Wisconsin Revolt

[NewGrowth]

There are numerous alternatives to state run education; there are poorly homeschooled children but it does not compare to vast number of children coming put of our failed state run education system. Charter schools are a common alternative and most
modern homeschooled children are part of parent groups, they also often participate in sports and other activities. Saying all homeschooled children are socially mal-adjusted is just a stereotype put in place by the unproven "science" of psychology. Just because it is the accepted norm doesn't make it correct. The goal of the state is to indoctrinate not teach.

 

[Rob Roy]

you are mistaken. homeschooled children have better grades b/c the system isn't standardized. colleges look more carefully at homeschooled teens than any other variety b/c they know that homeschooling isn't always successful. psychologists agree that homeschooled children sometimes lack social skills and the self-confidence other individuals taught in a regular school have.

state-run schools are the benchmark of a SUCCESSFUL society. comunist, capitalist, whatever. find me a country. just one. please, in the top ten economies in the world for the last 20 years without a successful public school system...... you won't.

you'll be hard-pressed to find a teacher who does it b/c the money's excellent....

you are just hardlining in the name of philosophy but reality can have a pretty heavy hand when it slaps you in the face.....

Speaking of reality...find me one "public school system" that doesn't rely on the threat of government violence to fund itself....bet you won't.

Hardlining in the name of philosophy? Does your personal philosophy, assuming you have one, approve of the taking of money from home schoolers parents when they don't use the public school system? How is that fair?

How can a society that depends on government force be termed SUCCESSFUL? Wouldn't a successful society be one absent coercion?
What is the criteria you use to determine a successful society? I think the baseline, for me anyway, would have to include a person's right to peaceful self determination is PROTECTED, rather than dictated. What am I missing?

 

[mindphuk]

One major difference that people tend not to think about between public vs. private sector unions -- Public unions can threaten the jobs of their 'employer.' They will demand concessions and threaten the politicians that they will actively work to vote them out of office during the next cycle if they don't get them. Unions in the private sector cannot threaten the owners and CEOs of the companies that they work for. The negotiations do not become as imbalanced as they do with government worker unions.

 

[NewGrowth]

Good to see you around JohnnyO, mindphuk has made some astute observations. Americans need to stop acting so entitled, no one is owed or deserves anything. We need more self starters, entrepreneurs, and dreamers but there are too many leaches sucking off those people. School is a system designed by the establishment, they operate under no morals only the dogma of submission handed down by the state. Parents should take responsibility for their child's education not pass the buck to our beurocratic government.
I'm sure Wisconsin is going bankrupt like every other state, unions simply should not be allowed for supposed "public servants". These people should be protesting for reduced tax rates and incentives for local business. Maybe if they were innovative people they would have a fund raiser. Their behavior shows clearly how incompetent they are.

 

[Uncultivated]

Screw the unions! Public sector unions are THE ULTIMATE special interest group! Dems give them fat contracts and collect union dues for them; unions donate mega-amounts of what are afterall taxpayer dollars to elect the dems. Stinks out loud!

Government employees shouldn't be allowed to unionize. Even FDR knew that.

 

[redivider]

Good to see you around JohnnyO, mindphuk has made some astute observations. Americans need to stop acting so entitled, no one is owed or deserves anything. We need more self starters, entrepreneurs, and dreamers but there are too many leaches sucking off those people. School is a system designed by the establishment, they operate under no morals only the dogma of submission handed down by the state. Parents should take responsibility for their child's education not pass the buck to our beurocratic government.
I'm sure Wisconsin is going bankrupt like every other state, unions simply should not be allowed for supposed "public servants". These people should be protesting for reduced tax rates and incentives for local business. Maybe if they were innovative people they would have a fund raiser. Their behavior shows clearly how incompetent they are.

your comments show how out of touch with the people of winsconsin's wishes you are.

 

[NewGrowth]

your comments show how out of touch with the people of winsconsin's wishes you are.

It's a small majority of people as previously stated in the forum. Seems like my comments show how out of touch with reality these people are.

 

[MrDank007]

There's no doubt anything unionized produces lesser results. Look at how under water the USPS is, while Fed Ex and UPS turn profits. They have to pay people to literally sit in empty rooms doing nothing. There are microarguements about lines of business, ect., but
80% of the USPS cost is labor related. Union contracts. Who bails out the USPS....the tax payer!

