[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Unions In WI? Suggestions? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/12/2011 6:33:37 PM EDT
|
I am just seeking others opinions in a non-hostile environment, on a site dedicated to weapons of all things( I know I sound like a pu$$cake) But, I for one do not see unions as the reason for the state being broke. Wouldn't a better solution involve seeking out specific areas of less than essential nature and eliminating them? I stand with our governer on his fight for the well being of our state. I, for one am not involed. I am watching from a distance in Ft. Drum NY. If I was involved as I would like to be, why would I be inclined to stand with or against our governer? I understand I am only 21, and lack experience of people who have worked normal jobs for twice as many years. But I have learned the further east I go, the more pissed off I get. My solution is, there are a lot of people in Wisconsin. Why not tax more(it will help us in the long run) and if you are not willing to give to the state that gave you so much, then #### you. Let's bank off of the interest. If one can comfortably live off of the interest of $1,000,000, then I can only imagine the interest of a few hundred more per taxable citezen a year. That, along with cutting non-essential programs and spending could only restore our budget over time. There will be no immediate fix to anything. Anyone suggesting there is, is every degrading thing I could accuse them of being.
Opinions and verbal stab wounds welcome. |
|
Quoted:
I am just seeking others opinions in a non-hostile environment, .......My solution is, there are a lot of people in Wisconsin. Why not tax more(. ....... It should already be blatantly obvious to you that the general environment on ARFCOM is anti-Union and most definitely hostile... 
We already pay some of the highest taxes in WI. The problem is most definitely on the spending end and not the income end. No new taxes.... 
|
I'm pretty new to this board, but that was not thought out very well, and in truth proby a troll post or a joke. NO WAY you were for real dude, if you were trying to stir the pot and you really are in Iraq I know you have more time to think of something better/more provacative.
|
|
Quoted:
I'm pretty new to this board, but that was not thought out very well, and in truth proby a troll post or a joke. NO WAY you were for real dude, if you were trying to stir the pot and you really are in Iraq I know you have more time to think of something better/more provacative. Jisr Diyala. The trashiest city on the semi-green earth. Oct. 2009 to Oct. 2010. I'm back now. http://www.dvidshub.net/holiday/258803 Troll yet? Check the combat patch, and the place where I am stationed. I'm for real. Notice the flag I stood before. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty new to this board, but that was not thought out very well, and in truth proby a troll post or a joke. NO WAY you were for real dude, if you were trying to stir the pot and you really are in Iraq I know you have more time to think of something better/more provacative. Jisr Diyala. The trashiest city on the semi-green earth. Oct. 2009 to Oct. 2010. I'm back now. http://www.dvidshub.net/holiday/258803 Troll yet? Check the combat patch, and the place where I am stationed. I'm for real. Notice the flag I stood before. OK. Then in that case I stand by my statement of "not well thought out question" . To have a few hundrend million sitting around to draw intrest off would take care of, by your own math a few hundred people. Now if you wanted to have enough for each person in the state to have a million to draw intrest off you would need closer to 5,686,986,000,000 to deposit, but before you could get that surplus you need to pay off the 43,953,496,000 debt the state currently has. How long will this take with a state GDP of 253,808,109? So if somehow in this lifetime the state could "save" that kind of cash the best interest you could get would be in the 1-2%(.gov pays less % to our CHICOM pals) area, giving each person 10,000-20,000$ per current state resident. I found these few fun fact with about 5mins of google-fu, great time killers while in some shitty assed shit hole. And before you think I do not respect your service my friend, I have walked your shoes(guessing for the most part) for the last 18 years. I ment my post as more poking fun in a good way, read a few contradicting statments in your first post. |
|
OP is a troll...
and a union tit sucker to boot to answer his question, one need only look at how businesses migrate away from heavy handed union states to states that have right to work and less intrusive unions, if any at all. as far as the recent union legislation, it is ESSENTIAL to allowing local governments to balance their budgets when the state cuts their funding. public sector cuts alone that walker is putting through will get us 10% closer to paying off the massive deficit in wisconsin. but hey, since it does not fix 1005 of the problem, its not worth bothering cutting right? typical liberal instant gratification mentality... |
|
I agree with your point on taxes. I don't understand how someone can want to freeze taxes, but expect the same level of services year after year. Every year the price of things goes up. If you are paying the same in taxes, you have less buying power every year. There must be an increase in taxes to cover the increased prices for services. Many people believe that cutting programs is the answer to limiting tax increases. Notice how few program cuts are targeted at mainstream families who consider themselves "middle class" or better? One example would be transit and the public outcry against a small sales tax increase to fund it. Most "middle class" people do not use MCTS. Only the working poor and flat out poor ride the bus (a very small group of people of means also use the bus, mostly the freeway flyers). I just don't see how we fund a baseball stadium with a sales tax increase but people won't accept one for transit for a large part of the population.
I just wish people would understand that AM620 and AM1130 have a political agenda and are not unbiased news reporting services. TV news is just as bad. I wish more people in this state would identify the bias of their "news" programming and take that into consideration before they fly off the handle with "facts" they have heard from Jeff Wagner or Charlie Sykes or Glen Beck. These people are selling a product (listeners) to a buyer (companies that advertise on their shows), there is no news, just sensationalizing to get the highest ratings so they can charge the most for advertising time. On a side note, I doubt you will get any conversation that doesn't follow the tried and true ar15 political formula of "republican vs. anyone who doesn't agree with me 100%". Also, I will be branded as a troll. However, I thank you for posting in effort to spark some hopefully thoughtful and civil conversation. Bill |
|
Quoted:
I agree with your point on taxes. I don't understand how someone can want to freeze taxes, but expect the same level of services year after year. Every year the price of things goes up. If you are paying the same in taxes, you have less buying power every year. There must be an increase in taxes to cover the increased prices for services. Many people believe that cutting programs is the answer to limiting tax increases. Notice how few program cuts are targeted at mainstream families who consider themselves "middle class" or better? One example would be transit and the public outcry against a small sales tax increase to fund it. Most "middle class" people do not use MCTS. Only the working poor and flat out poor ride the bus (a very small group of people of means also use the bus, mostly the freeway flyers). I just don't see how we fund a baseball stadium with a sales tax increase but people won't accept one for transit for a large part of the population. I just wish people would understand that AM620 and AM1130 have a political agenda and are not unbiased news reporting services. TV news is just as bad. I wish more people in this state would identify the bias of their "news" programming and take that into consideration before they fly off the handle with "facts" they have heard from Jeff Wagner or Charlie Sykes or Glen Beck. These people are selling a product (listeners) to a buyer (companies that advertise on their shows), there is no news, just sensationalizing to get the highest ratings so they can charge the most for advertising time. On a side note, I doubt you will get any conversation that doesn't follow the tried and true ar15 political formula of "republican vs. anyone who doesn't agree with me 100%". Also, I will be branded as a troll. However, I thank you for posting in effort to spark some hopefully thoughtful and civil conversation. Thanks bill. What I am fearful of is what will happen when we let ourselfes be trampled on, and have proven ourselves weak. I do not want to be part of a national experiment. Wisconsin has the strongest unions in the country. If they can be subdued here, then it shows they can be controlled elswhere. Read animal farm. Eating less and working more is what we will do without unions. What comes after the unions have been abolished? our beloved AR15'S? god no. I wonder how many of you will actually fight for your rights. Does "from my cold dead hands" mean anything to you? I personally will be annihilated before I will surrender my freedoms. "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -Thomas Jefferson. Bill |
|
Quoted:
I for one do not see unions as the reason for the state being broke. The issue isn't just "unions". The issue is the fiscal suicide that comes with public unions writing their own contracts with zero opposition from those politicians who should be representing their constituents, instead of their campaign contributors (the largest of which, in the case of Democrats, are the unions). This manifests itself in any number of ways, the largest of which is the contracted benefits of pension and healthcare, though some benefits like vacation/sicktime also play a part in specific jobs (corrections, off the top of my head). These things are generally negotiated at a local level. The "shared revenue" program that sends tax subsidies from our state income tax to counties/municipalities is used in large part to pay for those contracted benefits. Without the ability for a vast reduction in benefit compensation at ALL levels (which will NOT come from the unions voluntarily), the ability of the county and municipal governments to survive a reduction in "shared revenue" doesn't really exist. We are "broke" because previous generations of politicians - both Democrat and Republican - have capitulated to (or colluded with) the demands of public union workers for ever better and better wages and benefits, while putting off paying for those things using budgetary tricks (the 2009 budget used one time Federal stimulus grants as a source of income), or outright stealing from one area of revenue (the transportation and patient compensation funds) to pay for things that those funds aren't to be used for. This has left us with close to 4 BILLION dollars inrevenue shortfall based on the previous budget. Wouldn't a better solution involve seeking out specific areas of less than essential nature and eliminating them?
I'd suggest you read up on the entire Walker budget. Their are lots of cuts of inessential services/departments. The "union issue" was simply a requirement to refinance the $150M debt for the current fiscal year (though essential for future cuts in shared revenue). My solution is, there are a lot of people in Wisconsin. Why not tax more(it will help us in the long run)
Roughly 53% of the state pays 100% of the income taxes, which are among the highest in the US. Because I am essentially "self-employed" for my full-time job, I also get to pay the employer's share of income tax (you only pay 1/2 your income tax, with the other half being paid directly by your employer). My current combined Federal and State income and FICA (Social Security and Medicare) tax load is right about 45%. Add in the sales tax on every dollar I spend, and that means I get to "keep" around $0.50 of every dollar I earn. Much of that goes to paying my mortgage, which is again taxed (and WI's property taxes are again some of the highest in the nation). ETA: I forgot the gas taxes (which have ended up in the general fund despite being earmarked for transport fund), the cigarette taxes (which should be lower, but our AG turned governor spent the lawsuit money over his two terms), the HSA taxes (which apply to the money my wife and I save to pay for our own healthcare), but you should get the picture. Where would you like it to stop? and if you are not willing to give to the state that gave you so much, then #### you.
I already get to keep less of my money than the government does, and I utilize very little in the way of services. With respect, #### you with the idea that I should be paying more. The state has taken more than enough. Let's bank off of the interest. If one can comfortably live off of the interest of $1,000,000, then I can only imagine the interest of a few hundred more per taxable citezen a year. That, along with cutting non-essential programs and spending could only restore our budget over time.
We are currently running a deficit to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars. That means the state has to borrow that money to keep functioning. We (as a state) have to PAY interest. There is no money to make interest off of. We can not cut spending without drastically altering the ability to negotiate terms with the employees of the state. Labor costs are a huge part of why the state has no money. There will be no immediate fix to anything. Anyone suggesting there is, is every degrading thing I could accuse them of being.
If by "immediate", you mean "tomorrow", sure. If by "immediate" you mean the two consecutive fiscal budgets (2011-13 & 2013-15) that the governor may be able to influence and get us into the black, then yes, Virginia, an "immediate" fix is possible. Suggesting otherwise, or thinking that what you propose with "a couple of hundred extra per taxpayer" will fix things? Well, I have pity on you because you are young and monumentally ignorant of the situation. ETA: What I am fearful of is what will happen when we let ourselfes be trampled on, and have proven ourselves weak. I do not want to be part of a national experiment. Wisconsin has the strongest unions in the country. If they can be subdued here, then it shows they can be controlled elswhere. Read animal farm. Eating less and working more is what we will do without unions.
Again, monumental ignorance. If you're 21 and fail to grasp the concepts of Animal Farm, I'm not sure anything I type could reach you. Here's a hint: The whole point of Orwell was to repudiate the notion you are spouting above. What comes after the unions have been abolished? our beloved AR15'S? god no.
You can't be serious. This whole thing is either trolling, or you're not very smart - even for a 21 year old. You do realize that no one is trying to "bust" private-sector unions, and even the public sector unions aren't being abolished (even though they could and probably should be)? I wonder how many of you will actually fight for your rights. Does "from my cold dead hands" mean anything to you? I personally will be annihilated before I will surrender my freedoms.
Go buy an AR with a bayo lug at the gunshop off base. Oh wait... you can't. So much for the "cold dead hands" thing, huh? We've already surrendered so many freedoms that we wouldn't know liberty if it bit us in the ass. As a matter of fact, most liberty, when suggested, is oft described as part of the lunatic fringe. How dare we actually encourage folks to be paid based on merit!? How dare we, as taxpayers, decide how our tax money is being spent!? Surrender your freedoms? You barely have any left. Too bad you're not old enough to remember when they existed. "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
-Thomas Jefferson "A fool and his money are soon parted" - Thomas Tusser, 1557 |
|
Quoted:
Thanks bill. What I am fearful of is what will happen when we let ourselfes be trampled on, and have proven ourselves weak. I do not want to be part of a national experiment. Wisconsin has the strongest unions in the country. If they can be subdued here, then it shows they can be controlled elswhere. Read animal farm. Eating less and working more is what we will do without unions. What comes after the unions have been abolished? our beloved AR15'S? god no. I wonder how many of you will actually fight for your rights. Does "from my cold dead hands" mean anything to you? I personally will be annihilated before I will surrender my freedoms. "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -Thomas Jefferson. As far as our guns, Article 1 Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution protects the citizens of Wisconsin as far as firearms goes. That would have to be repealed, and I am not sure the process for it. I would imagine the repeal process is rarely used. I am interested in how far the Governor is willing to go in the name of state finances before the cuts to services and "belt tightening" get to be too much for the average Wisconsinite. At some point there will be nothing left to cut and taxes must be raised. You cannot fix a budget by cutting alone, there has to be a balance of the two. When Governor Walker is forced to raise taxes will he be signing his own political pink slip? What worries me now is that there is a Bill to eliminate the City of Milwaukee ordinance that requires employers to pay sick days for employees, up to 9 days a year. The measure passed in 2008 with 67% of voters in favor of it. I don't like that voters decisions are being taken away with the stroke of a pen. It is in direct defiance of what the people of the City of Milwaukee wanted for their own people, I feel it should not be an issue for state government. I thought the idea of the Republican party was less big government? I do not like when Governors abuse the law making process to further their agenda. Walker is doing it by using the control of the House and Senate by Republicans to create laws to circumvent years of standard practices. Doyle was just as bad when he would used line item veto to veto parts of words or whole words to change the wording of a Bill to suit his needs. It bothers me that people have such a short memory. Why was Tommy Thompson defeated by Doyle? Doyle made a political issue of the fact that Thompson used airplanes to travel. Why did Doyle not seek reelection? Oddities in contract awarding procedures. People in our state pick one party when they are tired of the other. My only wish is that everyone who goes to the polls would take the time to try and find unbiased information and make the choice that they truly see as good for Wisconsin, not simply go and compete the arrow for only Republican or Democrat candidates. No matter how you feel currently, you must appreciate that you are in the front seat of history in the making for not only Wisconsin but the United States as well. Bill |
|
Ellefsonz,
Hows the weather in sunny upstate NY? I grew up in Syracuse (about 80 miles down Rte 81) and we still have a cabin east of you by Stillwater in the Adirondacks. Don't worry, you're still young and naive...though you shouldn't be at this stage in life. Just take a look around you and see what the public service unions are doing to NY. How much off your party check goes towards taxes? How would you feel if you had to pay more? Thanks for serving. |
|
Quoted:
But, I for one do not see unions as the reason for the state being broke. Look up the difference between defined contribution and defined benefit. Example: An employee of a corporation may make contributions to a 401k. A Soldier has a fully funded pension. Pensions fall under defined benefits. So all of those defined beneftit obligations from the 1960's plus overly high compensation killed companies like GM. Actuaries in the 1980's made it very clear this would happen, but math is boring. Massive amounts of money were paid to a work force that added no value to the product, they just built it. Bolt on a bumper and go. This is why the Japanese kicked our ass and took the auto industry away from us. Who will take it from them? A non-union environment. Teachers get paid well for an average of 9 months work (maybe 9 months) and the kids continue to fail in testing and in life. We pump massive amounts of money into a system that you can argue many of the Teachers may not add any value. There is no accountability, no measures or ROI. Who operates like this? Only non-proft operations, Govt and of course Unions. Unions are not about success and profits. Unions are a form of Tyrany unto themselves. I have known a few Hoffas. You no longer see defined benefits like Pensions in corp America. Even in many Govt operations they have tried to move away from Pensions. Old Cops on the force may have Pensions, new hires have something else. Even then, you get an Enron and poof, 401k funds are gone because it was built on the stock of the employer. We bailed out GM. We will have to bail out California and New York. Assuming that does not cause civil war right there, which States come next? Who bails out the Federal govt? Remember, the Feds will pay your pension. You are a Soldier, you understand failure is not an option. The math shows failure is not 20-30 years away, so cash flow today is ciritcal and even then, we may still fail. The chance to "plan" was in the 80's and 90's after we watched everything fail in the 70's. Unions, union pay and pensions are the Elephant in the room. The same way Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are at the Federal level. Combine these with career politicians and you have total failure. We are no different from the countries that have failed this past year, we are just bigger and big dinosaurs die slower. Same goes for big Unions. In Wisconsin terms, kill the cow and no one drinks milk. 100% of nothing is still nothing. The Unions have to pitch in and pitch in big as they represent a large portion of the pie and their contribution has to be permanent..........................or the Cow dies. |
|
Quoted:
Excellent post FMD. Thank you, but hold your applause until the end...
