Union Worker Protests In Wi

[Oggmonster 0]

I was thinking along the same lines as you. Until I watched the 17 minute you tube clip.

All right, I just watched about 4 minutes, and it was hilarious. He's simply stating that it takes a certain loserish quality to choose to sleep on a ****ing air mattress in the middle of the capitol building for days on end. When the host and the protesters point out that they have been washing in the bathroom every morning and expect him to make a lame ass apology for his comments he says something like, "yeah they're washing up in the bathroom in the morning which is kind of another reason they're slobs."Admittedly I only watched a few minutes, but c'mon, it was funny.I just watched a few more minutes. What part of this "disgusting" on his part? Wouldn't you be a little unnerved if you just had thousands of people yelling in your face? Kudos to him for poking lighthearted fun at an angry mob an hour after what could have been a scary situation for him and not backing down in order to pander to oversensitive people like yourself.

[hblask 1]

....ok? What's your point? Would you like to compare them with CEO salaries who give extensively to Republicans? I mean...I don't see your point.

You may want to check the stats on that one. Oh wait, I forgot, you don't care about facts and things, only unions soundbites.I may change my opinion if you'll address the actual wording of the bill.And the actual giving of large companies.

[custom36 4]

You may want to check the stats on that one. Oh wait, I forgot, you don't care about facts and things, only unions soundbites.

I made it this far. Still ignoring you, based on previous discussions.

[hblask 1]

For anyone who is wondering why people are so desperate to break the public sector union's stranglehold on public policy, here's a hint:Unions' idea of how to provide education

[hblask 1]

I made it this far. Still ignoring you, based on previous discussions.

Curious that you are ignoring the person who has provided the most, you know, facts and stuff, regarding the bill.Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

[custom36 4]

Curious that you are ignoring the person who has provided the most, you know, facts and stuff, regarding the bill.Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

Yeah. It's pretty tough to argue with the 20 people you know in Wisconsin.

[hblask 1]

Yeah. It's pretty tough to argue with the 20 people you know in Wisconsin.

And, you know, the actual bill, which I read and posted. But hey, why should that matter, this is about PRINCIPLES!And if you've skipped reading my posts, you've missed that I've changed my mind and am now opposed to the bill as written.But hey: WORKERS RIGHTS!!! FIGHT FOR THE LITTLE GUY!!!! UNITED AGAINST THE MAN!!!! LOOK FOR THE UNION LABEL!!!Wow, that's so much better than, you know, reading the actual bill.

[custom36 4]

And, you know, the actual bill, which I read and posted. But hey, why should that matter, this is about PRINCIPLES!And if you've skipped reading my posts, you've missed that I've changed my mind and am now opposed to the bill as written.But hey: WORKERS RIGHTS!!! FIGHT FOR THE LITTLE GUY!!!! UNITED AGAINST THE MAN!!!! LOOK FOR THE UNION LABEL!!!Wow, that's so much better than, you know, reading the actual bill.

Heh. I have read the bill. If you had shown any interest in the beginning of the thread of actually debating the merits and keeping an open mind, I may not have chosen to stop responding. It's good that you've changed your mind, but based on our previous interactions, I've lost any desire to debate with you on this issue, specifically.Again, it has nothing to do with facts - I love using facts. It's you. Personally. Have a good night.

[hblask 1]

Heh. I have read the bill been told what to think about the bill. If you had shown any interest in the beginning of the thread of actually debating the merits and keeping an open mind agreeing with my union overlords, I may not have chosen to stop responding. It's good that you've changed your mind, but based on our previous interactions the fact that I look silly when faced with facts, I've lost any desire to debate with you on this issue, specifically.

FYP

[custom36 4]

FYP

This is exactly why I will not engage in debate with you. Though, it's a bit of an ego-boost to see that you care so much about it. So....thanks for that.

[85suited 0]

Heh. I have read the bill. If you had shown any interest in the beginning of the thread of actually debating the merits and keeping an open mind, I may not have chosen to stop responding. It's good that you've changed your mind, but based on our previous interactions, I've lost any desire to debate with you on this issue, specifically.Again, it has nothing to do with facts - I love using facts. It's you. Personally. Have a good night.

HB might be the only one here with an open mind...and if you read any of his posts...he said he has changed his stance on some of the issues...

[custom36 4]

HB might be the only one here with an open mind...and if you read any of his posts...he said he has changed his stance on some of the issues...

You are likely correct, that I've missed his change. But I do not wish to speak with someone who continues to characterize me as sheep looking to my union overlords for direction. Someone who does not believe that I do my own research, come to my own conclusions based on that research, and correct myself when proven wrong is not someone I wish to engage in debate with. Maybe it's a personal grudge now...I don't know. I just feel it's not worth my time.