In the private sector, you have to adapt to succeed or that's it...you're dead and the competition wins. The problem is that once you're unionized...you can't adapt, be more competitive, change, streamline, manage, rebuild or remodel....because of collective bargaining. To add insult to injury when the market tanks and the pensions suffer, guess who gets to pick up more of the tab...ahem tax payer? It's a mini bubble of unfunded liablities much like the more macro level SS with the US gov. If I told my company that I expected to retire at 50 and get 90% of my wages for life, they wouldn't even fire me cause they would think it's a fucking joke!

 

[Mike Young]

There's no doubt anything unionized produces lesser results. Look at how under water the USPS is, while Fed Ex and UPS turn profits. They have to pay people to literally sit in empty rooms doing nothing. There are microarguements about lines of business, ect., but
80% of the USPS cost is labor related. Union contracts. Who bails out the USPS....the tax payer!

In the private sector, you have to adapt to succeed or that's it...you're dead and the competition wins. The problem is that once you're unionized...you can't adapt, be more competitive, change, streamline, manage, rebuild or remodel...

I'm sorry, but you in the same way that wallstreet adapted? Housing, Auto industry? You can blame auto industry on unions all you want. they may have helped, sure. But building shitty cars was the root problem.

Adapt. I guess your meaning would be to accept what you are told and instructed without question.

 

[MrDank007]

I'm sorry, but you in the same way that wallstreet adapted? Housing, Auto industry? You can blame auto industry on unions all you want. they may have helped, sure. But building shitty cars was the root problem.

Adapt. I guess your meaning would be to accept what you are told and instructed without question.

Your post is somewhat incoherent. The unions have screwed up the auto industry. Adapting...yes things change companies adapt all the time to stay relevant.

As far as accepting what you are told without question...I agree that unions had a place in a different time, but have turned into a whole different animal. In a free market, you have choice...you don't like it...go somewhere else. Eventually, an employer has to treat people at a level that the market will bear or they will leave. Clearly, the system we have is not incentivizing talent.

As far Wallstreet, I'm not going to go there...you are conflating something completly off topic/Ad hominem

 

[UncleBuck]

Americans need to stop acting so entitled, no one is owed or deserves anything.

what is your vague statement regarding here?

the teachers, nurses, and other union members have already agreed to every financial concession. they clearly know they are not owed anything or deserve anything, even if it was contractually promised to them.

there is nothing say we owe every child a chance to get an education or that children deserve a chance at education, but give me an example of the most powerful country you can find that has no public education system.

name that country!

We need more self starters, entrepreneurs, and dreamers but there are too many leaches sucking off those people.

are you insinuating that public unions for teachers and nurses stifle the rest of the entrepreneurial spirit of everyone else?

School is a system designed by the establishment, they operate under no morals only the dogma of submission handed down by the state.

wow! according to you, schools are immoral government indoctrination centers.

i wonder how you would justify that.

Parents should take responsibility for their child's education not pass the buck to our government.

"bureaucracy"

i learned that in an immoral government indoctrination center.

my parents both worked. didn't really have time to home school me like you seem to want.

I'm sure Wisconsin is going bankrupt like every other state, unions simply should not be allowed for supposed "public servants". These people should be protesting for reduced tax rates and incentives for local business.

wtf are you even talking about? they have already bargained themselves a huge pay/benefits cut.

but that does not seem to be enough. they also want them to never be able to bargain again.

and you say they should go protest for lower taxes on businesses they don't run? you are deluded. wtf.

Maybe if they were innovative people they would have a fund raiser. Their behavior shows clearly how incompetent they are.

insults are a sure fire way to win an argument via making your opponent sound incompetent.

even though your opponents teach kids how to spell 'bureaucratic'.

 

[UncleBuck]

There's no doubt anything unionized produces lesser results. Look at how under water the USPS is, while Fed Ex and UPS turn profits. They have to pay people to literally sit in empty rooms doing nothing. There are microarguements about lines of business, ect., but
80% of the USPS cost is labor related. Union contracts. Who bails out the USPS....the tax payer!

