nuts.

  41. Holy crap. Anyone else watch this NPR executive (former, apparently he’s now left the building)? Yikes. It is amazing the things you find out when daylight shines on the likes of NPR, Planned Parenthood, Unions.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/media/2011/03/08/daily-caller-npr-executive-caught-sting-video

  42. gmanfortruth says:

    As we get older we sometimes begin to doubt our ability to
    “make a difference” in the world. It is at these times that
    our hopes are boosted by the remarkable achievements of
    other “seniors” who have found the courage to take on
    challenges that would make many of us wither.

    Harold Schlumberg is such a person:

    “I’ve often been asked, ‘What do you old folks do now that
    you’re retired?’ Well, I’m fortunate to have a chemical
    engineering background, and one of the things I enjoy most is converting beer, wine and vodka into urine. Then I spray it over a photo of Obama! I do it every day and I really enjoy it.”

    Harold should be an inspiration to us all.

  43. Sorry for the long post but could not figure out way to link it.

    Strange But True Provisions of Collective Bargaining

    Madison—Today Governor Walker’s office released additional examples of how collective bargaining impacts government and how reforming collective bargaining can improve government. The following are some of the items contained in collective bargaining provisions:

    1.Employer must provide bulletin boards to post information about union social and recreational activities. The size and location of the board is subject to collective bargaining.
    2. When a local union meets the following conditions are subject to bargaining:

    1. lighting,

    2. vision care and examinations,

    3. noise,

    4. chairs,

    5. desks,

    6. footrests,

    7. adjustable terminals and keyboards,

    8. work environment design (wall cover, carpet, windows),

    9. room temperature,

    1.Starting of vehicles during cold weather is subject to collective bargaining.
    2.Paid time off to donate blood.

    Earlier today, Governor Walker’s office released some specific examples and new details to show how collective bargaining fiscally impacts government and how reforming collective bargaining can improve government.

    A Year’s Worth of Pay for 30 Days of Work

    Under the Green Bay School District’s collectively bargained Emeritus Program, teaches can retire and receive a year’s worth of salary for working only 30 days over a three year period. This is paid in addition to their already guaranteed pension and health care payouts.

    At the average annual salary for a Green Bay teacher of $51,355, this amounts to a daily rate of pay of $1,711.83, or an hourly rate of $213.98. Since most retiring teachers receive higher than average salary, these amounts are, in practice, much higher.

    Source: WLUK-TV, 3/3/11

    Teachers Receiving Two Pensions

    Due to a 1982 provision of their collective bargaining agreement, Milwaukee Public School teachers actually receive two pensions upon retirement instead of one. The contribution to the second pension is equal to 4.2% of a teacher’s salary, with the school district making 100% of the contribution, just like they do for the first pension. This extra benefit costs taxpayers more than $16 million per year.

    Source: February 17, 2010 Press Release, Process of developing FY11 budget begins Milwaukee Public Schools

    Almost $10,000 Per Year for Doing Nothing

    While the Green Bay Emeritus Program actually requires teachers to at least show up for work, the Madison Emeritus Program doesn’t even require that. In addition to their pension payouts, retired Madison public school teachers receive annual payments of at least $9,884.18 per year for enrolling in the Emeritus Program, which requires ZERO days of work.

    When this program began, 20 days of work per year were required. Through collective bargaining, the union successfully negotiated this down to zero days.

    Source: Madison Teachers Inc. Website

    Yesterday the Governor’s office released these examples of the fiscal impact of collective bargaining

    No Volunteer Crossing Guards Allowed

    A Wausau public employee union filed a grievance to prohibit a local volunteer from serving as a school crossing guard. The 86-year-old lives just two blocks away and serves everyday free of charge.

    Principal Steve Miller says, “He said, you know, this gives me a reason to get up in the morning to come and help these kids in the neighborhood.”

    But for a local union that represents crossing guards, it isn’t that simple. Representatives didn’t want to go on camera but say if a crossing guard is needed, then one should be officially hired by the city.

    Source: WAOW-TV, 1/27/10

    $6,000 Extra for Carrying a Pager

    Some state employees, due to the nature of their positions, are required to carry pagers during off-duty hours in order to respond to emergency situations. Due to the collective bargaining agreements, these employees are compensated an extra five hours of pay each week, whether they are paged or not.

    For an employee earning an average salary of $50,000 per year, this requirement can cost more than $6,000 in additional compensation.

