Wisconsin Law Declared Valid

[Richard Simmons]

Just heard it on Fox News. The state supreme court just ruled that the law that was passed that limited the collective bargaining rights of unions in Wisconsin was ruled to be valid and will take effect immediately.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/14/wisconsins-high-court-says-controversial-union-law-can-take-effect/

[Schuetzenman]

Good for Wisconsin, they might have a chance now.

[LAGC]

Great, so the race to the bottom is now full speed ahead.

Maybe all those idiots who voted for Justice Prosser will think twice once they've suffered a few more cuts in wages/salaries.

"Shared sacrifice" indeed.

[Richard Simmons]

Great, so the race to the bottom is now full speed ahead.

Maybe all those idiots who voted for Justice Prosser will think twice once they've suffered a few more cuts in wages/salaries.

"Shared sacrifice" indeed.

Actually "the race to the bottom" just got the brakes thrown on full force. I mean let's be real, what are the chances of you getting a union job anyway? Oh wait, on second thought as a twice convicted felon there's probably a pretty good chance you're union already.

[old Grump]

Missed the news, last I heard they were arguing the case and I had all my fingers and toes crossed that they would get it right. That's why the recount vote for superior court judge was so critical. Now it's time to take that weenie judge to the woodshed and disrobe, disbar, impeach her and then dump commie ass out on the street. A Cuban street. Aw man is my bias showing again? Sorry folks.

[LAGC]

Actually "the race to the bottom" just got the brakes thrown on full force. I mean let's be real, what are the chances of you getting a union job anyway? Oh wait, on second thought as a twice convicted felon there's probably a pretty good chance you're union already.

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are? It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own, while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.

[Oswald Bastable]

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are? It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own, while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.

This from the guy who screams about taxing the rich at a 90% rate? Not much hypocrisy there, is there? I mean, why are you so determined to steal money you didn't earn from those who worked and sacrificed to become rich? In this case, given public workers are paid on our dime, the poor working stiffs, I think we have every right to have a say in what recompense they get, particularly when it appears we aren't getting our money's worth.

[old Grump]

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are? It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own, while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.
Wow, do you ever know what you are talking about. The unions in this case protected the teachers rights so well their salaries went up faster than anybody elses and our standards in what used to be the best rated school system in the country went right down the poop hole when the bad teachers couldn't get pushed our or retired early. Good teachers would stay a few years to gain some credentials then leave for where they got paid for quality and not just seniority. The teachers union in Wisconsin literally was the single largest and most powerful political force in the state and if you didn't kiss their little behinds you didn't get their support, their funding or their huge block of votes. When government salaries in Wisconsin got frozen and medical benefits for other unions was frozen and other public workers were getting short work weeks to balance the budgets the teachers still got their automatic raises and kept their hours. All teachers who were just putting in their time and collecting a paycheck loved the Wisconsin union. But hey, what the heck do I know I only live here and my next door neighbor works at the local high school. You should hear her take on it. I don't think you would like it very much. At least 20 teachers in the two towns I live between have put in for early retirement right after the law was initially passed and they are now officially gone. A few were hoping to come back in case the court went their way, so sad, to bad say bye bye. School boards in our little district have enough problems without the deadwood they had been stuck with.

[Richard Simmons]

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are? It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own, while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.

Actually I make MORE than the average union worker in Wisconsin and many, many times more than I wager you'll ever make, in a legal fashion anyway. I have upped my own standards, my entire adult working life, I just didn't do it through fraud and cronyism.

[LAGC]

Actually I make MORE than the average union worker in Wisconsin and many, many times more than I wager you'll ever make, in a legal fashion anyway. I have upped my own standards, my entire adult working life, I just didn't do it through fraud and cronyism.

Wow, I guess its not jealousy then, just a superiority complex on your part. Don't think others should be making anywhere near as much as you, eh?

Oh yes, the sheer horror of workers deciding to organize for themselves to ask for better wages and conditions. Forget free association and everything else in the Constitution, lets just undermine those groups that try to better themselves, since "we already got ours." Gotcha.

[sksAL]

any teacher ive ever brought this thing up to says the ed system is top heavy. $475k a year a superintendents salary? GTFOH. thats in my district. my kids have gotten a supreme education, but dam. thats a lotta shmazoola. they been setting their own pay scale. oh well, better the american crooks get it than the illegal aliens that really are raping the tax payers.by the by, my ex's family member was the super of dist 214, thats arlington hieghts, mabey wheeling too. you were holed up by there for a while wernt you grump? that guy was way up there in salary.i went to a few family things over there, 3 mil home at least. fat kablinky baby.(good food and booze too)

[Richard Simmons]

Wow, I guess its not jealousy then, just a superiority complex on your part. Don't think others should be making anywhere near as much as you, eh?

Oh yes, the sheer horror of workers deciding to organize for themselves to ask for better wages and conditions. Forget free association and everything else in the Constitution, lets just undermine those groups that try to better themselves, since "we already got ours." Gotcha.

Ask for better wages. You mean demand, strike and extort better wages. Those that don't want to organize are threatened and harassed into doing so. Yeah, sounds just like that workers uptopia you're looking for. I understand perfectly how someone like yourself would view someone like me as having a superiority complex. The idea that someone can accomplish something on their own has to convey superiority to someone like you. You've proven to yourself and the world that you're willing to take the easy way, stealing from others that which you're too lazy to earn on your own. I find it difficult and more than a little unpleasant discussing the benefits of an honest days work and the reward it brings with someone who has no first hand knowledge of the subject. Just seems like a waste of time, at least on my part.

