It's All Over But The Crying in WI

[Saving Hawaii]

Why do you think teachers aren't generating wealth too?

Apparently when teachers at ritzy private schools teach rich kids they're generating wealth. When teachers at rundown public schools teach everybody else they're suckling up to the trough. When the UPS driver smashes a box on your front porch it's wealth generation (although he has a good union, so I'm not certain about that). When the USPS mailman drops a letter in your box, he's leeching off the blood of the fat guy who sits at his desk all day rubber-stamping layoff notices.

It's strange how that works.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

Nobody has taken any rights away from anybody, every teacher can still negotiate their contracts

No they can't.

 

[JoyJuice]

 

[lordbt]

Sorry to disappoint you, but this is just to opening volley in the Wisconsin Wars. These are just a few of the challenges the Republicans will face before/during the 2012 Election.

1. Governor Walker faces 300 000 angry public servants and a whole series of legal challenges that willl steadily be making their way through the courts.

2. 8 Republican senators who have served more than 1 year are subject to recall. Governor Walker and the rest of the GOP legislatures will be subject to recall in January 2012.

3. Faced with just a 43% approval rating, Governor will face both external abd internal pressures. The chances of the Wisconsin Republicans retaining their majorrity in the legislature is looking bleak, while those Republican politicians whose careers are in jeporady due to recall, will be pressuring the Governor to make compromises to save their seats.

4. Governor Walker faces the ire of 50 000+ public school teachers whose union he arbitrarily refuses to recognize as their legal representative to negotiate collecting bargains. Walker will have to explain to the courts why the unions that supported him in the last election are exempt, while those who didn't support him are punished.

5. Wisconsin's teachers will also have the full support of the nation's 3 million+ public schools in addition to organized labor in the private sector.

6. Wisconsin's Governor has provided the Obama Administration with the ideal issue to reinvigorate the "foot soldiers" and mobilize millions of additional teachers, public sector workers and members of organized lavor.

Yawn. Like these unions werent mobilized against him in 2010. The only thing of interest to me in your post was Walkers 43% approval rating. I find that to be quite high considering everything that happened. If that is his low water mark, and I suspect it will be, he has nothing to worry about particularly if the economy of his state improves over the next couple of years.

To be honest, when this story first broke, I was certain the republicans would cave in the face of angry protesters and bad press. But to their credit, they stood their ground. Now if only republicans on the national level would follow suit. Perhaps this is just the showing of spine that they needed. We will see.

 

[GQ Chris]

I'd love for moonbeam to do this in California, but he lacks the courage.

 

[nephilimiyr]

"All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public-personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government-employee organizations. The employer is the whole people."

-- President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1937 --​

.​

 

[jamesrwright3]

So it's okay for corporations to donate to politicians, but not unions? I see. Oh wait...that's right, unions are corporations too. And corporations are people if you believe Scalia et al. Hmm...sounds like there's a federal civil rights violation case here too.

Unions are not corporations, not even close. Corporations produce wealth. Unions destroy it.

 

[Umaro]

Unions are not corporations, not even close. Corporations produce wealth. Unions destroy it.

Tell that to the financial sector. They sure destroyed plenty.

 

[tulc]

Unions are not corporations, not even close. Corporations produce wealth. Unions destroy it.

See, i don't get that, Unions sell a product (their labor), and as with anyone who sells something they try and get as much for their product as they ca, Do corporations sell tire products for as little as they can? Why do people whine about the Unions, is it because they're better at it then the corporations like them to be?
tulc(don't hate the player, hate the game)

 

[EdwinWillers]

"All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public-personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government-employee organizations. The employer is the whole people."

-- President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1937 --​

Excellent quote.

• The public pays the salaries of public sector [union] workers.
• Union dues are collected by the union leadership.
• Union leadership donates a portion of union dues to various campaigns.
• The vast bulk of union dues (> 90%) historically go to Democrat politicians.
• Unions collectively bargain with government officials, often the very Democrats to whose campaigns they contributed.
• Unions gain powerful concessions from those to whom they contributed.
• The public has effectively no say in how their money is spent.

It's a great money laundering scheme for Democrats.

It's a despicable use of public funds.

 

[tulc]

Excellent quote.

• The public pays the salaries of public sector [union] workers.
• Union dues are collected by the union leadership.
• Union leadership donates a portion of union dues to various campaigns.
• The vast bulk of union dues (> 90%) historically go to Democrat politicians.
• Unions collectively bargain with government officials, often the very Democrats to whose campaigns they contributed.
• Unions gain powerful concessions from those to whom they contributed.

It's a great money laundering scheme for Democrats.

It's a despicable use of public funds.

Honestly? I'm not seeing anything except management (private/public sector) trying to coerce workers to work for less money and benefits. Which is what management ALWAYS wants. That they wrap it up in mom/apple pie/patriotism doesn't change that.
tulc(needs one more cup of coffee then needs to go to bed)

 

[jamesrwright3]

Tell that to the financial sector. They sure destroyed plenty.

The fact is unions have never "produced" anything.

 

[Drekkan85]

Excellent quote.