Originally Posted By Bill2k1:
I am interested in how far the Governor is willing to go in the name of state finances before the cuts to services and "belt tightening" get to be too much for the average Wisconsinite. At some point there will be nothing left to cut and taxes must be raised. You cannot fix a budget by cutting alone, there has to be a balance of the two. Actually, I think he just might pull it off. The rollback of the 190 Mil (?) increase Doyle and the Democrats gave the teachers two years ago, a (relatively) huge reduction in spending on pensions and healthcare for state workers, the (truly) huge reductions in shared revenue, and (hopefully) the increase of the tax base via new businesses hiring workers that will be attracted to the state via corporate tax incentives will go a long way to getting it done. When Governor Walker is forced to raise taxes will he be signing his own political pink slip?
I'm not convinced that Walker will need to raise taxes. What worries me now is that there is a Bill to eliminate the City of Milwaukee ordinance that requires employers to pay sick days for employees, up to 9 days a year. The measure passed in 2008 with 67% of voters in favor of it. I don't like that voters decisions are being taken away with the stroke of a pen. It is in direct defiance of what the people of the City of Milwaukee wanted for their own people, I feel it should not be an issue for state government. I thought the idea of the Republican party was less big government?
Okay, let's discuss this for a second, with the actual text of the ordinance available for viewing: http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/User/jkamme/PaidSickLeaveOrdinance.pdf There are several issues here: 1) From a principal standpoint, can the government compel private businesses to give money to their employees for not showing up? This is essentially what the ordinance does. The voters of Milwaukee just gave themselves an extra week or so of pay at the expense of their employer, who is now required to take an additional ~2% hit in their employee costs. How is letting that stand consistent with less government? 2) While this measure theoretically applies only to employers located within the city limits, that specification does not appear anywhere but the summary. In the specifics of this ordinance, the law applies to any employer whose employees work within the city limits. It could easily be argued that my company, located in Jefferson county, could be subject to the requirements of this ordinance since my employees regularly work in the city. Why didn't >>I<< get to vote on the ordinance then? This very well could affect companies well beyond the city limits. I won't even get into the specific financial impact this will have on those businesses that actually do exist and employ within the city... but suffice it to say, it aint gonna be pretty. I do not like when Governors abuse the law making process to further their agenda. Walker is doing it by using the control of the House and Senate by Republicans to create laws to circumvent years of standard practices. Doyle was just as bad when he would used line item veto to veto parts of words or whole words to change the wording of a Bill to suit his needs.
I disagree entirely. The "standard practices" are what got us in this mess, and Walker isn't "abusing" the law in any way. We, the people of the State of Wisconsin, elected the Governor and Legislature to represent our needs and wants - specifically a smaller government that taxes less - and the three are doing exactly what they told constituents they were going to do to get them elected (less, actually). If Walker starts exercising the line-item veto power that the WI Constitution gives him to gut or change the laws that the legislature (and those that elected the legislature) sends to him, then you might be able to point to Doyle-like abuse. Until then... It bothers me that people have such a short memory. Why was Tommy Thompson defeated by Doyle?
Tommy Thompson wasn't defeated by Doyle. He left during his term when GWB appointed him head of HUD. Doyle made a political issue of the fact that Thompson used airplanes to travel.
Scott McCallum, not Tommy, who used used airplanes more than McCallum. Why did Doyle not seek reelection? Oddities in contract awarding procedures. FMD's note: A political scandal about to blow up in his face? Which one? </sarcasm> People in our state pick one party when they are tired of the other.
Folks were tired of Doyle right after the second election, and the back-door deals he made and games he played all along didn't help. A third term was unwinnable, and he knew it. My only wish is that everyone who goes to the polls would take the time to try and find unbiased information and make the choice that they truly see as good for Wisconsin, not simply go and compete the arrow for only Republican or Democrat candidates.
Bill, I have been vilified in this very forum in the past for suggesting that Feingold actually voted the way I wanted him to more often than his Republican opponent would. I, for one, do not advocate party politics. I think they're both driving us over a cliff and arguing about what speed we should be going while heading there. This isn't about party, and with Walker, it rarely has been (hence why the Republican Party failed to get behind him in the primaries in 2006). No matter how you feel currently, you must appreciate that you are in the front seat of history in the making for not only Wisconsin but the United States as well.
