Walker is doing the job he was elected to do

[chrisrobin]

Oh, by the way... in addition to the head Koch-sucker, the lieutenant governor and three state senators (R. Wisconsin) are on the recall list. On Wisconsin!

 

[vulgar_newcomer]

you live in a fantasy world inhabited with good guys and bad guys

no gray

unions inherently are not the problem

unions that abuse their power are

you're right in that legislatures have "agreed" to all

after being pressured/threatened/bought - pick one or more

that doesn't make it right

do you think state employees should pay $0 for pension benefits?
do you think that state employees should have health benefits 1/4 to 1/2 of the % that private sector
do you think that teachers should have jobs for life?

let me know

Pathetic!

The young minded don't seem to remember a time when the private sector had decent pay, benefits for the masses. Government jobs paid less and attracted people due to the benefits. It was harder to attract employees to stay in a government job even with that. This ranged from federal to state, local.
Slowly the private sector whittled away benefits , pay was reduced or stagnant and bingo all the sudden the best jobs left are government.

Guess what no one really raised any hell as it happened just whined the unions are bad, or they had a time and place but thats over. Point out the bad, and zoom in on that as if unions in the majority are evil, mafia, greedy, corrupt worthless devils.

Union jobs help stabilize and create a prevailing pay rate for similar jobs that are not union in a area making it more affluent, a better quality of life. Working conditions, safety, hours, & benefits are vital.

Take away that and as billion dollar profiteers Wal-Mart or McDonalds will gladly show you how they treat the pee-ons that work for them.

Plus you totally overlook the fact that the unions, public & private all when shoved agreed to negotiate........... all of them, they almost always do. You don't start off agreeing to that. Fuck but when you hand is twisted you compromise and they did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The top spot in my state, the Gov pays $140,000 a yr. Now why in the fuck would any person, former CEO spend 75 million of their own money to buy the election for a job that pays that?????

[Text: Removed by Moderator]

 

[freshjock90]

My biggest problem with unions is their ability to force people to pay dues. That excess money is one of the causes of union corruption that makes it difficult for the government to make effective and timely compromise when necessary. . My fahter is in one and told me some crazy stories about unions fighting with each other during an airline merger (fists and all). They do have mob qualities. But as with everything someone can find a negative or positive if they look hard enough.

The state employees should be paying something for their health insurance. What I find interesting is that private school teacher are able to survive just fine with traditionally less pay and no unions, why can't the public school teachers?

 

[JayHawk]

JayHawk: So basically you're faulting the unions for trying to negotiate? I guess I don't see the virtue of that.

WI wasn't bankrupt. Mr. Walker inherited a budget deficit, to be sure. So did most of the governors that came before him, Republicans and Democrats. The difference is how they approached fixing it.

No I fault them for not offering ANYTHING in the way of a solution until their balls were in a vice. They could have demonstrated as unions and as civil servants they desired to see a healthy outcome. They could of done so much sooner than when Walker announced and then gain legislative traction on the idea of removing their ability to not offer any assistance.

 

[Yngbldhwk]

No I fault them for not offering ANYTHING in the way of a solution until their balls were in a vice. They could have demonstrated as unions and as civil servants they desired to see a healthy outcome. They could of done so much sooner than when Walker announced and then gain legislative traction on the idea of removing their ability to not offer any assistance.

Actually, I would say that they demonstrated pretty well; there were over 100,000 people in front of the capitol at one point. Seriously, though, how do you negotiate with someone who says "I have nothing to negotiate." That is what Mr. Walker said.

None of that, of course, changes the fact that WI wasn't bankrupt or broke when the budget was drawn up and isn't bankrupt or broke now. And if we are bankrupt, then how is that Mr. Walker: (1) gave back $800 million for rail improvements to the feds; (2) cancelled $1.2 billion in solar and wind energy projects; (3) gave back $23 million for expanding internet connectivity in rural areas, and (4) just gave back another $38 million earmarked for setting up state health exchanges, something that he said he was all for less than a year ago. This is over $2 billion dollars that's been removed from the state's economy. It doesn't sound, to me, like something the governor of a bankrupt state would or should do.

I'm not sure if you've ever been to WI, but we're definitely not a poor state. In fact, we're a donor state. We regularly send more income tax dollars back to the feds than what we get back in federal dollars. What happens to the difference? It goes to truly poor states, like Mississippi. Understand me, if we truly were broke, I could accept Walker's actions better; but we just aren't.

 

[JayHawk]

Actually, I would say that they demonstrated pretty well; there were over 100,000 people in front of the capitol at one point. Seriously, though, how do you negotiate with someone who says "I have nothing to negotiate." That is what Mr. Walker said.

None of that, of course, changes the fact that WI wasn't bankrupt or broke when the budget was drawn up and isn't bankrupt or broke now. And if we are bankrupt, then how is that Mr. Walker: (1) gave back $800 million for rail improvements to the feds; (2) cancelled $1.2 billion in solar and wind energy projects; (3) gave back $23 million for expanding internet connectivity in rural areas, and (4) just gave back another $38 million earmarked for setting up state health exchanges, something that he said he was all for less than a year ago. This is over $2 billion dollars that's been removed from the state's economy. It doesn't sound, to me, like something the governor of a bankrupt state would or should do.

