Protests in Wisconsin - Scott Walker

[Newtons Bit]

Yes, they have agreed to this sort of concession, and they've done so publicly. Yet Gov. Walker refuses to accept any kind of compromise, even that offered by a GOP state senator; in short, he wants nothing less than taking away their right to collectively bargain... period.

He wants to bust the unions, end of story. Only a fool or a tool would believe otherwise by this point.

Walker said on Fox News Sunday that this was also about giving the local governments (cities and counties) the ability to change contracts as well. Does this compromise affect those workers?

 

[BeAChooser]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...support_to_union_protestors_in_wisconsin.html

New York's Teamsters Local 237 to bus in support to union protestors in Wisconsin

LOL! New York unions fear this coming to their own state. As they should. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ose-government-employee-unions-116481443.html "Clarus Poll: 64% of Voters Oppose Government Employee Unions"

 

[MattusMaximus]

Walker said on Fox News Sunday that this was also about giving the local governments (cities and counties) the ability to change contracts as well. Does this compromise affect those workers?

It doesn't matter, since Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise.

 

[BeAChooser]

Here's Obama saying he'll make us a nation of purple states … SEIU states:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQj-xBH30-I&feature=player_embedded

Walker is right. Obama and his campaign organizers should butt out of what's going on in Wisconsin. But he can't. BECAUSE THE UNIONS OWN HIM. So the thugs are on the way to help those poor underpaid teachers rolleyes. And the feds will undoubtedly look the other way, just as they have previously.

 

[Newtons Bit]

What strawman? You said safety is taken care of by OSHA, did you not? Food safety is taken care of by the FDA, and that is something the Pubs want to defund. It appears the Pubs want to defund public safety and work safety. Now they're trying to eliminate unions, which would be our last line of organizational defense against big-money getting people to work unsafe again.

There's no sign that the Republicans want to defund OSHA or the FDA much less the entire government. You entire argument is that "they appear to" based on the evidence of "they appear to".

 

[MattusMaximus]

There's no sign that the Republicans want to defund OSHA or the FDA much less the entire government. You entire argument is that "they appear to" based on the evidence of "they appear to".

I thought this thread was about the union protests in Wisconsin...

 

[Newtons Bit]

It doesn't matter, since Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise.

Your link doesn't support that statement.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I thought this thread was about the union protests in Wisconsin...

Me too, but because the Republicans want to defend OSHA, we need unions to keep safety in the workplace. Or whatever thaiboxerken's specious argument is...

 

[MattusMaximus]

Yes, they have agreed to this sort of concession, and they've done so publicly. Yet Gov. Walker refuses to accept any kind of compromise, even that offered by a GOP state senator; in short, he wants nothing less than taking away their right to collectively bargain... period.

He wants to bust the unions, end of story. Only a fool or a tool would believe otherwise by this point.

It doesn't matter, since Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise.

Your link doesn't support that statement.

You need to read it again then, it's in the first two paragraphs - TWICE... and in the headline:

Wis. gov. says he won't accept union compromise

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker again rejected a proposed compromise Monday to end a political stalemate over collective bargaining rights that led to 14 Senate Democrats skipping town and motivated tens of thousands of people to march on the Capitol in protest for more than a week.

Walker said Monday afternoon he wasn't interested in compromises that have been floated by public employee unions and even a Republican state senator. He spoke inside his heavily guarded conference room in the Capitol as thousands of people screamed and stomped outside his office to "Recall Walker!"...

You fail... badly

 

[DavidJames]

Your link doesn't support that statement.

You may quibble with the word, but this sounds like no compromising:

We're broke," the governor told reporters Monday. "You really can't negotiate when you don't have money to negotiate with

.

Of course, requiring a yearly recertification of unions sure would ease that budget crunch

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Here's Obama saying he'll make us a nation of purple states … SEIU states(

So I assume you're not going to answer any of the previous criticisms addressed to you. Least of which my challenge to explain the functional difference between a deficit incurred by spending or by tax increases.