[sksAL]

they strike, and the payola flys every time. parents cant stay home and loose work. high paid babysitters is all they been for 40 years imo. now its just stupid with all the illegals jamming up the works these days.over and over again. chicago anyway.

[stinker]

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are?
We have. The reason we don't make as much as government workers is because government jobs are paid through tax revenue.
When the government workers union negotiates their members wages there will be two people at the table participating.
The representative from the union and the politician that will confiscate the wealth of productive taxpayers.
The one person at the table that will never be present is the taxpayer actually shelling out the cash that the negotiations agree upon.
Remember the quote about democracy being two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat?
At no point during the negotiations will any person at the table have a personal stake in the demanded sacrifice.
The quote is LITTERALLY the case here.

Taxes have the same effect on the economy as a parasite does to it's host.
The more the parasite consumes(of our economic productivity) the less that it has to live on.
If too many parasites(government workers) get on one host(us) the host eventually dies.
It can also be thought of as "economic cannibalism" if you prefer, because the government worker only consumes the taxpayers.
So on to where you got that thought completely reversed....

It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own,
First point, that i'm pretty sure you don't understand, government jobs produce NOTHING.
Every government job is a net loss to the society in terms of production of wealth.
"the working class" do not include government workers.
What you're preaching there is known as "emotional economics"
That being said, it also does not mean that they do not perform a necessary function.
BUT
To say that "the working class eating it's own" is eliminating the ability of a few government workers to force all government workers to join a union wether they like it or not and using the power of law to enforce it is pure poppycock.

while the rich laugh all the way to the bank.
Last i checked schools are generally paid for through state property taxes. Yes?
That would be everyone from the rich guy with a mansion to the trailer park trash with a 40x100 lot to put his econohome model P.O.S on it.
It also includes apartment renters. You really think the property taxes are'nt rolled into the cost of the monthly rent?
How about every person that rents a storefront business with 2 employees? Are they "the rich"?
Because i guarantee property taxes are part of the lease.
So who was it that's supposed to be laughing all the way to the bank again?

Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.
We are. We're starting with the government union parasites. :nutkick:

What you clearly don't understand is that unions do not raise living standards and real wages for their workers.
They can't. Never have been able to, never will.
What you perceive as "increased wages" is an illusion that only lasts as long as you don't follow things to their logical conclusion and examine "the hidden" effects of economics.
Read chapters 4,5,15,19 and 20 from Economics in One Lesson (http://mises.org/store/Economics-in-One-Lesson-P33.aspx) and get back to us when you actually know something about basic economics.
In fact....read the whole book.

Edit: Oh yeah...by the way...i almost forgot...read and weep. :crying_small:
F.D.R. Warned Us About Public Sector Unions (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions)
FDR's Ghost Is Smiling on Wisconsin's Governor (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/19/the_ghost_of_fdr_is_smiling_on_wisconsins_governor _108962.html)
That's the annointed golden child of democrats/progressives/socialists in America himself.
The godfather of big government in his own words.
You gonna argue with him?

Checkmate

[Schuetzenman]

Great, so the race to the bottom is now full speed ahead.

Maybe all those idiots who voted for Justice Prosser will think twice once they've suffered a few more cuts in wages/salaries.

"Shared sacrifice" indeed.

Hardly so. AS Richard has pointed out the race to the bottom has been stopped. Wisconsin will be bankrupt if they don't implement this bill. There is no correlation to money spent and quality of education. It most times seems to be an inverse relationship. School districts that spend the most usually turn out the lowest scoring students because these districts are staffed by overpaid unmotivated Union slackers. I've worked in union environments when I was going to college. The union protects lazy goof offs and thieves ... oh wait a minute your contemporaries! They demand high wages and deliver little work.

Unions are the main reason why many US industries have fled the US for Mexico, Malaysia and China. Auto workers are the prime example of overpaid, under producing types. I had a buddy that quit in his Junior year at Indiana University to go to work at a Ford plant. He told me even the broom pushers made $17.50 an hour and this was 1978. The jokes on him as that plant was shuttered by the mid 1980's. I wonder what he's doing these days.

[Oswald Bastable]

Hardly so. AS Richard has pointed out the race to the bottom has been stopped. Wisconsin will be bankrupt if they don't implement this bill. There is no correlation to money spent and quality of education. It most times seems to be an inverse relationship. School districts that spend the most usually turn out the lowest scoring students because these districts are staffed by overpaid unmotivated Union slackers. I've worked in union environments when I was going to college. The union protects lazy goof offs and thieves ... oh wait a minute your contemporaries! They demand high wages and deliver little work.

Unions are the main reason why many US industries have fled the US for Mexico, Malaysia and China. Auto workers are the prime example of overpaid, under producing types. I had a buddy that quit in his Junior year at Indiana University to go to work at a Ford plant. He told me even the broom pushers made $17.50 an hour and this was 1978. The jokes on him as that plant was shuttered by the mid 1980's. I wonder what he's doing these days.