    Source: 2008-09 Agreement between the State of Wisconsin and AFSCME Council 24

    Arbitrator Reinstates Porn-Watching Teacher

    A Cedarburg school teacher was reinstated by an arbitrator after being fired for viewing pornography on a school computer. The school district ultimately succeeded in terminating the teacher only after taking the case to the Wisconsin Supreme Court at great cost to the taxpayers.

    Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 8/23/08

    ‘Outstanding First Year Teacher’ Laid Off

    Milwaukee Public Schools teacher Megan Sampson was laid off less than one week after being named Outstanding First Year Teacher by the Wisconsin Council of English Teachers. She lost her job because the collective bargaining agreement requires layoffs to be made based on seniority rather than merit.

    Informed that her union had rejected a lower-cost health care plan, that still would have required zero contribution from teachers, Sampson said, “Given the opportunity, of course I would switch to a different plan to save my job, or the jobs of 10 other teachers.

    Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/14/10

    Union Opposes Cost-Saving Lawn Mowing Program

    As a cost cutting measure, Racine County began using county inmates to cut the grass in medians and right-of-ways at no cost to the taxpayers. A county employee union filed a grievance indicating it was the right of government workers to cut the grass, even though it would cost the taxpayers dramatically more.

    Source: Racine Journal Times, 5/12/10

    The $150,000 Bus Driver

    In 2009, the City of Madison’s highest paid employee was a bus driver who earned $159,258, including $109,892 in overtime, guaranteed by a collective bargaining agreement. In total, seven City of Madison bus drivers made more than $100,000 per year in 2009.

    “That’s the (drivers’) contract,” said Transit and Parking Commission Chairman Gary Poulson.

    Source: Wisconsin State Journal, 2/7/10

    $150,000 Correctional Officers

    Correctional Officer collective bargaining agreements allow officers a practice known as “sick leave stacking.” Officers can call in sick for a shift, receiving 8 hours of sick pay, and then are allowed to work the very next shift, earning time-and-a-half for overtime. This results in the officer receiving 2.5 times his or her rate of pay, while still only working 8 hours.

    In part because of these practices, 13 correctional officers made more than $100,000 in 2009, despite earning base wages of less than $60,000 per year. The officers received an average of $66,000 in overtime pay for an average annual salary of more than $123,000 with the highest paid receiving $151,181.

    Source: Department of Corrections

    Previously the Governor’s office released these examples of the fiscal impact of collective bargaining:

    Paid-Time off for Union Activities

    In Milwaukee County alone, because the union collectively bargained for paid time off, fourteen employees receive salary and benefits for doing union business. Of the fourteen, three are on full-time release for union business. Milwaukee County spent over $170,000 in salary alone for these employees to only participate in union activities such as collective bargaining.

    Surrender of Management Rights

    Because of collecting bargaining, unions have included provisions in employee contracts that have a direct fiscal impact such as not allowing management to schedule workers based on operational needs and requiring notice and approval by the union prior to scheduling changes. As County Executive Walker attempted to reduce work hours based on budget pressures and workload requirements by instituting a 35 hour work week to avoid layoffs, which the union opposed. Additionally, government cannot explore privatization of functions that could save taxpayers money.

    WEA Trust

    Currently many school districts participate in WEA trust because WEAC collectively bargains to get as many school districts across the state to participate in this union run health insurance plan as possible. Union leadership benefits from members participating in this plan. If school districts enrolled in the state employee health plan, it would save school districts up to $68 million per year. Beyond that if school districts had the flexibility to look for health insurance coverage outside of WEA trust or the state plan, additional savings would likely be realized.

    Viagra for Teachers

    The Milwaukee Teachers Education Association (MTEA) tried to use a policy established by collective bargaining to obtain health insurance coverage that specifically paid for Viagra. Cost to taxpayers is $786,000 a year.

    Reference: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/milwaukee-schools-ban-viagra-teachers-union-sues-discrimination/story?id=11378595

    Unrealistic Overtime Provisions

    On a state level, the Department of Corrections allows correctional workers who call in sick to collect overtime if they work a shift on the exact same day. The specific provision that allows this to happen was collectively bargained for in their contract. Cost to taxpayers $4.8 million.

    • Bailout of Wall Street … cost to taxpayers $700 billion.

