Twinsdad 22 hours ago
The Reason-Rupe poll finds voters overwhelmingly support many of the key changes Gov. Walker and the legislature implemented on public sector pensions and health care last year. Reason-Rupe finds 72 percent favor the change requiring public sector workers to increase their pension contributions from less than 1 percent to 6 percent of their salaries. And 71 percent favor making government employees pay 12 percent of their own health care premiums instead of the previous 6 percent.
http://reason.org/blog/show/wisconsin-recall-poll-reason-rupe
http://reason.org/blog/show/wisconsin-recall-poll-reason-rupe
snarking.slug 22 hours ago
+3 Votes
Twinsdad 22 hours ago
+4 Votes
Collective bargining in the private sector is a requirement, in the public sector it allows unions to buy the public officials they want to get elected and once elected they vote for the increases and other perks that the unions want.
Maxyasgur 20 hours ago
+5 Votes
Well if that's the case TD, why not make all government workers wear a burqa and forbid them from ever speaking to an elected official lest they garner some friendly support. The opposite point to yours here is that you have a guy like Walker who worships people like the Kochs. The people who work for government pay taxes too. Now that we have turned our economy into nothing but a giant funnel to send wealth upward, the benefits of government workers suddenly look outrageous. The issue is how bad the private sector has been slaughtered. You may enjoy seeing people lose benefits, but it's not going to make Wisconsin a better place to live.
snarking.slug 20 hours ago
+4 Votes
Being susceptible to unions seems no different than being susceptible to other interested entities (lobbyists, corporations, etc).
Wouldn't enacting controls on lobbyists and election fundraising accomplish the same thing as abolishing public employee collective bargaining?
Wouldn't enacting controls on lobbyists and election fundraising accomplish the same thing as abolishing public employee collective bargaining?
TheScott 19 hours ago
+6 Votes
I suggest, given that public sector workers provide services to the taxpayer and not the government, public sector contracts should be decided by referendum..... It'll give instant feed back as to how they are doing....... Might even cause a few unions and public sector workers to realise that their 'taxes' are a by product of private sector wealth creation. By the way, if all of private sector income is just funnelled to the uber rich.... we can't afford what you are selling (at least not at the continually escalating prices you want to charge) and the rich don't need it. We may choose to keep some well paid services and let others we find less relevant go.....
Maxyasgur 19 hours ago
+2 Votes
Gee Scott, you wanna start a signup sheet referendum where hard working, world saving, wealth creating titans like yourself can demand that public employees get sent to your house to do some cleanup work because after all, YOU pay their salary. Should all government employees hand you a little survey card when you deal with them that you can use to dictate how much you feel they should be paid for the service they gave you? Better yet, how bout you just call your local government offices a week or so in advance to let them know you will be coming in for your drivers license so they can make sure a manager is working the desk to speed you on your way.
TheScott 18 hours ago
+5 Votes
No, I didn't say that at all...... I just don't believe that public sector unions have the right to bully a government into accepting services that a community doesn't want and especially can't afford. The public sector feel that they have jobs for life and use unions to enforce their right to work.... even if the majority of taxpayers would rather cut back and balance the budget for their municipality and I find it especially overbearing when a state wide union forces cost increases on small communities that can't afford them.....
Twinsdad 22 hours ago
+4 Votes
When asked what state and local officials should do if pensions and health benefits are underfunded, 74 percent favor requiring government employees to pay more for their own health care and retirement benefits. In sharp contrast, 75 percent oppose cutting funding for programs like education and 74 percent oppose raising taxes to help fund government worker benefits
Those folks in Wis. are right on top of things now.
Those folks in Wis. are right on top of things now.
Nohelp1 12 hours ago
+2 Votes
Nothing special about folks in Wis. since all rational people want things done but at minimum cost to themselves.
Maxyasgur 22 hours ago
+4 Votes
Rather then question the policies that have boom/busted America, most Americans who have had their lives downsized have instead supported making everyone else as miserable as them. The unions, at the very start of this, agreed to concessions. That, however, was not good enough for Walker who shoved through the extra step of stripping unions of the ability to ever bargain again. From the link you posted TD, the voting public is clearly not in overwhelming support of that idea. yet, like all pork ideas, it get's rammed through with what people do support. Walker is not just doing this to save money, it's about destroying unions. It wasn't what he ran on, and it's not where the overwhelming support is.