 

[Newtons Bit]

You need to read it again then, it's in the first two paragraphs - TWICE... and in the headline:

Wis. gov. says he won't accept union compromise


You fail... badly

Rejecting compromises that have been offered doesn't mean that "Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise." He may accept a future compromise. He hasn't ruled that out like you stated.

Words have meaning. Learn what they are.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Rejecting compromises that have been offered doesn't mean that "Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise." He may accept a future compromise. He hasn't ruled that out like you stated.

Words have meaning. Learn what they are.

Keep moving your goalposts, NB

 

[Newtons Bit]

Keep moving your goalposts, NB

What goal post would that be? Your claim that he shut the door to any kind of compromise? He hasn't. The door is still open. He's just rejected that ones that have been offered thus far.

 

[rwguinn]

Rejecting compromises that have been offered doesn't mean that "Gov. Walker has closed the door to any kind of compromise." He may accept a future compromise. He hasn't ruled that out like you stated.

Words have meaning. Learn what they are.

Sorry, N'sB
But words have only one meaning, that being what the individual wants them to be (or, in some cases, what they try to define them to be on wiki...).
Context is a dead horse, just like systems analysis...

 

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Did you miss the discussion on this? Union workers can opt out of that part of the dues.

Looks like I did miss that. The way that a given "opt out" works though can render it functionally meaningless. Haven't found the relevant info yet as it applies to Wisconsin, what I did find is the membership form of the California Teachers Association:

http://www.ostahome.org/CTA_Docs/CTA Membership Enrollment Form.pdf

Again, not sure how any particular WI public unions work yet, but in the CTA you don't actually get that money back, it just "remains in the general fund". In theory this is the only money that must remain in the general fund.. Say 200 teachers pay dues and 50% of each teacher's contribution goes to the PAC, if 100 of them opt out the union needn't decrease its PAC transfers at all so long as the opt-out group's total dues are less than or equal to the entire general fund. Effectively the opt-outs are meaningless unless they exceed the total non-PAC spending that would occur either way.

If the opt-outs aren't pretty significant it could make an artful end-run around the Beck decision.. Well, for the CTA at least, no time to dig around more right now.

*Edit: How about a system where if the union spends 20% of it's total dues collection on PACs and you opt out, your dues are actually 20% less? Maybe some unions do work that way, but in the ones that don't I still consider the PAC donations quite mandatory (and therefore taxpayer funded) unless the members opt-out en masse (probably doesn't happen much if ever since they don't even get the money back).

 

[BeAChooser]

Least of which my challenge to explain the functional difference between a deficit incurred by spending or by tax increases.

Would it mean anything to someone who admires communists?

 

[BeAChooser]

This doctor should be investigated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65X9xPjJQk&feature=player_embedded#at=165

And any teachers that don't show up tomorrow should be fired:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8fQZPapyAI&feature=player_embedded#at=79 "Andrew Breitbart Has Walker Pneumonia"

 

[tyr_13]

What goal post would that be? Your claim that he shut the door to any kind of compromise? He hasn't. The door is still open. He's just rejected that ones that have been offered thus far.

He has rejected the unions giving him everything he wanted except taking away collective bargaining, the main part of unions in the first place. It isn't a stretch to say he rejects everything but destroying unions.

Not that you're doing this Newtons Bit, but it is interesting to see the reasoning many display. Unions are always good, or unions are always bad seems the default two, then it's worked backwards from that premise.

 

[BeAChooser]

Keep in mind folks, these people are teaching your children (see the photos in the link):

http://www.uncoverage.net/2011/02/fire-the-wisconsin-teachers-arrest-the-doctors-who-lie-for-them/

But perhaps that's why so many of them send their children to private schools:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/sep/22/20040922-122847-5968r/

The report says the school choice movement has begun competitively forcing public school improvement, particularly in cities like Milwaukee, called “a hotbed of school reform,” where 29.4 percent of public school teachers sent their children to private schools, the study finds.