      • Charlie,

        Socialism for America costs taxpayers $3 trillion

        • Try $70 Trillion

        • So, which is it, BF. We’re a capitalist society not in the same trouble as socialist France (with all that debt) or is the $3 trillion the fault of public unions?

          What I fail to understand about your collective argument(s) is how does knocking down the benefits and paychecks of middle class workers improve the overall economy when there is clearly enough money (the 2% wealth) that is available.

          Oh, right, they “earned it” (the 2%’s) … so redistributing it would be stealing it from them … as if they didn’t steal it from us (bailouts/corporate loopholes/outsourcing/union busting, et al).

          Don’t bother responding, I know your answer. It will remain obscene to me; the small guys eating the small guys for the sake of the big guys. Great plan. Should last another 50 years or so … hopefully less.

          • Public unions are only a tiny fraction of the problem Charlie. As corruption and overspending goes, I must admit that the unions are comparatively small potatoes to the total losses of freedom and theft from the citizens. They are an example of a problem (not because they are unions or little guys with a voice, but because they are apadding the cost of government without adding to the economy). They are NOT, nor should they be or become, some sort of scapegoat.

            As for the 2%, I fully agree that those who took bailout money and utilize government (legal) protectionism to prevent or combat competition and insure profit and a place in the “market” are thieves. I have no problem with reclaiming wealth gained that way. However, wealth not gained through nefarious means I have no right to touch, nor do you.

  44. Charlie,

    I care, because I have children.

    Already brainwashed, no doubt.

    Indeed – to the befuddled and confused mind as yours, the enlightened look brainwashed.

    his freedom and rights do not change.

    So long as he’s willing to live at the peril of others. Which, sorry to say, seems just a little self-defeating if he’s determined to in live via greed. (talk about simplicity).

    Again, you “guess” at things you do not understand.

    As I repeat:A man is free to pursue his own free from YOU imposing on him

    How he chooses to solve his life problems beyond that are his – and his only – decisions.

    Ideas have power. First an idea, then comes action.

    We agree … and the idea of socialism requires the action of the many to help one another.

    Socialism is NOT one helping another – there is nothing voluntary in Socialism.

    It is a philosophy of wide-spread slavery.

    The idea of capitalism requires the few to benefit from the many.

    Socialism is a broad misery for the benefit of a few.

    There you go again … a democratically decided “greater good” prevails.

    Again, you are a short-term thinker and unable to see beyond the two-minutes past an hour.

    It will not prevail – it will collapse upon itself in an orgy of violence.

    So, you agree men have lived together in cooperation over time, yet they can’t progress. Now who’s being irrational (and a numbskull)?

    Cooperation is voluntary – which you hate.

    You merely attempt to redefine your words of violence to be within those of freemen in a fool’s attempt to fool the people.

    You may or may not succeed with this tactic.

    • I’ll give you this much, BF … you’re a relentless lunatic.

      But still a lunatic.

      Now comes the ad hominem baloney.

      Brother, I’m tired. You wore me out. Capitalism remains a greed based evil that is fast falling apart. Democracy is on the rise worldwide (for better or worse–depending on whose ox is gored). Your ox is standing at the ready warning of “The Great Danger” …

      Have at it. You’ve bored me to watching television.

      • Charlie,

        “The Owl of Minerva flies only at dusk”

        http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9781405106795_chunk_g978140510679516_ss1-71

        The warning of democracy has been exposed – Hitler was a Democrat.

        The full extent of the doom has yet to be fully expressed. The slim hope: the People will avoid it.

        • Hitler was a Democrat

          Right, I forgot. Germany had popular elections after the Nazi party came to power. They permitted a free press and alternative political options. What was I thinking?

          The lying you do I figure is embarrassment on your part (fair enough–you have legions here who look up to you), but the revisionist history is absolutely incredible … frankly, quite like the Nazi party itself. You make bold statements (literally using the bold code) and issue them as edicts from on high. The fact they completely out of context or just bullshit is sort of how some of what the Tea Partiers handle facts.

          Hitler was a national socialist … and a vegetarian and animal lover (while you’re at it) … he talked democracy (but was in fact against and ran against the democratic principles of the Weimer Republic (putz) and was devoutly anti-Marxist (moron) … was voted in democratically and no sooner than he attained power than he removed all resistance to the nazi party within Germany. Are you suggesting Obama (who you all seem to call a socialist) or some other democratically elected official will then remove all his/her political resistance? Possible, yes. Probably, no. What is more probable is the widening gap between the 2%’s and the mass of American workers will eventually push America another (worse) depression.

