Wisconsin Assembly Passes Anti-Union Bill

Originally posted by Danbones


On the other hand you can't have a privileged class like say teachers, with a terrible success rate, where kids are proven to do better at home, expecting pensions and outlandish benefits while the people that are "paying" now are starving, and having to teach their kids at home anyway (statistically, if you want them to be able to read, you better...)...

Let's clear a few things up. When you sign a contract for a job, and it includes a pension, you and your employer both pay into it. To imply that they are asking for more than they deserve is asinine. The STATE mis-spent the money that was meant to go into pensions. IF the state didn't think they could afford to pay the pensions, they shouldnt have offered them.

Blaming the employees for expecting to receive a pension they paid into themselves and agreed upon is CRAZY.

Let's say you paid into Social Security your whole life. Then, come retirement, you decide you want to collect and the federal government says, sorry, we spent it all on other crap.

You'd find that "fair"???????????????

This distorts the issue at hand because, Johnston writes at Tax.com, it leads to a certain implicit impression:

"Somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers. How can that be? Because the "contributions" consist of money that employees chose to take as deferred wages -- as pensions when they retire -- rather than take immediately in cash. The same is true with the health care plan. If this were not so a serious crime would be taking place, the gift of public funds rather than payment for services.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by inkyminds

Originally posted by Danbones


On the other hand you can't have a privileged class like say teachers, with a terrible success rate, where kids are proven to do better at home, expecting pensions and outlandish benefits while the people that are "paying" now are starving, and having to teach their kids at home anyway (statistically, if you want them to be able to read, you better...)...

Let's clear a few things up. When you sign a contract for a job, and it includes a pension, you and your employer both pay into it. To imply that they are asking for more than they deserve is asinine. The STATE mis-spent the money that was meant to go into pensions. IF the state didn't think they could afford to pay the pensions, they shouldnt have offered them.

Blaming the employees for expecting to receive a pension they paid into themselves and agreed upon is CRAZY.

Let's say you paid into Social Security your whole life. Then, come retirement, you decide you want to collect and the federal government says, sorry, we spent it all on other crap.

You'd find that "fair"???????????????

This distorts the issue at hand because, Johnston writes at Tax.com, it leads to a certain implicit impression:

"Somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers. How can that be? Because the "contributions" consist of money that employees chose to take as deferred wages -- as pensions when they retire -- rather than take immediately in cash. The same is true with the health care plan. If this were not so a serious crime would be taking place, the gift of public funds rather than payment for services.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

edit on 26-2-2011 by inkyminds because: (no reason given)

Ah, you stumbled right into the truth.
"If the state didn't think they could afford to pay the pensions, they shouldn't have offered them."
Bingo!
-- Seek the Truth --
The corrupt politicians who signed off on the "sweetheart union deals" couldn't care less about the
ability to pay for the pensions.
They just wanted to get re-elected.
As far as paying for the "sweetheart union deal"? Who knows? Who cares?
Lets just kick the can down the road and deal with a budget crises when it arrives.
When push comes to shove maybe we could pass "just 1 more tax increase" to fill the gap.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The exact same mess with pensions is hitting California.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Ah, you stumbled right into the truth.
"If the state didn't think they could afford to pay the pensions, they shouldn't have offered them."
Bingo!
-- Seek the Truth --
The corrupt politicians who signed off on the "sweetheart union deals" couldn't care less about the
ability to pay for the pensions.

You seem to have missed a BIG POINT. These pensions were paid into 100% by the employees. The money WAS THERE. The claim that these 'elitist' pensions are the reason the state is bankrupted is NONSENSE!

"sweetheart union deals' my foot.

This constant spinning and misrepresentation of the truth to paint the WORKERS who PAID INTO THEIR PENSIONS as bing th reason the state is 'bankrupt' DEFY LOGIC>


It's all just a test-run of them claiming the US is broke because of social programs, and not multi-trillion dollars wars.