In the private sector, you have to adapt to succeed or that's it...you're dead and the competition wins. The problem is that once you're unionized...you can't adapt, be more competitive, change, streamline, manage, rebuild or remodel....because of collective bargaining.

wow, you are willfully ignoring the facts of the situation.

do you think UPS and fedex have a location at every backwoods town across the entire nation? nope.

the USPS does, because that is their duty.

yet you are so simple that you pin it all on collective bargaining.

nevermind that 2,000+ locations are located in places like shitshatapoopton, kentucky and they get only a very few customers every day and the nearest UPS or fedex is 40 miles away. it is all collective bargaining...

To add insult to injury when the market tanks and the pensions suffer, guess who gets to pick up more of the tab...ahem tax payer? It's a mini bubble of unfunded liablities much like the more macro level SS with the US gov. If I told my company that I expected to retire at 50 and get 90% of my wages for life, they wouldn't even fire me cause they would think it's a fucking joke!

there would be no problem right now if not for mismanagement of these funds during good times.

a prime example is NJ, where possibly the fattest governor is trying to reverse promises made to teachers, nurses, and other public employees. he would not have to even touch the subject if not for republican governor christie todd whitman raiding the fund during the prosperity of the clinton years and never paying it back.

you will see the same thing all over the place. just look around. they used the funds during good times and never repaid it before the next inevitable recession.

 

[MrDank007]

wow, you are willfully ignoring the facts of the situation.

do you think UPS and fedex have a location at every backwoods town across the entire nation? nope.

the USPS does, because that is their duty.

yet you are so simple that you pin it all on collective bargaining.

nevermind that 2,000+ locations are located in places like shitshatapoopton, kentucky and they get only a very few customers every day and the nearest UPS or fedex is 40 miles away. it is all collective bargaining...



there would be no problem right now if not for mismanagement of these funds during good times.

a prime example is NJ, where possibly the fattest governor is trying to reverse promises made to teachers, nurses, and other public employees. he would not have to even touch the subject if not for republican governor christie todd whitman raiding the fund during the prosperity the clinton years and never paying it back.

you will see the same thing all over the place. just look around. they used the funds during good times and never repaid it before the next inevitable recession.

Buck I love your MJ posts, but calling me simple...I feel like Walter about to lose it with Donny.

I conceeded the fact the USPS business line is different, however, when 80% of your overhead is labor and you litterally have to pay people not to work, delivering mail to the backwoods is not what is putting you in the red. It's tape and subsidy.

Raiding the funds...sounds a lot like social security. And it is much the same...more people retiring, more people living longer. The difference is that pensions invest. The bottom line is the value of those funds goes down in a recession, therefore, as the payments going out continually increase, the problem compounds. It's just one more thing doomed to fail...the recession just accelerates this raided or not. What they collectively bargained for is proposterous.

Collective bargaining... while it sounds nice in theory it's really a recipe for inefficient management, subpar standards and egregious overhead

 

[Mike Young]

It's easy for you to give your prospective from an off angle. I'd be willing to bet you aren't a teacher. Certainly not a public school teacher. You may find the public sector repulsive, but it's not going anywhere. Turning your back on it must sound good in theory. But I think you'd find yourself vastly outnumbered when push came to shove.

 

[MrDank007]

I love teachers and have respect for people who want to serve the community. Doesn't change the fact that unions are an albatross and corrupt. Having them in bed with the politicians at the tax payers expense isn't right. Speaking of push comes to shove...i'm suprised it took so long for someone to stand up to them. This is because of their power and bullying. It's a real world we live in and someone has to be responsible. Can't just keep pandering to demands for campaign contributions when the gov is broke. The juice just isn't there to squeeze. It's a shame that it takes us getting to the breaking point to say ok guys enough...this isn't working!

 

[Mike Young]

I love teachers and have respect for people who want to serve the community. Doesn't change the fact that unions are an albatross and corrupt. Having them in bed with the politicians at the tax payers expense isn't right. Speaking of push comes to shove...i'm suprised it took so long for someone to stand up to them. This is because of their power and bullying. It's a real world we live in and someone has to be responsible. Can't just keep pandering to demands for campaign contributions when the gov is broke. The juice just isn't there to squeeze. It's a shame that it takes us getting to the breaking point to say ok guys enough...this isn't working!

Fuck that.

Unions are providing representation to folks that work hard doing important, but not always glamorous things. Things you probably wouldn't be willing todo yourself. Honestly.

The fact that you could point the finger at the unions in that they are corrupt without considering that the politicians they are dealing with aren't just as corrupt, if not more?

 

[mindphuk]

Fuck that.

Unions are providing representation to folks that work hard doing important, but not always glamorous things. Things you probably wouldn't be willing todo yourself. Honestly.

The fact that you could point the finger at the unions in that they are corrupt without considering that the politicians they are dealing with aren't just as corrupt, if not more?

Private-sector unions fight with management over an equitable distribution of profits. Government unions negotiate with friendly politicians over taxpayer money, putting the public interest at odds with union interests, and, as we've seen in states such as California and Wisconsin, exploding the cost of government. California's pension costs soared 2,000 percent in a decade thanks to the unions.

The labor-politician negotiations can't be fair when the unions can put so much money into campaign spending. Victor Gotbaum, a leader in the New York City chapter of AFSCME, summed up the problem in 1975 when he boasted, "We have the ability, in a sense, to elect our own boss."
This is why FDR believed that "the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," and why even George Meany, the first head of the AFL-CIO, held that it was "impossible to bargain collectively with the government."

As it turns out, it's not impossible; it's just terribly unwise. It creates a dysfunctional system where for some, growing government becomes its own reward. You can find evidence of this dysfunction everywhere. The Cato Institute's Michael Tanner notes that federal education spending has risen by 188 percent in real terms since 1970, but we've seen no significant improvement in test scores.

http://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2011/02/23/public_unions_must_go/


All of the people at the bargaining table are salaried by taxpayers anyway, so it's a big negotiation with someone else's money. But don't call it "negotiation" -- call it "divvying up the loot."

 

[Mike Young]

Campaign spending by unions is the reason any light is being brought to this to begin with. The opposition would easily strip people of their rights, to stomp out the influence of unions to the left vote.

You basically admited to it in your last post.

Votes are being swayed by other interests, and I'd say alot harder.
If D. Trump runs, do you think he'll have a problem raising money for his campaign? Why does it matter when the union uses dues to support a politician that will back their goals, and a oil company pays 1000x as much to gain control over their entire area of the market? Reguardless of negative side effects. I just don't see why these two things can't be looked at in the same light.

 

[mindphuk]

If D. Trump runs, do you think he'll have a problem raising money for his campaign? Why does it matter when the union uses dues to support a politician that will back their goals, and a oil company pays 1000x as much to gain control over their entire area of the market? Reguardless of negative side effects. I just don't see why these two things can't be looked at in the same light.

It matters when the union can use extortion to threaten the job of their 'boss.' We are talking about the the threat to the political life of the incumbent that is supposed to be negotiating with the union on behalf of the taxpayer. These politicians have conflicting interests, unlike the CEO of an oil company who only has the company's interest in mind during negotiations. Often, these politicians that are supposed to be representing the taxpayer are beholden to the unions that put him in office in the first place. Why is this so hard for you to see?

 

[Rob Roy]

It's easy for you to give your prospective from an off angle. I'd be willing to bet you aren't a teacher. Certainly not a public school teacher. You may find the public sector repulsive, but it's not going anywhere. Turning your back on it must sound good in theory. But I think you'd find yourself vastly outnumbered when push came to shove.

Actually turning your back on it is good in reality too. Why embrace a system that has a base in pushing and shoving to get it's way?
Tyranny of a majority doesn't somehow bestow right does it?

I think the public sector will eventually give way or at least get much leaner. As more people become reliant on it fewer people are left to fund it, that is not sustainable...the cracks at the seams we are witnessing today are just the beginning. Wait until oil prices surge and the dollar devalues further, public sector employees bitching won't sit well with hungry jobless people. The United States is not immune to civil unrest, financial collapse or a drop in standard of living. It is a consequence of a welfare / warfare state policy.

We live in interesting times, when people that are paid thru a system reliant on forced taxation feel entitled to demand their government take MORE on their behalf all the while remaining oblivious to the irony of how they are paid, the cycle has almost run it's course. The "educators" have been dumbed down.

My recommendation....move to a trailer park in Canada and grow weed.