Twinsdad 22 hours ago
+3 Votes
"the extra step of stripping unions of the ability to ever bargain again"
That is not a fact. FDR 1937
"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters" less
That is not a fact. FDR 1937
"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters" less
Maxyasgur 21 hours ago
+3 Votes
That's a nifty little philosophy lesson, but again, it's not what Walker ran on. The world has changed since 1937, we should start with our discussions addressing what the world looks like TODAY rather then how we wish it was or how is was 75 years ago. But even if we stick to what you are saying here, there is a blatant dishonesty in what Walker did because he did not treat the fireman and policemen the same way. Because of divisive Republican tactics, teachers and government staffers have been lumped into and portrayed as a faceless but nonetheless deadly enemy to freedom. Separate them from the cops and firemen, who are brave heroes, and you get the exact result Walker achieved. Are you willing to admit the same TD that by not including ALL government workers of Wisconsin, Walker is being underhanded? If what FDR said is good for teachers, why not cops and firemen? less
Maxyasgur 20 hours ago
+2 Votes
But they weren't gotta and for obvious reasons, namely that at this point and time, it's political suicide to dump on them like we do teachers and government staffers. Next time you or someone else wants to talk about how Obama is practicing the politics of division, remember this thread.
TheScott 19 hours ago
+5 Votes
Maxyasgur - "Because of divisive Republican tactics, teachers and government staffers have been lumped into and portrayed as a faceless but nonetheless deadly enemy to freedom. Separate them from the cops and firemen, who are brave heroes, and you get the exact result Walker achieved."
You mean public sector functions are like cable TV packages..... you either take the whole lot and an inflated price or you get to watch whitenoise? I think that the public should be able to downsize their government services any time they wish..... The could even choose to have an all volunteer fire department if they want... some communities do.
You mean public sector functions are like cable TV packages..... you either take the whole lot and an inflated price or you get to watch whitenoise? I think that the public should be able to downsize their government services any time they wish..... The could even choose to have an all volunteer fire department if they want... some communities do.
Maxyasgur 18 hours ago
+2 Votes
Here's my difference with you on this issue Scott. The discussions being held are not, what outcome do we want to achieve. Instead, the discussions are, who can we squeeze so that my taxes don't go up. Again, the unions here agreed to cuts. This is about an ideological agenda.
your cable analogy doesn't fit.
your cable analogy doesn't fit.
TheScott 18 hours ago
+4 Votes
Of course it does Max.... one example might be a cash strapped community that may not be able to afford extended hours in their library or a book mobile.... Should they always have to pay for those services if they no longer want them? Should a community not have the choice to have trash collections on a different service that saves money? Can we dispense with cutting the park grass half as much.... If the people who pay the tax dollars are pressured on their income, should they not, as a community, say what they are willing to do without?
Maxyasgur 16 hours ago
+2 Votes
The cable provider bundles all those shows to pay for the cost of the upkeep of the system. I get the fantasy that we should be allowed to pay ONLY for the five shows we watch and not a penny for anything else. Would you be less annoyed if the cable company said, "Fine, we'll charge you $30 for the shows you want to see and $30 for the network upkeep." Would you be cool with that or would you complain that since you live closer the cable hub, people who live further away should pay more? I don't have kids, but I pay for their education just the same. I don't whine about it and b!thc endlessly about how much teachers make. cutting their livelyhood will not make my life better in any way. Instead of whining so much about what things cost, why don't we instead hire competent people who can do a good job? less
TheScott 16 hours ago
+5 Votes
I certainly agree with you that we should be hiring well qualified people who are routinely assessed for their competence and either promoted or reduced either in responsibility or fired but without union bureaucracy. That however does not mean that I should keep services under the umbrella of a workers union if the city or county or state does not need them any more. Some how public sector workers feel that they should have some special privilege to guaranteed employment when the vast majority of the tax dollars that pay them come from people will little certainty and even less support in retirement.
Maxyasgur 14 hours ago
+2 Votes
"I certainly agree with you that we should be hiring well qualified people who are routinely assessed for their competence and either promoted or reduced either in responsibility or fired but without union bureaucracy."
Good luck Scott, may the world someday live up to your expectation of perfect efficiency and may no inconveniences or inappropriate fees ever be levied against you. Further, God willing, may you never be forced to have to endure dealing with someone who is not the brightest bulb in the box who, just by having that job, is undoubtedly making you pay more for something then you should have to. And most of all, may you live to see a world where every public employee is assessed weekly and promoted or demoted based on what they did that week, a world where having a good on Monday can be completely negated by not showing enough gratitude on Friday when checks are handed out. less
Good luck Scott, may the world someday live up to your expectation of perfect efficiency and may no inconveniences or inappropriate fees ever be levied against you. Further, God willing, may you never be forced to have to endure dealing with someone who is not the brightest bulb in the box who, just by having that job, is undoubtedly making you pay more for something then you should have to. And most of all, may you live to see a world where every public employee is assessed weekly and promoted or demoted based on what they did that week, a world where having a good on Monday can be completely negated by not showing enough gratitude on Friday when checks are handed out. less
TheScott 6 hours ago
+1 Vote
"And most of all, may you live to see a world where every public employee is assessed weekly and promoted or demoted based on what they did that week, a world where having a good on Monday can be completely negated by not showing enough gratitude on Friday when checks are handed out."
With such a staunch backing of everything public and everything union, I would just have to say to the above remark....... Working on it Max, working on it.
With such a staunch backing of everything public and everything union, I would just have to say to the above remark....... Working on it Max, working on it.
louman 17 hours ago
+4 Votes
One of the big issues is you have elected officials negotiating long term union contracts with future financial ramifications. In some cases they increase pension benefits and theirs are automatically increased as they are covered by the same pension system. 4 maybe 8 years later they are gone, the problem gets bigger.
Might be time to review the necessity of public unions. Benefits, pay often exceed those that pay them.
Seems like a problem that will explode as more retire taking more for the tax payer to cover the largess granted by short time government management.
Might be time to review the necessity of public unions. Benefits, pay often exceed those that pay them.
Seems like a problem that will explode as more retire taking more for the tax payer to cover the largess granted by short time government management.
kingston 15 hours ago
+3 Votes
I receive updates from a fellow member of articles in the local Wisconsin press. I am fascinated by the extremes in the debate and in the apparent belief that the situation is affecting the locals only.
The general problem is endemic to the wealthier countries of the world. Those employed by the government seem to develop an institutionalised mentality whereby they feel they have a right to "entitlements" better than their fellow workers in private enterprise. Australia is just the same and the Union movement here is strongest in areas of government service but even there only about 25 percent are members. The drain on the public purse from these "lurks and perks" is considerable. In the interest of the state, I would think the Gov deserves re-election. Cheers from Aussie less
The general problem is endemic to the wealthier countries of the world. Those employed by the government seem to develop an institutionalised mentality whereby they feel they have a right to "entitlements" better than their fellow workers in private enterprise. Australia is just the same and the Union movement here is strongest in areas of government service but even there only about 25 percent are members. The drain on the public purse from these "lurks and perks" is considerable. In the interest of the state, I would think the Gov deserves re-election. Cheers from Aussie less
Maxyasgur 12 hours ago
+1 Vote
Well there's an objective opinion........for those with a right of center view. What we have today is the logical conclusion of Reagan's axiom, "Government IS the problem." What makes government workers benefits seem extreme is the contrast of the slap down private sector labor has endured to endlessly pump profits. The only good thing I see in all this is that I will probably die before the right realizes it's dream of an entire world that operates on the principle of survival of the fittest while the rest openly starve to serve as an example.
Cheers indeed
Cheers indeed
kingston 12 hours ago
+3 Votes
Max and No Help. (below) Two very good posts. Not necessarily at odds with each other.
So, can I help? Probably not but look to the Industrial Revolution and the beginning of Economic theory. Adam Smith and his Wealth of Nations 1776. Smith extolled the virtues of mass production and it is from this concept that the "values" of work grew. As the realisation that work had value to the employer worth more than the wages paid, the worker realised he was being paid less than his perceived worth. From these beginnings, organised labor grew and with it the counterbalance of managerial "rights" to dispense with, reduce or abolish, including lock outs the labour force. Left leaning governments interfered on behalf of the worker and the resultant mess is what we now have in Wisconsin. I leave my friends to provide the solution; I have provided an explanation of the problem!!
Cheers from Aussie less
So, can I help? Probably not but look to the Industrial Revolution and the beginning of Economic theory. Adam Smith and his Wealth of Nations 1776. Smith extolled the virtues of mass production and it is from this concept that the "values" of work grew. As the realisation that work had value to the employer worth more than the wages paid, the worker realised he was being paid less than his perceived worth. From these beginnings, organised labor grew and with it the counterbalance of managerial "rights" to dispense with, reduce or abolish, including lock outs the labour force. Left leaning governments interfered on behalf of the worker and the resultant mess is what we now have in Wisconsin. I leave my friends to provide the solution; I have provided an explanation of the problem!!
Cheers from Aussie less
louman 10 hours ago
+2 Votes
The question that must be asked, if the public cannot afford the pay and benefits for the public servants, shouldn't pay and benefits be reduced to reflect what is realistic or do you leave the pay and benefits sacrosanct and lay people off?
In 2009, the state of Michigan facing a horrible financial issue due to a failing economy were forced to make a decision. Have State Troopers work 36 hours a week or layoff 100 State Troopers. They let the membership decide. 100 State Troopers were laid off.
In 2009, the state of Michigan facing a horrible financial issue due to a failing economy were forced to make a decision. Have State Troopers work 36 hours a week or layoff 100 State Troopers. They let the membership decide. 100 State Troopers were laid off.
Maxyasgur 8 hours ago
+1 Vote
To me Lou, you are asking the wrong question. If we are being specific about Wisconsin, the question was asked and the answer from the union was an agreement to financial concessions. To that point, our discussion here is not comprehensive. If money is the issue, and concessions were agreed to by the union, why do we need that extra slap. Several of you guys keep framing this as a situation where an intractable union is saying no, and it's just not accurate. If a state is broke and cuts need to be made, they should be. That wasn't the case here. Like Scott's cable company analogy, just saving money isn't good enough for you guys. You don't like unions, you don't like the idea of public workers not suffering like everyone else, but you bury that agenda behind the wail of expense. What Republicans want is concessions to match the current crisis, but they also want to make sure that if things get better, public employees will never get back what they gave up. less
FlunkedAgain 13 hours ago
+2 Votes
Since Collective Bargaining involves 2 sides; the Employees, and the Employer, maybe the Employers should get better negotiators.
Insurance Companies negotiate payment amounts with Hospitals. Will this go away too?
Insurance Companies negotiate payment amounts with Hospitals. Will this go away too?
kingston 13 hours ago
+4 Votes
Flunked
It is quite complex but we must remember that with Government service it is the taxpayers who foot the bill. The" Government negotiators" are hamstrung if they are dealing with entrenched sympathisers within the government ..
No one looks after money as well as the man who earned it and no one wastes it as readily as the government who have taxed from their constituents.
Cheers from Aussie
It is quite complex but we must remember that with Government service it is the taxpayers who foot the bill. The" Government negotiators" are hamstrung if they are dealing with entrenched sympathisers within the government ..
No one looks after money as well as the man who earned it and no one wastes it as readily as the government who have taxed from their constituents.
Cheers from Aussie
FlunkedAgain 12 hours ago
+1 Vote
"""
It is quite complex but we must remember that with Government service it is the taxpayers who foot the bill.
"""
Maybe they should have the power to elect their negotiator.
When I negotiated for myself, I found the Letter of Resignation to be an effective tool.
It is quite complex but we must remember that with Government service it is the taxpayers who foot the bill.
"""
Maybe they should have the power to elect their negotiator.
When I negotiated for myself, I found the Letter of Resignation to be an effective tool.
Nohelp1 12 hours ago
+3 Votes
What seems to elude these people is that wage rates can not be established by market forces since the Government is the only buyer and in many instances our policies have allowed private industry to become oligopoly(car industry) buyers of labor; thus there exists no market mechanism/ competition of wage determination.
StoutRopeStrongTree 12 hours ago
+3 Votes
Public unions have embedded themselves into essential service categories. Even if you have no experience in labor negotiations, you gotta understand the employer starts out in the hole.
Nohelp1 10 hours ago
+1 Vote
"employer starts out in a hole" would be incorrect. The employer will always come out ahead because the collective bargaining process occurs between the value that labor contributes to the product and the supply of labor. Under competition the employer is forced to pay the value that labor contributes; under collective bargaining the amount will always fall below this amount.
louman 9 hours ago
+2 Votes
NoHelp,
Works well until the point is reached where the value of the labor exceeds the value of the product as recently played out by GM and Chysler. The employer ended up in the hole.
Works well until the point is reached where the value of the labor exceeds the value of the product as recently played out by GM and Chysler. The employer ended up in the hole.
louman 9 hours ago
+2 Votes
In the private sector Collective Bargaining involves 2 sides; the Employees, and the Employer, where the employer is responsible for the negotiated contract.
In the Public sector Collective Bargaining involves 2 sides; the Employees, and the Employer where the employer is not responsible for the negotiated contract as the responsibility falls to the taxpayer. The flaw in the system.
In the Public sector Collective Bargaining involves 2 sides; the Employees, and the Employer where the employer is not responsible for the negotiated contract as the responsibility falls to the taxpayer. The flaw in the system.
kingston 8 hours ago
+1 Vote
I do hope all you blokes come back to the thread tomorrow when you have time. Still mid afternoon here and I have just re-read the entire thread. Yes we have all made some exaggerations or mis-statements of FACTS rather than opinions; nevertheless, what a good civilized debate it has been. Is there I wonder, just a small chance this site will get back to the standard envisaged by Carol when she started it?
Cheers from Aussie
Cheers from Aussie
Maxyasgur 20 minutes ago
+1 Vote
"Is there I wonder, just a small chance this site will get back to the standard envisaged by Carol when she started it? "
With elections coming, that isn't likely.
With elections coming, that isn't likely.
No comments:
Post a Comment