[CaneBrain 95]

All right, I just watched about 4 minutes, and it was hilarious. He's simply stating that it takes a certain loserish quality to choose to sleep on a ****ing air mattress in the middle of the capitol building for days on end. When the host and the protesters point out that they have been washing in the bathroom every morning and expect him to make a lame ass apology for his comments he says something like, "yeah they're washing up in the bathroom in the morning which is kind of another reason they're slobs."Admittedly I only watched a few minutes, but c'mon, it was funny.I just watched a few more minutes. What part of this "disgusting" on his part? Wouldn't you be a little unnerved if you just had thousands of people yelling in your face? Kudos to him for poking lighthearted fun at an angry mob an hour after what could have been a scary situation for him and not backing down in order to pander to oversensitive people like yourself.

when the tea partiers were criticized for how they protested and their general appearance I am sure it was also all in good fun to you.

[Oggmonster 0]

when the tea partiers were criticized for how they protested and their general appearance I am sure it was also all in good fun to you.

It was. I laughed many times when the tea partiers were being mocked, ad nauseum. And now I'm laughing at the specific way a state politician is mocking a large group of people, many of them his constituents. I also think it's funny that custom thinks that the politician's comments are "disgusting." I'm sure he was disgusted by the way the tea partiers were mocked.

[brvheart 1,752]

Well, this thread is worthless again.

[Roll the Bones 74]

Well, this thread is worthless again.

Okay, I'll try. The problem is the last 30 years on average the middle class salaries have been in decline and the lower wage jobs are dissapearing and certainly not growing with the cost of living? Does anyone see that as a long term problem? It would be different if we could say "Hey, RR, our companies are failing and going out of business though!" But the problem is you'd be wrong. We have two distinct classes these days. The upper class is growing and the middle class is declining as I've shown graph after graph and analysis. Since the crash the government has done everything for these big businesses and it has worked. The stock market is back up, Wall Street is making record salaries. Big Businesses have a trillion dollars cash on hand. But are they making that here? No. They are investing all their money overseas. You guys seem to measure economic succes in America by how rich our top companies get. I measure it by the standard and health of the American worker; unemployment and wages. Our manufacturing force has been cut in half. Where we really seem to differ is on how to get it back. You keep wanting to keep low taxes so these businesses can keep developing other countries, I want to keep it here. China is kicking our goddam ass right now. In the next few years they are opening 20 universities comparable to MIT. They are light years ahead of us in Green tech, they are investing out the ass in infrastructure which employs tons of people and helps there economy. They are investing hundred of billions in R and D.What's the Republican plan here? Cut wages, lower tax on the rich, lower our standard of living, cut education, cut science, cut R & D, in other words do away with all the things that would create jobs, higher pay and ultmately increase taxes to pay for the problems we have. There are tons of things we can do to improve the situation. FDR had the New Deal, Eisenhauer built expressways across the country, LBJ had NASA, we have Afghanistan and Iraq to show for all that money.This isn't rocket science and worked for us for many years. Stop the coorporate welfare, raise the tax on the rich instead of the middle class, create jobs. Do some sensible things instead of buying into this cultural meme of supply side economics and it's mantras that people keep repeating regardless of the fact that it isn't working. There is no demand because our money is gone and depleted. Christ, in the great recession Wall Street took a ton of it. People joke about my comment of class warfare and giving money to the rich from the poor, but isn't that exactly what happened. Our pensions tanked, our property values were slashed and the rich made billions and billions off it. How much of our tax dollars had to go to the rich in bailouts? How are they repaying us? Spending it overseas and buying politicians so they can do it all over again. They want to ban any oversight or regulation from stopping them from screwing us again as well. We are creating another bubble right now.You guys screaming about big government always point to examples of waste. No one wants wasteful government, but that doesn't mean you get rid of it! It means you work on making it less wastefull!

[LongLiveYorke 38]

So going back to that earlier example I was using with the theoretically perfectly fair system that results in a wide disparity of wealth among the rich and not-rich. Your position would be that if there was a theoretically guaranteed mechanism to shrink that gap that was inherently unfair to the rich, that mechanism should be used.Is that a fair assessment?

Clearly, fairness should not be the only standard by which we judge a political philosophy. Pure anarchy, of course, is a theoretically fair system, but I don't think anyone really thinks that would be best for America.I also don't understand the argument that a fixed percentage of income is somehow fair. The rich are still paying more for essentially the same services. Why don't we simply have a truly flat tax: everybody over the age of 18 pays the same dollar amount. With about 4 trillion in total taxes and 200 million adults, why don't we simply require all people pay $20,000 a year? That'd be more fair, certainly.

[CaneBrain 95]

My favorite part of this is watching the same conservative pundits who insisted (during the Bush tax cut discussions) that 250k a year was barely a livable wage declare that teachers making 51k a year plus benefits are fat-cats in their yachts. Well, conservative pundits and people who post here.

[hblask 1]

The problem is the last 30 years on average the middle class salaries have been in decline and the lower wage jobs are dissapearing and certainly not growing with the cost of living? Does anyone see that as a long term problem?

If the number of those jobs is shrinking and can be done more cheaply overseas, then no, not so much. Getting cheap stuff is good.

Big Businesses have a trillion dollars cash on hand.

What do you think the correct number should be? Is that too high or too low, based on current business opportunities and tradeoffs?

But are they making that here? No. They are investing all their money overseas. You guys seem to measure economic succes in America by how rich our top companies get. I measure it by the standard and health of the American worker; unemployment and wages. Our manufacturing force has been cut in half.

We still make as much stuff, with half as many people. This is a Good Thing, economically speaking. It's tough for the people who lost their job, but a big improvement overall. Just as people said computers would wipe out the workforce, this fear of losing crappy jobs to foreign competitors is misguided.

Where we really seem to differ is on how to get it back. You keep wanting to keep low taxes so these businesses can keep developing other countries,

If you lower the cost of something, you get more of it. If you raise the cost, you get less of it. What happens if you raise the cost of manufacturing here by raising a major cost component, taxes?

China is kicking our goddam ass right now.

Basically, only in population. For example, from here we learn:

Despite all the recent hoopla about China becoming the world’s second biggest economy and India hoping to follow suit, the reality is that the per capita GDP—even measured by purchasing power parity—in both is pathetic. America’s is about $47,000, China’s $7,500

[hblask 1]

Part 2:

They are light years ahead of us in Green tech, they are investing out the ass in infrastructure which employs tons of people and helps there economy.

And what is that, 0.0001% of their economy? Sure, corporate welfare can produce specific results, but that's no guarantee it's a net gain.

They are investing hundred of billions in R and D.

Which for a country their size is nothing. For example, the US is spent almost 370 billion in 2007, with a fraction of their population.

Cut wages,

The federal government is not doing this; state governments are because they are on the verge of bankruptcy (more specifically, they are not giving wages), and the government is not doing this to the private sector.

lower tax on the rich, lower our standard of living,

Make up your mind, which is it?

cut education,

Cutting federal spending on education = net gain in educational achievement. Money spent at the federal level on education is pure, 100% waste.

This isn't rocket science and worked for us for many years.

If you ignore opportunity costs, anything can look like it worked.

Stop the coorporate welfare,

I guess you don't realize that this is the exact opposite of everything you've said to this point.And on and on.... basically, look at my responses. What you've listed is a bunch of unrelated soundbites, strung together, without much thought as to whether they are true or make sense. If you'd like further explanations of any point, let me know.

[85suited 0]

My favorite part of this is watching the same conservative pundits who insisted (during the Bush tax cut discussions) that 250k a year was barely a livable wage declare that teachers making 51k a year plus benefits are fat-cats in their yachts. Well, conservative pundits and people who post here.

For the first time in history, the average annual compensation for a teacher in the Milwaukee Public School system will exceed $100,000. That staggering figure was revealed last night at a meeting of the MPS School Board.The average salary for an MPS teacher is $56,500. When fringe benefits are factored in, the annual compensation will be $100,005 in 2011.

On Average there are 180 school days a year.$56,500 = $314 per day with 180 days workingOn Average there are 260 business days a year (most people work this)say most people get 2 weeks vacation So they then work 250 days a yearIf you take the average teacher pay per day and multiply it by $314 they would make $78,500 if they were to work a full business year.Teachers for the most part, are well compensated - plus...Job for life.....

[custom36 4]

On Average there are 180 school days a year.$56,500 = $314 per day with 180 days workingOn Average there are 260 business days a year (most people work this)say most people get 2 weeks vacation So they then work 250 days a year

You're assuming 8 hours per day, right? Make that 10 or 11. I know it's tough to believe, but it's true. Most teachers work (at least) 7-5, and generally more hours than that. Their day really doesn't start at 8 or end at 3.

[hblask 1]

You're assuming 8 hours per day, right? Make that 10 or 11. I know it's tough to believe, but it's true. Most teachers work (at least) 7-5, and generally more hours than that. Their day really doesn't start at 8 or end at 3.

Yeah, the real world works that way too.

[85suited 0]

You're assuming 8 hours per day, right? Make that 10 or 11. I know it's tough to believe, but it's true. Most teachers work (at least) 7-5, and generally more hours than that. Their day really doesn't start at 8 or end at 3.

neither does most people's making over 70K

[custom36 4]

neither does most people's making over 70K

And the average teacher salary in the state of Wisconsin (because the state doesn't consist of Milwaukee) is ~46k/year according to conservative fuckslut Michele Malkin.And they don't work 180 days per year nor 8 hours/day School calendar =/= teacher calendar.For many children, they're the only positive influence they ever see.They're not fighting pay cuts - only fighting for the ability to collectively bargain working conditions (like teaching 25-30 kids/class as opposed to 35-40 kids/class)Not that they deserve these pay cuts anyway, when we could make more money closing tax loopholes or bringing tax rates back to where they were before GWBush and significantly improve the state's revenue.But obviously cutting funding to education and cutting the pay of those making (arguably) 50k/year is more important than a slight raise in taxes on those making over 250k/year, or even closing tax LOOPHOLES for multi-million (multi-billion?) dollar coporations.So, I mean, why not, right?And, for the millionth time, THIS ISN'T JUST TEACHERS! You really want to argue that social workers are underpaid? Janitors? Snow plow drivers? I realize the conservative talking point is "Those damn greedy moneybag teachers," but even if it were true that they were overpaid, that doesn't legitimize taking away bargaining rights from the millions of other public service workers that nobody is even arguing are overpaid or greedy. This entire thread I haven't seen the argument that any of these other people are overpaid./been drinkin.