Wisconsin govenor busted!

[Engyo]

GOP passed the bill on the quiet after midnight (Friday 25th Feb, 2011) -

44 - Wisconsin Dems shout 'shame' after union vote

Yes, but just the Assembly so far. The Senate is still awaiting a quorum.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

And, since I know a few teachers (including my mom for a 30 year career), doing so will generate a new problem. The newly reconstituted school district will be looking for good teachers, or at least better teachers than the ones they let go, right?

How many good teachers are going to be applying to a new school district operated by folks who use those kinds of human resource methodologies?

The answer is, not very many. They will get applications from teachers that are already out of work from similar actions, and from brand-new graduates whose teaching certificates are still wet. Some of those new ones may turn out to be good teachers; but if they do, they will soon be snapped up by districts with better pay and conditions that offer a more secure job situation.

Anyone who had a choice of working for a district in that situation, and one which had not resorted to such HR methodologies, will choose the stable and established district everytime, unless of course if the new district is offering premium wages. Since one of the main motivators for doing this in the first place is to cut costs, premium wages would seem to be contraindicated.

All of this is true. I think that only in the Worst Case Scenario this should happen. The biggest problem is nobody wants to work in poor schools.
Most teachers want to teach and not deal with behavior problems. Also if the whole system is failing it is not the teachers fault. (Sure their are a few bad teachers) It is the people in charge. They are the ones who need to be fired.

I know in places like Oakland they can't find teachers who will work in the bad schools. They hire students in teacher programs to do the job. As soon as they get there teaching credential they move to a new district. My best friend tried to work in the Oakland schools. He could stand it about 2 years then he moved on. Teaching in prison also pays better then the public schools.

 

[Random]

Yes, but just the Assembly so far. The Senate is still awaiting a quorum.

Yes. What if the Democrats who fled do not return?

 

[Engyo]

Yes. What if the Democrats who fled do not return?

At some point someone is going to blink. The jury is still out as to who it will be. I hope Wisconsin's voters are paying attention to how ALL of their elected officials are performing the tasks they were elected to perform.

 

[Random]

At some point someone is going to blink. The jury is still out as to who it will be. I hope Wisconsin's voters are paying attention to how ALL of their elected officials are performing the tasks they were elected to perform.

Appreciate the reply.

 

[asketikos]

Scott Walker says he is a Christian, and many of his social and political positions are supposedly faith-based.

If he really believes in God, then he is a shame, liar, and disgrace. Putting the needs of the rich before the poor is a terrible sin.

His anti-poor politics are indicative of one thing - he is a fraud and cares only for the rich.

 

[Revoltingest]

Scott Walker says he is a Christian, and many of his social and political positions are supposedly faith-based.
If he really believes in God, then he is a shame, liar, and disgrace. Putting the needs of the rich before the poor is a terrible sin.
His anti-poor politics are indicative of one thing - he is a fraud and cares only for the rich.

You say "anti-poor", but that's histrionic. The guy is a bit of a blunt instrument, but he has a budget to balance.
Curbing union costs & power gets there. It's a stretch to attack him using his religion.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What a shame.

I clicked on the thread thinking that he was busted.

Oh well. The fascists got their way. Now it will be fought out in court over precisely how they did everything underhanded.

(I suspect that the protests will go on for a little while - seems like a moot point now, though)

 

[Revoltingest]

What a shame.
I clicked on the thread thinking that he was busted.
Oh well. The fascists got their way. Now it will be fought out in court over precisely how they did everything underhanded.

The good guys won for a change.
Take that....Jessie!
Today Wisconsin...tomorrow Michigan!

 

[asketikos]

You say "anti-poor", but that's histrionic. The guy is a bit of a blunt instrument, but he has a budget to balance.
Curbing union costs & power gets there. It's a stretch to attack him using his religion.

If you read the bill then you will see that it has nothing to do with the budget.
Beyond the destruction of the union, there are severe draconian amendments to the bill.
The costs of unions and labor are so insignificant compared to the budget that it is a ridiculous argument, not even 2% of the budget.

It's a shame is what it is.

If someone calls themselves a Christian and then lives by the gospel of pandering to the rich while at the same time lying to his constituents, well, than that's a disgrace to me. I might have some respect for him as a man if he was honest and said that this is to destroy the union and the education system, but to say its a budget issue is just an open lie - and its in front of everyone.

Read the bill, tell me if it doesn't scare you. After that read the SB 5 bill in Ohio and the proposals in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

While everyone is out of work and losing their jobs Walker's and other Rep. solution is -- kill more jobs! Kill the jobs of the most valuable members of our society - teachers, police, and firefighters.

Their strategy is simple, and its working -- cause a division within the working class, the private sector and the public sector, let them turn against each other rather than the 1% that holds most of the wealth in this nation - the wealth that we gave them in 2008! So why are we bashing our teachers and police and firefighters? Why aren't we demanding justice for the fraud of 2008? It's disturbing to me.

Just watch, and I bet, that soon they'll come for the private unions, because, why shouldn't the private unions "share the sacrifice" (and in fact, several Rep's are already talking about severly curbing private unions).

 

[Sunstone]

If you read the bill then you will see that it has nothing to do with the budget.
Beyond the destruction of the union, there are severe draconian amendments to the bill.
The costs of unions and labor are so insignificant compared to the budget that it is a ridiculous argument, not even 2% of the budget.

It's a shame is what it is.

If someone calls themselves a Christian and then lives by the gospel of pandering to the rich while at the same time lying to his constituents, well, than that's a disgrace to me. I might have some respect for him as a man if he was honest and said that this is to destroy the union and the education system, but to say its a budget issue is just an open lie - and its in front of everyone.

Read the bill, tell me if it doesn't scare you. After that read the SB 5 bill in Ohio and the proposals in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

While everyone is out of work and losing their jobs Walker's and other Rep. solution is -- kill more jobs! Kill the jobs of the most valuable members of our society - teachers, police, and firefighters.

Their strategy is simple, and its working -- cause a division within the working class, the private sector and the public sector, let them turn against each other rather than the 1% that holds most of the wealth in this nation - the wealth that we gave them in 2008! So why are we bashing our teachers and police and firefighters? Why aren't we demanding justice for the fraud of 2008? It's disturbing to me.

Just watch, and I bet, that soon they'll come for the private unions, because, why shouldn't the private unions "share the sacrifice" (and in fact, several Rep's are already talking about severly curbing private unions).

There are lots of people who still support the Republicans, though.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you read the bill then you will see that it has nothing to do with the budget.
Beyond the destruction of the union, there are severe draconian amendments to the bill.
The costs of unions and labor are so insignificant compared to the budget that it is a ridiculous argument, not even 2% of the budget.

Costs should be cut wherever savings can be had. One person's "draconian" is another's necessary.

It's a shame is what it is.

A worse shame is to continue deficit spending.

If someone calls themselves a Christian and then lives by the gospel of pandering to the rich while at the same time lying to his constituents, well, than that's a disgrace to me. I might have some respect for him as a man if he was honest and said that this is to destroy the union and the education system, but to say its a budget issue is just an open lie - and its in front of everyone.

You think the union will be destroyed? I thought they'd still exist, but with less collective bargaining power.

Read the bill, tell me if it doesn't scare you. After that read the SB 5 bill in Ohio and the proposals in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Have some links?
Btw, I'm facing far scarier things than budget proposals: property tax increase, foreclosure, tenants failing, & dinner with a socialist tomorrow.

 

[asketikos]

Costs should be cut wherever savings can be had. One person's "draconian" is another's necessary.


A worse shame is to continue deficit spending.


You think the union will be destroyed? I thought they'd still exist, but with less collective bargaining power.


Have some links?
Btw, I'm facing far scarier things than budget proposals: property tax increase, foreclosure, tenants failing, & dinner with a socialist tomorrow.

With no collective bargaining there is no union. That is the whole point of a union, to be able to bargain collectively. Collectivity = union. No bargaining power -- no union. You can call them whatever you want, but the point of a union is to collectively bargain.

To say that necessity trumps the right to organize and demand better working conditions is to say that anything is possible.

I'll give you one quote to sum up this philosophy that the Walkers and Kasich's stand on:

"We must close union offices, confiscate their money and put their leaders in prison. We must reduce workers salaries and take away their right to strike."
Adolf Hitler, May 2, 1933.
I'll get you the links in a bit.

 

[Revoltingest]

With no collective bargaining there is no union. That is the whole point of a union, to be able to bargain collectively. Collectivity = union. No bargaining power -- no union. You can call them whatever you want, but the point of a union is to collectively bargain.

I have been wondering what powers they have left. Are you saying they would have absolutely none?

To say that necessity trumps the right to organize and demand better working conditions is to say that anything is possible.

This raises a question. Can our government not be trusted to employ workers without more protection than is afforded them in the private sector?

I'll give you one quote to sum up this philosophy that the Walkers and Kasich's stand on:
"We must close union offices, confiscate their money and put their leaders in prison. We must reduce workers salaries and take away their right to strike."
Adolf Hitler, May 2, 1933.
I'll get you the links in a bit.

So, Hitler finally popped up. You imagine they're like Nazis...seriously?

 

[asketikos]

I have been wondering what powers they have left. Are you saying they would have absolutely none?


This raises a question. Can our government not be trusted to employ workers without more protection than is afforded them in the private sector?


So, Hitler finally popped up. You imagine they're like Nazis...seriously?

No of course not like Nazi's. That would be ridiculous. I was hoping to raise the issue that when we begin restricting people's abilities to organize, to demand certain basic rights like health-care (yes I believe it's a right), protection from exploitation, wage increases in accordance with production, work hours, etc., then we are going down a path where we do not want to go. First they take one thing and we allow it. Then they come back for more, and we begin to allow that. And so on and so forth, and then what do we have? We have terror. We have people working under conditions where there are no other options except low-paying 13-hour days, and if you don't like it, then get lost because the next guy will do it gladly for even less.

People bled and died for the rights that unions have today, and we complain over a .5% increase in taxes, or we complain about teachers who work 10 hour days sometimes? Ridiculous, disgraceful.

It's not just Nazi's who have done this, not just the Soviets, we've seen this occur in many places, including in 19th and early 20th century United States.

I am afraid to see us go back there. And if history teaches us anything is that oppression, people's rights, are nothing if they are not fought for and defended, because they can be easily taken away.

The power of a union rests in its ability to collectively bargain -- what else is there? What rights are you speaking of?

 

[Revoltingest]

No of course not like Nazi's. That would be ridiculous. I was hoping to raise the issue that when we begin restricting people's abilities to organize, to demand certain basic rights like health-care (yes I believe it's a right), protection from exploitation, wage increases in accordance with production, work hours, etc., then we are going down a path where we do not want to go. First they take one thing and we allow it. Then they come back for more, and we begin to allow that. And so on and so forth, and then what do we have? We have terror. We have people working under conditions where there are no other options except low-paying 13-hour days, and if you don't like it, then get lost because the next guy will do it gladly for even less.

People bled and died for the rights that unions have today, and we complain over a .5% increase in taxes, or we complain about teachers who work 10 hour days sometimes? Ridiculous, disgraceful.

It's not just Nazi's who have done this, not just the Soviets, we've seen this occur in many places, including in 19th and early 20th century United States.

I am afraid to see us go back there. And if history teaches us anything is that oppression, people's rights, are nothing if they are not fought for and defended, because they can be easily taken away.

The power of a union rests in its ability to collectively bargain -- what else is there? What rights are you speaking of?

I don't know what rights they'd have left. Good question.
We do have a problem with unionized public workers. Gov't bureaucrats can give into demands easily because they don't face the same budget pressures that a private company would. If costs get out of hand for a business, they go out of business. If government's costs get out of hand, they raise taxes. That's been too easy. Michigan just raised my property taxes by raising the assessment...you know...the supposed housing boom here. It's expensive & difficult to appeal assessment increases, so it's easy for them to get away with it. To them, "shared sacrifice" is when taxpayers share the burden of increasing gov't employee compensation.

 

[asketikos]

I don't know what rights they'd have left. Good question.
We do have a problem with unionized public workers. Gov't bureaucrats can give into demands easily because they don't face the same budget pressures that a private company would. If costs get out of hand for a business, they go out of business. If government's costs get out of hand, they raise taxes. That's been too easy. Michigan just raised my property taxes by raising the assessment...you know...the supposed housing boom here.

That's not the problem, unfortunately. In fact union power is not as big as it was in the 1950s and 60s, when 1 in 5 people where in a union and our economy was booming.

The costs of teachers and pensions are not, realistically, as out of hand as government contracts to firms and consultants are. For example, a teacher makes around $40,000 a year, and he or she is in a union. But a superintendent of a school district makes $250,000 plus pensions and benefits (he's not in a union), and our schools are in trouble nevertheless. Explain: who is at fault here, unions or non-unions?

The problem is that we are lazy, and we ignore corruption, and it is easy to find a boogy-man. Today that boogyman is a schoolteacher, a police office, and a fireman.

Let's look at Wall Street. They went out of business and what happened? WE BAILED THEM OUT WITH OUR TAXES. But apparently nobody is talking about them sacrificing their fare shares. It's just gross. How can we call ourselves decent people when we beat on the people, our neighbors, who can barely survive and are only fighting for the basic right to organize and negotiate for better necessities?

Personally, I am not in a union. I have never been in a union. But I cannot imagine living in this country and not having the right to organize with my fellow workers or strike if things are unfair without the threat of being completely laid off.

Where is our country going if that is the case. Who will want to be a teacher, when it pays more to be a lawyer or a truck driver? Who will want to be a police officer if its pays more to sell pharmaceuticals?

We are thinking short-term, not long-term. And long-term, it is a tradedy to destroy the unions that nurture our students minds, and even more destructive to attack those who protect us and set out our fires.

 

[Revoltingest]

You're covering so many issues.....I deplore the Wall St bail-outs. But they aren't related to over-compensated unionized public employees.
Moreover, the unionized types in my city are a pain to deal with because management is afraid to discipline them.....useless building &
housing inspectors (grumble, grumble). Money must be saved, & it won't happen by just casting blame on federal waste.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The good guys won for a change.
Take that....Jessie!
Today Wisconsin...tomorrow Michigan!

Too bad they didn't use the democratic process.

That's bad for all of us.

Unfortunately for everyone this law will be thrown out (if people really care about democracy) and we're going to have to go through all of this again.

 

[Revoltingest]

Too bad they didn't use the democratic process.
That's bad for all of us.
Unfortunately for everyone this law will be thrown out (if people really care about democracy) and we're going to have to go through all of this again.

If only the Democrats had bothered to show up for work.
If'n yooz skips town, don't be surprised if your vote don't count fer nuthin.