          But feel free to blame the public workers and their unions.

          Like I said, why not just hold job auctions where you give the jobs to the lowest bidders? Then you can covet even more. Greed knows no bounds … which is exactly why it always does and will fail.

      • Charlie,

        Capitalism remains a greed based evil that is fast falling apart

        Capitalism is not falling apart – the consequences of Socialism -government-run economy – is creating the collapse.

        The economy can no longer sustain the $3+ trillions poured into the unproductive pockets of the People. It will come to an end -sooner then later.

        • Yep, in the form of a depression … then, god bless it, socialism.

          I thank you.

          • Charlie,

            Either hyperinflation or a massive Great Depression, but yes, probably the Great Depression.

            The People will not stand for another round of Socialism I would wager …. but who knows.

            Read my post on Friday regarding this.

  45. Charlie,

    As you seem to believe the US is not a Socialist nation…..

    Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages

    Government payouts—including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance—make up more than a third of total wages and salaries of the U.S. population…

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/41969508

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m jealous. You never say anything when I write something. Charlie says something and you go on a logic binge. That simply isn’t fair, and Charlie thinks you should share your logic equally. You see, your logic is a natural resource, and everybody should be entitled to it. Your being a Capitalist and your greedy. 😆

      (sarc now off)

      • Gman,

        LoL! 🙂

        Okay, – here, I’ll indulge.

        Your problem:
        Rarely do you end up on a track that is irrational. That irritates me, as I cannot exercise my sore left arm typing endlessly back at you as the doctor demands.

        ….see, now both of us feel better 😉

  46. He’s Baaaaaack!

    Jimmy Mcmillin–Rent is too damn high guy…says he want to run against Obama…big time down on democrats…now the new slogan is:

    THE DEFICIT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!

    Mcmillin/2012 🙂

  47. Charlie

    Right, I forgot. Germany had popular elections after the Nazi party came to power. They permitted a free press and alternative political options. What was I thinking?

    Yes, when Hitler was elected, he was in a runoff between three political parties, of which he came second (ahead of the Communist Party) and behind Hindenburg.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_presidential_election,_1932

    During his term, he used the crisis of the Reichstag fire to obtain the “Enabling Act” and seize temporary dictatorial power, which he renewed every 4 years as required by the Constitution.

    The lying you do I figure is embarrassment on your part

    In your muddled brain, fantasy reigns supreme.

    issue them as edicts from on high.

    You obviously do not know what “edict” means.

    he talked democracy (but was in fact against and ran against the democratic principles of the Weimer Republic (putz) and was devoutly anti-Marxist (moron)

    He was a Socialist – head of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party ….

    ….doesn’t that name represent your premise??

    … was voted in democratically and no sooner than he attained power than he removed all resistance to the nazi party within Germany.

    He was elected democratically every 4 years. Gotta be right according to Charlie!

    Are you suggesting Obama (who you all seem to call a socialist) or some other democratically elected official will then remove all his/her political resistance?

    In the USA, it is unnecessary.

    The politics you see on TV is not the power that operates the nation.

    But feel free to blame the public workers and their unions.

    I do not “blame” them. They are self-centered and most do not understand the damage they do to their children’s future.

    Like I said, why not just hold job auctions where you give the jobs to the lowest bidders?

    Because you do not know what is a product and who is the buyer, you often get confused in the market place.

    The consumer is king in a free market for the seller is always trying to convert what he has in excess for something he does not have – and money is something that almost all in a market place desire.

    Because you do not understand that labor is merely an economic good, whereas you see this at play selling your books and novels, you are confused about it when you are selling your labor.

    For most people, the have an excess of time and talent and desire money. Thus, they trade their goods (talent and time) for money (wage).

    The more valuable their goods are to others, the more money they make. Thus, those with greater talent tend to earn more because others see this talent as more valuable.

    If you are not earning what you would like, it is the marketplace saying you need to improve the product you are selling.

    Then you can covet even more. Greed knows no bounds … which is exactly why it always does and will fail.

    The desire for a better life has no boundary. Man lives in skyscrapers instead of mud huts because of this.

  48. Charlie,

    So, which is it, BF. We’re a capitalist society not in the same trouble as socialist France (with all that debt) or is the $3 trillion the fault of public unions?

    So which is what, Charlie? I made no choice for you to pick.

    I guess you do not read well, either.

    I said, above, the US is in trouble due to its Socialist programs – which is the same trouble in France.

    Why does this confuse you?

    What I fail to understand about your collective argument(s) is how does knocking down the benefits and paychecks of middle class workers improve the overall economy when there is clearly enough money (the 2% wealth) that is available.

    The solution to Socialist disaster is stopping the bleeding.

    Taking money from the productive and giving it to the unproductive is unsustainable. Eventually, Charlie, it stops.

    There is not enough money in the Universe that can continue such a plan.

    You are merely witnessing the “stopping”.

    I warn you, it will get even worse.

  49. Truthseeker says:

    BF, I trully admire your patience and the fact that you are pointing out all the fallacies and irrational, emotional arguements Charlie is trying to make!

    Charlie is using a typical tactic of those that do not understand the topics being discussed. He insists on attacking the messager (whom he has no clue about personally), instead of attacking the information that is being provided.

    Charlie, if you will every learn anything in this life, it should be this: You will never convince people to join your cause if you are unable to debate the points that are being made and instead try to attack someones character.

    You seem to think that BF thinks he perfect, all knowing. This makes you mad. So now you try to attack his character even though you do not know anything about him personally. Did you know Ann Rynd personally too? How about Sara Pallin? You only know what people told you and you do not even question it.

    I feel sorry for you.

    • So now you try to attack his character even though you do not know anything about him personally. Did you know Ann Rynd personally too? How about Sara Pallin? You only know what people told you and you do not even question it.

      Truth, thanks for lumping those three together. You just made one of my points for me.

    • In defense of Charlie and regardless of who is right in their debate….these two have been duking it out since day one of SUFA..they know how each other thinks and how much each other can take…BF has the patience of JOB and Charlie basically comes out arguing with a jolly attitude. I’m sure the two could sit and play poker all night with no hard feelings, and there would be plenty of laughs.

      Insert a couple different SUFA lefties in Charlie’s place and the story would read differently….but Charlie?….leave my Charlie alone…he wouldn’t hurt a fly…he’s still trying to figure out what camp he’s in. 🙂 ….their debate can help other SUFA readers figure out which camp they are in.

    • anita

      Watch what happens in Oregon the next 12 months. The school system is seriously broke.

      I loved this comment attached to the story.

      “Galt had time in Rand’s fictional universe too make the choice to disappear on his own. In today’s reality, The Machine, in its many forms, chews you up and destroys you before you even realize you need to run.”

    • Wow. Not unlike some of the behavior I have seen here. One of the commenters to that FB post (paraphrased): “tell them they have no business at our bargaining table”. That’s the whole problem! The taxpayers have no seat at the table but will foot the bill.

  50. Early AM Engine-Starter: Guess the Costs of Milwaukee School District’s Legal Defense Over an ‘Equal Rights’ Drug

    Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2011/03/09/early-am-engine-starter-guess-costs-wisconsins-legal-defense-over-equal-#ixzz1G7CWJKj4
    1) The drug in question, as reported by the AP, is Viagra. But despite the ongoing standoff in the Badger State over collective bargaining and union demands, the wire service apparently didn’t believe that this story was worthy of national attention. A search on “Viagra” at the AP’s main site returns no results.

    2) The cost of defending against the lawsuit, according to PostCrescent.com columnist Bob Kowalczyk, is almost $1 million:

    The Walker camp counters that if existing collective bargaining is allowed to continue, the state will continue to be subjected to expenses such as the almost $1 million cost to defend a lawsuit brought by the union because their current health plan excluded Viagra. Or that local school districts would not have the tools needed to operate their districts in the wake of decreasing revenues. These decreasing revenues with the current collective bargaining have forced many school districts into the ridiculous position of firing teachers to balance the budget, but giving a raise to the teachers who remain.

    Good luck finding the cited cost figure elsewhere in the establishment press — and heaven knows how much dues money the union spent in its now-abandoned effort.

    Two weeks ago, Kenneth Spence at the Heritage Foundation reported some, uh, hard to fathom items about the litigation (links were in original):

    In 2002, through collective bargaining, MTEA won the inclusion of Viagra in its members’ health plans, and by 2004, 10% of union membership (which isn’t a male-dominated set) was subscribing to the benefit — at a cost of more than $200,000 per year to the Milwaukee school district. Not until 2005 was the school district finally able to convince an arbitrator to drop the coverage.

    Last year, while the school district faced a $10 million dollar budget shortfall, the MTEA decided it was time to revisit those drug benefits and filed a lawsuit demanding their reintroduction to union health plans—at a projected cost of $786,000 in 2010.

    It may look like the union trying to raise costs for taxpayers, but MTEA spokeswoman Kristin Collett insists that it’s really a matter of fundamental rights: “this is an issue of discrimination, of equal rights for all our members.” (Lest any private sector employee forget that Viagra is a right.)

    The MTEA represents more than 10,000 teachers and administrators in Milwaukee and has an annual budget of millions of dollars. Its priority was not, however, saving the jobs of the 400 teachers laid off because of a budget hole. Instead, the union pursued an opportunity to flex its muscles under the guise of defending a civil right — just as protestors are now.

  51. Charlie,

    You’re a strong voice for greed, but I don’t think it’s catching as more and more other middle class workers feeling the straing of disparities of income struggle to survive.

    Again, I say you are observant.

    The Middle Class is struggling – agree.
    They are also struggling to understand why there appears to be such a large disparity between themselves and the “ruling elite” – agree.

    However, you wish to make it a war between rich and the middle class. It is not.

    It is a war on the middle class by the elite – the latter in a struggle to hold on to their lofty position. It has nothing to do with wealth and everything to do with coercive power.

    The FED, the Congress, Wall Street are not there for you. They never were.

    They are there to maintain a status quo of the elite.

    It is dangerous to make the mistake you are making – for even if you win, you will lose since nothing changes.

    Outside of lip service, do you complain with the same vigor about Congressman and their lifetime pensions/healthcare for serving a single term?

    Yes.

    Do you take issue with the CEO who “earns” multi million bonuses (often for bankrupting his company)?

    No.

    The Congress critter is stealing your money and putting it in his pocket – you should care.

    The CEO is burning his money and not yours. You should not care.

    Seems to me you guys are fighting the wrong battle.

    You should heed your own words.

    Since you cannot tell the difference between what someone has stolen vs. someone has earned, you attack both.

  52. Charlie

    I own a factory and there are 1,000 men out of work and 20 jobs. I tell them I’ll pay $1.02 an hour. 900 tell me to take a hike but the remaining 900 still “need” to work. I tell them the wage just dropped to $1.00 an hour. Another 10 walk. The remaining 90 still “need” the job.

    While that maybe a tactic, it rarely (never?) works.

    I have cars on a used car lot.
    Every year 10 million new cars are made.
    Every year 6 million used cars come on to the market.
    There are 30 million used cars on the market already.

    There are only 12 million buyers per year.

    According to you, you should be able to go to a used car dealer and get one of them for $1.

    Yet, it does not happen.

    All goods have three prices:
    (1) the price a buyer will pay.
    (2) the price the seller will accept.
    (3) the price that is actually transacted.

    Both parties work to achieve the closer to their price. In the end, it is somewhere in between.
    This happens with labor as well and as such your scenario NEVER OCCURS

    It is a fantasy you make up in your head to justify great evil on other people.

  53. Richmond Spitfire says:

    Blag Flag,

    I have learned so much from you the past couple of days on this!

    Charlie will accuse me of being one of your sychophants, but he’s wrong…because what you are teaching here does make sense to me and confirms in my mind things that I had wondered about…

    Thank you!
    RS

    • confirms in my mind what you want to believe.

      BF’s example above is absolute nonsense, but convince yourself it isn’t. This is like talking to walls … except a lot more boring. You guys kill me …

      • Charlie,

        Where do you see the nonsense? If I were hungry, eight dollars a day would buy me seven dollar value meals. And if I worked hard, I might prove myself and get a raise. He’s not forcing me to take the job, just offering very little money to work for him. I can choose to seek other jobs.
        Funny thing, those who work fare much better than those who refuse to work.

        http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/221932/poor-politics/robert-rector
        In both good and bad economic environments, the typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year — the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year — the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year — nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.

    • I think they should split the bills. Consider when the Dem’s had the majority and passed Obamacare. We had our town hall meetings and they ignored us, until election time. But they had the authority and acted as they thought proper. If the voters agree with their actions, they will stay in office.

      Did you see my post above on the $786,000 lawsuit over Viagra the unions demanded be included in their healthcare?

      • I did. I also heard that since that all became public, they have now dropped it. Showing, of course, how reasonable unions really are.

      • I also read where the Green Bay school board met last night and suspended their expensive Emeritus program. Amazing what happens when some exposure is given to these scams. Article said teachers were in tears. No doubt they were! I cry too if I knew I would not be in for the $2000/day gig!

  54. Charlie,

    Apples/oranges; survival vs. choice. Try again.

    Interesting.

    So what I see here in your understanding is:

    If the choice to be made has NO difference in consequences, then you belief it is a free choice

    If the choice to be made has trade offs, resulting is a divergence of consequences, then you belief it is forced

    Agree or disagree? Just tryin’ to understand your thinking here, bro!

  55. We made our move!!!! Separated the bill out and voted! Collective bargaining now restricted in Wisconsin!

    Protesters running to capital and whining that it isn’t fair. What?????

    • Bamadad says:

      The news just said the Dim Senators are running back to the capital to try and put a stop to this “illegal move”. Too late, they should have been there doing their job.

      • It’s unbelievable. Apparently all hell’s broke lose downtown Madison. Breaking glass at the capital,etc.

        • I hope your fleebags are proud of themselves.. Stay on your own side of Lake Michigan………

  56. Kathy

    This one is for you, from one of those I used to do battle for. Yes, we lost.

    Noticed he was in Oregon. Maybe there will be 2 of us. 🙂

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/why_i_do_not_have_solidarity_w.html

    • Thank you! I can’t tell you how much hearing these kinds of stories help. Living near Madison, the progressive agenda has always been alive and well and this last month has been extra trying. There is hope!

  57. Warning-Reading this may make you throw up!! I’m surprised they didn’t just go ahead and say he was riding a white horse.

    Before the Wisconsin State Senate separated collective bargaining rights for public unions from their budget bill and passed it, a Democratic State Senator on the lam said he “drove 80 miles per hour in order to try to get back to do something” about it. However, he was unable to get back to the Capitol since he, along with the 13 other Democrats in Wisconsin’s state Senate, are currently hiding in Illinois.

    Relevant transcript below:

    LAWRENCE O’DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Senator Larson (D-Wis), as soon as you heard about this plan, you actually started driving back to Wisconsin right away?

    STATE SEN. LARSON (D-WIS.): I did. I was trying to see if there was something we could do, anything, in order to try and stop this, but it was pretty obvious they didn’t want to have anything to do with that. They didn’t want the Democrats there. We thought we were talking, we thought we were having good discussions, we thought we were on our way to having a compromise that would preserve workers’ rights, remove some of the bad things from this Trojan Horse bill and get something through that the people of Wisconsin could agree with and find a compromise with. That seemed to have been an affront. It seemed to have been a trick again on their part. If they wanted us back, they could have had us back. This was something where they intentionally deceived us.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/03/09/runaway_wis_dem_drove_back_as_fast_as_he_could_to_stop_gop.html

    • This from a Senator in hiding…how could they be talking from Illinois….they cannot handle the fact that ther dems are getting back what they sowed.

    • It has been amazing to me who the left chooses to idolize. Speaks volumes to their character and moral principles.

  58. Breaking glass at the capital

    Awhile ago I posted, both here and on my blog, that any attempt to reduce government expenditures would lead to civil unrest.

    Since such reductions would necessarily be placed upon a specific group of citizens, that group would react very poorly to such reductions.

    This is important: this was not necessarily a reduction –but merely a threat of reduction– and the outcry has been massive.

    When reductions are mandated by economic reality, cities will burn.

    • OK, BF, you’ve won me over on another point. While I still think there might be someone in that football stadium that is smarter than you, I do have to admit, you certainly are correct more often than not.

      I still think voting is important, however!

  59. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    Even FDR, who was no “conservative” understood that you cannot have “public” unions with collective bargaining power in a “free” society.

    Ultimately, who pays for the public employees and provides their wages, pensions, benefits, and everything else? The TAXPAYERS! If the public employees are allowed to unionize and demand collective bargaining “rights” (I love how they misuse the word “right” here…), then who are they bargaining AGAINST??? After all, bargaining is an adversarial process.

    They are bargaining AGAINST THE TAXPAYERS!

%d bloggers like this: