I can never understand how people can vote against their own interest. The ones that voted for the Gov were any of them the very people he's trying to destroy.
First, I have not said the people haven't spoken. They have. Though I'd be slow to take too much from an vote that close.
What I have said, and you should read slowly, is that their right to unionize is the same as it is in the private sector. And when you try to deny them that right, you effectively regluate them to second class status. They don't have the same rights. What you fail to realize is that in the few states where problems of any significance has arisen, the blame is either equal or more so on the the other side of the negotiating table. If you think your leaders can be bribed, you'd do better to get another leader.
This is probably the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Recalls are part of the democratic process; when enough citizens want a recall, then one is performed. IIRC like a million people signed the recall, which is a massive number and therefore - legally and rationally - satisfies the need for one.
No. There is no "right to unionize" and expect to keep your job. And you keep saying things as if fact, when most of us know them to be your imaginative folly.
The vast majority of Obama's fundraising comes from small donors. The vast majority of Romney's money comes from millionaires and billionaires.
Factory workers, retail clerks and, yes, even the UAW doesn't have the sweet deal that public sector employees have. Not anywhere near. All to buy those union votes -- and the contributions the unions make to the coffers of the Democrats to keep their butts in office.
If we're still talking about Walker, the Unions agreed to all the financial consessions he proposed (reluctantly) but as Walker later admitted, it wasn't about the $$$, it was about stripping Unions of their right to bargain in good faith.eace
If we're still talking about Walker, the Unions agreed to all the financial consessions he proposed (reluctantly) but as Walker later admitted, it wasn't about the $$$, it was about stripping Unions of their right to bargain in good faith.eace
Yeah, it's easier to depersonalize them as Union Thugs.......eace
Yes I know they agreed to the concessions. But how long would those concessions have lasted? The odds are that they would have lasted until a democrat was in office. Then things would have gone back up. Which means that ultimately the situation wasn't fixed. They just put a bandaid on it. Walkers solution was far more permanent.
A union is a collective voice, formalized. What makes someone second class is when they can't do what others do. When you say one group can form a union, and another group can't, you are regulating that group to second class status.
Try following the argument.
Except that no one is telling anyone, not even public employee's, that they cannot form a union.
MAybe, Maybe not. But this is the nature of negotiations. Works best when both sides participate.
Oh, this is the be silly approach used when you can't address the actual points. I'm well aware of the tactics. However, as one who supports more to the solider, by all means, unionize.
But we're not talking about themilitary.
We're talking about civilians who do a job, like any other employee
I know that some don't think comparisons should be between things that are actually alike, as that wouldn't work as well for the false point they try to make. But, I insist they must actually be alike.
There has been no removal of soverity from the public.
They can vote for any candidate who runs. They can made negotiating priority in the candidate they want. As I noted earlier, most states handle this rather well.
sure we are - or are you arguing that members of the military are not public employees?
no, not "like any other employee", as the government is not "any other employer". The nature of representative government is inimical to the unionization of it's workforce, as Samuel Gompers and FDR well understood.
that is incorrect. When any part of government is controlled by factions of the government, the power of the populace to have its will reflected instead is reduced in direct proportion.
Correct. Most states handle this rather well through the expedient of limiting their public sector unions. The ones that do not do so (Illinois, California) are doing rather badly.
They are not civilian employees. No, they are not.
Actually, the government is a lot like every other employer. Police provide a service. Firefighters provide a service. Teachers provide a service and they are paid for doing that service.
No, I am correct. There has bene no removal of soverity from the public. They are just as free to vote as they ahve ever been.
NO, they negotiate better
...The budget repair law experience has not been uniform across the state of Wisconsin. Some jurisdictions that are not encumbered by legacy labor contracts were able to achieve significant savings right away due to the budget repair law, and were not forced to make sharp reductions in employment—some, such as the City of Milwaukee, were even able to expand public services.
Milwaukee lost $14 million in annual aid payments from the state, but found $30 million in employee benefits savings, of which $20 million was made possible by the budget repair law. These savings came mostly from changes to health benefits: partly requiring employees to pay a larger share of their insurance premiums, and partly switching to more economical plans. This is an example of what Wisconsinites can expect to see in cities and towns across their state in the next few years.
But other jurisdictions that must honor existing contracts have had very different experiences. Take, for example, the Milwaukee Public Schools. The district lost $82 million in state aid. But it was not able to realize any health care or pension savings with unionized employees, because it entered into a four-year employee contract at the end of 2010. As a result, the district laid off 119 teachers and over 100 other employees.
This situation is difficult, but temporary. There will be significant labor savings available to the Milwaukee Public Schools starting in 2014 when existing contracts expire. Employees will make larger pension and health contributions, and the district will have a free hand to modify health benefits.
Those savings, when realized, should be substantial. A recent study found that even simply moving MPS employees into the same health plan used by state employees would save $64 million per year, enough to nearly wipe out the loss of state aid.[3]
Over the next three years, municipal governments will begin taking advantage of labor reforms, and we can expect their ability to maintain or expand headcount to improve. Over time, the City of Milwaukee experience will move from unusually fortunate to typical—much as we’ve seen with how Indiana governments have weathered the recession...
The few states that did a poor job do not reflect unions, but the poor leadership involved by the state.
NO, they negotiate better. The few states that did a poor job do not reflect unions, but the poor leadership involved by the state.
NO, they negotiate better. The few states that did a poor job do not reflect unions, but the poor leadership involved by the state.
This is insane. Try this on. When you tell someone that if they take the job, they must join the union, that is to take away their liberty. When you then automatically deduct money from their paychecks to support a political party, you take away more liberty. When you then use the threat of force on a taxpayer to pay you more money, you are now taking away the liberty of that taxpayer.
The people of Wisconsin spoke. They told the municipal unions that they were full of ****.
And frankly, I am tiring of the whiney liberal parasites myself.
Apparently I am having my rights denied. Interesting.
Very well, Boo, I accept your logic. If teachers can invade Madison to protest budget cuts, then we shall see how well you favor it when I unionize the Marine Corps and we.... "invade"... Washington DC to lodge our protests over slashes to DOD funding. I'm betting a couple of tanks parked outside the capital and a BN of infantry guarding the exits would focus Congresscritters minds wonderfully on how Very Important It Is To Double Each Military Member's Pay Overnight Regardless Of The Effect On The Budget.
When portions of a government become an active political interest group, it represents a removal of sovereignty from the populace. It is Government by the Government for the Government.
Except that in this case it was a waste of money as the recall did not do what those that called for it wanted it to do. They also only wanted it for one reason and one reason only. To protect their precious public union bargaining "right". If you spend millions of dollars on something and it fails in its purpose then that money was wasted.
If a recall suceeds then its not a waste. If it fails then it was a waste.
Yes I know they agreed to the concessions. But how long would those concessions have lasted? The odds are that they would have lasted until a democrat was in office. Then things would have gone back up. Which means that ultimately the situation wasn't fixed. They just put a bandaid on it. Walkers solution was far more permanent.
What were the results of the recall election?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?