I'm not sure if you've ever been to WI, but we're definitely not a poor state. In fact, we're a donor state. We regularly send more income tax dollars back to the feds than what we get back in federal dollars. What happens to the difference? It goes to truly poor states, like Mississippi. Understand me, if we truly were broke, I could accept Walker's actions better; but we just aren't.

So then what is the issue?

Are you telling me there was zero budget deficit in the WI budget and he came in a made something up to satisfy his nefarious plot to end unions? Which as it turns out just removes their ability to demand better healthcare WHICH if I am not mistaken is the route we are headed down with the healthcare bill... unless of course you have money to pay out of pocket? That route being someone else dictating what you can and what you cannot afford to have done at the doctor's office.

I don't think it is wise to NOT fund public trans. For the record. BUT if you all had so much money to give back then why do you have a 3.6 billion dollar hole in your budget?

 

[Yngbldhwk]

So then what is the issue?

Are you telling me there was zero budget deficit in the WI budget and he came in a made something up to satisfy his nefarious plot to end unions? Which as it turns out just removes their ability to demand better healthcare WHICH if I am not mistaken is the route we are headed down with the healthcare bill... unless of course you have money to pay out of pocket? That route being someone else dictating what you can and what you cannot afford to have done at the doctor's office.

I don't think it is wise to NOT fund public trans. For the record. BUT if you all had so much money to give back then why do you have a 3.6 billion dollar hole in your budget?

JayHawk: No, I'm not saying there was no deficit. But there's always a state deficit at the beginning of the two-year WI budget cycle. The governor immediately before Walker inherited a $3.2 billion deficit. What I am saying is that the state wasn't broke or bankrupt. The state was still taking in revenue, still paying its bills. So what could technically be said is that the projected tax revenue for the next two years didn't meet the projected spending. But that's very different from being bankrupt or broke. Tax revenues are down because we're in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

So did Walker use the budget cycle as an excuse to go after the unions? Personally, I believe he did, but that's just my opinion. It is, however, based in part on his behavior for the past eight years as Milwaukee County Executive. He actually violated labor laws with respect to county security positions using the same method of saying there was a budget crisis when there wasn't. It went to arbitration and the union won. The county ended up paying more than if Walker had done nothing, because it had to reinstate the old employees and continue to pay the private security company Walker had tried to outsource the jobs to. That's the irony. Or it would be, if everything he touched didn't turn out the same way.

 

[JayHawk]

So if the State ALWAYS starts the year off with a 3 billion -ish budget deficit and since it is further complicated by the fact that we are in such a tight recession does it not make sense to go after the root cause of the shortfall year after year after year?

What is the shortfall and how is it normally covered? In other words before the union had a bite taken out of them who was losing so they might win?

I dunno how knowing you have such a shortfall every year is sane or is it a fake budget every year Or do you just hope and pray it might work out?

 

[Kulindahr]

The state employees should be paying something for their health insurance. What I find interesting is that private school teacher are able to survive just fine with traditionally less pay and no unions, why can't the public school teachers?

This depends on what you define as "just fine". I've known quite a few private school teachers; most planned to work until 75 or so to try to have a retirement above the poverty level.

 

[Kulindahr]

So if the State ALWAYS starts the year off with a 3 billion -ish budget deficit and since it is further complicated by the fact that we are in such a tight recession does it not make sense to go after the root cause of the shortfall year after year after year?

What is the shortfall and how is it normally covered? In other words before the union had a bite taken out of them who was losing so they might win?

I dunno how knowing you have such a shortfall every year is sane or is it a fake budget every year Or do you just hope and pray it might work out?

Oregon played that game under a governor or two. The "shortfall" was because to look good, the governor's staff always made rosy economic forecasts, and based the next budget on those, but then at the start of each fiscal year the people who were honest about the economy weighed in with realistic revenue projections, so every year there was a "shortfall".

My guess is that's what's happening in Wisconsin -- "shortfall" is politician-speak for "mendacious projections".

 

[Yngbldhwk]

So if the State ALWAYS starts the year off with a 3 billion -ish budget deficit and since it is further complicated by the fact that we are in such a tight recession does it not make sense to go after the root cause of the shortfall year after year after year?

What is the shortfall and how is it normally covered? In other words before the union had a bite taken out of them who was losing so they might win?

I dunno how knowing you have such a shortfall every year is sane or is it a fake budget every year Or do you just hope and pray it might work out?

Ah, JayHawk -- you've hit on the point I was hoping and expecting you would. What's the root cause of our state's deficit? It's not public employee salaries. If memory serves, they account for only 12% of the state's budget. Teachers, public health nurses, janitors, university teaching assistants -- they're not the reason there's a deficit.

The problem is on the revenue side. Fees here tend to be lower than other states. However, personal income taxes in WI tend to be relatively higher than other midwestern states. Property taxes are substantially higher here. So why is there a deficit? Because WI has steadily -- since about 1950 -- been lowering corporate income taxes. (The company I work for has never paid a penny in corporate income tax to the state in over half a century, and probably never will.) To make up for this, the state's had to correspondingly raise income and property taxes. Those are the two areas where most people keenly feel the effect, and, I think, why most people here feel we're overtaxed. And we are. It's just not because of unions. And that's why a solution based on that premise isn't going to work.

 

[Kulindahr]

^
I've got a suggestion that could make things interesting: make the corporate tax rate equal to the rate of the state's bottom personal bracket plus the current prime rate.

It would then be in the interest of the rich to make the bottom tax bracket approach zero.