507,533 Signatures Collected As Of Today

[Trajan]

If public employees are prohibited from collective bargaining then presumably pay increases would return to being merit based as opposed to simply giving an entire group more money regardless of whether they've earned.

But the Wisconsin budget shortfall, like that of other states that have gotten into fiscal trouble, is only a short-term problem caused by the recession. While it does mandate some belt-tightening in order to get through this revenue dip, it does not mandate any long-term fixes, especially not one so draconian as the denial of basic labor rights to public employees.

The only sense in which Wisconsin even has a budget problem is short-term, and a short-term cut in pay and benefits had already been agreed to by the public employees' unions. As nothing else was broken, nothing else needed fixing in terms of the state budget.

Yes, actually there is. Unless of course you would like to contend that a free market is not the best way to determine something's true value.

So you contend that when workers bargain collectively, that means the labor market has ceased to be a free market? How ya figger?

2 things

1

Posted on March 2, 2011
In Rhode Island, a Massive Public Pension Crisis

snip-


While the biggest national fights in Wisconsin and Ohio continues over new bills to limit or end collective bargaining, in the small New England state of Rhode Island, a battle is brewing over demands to change employee pensions which are largely responsible for a $300 million deficit.

In Rhode Island, as elsewhere, the root cause is plain and simple: Governments gave workers benefits instead of raises without a specific plan to pay for the extra benefits. With the retirement age being raised and benefits being reduced many state workers are concerned that their pension plans are being drastically reduced.

Without dramatic changes to the pension system, Rhode Islanders are facing higher taxes and over cuts in government services. With limited resources public services such schools, buses, parks, libraries and higher education are in jeopardy of losing critical funding.

more at-

In Rhode Island, a Massive Public Pension Crisis | NewsHour Extra: Video ClipBoard | PBS

2-

the result;


R.I. Gov. Signs Pension Overhaul

Friday, November 18, 2011


NEW YORK – Gov. Lincoln Chafee late Friday signed a sweeping public pension overhaul bill that Rhode Island’s legislature passed the night before.

After more than five hours of debate, the House of Representatives approved the bill, which Chafee and General Treasurer Gina Raimondo supported, by a 57-15 vote. The Senate approved the House version 32 to 2.

The bill creates a hybrid plan that merges conventional public defined-benefit pension plans with 401(k)-style plans. While some other states have implemented hybrid plans, Rhode Island’s would be the first to affect current employees, according to the Pew Center on the States.

It also includes a suspension of cost-of-living adjustment increases for retirees and raises the retirement age for employees not yet eligible for retirement.

“Tonight’s vote marks a turning point,” Chafee said after the vote. “We are committed to getting our fiscal house in order.”

The state’s pension plan in only 58.7% funded, according to Bloomberg data. On Aug. 1, 19,000-population Central Falls filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection, citing an $80 million unfunded pension liability. Other municipalities and conduit issuers in the Ocean State have sustained bond rating downgrades in the aftermath of the filing.

more at-
R.I. Legislature Sends Pension Overhaul to Gov. - The Bond Buyer Article

now, question for you, how do you suppose they got here?

 

[Dragon]

now, question for you, how do you suppose they got here?

Why do you think that's relevant? Neither of those stories is from Wisconsin.

Besides, I strongly question the assertion as to the cause of the problem. There was no problem until the recession hit. The obvious cause of the problem was a calamitous drop in state tax revenue caused by the decline in economic activity, together with a big jump in expenditure for things like unemployment insurance.

 

[SAT2]

now, question for you, how do you suppose they got here?

Why do you think that's relevant? Neither of those stories is from Wisconsin.

Besides, I strongly question the assertion as to the cause of the problem. There was no problem until the recession hit. The obvious cause of the problem was a calamitous drop in state tax revenue caused by the decline in economic activity, together with a big jump in expenditure for things like unemployment insurance.

Which is a reality based view. But it screws up their excuse to take the nation apart and reassemble it according to the Articles of Confederation.

 

[MeBelle]

[ahhh, clarity.
Here is the main issue from my unique POV working in both private and public sector, simultaneously.
Public sectors are funded with taxpayer dollars. I think we can agree on this.
Private sector is NOT funded with taxpayer dollars. I think we can agree on this.

So, what I see in the school district is, larger class sizes (^ to 30+students in K-5), transportation, which parents had to purchase bus passes, cut (makes zero sense to me) , one week cut from actual teaching students, yet there are no pay cuts or staff contributions to their pensions or health insurance.
So, as a taxpayer, a parent and an employee, I find all of this unacceptable and unsustainable! The money 'saved' goes to fund, unfunded liabilites, ie pensions.
What happened to the CHILDREN getting an education?

I work every day to help the children get an education. That doesn't mean I shouldn't have a pension plan.

I agree, the "bus passes" seem ridiculous-a way of charging parents for something that ought to be a part of the package.

Part of my point is, transportation was cut to zero, even though parents were paying into it by buying passes ($750 a year per child).

Of course people should get a pension. Do you pay your fair share into the pension system?

 

[SAT2]

Part of my point is, transportation was cut to zero, even though parents were paying into it by buying passes ($750 a year per child).

Of course people should get a pension. Do you pay your fair share into the pension system?

They were charging you for something that you weren't getting? You're right, that makes no sense at all.

I have been paying into my pension for 25 years. I would say it's my fair share, yes. It's been negotiated with the perennially cheap State of Tennessee.

 

[MeBelle]

Part of my point is, transportation was cut to zero, even though parents were paying into it by buying passes ($750 a year per child).

Of course people should get a pension. Do you pay your fair share into the pension system?

They were charging you for something that you weren't getting? You're right, that makes no sense at all.

I have been paying into my pension for 25 years. I would say it's my fair share, yes. It's been negotiated with the perennially cheap State of Tennessee.

Clarity: Parents were already paying out of pocket for a system that was cut, re transportation, in addition to paying taxes for transportation.

You answered my PM! lol
My outlaws live in TN.

Go UT!

 

[Bern80]

So you contend that when workers bargain collectively, that means the labor market has ceased to be a free market? How ya figger?

No. I have no problem with people organizing for better wages. Unfortunately that's not what today's unions are. If you want to teach for example in a public school, you have no choice but to join a teacher's union. But the real reason it isn't a free market is because a public employee's pay does not come from anything they produce. In the private sector it is always a two party negotiation. One decides what they will provide while the other decides how much they are willing to forgoe to get it. That isn't the case in the public sector. Those who decide what to pay people aren't deciding how much to forgo of their own money. They are deciding how much to give of someone elses. That makes it easier for them to give up more. That is basic human nature. People are far more protective of their own property than they are of someone elses. A trait liberals show over and over. That is the basic reason why public sector labor is paid at an inflated rate and why your questions are not objectively equal.

 

[SAT2]

So you contend that when workers bargain collectively, that means the labor market has ceased to be a free market? How ya figger?

No. I have no problem with people organizing for better wages. Unfortunately that's not what today's unions are. If you want to teach for example in a public school, you have no choice but to join a teacher's union. But the real reason it isn't a free market is because a public employee's pay does not come from anything they produce. In the private sector it is always a two party negotiation. One decides what they will provide while the other decides how much they are willing to forgoe to get it. That isn't the case in the public sector. Those who decide what to pay people aren't deciding how much to forgo of their own money. They are deciding how much to give of someone elses. That makes it easier for them to give up more. That is basic human nature. People are far more protective of their own property than they are of someone elses. A trait liberals show over and over. That is the basic reason why public sector labor is paid at an inflated rate and why your questions are not objectively equal.

What state are you talking about, where membership in NEA is mandatory?

The public sector used to be second rate in terms of earnings. Shows how much the private sector is suffering the lack of unions.

 

[Listening]

But the Wisconsin budget shortfall, like that of other states that have gotten into fiscal trouble, is only a short-term problem caused by the recession. While it does mandate some belt-tightening in order to get through this revenue dip, it does not mandate any long-term fixes, especially not one so draconian as the denial of basic labor rights to public employees.

There is no such thing as a basic labor right.

All rights are universal or else they are favors and prejudice.

 

[Listening]

Great. He cut class sizes. Pay no attention to the massive education cuts. Yeah, whatever, champ. Deflection noted. Moron.

Meaning you have no response. I understand. That was one of the nice things about Brewers law in AZ. It cut many class sizes by 25% almost overnight. There was a lot less need to translate too. So they cut some money out of the budget.

Nice try there PFB.

I did respond. You just don't like what I have to say.

We're talking about WI, buddy, not AZ. WI cut education by 10%. You're trying to tell me that reduced class sizes makes up for that 10% cut? That makes no sense. But then again, it's coming from you. I'm not surprised

What I am telling you (sorry to have made it so complicated....I realize your class size was probably 100) is that he cut spending and class sizes. They don't necessarily correlate. He could have cut out special classes like "strings" (like Kansas just did). Or maybe they decided to consolidate schools. You don't know.

But your claim is assanine.

 

[Amelia]

So you contend that when workers bargain collectively, that means the labor market has ceased to be a free market? How ya figger?

No. I have no problem with people organizing for better wages. Unfortunately that's not what today's unions are. If you want to teach for example in a public school, you have no choice but to join a teacher's union. But the real reason it isn't a free market is because a public employee's pay does not come from anything they produce. In the private sector it is always a two party negotiation. One decides what they will provide while the other decides how much they are willing to forgoe to get it. That isn't the case in the public sector. Those who decide what to pay people aren't deciding how much to forgo of their own money. They are deciding how much to give of someone elses. That makes it easier for them to give up more. That is basic human nature. People are far more protective of their own property than they are of someone elses. A trait liberals show over and over. That is the basic reason why public sector labor is paid at an inflated rate and why your questions are not objectively equal.

What state are you talking about, where membership in NEA is mandatory?

The public sector used to be second rate in terms of earnings. Shows how much the private sector is suffering the lack of unions.

Is that a trick question?

In Wisconsin teachers were required to pay money to WEAC, the Wisconsin teachers' union, whether they joined or not. It was taken out of their check directly.

This is no longer the case.




That's the only state I know about.

 

[Trajan]

now, question for you, how do you suppose they got here?

Why do you think that's relevant? Neither of those stories is from Wisconsin.

Besides, I strongly question the assertion as to the cause of the problem. There was no problem until the recession hit. The obvious cause of the problem was a calamitous drop in state tax revenue caused by the decline in economic activity, together with a big jump in expenditure for things like unemployment insurance.

why do I think its relevant? Seriously?

 

[SAT2]

Is that a trick question?

In Wisconsin teachers were required to pay money to WEAC, the Wisconsin teachers' union, whether they joined or not. It was taken out of their check directly.

This is no longer the case.

That's the only state I know about.

I'm wondering about some documentation of that.

Thanks.

 

[Trajan]

now, question for you, how do you suppose they got here?

Why do you think that's relevant? Neither of those stories is from Wisconsin.

Besides, I strongly question the assertion as to the cause of the problem. There was no problem until the recession hit. The obvious cause of the problem was a calamitous drop in state tax revenue caused by the decline in economic activity, together with a big jump in expenditure for things like unemployment insurance.

Which is a reality based view. But it screws up their excuse to take the nation apart and reassemble it according to the Articles of Confederation.

the 'reality' is they were getting here even without the downturn. To say there was no problem until the recession is like throwing yourself off a building and on the way down assuring yourself, so far, so good.

I would also note that the RI leg. hold a 65-10 Dem vs. Rep advantage.


your riff on the articles of the confed. means what exactly?

 

[Ringel05]

To give Scottie Walker his walking papers.

Out of a total of 94% of the 540,000 needed. Their internal goal is 740,000 or thereabouts.

It's a wrap folks...Scottie's TOAST!!!



Source: The Wisconsin Democratic Party

Scott Walker Recall Effort Collected 507,000 Signatures in a Month | Mother Jones

That's roughly one twelfth of the state population, not much of a majority.

 

[SAT2]

The point that this is largely a problem due to the recession isn't something you can dismiss.

My comment about the Articles of Confederation is that I believe that's what the cons are seeking. They say that they loooovee the Constitution, but it established a federal government. What they want is fifty separate countries, where they can be free of pesky modern ideas.

 

[Ringel05]

The point that this is largely a problem due to the recession isn't something you can dismiss.

My comment about the Articles of Confederation is that I believe that's what the cons are seeking. They say that they loooovee the Constitution, but it established a federal government. What they want is fifty separate countries, where they can be free of pesky modern ideas.

Hyperbole much?

 

[Trajan]

The point that this is largely a problem due to the recession isn't something you can dismiss.

I never dismissed it.

My comment about the Articles of Confederation is that I believe that's what the cons are seeking. They say that they loooovee the Constitution, but it established a federal government. What they want is fifty separate countries, where they can be free of pesky modern ideas.

 

[SAT2]

The point that this is largely a problem due to the recession isn't something you can dismiss.

My comment about the Articles of Confederation is that I believe that's what the cons are seeking. They say that they loooovee the Constitution, but it established a federal government. What they want is fifty separate countries, where they can be free of pesky modern ideas.

Hyperbole much?

I'm telling you what I see, from the Tea Party rhetoric from the posters here and the candidates for the GOP nomination. They are anti-science, anti-freedom of religion, anti-civil rights, and they cite the 10th Amendment as a justification for doing what they want in their own states. You see yourself as a voice of reason, but you need to add an eye patch to that pirate getup in your avatar-Jack Black had two eyes, but one of yours is covered up.

 

[Ringel05]

The point that this is largely a problem due to the recession isn't something you can dismiss.

My comment about the Articles of Confederation is that I believe that's what the cons are seeking. They say that they loooovee the Constitution, but it established a federal government. What they want is fifty separate countries, where they can be free of pesky modern ideas.

Hyperbole much?

I'm telling you what I see, from the Tea Party rhetoric from the posters here and the candidates for the GOP nomination. They are anti-science, anti-freedom of religion, anti-civil rights, and they cite the 10th Amendment as a justification for doing what they want in their own states. You see yourself as a voice of reason, but you need to add an eye patch to that pirate getup in your avatar-Jack Black had two eyes, but one of yours is covered up.

Ain't paradigm produced perception grand...........

Better get some new ones before yours wear out, you're using them too much.