Page 6 of 59 FirstFirst ... 23456789101656 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 873
  1. #76
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,457

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    I think this addresses the class warfare stuff pretty well...
    As talk turns to the 'new class war', the concept of a class defined not so much by its net worth or tax bracket as by its economic (and therefore political) dependence on government will sharpen step for step with the reality of this class, which will be hitting home in all its gruesome implications for those outside and inside it.

    ...

    Anyone who responds to the current crisis by anointing unionized employees of the government as the epitome of 'the working man' is placing themselves, and I really do not say this lightly, at the mercy of socialism -- not just as an intellectual theory, but as an emotional promise of happiness. There has never been a viable, durable Labor Party in the US. But neither has the government class ever been so big or faced such an existential threat.
    link to the rest

    What's weird is the attempt to include these government workers into the "working class". Far be it from me to decide which should and which shouldn't be put into this class or that class, but since a lot of the people we're discussing here are administrators pulling in six figure salaries, I'm having a little trouble with that set of parameters.

  2. #77
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,889

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    Its in the very rhetoric of those who speak out against the unions in this very forum.

    "Nope no class warfare to see here....move along. I could care less about the working man who has to pay a mortgage and take pay cuts to balance the self-created budget deficit the governor created by giving tax breaks to corporations. Nothing to see here."

    The Unions have conceded the pay cuts and all of the financial stuff. Theyjust want their right to collectively bargain. The governor is now fighting the unions not over money, but whether or not they get to be a union any more.
    You know, I've been seeing one particular bit of this repeated over and over ad naseum by the union crowd. It's the part about Walker's tax cuts creating the budget crisis.

    In a word, no. Wisconsin's budget has been running a consistent deficit for several years. The former governors have used an array of shenanigans to "balance" the budget. The first ball o' crap I recall was a Republican governor selling our share of the tobacco settlement for pennies on the dollar. More recently a Democrat governor did things such as mandating furlough days and accepting stimulus money from the feds to keep public sector employees from being laid off or fired.

    Bottom line? We've been running annual (we actually go by 2-year budgets here) to the tune of $1B+ for a while, and each past governor has used assorted tricks to avoid dealing with the fundamental issues.

    Something else to keep in mind in the midst of all this. Wisconsin consistently scores well into the upper half for government burden imposed on its citizens. Some score sheets have put us repeatedly in the top five for tax burden. Our income tax tops out near 7%, we've got all the typical (and recently created) "fees" like wheel taxes, 911 taxes, cable franchise fees, etc. We've been bleeding industrial jobs for decades, all while upping our stake in public sector jobs.

    We've been kidding ourselves for years that our budget is in good shape. And frankly with the likes of Illinois to our immediate south, things aren't really so bad around here. Nonetheless, we can not sustain the outlays that we have worked our way up to, in the last decade especially.

    You can argue that Walker's tax cut (a bit to the high side of $100M, as I recall) is political payback versus stimulating to private business. You can argue that the guy has zero PR skills the way he's handling this union busting bill while exempting the 3 unions that supported his election bid. You can not argue that our budget does not work on a fundamental level and you can not argue that Walker's tax cut is the reason why.

  3. #78
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,889

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    While we're on this topic, there's another bit that strikes me as quite comical. Invariably I see two arguments put forth by the union side that are diametrically opposed, yet never seem to be challenged.

    One the one hand, we keep hearing things along the lines of "union workers enjoy higher pay and better benefits than non-union workers".

    On the other hand, we keep hearing things along the lines of "pay is better in the private sector, and without collective bargaining the scales would tip even more so."

    Now how can it be that union people make more than non-union folks, yet the private sector pays better than the public sector?

    I confess that I'm a guy who fully believes in the notion of a "compassionate meritocracy". By that I mean if you're able to work, you won't eat unless you do work. If you're unable to work, the rest of us will support you. How much you make depends on how valuable your work is, as judged by the free market of the whole of us.

    This notion runs contrary to a simple reality in life, namely that there are lots of jobs that need doing yet don't require rare skills or talents. The UAW comes to mind. As short as a decade ago, you could pull down to the high side of $80K a year by putting in a little overtime and having nothing more than a high school education. Yet we *need* transportation. . .so while we're able we pay exorbitant salaries for menial work with limited skill requirements we buck up and take it.