• The public pays the salaries of public sector [union] workers.
• Union dues are collected by the union leadership.
• Union leadership donates a portion of union dues to various campaigns.
• The vast bulk of union dues (> 90%) historically go to Democrat politicians.
• Unions collectively bargain with government officials, often the very Democrats to whose campaigns they contributed.
• Unions gain powerful concessions from those to whom they contributed.
• The public has effectively no say in how their money is spent.

It's a great money laundering scheme for Democrats.

It's a despicable use of public funds.

Ok, so, Public Sector unions give heavily to Democrats, and then benefit when those Democrats get into office in terms of negotiation... so they shouldn't be allowed to exist.

Massive corporations, such as Halliburton, give heavily to Republican candidates. When those candidates win, Halliburton negotiates with them and gets massively inflated 'no-bid' government contracts.

So my question is - should we not allow Halliburtons to exist, not allow them to give money, or not allow any corporation that donates money to benefit from a government contract (and will we enforce this through 'shell' or 'sham' companies to prevent them from getting around those restrictions)?

 

[kermit]

Unions are not corporations, not even close. Corporations produce wealth. Unions destroy it.

Once again you make the erroneous claim that labor wages are a zero-sum transaction. Henry Ford's detractors made the same claims when he was raising employee wages. Contrary to their wealth destroying argumnet of higher labor wages his company grew each time he raised wages. We can see the same thing is the 20th century history of labor. When union membership was high American companies did well and the economy was relatively stable (recessions are invitable). As union membership decreased our economy has been on a downward spiral. Union membership rates is directly related to the size and health of the middle class and our whole economy is dependent on the size and health of the middle class.

UNIONS DON'T DESTROY WEALTH...OUTSOURCING DESTROYS IT!!

 

[jamesrwright3]

Once again you make the erroneous claim that labor wages are a zero-sum transaction. Henry Ford's detractors made the same claims when he was raising employee wages. Contrary to their wealth destroying argumnet of higher labor wages his company grew each time he raised wages. We can see the same thing is the 20th century history of labor. When union membership was high American companies did well and the economy was relatively stable (recessions are invitable). As union membership decreased our economy has been on a downward spiral. Union membership rates is directly related to the size and health of the middle class and our whole economy is dependent on the size and health of the middle class.

UNIONS DON'T DESTROY WEALTH...OUTSOURCING DESTROYS IT!!

You are confusing correlation with causation. Yes, unions initially served a purpose. They improved working conditions and got higher wages and improved working conditions for their workers. However, they have gotten overly greedy, especially public sector unions and are now net wealth destroyers. The legacy pension/healthcare costs have turned the auto companies into healthcare companies that produce autos, and most public pension systems are a disaster. If unions can get higher wages, that is fine. Workers can be cut. However, you can't weigh down the system with exorbitant benefits to employees that are no longer producing anything.

 

[tulc]

The fact is unions have never "produced" anything.

...those were corporation heads working on the assembly lines building cars? Or were there workers putting things together? To me? you seem to be saying "It's Santa who makes all the toys, those elves just get in the way!"
tulc(suspects workers play an important part, claiming they don't just sounds...silly)

 

[Belk]

Excellent quote.

• The public pays the salaries of public sector [union] workers.
• Union dues are collected by the union leadership.
• Union leadership donates a portion of union dues to various campaigns.
• The vast bulk of union dues (> 90%) historically go to Democrat politicians.
• Unions collectively bargain with government officials, often the very Democrats to whose campaigns they contributed.
• Unions gain powerful concessions from those to whom they contributed.
• The public has effectively no say in how their money is spent.

It's a great money laundering scheme for Democrats.

It's a despicable use of public funds.

You might have missed this, but simply because I work for the government does not make my salary public funds. You can no more tell me who I may or may not support financially then you can dictate the type of furniture I buy for my house. If I choose to support the Democratic party due to enlightened self interest it is no different then you choosing the party you feel best supports your interests.

 

[Belk]

You are confusing correlation with causation. Yes, unions initially served a purpose. They improved working conditions and got higher wages and improved working conditions for their workers. However, they have gotten overly greedy, especially public sector unions and are now net wealth destroyers. The legacy pension/healthcare costs have turned the auto companies into healthcare companies that produce autos, and most public pension systems are a disaster. If unions can get higher wages, that is fine. Workers can be cut. However, you can't weigh down the system with exorbitant benefits to employees that are no longer producing anything.

Yup. That is why people choose a teaching career. Greed.

 

[tulc]

You are confusing correlation with causation. Yes, unions initially served a purpose. They improved working conditions and got higher wages and improved working conditions for their workers. However, they have gotten overly greedy, especially public sector unions and are now net wealth destroyers. The legacy pension/healthcare costs have turned the auto companies into healthcare companies that produce autos, and most public pension systems are a disaster. If unions can get higher wages, that is fine. Workers can be cut. However, you can't weigh down the system with exorbitant benefits to employees that are no longer producing anything. (emp. added)

Yeah, too bad we don't have a handy ice floe where they could all just walk out on and take care of the problem.
tulc(sorry, feeling a little cranky today)

 

[lordbt]

You might have missed this, but simply because I work for the government does not make my salary public funds. You can no more tell me who I may or may not support financially then you can dictate the type of furniture I buy for my house. If I choose to support the Democratic party due to enlightened self interest it is no different then you choosing the party you feel best supports your interests.

He wasnt talking about who YOU contribute to, but to whom the union contributes with your dues.