Silly Schuetz, don't you know it's the evil corporations driving business to other shores, not the unions, not the excessive gov't regulation at the behest of environmentalists and out of control gov't agencies, not a corporate tax structure that makes other shores more attractive for manufacturing, not the socialist demand that America become a third world nation in order to achieve a disaffected belief in equality...it's all due to corporate greed. Those damned evil corporations attempting to do what corporations do, make money for themselves and their stockholders, creating jobs, looking for the best climate to do so...being denied that environment here in the US by greedy politicians on the left looking for more power over the plebes, placing demands upon them that make their raison d'être ineffectual...

Oh wait, I seem to have come full circle...to the real problem.

[stinker]

A man walked up to a farm one day and asked the farmer "You have any work".
The farmer said "Sure i got a job for you".
The man asked the farmer "How much the job pay?"
The farmer said "I'll pay you what you're worth"
The man said "Well i won't work for that"


Must've been a unionized ranchhand :roflwithfeetcv2:

[old Grump]

any teacher ive ever brought this thing up to says the ed system is top heavy. $475k a year a superintendents salary? GTFOH. thats in my district. my kids have gotten a supreme education, but dam. thats a lotta shmazoola. they been setting their own pay scale. oh well, better the american crooks get it than the illegal aliens that really are raping the tax payers.by the by, my ex's family member was the super of dist 214, thats arlington hieghts, mabey wheeling too. you were holed up by there for a while wernt you grump? that guy was way up there in salary.i went to a few family things over there, 3 mil home at least. fat kablinky baby.(good food and booze too)
Yeah I was there when my kids were in the middle school that won the presidents award for best school and then they were in the high school when it won the presidential award. I had no grief with their schooling except for one teacher my daughter had. Daughter went on to win top awards in both schools for scholarship, citizen ship, activities and whatever else was in the award. Teacher went to another district, she had been trying to tell the wife and me and the other teachers that my daughter was retarded. I wonder if that teacher left there and came up here to Wisconsin. She is probably department head by now if she did. Daughter went on to teach in Buffalo Grove High school.

[vit]

LAGC's posts make me miss Fred.

Did anybody catch what passed in the WI senate today?

[PROBASCO]

Missed the news, last I heard they were arguing the case and I had all my fingers and toes crossed that they would get it right. That's why the recount vote for superior court judge was so critical. Now it's time to take that weenie judge to the woodshed and disrobe, disbar, impeach her and then dump commie ass out on the street. A Cuban street. Aw man is my bias showing again? Sorry folks.

x2 judges that legislate from the bench need to be put in prison until they can translate
the constitution and grasp the concept of 3 branches of government.

[JVD]

LAGC's posts make me miss Fred.

Did anybody catch what passed in the WI senate today?

Galloway’s Concealed Carry Bill Clears Senate

Madison—Today the Wisconsin State Senate passed State Senator Pam Galloway’s (RWausau)
legislation to allow law-abiding citizens to become licensed to carry a concealed
weapon. Senate Bill 93 (SB 93) passed the State Senate on a bipartisan vote of 25-8.
“This is a great day for my constituents and people all across this state who are now one step
closer to finally getting the opportunity to legally carry in order to protect themselves and their
loved ones. For far too long, Wisconsin citizens have been denied their Second Amendment
rights,” stated Galloway.
Senate Bill 93 creates a licensing system under which a person is permitted to carry. If a person
satisfies the training requirement and passes a background check, the Department of Justice
shall issue a permit to the applicant. Under the bill, all private property owners may post their
buildings and surrounding property, state and local government can post their buildings, and
private and public colleges and universities may post their buildings against carry.
“Currently, 48 states provide their citizens the opportunity to carry for self-defense. There is no
reason to believe that Wisconsin residents will be the exception to the rule of responsibility set
by those states,” said Galloway.
Senate Bill 93 now moves to the State Assembly for passage and then onto Governor Walker.
“I want to thank my colleagues for their support of this issue and urge swift passage of this bill
in the State Assembly,” concluded Galloway.
-#-
Contact: Senator Pam Galloway FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone: (608) 266-2502 June 14, 2011
copied from http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/June11/0614/0614galloway.pdf

[LAGC]

First point, that i'm pretty sure you don't understand, government jobs produce NOTHING.
Every government job is a net loss to the society in terms of production of wealth.
"the working class" do not include government workers.

You know, its not just the teachers and government bureaucrats who are going to be fucked over here. Police. Firefighters. EMTs. All union "scum" to you? Its not so much that the public sector doesn't produce wealth, but it lays the foundation for the private sector to flourish. Some occupations you just can't do better by privatizing, namely those dealing with human needs.

And do you really think good-paying public sector jobs don't cause private sector employers to offer competitive wages? Erode the foundation, and the whole house of cards eventually comes falling down, as private employers have no pressure to keep wages high.



Last i checked schools are generally paid for through state property taxes. Yes?
That would be everyone from the rich guy with a mansion to the trailer park trash with a 40x100 lot to put his econohome model P.O.S on it.
It also includes apartment renters. You really think the property taxes are'nt rolled into the cost of the monthly rent?
How about every person that rents a storefront business with 2 employees? Are they "the rich"?
Because i guarantee property taxes are part of the lease.
So who was it that's supposed to be laughing all the way to the bank again?

Property taxes are ridiculously low for most individual households/small businesses. The only people who need to worry about property taxes are those who own lots of land, which would be... *drumroll* the rich and big corporations.

[LAGC]

Unions are the main reason why many US industries have fled the US for Mexico, Malaysia and China.

Right, it has nothing to do with countries like China keeping their currency artificially low to benefit their domestic manufacturing sectors. Eventually, workers will demand better wages in those countries too, and we'll reach a new global equilibrium. Of course, we could just re-impose duties and tariffs on imported goods if we really wanted to jump-start our own economy, but that would violate our precious "free trade" agreements that have been the real reason for capital flight from this country, wouldn't it?

[stinker]

Right, it has nothing to do with countries like China keeping their currency artificially low to benefit their domestic manufacturing sectors. Eventually, workers will demand better wages in those countries too, and we'll reach a new global equilibrium. Of course, we could just re-impose duties and tariffs on imported goods if we really wanted to jump-start our own economy, but that would violate our precious "free trade" agreements that have been the real reason for capital flight from this country, wouldn't it?

History is your friend in all cases.
It helps you prevent making the same mistakes over and over again if you pay attention to it.
What you suggest is basically the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot-Hawley_Tariff_Act)
That amplified the great depression considerably.
If there is an absolute worst possible idea you could come up with to deal with the problems of today that just might be it.

Read chapter 11 from economics in one lesson.(i mean it. go buy the book now)

Eventually, workers will demand better wages in those countries too, and we'll reach a new global equilibrium.
But before that happens the chinese government will either incarcerate anyone that protests or just plain kill them for seditious activity.
Remember Tiananmen Square (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989)?
Workers have no rights in communist countries except "the equal obligation to work".
Need clarity about it?..Read it for yourself in the chinese constitution.
Constitution of the People's Republic of China (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China)
Chapter 2 article 42
Chapter 2 article 51
Put the two together and it just sounds ducky does'nt it?

I'll get to your other post in a few.
I'm hungry and gotta go grab something from the local choke and puke.

[Oswald Bastable]

Its not so much that the public sector doesn't produce wealth, but it lays the foundation for the private sector to flourish.

Wow, imagine that, the private, actual wealth producing/creation of jobs sector flourishing...the sector that makes public sector jobs possible. As opposed to the wealth sucking, vampiric public sector sucking money to sustain itself...

Such a horrible thing...

God help us...

Where, exactly, do you think the money comes from to pay for those pubic sector jobs? Thin air? Please do elucidate us with your leftist drivel.

[Oswald Bastable]

Galloway’s Concealed Carry Bill Clears Senate

Madison—Today the Wisconsin State Senate passed State Senator Pam Galloway’s (RWausau)
legislation to allow law-abiding citizens to become licensed to carry a concealed
weapon. Senate Bill 93 (SB 93) passed the State Senate on a bipartisan vote of 25-8.
“This is a great day for my constituents and people all across this state who are now one step
closer to finally getting the opportunity to legally carry in order to protect themselves and their
loved ones. For far too long, Wisconsin citizens have been denied their Second Amendment
rights,” stated Galloway.
Senate Bill 93 creates a licensing system under which a person is permitted to carry. If a person
satisfies the training requirement and passes a background check, the Department of Justice
shall issue a permit to the applicant. Under the bill, all private property owners may post their
buildings and surrounding property, state and local government can post their buildings, and
private and public colleges and universities may post their buildings against carry.
“Currently, 48 states provide their citizens the opportunity to carry for self-defense. There is no
reason to believe that Wisconsin residents will be the exception to the rule of responsibility set
by those states,” said Galloway.
Senate Bill 93 now moves to the State Assembly for passage and then onto Governor Walker.
“I want to thank my colleagues for their support of this issue and urge swift passage of this bill
in the State Assembly,” concluded Galloway.
-#-
Contact: Senator Pam Galloway FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone: (608) 266-2502 June 14, 2011
copied from http://www.thewheelerreport.com/releases/June11/0614/0614galloway.pdf

Yeah, I'm appreciative for this, but I'm still pissed we won't have constitutional concealed carry. There should be no restrictions upon the 2nd. This is a compromise that (while welcome in a state that has long needed it) still sticks in the craw because they didn't do it right.

[63DH8]

You know, instead of bashing unions and being so concerned with smashing down other people's good wages and benefits, maybe you should examine your own situation and ask yourself why you aren't making as much as they are? It's nothing but pure jealously, the working class eating its own, while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. Instead of trying to lower those workers down to your low standards, you should be trying to up your own standards instead.

And people wonder why there's a Government deficit.

[stinker]

Yeah, I'm appreciative for this, but I'm still pissed we won't have constitutional concealed carry. There should be no restrictions upon the 2nd. This is a compromise that (while welcome in a state that has long needed it) still sticks in the craw because they didn't do it right.

Patience young padawah. Baby steps.
It took the left about a century to wrap our rights in shit paper and flush them, it'll take a little while to snake them back up.
A good start is better than a nonstart.
The really good news is some politicians on our side have learned a few lessions from the left's successful tactics and are flipping them back at them.
There is hope.

[stinker]

You know, its not just the teachers and government bureaucrats who are going to be fucked over here. Police. Firefighters. EMTs. All union "scum" to you? Its not so much that the public sector doesn't produce wealth, but it lays the foundation for the private sector to flourish.
I did'nt specify just teachers and government beauracrats. I said ALL government jobs. And i also did say that some of those jobs are perhaps a valid, necessary and valuable function in society reguardless of the parasite effect it has on economies. The jobs value is irrelevant to the draining effect it has on the private sector, but the jobs value may justify tollerating the effect. With the changes to Wisconsin law there is nothing stopping police, firefighters and emt's from being a member of a union, they just can't use the force of government to compel anyone to join their union against their will now.

And that's a damn good thing.

The national and international unions have absolutely no business involving themself in local level government affairs anyways. Do you actually think Richard Trumka or Mary Kay Henry actually gives a shit about the plight of the working man in Wisconsin, or the money they're going to lose as a result of members telling them where to shove it since the state government is no longer mandating union membership and the resulting involuntary confiscation of their wages as a condition of working?


Some occupations you just can't do better by privatizing, namely those dealing with human needs.
Name one that deals with human needs that's not allready specified by the U.S. Constitution(and get ready for me to rip your example to shreds)


And do you really think good-paying public sector jobs don't cause private sector employers to offer competitive wages? Erode the foundation, and the whole house of cards eventually comes falling down, as private employers have no pressure to keep wages high.
"Good paying public sector jobs" meaning jobs funded by taxpayers at a rate higher than taxpayers are able or willing to provide privately only hurts all of the people in the society. For the government to apply artificial upward pressure in the pricing of labor also drives up the cost of living for everyone across the board. The public sector worker gets paid through the confiscation of the private sectors wealth. If the price of that labor is too high the resulting confiscation results in higher cost of goods and services through a double hit of increased taxation and higher labor costs as the private sector competes for it's workers.

In the end the private sector ultimately can not compete with a government that pays too much for it's workers because the government does not have profitability as a function of it's business model. When a government runs out of money because it pays too much for things it just takes more from everyone. Nobody in the private sector can do that. Government paying too much for labor IS an example of eroding a societies foundations.


Property taxes are ridiculously low for most individual households/small businesses. The only people who need to worry about property taxes are those who own lots of land, which would be... *drumroll* the rich and big corporations.
Tell that to someone that lives in an apartment in Manhattan.

That microcosim of tax insanity aside, any time you tax a corporation,i.e. a business, that tax is passed on and applied to the cost of whatever they sell. That includes property taxes. The person that actually pays the tax is the anyone that buys anything(as in "the poor" that you so dearly want to protect). That is a reality of economics that is not subject to opinion and cannot be changed.

If the tax were absorbed by the company then their profit margin would at some point cease to exist as the burden of taxation continued to increase. When that happens the company and the produnt or service it offers ceases to exist.

You can also tax companies to the point that they can no longer compete with foriegn producers of the same goods and they're left with two basic chioces, close up and go out of business because they can no longer sell their higher priced products or move the company out of the country(you know, the moving of jobs overseas you were bitching about). Either way the worker in the taxed country gets screwed in the name of helping the worker.

If you were to slap down laws/tarriffs to prevent the importation of cheaper goods then all you're doing is again artificially increasing the cost of living. That only hurts the workers you were trying to protect.

The government can not give anyone anything that it has not first taken from them.

[mriddick]

It's simply bringing the public sector in line with what the private sector gets. Since Unions benefit in good times, they should also give up some when times get rough. To act as they are immune from down turns does not work for most.

[LAGC]

With the changes to Wisconsin law there is nothing stopping police, firefighters and emt's from being a member of a union, they just can't use the force of government to compel anyone to join their union against their will now.

And that's a damn good thing.

Yeah, the fastest way to weaken a union is to let all the free-loaders get by without paying dues, while still reaping all the union benefits like the hypocrites they are. If folks don't want to be part of a union, why don't they just seek non-unionized outfits to work in, in the private sector if they're so offended?


Some occupations you just can't do better by privatizing, namely those dealing with human needs.


Name one that deals with human needs that's not allready specified by the U.S. Constitution(and get ready for me to rip your example to shreds)

Prisons are a perfect example. Privatizing them has shown time and time again that the corporations cut corners trying to maximize their profits, with terrible results. The shittier food, decreased recreational activities, and rationed health care all contribute to the general unrest which inevitably leads to much higher prison violence than in state-run facilities. Having spent some time in a private prison, as well as working as a volunteer intern with the ACLU during a law-suit against one on 8th Amendment grounds, really opened my eyes to how acute the problem is. "Gladiator schools" is putting it lightly. Private sector FAIL, just like with health care and pretty much everything else dealing with human needs that Canada and much of Europe has gotten right, but we are still stuck in the Stone Age, hostages to corporate greed.


In the end the private sector ultimately can not compete with a government that pays too much for it's workers because the government does not have profitability as a function of it's business model. When a government runs out of money because it pays too much for things it just takes more from everyone. Nobody in the private sector can do that. Government paying too much for labor IS an example of eroding a societies foundations.

How much is "too much" in your eyes? Do you really think teachers are overpaid? They train future workers for Goddess sakes! How can you put too high a price tag on that? Or police/firefighters/prison-guards? Many of our government servants often do a thankless job, putting their lives on the line every day for only meager pay. Are unions being "greedy" when they negotiate for half-decent benefits for these public servants? Seriously?


That microcosim of tax insanity aside, any time you tax a corporation,i.e. a business, that tax is passed on and applied to the cost of whatever they sell. That includes property taxes. The person that actually pays the tax is the anyone that buys anything(as in "the poor" that you so dearly want to protect). That is a reality of economics that is not subject to opinion and cannot be changed.

That meme is an old relic from right-wing schools of economic thought. The fact is, unless you're dealing with a monopoly, corporations can't just raise prices and pass off costs to the consumer if they want to stay competitive with other businesses. Corporate taxes more often than not come straight out of their fat profit margins, where they still make billions and bitch just cause they have to pay a few million to the government, for all the security services they provide. Oh WAAAAAAAH! Cry me a river.


If the tax were absorbed by the company then their profit margin would at some point cease to exist as the burden of taxation continued to increase. When that happens the company and the produnt or service it offers ceases to exist.

Corporations are being taxed right now at historical lows. The only reason any businesses are going under isn't due to "oppressive" taxes, but rather lack of CONSUMER DEMAND for their products/services. Slashing people's wages isn't going to help with consumer demand, its only going to make the downward cycle worse.

[O.S.O.K.]

I just want to congratulate the people of Wisconsin for their steps back into the United States of America.

Apparently, the shining example of Texas and other right to work states is beyond the communist mentlality that has infected certain sectors... but they have been defeated in Wisconsin which is a good thing.

[Richard Simmons]

Heard yesterday that Democrats in WI are proceeding with the recall of some Republicans and that there is going to be some kind of speical election on 7/12. If they can win the seats from the recall they hope to pass an new law or invalidate this one.

If that doesn't work I would imagine the Republicans will need bodyguards as the unions will be pulling out ALL stops to keep their life blood flowing.

[(AK)1000shots]

First point, that i'm pretty sure you don't understand, government jobs produce NOTHING.
Every government job is a net loss to the society in terms of production of wealth.
"the working class" do not include government workers.

Wait, let me get this straight, you're making a blanket statement that every government job produces nothing for society. I just want to let that sink in for a minute.

Maybe I'm biased, since I work for the government. I suppose we don't produce anything, certainly not technology that enables society to move forward. Certainly Lawrence-Livermore, Sandia, Los Alamos, Pacific Northwest, Brookhaven, Oak Ridge, Argonne, Ames, and the Idaho National Labs have never produced anything of value. They certainly weren't extremely fundamental in creating the internet, nuclear technology, jet propulsion, advanced semi-conductor devices, high-performance computing, sensor technology, or anything else even remotely useful. I think America would be so much better off with all those "wasteful" government employees producing "nothing."

[Richard Simmons]

What I believe Stinker is saying is that public sector jobs don't, for the most part produce a saleable commodity. If you're a govenment employee does your "business" turn a profit?

In the private sector you can't demand higher wages or benefits unless the "business" can support those increases out of it's profit. In the public sector unions, in order to increase pay or benefits you have to increase the tax revenue that funds those public sector union jobs either by increasing the tax burden on the public or providing an atmosphere that increases the tax base. Either way you don't do it with "profits" from those union jobs.

In private sector union jobs you have a slightly different senario as those jobs can produce a profit but as we're seeing with the auto manufacturers the union benefits and pay are out pacing the revenue from the auto sales.

At least that's the way I see it and what I believe Stinker was saying.

[stinker]

Wait, let me get this straight, you're making a blanket statement that every government job produces nothing for society. I just want to let that sink in for a minute.

Maybe I'm biased, since I work for the government. I suppose we don't produce anything, certainly not technology that enables society to move forward. Certainly Lawrence-Livermore, Sandia, Los Alamos, Pacific Northwest, Brookhaven, Oak Ridge, Argonne, Ames, and the Idaho National Labs have never produced anything of value. They certainly weren't extremely fundamental in creating the internet, nuclear technology, jet propulsion, advanced semi-conductor devices, high-performance computing, sensor technology, or anything else even remotely useful. I think America would be so much better off with all those "wasteful" government employees producing "nothing."

Insofar as to say that government does not raise the value of raw materials by producing a product from them then yes, it produces nothing.Anything that the government makes or provides has to be funded by capital that is first confiscated from the private sector which is automatically a loss to the private sector from the start.

Insofar as to say the inventions produced/discovered by government would not have been produced if the government had not involvd itself cannot be said. Who is to say that the inventions would not have been created earlier and at a lower cost if the government had not been competing with the private sector on research projects. How many research projects were not pursued because the private sector saw that the government was involved allready. How many discoveries were never made as a result?

At the very least i would say the cost would probably have been far lower as the tendency of government researchers is to say that if progress has not been made then it's only because they're underfunded. Government funded research is a gravy train that's very tempting to prolong for as long as possible. If you're politically well connected a simple project can be extended for years.

I'll throw up NASA as an example. Want to go to mars? Announce to the public that mineral rights backed and enforced by the full force of the U.S government will be issued to interstellar prospectors that can get there and mine the planet profitably. The rockets and the billions of dollars necessary to build them will very quickly follow. But since current policy is "nobody can own anything in space" nobody is stupid enough to sink money in it without the government forcing it through taxation. We could've been allready colonizing the planet years ago but for that policy.

@Richard Simmons
You get it :anim_beer-1:

[(AK)1000shots]

Insofar as to say the inventions produced/discovered by government would not have been produced if the government had not involvd itself cannot be said. Who is to say that the inventions would not have been created earlier and at a lower cost if the government had not been competing with the private sector on research projects. How many research projects were not pursued because the private sector saw that the government was involved allready. How many discoveries were never made as a result?