Can most of you who are claiming and counter claiming the issues at hand please step out of the illusions that are represented by the elite and actually progress instead of regress like they want you too?

Thanks.

reply to post by inkyminds


They got rid of collective bargaining in the great state of Indiana.
Look what happened. -- success -- !
Indiana is in great shape right now.
Wisconsin is in the toilet.
-----------------------------------------
The cuts are going to happen. Get used to it.

reply to post by Vitchilo


This is hardly equatable to Egypt.

These protesters want money. This is not about rights, privileges, nor anything else. They want money. People are being taxed because they want money. Therefore, let them go. They're a cancer.

There is no right side here. But the government wants to shrink and lower taxes. So they are the lesser of two evils.

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
I belong to 3 separate unions. AFSCME, AF of M and PPAN. So, without salary and benefits, Im screwed, and stand to lose all. Just have to let the cards fall I suppose..but I am wondering. All union brothers and sisters here? Check in. Lets see what we got here at ATS.

I belong to AFSCME.
2nd line

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Vitchilo

 

These protesters want money. This is not about rights, privileges, nor anything else. They want money. People are being taxed because they want money. Therefore, let them go. They're a cancer.

Them wanting access to pensions THEY PAID INTO is selfish?

Funny how you have it 180 degrees backwards. It is the GOVERNMENT who wants to TAKE their money way from them, because they spent it on unrelated crap.

Get your facts straight, not straight from the corporations.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by inkyminds

 

They got rid of collective bargaining in the great state of Indiana.
Look what happened. -- success -- !
Indiana is in great shape right now.

Great shape? You mean, with all those massive government agribusiness subsidies?

-----------------------------------------

The cuts are going to happen. Get used to it.

Yes, roll over and take it.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by Alxandro

 

If you don't make the kind of salary unions fight for, I guess you have to attack them, is that it? Instead of attacking people who are making a livable wage, maybe you should be attacking corporations that have sent their manufacturing facilities over seas for cheap labor and high profits.

Hate to disappoint you but to be honest, I'm quite comfy with what I earn.
I'm well aware that Unions were a good thing for America once upon a time, but like everything else they gotten fat, lazy and complacent.
Bottom line, it's a different world now and they've outlived their usefulness.

Besides, must I remind you:
* Obama ran on a mantra of change and that same change should apply Unions.
* He also told us we must sacrifice, that should apply to Unions as well.
* He's tells us to redistribute the wealth, that should apply to Unions too.
* He wants to force us to pay for his heathcare, same should apply to Unions.

Did I leave anything out?

reply to post by inkyminds


Yes. because it's being taken from the people for workers whom honestly never deserved that much.

The government before, with different people, spent on useless crap. Unfortunately, they just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. They should have known that the money train would not last. Now it's over.

To sound like a total dick, sucks to be them. And that's just that. They bought into an unsustainable government. Now it;s collapsing, and they got screwed over. No different than Enron really. Blame the last guy, not the guy trying to fix it.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by inkyminds

 

Yes. because it's being taken from the people for workers whom honestly never deserved that much.

They 'never deserved' something they paid into 100%

Can you explain that more?

The government before, with different people, spent on useless crap. Unfortunately, they just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. They should have known that the money train would not last. Now it's over.

So now the workers should foot the bill for government mis-spending?

To sound like a total dick, sucks to be them. And that's just that. They bought into an unsustainable government. Now it;s collapsing, and they got screwed over. No different than Enron really. Blame the last guy, not the guy trying to fix it.

FASCINATING logic. Thanks.

Ya'll insane unions are not bad, they might need to cut some things down, and anything that becomes to big, becomes more and more corrupt, no mater what it is. But all in all there are bigger problems then the evil teachers union, because as we all know education does not create jobs. It's the other way around, job's create education, so there are some problems with the whole education thing, as people across the land are starting to see.

Education as we know it is ultimately doomed to lessen in its scope and the way it's used and set up in the first place, especially with the coming advent of technology. And if anything considering all the things most teachers/educators have had to deal with, that has been going on during the times, anything from corporate interests, to rich people trying to get more wage slaves when the system changes, and trying to control the necessities of living by implementing laws in favor of them. To just dealing with brats and annoying kids in schools, to teaching things that are ultimately not easy to implement in real life, to the changing technological world of today, they did a job that is not really worth it, nor do they get paid all that much money for doing it. So if there unions need to cut back on some things then they should, because it would happen sooner or latter, but still this is small fry stuff, compared to the things that are wasted daily by other interests out there. Government, politics, useless wars, old outdated interests that control the media and mass implementation of laws and societal changes, inflated bureaucracy's, ah the list can go on, before it gets to the teachers union and the problems they pose, and somebody is paying for all that junk, and guess who it is? It ain't the rich that's for sure.

It's like this, government is a necessary to at least bring the appearance of order, but ultimately its one big waste of time and moneys, and just a tool of the rich to keep you all in line. Politics is crapola and just a tool as well. Corporate entities are giant leaches but they wouldn't have gotten so big if they didn't have support from all walks of life both poor, middle, or rich class, and they create stuff that people use and buy, some useful some just plain junk. So what it is really is that the whole thing thing is ass backwards and one big mess everything is to blame, and no one really knows what would actually work or is good for all, but everybody has there little groups that they must adhere to, because that's what makes them the monies, and thats really all it is just a bunch of interests trying to come out on top of the dirt pile. Everybody is playing kind of the hill, and the hill is made of #.

The main thing here that most people do not seem to understand is that most people who are part of a union are forced to be part of it and they have essentially no power in their respective unions. Unions use scare tactics so that their members develop a sense of need for protection. The unions in turn offer this "protection" for the members money, vote, and blind support for their hidden agendas which have always been to radicalize the state. Come on people, this is exactly what the mafia does.

reply to post by inkyminds


The government lied. Unless they were retarded, they had no plan to actually pay those people.

The workers are simply the unfortunate victims of the course government took. It was a failure. Now if they want to revolt for the stupidity of government I would be honored. But to say they deserve that which was based off a lie is simply foul hearty. The money they were promised never existed. They are the victims of a fraud. They should sue, not protest.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by inkyminds

 

. But to say they deserve that which was based off a lie is simply foul hearty.

Why wouldn't they deserve something they paid into entirely? Please elaborate.

Also, the term is 'fool hearty'

The money they were promised never existed. They are the victims of a fraud. They should sue, not protest.

You are amazingly and irrefutably incorrect. The money was there. It was paid into by the employees.

Do you think Social Security should be scrapped, too, and anyone who paid into it is ship outta luck?

Originally posted by Gorman91
They should sue, not protest.

They ought not to need to sue...they grieve. It's a collective agreement, negotiated and signed in good faith by both parties. Why all this support for moral turpitude?

reply to post by inkyminds


You could argue the same for Enron victims. They sued. Makes more sense to sue then to sit and say they deserve something.

If I have the government sign me a contract that says I will get to own a planet that doesn't exist, and it turns out not to exist, then I sue them, I don;t protest them and say I deserve that planet still.

They are protesting for nonexistent money.

The state used that money which they paid into. Now all of it is coming down and stripping bare.

Just because you put money into something does not mean that money still exists. Look down at the roads you drive on. There's your SS fund. If SS got scraped, then yes, those folks would be out of luck too. They should sue to get what is theirs.

reply to post by mysterioustranger


By the way, VA = Virginia.

Originally posted by inkyminds
All Right! The race for the bottom continues! Let's strip people of access of the pensions they paid into, because the states mismanaged the funds! And pay teacher's less! It's the BEST way to attract TOP NOTCH educators! Maybe all these jobs that will suposedly be created by the tax incentives to out-of-state companies can replace some of the jobs that the governor just killed.

What jobs were just killed? There will be layoffs if they cannot control the budget, then we will really see stuff hit the fan.