    The real contradiction comes, for me at least, when you toss teachers into the union mix. While their UAW "brothers and sisters" were pulling down big money, teachers toiled away for peanuts. Every year the quality of kids we drop off in the schools declines, and every year we beat on the schools to produce better product. All the while we pay our best teachers less than a guy turning a wrench, and the precise same as our absolute worst teachers. Where oh where is the logic in any of this?

    Back to my original two observations. . .I get what the union crowd means. Union mechanics earn more than non-union mechanics, and so on and so on. That observation does not necessarily mean that we overpay our union mechanics or that we underpay our non-union mechanics. It simply is a statement of fact, and can't be used to justify one way or the other. If you wish to argue for higher wages, justify the value of the labor.

    On the other, at least in Wisconsin, the scales have been sliding heavily in favor of the public sector employees for probably 10 years or more. Our historical industrial job base is a shadow of its former self, and the family-supporting wages that it provided are largely gone. While our average wage in the private sector has probably dropped in inflation adjusted dollars (an assumption on my part), our public packages have exceeded inflation. It's pretty basic math to show that we can't sustain the trend.

    Walker's move is a clear paradigm shift designed to substantially alter that balance in a very, very short time and to do so for the long haul.

  4. #79
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    41
    Posts
    6,498

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Well put myv65.

    You should be the governor of Wisconsin

    Unfortunately up until now we only got to speculate on the conservative wet dream of complete de-unionization of the work force. Looks like we are heading that way though. If you think unemployment and home foreclosure rates are high now, just wait.

    Its like Aerosim always says. Who owns our debt? And what happens when people simply stop paying them because they don't have the means to do so anymore? You think that the de-unionization of our work force is going to improve the economy? The only difference will be that the people will be in debt rather than the government.

    We are all gonna be working minimum wage jobs....if their even is a minimum wage. We will become a nation of renters rather than home-owners. And everything we produce is going to be shit because nobody is going to take pride in a job that only pays them $10 an hour. The middle class will be a distant memory.

    /tin foil hat removed

  5. #80
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,027

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by JustinC939 View Post
    So?
    Because people protesting at the capital here have been claiming that "working without collective bargaining = slavery" and other crap. And some ASME slob gave a speech over the weekend calling collective bargaining a human right.


    Quote Originally Posted by JustinC939 View Post
    I'd give that a BS factor of about 1,000% or so.
    Maybe it is a bit high, but union bosses are still well paid.

    http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1092605/posts

    Quote Originally Posted by JustinC939 View Post
    It is. What really drags a knot in my ass is how all of these people act like these teachers are living the life or something. These are people trying pay their mortgage, and feed their children just like anybody. You all act like every teacher is some unionized POS that doesn't deserve pot to piss in. You guys would be griping if teachers were making $20 a week and living in a van. What about all the teachers who do their jobs and care about their students? How many of us here have graduated from a pooblic school?
    Balancing the budget is great, but why won't the Governor step up and take a cut in pay? What about the other elected officials? What about their staff(s)? Who is coming out saying "I make too much money, and maybe I should serve the public good and not make as much"? Why does every spending cut need to come off the backs of schools, fire and police depts? It's because they're an easy target, nothing more.

    And yes, it's class warfare, and this is only the beginning.
    Jesus, you're acting like what Walker is asking the teachers to put on shackles. Wisconsin has one of the best benefits packages for state and municipal employees int he country. Asking them to contribute 50% to their pension (which is money they get back when they retire) and pay more to their health care is completely reasonable.


    Quote Originally Posted by JustinC939 View Post
    He's obviously smarter than a baboon considering that he can look up Media Matters and find that Fox News does infact lie.
    The Fox News reporter gave him the microphone and let him say whatever he wanted. But he kept screaming like a baffoon. What if one of his students acted like that in glass during a class conversation on something? Levenhagen was worked up into an inane fever pitch.

  6. #81
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In a House
    Posts
    968

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Jesus, you're acting like what Walker is asking the teachers to put on shackles. Wisconsin has one of the best benefits packages for state and municipal employees int he country. Asking them to contribute 50% to their pension (which is money they get back when they retire) and pay more to their health care is completely reasonable.



    The teachers already said they'd take the concessions, Walker won't budge on the Collective Bargining issue, He's the problem. He refuses to compromise.



    Here's an fine example of Walker saving the taxpayer of Wisconsin money by union busting:


    link

    He fired courthouse workers last year in favor of a private firm. Arbitration ruled Walker exagerated the nature of his budget shortfall. WI will now have to offer the guards their jobs back with back pay, ultimatately costing the state more.

    The firm he hired was a foreign firm and it's head had a crimnal record !! And he was head of courthouse security!!

    Yer doin a heck of a job Scotty!!
    Fox News watchers are less informed - The Proof

    I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
    - Thomas Jefferson

  7. #82
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,287

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    ^^^ I think it's comical to hear the left droning about how taking collective bargaining away will lead to the demise of civilization as we know it. When in fact the trends overseas show the exact opposite to be the truth. Let's all be like Greece eh? They have a slew of entitled feeling union twits too... look how well that lil socialist experiment is turning out. Most complaints built squarely on the shoulders of the strawman and unsupportable union talking points. A few unattributed favorites so far....

    Well of course Unions are going to donate to the democratic party because they are the only ones who give two shits about the working class.

    . . .

    It is. What really drags a knot in my ass is how all of these people act like these teachers are living the life or something. These are people trying pay their mortgage, and feed their children just like anybody. You all act like every teacher is some unionized POS that doesn't deserve pot to piss in. You guys would be griping if teachers were making $20 a week and living in a van. What about all the teachers who do their jobs and care about their students? How many of us here have graduated from a pooblic school?

    . . .

    I could care less about the working man who has to pay a mortgage and take pay cuts to balance the self-created budget deficit the governor created by giving tax breaks to corporations.

    . . .

    Unfortunately up until now we only got to speculate on the conservative wet dream of complete de-unionization of the work force. Looks like we are heading that way though. If you think unemployment and home foreclosure rates are high now, just wait.

    . . .

    You think that the de-unionization of our work force is going to improve the economy? The only difference will be that the people will be in debt rather than the government.

    . . .

    We are all gonna be working minimum wage jobs....if their even is a minimum wage. We will become a nation of renters rather than home-owners. And everything we produce is going to be shit because nobody is going to take pride in a job that only pays them $10 an hour. The middle class will be a distant memory.
    What a rational lot you guyz are. BTW.. how long you guyz gonna pimp the lie about the gubbenor creating the budget crisis?

    Lemme see if I got the message here:

    1) If you don't like the unrealistic benefit and retirement pooblic sector union employees have that your tax dollars pay for.. you apparently hate the middle class. Even if you happen to be part of it.

    2) These poor unionized employees will all be working for minimum wage if we take away their collective bargaining. Even though the gubbenor only wants to take away their ability to collectively negotiate their benefit packages... not their wages. Stubborn facts keep getting in the way again. As an aside.. I wonder how all those private sector employees get paid above minimum wage?

    3) If you agree that the union members should contribute more to their own benefits and retirement like everyone else... again you hate the middle class.

    4) If you support the gubbenors plans you think:

    de-unionization of our work force is going to improve the economy? The only difference will be that the people will be in debt rather than the government.
    I've personally never heard any of the gubbenors supporters use that position so I'm pretty sure it's a strawman. Regardless... improve the economy? No. Balance the budget? Yes.

    People will be in debit rather than the gubberment? Wow.. what a novel concept... personal accountability! I'm all for that. People can be held accountable for their own actions (unless democrats get involved... then it becomes everyones problem in the name of "fairness"). Union folk.. welcome to the world the rest of us live in.

    5) We'll be a nation of renters instead of homeowners. Well.. gubberment already tried it's hand at affirmative action for home loan lending. Anyone else remember how well Fannie & Freddie "worked"?

    Unions simply don't want to lose their $$$. They could give a hoot if their members get laid off as we've seen time and again where gubbenors and cities have had to lay pooblic employees off because the unions would not budge. The time for the pie in the sky benefit and retirement packages is over. Pooblic employees need to share the pain of those who pay their salaries.