For those of us who've been paying attention, our current situation (in Wisconsin, upon electing Scott Walker to Governor, and many Republicans to the Assembly/Senate) was expected. We've gotten exactly what we voted for. "History in the making" is a good thing. |
|
Quoted:
I agree with your point on taxes. I don't understand how someone can want to freeze taxes, but expect the same level of services year after year. Every year the price of things goes up. If you are paying the same in taxes, you have less buying power every year. There must be an increase in taxes to cover the increased prices for services. Many people believe that cutting programs is the answer to limiting tax increases. Notice how few program cuts are targeted at mainstream families who consider themselves "middle class" or better? One example would be transit and the public outcry against a small sales tax increase to fund it. Most "middle class" people do not use MCTS. Only the working poor and flat out poor ride the bus (a very small group of people of means also use the bus, mostly the freeway flyers). I just don't see how we fund a baseball stadium with a sales tax increase but people won't accept one for transit for a large part of the population. I just wish people would understand that AM620 and AM1130 have a political agenda and are not unbiased news reporting services. TV news is just as bad. I wish more people in this state would identify the bias of their "news" programming and take that into consideration before they fly off the handle with "facts" they have heard from Jeff Wagner or Charlie Sykes or Glen Beck. These people are selling a product (listeners) to a buyer (companies that advertise on their shows), there is no news, just sensationalizing to get the highest ratings so they can charge the most for advertising time. On a side note, I doubt you will get any conversation that doesn't follow the tried and true ar15 political formula of "republican vs. anyone who doesn't agree with me 100%". Also, I will be branded as a troll. However, I thank you for posting in effort to spark some hopefully thoughtful and civil conversation. Bill ignorance is bliss... the price of things do not ALWAYS go up. there is a ungodly amount of waste and inefficiency in all levels of government. the tax payers are not a bottomless spit of funding. as for where to start cutting, how about all entitlement programs. cant pay your utility bill in the winter? well you get to be cold like i am, so i can actually afford my utility bills! cant afford to eat? well pick up a second job like i have! cant afford a cell phone? TOUGH SHIT! the state shouldnotbe paying for these things! the list goes on and on. |
|
I'm coming back to this:
Quoted:
Read animal farm. Eating less and working more is what we will do without unions. As far as I'm concerned, Animal Farm, not 1984 is Orwell's finest work. While it applies to Communism, revolution, and government, the allegory can easily be translated to Socialism as represented by unions. Consider this imperfect comparison, for just a moment: The Manor Farm is a company. Farmer Jones is the company owner/management. The pigs are union bosses, from national reps on down to BAs and stewards. Boxer is the one guy in the shop who will do his level best no matter what. The rest of the animals (specifically the sheep) are the rest of the workers. Mr. Frederic owns a competing business, and attempts a hostile takeover. What is the result? The one guy in the shop who does his best is purged, while the pigs get fatter. The farm survives the takeover, but the animals end up starving (read: concessions and layoffs). The pigs continue to get fat, and act as overlords replacing Farmer Jones' greed with their own. The sheep continue to bleat the only slogan that matters: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." BTW, thank you for your service (sincerely). You might want to consider staying in, since I have a feeling the disillusionment you'd experience afterward would be life-changing. If you can't see it for what it is, I'm not sure how to help. |
|
Quoted:
BTW, thank you for your service (sincerely). You might want to consider staying in, since I have a feeling the disillusionment you'd experience afterward would be life-changing. If you can't see it for what it is, I'm not sure how to help. Staying in is a great idea. Perhaps he should work at trying to unionize the military.
|
|
Well, I think that FMD did a fine job explaining this, but I thought I'd add my two cents about taxation. As far as the notion that we can "just tax people more" to pay for the budget, that is an absolutely clueless statement.
The only people who think that will work are people who are living in a fantasy land that they have constructed in their mind about how they think the real world is, when in fact it bears no resemblance to reality at all. Here's your reality check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ Cliff notes: Even if we taxed basically everyone into oblivion it would only pay for about one years worth of the federal budget. Then what? We've just destroyed the entire country taking everything from everyone, so there is nothing left to tax for next year. And also this: http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=183855 Cliff notes: The Federal Government has never in the history of the nation managed to collect more than 20% of GDP in taxes. This has been true in times of peace, war, Democrats, Republicans, deficit hawks and doves. It has been the case with a top marginal tax rate from 90% all the way down to today's rates. The reasons for this are complex, but the primary one is that people don't have to work, and there is a pain threshold beyond which they simply work and get paid less, or at least "paid less" in terms that can be taxed.
Ponder on that one for a moment and tell me "taxing more" is the solution. If anyone still thinks it is, then they need help. The bottom line is that SPENDING is the problem, period. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand basic mathematics. |
|
Quoted:
I'm coming back to this: Quoted:
Read animal farm. Eating less and working more is what we will do without unions. As far as I'm concerned, Animal Farm, not 1984 is Orwell's finest work. While it applies to Communism, revolution, and government, the allegory can easily be translated to Socialism as represented by unions. Consider this imperfect comparison, for just a moment: The Manor Farm is a company. Farmer Jones is the company owner/management. The pigs are union bosses, from national reps on down to BAs and stewards. Boxer is the one guy in the shop who will do his level best no matter what. The rest of the animals (specifically the sheep) are the rest of the workers. Mr. Frederic owns a competing business, and attempts a hostile takeover. What is the result? The one guy in the shop who does his best is purged, while the pigs get fatter. The farm survives the takeover, but the animals end up starving (read: concessions and layoffs). The pigs continue to get fat, and act as overlords replacing Farmer Jones' greed with their own. The sheep continue to bleat the only slogan that matters: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." BTW, thank you for your service (sincerely). You might want to consider staying in, since I have a feeling the disillusionment you'd experience afterward would be life-changing. If you can't see it for what it is, I'm not sure how to help. the other result is a bankrupt state who has to fire employees vs cutting their pay. same goes for a business. |
| I'll make this short. I own a business. If my taxes get raised, my prices must go up to compensate. When my prices go up, I may very well lose some business. If enough business gets lost (and remember that my customers are also paying more in taxes and have less to spend, so I'd likely lose some customers anyway), an employee has to go. Unemployed people pay no income tax, and pay less in sales tax simply because they have little, to no, "discretionary" money to spend. End result is tax revenue does not increase, and very likely will decrease due to higher unemployment (less income tax) and less discretionary spending by both the unemployed and employed who get taxed more also (sales tax). |
|
Quoted:
I'll make this short. I own a business. If my taxes get raised, my prices must go up to compensate. When my prices go up, I may very well lose some business. If enough business gets lost (and remember that my customers are also paying more in taxes and have less to spend, so I'd likely lose some customers anyway), an employee has to go. Unemployed people pay no income tax, and pay less in sales tax simply because they have little, to no, "discretionary" money to spend. End result is tax revenue does not increase, and very likely will decrease due to higher unemployment (less income tax) and less discretionary spending by both the unemployed and employed who get taxed more also (sales tax). that just makes too much sense. everyone knows that you can tax someone at 90+% and nothing bad will happen 
actions have consequences, or in this case, taxes have consequences. raise taxes, and it hurts everyone. the majority fop the pain is endured by the low income and middle class as they are more sensitive to price changes. |
|
I will still applaud your post FMD, it is well thought out.
Actually, I think he just might pull it off. The rollback of the 190 Mil (?) increase Doyle and the Democrats gave the teachers two years ago, a (relatively) huge reduction in spending on pensions and healthcare for state workers, the (truly) huge reductions in shared revenue, and (hopefully) the increase of the tax base via new businesses hiring workers that will be attracted to the state via corporate tax incentives will go a long way to getting it done.
I don't see how the addition of the 8 tax incentive zones (up to 20 total, with some being in rural areas(which is really awesome)) which allow for 5 million in tax breaks over 5 years can help us now in our budget problems. I like the fact that this will entice business to our state, but the delay in obtaining full tax revenue confuses me. Okay, let's discuss this for a second, with the actual text of the ordinance available for viewing:
http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/User/jkamme/PaidSickLeaveOrdinance.pdf There are several issues here: 1) From a principal standpoint, can the government compel private businesses to give money to their employees for not showing up? This is essentially what the ordinance does. The voters of Milwaukee just gave themselves an extra week or so of pay at the expense of their employer, who is now required to take an additional ~2% hit in their employee costs. How is letting that stand consistent with less government? 2) While this measure theoretically applies only to employers located within the city limits, that specification does not appear anywhere but the summary. In the specifics of this ordinance, the law applies to any employer whose employees work within the city limits. It could easily be argued that my company, located in Jefferson county, could be subject to the requirements of this ordinance since my employees regularly work in the city. Why didn't >>I<< get to vote on the ordinance then? This very well could affect companies well beyond the city limits. I won't even get into the specific financial impact this will have on those businesses that actually do exist and employ within the city... but suffice it to say, it aint gonna be pretty. My complaint is not with the merit of the ordinance, I work the city but live outside of the city (I would not be eligible nor anyone at my workplace because we are provided PTO). The south side is my laborhood. My sticking point is that the referendum passed in 2008 with 67% (around there) of voters in the city of Milwaukee voting in favor of this measure. It has survived the court process all the way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court (where it deadlocked). The fact that a law is being created to undo what the people of Milwaukee and the court system has chosen to allow is what bothers me. This is a concrete example of where the quintessential functioning of our government is being circumvented. Using a law to regulate City ordinance stinks of "big government" which the Republican and TEA party is all about doing away with. Scott McCallum, not Tommy, who used used airplanes more than McCallum.
You are correct, I can only blame a brain fart. I should have recalled that, I just saw a Tommy Thompson story in the news that referenced his going ons since his stint in federal government. Bill, I have been vilified in this very forum in the past for suggesting that Feingold actually voted the way I wanted him to more often than his Republican opponent would. I, for one, do not advocate party politics. I think they're both driving us over a cliff and arguing about what speed we should be going while heading there. This isn't about party, and with Walker, it rarely has been (hence why the Republican Party failed to get behind him in the primaries in 2006).
I agree with you on the party politics. The only people they benefit is the ones who are in office. I disagree on Walker, and I doubt we will change each others minds. For those of us who've been paying attention, our current situation (in Wisconsin, upon electing Scott Walker to Governor, and many Republicans to the Assembly/Senate) was expected. We've gotten exactly what we voted for. "History in the making" is a good thing.
I really thought the whole Milwaukee County courthouse security guard fiasco would cool Governor Walker's jets on the cut cut cut ideals he embraces. I just fear that the cuts will negatively impact the state and speed up the "brain drain" we suffer. Which I believe is true, because I am preparing to leave also. I don't see how I can afford to stay here with the cuts my better half will be forced to take. Looking at the numbers, I simply cannot afford to live here and provide a lifestyle similar or better to the one I enjoyed as a child to my children. |
|
Quoted:
I will still applaud your post FMD, it is well thought out. Thanks again. Actually, I think he just might pull it off. The rollback of the 190 Mil (?) increase Doyle and the Democrats gave the teachers two years ago, a (relatively) huge reduction in spending on pensions and healthcare for state workers, the (truly) huge reductions in shared revenue, and (hopefully) the increase of the tax base via new businesses hiring workers that will be attracted to the state via corporate tax incentives will go a long way to getting it done.
I don't see how the addition of the 8 tax incentive zones (up to 20 total, with some being in rural areas(which is really awesome)) which allow for 5 million in tax breaks over 5 years can help us now in our budget problems. I like the fact that this will entice business to our state, but the delay in obtaining full tax revenue confuses me. Basically you are trading zero increase in potential tax revenue increases now, for big tax revenue increases later. Company A is located in N. Illinois. It employs 200 people, 50 of which are WI residents. We get 50 employees paying WI income tax, and that's it. Due to the delayed WI income tax provisions, it relocates to S. Wisconsin. Besides the immediate property tax revenue (which benefits the municipality), we still have 50 employees paying WI income tax. Lets say 50 of the current employees refuse to commute, forcing the company to hire 50 more folks, 30 of which are local. Now we have 80 employees paying WI income tax. 24 months after relocating, the Company A now has to pay corporate income tax to WI. We went from 50 employees paying income tax to 80 employees + a corporate entity paying income tax in the span of two years. Without the tax incentive zones/delayed corporate income tax, we'd never make it past 50 individuals paying income tax. Okay, let's discuss this for a second, with the actual text of the ordinance available for viewing:
http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/User/jkamme/PaidSickLeaveOrdinance.pdf There are several issues here: 1) From a principal standpoint, can the government compel private businesses to give money to their employees for not showing up? This is essentially what the ordinance does. The voters of Milwaukee just gave themselves an extra week or so of pay at the expense of their employer, who is now required to take an additional ~2% hit in their employee costs. How is letting that stand consistent with less government? 2) While this measure theoretically applies only to employers located within the city limits, that specification does not appear anywhere but the summary. In the specifics of this ordinance, the law applies to any employer whose employees work within the city limits. It could easily be argued that my company, located in Jefferson county, could be subject to the requirements of this ordinance since my employees regularly work in the city. Why didn't >>I<< get to vote on the ordinance then? This very well could affect companies well beyond the city limits. I won't even get into the specific financial impact this will have on those businesses that actually do exist and employ within the city... but suffice it to say, it aint gonna be pretty. My complaint is not with the merit of the ordinance, I work the city but live outside of the city (I would not be eligible nor anyone at my workplace because we are provided PTO). The south side is my laborhood. My sticking point is that the referendum passed in 2008 with 67% (around there) of voters in the city of Milwaukee voting in favor of this measure. It has survived the court process all the way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court (where it deadlocked). The fact that a law is being created to undo what the people of Milwaukee and the court system has chosen to allow is what bothers me. This is a concrete example of where the quintessential functioning of our government is being circumvented. Using a law to regulate City ordinance stinks of "big government" which the Republican and TEA party is all about doing away with. I think you're missing the point. That the majority of voters in the city of Milwaukee voted to give themselves a raise that they don't merit is secondary. The ordinance is a big-government operation at the expense of business... quite possibly including business located outside the city. That is the purview of the legislature, and it is the state vs. local function of government that we should want to see. The current legislation negating the ordinance is no different than the state preemption statute when it comes to firearm possession. For those of us who've been paying attention, our current situation (in Wisconsin, upon electing Scott Walker to Governor, and many Republicans to the Assembly/Senate) was expected. We've gotten exactly what we voted for. "History in the making" is a good thing.
I really thought the whole Milwaukee County courthouse security guard fiasco would cool Governor Walker's jets on the cut cut cut ideals he embraces. To be fair, that was both out of his control, and was a fair bit of manipulating by the DOC's employee union. In the end, the taxpayers got screwed not because Walker implemented cuts, but because the DOC union hired better lawyers than the county of Milwaukee, and they got to argue in front of a decidedly pro-union Madison lawyer for an arbitrator.* I just fear that the cuts will negatively impact the state and speed up the "brain drain" we suffer. Which I believe is true, because I am preparing to leave also. I don't see how I can afford to stay here with the cuts my better half will be forced to take. Looking at the numbers, I simply cannot afford to live here and provide a lifestyle similar or better to the one I enjoyed as a child to my children.
If your wife is a public employee and you as a family can't afford the 10% pay "cut" to fund her pension and healthcare, then you are living well beyond the means of most "middle class" citizens of Wisconsin. If that sounds harsh, it is not meant to be, it's just a statement of fact. You saw my previous post about my tax rate? Besides giving half to .gov for little/no benefit, the wife and I still manage to pay for both our healthcare and retirement... and we have it good as the company she works for matches the 401k to 4% and soaks up 80% of the HC premiums, which is still more than double what your wife would have to contribute. Public employee compensation in WI great if you can get it, but the reality is that outside of NY, NJ, and CA (along with their cost of living) your chances of finding a sweatheart deal like folks in WI have are somewhere between slim and none. * Scroll down to "OTHER RELEVANT OR EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE" and have a gander. Can you say "stacked deck"? |
|
Basically you are trading zero increase in potential tax revenue increases now, for big tax revenue increases later.
Company A is located in N. Illinois. It employs 200 people, 50 of which are WI residents. We get 50 employees paying WI income tax, and that's it. Due to the delayed WI income tax provisions, it relocates to S. Wisconsin. Besides the immediate property tax revenue (which benefits the municipality), we still have 50 employees paying WI income tax. Lets say 50 of the current employees refuse to commute, forcing the company to hire 50 more folks, 30 of which are local. Now we have 80 employees paying WI income tax. 24 months after relocating, the Company A now has to pay corporate income tax to WI. We went from 50 employees paying income tax to 80 employees + a corporate entity paying income tax in the span of two years. Without the tax incentive zones/delayed corporate income tax, we'd never make it past 50 individuals paying income tax. I am not against a business coming into Wisconsin. I do think it is unrealistic to expect an established business to move from another state to Wisconsin purely for a short term tax break. The cost of moving a business would far outweigh the proposed savings. Additionally, odds are the increase in income tax realized by additional jobs would most likely be a switch from a person working one place to another. Example, Joe works for a retail store. A box company moves to WI. He gets a job there. He is paying (hopefully) slightly more in income taxes while someone who is working at fast food takes his job in retail paying slightly more in taxes. Then finally fast food hires a person, and that person pays very little in income tax because they do not make much money. To expect a business to pack up and move to WI and bring 30 new jobs and 30 new families (or taxpayers) is unrealistic. I think you're missing the point. That the majority of voters in the city of Milwaukee voted to give themselves a raise that they don't merit is secondary. The ordinance is a big-government operation at the expense of business... quite possibly including business located outside the city. That is the purview of the legislature, and it is the state vs. local function of government that we should want to see. The current legislation negating the ordinance is no different than the state preemption statute when it comes to firearm possession.
I believe your argument is only valid if the ordinance is applied to companies that do business in Milwaukee. I do not read it that way. Therefore, I can stand by my argument of "big government". If your wife is a public employee and you as a family can't afford the 10% pay "cut" to fund her pension and healthcare, then you are living well beyond the means of most "middle class" citizens of Wisconsin. If that sounds harsh, it is not meant to be, it's just a statement of fact. You saw my previous post about my tax rate? Besides giving half to .gov for little/no benefit, the wife and I still manage to pay for both our healthcare and retirement... and we have it good as the company she works for matches the 401k to 4% and soaks up 80% of the HC premiums, which is still more than double what your wife would have to contribute. This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. |
|
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. |
|
Quoted:
This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. The problem is, our society is currently rewarding cost savings vs. quality. Any school board and superintendent who saves money is going to be reelected year after year. The only people who will be looking for quality before cost are those who have a vested interest in the system, ie. parents with school aged children. The community at large will be happy with holding the line on school tax. So I cannot believe that a quality teacher will continue to hold a job when there is a less costly replacement available. Many many quality teachers will continue to be employed simply because there are not enough "new" teachers to replace them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising. Exactly, its the line in the sand the difference between a true Conservative and those who call them selves republicans. I'd rather this purge the party now and end up with another batch of "republicans" like those in the early 2000's that ran up the debt and acted like democrats and further taint and destroy the prinicipal of conservatisim. Its stupid for people to run around and say I want to cut spending and control government, but then complain when people actually do what they said they were going to, because they think it might affect them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising. Exactly, its the line in the sand the difference between a true Conservative and those who call them selves republicans. I'd rather this purge the party now and end up with another batch of "republicans" like those in the early 2000's that ran up the debt and acted like democrats and further taint and destroy the prinicipal of conservatisim. Its stupid for people to run around and say I want to cut spending and control government, but then complain when people actually do what they said they were going to, because they think it might affect them. Typical. The second someone disagrees with one stance of the party, they are "traitors". The funny thing is, I've never once mentioned I was a republican, much less considered myself one. I've always been an independent voter and voted for who I thought best represented my interests. That is what a representative is supposed to do. I lean right on quite a few stances, like being anti-gun control, anti-abortion, and anti-amnesty. But when someone starts coming after the job I love, and attacking the job I love. Then I take issue with that and that representative loses my vote, my donations and the privilege of representing me. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty new to this board, but that was not thought out very well, and in truth proby a troll post or a joke. NO WAY you were for real dude, if you were trying to stir the pot and you really are in Iraq I know you have more time to think of something better/more provacative. Jisr Diyala. The trashiest city on the semi-green earth. Oct. 2009 to Oct. 2010. I'm back now. http://www.dvidshub.net/holiday/258803 Troll yet? Check the combat patch, and the place where I am stationed. I'm for real. Notice the flag I stood before. Are you really going pull that card? Dude everyone has a combat patch these days hmmmm....speaking of that which should I wear today???? BTW where is the OP?? px I suppose.... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. you are trying to tell me that teachers and other public sector employees are not receiving lavish pay and benefits which are greater than anything they would receive in the private sector??? I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. so you vote with your pocket book? whatever candidate best serves your fiscal interest? the reason collective bargaining was removed was that if left in place, any fiscal savings made now, would be erased as soon as walker and the republicans are out of power. Walker is thinking long term fixes for our states fiscal crisis |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising. Exactly, its the line in the sand the difference between a true Conservative and those who call them selves republicans. I'd rather this purge the party now and end up with another batch of "republicans" like those in the early 2000's that ran up the debt and acted like democrats and further taint and destroy the prinicipal of conservatisim. Its stupid for people to run around and say I want to cut spending and control government, but then complain when people actually do what they said they were going to, because they think it might affect them. Typical. The second someone disagrees with one stance of the party, they are "traitors". The funny thing is, I've never once mentioned I was a republican, much less considered myself one. I've always been an independent voter and voted for who I thought best represented my interests. That is what a representative is supposed to do. I lean right on quite a few stances, like being anti-gun control, anti-abortion, and anti-amnesty. But when someone starts coming after the job I love, and attacking the job I love. Then I take issue with that and that representative loses my vote, my donations and the privilege of representing me. you said you would never vote republican gain... that statement alone says a lot. then you go onto claim to be Mr independent who never votes a straight party line... up until now as you vowed to never vote republican again. you clearly vote with your pocket book. which is fine as that is your right as an american to do so. however walker is protecting your job. if he just kicks the can down the road like his predecessors have, you would be out of a job, or many of your co workers would be out of a job due to the unsustainable deficit this state is running up. i swear to god, its like some people do not know how to run a simple budget. dollars spent cannot exceed dollars taken in! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising. Exactly, its the line in the sand the difference between a true Conservative and those who call them selves republicans. I'd rather this purge the party now and end up with another batch of "republicans" like those in the early 2000's that ran up the debt and acted like democrats and further taint and destroy the prinicipal of conservatisim. Its stupid for people to run around and say I want to cut spending and control government, but then complain when people actually do what they said they were going to, because they think it might affect them. Typical. The second someone disagrees with one stance of the party, they are "traitors". The funny thing is, I've never once mentioned I was a republican, much less considered myself one. I've always been an independent voter and voted for who I thought best represented my interests. That is what a representative is supposed to do. I lean right on quite a few stances, like being anti-gun control, anti-abortion, and anti-amnesty. But when someone starts coming after the job I love, and attacking the job I love. Then I take issue with that and that representative loses my vote, my donations and the privilege of representing me. you said you would never vote republican gain... that statement alone says a lot. then you go onto claim to be Mr independent who never votes a straight party line... up until now as you vowed to never vote republican again. you clearly vote with your pocket book. which is fine as that is your right as an american to do so. however walker is protecting your job. if he just kicks the can down the road like his predecessors have, you would be out of a job, or many of your co workers would be out of a job due to the unsustainable deficit this state is running up. i swear to god, its like some people do not know how to run a simple budget. dollars spent cannot exceed dollars taken in! You guys really need to learn to read. I had always BEEN an independent voter. Mr. Walker has changed that. As for Walker protecting my job, that's never been further from the truth. As a city Fire Fighter most of the finances that provide my job security come from State Shared Revenue Programs. By cutting that by around 50% he directly puts my job at risk. I won't stand for that and vote will go else where. As explained before I have no problem paying the 5.8% and insurance is a moot point for my city. What I won't stand for and the reason I will never vote Republican again is the cut to collective bargaining which is just a ploy to gain power and break unions and the cut to shared revenue which directly affects my job status. I'm pretty sure each and every one of you would feel the say way if your employer made cuts that put your job at risk. I love my job, and enjoy protecting the people in my city and for that reason alone I will stand toe to toe with anyone on this issue. Let the name calling and bashing begin. It will just show how disrespectful people can be. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This comment hits home, so I may sound harsh. However, that is not my intention, I have enjoyed our back and forth on these issues. To start, we live within our means (I have no way to prove it other than our cars, both are from the mid 90's). My concern is more than the 10% pay "cut" as you put it. Many many people only looked at the 12% health care and 5% pension contributions. The news media failed to grasp the major issue of teachers. The removal of bargaining rights. Gone are pay raises based on teacher education levels, the only pay increase is now up to inflation (any other has to be by referendum). This means wages will stagnate and over time she will earn less money for the same work. The counter to this is "merit" based pay. The problem with merit pay is that due to mainstreaming, children with learning or emotional disabilities are in classrooms with normal grade level kids and expected to perform on that level. When I was young, these students were not included in the classroom and had their own special teachers and rooms. I imagine your experience is similar. There is no merit based system that does not include test scores, so the disabled child who may have the mental capacity of a younger than grade level kid is dragging down the class average. In low income schools there is a disproportionate number of children with disabilities. All of my teacher friends are in favor of merit pay, but there is no current system concept to compensate for the disabled children. Secondly, there is now no protection for teachers who make more money than the base wage. School district superintendents have the power to now let go older more educated and experienced teachers who would make more money and hire new teachers. Why pay an experienced teacher $57,000 when you can pay a new teacher $38,000 and never have to pay them increases based upon education levels? I know of numerous people who will lose their jobs when the new school year starts because the district they are in is keeping all the new hires and not offering jobs to experienced teachers. The reason we will move is that there is now zero job security. Being replaced solely due to budget concerns is unethical in my book and will happen. This will lead to a distinct disadvantage for children. However, unless you have young children, you won't care because the odds for your local school district tax to increase are lessened. I so wish that people would realize that not only the teachers in WI are going to be screwed. There are state custodians, security guards, corrections officers, laborers, DNR workers, and many many others who are loosing income and working conditions that they negotiated in lieu of monetary compensation. I know some people who work for the state in the University of Wisconsin system in food service, they are excited because they can now apply for food stamps. That to me is sad. This can be said about ANY job that is non-union. This is the fear based logic the union heads like to scare their membership with. Fact is, if your wife is a good quality teacher, she will still have a job. While it may sound harsh I don't feel bad that teachers won't get guarenteed raises just because they simply exist in the school system. until they are at a level equal to that of the private sector, i will not give a shit about teacher or any other public sector employees pay. as a whole, they are OVER PAID right now. this legislation will bring their compensation to a level that is comparable to what it should be. Explain to me what "at a level equal to that of the private sector" would be in your opinion. I can tell you right now my salary and benefits package come in around 50K a year total. I have no problem paying the 5.8% pension increases, that's not a big deal. I contribute to my own side pension anyways. As far as the insurance goes that is a moot point, my city had the foresight to go self insured and save itself a very good chunk of change.. What I do have a problem with is nixing the collective bargaining. There are a reason why so many cities are signing contracts as quickly as they can before this goes into effect. In my eyes the collective bargaining side of the law is nothing more than a political power play, that I must say succeeded brilliantly. I've always tried to vote a split ticket so there is some balance. Now, it would take a miracle for me to ever vote for a true Republican ever again. So you were never a true Republican in the first place. You can choose to do what you want, but it's fake Republicans like you the party does not need. The ones that talk a good game, but at the first sign it might affect them, they jump ship. So, bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. There is a lot of this going around right now. It is surprising how some subjects including taxation, unions, and size of government will clearly define where people stand. On second thought, it's not that surprising. Exactly, its the line in the sand the difference between a true Conservative and those who call them selves republicans. I'd rather this purge the party now and end up with another batch of "republicans" like those in the early 2000's that ran up the debt and acted like democrats and further taint and destroy the prinicipal of conservatisim. Its stupid for people to run around and say I want to cut spending and control government, but then complain when people actually do what they said they were going to, because they think it might affect them. Typical. The second someone disagrees with one stance of the party, they are "traitors". The funny thing is, I've never once mentioned I was a republican, much less considered myself one. I've always been an independent voter and voted for who I thought best represented my interests. That is what a representative is supposed to do. I lean right on quite a few stances, like being anti-gun control, anti-abortion, and anti-amnesty. But when someone starts coming after the job I love, and attacking the job I love. Then I take issue with that and that representative loses my vote, my donations and the privilege of representing me. you said you would never vote republican gain... that statement alone says a lot. then you go onto claim to be Mr independent who never votes a straight party line... up until now as you vowed to never vote republican again. you clearly vote with your pocket book. which is fine as that is your right as an american to do so. however walker is protecting your job. if he just kicks the can down the road like his predecessors have, you would be out of a job, or many of your co workers would be out of a job due to the unsustainable deficit this state is running up. i swear to god, its like some people do not know how to run a simple budget. dollars spent cannot exceed dollars taken in! You guys really need to learn to read. I had always BEEN an independent voter. Mr. Walker has changed that. I read that you were an independent who will no longer vote republican. so unless you vote third party half the time, you are now a democrat. congratulations. As for Walker protecting my job, that's never been further from the truth. As a city Fire Fighter most of the finances that provide my job security come from State Shared Revenue Programs. By cutting that by around 50% he directly puts my job at risk. I won't stand for that and vote will go else where. As explained before I have no problem paying the 5.8% and insurance is a moot point for my city. What I won't stand for and the reason I will never vote Republican again is the cut to collective bargaining which is just a ploy to gain power and break unions and the cut to shared revenue which directly affects my job status. I'm pretty sure each and every one of you would feel the say way if your employer made cuts that put your job at risk. I love my job, and enjoy protecting the people in my city and for that reason alone I will stand toe to toe with anyone on this issue. Let the name calling and bashing begin. It will just show how disrespectful people can be. we are not calling you names or bashing. i will ask you this though, how do you propose walker fix the states budget issue without cutting costs? raise taxes like the OP of another thread has suggested? what do you think will happen when the state cannot borrow any more money and the interest on its debt begins to increase each time we are forced to refinance? |
|
1)Cut entitlement programs. I.E.-low income cell phones. Vehicle subsidies and so on.
2) Don't allow the WIsconsin EPA to require farmers to get HAZMAT certifications and show clean up abilities for milk spills, simply because milk has chemicals in it. (It will cost tons of money to regulate and has little affect on the environment) 3) Stop spending money on CWD erradication. It isn't harmful to humans and you aren't going to ever stop the spread no matter how hard you try. 4) I know this won't go over well but raise the tax, just a little on beer and alcohol sails. It has been raised since 1969. Even in if it a minimal amount like 0.5% to 1.0%, this state drinks more than enough alcohol to for that small of a tax to help will the budget. 5) Stop spending money on stupid things for the government (Department head do not need to be driving around $30,000+ SUV's while at work also school's driver's education vehicles don't need to be a $20k Buick SUV.) 6) This will probably only help with the cost of oversight but take Tommy Thompson's idea of Work for Welfare one step further and require enrollees to show that they are either working towards an education for 1 or more year or at a tax status job for 1 or more years before they are elligible for receiving benefits. 7) Most importantly cut pay and benefits to politicians at the both the federal (no bearing on state budget but it needs to be done) and state politicians 8) Put a spending cap on the amount of tax payer dollars that can be used during political campaigns. It won't completely fix the budget but I'm confident it would make a good dent in it without adding a noticeable burden to tax payers. |
|
Quoted:
1)Cut entitlement programs. I.E.-low income cell phones. Vehicle subsidies and so on. 2) Don't allow the WIsconsin EPA to require farmers to get HAZMAT certifications and show clean up abilities for milk spills, simply because milk has chemicals in it. (It will cost tons of money to regulate and has little affect on the environment) 3) Stop spending money on CWD erradication. It isn't harmful to humans and you aren't going to ever stop the spread no matter how hard you try.4) I know this won't go over well but raise the tax, just a little on beer and alcohol sails. It has been raised since 1969. Even in if it a minimal amount like 0.5% to 1.0%, this state drinks more than enough alcohol to for that small of a tax to help will the budget. 5) Stop spending money on stupid things for the government (Department head do not need to be driving around $30,000+ SUV's while at work also school's driver's education vehicles don't need to be a $20k Buick SUV.) 6) This will probably only help with the cost of oversight but take Tommy Thompson's idea of Work for Welfare one step further and require enrollees to show that they are either working towards an education for 1 or more year or at a tax status job for 1 or more years before they are elligible for receiving benefits. 7) Most importantly cut pay and benefits to politicians at the both the federal (no bearing on state budget but it needs to be done) and state politicians 8) Put a spending cap on the amount of tax payer dollars that can be used during political campaigns. It won't completely fix the budget but I'm confident it would make a good dent in it without adding a noticeable burden to tax payers. red I disagree on that one, on both counts. It is not known what, if any, effects it has on humans. It may only be communicable by consuming meat from an infected animal... but with the number of deer hunters in this state, that's enough cause for concern. Secondly, all efforts to stop it's spread should be done. I'm not speaking of just not wanting the deer herd to be decimated (as a deer hunter), but the economic catastrophy that could cause involving the money spent by deer hunters, and the revenue to the state that deer hunting creates (license sales and sales tax on guns, ammo, hunting clothes, meals, alcohol, lodging, gasoline, etc etc etc). Deer hunting license sales alone amount to about $17Million (based on $20 per license, roughly 650,000 gun tags, roughly 200,000 archery tags sold yearly... does not account for "cheaper" tags, such as buying a Sportsmans license, nor the more expensive non-resident tags... it's just an "average"). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
1)Cut entitlement programs. I.E.-low income cell phones. Vehicle subsidies and so on. 2) Don't allow the WIsconsin EPA to require farmers to get HAZMAT certifications and show clean up abilities for milk spills, simply because milk has chemicals in it. (It will cost tons of money to regulate and has little affect on the environment) 3) Stop spending money on CWD erradication. It isn't harmful to humans and you aren't going to ever stop the spread no matter how hard you try.4) I know this won't go over well but raise the tax, just a little on beer and alcohol sails. It has been raised since 1969. Even in if it a minimal amount like 0.5% to 1.0%, this state drinks more than enough alcohol to for that small of a tax to help will the budget. 5) Stop spending money on stupid things for the government (Department head do not need to be driving around $30,000+ SUV's while at work also school's driver's education vehicles don't need to be a $20k Buick SUV.) 6) This will probably only help with the cost of oversight but take Tommy Thompson's idea of Work for Welfare one step further and require enrollees to show that they are either working towards an education for 1 or more year or at a tax status job for 1 or more years before they are elligible for receiving benefits. 7) Most importantly cut pay and benefits to politicians at the both the federal (no bearing on state budget but it needs to be done) and state politicians 8) Put a spending cap on the amount of tax payer dollars that can be used during political campaigns. It won't completely fix the budget but I'm confident it would make a good dent in it without adding a noticeable burden to tax payers. red I disagree on that one, on both counts. It is not known what, if any, effects it has on humans. It may only be communicable by consuming meat from an infected animal... but with the number of deer hunters in this state, that's enough cause for concern. Secondly, all efforts to stop it's spread should be done. I'm not speaking of just not wanting the deer herd to be decimated (as a deer hunter), but the economic catastrophy that could cause involving the money spent by deer hunters, and the revenue to the state that deer hunting creates (license sales and sales tax on guns, ammo, hunting clothes, meals, alcohol, lodging, gasoline, etc etc etc). Deer hunting license sales alone amount to about $17Million (based on $20 per license, roughly 650,000 gun tags, roughly 200,000 archery tags sold yearly... does not account for "cheaper" tags, such as buying a Sportsmans license, nor the more expensive non-resident tags... it's just an "average"). I can agree with the financial impact. I just don't see the point in hiring outside companies to do a job that the average everyday hunter can do for free. I know they have opened up specialized seasons in the past as well as hired sharp shooters and to me it makes much more sense to keep the special seasons in play rather than hire a sharp shooter to do a job most of us gun deer hunters would do for free (especially those of us that don't see many deer while gun hunting). |
|
Quoted:
1)Cut entitlement programs. I.E.-low income cell phones. Vehicle subsidies and so on. 2) Don't allow the WIsconsin EPA to require farmers to get HAZMAT certifications and show clean up abilities for milk spills, simply because milk has chemicals in it. (It will cost tons of money to regulate and has little affect on the environment) 3) Stop spending money on CWD erradication. It isn't harmful to humans and you aren't going to ever stop the spread no matter how hard you try. 4) I know this won't go over well but raise the tax, just a little on beer and alcohol sails. It has been raised since 1969. Even in if it a minimal amount like 0.5% to 1.0%, this state drinks more than enough alcohol to for that small of a tax to help will the budget. 5) Stop spending money on stupid things for the government (Department head do not need to be driving around $30,000+ SUV's while at work also school's driver's education vehicles don't need to be a $20k Buick SUV.) 6) This will probably only help with the cost of oversight but take Tommy Thompson's idea of Work for Welfare one step further and require enrollees to show that they are either working towards an education for 1 or more year or at a tax status job for 1 or more years before they are elligible for receiving benefits. 7) Most importantly cut pay and benefits to politicians at the both the federal (no bearing on state budget but it needs to be done) and state politicians 8) Put a spending cap on the amount of tax payer dollars that can be used during political campaigns. It won't completely fix the budget but I'm confident it would make a good dent in it without adding a noticeable burden to tax payers. well i agree with you 100% on those points, less maybe the CWD as well. the fiscal impact and environmental far outweigh the cost of combating its spread. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
1)Cut entitlement programs. I.E.-low income cell phones. Vehicle subsidies and so on. 2) Don't allow the WIsconsin EPA to require farmers to get HAZMAT certifications and show clean up abilities for milk spills, simply because milk has chemicals in it. (It will cost tons of money to regulate and has little affect on the environment) 3) Stop spending money on CWD erradication. It isn't harmful to humans and you aren't going to ever stop the spread no matter how hard you try. 4) I know this won't go over well but raise the tax, just a little on beer and alcohol sails. It has been raised since 1969. Even in if it a minimal amount like 0.5% to 1.0%, this state drinks more than enough alcohol to for that small of a tax to help will the budget. 5) Stop spending money on stupid things for the government (Department head do not need to be driving around $30,000+ SUV's while at work also school's driver's education vehicles don't need to be a $20k Buick SUV.) 6) This will probably only help with the cost of oversight but take Tommy Thompson's idea of Work for Welfare one step further and require enrollees to show that they are either working towards an education for 1 or more year or at a tax status job for 1 or more years before they are elligible for receiving benefits. 7) Most importantly cut pay and benefits to politicians at the both the federal (no bearing on state budget but it needs to be done) and state politicians 8) Put a spending cap on the amount of tax payer dollars that can be used during political campaigns. It won't completely fix the budget but I'm confident it would make a good dent in it without adding a noticeable burden to tax payers. well i agree with you 100% on those points, less maybe the CWD as well. the fiscal impact and environmental far outweigh the cost of combating its spread. This is the kind of political conversation I wish I could have with people who have view points differing from mine and the kind of conversation I wish the politicians would have in Madison. This is how problems get solved. Not by throwing insults at each other. Unfortunately many people on both side of the aisle take differing view points as personal attacks and things get nasty from there. |