[turtle777]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

The workers in Wisconsin agreed to every single one of the Governor's cuts except the loss of collective bargaining.

You are aware that they are NOT losing collective bargaining for salaries.

The only loss will be collective bargaining for benefits (pensions, retirement, health care).
This is OK IMO.

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

They're not striking because they want more money, they're striking because they don't want to lose the only edge they have in ensuring public service jobs don't end up as minimum wage positions for people with advanced skills and college degrees.

Let's talk whne the pendulum is in danger swinging in that direction.
Right now, it's all about rolling back the excesses of the last 10 years, and bringing government employees in line with private company employees.

-t

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Right now, it's all about rolling back the excesses of the last 10 years, and bringing government employees in line with private company employees.

Which is what they're doing, but when times are better, they still want the ability to negotiate for a decent retirement plan and not be stuck in a system built for a recession. That's all they want.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Which is what they're doing, but when times are better, they still want the ability to negotiate for a decent retirement plan and not be stuck in a system built for a recession. That's all they want.

How about we let a future WI state legislature worry about that.
They can always expand the laws to favor public employees.
The last 50 years show that this is easily done.

Deal ?

-t

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

How about we let a future WI state legislature worry about that.
They can always expand the laws to favor public employees.
The last 50 years show that this is easily done.

Deal ?

The unions have been collective bargaining without regard for the economic health of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin voters have collectively bargained the unions down a peg. Sounds fair to me. Hope it spreads. Massively.

[OldManMac]

I know this is long (for some of you, at least), but here's what Governor Walker won't tell you.

What Gov. Walker Won’t Tell You | Common Dreams

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

There's a lot of demagoguery on this issue. The teachers unions are corrupt and there are many failing government schools, but if we ignore the student side of the equation we miss some very important aspects of the debate. We rank right around the European countries in test scores according to the Time magazine graphs I just saw in a doctor's office (not exactly conservative publication). As I think Kerrigan pointed out, there's also an ethnic gap in attainment with white students in isolation ranking even better. We're a multi-cultural, heterogeneous society with ethnic minorities making up an increasingly large part of the population. Some of those ethnicities by in large don't value education that highly (i.e. Hispanics). Such demographic facts will have real impacts on aggregate educational statistics. Obviously people don't like to talk about such issues because the politically correct thugs will come out to call them racists, but the facts will still be there.

If by demagoguery you mean impassioned speech; I agree. I think isolating Hispanics as "not valuing education that highly" is not only bold, but places a lot of weight on race instead of socio-economics. For example, does the theory also apply to wealthy minorities in any statistically meaningful way? To be clear, we likely agree on the importance of border security and enforcement, but IMO this should be to protect the skills to economy ratio, having nothing to do with Hispanics specifically. Poor immigration policy, collective bargaining, and increasing entitlements all serve to distort the labor market creating greater socio-economic disparity in all its forms; less skin in the game, lower achievement, poverty, crime...

My .02 on Wisconsin state politics is a general distaste for the Union complaint that seems to have little regard for students or achievement. Some call it demagoguery, I call it retention through repetition.

[OldManMac]

Here's what's really going on in WI.

Wisconsin Chicanery: A Short History Of Public Employees' Right To Negotiate | The New Republic

"No matter what conservative governors say, the extension of collective-bargaining to public-sector workers is not what entangled us in the current economic crisis. Indeed, what is going on in Wisconsin and other states ought to be seen for what it is: a bald attempt to exploit the bad economy, undo 50 years of legal precedent on labor issues, and win a political victory, no matter the cost."

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

I know this is long (for some of you, at least), but here's what Governor Walker won't tell you.

What Gov. Walker Won’t Tell You | Common Dreams

So... according to you and the good folks at CommonDreams.org believe there is only one way to stimulate the economy? I just want to make sure I understand them...

per your "news" citation;

Now the governor has offered a proposal simple and clear in its intent, and patently dishonest. Walker wants state workers to contribute to their pension fund

... like virtually everyone else on the planet the evil bastard.

and is calling for an increase in their payments for medical insurance.

... like everyone including literally, their grandmothers are going to have to do.

AND HE'S CUT TAXES!!! AHA!

How dare he model Obama by cutting taxes AND spending right?

Make no mistake: The governor’s “budget repair bill” has little to do with a budget shortfall and everything to do with breaking unions, starting with public employees and then perhaps moving on to others as well.

Yeah... this'll break the unions for sure.

Now let me show you what CommonDreams won't tell you;

According to Robert Lang, the director of the Wisconsin Fiscal Bureau (the Legislature's nonpartisan budget office), the purported $121 million surplus does not account for $258 million in other shortfalls, including money owed to the state of Minnesota. Lang writes in an email to TWS: The condition statement is shown on page 2. It reflects a projected gross balance on June 30, 2011, of $121.4 million. This document was prepared prior to the introduction of the state's budget adjustment bill. In addition to the condition statement, the document identifies a pending payment under the Minnesota/Wisconsin Income Tax Reciprocity Program (page 3) and 2010-11 appropriation shortfalls (pages 3 and 4). The Minnesota/Wisconsin payment and the identified shortfalls total $258.1 million. These amounts are not reflected in the January 31 condition statement because legislative and executive action would be required between February 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011, to address them. If the entire $258.1 million was to be addressed before June 30, 2011, the gross general fund balance would be -$136.7
WI Fiscal Bureau Chief: Walker Tax Cuts Did Not Cause This Year's Budget Shortfall

Next up... Walker kicked a puppy dog! PROVE HE DIDN'T!!!

[finboy]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

I know this is long (for some of you, at least), but here's what Governor Walker won't tell you.

What Gov. Walker Won’t Tell You | Common Dreams

Well, as long as it doesn't use any big words...

He passed some business incentives to try to save some jobs, but they weren't PUBLIC SECTOR jobs? The shame. What a monster!

How about let's see what the unions won't tell us? Hmmmm?

Heck, just the fact that these 50,000 people have time/$ to leave their jobs and protest shows that they're overpaid (or underworked). Who teh frak has time to demonstrate against the government? Not working folks, we're too busy out here.

[OldManMac]

As I suspected, neither of you two (ebuddy and finboy), understand what's going on. This isn't about a budget problem. The unions have already indicated that they're willing to talk, but Walker doesn't want to talk; he just wants to bust them, so his rich friends can run rough shod over what's left of the work force. Walker created a deficit, on purpose, so that he could turn Wisconsin (and by extension, set a precedent for the rest of the country), into an oligarchy. He, and his cohorts, have no morals, no conscience, and no ethics, and they're proving that quite handily.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

As I suspected, neither of you two (ebuddy and finboy), understand what's going on. This isn't about a budget problem. The unions have already indicated that they're willing to talk, but Walker doesn't want to talk; he just wants to bust them, so his rich friends can run rough shod over what's left of the work force. Walker created a deficit, on purpose, so that he could turn Wisconsin (and by extension, set a precedent for the rest of the country), into an oligarchy. He, and his cohorts, have no morals, no conscience, and no ethics, and they're proving that quite handily.

Seriously, you have lost it.

-t

[screener]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Seriously, you have lost it.

-t

Seriously, you have to get out of that basement occasionally.

[screener]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Okay, sorry, I got a little carried away there. I'm kind of seeing the appeal, though. It was fun to get that nutty.

[Dork.]

The Wisconsin Democrats should offer that they would come back if any changes in bargaining rights would apply to all public unions in the state, not just the ones the Governor doesn't like. Let's see how the Governor's philosophy changes when he's busting unions that support him as well as ones that don't.

I'm not 100% sure I'm on the unions' side in this -- but I know I'm not on the Governor's side as long as he is exempting certain public unions for blatant political reasons.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

The Wisconsin Democrats should offer that they would come back if any changes in bargaining rights would apply to all public unions in the state, not just the ones the Governor doesn't like. Let's see how the Governor's philosophy changes when he's busting unions that support him as well as ones that don't.

I'm sure he'd LOVE that. I'm serious.

-t

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Seriously, you have lost it.

-t

My apologies; I forgot to include you when I mentioned ebuddy and finboy as people who don't understand what's going on.

There is, however, a silver lining in this. When the 2012 elections come around, the Republicans that are running won't have a chance.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I'm sure he'd LOVE that. I'm serious.

-t

Would he? There's a reason why he exempted those unions to begin with.

[lpkmckenna]

Glenn Beck explains the events in Wisconsin.

This is a fellow ebuddy listens to with regularity. It's worst than an abattoir of retarded children in that studio.

[BadKosh]

Yeah, we could be listening to why union thugs who serve no purpose should still be getting insurance paid for by tax dollars.

[Dork.]

I guess it's the notion that it's tax dollars that are going to pay these people that makes people so passionate about this affair on both sides. After all, if it were a union of private employees that extracted these terms that turned out to be unaffordable, only the shareholders in the businesses that used that union's labor would be affected. (Until we bail out those businesses, I guess.) And the government could enforce and suggest changes in the collective bargaining process without having an interest in one side or the other.

But since these are public employee unions we are talking about, and their members are paid by tax dollars*, the taxpayers have more of an interest in the outcome. In effect, when public employee unions bargain collectively, they are bargaining with the entire [city, state, federal] government, and all its citizens. So maybe it does make sense to have major changes in their contract subject to a referendum.


(* = I've always wondered how much of a [city, state, federal] government's budget is funded through personal income taxes vs. business income taxes vs. capital gains vs. tariffs and excise taxes vs. sales taxes, etc. And whether we can legitimately say "this government function is paid for by tax dollars" if the budget is structured so that all its funding comes from other sources.)

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

There is, however, a silver lining in this. When the 2012 elections come around, the Republicans that are running won't have a chance.

What are you smoking ?

Walker is doing what the majority of the people in WI have elected him to do: clean up the mess the Democrats left. He's doing it, and the majoprity is still for him.
It seems you really get easily confused by a vocal minority that gets paid tax payer money to not show up for work, so that they can protest on the streets to keep a benefits package most people in WI can only dream about.

-t

[OAW]

The GOP is in serious danger of overreaching on this one .....

The public strongly opposes laws taking away the collective bargaining power of public employee unions as a way to ease state financial troubles, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

The poll found that 61% would oppose a law in their state similar to one being considered in Wisconsin, compared with 33% who would favor such a law.

Poll: 61% oppose limits on union bargaining power - USATODAY.com

We're talking opposition in the 2-to-1 range here. As has been noted earlier .... the public employees have already agreed to the benefit and pension cuts that the Wisconsin governor has demanded. The only thing at issue now is the right to collectively bargain itself in the future. Bear in mind that public employees are generally paid less in salary* than private sector workers for comparable positions ... so historically they have negotiated better long-term benefits in lieu of immediate salary. The current governor is trying to pass legislation that would neuter the ability of public employees to negotiate for better benefits and pensions in the future even after the budget situation has improved. Essentially leading to a situation where they will be paid less across the board than comparable private sector workers. This is union busting ... plain and simple.

*

How do the earnings of government workers who are union members compare to the earnings of private-sector workers?

In 2010, median earnings of government workers who were union members were 25 percent higher than earnings of private workers.

However, two economists at the University of Wisconsin, Keith Bender and John Heywood point out that “government workers have jobs that demand more education, which is not accounted for by raw averages.”

Bender and Heywood did a study last year for the Center for State & Local Government Excellence, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, in which they concluded that “although a comparison of unadjusted average earnings will show that wages are higher among jobs in state and local government, this result is largely due to the fact that the workers in those sectors have more education.”

They said, “Holding education and other characteristics the same, typical state and local workers earn an average of 11 percent less and 12 percent less, respectively, than comparable private-sector workers.”

They also concluded that “the compensation of state and local workers is not excessive” and that “this remains true when including benefits.”

“People who go into the public sector — especially at the highest occupations that require a lot of education — are trading off stability for higher salaries,” said Kim Rueben, a public finance economist at the Urban Institute. That is, such highly educated workers could likely make more money in the private sector but wouldn’t enjoy as much job security.

“For lower educated workers, they actually do get a premium for being in the public sector, even on the wage side,” said Rueben.

How much do public workers earn? The facts - Politics - More politics - msnbc.com

OAW

[Lint Police]

Originally Posted by OAW 

The GOP is in serious danger of overreaching on this one .....

LOL. Pussies have to come back to fight for that first sentence to be even remotely true.

lol, quoting MSNBC. cute.

[turtle777]

If Gov. Scott Walker and Republicans pass a budget repair bill that restricts union rights, labor groups in Madison said they would endorse the entire of a general strike of unions around the state.

Aniel said the group would make sure all emergency services would continue throughout the state.”What we have to do is to make sure all essential services to people are provided,” said Aniel. “Then we’ll determine what other entities deserve those services.”

In response, Denninger is on a roll: Heh Look, It's PATCO! in [Market-Ticker]

I hope the unions are stupid enough to start a general strike. That would be then end of them in WI.

Denninger also has a few good suggestions for Walker:

And since the Democrats don't have to be present for any non-revenue bill, I have a few suggestions for Wisconsin Republicans who have sufficient votes to pass these two simple provisions that ought to put a permanent cork in your diarrhea hole:

"Right to work" - Nobody may be forced to join a union, nor to pay union dues. Simple majority required.

"Respect for the second amendment" - All my carry openly or concealed as their conscience dictates. This is for the union pukes who think violence is the way to get what they want. After all, we can't have the citizens unable to defend themselves.

Bring it on, I say

-t

[Chongo]

Beck is on a roll today. It's all part of a " new world order" conspiracy.

[Dork.]

Now Indiana Democrats have decided to take a vacation in sunny Illinois. Pretty soon, you'll be able to hold every state Democratic convention there....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24states.html

Edit: coming back because I just read an op-ed in the Communist Paper of Record (by Comrade Brooks, no less) which, I think, makes the point I've been struggling to make for the past few days: we're going to need to balance the budget by making cuts. It's gonna hurt. The best way to do it is to spread the pain equally, so nobody thinks that the budget is being balanced on their backs. And right now, the democratic-leaning public employee unions are being targeted to the point where they think they're in an existential crisis, and they are responding as such. Is that the fight that state governments really ought to be having while they are trying to get a broad consensus to cut spending and balance budgets?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/opinion/22brooks.html

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

we're going to need to balance the budget by making cuts. It's gonna hurt. The best way to do it is to spread the pain equally, so nobody thinks that the budget is being balanced on their backs.

F*ck that.

Public employees benefited from outrageous pay and benefit increases in the last 10 years.
Private employees had no part in this at all.

To ask private employees to pay for this, even in part, is bullshit.

-t

[BadKosh]

If the unions don't start acting like adults, they will surely be demonized during the election season in 2012. They will be associated with the Democrats and their game playing, budget tricks and their own irresponsible behavior. Harry Reid will also be a major target as he stands for the tax n spend Senators, and the reason more cuts weren't made. Obama will be shown to be weak and wishy-washy in all his decision making attempts.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

F*ck that.

Public employees benefited from outrageous pay and benefit increases in the last 10 years.
Private employees had no part in this at all.

To ask private employees to pay for this, even in part, is bullshit.

-t

I'd like to hear about a state where teachers were paid outrageously. This rarely, if ever happens, especially in states that fare poorly in educational scores.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by OAW 

The GOP is in serious danger of overreaching on this one .....

In addition to 61% of the public being opposed to eliminating the collective bargaining rights ... a 2-to-1 margin ... it appears that some of Gov. Walker's conservative allies are starting to uh ... "distance" themselves from his no compromise tactics.

Fix budget, then bring bargaining back - Wisconsin State Journal

Make Everybody Hurt - David Brooks

What Did Walker Campaign On? - The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Ezra Klein - What a prank call proves about Wisconsin

When it starts to become very obvious that you simply won't take yes for an answer ... you refuse to take the calls of Democratic lawmakers to discuss the issue but are quick to take a call from someone you presume to be one of the billionaire Koch brothers ... it's really not a good look.

OAW

[BadKosh]

Hate speech from a Democrat! The party of HATE.

Democrat urges unions to 'get a little bloody when necessary' - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

[Lint Police]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'd like to hear about a state where teachers were paid outrageously. This rarely, if ever happens, especially in states that fare poorly in educational scores.

Yeah, none at all.

Two-thirds of the eighth graders in Wisconsin public schools cannot read proficiently according to the U.S. Department of Education, despite the fact that Wisconsin spends more per pupil in its public schools than any other state in the Midwest.

Average Teacher Pay w/Benefits (off WI DPI Database Excel Sheet)
Milwaukee - $86,297
Elmbrook - $91,065
Germantown - $83,818
Hartland Arrwhd - $90,285
Men Falls - $81,099
West Bend - $82,153
Waukesha - $92,902
Sussex - $82,956
Mequon - $95,297
Kettle Mor - $87,676
Muskego - $91,341

[turtle777]

There. AVERAGE teacher pay. WTF ?

-t

[besson3c]

Source?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

There. AVERAGE teacher pay. WTF ?

-t

If you don't mind me asking, what made you assume that teachers are being chronically overpaid?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

If you don't mind me asking, what made you assume that teachers are being chronically overpaid?

Unlike you, I don't have to ASSUME on a variety of topics. I know.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Unlike you, I don't have to ASSUME on a variety of topics. I know.

-t

I'll ignore the pointless cheap shot, but I'd like to know what your information source is for this?

All I've ever known is a chronic underfunding of teachers and schools.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

There. AVERAGE teacher pay. WTF ?

-t

Maybe I'm crazy, buy pay with benefits seems to me like they added in the cost of healthcare and other perks into that total.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

All I've ever known is a chronic underfunding of teachers and schools.

Funding - Expenses = Over-/Underfunding

IMO, Funding is NOT the problem. The underfunding comes from inefficient spending.

-t

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Maybe I'm crazy, buy pay with benefits seems to me like they added in the cost of healthcare and other perks into that total.

Yes, that's what "pay with benefits" means.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Maybe I'm crazy, buy pay with benefits seems to me like they added in the cost of healthcare and other perks into that total.

Yeah, those averages seem really freaking high.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Yes, that's what "pay with benefits" means.

Well, even with a $10k health care package, those averages are still pretty high.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Funding - Expenses = Over-/Underfunding

IMO, Funding is NOT the problem. The underfunding comes from inefficient spending.

-t

So, do you have an answer to my question, interchanging "overpay" with "overfund" if that suits you?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Lint Police 

Average Teacher Pay w/Benefits (off WI DPI Database Excel Sheet)
Milwaukee - $86,297
Elmbrook - $91,065
Germantown - $83,818
Hartland Arrwhd - $90,285
Men Falls - $81,099
West Bend - $82,153
Waukesha - $92,902
Sussex - $82,956
Mequon - $95,297
Kettle Mor - $87,676
Muskego - $91,341

Cute, way to cherry pick the data. What the spreadsheet doesn't tell you is:

Wisconsin is 49th in the country for starting salaries at about $27,000. That's $27,000 a year for a Master's Degree in Education. I can just see people chomping at the bit for a salary like that.

They get a 21.5% raise over 10 years. That means after dedicating 10 years of service, they'll be making $32,805. With a Master's Degree. When you're hitting the upper echelon of salaries, you're talking about teachers that have been there for 20 years or more.

Why would someone stay in a job making 1/5th the salary they could be making in the private sector? Sure as f*ck isn't for the pay. I would think that a generous benefits plan would be that absolute least we could do for our teachers.

[besson3c]

Where are your numbers coming from, pigeon?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Cute, way to cherry pick the data. What the spreadsheet doesn't tell you is:

Wisconsin is 49th in the country for starting salaries at about $27,000. That's $27,000 a year for a Master's Degree in Education. I can just see people chomping at the bit for a salary like that.

They get a 21.5% raise over 10 years. That means after dedicating 10 years of service, they'll be making $32,805. With a Master's Degree. When you're hitting the upper echelon of salaries, you're talking about teachers that have been there for 20 years or more.

What you say doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
The salaries posted are AVERAGER, not the "upper echelon".

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So, do you have an answer to my question, interchanging "overpay" with "overfund" if that suits you?

Geez, dude, no.

Obviously, with those high salaries, the "Funding" side of the teachers is not the problem.

Now, what DOES happen is that the schools have to "waste" all their funding (taxpayer money) on salaries and fringes, and have a "funding problem" with everything else.
But this kind of "funding problem" has a clear root problem: too high teacher's salaries.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Geez, dude, no.

Obviously, with those high salaries, the "Funding" side of the teachers is not the problem.

Now, what DOES happen is that the schools have to "waste" all their funding (taxpayer money) on salaries and fringes, and have a "funding problem" with everything else.
But this kind of "funding problem" has a clear root problem: too high teacher's salaries.

-t

What evidence do you have that teacher salaries are too high? Where are you getting this information from? That was my question. While you're responding to this, what should their salaries be?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

What evidence do you have that teacher salaries are too high? Where are you getting this information from? That was my question. While you're responding to this, what should their salaries be?

A wise man that likes poop and candy cane confirmed this:

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Yeah, those averages seem really freaking high.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

A wise man that likes money and candy cane confirmed this:





-t

So, so much for this?

Unlike you, I don't have to ASSUME on a variety of topics. I know.

Pretty simple question, no?