Protests in Wisconsin - Scott Walker

This whole budget thing makes my brain hurt. So, supposedly we have a surplus? Why hasn't the media picked up on that then? During the elections, all the candidates were talking about "fixing WI's budget" and "being more fiscally responsible". I guess they were all wrong?? If Doyle (Dem governor who Walker replaced) left the state with a surplus, that would have been played up big time by the Dems during the election. I guess I'm skeptical of the claim that WI is doing just fine financially.
 
leftysergeant said:
Well, of course it's thjeir fault. America was starting to work again when the Shrub came along and broke it.

By the same token, idiot boy Walker should get no support for his programs to fix what he broke by breaking something else.

Walker broke the state deliberately to have an excuse to break the working class for the benefit of the entrepreneurs who own his nads.

Disgusting little punk, that one.
Click to expand...

 
EatatJoes said:
If Doyle (Dem governor who Walker replaced) left the state with a surplus, that would have been played up big time by the Dems during the election.
Click to expand...

How were they supposed to know that Walker intended to break the budget if ellected?
 
* Chose to turn down a federally supported high speed rail which could have helped create jobs and improved transportation in the state

That might just get him re-elected where I come from.

'Supported' means they give us some money, we spend more, and then it sucks money out of the budget like a blast furnace in perpetuity. They've been trying to shove this down our throats for years now, we don't want it. Last I heard it would be $60.00 for a one way ticket to Milwaukee. Who the hell wants to go to Milwaukee that bad anyway? If you do, it's about an hour on 1-94, might cost $10.00 in gas, and you don't have to try to take a cab or bus when you get there.

If public employees don't like the cutbacks they can get jobs in the private sector. What's that? Kind of a bad job market, has been for years? Lotsa cutbacks there too?
Yeah, we know. Your turn.

Fleeing the state? Please! Ante up and kick in, drama queens. You lost, and you're gonna lose some more if you run like cheap mascara because you're afraid of the public sector unions.
 
Checkmite said:
The police cannot arrest state representatives just for not voting. And they certainly can't "round them up and force a vote". Come on guys, a little critical thinking is warranted here.
Click to expand...

By becoming elected officials they become slaves to the people and lose their civil rights, I thought everyone knew that.
 
The_Animus said:
[*]Chose to turn down a federally supported high speed rail which could have helped create jobs and improved transportation in the state
Click to expand...
Why are there plans to build high speed rail in sparsely populated states anyway? "Oohhh shiny" factor? Just because Chinese are building high speed rail? Too much Thomas Friedman? Even in densely populated Japan, only one of the high speed rails is profitable, and that is the only one in the world that is profitable. China has population pretty neatly concentrated on eastern part of their country, so it may make more sense for them.
 
Last edited:
casebro said:
If they don't like it, they can always go 'outside' and find a job in the private sector. Hey, isn't that the proof of the pudding? If the civil service job is not so much easier for more pay, why aren't more employees moving out? Perhaps the true way to compare public sector jobs to private sector jobs is the turnover rate? Not the wages or bennies. Basically, if nobody ever quits a civil service job, they are over compensated. Cut their compensation until the 'quit rate' is the same as the private sector?
Click to expand...

Teacher turnover rates are high, especially in high poverty areas. If states want to gut the teacher's unions, and cut compensation to where it's a better deal to work at Walmart, just who do you think is going to replace all these teachers? Where are all these super-teachers willing to work for minimum wage and no benefits? In addition do you know what the cost would be to replace all these teachers?
 
Kaosium said:
If public employees don't like the cutbacks they can get jobs in the private sector. What's that? Kind of a bad job market, has been for years? Lotsa cutbacks there too?
Yeah, we know. Your turn.

Fleeing the state? Please! Ante up and kick in, drama queens. You lost, and you're gonna lose some more if you run like cheap mascara because you're afraid of the public sector unions.
Click to expand...

"If I gotta hurt, you gonna too." is a very ugly sentiment.

You might want to rein it in.

ETA: Also, uh. 'afraid'? You do realize the unions are the Democratic Base, right? They agree on shared ideals and principles.

Whether or not you agree is a different matter. Personally, I think that removing the rights of a union to bargain together is wrong because it's simply a move to assert the employer's power over the employee. But I'm crazy that way.
 
Last edited:
KoihimeNakamura said:
Personally, I think that removing the rights of a union to bargain together is wrong because it's simply a move to assert the employer's power over the employee.
Click to expand...

I'd also think it's unconstitutional - freedom of assembly.
 
KoihimeNakamura said:
Personally, I think that removing the rights of a union to bargain together is wrong because it's simply a move to assert the employer's power over the employee. But I'm crazy that way.
Click to expand...

The problem with public employee's unions is that government isn't tough enough negotiation partner, since they are using other people's money, and private unions can't affect the firing of CEOs as much as public employee unions can affect the election of politicians.
 
Neally said:
Limiting the data set to the most relevant data is what makes it the most useful. Fudging around the data to make it work according to the requested ideology is what Keefe did.
Click to expand...

Oh god. That's literally 180 degrees off. You're using a study that made a very sloppy attempt at directly comparing the two arenas of employment and failed to factor in the two most important variables.

That's a terrible, terrible study. If such a crappy study came out about homeopathy or chiropractic or vaccines or anything else, it would be obviously flawed and everyone would laugh at it. Because this one backs up your preexisting bias, however, you've gobbled it up.

Hilarious.

Neally said:
If data manipulation for the desired result in order to support your belief system works for you, then enjoy your fantasy world.
Click to expand...

The irony.

We have one study that used professionally accepted method of comparing jobs with significantly different requirements that controlled for the important variables vs. a broad, sloppy direct comparison.

The faults of the latter have been shown, and you have no substantive response. You literally have just said, "I prefer the one that backs up what I already believe."
 
Alt+F4 said:
Teacher turnover rates are high, especially in high poverty areas. If states want to gut the teacher's unions, and cut compensation to where it's a better deal to work at Walmart, just who do you think is going to replace all these teachers? Where are all these super-teachers willing to work for minimum wage and no benefits? In addition do you know what the cost would be to replace all these teachers?
Click to expand...
Yes, because it's either grossly overpay them or minimum wage. :rolleyes:

And this isn't just about teachers. It's the lackeys working in the DMV, the corrupt cop who was fired years ago but still gets to keep his pension and health benefits, the workers who are getting raises despite the state being broke. Convicted felons getting cushy do-nothing government jobs because they're somebody's somebody.

Taxpayers are sick of this crap.
 
WildCat said:
And this isn't just about teachers. It's the lackeys working in the DMV, the corrupt cop who was fired years ago but still gets to keep his pension and health benefits, the workers who are getting raises despite the state being broke. Convicted felons getting cushy do-nothing government jobs because they're somebody's somebody.
Click to expand...

Gov. Walker's proposed bill doesn't address any of this. The major issue here seems to be the eliminate collective bargaining rights for state employees.

Taxpayers are sick of this crap.
Click to expand...

Then the taxpayers should have elected someone who would do something about it.
 
When a picture is worth 1,000 words:

union_pig.gif
 
TraneWreck said:
We have one study that used professionally accepted method of comparing jobs with significantly different requirements that controlled for the important variables vs. a broad, sloppy direct comparison.
Click to expand...
You have Keefe's study that's obviously ideologically driven and manipulated to arrive at the desired outcome vs a direct apples to apples comparison which shows average federal salaries exceed average private-sector pay in 83% of comparable occupations in addition to the fact that federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.
 
WildCat said:
When a picture is worth 1,000 words
Click to expand...

The banking sector and Wall Street perpetrated the largest economic meltdown and financial fraud in this nation's history, and yet firefighters, teachers, prison guards and other civil service workers now must shoulder the blame.
 
Neally said:
You have Keefe's study that's obviously ideologically driven and manipulated to arrive at the desired outcome vs a direct apples to apples comparison which shows average federal salaries exceed average private-sector pay in 83% of comparable occupations in addition to the fact that federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.
Click to expand...

This is getting more pathetic as you go.

It is impossible to do a direct apples to apples comparison, as the study explained. What do we compare the salaries of police and firefighters to in the private sector? Bodyguards?

Keefe used well-established economic methods to compare actual labor. You have offered nothing to criticize this method save vapid, ignorant scorn.

You keep citing stats that fail to control for eduction and experience. This is a waste of time.

Once again, within A SINGLE LAW FIRM, an apples to apples comparison between "lawyers," if education and experience aren't controlled for, could lead to idiotic claims like, "People from Oregon make and average of $800,000 more per year than people from Washington."

This is basic, basic stuff. Because you keep referring to a study that failed to control for the important variables, you've failed miserably in establishing the appropriate causal story.
 
Last edited:
Alt+F4 said:
The banking sector and Wall Street perpetrated the largest economic meltdown and financial fraud in this nation's history, and yet firefighters, teachers, prison guards and other civil service workers now must shoulder the blame.
Click to expand...
You're asking taxpayers, many of whom have lost their jobs entirely or took a pay/benefit cut, to pay for automatic pay raises for goverment workers already making more money than they are?

Goverment workers have no idea what the rest of the country is going through right now. The arrogance and sense of entitlement is astounding. You may as well be so many Marie Antoinettes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom