Is anyone following Wisconsin?

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
The Education system need's to be totally revamped, to go back again is a mistake, as Europe and Asia are putting our kid's behind them, we need to re do the Education system over, why do private school's spend less per pupil but get as good and sometimes better results? It;s just not about spending, but spending wisely which this country never has done. As far as industry the one of the reason's they left was high cost in production. They also get killed with cheaper imports. The Gas tax was for the infrastructure, what happened to that, they used it for something else, Do we really trust our Government with our money? SS is broke Medi care is broke Medi cair is broke, I surely don't!

So how does Europe and Asia do it? We agree on wise spending, but cutting off both feet in able to run the coming marathon makes no sense. Nor does wise spending even necessarily mean less spending. As far as SS and Medicare and Medicaid, SS is not broke, nor would it even be in any danger whatsoever if the SS tax that the government has been collecting for half a century hadn't been spent on everything else. Medicare and Medicaid while expensive are also very popular programs. It is not uncommon to have people rail against socialized healthcare yet decry any cuts against these programs which are in essence socialized healthcare.
 

Jones

fILE A GRIEVE!
Staff member
Real leaders don't bust unions

By Robert J. Kleine

As a former state treasurer of Michigan, I oversaw the finances of a state whose economic problems are even worse than those of our next-door neighbor, Wisconsin. Yet last year, we were able to enact legislation reduce pension benefits for school employees and require employee contributions for retiree heath care, without threatening to take away collective bargaining rights.
In 2010, budget problems brought on by the recession forced us to ask for concessions from state and school workers. Specifically, we needed to reduce our future liabilities for retiree health care and school employee pensions At the beginning of the decade, the pension system had been over 100 percent funded. After ten years of reversals in the stock market, it was down to 80 percent.
Our governor, Jennifer Granholm, told the teachers union the state could no longer afford a pure defined benefit plan for new school hires, in which the state is responsible for an employee’s entire retirement fund. Nor could we afford to allow teachers to retire at age 55 with a pension based on the average of their last three years’ salary.
The teachers recognized that Michigan was in financial straits and that changes had to be made. We were willing to compromise, too. After discussions with the union, the legislature passed a plan for new hires that raised the retirement age to 60 (we'd wanted 65), based pensions on the last five years' salary (we'd wanted nine), and required teachers to contribute 3 percent of their pay to retiree health benefits. In exchange, the state is contributing 1 percent of teachers’ salaries to a 401(k) each year.
In the end, we got a fair deal that saved Michigan millions of dollars, with potential savings of billions if the 3 percent contribution for retiree health benefits is ruled constitutional.

One thing we never considered was ending teachers' collective bargaining rights. Michigan is a strong union state. If we had tried that tactic, Lansing would have been just as chaotic as Madison has been these past few weeks. Beyond that, it's good policy to allow teachers, police officers and firefighters to sit down at the table and work out agreements with their employers. If you treat public employees well, you get good public service in return.
Governor Granholm is a Democrat, so she wasn’t going to attack union rights. But in 1997, Republican Governor John Engler and an all-Republican legislature made similar changes to the pension system for state employees, without trying to take away collective bargaining. Our new governor, Rick Snyder, is also a Republican. He’s asking state employees for $180 million in concessions, but he’s a practical businessman who understands that stripping workers of their rights will ruin labor relations in Michigan.
We didn’t need to take an adversarial stance toward unions to strike a pension reform deal. If Governor Walker had followed Michigan’s strategy, he would have an agreement with Wisconsin’s public employees by now. Public employee unions realize the states are in financial trouble. In Wisconsin, they've already agreed to most of Walker's financial demands.
And yet, Walker is intent on taking advantage of the economic downturn to do away with labor rights and repeal 100 years of legislation enacted to help workers and low-income individuals. It might be a good ploy to get concessions for the unions, and it may help him in the short run, but it’s going to ruin him in the long run.
If Scott Walker were a good leader, he could figure out a way to negotiate with his employees and save Wisconsin money without eliminating collective bargaining. The fact that he would rather dictate his own terms shows he doesn’t know how to run a state. Good government depends on good relationships with workers. If Walker wins his struggle with the unions, he'll inevitably end up complaining that government is inefficient and state employees are lazy, even though he will have caused those problems by destroying the morale of his workforce.
I believe Governor Walker has poisoned labor relations for years to come, ensuring the failure of his administration. Compromise is not a dirty word. It is an integral part of politics and the collective bargaining process. Anyone who thinks otherwise should not be in politics or in a leadership position. As Edmund Burke said, "All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter."
Over the past two years, I have given several speeches warning about the threat of income inequality to our democracy. Michigan has lost 850,000 jobs in the last decade, almost all due to the decline in the domestic auto industry. Our state has slid from the top ten in per capita income to 37th. The auto industry and the unions helped create the middle class in Michigan. Now, that’s pretty much gone. Real incomes for the average American have not risen in 30 years. Almost all the economic gains are going to the top one percent.
Ironically, some economists believe that income inequality contributed to the financial collapse that’s causing Governor Walker to claim his state can no longer afford public employee unions. Since middle class incomes were stagnant, the only way the average American could spend was through borrowing. People used their houses as ATMs, and became overextended financially. As the super-wealthy began looking to stash their swelling incomes in more lucrative investments, financiers created mortgage-backed securities and collateral debt obligations. The whole system fell apart, and now Governor Walker is exploiting the crisis to reduce government spending and take away benefits from public workers, which will further erode the middle class.
The phrase "class warfare" means you can’t complain if the rich get everything. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said, "We can either have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of the few, but we can’t have both."
Governor Walker’s misguided proposal to balance his state’s budget is pitting middle-class workers against the government, against public sector workers, and even against each other. If Governor Walker and his Tea Party allies have their way, they’ll destroy America’s social safety net. We're seeing in Wisconsin how this has the potential to tear the country apart.
Robert J. Kleine was Treasurer of Michigan from 2006 to 2010.
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
Real leaders don't bust unions

By Robert J. Kleine

As a former state treasurer of Michigan, I oversaw the finances of a state whose economic problems are even worse than those of our next-door neighbor, Wisconsin. Yet last year, we were able to enact legislation reduce pension benefits for school employees and require employee contributions for retiree heath care, without threatening to take away collective bargaining rights.
In 2010, budget problems brought on by the recession forced us to ask for concessions from state and school workers. Specifically, we needed to reduce our future liabilities for retiree health care and school employee pensions At the beginning of the decade, the pension system had been over 100 percent funded. After ten years of reversals in the stock market, it was down to 80 percent.
Our governor, Jennifer Granholm, told the teachers union the state could no longer afford a pure defined benefit plan for new school hires, in which the state is responsible for an employee’s entire retirement fund. Nor could we afford to allow teachers to retire at age 55 with a pension based on the average of their last three years’ salary.
The teachers recognized that Michigan was in financial straits and that changes had to be made. We were willing to compromise, too. After discussions with the union, the legislature passed a plan for new hires that raised the retirement age to 60 (we'd wanted 65), based pensions on the last five years' salary (we'd wanted nine), and required teachers to contribute 3 percent of their pay to retiree health benefits. In exchange, the state is contributing 1 percent of teachers’ salaries to a 401(k) each year.
In the end, we got a fair deal that saved Michigan millions of dollars, with potential savings of billions if the 3 percent contribution for retiree health benefits is ruled constitutional.

One thing we never considered was ending teachers' collective bargaining rights. Michigan is a strong union state. If we had tried that tactic, Lansing would have been just as chaotic as Madison has been these past few weeks. Beyond that, it's good policy to allow teachers, police officers and firefighters to sit down at the table and work out agreements with their employers. If you treat public employees well, you get good public service in return.
Governor Granholm is a Democrat, so she wasn’t going to attack union rights. But in 1997, Republican Governor John Engler and an all-Republican legislature made similar changes to the pension system for state employees, without trying to take away collective bargaining. Our new governor, Rick Snyder, is also a Republican. He’s asking state employees for $180 million in concessions, but he’s a practical businessman who understands that stripping workers of their rights will ruin labor relations in Michigan.
We didn’t need to take an adversarial stance toward unions to strike a pension reform deal. If Governor Walker had followed Michigan’s strategy, he would have an agreement with Wisconsin’s public employees by now. Public employee unions realize the states are in financial trouble. In Wisconsin, they've already agreed to most of Walker's financial demands.
And yet, Walker is intent on taking advantage of the economic downturn to do away with labor rights and repeal 100 years of legislation enacted to help workers and low-income individuals. It might be a good ploy to get concessions for the unions, and it may help him in the short run, but it’s going to ruin him in the long run.
If Scott Walker were a good leader, he could figure out a way to negotiate with his employees and save Wisconsin money without eliminating collective bargaining. The fact that he would rather dictate his own terms shows he doesn’t know how to run a state. Good government depends on good relationships with workers. If Walker wins his struggle with the unions, he'll inevitably end up complaining that government is inefficient and state employees are lazy, even though he will have caused those problems by destroying the morale of his workforce.
I believe Governor Walker has poisoned labor relations for years to come, ensuring the failure of his administration. Compromise is not a dirty word. It is an integral part of politics and the collective bargaining process. Anyone who thinks otherwise should not be in politics or in a leadership position. As Edmund Burke said, "All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter."
Over the past two years, I have given several speeches warning about the threat of income inequality to our democracy. Michigan has lost 850,000 jobs in the last decade, almost all due to the decline in the domestic auto industry. Our state has slid from the top ten in per capita income to 37th. The auto industry and the unions helped create the middle class in Michigan. Now, that’s pretty much gone. Real incomes for the average American have not risen in 30 years. Almost all the economic gains are going to the top one percent.
Ironically, some economists believe that income inequality contributed to the financial collapse that’s causing Governor Walker to claim his state can no longer afford public employee unions. Since middle class incomes were stagnant, the only way the average American could spend was through borrowing. People used their houses as ATMs, and became overextended financially. As the super-wealthy began looking to stash their swelling incomes in more lucrative investments, financiers created mortgage-backed securities and collateral debt obligations. The whole system fell apart, and now Governor Walker is exploiting the crisis to reduce government spending and take away benefits from public workers, which will further erode the middle class.
The phrase "class warfare" means you can’t complain if the rich get everything. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said, "We can either have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of the few, but we can’t have both."
Governor Walker’s misguided proposal to balance his state’s budget is pitting middle-class workers against the government, against public sector workers, and even against each other. If Governor Walker and his Tea Party allies have their way, they’ll destroy America’s social safety net. We're seeing in Wisconsin how this has the potential to tear the country apart.
Robert J. Kleine was Treasurer of Michigan from 2006 to 2010.


So you find it perfectly acceptable that public sector unions and politicians team up against you and I the taxpayer? Did you know that the biggest proponent of tax increases are public sector unions? These people are the enemy of the taxpayer and needs to be brought back down to earth on where they stand.
 

Jones

fILE A GRIEVE!
Staff member
So you find it perfectly acceptable that public sector unions and politicians team up against you and I the taxpayer? Did you know that the biggest proponent of tax increases are public sector unions? These people are the enemy of the taxpayer and needs to be brought back down to earth on where they stand.
I don't know how you're getting any of that from the article I posted. For the record though, I don't consider school teachers, police officers, firemen, etc, to be "the enemy". I don't even consider politicians to be "the enemy" although I do think they are frequently wrong.
 

1timepu

Well-Known Member
Just so you know Goons the Tea Party is planning huge protest around the country to protest what you guy's are doing, and be warned we will have cameras and Youtube is our best friend
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
That's not what I've witnessed at the polls. Do you think they'd show up is scrapping Medicare was on the ballot?


bbsam,
The baby boomers have and will come out to vote against major changes in Medicare that are presently in OBAMA-CARE.

To pay for Obama care or to claim it would reduce cost the "doctor fix" of reducing medicare payments to doctors by 25% is part of it-the so called 5oo billion of savings.

Many doctors have told me that with increased cost of liability insurance because of lack of tort reform when the medicare payments are reduced by 25% they will simply no longer see medicare patients.
Many union people support Obama care -not really too concerned with the cadilllac tax but better look ahead --at 65 you are out of your company-union coverage.
You are now part of Obama revised medicare--less doctors for many ,many more people.
The "Liberal" AARP sold out the retiring baby boomers by supporting Obama care ---WHY ? because it would be good for seniors --no --They are a big business that will soak you for very expensive "medigap" insurance --that will cost you as a senior --thousands in your retirement.

Union,union union !!! Be careful what you support. When you are a senior citizen your union will not be there to hold your hand.
Also SENIORITY --forget when you are over 65 and you need a kidney or liver transplant --guess what even if you are first on the list --seniority does not count ---now your age and all the years of hard work mean nothing --the liberals push for the "young " even if they have never worked .:sad-little:

But of course -you will be a teamster forever---forever young --will never be in that 65 yr old group !!
 
Last edited:

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
The Republican Recipe for a National Policy

Right after you take office (however you got there), you give an enormous tax break from a government that is solvent back to the wealthiest people who do not need it. Then, after you refuse all security help from the previous administration, an unprecedented national attack occurs that horrifies the nation. You use this attack to justify an unnecessary invasion of Iraq which was not at all involved in the attack. This war bankrupts the nation. Then you undo some more of the laws that regulate Wall Street and the banking industry, allowing a financial meltdown that further bankrupts the nation. Then you blame the entire eight-year disaster on the next president who is from the other party while insisting that your own party is "fiscally responsible" and you insist on continuing all tax breaks for the wealthy.
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
I don't know how you're getting any of that from the article I posted. For the record though, I don't consider school teachers, police officers, firemen, etc, to be "the enemy". I don't even consider politicians to be "the enemy" although I do think they are frequently wrong.

I never stated that school teachers, police officers, or firemen were the enemy, but their union leadership is. As I see it the only reason they are unionized is due to certain politicians realizing that they benefit financially from unionized workers, but since the private sector unions are in decline they devised these public sector unions up in order to funnel taxpayer dollars into their own political coffers. These unions cannot strike in most instances, only negotiate. They negotiate with their own bosses who hold the purse strings and coincidentally whose future is reliant upon the support of their own workers. For example, if Scott Davis's future as UPS CEO was directly related to a vote that we as workers could take part in, and all he had to do to raise more money for the company was to go out and take it by force my bet is there would be little incentive for him to put up much resistance in contract negotiations. Worse yet if the money he was using was being directly borrowed against the future labor of our children and grand children would that make it ok with you? Given your past responses I'm guessing it does, but some of us do realize we have a moral responsibility to past, present, and future generations to keep the burden of government low so that those who succeed us can enjoy the same freedoms as we have been able to enjoy.
 

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
Cool. Governor Quinn told Chris Matthews the 14 senators from WI are welcome to stay in Illinois as long as they need to.

President Obama spoke out today supporting workers' rights.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
Hey moreluck, I found a recipe for ya:

The Republican Recipe for a National Policy

Right after you take office (however you got there), you give an enormous tax break from a government that is solvent back to the wealthiest people who do not need it. Then, after you refuse all security help from the previous administration, an unprecedented national attack occurs that horrifies the nation. You use this attack to justify an unnecessary invasion of Iraq which was not at all involved in the attack. This war bankrupts the nation. Then you undo some more of the laws that regulate Wall Street and the banking industry, allowing a financial meltdown that further bankrupts the nation. Then you blame the entire eight-year disaster on the next president who is from the other party while insisting that your own party is "fiscally responsible" and you insist on continuing all tax breaks for the wealthy.


hubrat,
Another re-write of history but it is all fiction. Here are the real facts--it has been government INTERVENTION-with banks and the mortgages that was the root cause of the disaster. LIBERAL POLICIES.
Fannie mae was started a very long time ago --FDR --probably before you were born. Carter the COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT ---Clinton --the repeal of Glass/steagle --Obama's Community organization ACORN -sued City bank for not having enough MINORITY mortgages.
Zero down payment RISKY GOV BACKED loans went like wildfire for over 20 years --all politicans even Bush wanted to shout about the great housing growth with more minorities than ever owning homes--{forget that many were unable to pay for them) . At this point --this all liberals can remember--because of the stupid liberal policy Wall street greed created the derivatives -we all know where we are today.
If Liberals would stop pushing these these dopey policies and PEOPLE took responsability for themselves --we may get out of this mess.
The housing bubble burst under Bush true --but the cause of the "housing bubble" were over 60 years of liberals pushing banks to make risky loans or the:sad-little: race card would be used against them. Keep yelling wallstreet--wallstreet--without the liberal push for minority house ownership it would have NEVER HAPPENED !!

Sadly , you have spoken of "closed minds" While I can easily see the greed oF Wall street( the so called right) -I also see the cause (liberal policies -so called left)
Can see and condemn both --you --"open minded " can only see what your left eyes will permit you --very sad:sad-little:
 
Last edited:

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
Sadly , you have spoken of "closed minds" While I can easily see the greed oF Wall street( the so called right) -I also see the cause (liberal policies -so called left)
Can see and condemn both --you --"open minded " can only see what your left eyes will permit you --very sad:sad-little:

You must be a brilliant judge.

Look again.

 

Jones

fILE A GRIEVE!
Staff member
I never stated that school teachers, police officers, or firemen were the enemy, but their union leadership is.
That's a distinction without a difference. The members are the union, and they elect their leadership.

As I see it the only reason they are unionized is due to certain politicians realizing that they benefit financially from unionized workers, but since the private sector unions are in decline they devised these public sector unions up in order to funnel taxpayer dollars into their own political coffers.
I don't know where you got all that. The Wisconsin teacher's union (WEAC) was founded in 1853. The American Federation of Teachers (an AFL-CIO affiliate)was founded in 1916. In both cases they were founded by their own members, not politicians looking for money. Regardless of why you think they unionized, any class of workers has a basic right to organize and bargain collectively for their labor.

These unions cannot strike in most instances, only negotiate. They negotiate with their own bosses who hold the purse strings and coincidentally whose future is reliant upon the support of their own workers. For example, if Scott Davis's future as UPS CEO was directly related to a vote that we as workers could take part in, and all he had to do to raise more money for the company was to go out and take it by force my bet is there would be little incentive for him to put up much resistance in contract negotiations.
Union members can't (and don't) "elect their own bosses", the fact that Rick Walker is their elected boss should make that point obvious. The comparison to Scott Davis would only be valid if everyone else in the USA got to vote for the leader of UPS as well, in which case the worker's vote would just be one drop in a very large bucket, which is a lot closer to the reality of the public union member's vote in the Wisconsin election. And even then unions don't vote as a block, they vote as individuals just like everyone else.

Worse yet if the money he was using was being directly borrowed against the future labor of our children and grand children would that make it ok with you?
No, that wouldn't make it ok with me, but so what? As has already been pointed out numerous times, the unions have already stated their willingness to accept all the economic provisions in this bill. It's not the unions who are being unreasonable about this.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
You must be a brilliant judge.

Look again.


hubrat,
I would hope you are not under the influence. I have acknowledged problems on left or right. You show me a dopey video --supporting my postion --but continue to only post liberal talking points. Hey , what you are on must be pretty good.
 

hubrat

Squeaky Wheel
hubrat,
I would hope you are not under the influence. I have acknowledged problems on left or right. You show me a dopey video --supporting my postion --but continue to only post liberal talking points. Hey , what you are on must be pretty good.

NOT

You need a class in comprehension. Your remark makes it so obvious you hear only what you want. He slammed both "sides" equally.
 
Top