    Pooblic sector unions should have conceded the modest proposals and kept silent. Now that the curtain has been pulled back on what the gubbenors request was the benefits the union members were getting usually w/o any contribution on their part and how the unions responded... the country as a whole is gonna be putting their union contracts under the microscope. And about damn time IMHO.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  8. #83
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    village of idiots
    Posts
    2,368

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    We are all gonna be working minimum wage jobs....if their even is a minimum wage. We will become a nation of renters rather than home-owners. And everything we produce is going to be shit because nobody is going to take pride in a job that only pays them $10 an hour. The middle class will be a distant memory.
    How the middle class became the underclass

    In 1988, the income of an average American taxpayer was $33,400, adjusted for inflation. Fast forward 20 years, and not much had changed: The average income was still just $33,000 in 2008, according to IRS data.

    Meanwhile, the richest 1% of Americans -- those making $380,000 or more -- have seen their incomes grow 33% over the last 20 years, leaving average Americans in the dust.
    But union membership has declined rapidly over the past 30 years. In 1983, union workers made up about 20% of the workforce. In 2010, they represented less than 12%.

    "The erosion of collective bargaining is a key factor to explain why low-wage workers and middle income workers have seen their wages not stay up with inflation," Rodgers said.

    Without collective bargaining pushing up wages, especially for blue-collar work -- average incomes have stagnated.

    bb

  9. #84
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In a House
    Posts
    968

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    ^^^ I think it's comical to hear the left droning about how taking collective bargaining away will lead to the demise of civilization as we know it. When in fact the trends overseas show the exact opposite to be the truth. Let's all be like Greece eh? They have a slew of entitled feeling union twits too... look how well that lil socialist experiment is turning out. Most complaints built squarely on the shoulders of the strawman and unsupportable union talking points. A few unattributed favorites so far....



    What a rational lot you guyz are. BTW.. how long you guyz gonna pimp the lie about the gubbenor creating the budget crisis?

    Lemme see if I got the message here:

    1) If you don't like the unrealistic benefit and retirement pooblic sector union employees have that your tax dollars pay for.. you apparently hate the middle class. Even if you happen to be part of it.

    2) These poor unionized employees will all be working for minimum wage if we take away their collective bargaining. Even though the gubbenor only wants to take away their ability to collectively negotiate their benefit packages... not their wages. Stubborn facts keep getting in the way again. As an aside.. I wonder how all those private sector employees get paid above minimum wage?

    3) If you agree that the union members should contribute more to their own benefits and retirement like everyone else... again you hate the middle class.

    4) If you support the gubbenors plans you think:



    I've personally never heard any of the gubbenors supporters use that position so I'm pretty sure it's a strawman. Regardless... improve the economy? No. Balance the budget? Yes.

    People will be in debit rather than the gubberment? Wow.. what a novel concept... personal accountability! I'm all for that. People can be held accountable for their own actions (unless democrats get involved... then it becomes everyones problem in the name of "fairness"). Union folk.. welcome to the world the rest of us live in.

    5) We'll be a nation of renters instead of homeowners. Well.. gubberment already tried it's hand at affirmative action for home loan lending. Anyone else remember how well Fannie & Freddie "worked"?

    Unions simply don't want to lose their $$$. They could give a hoot if their members get laid off as we've seen time and again where gubbenors and cities have had to lay pooblic employees off because the unions would not budge. The time for the pie in the sky benefit and retirement packages is over. Pooblic employees need to share the pain of those who pay their salaries.

    Pooblic sector unions should have conceded the modest proposals and kept silent. Now that the curtain has been pulled back on what the gubbenors request was the benefits the union members were getting usually w/o any contribution on their part and how the unions responded... the country as a whole is gonna be putting their union contracts under the microscope. And about damn time IMHO.
    Sooo, you're fine with what he did here? This was BEFORE he was governor !! great track record.

    He fired courthouse workers last year in favor of a private firm. Arbitration ruled Walker exagerated the nature of his budget shortfall. WI will now have to offer the guards their jobs back with back pay, ultimatately costing the state more.