You pretty obviously don't know how government research works. Almost all government research is performed collaboratively with private industry. Chevron, for instance, has a huge contract with the DOE to work on protecting refinery materials from the corrosiveness of "sour gas." Westinghouse works with the DOE to improve nuclear technology, including new fuel materials and reactor facilities. The belief that private industry "stays away" because of government involvement is absurd.

The reality is that government-funded science is only done because the government can fund projects that don't always necessarily have an immediate "profit" ahead. Look at the space program. Expensive, yes, and not a single private corporation can legitimately generate the start-up capital to create such a program. Nor would they want to -- they don't see any returns in the immediate future. However, look at what came from the space program: computers (without the space program, personal computers would be a decades behind), advanced materials such as polymers (ask W.L. Gore if they make a profit), aerospace dynamic technology, and all sorts of other devices.

The government research had a simple mission: Fly into space, and increase the level of understanding regarding astrophysics. (Which is an entirely different branch of science, and also incredibly useful in ways that few understand.) Incremental technological breakthroughs all occur along the way, but the "profit" in them isn't seen until after they're created. Necessity for the general mission requires these innovations. If you want to see "private industry" innovation, look no further than biopharmaceuticals. Want to know why drug costs are so high? Because it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to make a concept drug into a production drug, and there's no guarantee it'll be accepted as safe by the FDA. If you can't fund the next project, you go out of business, so they need their 15%+ profit margins. It's not a cheap industry, and it's no more "efficient" than government science.

[sksAL]

Yeah I was there when my kids were in the middle school that won the presidents award for best school and then they were in the high school when it won the presidential award. I had no grief with their schooling except for one teacher my daughter had. Daughter went on to win top awards in both schools for scholarship, citizen ship, activities and whatever else was in the award. Teacher went to another district, she had been trying to tell the wife and me and the other teachers that my daughter was retarded. I wonder if that teacher left there and came up here to Wisconsin. She is probably department head by now if she did. Daughter went on to teach in Buffalo Grove High school.

years ago i had reps from the fox lake dist come to my home and tell me my one 5 yr old son was deaf, and lacked "upper body strength". i the child was 30' away, and i softly spoke "want some candy alex?" with this a-hole next to me. the boys head snapped to my attention. i told this fool,"hes not listening to YOU". and told them to leave. alex just graduated 2 weeks ago with mostly A's, and was the heavyweight on the wrestling team 4 years. 2 undefeated.( lacks upper what?) i learned to live in a good dist, fox lake wasnt it. by the way, im BGHS class of '80,im suprised your kid was so badly mis-diagnosed . and congrats on soon to be able to CCW!, ill be moving up there soon.

[stinker]

You pretty obviously don't know how government research works. Almost all government research is performed collaboratively with private industry. Chevron, for instance, has a huge contract with the DOE to work on protecting refinery materials from the corrosiveness of "sour gas." Westinghouse works with the DOE to improve nuclear technology, including new fuel materials and reactor facilities. The belief that private industry "stays away" because of government involvement is absurd.
I don't say that private industry "stays away" because of government involvement, but it can discourage research by some. Some companies plan their business and r&d model counting on the involvement of government and it's very deep pockets in their day to day operations. General Electric being the first one that comes to mind for that.

Government funding for private research opens the door wide to creating a kleptocracy. Too often it results in companies that exist and prosper solely at the expense of others with results that can be very questionable at best. Shrimp on treadmills as the most recent example i can think of.


The reality is that government-funded science is only done because the government can fund projects that don't always necessarily have an immediate "profit" ahead. Look at the space program. Expensive, yes, and not a single private corporation can legitimately generate the start-up capital to create such a program. Nor would they want to -- they don't see any returns in the immediate future.
Unless the government got the hell out of the way of seeking a profit through exploiting the natural resources of other planets. What would be to stop some enterprising group of aerospace engineers from announcing the creation of the "stardust pillagers corporation" and sell IPO shares at 200 dollars each. Get 500 million investors worldwide and you have 100 billion dollars to build a spiffy rocket ship and colony pod complete with mining and refinement equipment. I would wager a LOT of people would sink money in it if they think they were serious and can demonstrate the ability to carry out the mission.

However, look at what came from the space program: computers (without the space program, personal computers would be a decades behind)
That's an assumption that can neither be proven nor disproven unfortunately. We'll never know what could've been but most computer technology has been created by the private sector in spite of Al Gore's narcissism. We could try to play the butterfly effect game with history on that but it's only speculation unfortunately.


Necessity for the general mission requires these innovations.
Same as it would if the private sector was doing it, but a private company is going to apply far more pressure for results from it's funding and watch the money trail far more closely. Far less room for exploitation.

If you want to see "private industry" innovation, look no further than biopharmaceuticals. Want to know why drug costs are so high? Because it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to make a concept drug into a production drug, and there's no guarantee it'll be accepted as safe by the FDA.
Yup. And it's continued internal r&d funding is purely a result of profit seeking. One of my favorite examples because it lets me say that greedy corporations save lives :lool:

You also need to consider the extensive regulatory compliance costs just to put a product before the fda that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual development of the drug. That can ammount to a considerable number of dollars.

If you can't fund the next project, you go out of business, so they need their 15%+ profit margins. It's not a cheap industry, and it's no more "efficient" than government science.
That seems a bit high of a margin to me, but ok...not sure what the actual average margin is so i'll go with that. It's not cheap, but if you have a politician in your back pocket researching medicine becomes politicized. AIDS research is a good example of that. Theres LOTS of gazillions of taxpayer dollars in that. How much taxpayer money goes towards curing leprocy or a host of other not politically expedient ailments.

If the government subsidises something you will allways have more of it, but the cost of subsidizing must be added to determine the true cost of something. Government funding also politicizes whatever it funds. You think the cure for aids, an ailment that is mainly self inflicted by reckless behavior for the most part(yes there's lots of exceptions that are actual victims,don't bother going there if you're tempted to)and could have been avoided alltogether if the person had exercised some personal restraint will be priced according to the actual money that's been spent on it's development? Or will it be priced according to the politician that want's to obtain votes from his/her infected constituents and their friends/family?

[Ronwicp]

I told my squadron CC that I wanted to talk to my union rep one time.


Apparently my government job doesnt have a union. Who knew.

[LAGC]

Name one that deals with human needs that's not allready specified by the U.S. Constitution(and get ready for me to rip your example to shreds)

Still waiting for you to rip me to shreds. :laugh:

(But I understand if you need more time to go back to your right-wing economics text-books to gather more failed supply-side talking points...)

[stinker]

Actually i need sleep.
I've been hopping on here in between working off and on for the last 30 hours straight.
My eyes feel like they're gonna bleed soon.
Don't worry, i have'nt forgotten you :eyebrows:

[Oswald Bastable]

Actually i need sleep.
I've been hopping on here in between working off and on for the last 30 hours straight.
My eyes feel like they're gonna bleed soon.
Don't worry, i have'nt forgotten you :eyebrows:

Given you're arguing with a busboy, I'd avoid using large words and big concepts. He's proven on many occasions that he's easily confused with the whole consequences ensue from initial actions paradigm.

[stinker]

Still waiting for you to rip me to shreds. :laugh:

(But I understand if you need more time to go back to your right-wing economics text-books to gather more failed supply-side talking points...)
Ok...Here it comes...You ready for it?

I'm still waiting.
I said something not allready authorized by the U.S.Constitution. Article 4 section 4 reads "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"

The guarantee of a form of government directly includes the power and means to enforce that governments laws. Without that power you have no government or laws. That means....(dramatic pause)....cops and prisons.

Wanna try again or should i just thank you for playing?

Also, since when does economics have anything to do with right or left? That's one of the things i love most about it. The forces of economics are absolute and unbendable. Right or left can't change them no matter how hard they try. I don't do talking points about economics either. It either is true or it is not true. There's no inbetween. You can try to obfuscate the perception of truth but you can't change it. I have no need to do that.

[LAGC]

Ok...Here it comes...You ready for it?

I'm still waiting.
I said something not allready authorized by the U.S.Constitution. Article 4 section 4 reads "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"

The guarantee of a form of government directly includes the power and means to enforce that governments laws. Without that power you have no government or laws. That means....(dramatic pause)....cops and prisons.

Wanna try again or should i just thank you for playing?

Actually, if we want to go back in history to when the Constitution was written, how common were prisons? I thought most "high crimes" (felonies) back then were dealt with either by public hanging/execution, or exile of the offender? If memory serves, seems like prisons were more of a late 19th Century invention, as a more "civil" way of dealing with serious criminals, instead of hanging people for non-violent crimes like stealing shit or embezzlement. Either that or the victim challenging the accused to a public duel to the death.

If we were to be true to the idea that anything not explicitly defined by the Constitution is unconstitutional for the government to be funding or running, we'd have to empty all our prisons and either execute or exile all the prisoners.


Also, since when does economics have anything to do with right or left? That's one of the things i love most about it. The forces of economics are absolute and unbendable. Right or left can't change them no matter how hard they try. I don't do talking points about economics either. It either is true or it is not true. There's no inbetween. You can try to obfuscate the perception of truth but you can't change it. I have no need to do that.

Actually, there are other fields of economic thought beyond just the usual right-wing supply-side market economics that are taught on most college campuses by default. Not just Keynesianism, but labor theories of economics, for example. My local university actually had a junior-level Radical Economics course that I attended that was quite interesting. The first half dealt solely with Marxian theories of economics, the second-half was more of a hodge-podge of post-modernism.

Right-wing supply-side economics tends to have more of a "if you build it, they will come" trickle-down-wealth mentality, where more left-wing approaches point out that if there is no CONSUMER DEMAND (namely, a strong and vibrant middle-class with lots of disposable income), no one will be able to buy any of the shit that businesses produce or services they provide, if indeed they can't afford it. Keynesianism tries to address this flaw in laizze-faire economics, with only limited success.

[Ronwicp]

no one will be able to buy any of the shit that businesses produce or services they provide, if indeed they can't afford it.

Wow, you went to school to learn that.

[blacksheep]

Just heard it on Fox News. The state supreme court just ruled that the law that was passed that limited the collective bargaining rights of unions in Wisconsin was ruled to be valid and will take effect immediately.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/14/wisconsins-high-court-says-controversial-union-law-can-take-effect/

IN YOUR FACE LIBERAL DOUCHE'S ! :laugh:




Couldn't help myself, my apologies.:naughty: