%@#%@ the unions!

[Bob Maxey]

i dont agree with the cost of living increase. many companies dont do this as a norm. raises are based on worker and company performance.
if the economy is down and things are tight raises are often put on hold

We always received COLAs. We started in a garage and every worker contributed. Over time, a small company grew. Therefore, we adjusted incomes to help workers better make ends meet. We gave stock options to every permanent employee and that helped, too.

I agree, raises must be earned and in many cases, they are. Especially when a tiny company becomes a big player because of the effort of a group of workers that worked for the company, not themselves.

In a down economy, raises should be put on hold up to a point. If a company suffers and all of a sudden employees jump ship, then you are in big trouble. Raises, even small ones send a message to the employee. You really cannot afford to lose good people or you suffer even more.

Try finding an ICT Operator that can program in BT Basic and troubleshoot at the component level.... not easy.

Bob Maxey

 

[ElasticNinja]

It's amazing to me how easy it is to get average Americans to turn against things that benefit average Americans.

higher taxes and less services caused by PS unions benifit "average Americans"

 

[cipher6]

That's where unions came from. When the company makes record earning each year and the entire board of directors gets raises and huge bonuses each year and the workers are given less then %2 cost of living raises in an economy where inflation is well above %2...you get unions.

By the way, I'm pushing for unions for my company. Not because I like unions...but because there's a chance it will improve my job...and if not I can always leave, sticking my employer with a life long problem....all for not treating the employees like humans.

Not true, Unions came about, not because the low level labor guy was jealous of his boss' salary, but because before OSHA and worker protection laws, employers were forcing their employees to work crazy hours in really un-safe conditions. If you were a coal miner, and every coal mining company required yo to work 150 hours a week, with no safety equipment, you were stuck. You couldn't go down the street to the other company, because all the owners got together and said, we'll all keep wages low and hours high giving no other option.

Under those conditions, workers banding together and striking until management meet their demands of reasonable hours and safe conditions was a good thing.

But like everything, power corrupts. Just like when management had the power, and no government regulations to follow they got greedy. When Unions got the power, in the form of government protections, forced union dues etc... they got greedy as well.

I think the common union member isn't at fault, its union management. Forced dues give them piles of cash, which they use to get politicians elected that will pass laws that favor them. No different than rich CEOs and corporations funding politicians that pass laws favorable to business.

I see nothing inherently wrong with this system, but at times it gets out of balance. What we're seeing in WI, is an equalization of that balance, in the public sector.

 

[Ryan P.]

No one has a RIGHT to work. Unions are ruining this country. Look at their behavior. Do you think for one minute if the Tea Party crowd acted like the union types the media would give them a fair shake?
I didn't see the union people out when others were losing their jobs.


Screw the ^#$%#unions!

Do you like free public education? Thank unions. Do you like clean water, and sanitary working conditions? Thank unions. Do you like workplace safety regulations? Thank unions. Do you like the fact that everyone has the right to vote? Thank unions. Like having weekends off? Thank unions. Like unemployment insurance? Thank unions.

Unions have been responsible for maintaining what democracy we have in this country. Pretending that unions are the problem is just being a useful idiot. Especially since they already make less than private sector workers even when benefits are taken into account:

Wisconsin public servants already face a compensation penalty

So, even though public workers already make less, and even though they've already agreed to the cuts despite this fact, you still want to mischaracterize them as being greedy? Please explain yourself.

If you go into a store, you expect to pay money for the items you want. It sounds to me like you're the one who is really being greedy, since you want these workers to provide services without being fairly compensated.

Furthermore, if Walker were really serious about closing the budget gap, he wouldn't have immediately passed $117 million worth of tax cuts and special interest spending measures which added to the deficit.

All due respect, just think about things a little bit.

 

[Ryan P.]

And no, paying dues to the union should not be optional; that's the only thing that maintains their influence, and their influence is in turn the only thing preventing massive, concentrated corporate power from taking over our government lock, stock, and barrel.

When the top 1% of earners in this country control 50% of its total wealth, let's not pretend that unions are the bad guys, or that the rich are getting hosed. Don't be distracted!

Just have a glance at these charts and then try to tell me that the solution is for already-underpaid public employees to make even more sacrifices:

It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones

 

[jamor]

Do you like free public education? Thank unions. Do you like clean water, and sanitary working conditions? Thank unions. Do you like workplace safety regulations? Thank unions. Do you like the fact that everyone has the right to vote? Thank unions. Like having weekends off? Thank unions. Like unemployment insurance? Thank unions.

I LOLed. I would never thank a union for any of those listed.

My tax dollars pay for all of the above.

Thank me very much.

 

[Tempusfugit]

Just have a glance at these charts and then try to tell me that the solution is for already-underpaid public employees to make even more sacrifices:

It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones

Sorry guys, he brought an infographic, he wins.

 

[Bob Maxey]

When the top 1% of earners in this country control 50% of its total wealth, let's not pretend that unions are the bad guys, or that the rich are getting hosed. Don't be distracted!

Just have a glance at these charts and then try to tell me that the solution is for already-underpaid public employees to make even more sacrifices:

The top 20% pay 80% of all Federal Income Taxes. We build the mighty corporations, we employ millions of people and without us, you might need to find a job; the bottom 40% pay zero federal taxes. Most certainly, they ain't hiring, just absorbing and whining and sucking up resources.

And yes, joining a union should be optional and to hell with their GD dues. Time to chop the head off the union snake and let it die. AND . . .find a better source than Mother Jones.

Bob

 

[byteware]

Do you like free public education? Thank unions. Do you like clean water, and sanitary working conditions? Thank unions. Do you like workplace safety regulations? Thank unions. Do you like the fact that everyone has the right to vote? Thank unions. Like having weekends off? Thank unions. Like unemployment insurance? Thank unions.

While I disagree on the right to vote... since you know, we've had that since the constitution was enacted (at least white men... let me say sorry now to everyone else), the rest is the result of the unions.

Free public education? Do I like it? No. It's a black hole where money goes and absolutely no one is accountable for the results of our education system. There is never anyone to blame except "not enough money".

Clean water, and sanitary working conditions? I have no knowledge of unions and clean wter, but sanitary working conditions is thanks to unions and has been taken over by government agencies (as has clean water regulations).

Workplace safety regulations? Thanks to unions, and taken over by government agencies.

Weekends off, unemployment insurance? Thanks to unions, but taken over by government agencies.

So... what exactly are unions doing now?

Driving up labor costs ridiculously? Forcing companies to export JOBS overseas in order to compete?

Yep... thank your unions.

Unions DID great things, but what was the last great things unions did?

Unions have been responsible for maintaining what democracy we have in this country.

If by maintaining democracy, you mean decide which candidates should be elected into office by spending millions on ad campaigns? Then yes... you would be correct.

If you mean by making sure the people get a choice? Then no... you would be wrong.

Pretending that unions are the problem is just being a useful idiot.

Pretending that ANYTHING is all good and none bad is just ridiculous, and overly idealistic.

Especially since they already make less than private sector workers even when benefits are taken into account:

I don't see the value in comparing what a PhD in astrophysics makes and what a PhD in the humanities makes.

Comparing level of education doesn't work, as the most profitable degrees don't work in public sector jobs.

So, even though public workers already make less, and even though they've already agreed to the cuts despite this fact, you still want to mischaracterize them as being greedy? Please explain yourself.

I will explain this to you. You have been tricked. Comparing levels of education is misleading (and intentionally so). Comparing a Computer Science Bachelors to a Computer Science Bachelors is an accurate comparison. Comparing a Computer Science Bachelors to a Liberal Arts Bachelors is absolutely NOT accurate.

If you go into a store, you expect to pay money for the items you want. It sounds to me like you're the one who is really being greedy, since you want these workers to provide services without being fairly compensated.

Again, you have been misled.

Furthermore, if Walker were really serious about closing the budget gap, he wouldn't have immediately passed $117 million worth of tax cuts and special interest spending measures which added to the deficit.

When businesses feel that they have more money, and a lower tax debt, then they tend to hire more workers, increase production, increase R&D, and generally spend money in an effort to make more money. He's interested in closing the multibillion dollar deficit, but he's also interested in recovering his economy.

All due respect, just think about things a little bit.

We should all think about things more than we have, I think.

 

[byteware]

And no, paying dues to the union should not be optional; that's the only thing that maintains their influence, and their influence is in turn the only thing preventing massive, concentrated corporate power from taking over our government lock, stock, and barrel.

Unions are the only thing stopping corporate power from taking over our government?

I didn't realize Unions could vote.

 

[JimmyRayBob]

Furthermore, if Walker were really serious about closing the budget gap, he wouldn't have immediately passed $117 million worth of tax cuts and special interest spending measures which added to the deficit.

.

What is the best way to increase government revenue? I'm not talking about spending ... just REVENUE. Answer: grow the economy!!! If your state has an anti-business climate - businesses will NOT start up and / or will move to a state with a better business climate. In the last 20-30 years, a LOT of businesses have headed south - to right to work states. (the weather helps too ).

Why are the foreign car manufacturer opening plants in the South? I imagine the infrastructure (as it pertains to autos) is better in Michigan than South Carolina - but BMW opened their plant in South Carolina. WHY? TAXES and RIGHT TO WORK.

 

[ElasticNinja]

yes, lets privatize education, privately schooled children do so much better, clearly because THE GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING, and that is the only reason privately schooled children do better

 

[byteware]

yes, lets privatize education, privately schooled children do so much better, clearly because THE GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING, and that is the only reason privately schooled children do better

Let me put it to you this way. Your average parent who homeschools has absolutely no education in child education.

However, your average homeschooled child is 4 grade levels ahead of their public AND private school counterparts by the time they are in Eighth Grade.

The government doesn't suck at EVERYTHING, but they definitely suck at teaching our children.

If your average non-teacher parent can do a better job, then yeah... they are sucking hard.

Edited to add:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3070975/ns/us_news-only_on_msnbccom/

 

[ElasticNinja]

one to one teaching.

 

[mdram]

one to one teaching.

but it an uneducated person can do it one to one
an educated/trained person should be able to do it to a class
i mean they have years of training and continuing ed to show them better methods of teaching

 

[ElasticNinja]

really, try to control 30 kids, each with different abilities, and some her attention seeking

 

[mdram]

really, try to control 30 kids, each with different abilities, and some her attention seeking

if they cant do it they are in the wrong profession imho

 

[byteware]

really, try to control 30 kids, each with different abilities, and some her attention seeking

That's what they are TRAINED to do.

And it would be one thing if they were a year ahead, but FOUR Years ahead.

The rest of the developed world doesn't seem to have these problems... yet you are trying to justify them in the US?

 

[Bob Maxey]

yes, lets privatize education, privately schooled children do so much better, clearly because THE GOVERNMENT SUCKS AT EVERYTHING, and that is the only reason privately schooled children do better

I must point out that WE, those of us that live in the United States of America have the power to change the government. We the People. We are getting what many of you wanted and thought were good ideas and you must live in the aftermath.

We do indeed have the power to elect a better government.

Bob

 

[Ryan P.]

I LOLed. I would never thank a union for any of those listed.

My tax dollars pay for all of the above.

Thank me very much.

Well then you need a better knowledge of history before you make a bigger fool of yourself, because none of those existed before unions demanded them.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Well then you need a better knowledge of history before you make a bigger fool of yourself, because none of those existed before unions demanded them.

You are making the assumption that these things would not have naturally came to be. Perhas some people SHOULD read a little history, Roll Eyes

 

[Ryan P.]

The top 20% pay 80% of all Federal Income Taxes. We build the mighty corporations, we employ millions of people and without us, you might need to find a job; the bottom 40% pay zero federal taxes. Most certainly, they ain't hiring, just absorbing and whining and sucking up resources.

And yes, joining a union should be optional and to hell with their GD dues. Time to chop the head off the union snake and let it die. AND . . .find a better source than Mother Jones.

Bob

Who cares? Income tax only represents about 40% of all taxes. Most of the rest are quite regressive, and paid for disproportionately by the poor. Without you, people COULD find a job, as it is the top 1% or so that has outsourced all the jobs.

And no, you have no right to restrict private citizens in what they may do by freely joining together.

Perhaps you need a better grasp of the issue before you shoot your mouth off and look silly.

And regarding Mother Jones' stats, feel free to show that they are wrong; otherwise you fall victim to the fallacy called the ad hominem attack.

 

[Ryan P.]

You are making the assumption that these things would not have naturally came to be. Perhas some people SHOULD read a little history, Roll Eyes

Well, they didn't exist before unions won these concessions. This is strong evidence that supports me, not you. Recently, average income in this country has remained stagnant for over thirty years, coinciding with Reaganism and the decline of union power, which is another fact that supports me, not you. Furthermore, what you are doing is simply assuming that they WOULD have come to pass without unions, and are asserting that this assumption is more logical that its opposite. But it is not necessarily more logical without supporting evidence, and all that is available supports a different conclusion.

 

[Ryan P.]

Unions are the only thing stopping corporate power from taking over our government?

I didn't realize Unions could vote.

Oh, honey, voting doesn't actually matter!

 

[Bob Maxey]

Oh, honey, voting doesn't actually matter!

When you mature and read a few books, you will discover just how wrong you are. At your tender age, I am sure it just seems like voting does not matter, but it does. Ask your dad and mom. Honey.

Bob