    The firm he hired was a foreign firm and it's head had a crimnal record !! And he was head of courthouse security!!
    Fox News watchers are less informed - The Proof

    I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
    - Thomas Jefferson

  10. #85
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,889

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    baghdad bob's post above reminded of another observation regarding the circus in Wisconsin right now. Walker's move affects all public unions with three exceptions (police, fire, ??? I don't recall at the moment). So in addition to teachers, it's gonna hit public works, cleaning staff, secretaries, etc.

    Why is it that the only ones getting any attention are the teachers?

    I'll give you my answer, and why bb's post reminded me of it. When it comes to public union employees, the "work" they do hasn't changed a whole heckuva lot over the years. Other than teachers, they're still driving the same salt trucks, still operating the same water and wastewater treatment plants, still pushing the same mop bucket, and still filing paperwork in the same file cabinets.

    Much like the autoworkers, whose jobs disappeared from Janesville, WI without a whimper from the public union folks, there isn't much sympathy out of the average Joe when a guy spends his "career" driving a snow plow and is able to retire with full benefits at 55.

    Wages have stagnated? Well yeah, but so has the work. I know I'm generalizing here, and I get it that technology has worked its way into some of these jobs, sometimes in a big way. Believe me, with what I do for a living I really get that part.

    With the exception of teachers, the job description for many of the remaining public union employees really hasn't changed. In many cases, there are fewer of them required to do the same job, as automation plays an increasing role, but that same automation reduces jobs that used to be 50% up and about to 90% sitting in a chair driving a screen.

    So aside from the obvious that teachers have our kids and are responsible for patrolling them many hours, teachers are also the ones who continue to pursue higher education, continue to adapt to crappier student preparedness, continue to evolve to the changing demands of the world around them. In short, teachers are the ones of the lot most liable to get any sympathy from the average Joe.

    Why don't we see the fat guys in their stained DPW t-shirts in front of the camera proclaiming how they're underpaid?

    As an aside to liteman's rants about Walker, file it under the category of "Good grief, look how awful our choices have become." The Democrat contender was ready to stamp the status quo and push the budget debacle on down the line. That trick has lost its luster. Walker has far too many "good ole boy" moments on his resume for my taste, but by gosh he beat the alternative.

  11. #86
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In a House
    Posts
    968

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by myv65 View Post
    baghdad bob's post above reminded of another observation regarding the circus in Wisconsin right now. Walker's move affects all public unions with three exceptions (police, fire, ??? I don't recall at the moment). So in addition to teachers, it's gonna hit public works, cleaning staff, secretaries, etc.

    Why is it that the only ones getting any attention are the teachers?

    I'll give you my answer, and why bb's post reminded me of it. When it comes to public union employees, the "work" they do hasn't changed a whole heckuva lot over the years. Other than teachers, they're still driving the same salt trucks, still operating the same water and wastewater treatment plants, still pushing the same mop bucket, and still filing paperwork in the same file cabinets.

    Much like the autoworkers, whose jobs disappeared from Janesville, WI without a whimper from the public union folks, there isn't much sympathy out of the average Joe when a guy spends his "career" driving a snow plow and is able to retire with full benefits at 55.

    Wages have stagnated? Well yeah, but so has the work. I know I'm generalizing here, and I get it that technology has worked its way into some of these jobs, sometimes in a big way. Believe me, with what I do for a living I really get that part.

    With the exception of teachers, the job description for many of the remaining public union employees really hasn't changed. In many cases, there are fewer of them required to do the same job, as automation plays an increasing role, but that same automation reduces jobs that used to be 50% up and about to 90% sitting in a chair driving a screen.

    So aside from the obvious that teachers have our kids and are responsible for patrolling them many hours, teachers are also the ones who continue to pursue higher education, continue to adapt to crappier student preparedness, continue to evolve to the changing demands of the world around them. In short, teachers are the ones of the lot most liable to get any sympathy from the average Joe.

    Why don't we see the fat guys in their stained DPW t-shirts in front of the camera proclaiming how they're underpaid?

    As an aside to liteman's rants about Walker, file it under the category of "Good grief, look how awful our choices have become." The Democrat contender was ready to stamp the status quo and push the budget debacle on down the line. That trick has lost its luster. Walker has far too many "good ole boy" moments on his resume for my taste, but by gosh he beat the alternative.
    Great post! The reason I'm pointing out Walker's shortcomings is that he's the usual career politician, with a proven failed track record.

    They should've found someone much better to run. Totally agree with the no choice thing to a degree, they didn't have to run this clown.
    Last edited by liteman; 02-22-2011 at 04:51 PM.
    Fox News watchers are less informed - The Proof

    I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
    - Thomas Jefferson

  12. #87
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    41
    Posts
    6,498

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by myv65 View Post
    baghdad bob's post above reminded of another observation regarding the circus in Wisconsin right now. Walker's move affects all public unions with three exceptions (police, fire, ??? I don't recall at the moment). So in addition to teachers, it's gonna hit public works, cleaning staff, secretaries, etc.

    Why is it that the only ones getting any attention are the teachers?

    I'll give you my answer, and why bb's post reminded me of it. When it comes to public union employees, the "work" they do hasn't changed a whole heckuva lot over the years. Other than teachers, they're still driving the same salt trucks, still operating the same water and wastewater treatment plants, still pushing the same mop bucket, and still filing paperwork in the same file cabinets.

    Much like the autoworkers, whose jobs disappeared from Janesville, WI without a whimper from the public union folks, there isn't much sympathy out of the average Joe when a guy spends his "career" driving a snow plow and is able to retire with full benefits at 55.

    Wages have stagnated? Well yeah, but so has the work. I know I'm generalizing here, and I get it that technology has worked its way into some of these jobs, sometimes in a big way. Believe me, with what I do for a living I really get that part.

    With the exception of teachers, the job description for many of the remaining public union employees really hasn't changed. In many cases, there are fewer of them required to do the same job, as automation plays an increasing role, but that same automation reduces jobs that used to be 50% up and about to 90% sitting in a chair driving a screen.

    So aside from the obvious that teachers have our kids and are responsible for patrolling them many hours, teachers are also the ones who continue to pursue higher education, continue to adapt to crappier student preparedness, continue to evolve to the changing demands of the world around them. In short, teachers are the ones of the lot most liable to get any sympathy from the average Joe.

    Why don't we see the fat guys in their stained DPW t-shirts in front of the camera proclaiming how they're underpaid?

    As an aside to liteman's rants about Walker, file it under the category of "Good grief, look how awful our choices have become." The Democrat contender was ready to stamp the status quo and push the budget debacle on down the line. That trick has lost its luster. Walker has far too many "good ole boy" moments on his resume for my taste, but by gosh he beat the alternative.
    Its good to have you back myv65

    While the work has remained the same, the pay has remained the same, and the cost of everything else goes up. That's the problem.

    The stats in BB's article pretty much gives 30 years of history and proof to what I have been saying, and throws the anti-union argument in the trash.

  13. #88
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,287

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by baghdad bob View Post
    I love articles like this that miss the root entirely.

    Without collective bargaining pushing up wages, especially for blue-collar work -- average incomes have stagnated.
    The private sector ran like hell from union labor. They figured out long ago that it's financially unsustainable and went elsewhere with their jobs. So the jobs left here are for those with much more education required -or- unskilled labor. If anyone has been waging war on the middle class it's the unions themselves as they have essentially chased all the semi-skilled jobs overseas. Again.. be sure to thank a union when making those "class warfare" arguments.

    The pooblic sector is learning the same lessons. Gubberment does not need to turn a profit to stay in business. So it makes sense it took a lil longer to out the union ferrets. Now that people (taxpayers) are seeing what the unions have wrought.. they want them reeled back to reality also.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  14. #89
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,287

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    FDR..

    Text of FDR Letter Opposing Public Employee (Government) Unions

    Franklin Delano Roosevelt, like the overwhelming majority of Americans today, opposed public sector unions.

    See below the full text of FDR's letter to Luther C. Steward, President of the National Federation of Federal Employees, of August 16, 1937.

    My dear Mr. Steward:
    As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

    Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

    The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

    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.

    Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees.
    Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

    I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful.

    Very sincerely yours,

    [To] Mr. Luther C. Steward, President, National Federation of Federal Employees, 10 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.
    Source: John T. Woolley and Gerhard Peters, The American Presidency Project, Santa Barbara, California.

    For sticklers, I found alternative sources for the key paragraphs of this letter:

    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.
    Source: "A Handbook for Your Information," Miscellaneous Publication No. 532, October 1943, Rev. March 1947, Department of Personnel, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Government Printing Office. See Appendix II, citing a 1943 memo issued by the then Secretary of Agriculture (accessed via Google Books)

    Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of pubic employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.
    Source: Hearings of U.S. House Committee on Education, 1972, page 543 (accessed via Google Books)
    Seeing as the most oft used excuse of the left for the rights opposition to their agenda is "hate"(obviously we cannot dislike a position by employing logic and not like them on it's merits or lack thereof)... I eagerly await a rationale as to what a "hater" this dude is.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #90
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,889

    Re: Unions Federal, State & whats left of the private sector...

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    Its good to have you back myv65

    While the work has remained the same, the pay has remained the same, and the cost of everything else goes up. That's the problem.

    The stats in BB's article pretty much gives 30 years of history and proof to what I have been saying, and throws the anti-union argument in the trash.
    But that's just it BD, the numbers are inflation adjusted. Sure, you can get into a whole new thread arguing what really constitutes the cost of living but the bottom line is that the union folks have all been buying big screen TVs and SUVs and more house than they need, just like the rest of us non-union types.

    How quickly we've become a society where folks believe a smartphone, cable TV, and a shiny new car are "rights" of some sort.

    I think the stats bb posted beg the question. Why should we be paying these people (inflation adjusted) more than in the past? And don't mistake my point here, I think the question applies universally. If you're not doing something to make our standard of living rise, why should yours rise?

    Folks are gonna think I'm harsh here, but to my eye the low wages offered to pick up garbage are one of the greatest incentives to further your education and make yourself more valuable. Until the wages for that work get to the point that we can't employ people to do the job, I say we're probably paying too much.

    When we artificially prop up those wages, are we really, really doing a service to the guys picking up trash? I think it's little better than entitlement programs that give "just enough" to string people along through life as opposed to genuinely improving their lot by making them better people.

    The quandry is that, for the foreseeable future, we *need* trash collectors, and snow plow drivers, and people to stand around 8 hours a day holding a sign that says "slow - workers ahead". Fine, but if you choose to do something so mindless I don't feel compelled to pay you enough to upgrade your life.

    The other quandry, to me, is that teachers have thrown in their lot with people who stand around 8 hours (sometimes 12 ) holding that stupid sign. I want our teachers to enjoy greater returns for producing greater results. I want to cull the lousy teachers from the herd. We can't do either one. Right or wrong, the remedy at hand is to crush the teacher's union right along with all the others.

    Perhaps most frustrating of all, I look at the guys driving snow plows and I see guys who *could* do many other things. Whether they sloughed off in school, or had a broken family, or any other of the difficulties of youth I don't know. I just think it's waaaayyyyyy too late when they've committed to driving that truck til 55 to try getting them onto a more productive and fruitful path. And it drives me nuts that we have made underachievement such an institution. Rather than bluntly saying, "You know what, our biggest single problem is people bringing kids into this world not just without a clue of how to raise them, but without any intention of attempting to raise them." Fix the schools? You've got to be kidding me.

    I've got to be careful what I write here, because my spouse works in the educational system. The stories I hear make me sick. A single parent released from prison take all but one of her multiple kids back from a foster home. How do you explain to an 8 y/o why her crack head mom doesn't want them back, but took all your siblings? How do you explain that if that 8 y/o survives the immediate distress, they'll actually have a much better chance than any of their siblings? What do you do when kids say, "Mom told me to act up in class so she could get disability for me"? It's truly mind boggling.

    I know I've strayed a fair bit from the initial topic, but in my mind's eye these things are all tied together in a tenuous way. We have got to get serious about the cultural tail spin that exists in this country. School "reform" is a misguided joke, at best, and a diversion from the real problem. I see this union debate similarly. They've focused on the teachers, because the *good* ones truly are underappreciated and underpaid. They're also far from the majority of those who would be impacted by this legislation, and it's the plow drivers and mop bucket pushers sitting in the shadows who really have my ire. We ought to be discussing the *real* problems and not chasing after the fluff.
    Last edited by myv65; 02-22-2011 at 05:47 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •