PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsin, change



John Smith
03-09-2011, 07:11 PM
It seems the republicans in Wisconsin finally realized that by taking the collective bargaining part out of the buget bill they don't need the same quorum. By the time you read this, that language will have been voted on, and passed, separately, and collective bargaining for public employees in Wisconsin will be a thing of the past.

I hope this will fuel, rather than extinquish recall efforts in that state.

Ian McColgin
03-09-2011, 07:55 PM
It's a scheme to get them back, rather like the scheme that worked to get Lincoln back in the legislature occasioning his famous failed effort to break the quorum by leaping out a window.

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 09:00 PM
Well it has been done. 18 minutes worth. One thing disturbing is I had to get the info from a Chicago paper as the state and locals here are lacking in reporter efficiency.

Phillip Allen
03-09-2011, 09:11 PM
this IS funny...sport AWOLing

Hot Air
03-09-2011, 09:37 PM
Maddow is a little grumpy tonight.

Rich Jones
03-09-2011, 09:43 PM
Walker had best enjoy his first term as governor, because he won't get a second. Unions from around the country will rally to CRUSH him in the next election. At least Obama, with his passing of Health Care reform over the objections of the GOP, did it with honor. He didn't resort to some slick lawyers trick to slip it past the way Walker has done.
Question: Are the teachers now, having all their rights taken from them by this over zealous governor, free to strike?

BrianW
03-09-2011, 09:50 PM
Walker had best enjoy his first term as governor, because he won't get a second. Unions from around the country will rally to CRUSH him in the next election. At least Obama, with his passing of Health Care reform over the objections of the GOP, did it with honor. He didn't resort to some slick lawyers trick to slip it past the way Walker has done.
Question: Are the teachers now, having all their rights taken from them by this over zealous governor, free to strike?

Well, I'm not concerned with Walker, but I am amazed that someone could take Democrat legislators running away to curtail legislative process, and turn that into a governor being slick. Getting dizzy from all that spin.

If the democrats had been there in the first place, they wouldn't have missed the last vote. :D

Phillip Allen
03-09-2011, 09:55 PM
Well, I'm not concerned with Walker, but I am amazed that someone could take Democrat legislators running away to curtail legislative process, and turn that into a governor being slick. Getting dizzy from all that spin.

If the democrats had been there in the first place, they wouldn't have missed the last vote. :D
I reckon someone must have yelled KING'S X and no one paid any attention..."not MY fault" :)

when divisiveness enters politics...the people get screwed...

Is it possible that the "rank and file" of the constituents wanted it this way?

botebum
03-09-2011, 09:56 PM
Question: Are the teachers now, having all their rights taken from them by this over zealous governor, free to strike?In a sense, yes. They are still "free Americans" and can choose, as a group, to walk out. Where the Guv' would find replacements and uphold the educational system of the state is up for debate. It is possible that he could arrest them all for endangering the security of the state or some such hogwash but it'd be a hell of a lot of fun to watch.
I really kinda' hope they walk. I don't make much but I could scrape up a few bucks to help feed them while they fight.
Doug

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 10:15 PM
In Wisconsin state employees are not allowed to strike, work slow down or sick out. Teachers won't be going anywhere. They all have to eat and pay bills like the rest of us.
Walker had best enjoy his first term as governor, because he won't get a second. Unions from around the country will rally to CRUSH him in the next election. At least Obama, with his passing of Health Care reform over the objections of the GOP, did it with honor. He didn't resort to some slick lawyers trick to slip it past the way Walker has done.
Question: Are the teachers now, having all their rights taken from them by this over zealous governor, free to strike?

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 10:19 PM
Well, I'm not concerned with Walker, but I am amazed that someone could take Democrat legislators running away to curtail legislative process, and turn that into a governor being slick. Getting dizzy from all that spin.

I'm not amazed at all. I see it every day.

If the democrats had been there in the first place, they wouldn't have missed the last vote. :D
There are rumours that many tried to go back to debate when they heard what was happening. Kinda hard to get to Madison From Illinois in less tha 20 minutes though.

botebum
03-09-2011, 10:19 PM
In Wisconsin state employees are not allowed to strike, work slow down or sick out. Or else What? How many jail cells have you got available for teachers that choose to strike?

Doug

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 10:27 PM
Well Doug if they strike they get fired. Not trying like most to blanket all teachers or state workers but have a look at the wages I posted for my district on this thread http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?127991-Wisconsin-teachers-seem-to-be-reading-from-the-teabaggers-play-book.-.-.-.-. and tell me what you think. There are elementary gym teachers taking home those wages and benefits here as well. Not to mention that a graduate from high school in this district cannot get into the U of W because they can't get the required courses here.
Or else What? How many jail cells have you got available for teachers that choose to strike?

Doug

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 10:28 PM
This guy could be a BilgeRat!
Just don't expect him to pay for dinner.

botebum
03-09-2011, 10:41 PM
Well Doug if they strike they get fired. Not trying like most to blanket all teachers or state workers but have a look at the wages I posted for my district on this thread http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?127991-Wisconsin-teachers-seem-to-be-reading-from-the-teabaggers-play-book.-.-.-.-. and tell me what you think. There are elementary gym teachers taking home those wages and benefits here as well. Not to mention that a graduate from high school in this district cannot get into the U of W because they can't get the required courses here.Yeah, I say you should fire the lot of them and then blame them for your kids being stupid.
I won't go into the justifications for state employees salaries and benefits as most of the reasons have alredy been stated on this thread and others. Longevity, qualification, retention, etc.
Screw all the reasons. Fire your teachers. I'm sure teachers from other states will flock to your state to give up their rights and be treated like scum.
Wisconsin will be proud to be the first all home-schooled state ... and the dumbest.

Doug

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 10:51 PM
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. You asked a question and I answered it. If that makes you angry, well then you're angry. Nothing I can do about that. You also don't have to justify shyte all to me Doug. I'm one of those state employees and stand to lose some as well. I just don't cotton to the way things are being done. There is a process for fighting this. It's called voting and recalls. It's not screaming fascist and nazi in your coworkers face or running away to avoid the hard parts. At one time this was a fairly civilized state. Pity that is no longer the case.
Yeah, I say you should fire the lot of them and then blame them for your kids being stupid.
I won't go into the justifications for state employees salaries and benefits as most of the reasons have alredy been stated on this thread and others. Longevity, qualification, retention, etc.
Screw all the reasons. Fire your teachers. I'm sure teachers from other states will flock to your state to give up their rights and be treated like scum.
Wisconsin will be proud to be the first all home-schooled state ... and the dumbest.

Doug

L.W. Baxter
03-09-2011, 11:26 PM
Keen posts, Iceboy. Thanks for taking the time.

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 11:38 PM
Keen posts, Iceboy. Thanks for taking the time.

My pleasure. I really do try not to post any misinformation on this subject and enjoy a good conversation. I hope folks don't think Wisconsin is all shouting and backstabbing. For the most part we are very polite and civilized here. You know Ed Gein, Jeffery Dahmer and all that:)

Besides that I've been out sick this week so I'm bored silly. I really do want to go back to work in spite of all the madness.

Phillip Allen
03-09-2011, 11:47 PM
someone please tell boatbum that being stupid has nothing to do with education...I don't think he will listen to me

Phillip Allen
03-09-2011, 11:48 PM
Yeah, I say you should fire the lot of them and then blame them for your kids being stupid.
I won't go into the justifications for state employees salaries and benefits as most of the reasons have alredy been stated on this thread and others. Longevity, qualification, retention, etc.
Screw all the reasons. Fire your teachers. I'm sure teachers from other states will flock to your state to give up their rights and be treated like scum.
Wisconsin will be proud to be the first all home-schooled state ... and the dumbest.

Doug

what is this "scum" business...some sort of "either/or" thing?

Dave Wright
03-09-2011, 11:50 PM
I'm a former Wisconsin resident and I'd forgoten all about Ed Gein. Since this is the bilge and it stinks, might as well catalog his exploits:

(from Wikipedia)

Searching the house, authorities found:

Four noses
Whole human bones and fragments
Nine masks of human skin
Bowls made from human skulls
Ten female heads with the tops sawn off
Human skin covering several chair seats
Mary Hogan's head in a paper bag
Bernice Worden's head in a burlap sack
Nine vulvas in a shoe box
Skulls on his bedposts
Organs in the refrigerator
A pair of lips on a draw string for a windowshade
A belt made from human female nipples
A lampshade made from the skin from a human face
These artifacts were photographed at the crime lab and then were properly destroyed..

Phillip Allen
03-09-2011, 11:52 PM
damn! now I gotta look that up!

Iceboy
03-09-2011, 11:57 PM
Yeah, Plainfield is just down the road from here. And to think the locals liked to have old Ed babysit for them. Think any of those kids have night terrors? Also telling Ed jokes in a Plainfield bar will get you ass kicked fairly quick as more than a few students here have found over the years.
I'm a former Wisconsin resident and I'd forgoten all about Ed Gein. Since this is the bilge and it stinks, might as well catalog his exploits:

(from Wikipedia)

Searching the house, authorities found:

Four noses
Whole human bones and fragments
Nine masks of human skin
Bowls made from human skulls
Ten female heads with the tops sawn off
Human skin covering several chair seats
Mary Hogan's head in a paper bag
Bernice Worden's head in a burlap sack
Nine vulvas in a shoe box
Skulls on his bedposts
Organs in the refrigerator
A pair of lips on a draw string for a windowshade
A belt made from human female nipples
A lampshade made from the skin from a human face
These artifacts were photographed at the crime lab and then were properly destroyed..

Waddie
03-10-2011, 05:58 AM
Walker had best enjoy his first term as governor, because he won't get a second. Unions from around the country will rally to CRUSH him in the next election. At least Obama, with his passing of Health Care reform over the objections of the GOP, did it with honor. He didn't resort to some slick lawyers trick to slip it past the way Walker has done.
Question: Are the teachers now, having all their rights taken from them by this over zealous governor, free to strike?

I seem to remember Pelosi telling Republicans that they should pass the health care bill if they wanted to read it.

Weren't all those "special" deals given to a few favored states made behind closed doors without the Republicans?

If the Democrats want to get the guy who took away bargaining rights, they better man up---about 20 states have already done it or have it in the works .. :)

I actually have no idea how bargaining rights effects fiscal policy, so I don't know who's right or wrong on this issue. I'm just pointing out that the Democrats have their little games to play, too....:)

regards,
Waddie

Waddie
03-10-2011, 06:46 AM
Originally posted by Pugwash;
Might help you work a few things out.

I get what you're saying. Only Republican states, who receive money, are trying to dismantle bargaining rights. I understand the politics of it. What I don't understand is what do union bargaining rights have to do with fiscal policy? As I understand it, the unions can still bargain for wages, just no longer for fringe benefits. Is this correct? How does it help the state in any meaningful way if they still have to deal with the union over wages---if I'm even correct on that? Is this big fight even worth it, from the states perspective?

BTW, This is an honest question, I'm not trying to be a smartaleck or anything.

regards,
Waddie

John Smith
03-10-2011, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by Pugwash;

I get what you're saying. Only Republican states, who receive money, are trying to dismantle bargaining rights. I understand the politics of it. What I don't understand is what do union bargaining rights have to do with fiscal policy? As I understand it, the unions can still bargain for wages, just no longer for fringe benefits. Is this correct? How does it help the state in any meaningful way if they still have to deal with the union over wages---if I'm even correct on that? Is this big fight even worth it, from the states perspective?

BTW, This is an honest question, I'm not trying to be a smartaleck or anything.

regards,
WaddieMaynard G. Crebbs once said, "They may have won the battle, but they haven't lost the war."

It is obvious, or it should be, to everyone in this country who punches a time clock that the republicans of today are not your grandfather's republican party. They are not only not your friend, but they are your enemy. For those who haven't realized this, what happened in Wisconsin last night, along with what is happening in Michigan, need to be construed as a declaration of war on the people, our laws, and our constitution.

Consider, as I posted when this particular battle began, they could have never put this language in the budget bill, and they could have passed it through proper procedures; they had the votes. Now they are on record as saying, hell, arguing, that this is fiscal in nature.

I don't know what the rest here will do, but I am going to committ $10 a month out of my extremely tight budget to at least one organization fighting for the working people. I will join rallies near me every time I can.

Does anyone out there still want to tell me there's no diffeence today between the two parties? This is not the party of Lincoln. This is not your grandfather's republican party. This republican party is an arm of the religious right and the corporate wealthy. If we, the people, lose this war, we will have lost our country. They will not have taken it back, just taken it.

Ian McColgin
03-10-2011, 07:53 AM
Firstly, I hope that workers heed the Democratic legislators who are calling out against a general strike.

Secondly, while I don't generally favor court solutions over political solutions since the court solution can feel to the loser like cheating, there are a number of legal problems with this law and its passage that should be settled. For example, the name on the bill might make the whole thing still a budgetary measure. The closing off of debate may pose proceedural issues. We'll see.

Thirdly, what an interesting opportunity for a massive and carefully targeted set of recall elections to change the balance of power and electorally castrate the governor.

Finally, the Koch Brothers Astroturf "American's for Prosperity" campaign is being more and more exposed as a paid front. A series of tough campaigns may further expose the hollowness of that astroturf "populism".

Rich Jones
03-10-2011, 08:27 AM
Let's just hope that the crowds that turn up today won't get violent. Passions are running very high.

Can you imagine the howl that would go up from the Fox pundits if their employer suddenly stripped them of half their contract rights?

wardd
03-10-2011, 08:48 AM
what i see is that walker thought he could pit the public against those fat cat public unions and win in the state house and the court of public opinion,

when that wasn't going too plan they had to hurry up and switch gears before it got any worse than it is

this move on their part is an acknowledgement that the original plan was going down in flames and they are loosing favor

but don't worry about them, they will be taken care of,

Report: Major DC Lobby Firm Throwing Fundraiser For Wisconsin GOP Leaders

On the heels of their 18-1, Democratic Senator-free vote to roll back collective bargaining rights for thousands of state workers, Republican leaders of the Wisconsin state Senate will head to a high-price fundraiser in their honor in DC.

According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel key players in the Wisconsin GOP will gather at the downtown DC headquarters of lobbying firm BGR Group March 16 for an event that donors "are asked to give at least $1,000 to the state Republican Party's federal account" to attend.

It takes $1,000 to get you in the door, but "sponsors" are asked to pony up $2,500 and "hosts" 5,000.

Some of the names on the list of elected Wisconsin Republicans scheduled to attend, according to the Journal Sentinel:

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald of Juneau; Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald of Horicon; Rep. Scott Suder of Abbotsford; Sen. Glenn Grothman of West Bend; and Joint Finance Committee co-chairmen, Sen. Alberta Darling of River Hills and Rep. Robin Vos of Burlington. ... All five Republican congressmen and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson are listed as invited guests.
Wisconsin connections to BGR run deep. The president of government affairs for the firm is Bob Wood, who the paper reports was a "former chief of staff and campaign manager" for former Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson.

The state GOP says the event "was scheduled well before" Gov. Scott Walker's (R) controversial budget was introduced.

"While we'll be doing all we can on various fronts to try to counter some of the millions that national union bosses and Moveon.org are now pumping into the state to influence Wisconsin elections," state GOP Executive Director Mark Jefferson told the paper, "this particular event doesn't really play into it much."

this is class warfare and the people class is loosing

now what passed in michigan makes wisconsin look like small potatoes

Y Bar Ranch
03-10-2011, 08:49 AM
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.

-- FDR

Read more at the American Presidency Project: Franklin D. Roosevelt: Letter on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=15445#ixzz1GCjyGz9Q

Just to remind people...

wardd
03-10-2011, 08:53 AM
Just to remind people...

unionism was in it's infancy and not completely understood

and for all he wanted to do for the country fdr didn't have much in common with the common man, he was from old money.

i bet today his sentiments would be different

would you be dragging up teddy rosevelt as an example on the enviroment?

S.V. Airlie
03-10-2011, 08:57 AM
TR was a republican..I'm surprised you use him as an example.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 09:14 AM
Having recent experience in "the bottom of the barrel" employment wise ( suspending my blissful semi-retirement to earn some epoxy money at minimum wage ) I am not sold on the total popularity of AFSCME and other public employee Unions among the working folks. The Union employees are seen as privileged by many, if not most who go to work with their name on their chest.

Even those at the low paid end of the spectrum who are aware that they actually don't pay any taxes. still have some resentment that that which comes out of their checks is what makes closing the State or County Office they need services from at any pretense of a Holiday they haven't thought about since grade school ( when their Union teachers had the day student free courtesy of their parent's taxes ) .

When you move up the line a bit, retired GM workers ( our plant is long gone ), equipment operators, trades, the whole paradigm shifts radically. Walker is satan, all the WI reds are scum, lada yada dada.

Union folks are more likely to vote than McDonalds grunts according to some pundits, but they are sorely outnumbered.

I've got a sweet deal going on because my wife is in AFSCME, if she was a clerical person in the private sector instead of the State I would be doing something, and I probably couldn't be lazy enough to fark around with kids in restaurants. Might have to learn Ruby on Rails or something.... be the dog of perl once more.. who knows.

All of this has me wondering if my ride on the gravy train is temporary.

I completely understand the viewpoint of those who say this is about stripping workers of their rights. I did saunter around D.C. public housing wearing a badge and a .38. Of course those of us who actually stayed in the proj all day were non union sworn in security guards known as "Special Police" ( think special Ed), but I do understand that certain public employees do put it on the line for the rest of us. Paramedics, Police, Firefighters....

On the other hand, that **** (_insert_descriptor_here_) at DMV that gives out extra attitude for free, just sayin'. Which brings up an interesting point. In Washington D.C., security in the public and assisted housing is provided by private contractors and a few social connections aside is mostly competitive bidding ( or was circa 91-93 when I played ).

Does it make any sense that a minimally skilled clerk working for the city gets better pay and benefits than the SPO who is expected to dance with gangsters?

Then you have my Cousin, just retired as a cop and is working for a County "double dipping". Now if you knew where he worked no sane person could argue that he's not entitled to good things. But the young retirements and double dipped pensions extend far beyond the folks who risk their bacon for fun and profit. First responders? Hell yes! take care of them, give them a pension when they get to the age where they are more valuable somewhere besides "the breech".

But everybody who is a public servant? I just can't see it, even though I am on that teat.

We have those here who will instantly question my sanity, literacy, intelligence, humanity and howl about the "rich" not paying their fair share. I am hesitant to join in that chorus for fear of Karma.

While my humble 1973 Fleetwood manufactured and home brewed shack is certainly a hillbilly "starter" by any standards, I am rich in the eyes of some of my neighbors. So would be many here singing the "rich should pay their share" song. Just a thought.

I am going to have to go with my good friend and colleague Norman on this latest move by the WI legislature. Just one more step in the dance, no better, no worse than the prelude.

Phillip Allen
03-10-2011, 09:34 AM
I scanned a lot of this but it seems that our liberals here are arguing the "slippery slope". If this is what they are doing, I will then remember the derision I was treated with when I argued slippery slope for my own interests... perhaps they should have treated with my slippery slope concerns instead of ridicule them if they wanted me to listen to theirs...

wardd
03-10-2011, 09:34 AM
TR was a republican..I'm surprised you use him as an example.

what are you talking about?

Rich Jones
03-10-2011, 09:37 AM
What gets me is the stunning arrogance of the Wisconsin GOP. Pol after pol after pol showed that the PEOPLE were opposed to this measure. Elected officials are supposed to vote for the PEOPLE, not their own agenda. Yet, these Senators chose to obey their corporate masters and screw the people at whatever cost.
I won't totally defend the Democratic Senators running out of state, but it was the only way to bring this to the publics attention before the GOP could ram it through in midnight sessions.
This will definately paint the whole GOP with the same brush as enemies of the middle class. It could have negative effects for the GOP in the next Presidential election. Certainly gives the Dems some ammunition. (oops! I made a gun reference...)

wardd
03-10-2011, 09:41 AM
Having recent experience in "the bottom of the barrel" employment wise ( suspending my blissful semi-retirement to earn some epoxy money at minimum wage ) I am not sold on the total popularity of AFSCME and other public employee Unions among the working folks. The Union employees are seen as privileged by many, if not most who go to work with their name on their chest.

Even those at the low paid end of the spectrum who are aware that they actually don't pay any taxes. still have some resentment that that which comes out of their checks is what makes closing the State or County Office they need services from at any pretense of a Holiday they haven't thought about since grade school ( when their Union teachers had the day student free courtesy of their parent's taxes ) .

When you move up the line a bit, retired GM workers ( our plant is long gone ), equipment operators, trades, the whole paradigm shifts radically. Walker is satan, all the WI reds are scum, lada yada dada.

Union folks are more likely to vote than McDonalds grunts according to some pundits, but they are sorely outnumbered.

I've got a sweet deal going on because my wife is in AFSCME, if she was a clerical person in the private sector instead of the State I would be doing something, and I probably couldn't be lazy enough to fark around with kids in restaurants. Might have to learn Ruby on Rails or something.... be the dog of perl once more.. who knows.

All of this has me wondering if my ride on the gravy train is temporary.

I completely understand the viewpoint of those who say this is about stripping workers of their rights. I did saunter around D.C. public housing wearing a badge and a .38. Of course those of us who actually stayed in the proj all day were non union sworn in security guards known as "Special Police" ( think special Ed), but I do understand that certain public employees do put it on the line for the rest of us. Paramedics, Police, Firefighters....

On the other hand, that **** (_insert_descriptor_here_) at DMV that gives out extra attitude for free, just sayin'. Which brings up an interesting point. In Washington D.C., security in the public and assisted housing is provided by private contractors and a few social connections aside is mostly competitive bidding ( or was circa 91-93 when I played ).

Does it make any sense that a minimally skilled clerk working for the city gets better pay and benefits than the SPO who is expected to dance with gangsters?

Then you have my Cousin, just retired as a cop and is working for a County "double dipping". Now if you knew where he worked no sane person could argue that he's not entitled to good things. But the young retirements and double dipped pensions extend far beyond the folks who risk their bacon for fun and profit. First responders? Hell yes! take care of them, give them a pension when they get to the age where they are more valuable somewhere besides "the breech".

But everybody who is a public servant? I just can't see it, even though I am on that teat.

We have those here who will instantly question my sanity, literacy, intelligence, humanity and howl about the "rich" not paying their fair share. I am hesitant to join in that chorus for fear of Karma.

While my humble 1973 Fleetwood manufactured and home brewed shack is certainly a hillbilly "starter" by any standards, I am rich in the eyes of some of my neighbors. So would be many here singing the "rich should pay their share" song. Just a thought.

I am going to have to go with my good friend and colleague Norman on this latest move by the WI legislature. Just one more step in the dance, no better, no worse than the prelude.

there was a time when unions were common and a large percentage of workers belonged to one.

living standards were much better than now and one earner households were common

since the unions have been diminished in their influence the middle class has all but disappeared

but let's not protest the monied class from finishing the job

Phillip Allen
03-10-2011, 09:46 AM
there was a time when unions were common and a large percentage of workers belonged to one.

living standards were much better than now and one earner households were common

since the unions have been diminished in their influence the middle class has all but disappeared

but let's not protest the monied class from finishing the job
your cause and effect comparisons are way off

wardd
03-10-2011, 09:52 AM
your cause and effect comparisons are way off

and your point of view is?

Phillip Allen
03-10-2011, 10:04 AM
when unions were ascendant...living conditions were more like the "Honeymooners"
when your unions were ascendant...50 years ago, low end wages were a dollar an hour...many, many families had no vehicle at all and certainly not two
yes, there were one earner households...misogyny was dominant in the work place
middle class and unions are apples and oranges comparison
as to the monied class...you just made the argument that with unions ascendant that union workers were the monied class...(implied)

perldog007
03-10-2011, 10:15 AM
there was a time when unions were common and a large percentage of workers belonged to one.

living standards were much better than now and one earner households were common

since the unions have been diminished in their influence the middle class has all but disappeared

but let's not protest the monied class from finishing the job

What was it J.R. was always saying? "Correlation is not Causation". The reds use the same "good old days" schtick.... with the same flawed basis.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 10:16 AM
What gets me is the stunning arrogance of the Wisconsin GOP. Pol after pol after pol showed that the PEOPLE were opposed to this measure. Elected officials are supposed to vote for the PEOPLE, not their own agenda. Yet, these Senators chose to obey their corporate masters and screw the people at whatever cost.
I won't totally defend the Democratic Senators running out of state, but it was the only way to bring this to the publics attention before the GOP could ram it through in midnight sessions.
This will definately paint the whole GOP with the same brush as enemies of the middle class. It could have negative effects for the GOP in the next Presidential election. Certainly gives the Dems some ammunition. (oops! I made a gun reference...)

Remind you of the "Affordable" Health Care Act? Hell, it's so popular the the exemptions now number over 1000 and include the state of Maine, don't they?

wardd
03-10-2011, 10:22 AM
when unions were ascendant...living conditions were more like the "Honeymooners"
when your unions were ascendant...50 years ago, low end wages were a dollar an hour...many, many families had no vehicle at all and certainly not two
yes, there were one earner households...misogyny was dominant in the work place
middle class and unions are apples and oranges comparison
as to the monied class...you just made the argument that with unions ascendant that union workers were the monied class...(implied)

yes it was a different time and work wasn't denigrated

banking was a smaller slice of the economy and income disparities were not as great

one had the expectation if one wanted to work that one had job security

now financing and financial instruments are the biggest slice of the economy

now people are buying and selling stocks of companies that they have no idea what they do

buying and selling financial instruments they don't understand

the exchanges are run by computers that can buy and sell in milliseconds

it's becoming a world with no place for the common people

i see the world becoming more and more like that depicted in robocop

RonW
03-10-2011, 10:28 AM
This might be a interesting and informative read...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704132204576190260787805984.html?m od=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion


In 2010, Megan Sampson was named an Outstanding First Year Teacher in Wisconsin. A week later, she got a layoff notice from the Milwaukee Public Schools. Why would one of the best new teachers in the state be one of the first let go? Because her collective-bargaining contract requires staffing decisions to be made based on seniority.

Ms. Sampson got a layoff notice because the union leadership would not accept reasonable changes to their contract. Instead, they hid behind a collective-bargaining agreement that costs the taxpayers $101,091 per year for each teacher, protects a 0% contribution for health-insurance premiums, and forces schools to hire and fire based on seniority and union rules

Y Bar Ranch
03-10-2011, 10:30 AM
... but I don't fundamentally believe that public employees owe anything different to their employer.... or should expect anything different... than their private workplace counterparts.
Where is the analog on the private union side to the public union taking union dues and using them to influence the choice of who runs the "company" and therefore who they get to negotiate with?

perldog007
03-10-2011, 10:31 AM
Norman, when we agree on stuff the rest of the forum should be driving full speed to the nearest Sam's club and laying in 50lb bags of rice and beans, plenty of. :)

Your post, to me, illustrates the root of the problem completely. Each side will always act only for it's own interests. Republicans are happy to address the evils of Unions, but not the system which accelerates the whole "rich keep getting richer.." thing.

Democrats are only too happy to pass out pitchforks over corporate welfare but they will defend my "right" to sit here on my @$$ trying to figure out what boat to build next while the rest of my neighborhood has to get out there and stock those damn shelves at WalMart, and act like they are pleased as punch that some white collar type was kind enough to complain about the coffee at Qwik-Stop.

We both favor a more equitable system, we do seem to disagree over the best way to get there. It's a start, though.

Edit, private sector employees constantly have to make concessions, concessions that hurt so that their employers can make more money. Why should public servants be any different? Take a google fu session on Mastec, Inc. a DirecTv contractor which has squeezed their installers until you are lucky to get a "technician" who can expound on the difference between a transistor and a transponder.

The DirecTv installers working for Mastech were not asked but REQUIRED to take pay cut after pay cut while the executives and share holders got wealthier

I know you have a technical mind and an understanding of electronics well beyond most who are formally educated in the field. Call up DirecTv and have them send out a technician. Tech-check that person.....

Even in fast food, circa back in the day McDonald's employees got free meals, I did when I worked at Denny's circa '82. Rare to find a corporate store that feeds the help anymore. I know of one Subway in my area that does. The best kid at the one I worked for quit to go there.

Private sector employees are constantly getting squeezed to trim the budget.

Phillip Allen
03-10-2011, 10:32 AM
This might be a interesting and informative read...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704132204576190260787805984.html?m od=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion


an inconvenient truth?

wardd
03-10-2011, 10:38 AM
This might be a interesting and informative read...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704132204576190260787805984.html?m od=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion

every thing can have it's down side

seniority protects workers from arbitrary dismissle when they attain a higher pay level and the younger lower paid kept

it most large organizations line supervision doesn't always have the welfare of the organization at heart but their friends and cronies

one has to look no further than the big banks and wonder why those perpetrating fraud on a massive scale were kept

wardd
03-10-2011, 10:42 AM
Where is the analog on the private union side to the public union taking union dues and using them to influence the choice of who runs the "company" and therefore who they get to negotiate with?

so you want to eliminate the only counter to big money financing elections?

wardd
03-10-2011, 10:46 AM
Thanks for recognizing that I'm not always irrational, and occasionall make a good point :)



The inequities alone are, in my opinion, the biggest long term problem... bigger than the deficit, frankly. The end of WWII saw deficits that make today's budget problems look almost laughable... but it was also an era where income and wealth inequity was far smaller, and the natural growth of the nation created an era of unmatched prosperity, especially for the middle class. We grew our way out of that problem, and the realtively healthy wages paid to all those blue collar workers resulted in enough tax revenues to keep the budget under relatively good control. The secret to escaping this trap is job growth; putting money in the hands of consumers, resulting in far higher domestic demand, which cascades into greater revenues, and so forth.

The Republican solution of drastic austerity, in my opinion, is the bass ackwards way of going about it. Dumping perhaps a half a million jobs over the next year is NOT going to get investment and entrepeneurship to grow. My own struggling startup will be dead if the customers don't have the money to buy my product. It's the perfect prescription for KILLING recovery.

but norman, you're not too big to fail, in fact you're too small to succeed

perldog007
03-10-2011, 10:49 AM
I agree that the oligarchy is a bigger problem than the deficit, I don't believe the debt to GDP ration is harmless but that's just a belief. The fact that the separation between working people and the executives is increasing year by year is just that, A FACT.

To really understand how bad the problem is, you wooden boat types have to think about all the kids in my neighborhood who are lucky to get to the bank of a pond considering me in my Bolger box a wealthy yachtsman of some sort....

I would hazard a guess that most present here wouldn't want to enter my house unless the neighborhood "welcome wagon" scared them out of the yard and they lacked a conveyance to exit the area entirely. But I'm well off all up in my hood.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 10:54 AM
Norman, I'm glad you decided to join in here this morning. You are making some valid points here and keeping it civil. The way I see this last development is as another tactic to get the 14 to do their jobs as they were elected to do. Sure they are some crappy tactics but those same tactics were used in this state in the past by the opposing team. As I have said here before, there is a process for dealing with this through elections and recalls. Those processes work for both sides. Running off, even if it supposedly just delays things is just wrong in my opinion. All of this posturing and shouting and name calling is counterproductive and both sides here are doing a great disservice to the residents of Wisconsin.

wardd
03-10-2011, 10:55 AM
there are people willing to work and produce

there are factories and places of work for those workers

there are people that would like to buy those products and services if they had the means

did i miss anything?

RonW
03-10-2011, 10:57 AM
The deficit spending effects everyone and everything in the economy..This is part of the reason all these states are in red ink ..
Now where are they going to get the money to once again be whole...I know from the rich...
The big banks already failed, that was part of the wall street bailout..
Now the states need bailed out..
And the public service unions say we ain't going to take a pay cut..so there you have it..

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 11:01 AM
This might be a interesting and informative read...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704132204576190260787805984.html?m od=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion
Thank you for that article Ron. This is a major problem in my district as well. I have actually been told recently by a teacher in this district "I don't care what they do or how many they lay off. They won't touch me because I have been here too long. In fact I could just sit around here and do nothing until I retire with no repercussions". Needless to say as soon as I got away from him I was on the phone to the superintendent of the district and my local school board member. Their reply was "we know it isn't fair but it is true under the current labor rules" Now how about that?

wardd
03-10-2011, 11:01 AM
The deficit spending effects everyone and everything in the economy..This is part of the reason all these states are in red ink ..
Now where are they going to get the money to once again be whole...I know from the rich...
The big banks already failed, that was part of the wall street bailout..
Now the states need bailed out..
And the public service unions say we ain't going to take a pay cut..so there you have it..

so the common people suffer while the rich get to count their millions and billions

how many billions do you need until it become meaningless?

perldog007
03-10-2011, 11:05 AM
so the common people suffer while the rich get to count their millions and billions

how many billions do you need until it become meaningless?

Pay attention, the union members are rich compared to the rank and file clock puncher.

RonW
03-10-2011, 11:07 AM
Wardd...I don't know...I often wondered the same thing. quite frankly I would be happy with maybe a couple mill..

Iceboy...I was in madison last fall, great place to get cheese curds and the best beef sticks and summer sausage..
A little meat market up towards the reservation..

My girlfriend is from wisconsin and all her family lives there, so she has been watching and talking to her family..
The basic thought is these 14 dems that ran out is childish as hell and a lot of false info is being put out by the left such as ed schultz and rahael maddow..

wardd
03-10-2011, 11:10 AM
Pay attention, the union members are rich compared to the rank and file clock puncher.

i'm all for the rank and file clock punchers belonging to unions too

as i was there most of my working life

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 11:25 AM
Glad you liked it here Ron. It really is a nice place to live despite all of this controversy. Next time try to venture north a bit more. You can skip Wisconsin Dells though. Amusement parks are the same wherever they are.
Wardd...I don't know...I often wondered the same thing. quite frankly I would be happy with maybe a couple mill..

Iceboy...I was in madison last fall, great place to get cheese curds and the best beef sticks and summer sausage..
A little meat market up towards the reservation..

My girlfriend is from wisconsin and all her family lives there, so she has been watching and talking to her family..
The basic thought is these 14 dems that ran out is childish as hell and a lot of false info is being put out by the left such as ed schultz and rahael maddow..

RonW
03-10-2011, 11:27 AM
Well here is a thought for the brain surgeons in the crowd....The average cost to send your kid to a public school is 10K a year, for 1 thru 12.
A low of about 6k I think in utah to a high of about 17K in new jersey.
So you got 3 kids and make the national average of 48k a year..each kid will cost 120k just to get a high school diploma, times 3 kids = $360k for your kids to graduate..
Now what is wrong with this picture ?

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 11:32 AM
"The voters of Wisconsin are the only ones who gety to decide who has done them a disservice"

And they shall soon enough. I would also like to point out in the interest of being balanced that there are recall efforts against eight of the dems in this as well. There may be enough pissed off voters to make those stick as well.

I think if you read all of my posts that you will find that I don't condone the tactics of either side. Both should stick to the leagal open process.

RonW
03-10-2011, 11:34 AM
Iceboy..
It really is a nice place to live despite all of this controversy.

I don't know about that krapt...her one brother lives further north and told her the other day the total snowfall so far was 60 inches..
I am from w.va. and use to knee deep snow, but I am beginning to understand why all these old folks flock to florida..
O.K. so you get a little hurricane now and then, it still beats 60 inches of snow..
And it might be nice to sip on a cup of coffee and watch the sun comeup on the patio in janurary...

wardd
03-10-2011, 11:41 AM
Well here is a thought for the brain surgeons in the crowd....The average cost to send your kid to a public school is 10K a year, for 1 thru 12.
A low of about 6k I think in utah to a high of about 17K in new jersey.
So you got 3 kids and make the national average of 48k a year..each kid will cost 120k just to get a high school diploma, times 3 kids = $360k for your kids to graduate..
Now what is wrong with this picture ?


what's wrong is you apparently see something wrong

TimH
03-10-2011, 11:53 AM
Where would todays Republicans stand on this?

In the presidential election of 1860 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860), the Republican Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Republican_Party_%28United_States%2 9), led by Abraham Lincoln (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln), had campaigned against the expansion of slavery beyond the states in which it already existed. The Republicans were strong advocates of nationalism and in their 1860 platform explicitly denounced threats of disunion as avowals of treason. After a Republican victory, but before the new administration took office on March 4, 1861, seven cotton states declared their secession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession_in_the_United_States) and joined together to form the Confederate States of America. Both the outgoing administration of President James Buchanan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan) and the incoming administration rejected the legality of secession, considering it rebellion. The other eight slave states rejected calls for secession at this point. No country in the world recognized the Confederacy.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 11:54 AM
Hey, that's 60 inches total for the season. A lot of that disappears during the year. Maybe 8 inches standing on the ground here today and we just got 3 of those yesterday. I actually am sitting on the patio today drinking coffee. Wrapped in a blanket enjoying the sun watching the dogs make yellow snow. I lived in Va for a while. Nice place but too many bugs and other biting creatures for me. Plus back in the day getting good cheeses or beers down there was sketchy at best:)
Iceboy..

I don't know about that krapt...her one brother lives further north and told her the other day the total snowfall so far was 60 inches..
I am from w.va. and use to knee deep snow, but I am beginning to understand why all these old folks flock to florida..
O.K. so you get a little hurricane now and then, it still beats 60 inches of snow..
And it might be nice to sip on a cup of coffee and watch the sun comeup on the patio in janurary...

perldog007
03-10-2011, 12:20 PM
Where would todays Republicans stand on this?

In the presidential election of 1860 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860), the Republican Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Republican_Party_%28United_States%2 9), led by Abraham Lincoln (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln), had campaigned against the expansion of slavery beyond the states in which it already existed. The Republicans were strong advocates of nationalism and in their 1860 platform explicitly denounced threats of disunion as avowals of treason. After a Republican victory, but before the new administration took office on March 4, 1861, seven cotton states declared their secession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession_in_the_United_States) and joined together to form the Confederate States of America. Both the outgoing administration of President James Buchanan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan) and the incoming administration rejected the legality of secession, considering it rebellion. The other eight slave states rejected calls for secession at this point. No country in the world recognized the Confederacy.

Why don't you ask one? I'm sure you can find one somewhere. I found one near me, all up in the hood and just as broke as the rest of us.

blindbrook
03-10-2011, 12:33 PM
Mr. Bernstein and Iceboy, thank you for the balanced reports on the issues this morning. Three things:
1) The Democratic senators have grossly ignored their responsibilities. Rather than leaving and thus shutting the democratic process, they should have stayed, negotiated, and perhaps cut a better deal for their constituents. Democracy is tough for the minority. But the Governor is now simply doing what he said he would do in the election. The voters have spoken. They have a chance to review their satisfaction in the next election. The Democratic senators should pay their fines. They should make public the details of any subsidies they received to support their self imposed exile. And they should be the object of public scorn.
2) The issue of collective bargaining is more complicated than has been routinely discussed in this forum. Per the Governor’s letter in the Wall Street Journal this morning, collective bargaining requires seniority be followed in layoff decisions. This is reason enough to overturn it.
3) I don’t see this as an attack on unions or an issue of class warfare. This is simply an attempt to ratchet back the compensation scheme of a group of workers who seem to have a great deal. The collective bargaining issue makes it harder for the reduction of these benefits to be reinstated. I understand the motive. It is also natural that those affected fight to preserve their compensation/benefits. I understand that. But what is disconcerting here is to allow a group of workers negotiating in their own self interest to transform the discussion into a larger discussion of class war or the destruction of our children’s future. It’s not. It’s an economic cost benefit discussion that should be debated on those terms.
And lastly, can we stop demonizing the Kochs. Sure, they are jerks. As is Soros. What goes around comes around.

John Smith
03-10-2011, 12:38 PM
Looks like both sides have done the usual thing: taking advantage of the 'rules' to try to control the outcome. I can't say that what the Republicans did last night was any more or less noble, or more or less ignoble, than what the Democrats did, in leaving the state.... but I suspect this really isn't over. For one thing, there is apparently pressure on the WI attorney general to consider whether the GOP tactic was legal, according to existing senate rules.

Even if that avenue fails, Walker and the GOP are still going to pay a price for the victory... we just don't know what that price is. Perhaps the price of victory is a resurgence of organized labor, with MORE clashes like this to come. A politician can 'win ugly', which is what has apparently happened... but the ugly win can come back to haunt him and/or his party. One thing is for sure: Walker's pretense of stripping collective bargaining rights in the name of 'fiscal responsibility' is dead as a doornail.

I'd disagree as to the "nobleness" of the two groups. One group acted to save an American right. The other acted to take it away, under false pretenses.

This is just a battle in what promises to be a much larger war. No telling how it will end.

The only thing I'm reasonably certain of is my grandkids will inherit a huge debt and, if the unions are destroyed, lower paying jobs.

John Smith
03-10-2011, 12:42 PM
so you want to eliminate the only counter to big money financing elections?

I'd like to correct what I believe is a misconception. My union used NO dues money for political purposes, with the exception of a phone call or a stamp here or there. We raised, via donations, money with which we pursued political goals.

wardd
03-10-2011, 01:06 PM
Mr. Bernstein and Iceboy, thank you for the balanced reports on the issues this morning. Three things:
1) The Democratic senators have grossly ignored their responsibilities. Rather than leaving and thus shutting the democratic process, they should have stayed, negotiated, and perhaps cut a better deal for their constituents. Democracy is tough for the minority. But the Governor is now simply doing what he said he would do in the election. The voters have spoken. They have a chance to review their satisfaction in the next election. The Democratic senators should pay their fines. They should make public the details of any subsidies they received to support their self imposed exile. And they should be the object of public scorn.
2) The issue of collective bargaining is more complicated than has been routinely discussed in this forum. Per the Governor’s letter in the Wall Street Journal this morning, collective bargaining requires seniority be followed in layoff decisions. This is reason enough to overturn it.
3) I don’t see this as an attack on unions or an issue of class warfare. This is simply an attempt to ratchet back the compensation scheme of a group of workers who seem to have a great deal. The collective bargaining issue makes it harder for the reduction of these benefits to be reinstated. I understand the motive. It is also natural that those affected fight to preserve their compensation/benefits. I understand that. But what is disconcerting here is to allow a group of workers negotiating in their own self interest to transform the discussion into a larger discussion of class war or the destruction of our children’s future. It’s not. It’s an economic cost benefit discussion that should be debated on those terms.
And lastly, can we stop demonizing the Kochs. Sure, they are jerks. As is Soros. What goes around comes around.


had they stayed there would have been a quorum the vote would have been held and the measure passed, and all with no debate

as it is the issue was brought to the public view and debated in the public arena and the voters apparently don't like what happened


leaving was a tactical move on the part of the dems to shed light on this whole affair

in that affect it worked

artman
03-10-2011, 01:10 PM
Funny How the Democrats got Burnt by their own tactics. Everyone can cry wolf and foul all they want. it had to be done. I hope they got a speeding ticket on the way home.

wardd
03-10-2011, 01:12 PM
Funny How the Democrats got Burnt by their own tactics. Everyone can cry wolf and foul all they want. it had to be done. I hope they got a speeding ticket on the way home.

this may turn out to be the best thing that could have happened , maybe the working people will wake up to what is being done to them

wardd
03-10-2011, 01:35 PM
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."
Louis D. Brandeis (Supreme Court Judge)

TimH
03-10-2011, 01:35 PM
ya know. If yo really think about it why should those who arent smart enough to have an MBA or start their own business be allowed to make over minimum wage. Maybe we need a maximum wage for the slackers.

wardd
03-10-2011, 01:39 PM
ya know. If yo really think about it why should those who arent smart enough to have an MBA or start their own business be allowed to make over minimum wage. Maybe we need a maximum wage for the slackers.

not sure of your point

but not one bankster that brought the economy down has suffered for it

wardd
03-10-2011, 01:41 PM
i have this image of some here saying to the robber barons

"ooooh, it feels soooo gooood with your hand in my pocket"

TimH
03-10-2011, 01:51 PM
not sure of your point

but not one bankster that brought the economy down has suffered for it


Well if we want to be one of the haves the best place to start is to quit siding with common folks and start putting them down. Then figure out a way to get their money and take away their rights. Its the American way.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 01:57 PM
ya know. If yo really think about it why should those who arent smart enough to have an MBA or start their own business be allowed to make over minimum wage. Maybe we need a maximum wage for the slackers. Oh! OH! I know! Because minimum wage isn't enough to live on, and people being what they are will take if they can't get what they perceive as their needs any other way.

That's point one. Point two. Evidence in abundance and not far sought supports the notion that intelligence is not an absolute requirement for an advanced degree. Point three, while owning a business is a noble ideal - SOMEBODY has to work for that business. If an employer does not take care of their employees they really shouldn't expect the employees to take care of them.

wardd
03-10-2011, 02:12 PM
it's a brave new world, like 18'th century europe

perldog007
03-10-2011, 02:12 PM
Wow, what a great video... the only words I could think of was 'kangaroo court'.

The protesters are right... those guys should be ASHAMED of themselves!

Be that as it may, there can be no excuse for the protesters not letting people into the Capitol, smashing windows, etc.

TimH
03-10-2011, 02:32 PM
It would be interesting to see what all the people that are against workers rights here in the US think about the happenings in Egypt and Libya.

TimH
03-10-2011, 02:36 PM
Peace is not the answer.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 03:09 PM
I agree. Now tell me what the excuse is for ignoring the state's open meeting law?

The non partisan muckity whomever of the senate has come out and said the rules were followed, that's a position being promoted by the Democrats and if they're right, they're right and the vote has to be nullified, back to square one.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 03:10 PM
Just wish to point out that some vandalism had to occur for people to come in the windows. Politifact Wisconsin reported last week that Capitol maintenance had secured the windows with lag bolts to prevent further dammage to the wood frames from people dragging themselves and other items into the building.
Fox? Breitbart? Or just the Glock forums?



http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/117703343.html

Y Bar Ranch
03-10-2011, 03:11 PM
I agree. Now tell me what the excuse is for ignoring the state's open meeting law?

From WI Senate rules

Senate Rule 93 (2)
(2) A notice of a committee meeting is not required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board, and a bulletin of committee hearings may not be published.

Senate Rule 93 (3)
(3) The daily calendar is in effect immediately upon posting on the legislative bulletin boards. The calendar need not be distributed.

Senate Rule 93 (4)
(4) Any point of order shall be decided within one hour.

From the WI Open Meeting Law


19.87 Legislative meetings.
This subchapter shall apply to all meetings of the senate and assembly and the committees, subcommittees and other subunits thereof, except that:

(1) Section 19.84 shall not apply to any meeting of the legislature or a subunit thereof called solely for the purpose of scheduling business before the legislative body; or adopting resolutions of which the sole purpose is scheduling business before the senate or the assembly.

(2) No provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule.

Senate rules take precedence. No law violated. Google it!

perldog007
03-10-2011, 03:12 PM
Please don't let Derek off the hook like that when he goes into elitist mode, it's more fun to let him wade in a bit further :)

perldog007
03-10-2011, 03:14 PM
From WI Senate rules


From the WI Open Meeting Law



Senate rules take precedence. No law violated. Google it!

You must be new here, let me explain how stuff works. If a democrat says it about republicans and it's bad IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!! Hope that helps :)

wardd
03-10-2011, 03:17 PM
there was a political party in the 1930's that didn't really break the rules,

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 03:23 PM
That was the way I read it this morning Y Bar. Now the nastiness has begun. So much for being peaceful. http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/117738098.html

WI-Tom
03-10-2011, 03:28 PM
Wow--lots of comments. Some of them less than accurate. Here's some information about the legality of last night's move:

Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council weighs in on open meeting controversy
 
On Thursday, March 10, at 10:50 a.m., Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders issued the following statement:
 
I have been asked whether the Wisconsin FOIC has a position on last night's action by the state Legislature. As you know, I am not a lawyer and do not play one on TV. These are difficult issues to parse. But a few points can be made:

The Open Meetings Law, at 19.84(3), states: "Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting."

There is no dispute that yesterday's meeting was not noticed 24 hours in advance and I see no way it could be argued that giving 24 hours notice was "impossible or inpractical," three weeks into a budget stalemate. There is also some question as to whether a full two hours notice was given, in that it was arguably not posted in a location to which media and others have unfettered access. The Assembly Dems say they did were not notified until 4:10 pm, and the Senate meeting purportedly began at 6 pm.

The Senate Chief Clerk, Robert Marchant, has advanced the argument that the notice was sufficient under Senate Rule 93, which holds that the Senate can convene in special session without giving advanced notice. Others have pointed out that this rule pertains to the Senate, whereas last night's meeting was a Joint Committee of Conference, a.k.a. Joint Conference Committee. They say Rule 93 would not apply in such a case.

The councilís position is that, whether or not a viable legal challenge can be brought, this action merits the condemnation of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council as contrary to the spirit, at least, of the Open Meetings Law, as well as to the state's traditions of openness.

We believe the meeting was hastily convened without adequate public notice because the people convening it felt they needed an element of surprise to prevail -- making it precisely the sort of action the state's Open Meetings Law was intended to preclude.
 
Bill Lueders
President, Wisconsin FOIC
(608) 251-5627

John Smith
03-10-2011, 03:29 PM
not sure of your point

but not one bankster that brought the economy down has suffered for it

True, and that contributes to the problem. If the bankers hadn't done their dirty deeds, we wouldn't have all the budget problems we have, although some are created for the sole purpose of busting unions.

John Smith
03-10-2011, 03:31 PM
Be that as it may, there can be no excuse for the protesters not letting people into the Capitol, smashing windows, etc.

What windows?

John Smith
03-10-2011, 03:33 PM
It would be interesting to see what all the people that are against workers rights here in the US think about the happenings in Egypt and Libya.

It's going to be interesting when all these people who are against the things Unions have fought for start losing them; no more holidays, no more vacation time, no more sick time, no more overtime pay, etc. and so on.

John Smith
03-10-2011, 03:38 PM
Wow--lots of comments. Some of them less than accurate. Here's some information about the legality of last night's move:

Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council weighs in on open meeting controversy
 
On Thursday, March 10, at 10:50 a.m., Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders issued the following statement:
 
I have been asked whether the Wisconsin FOIC has a position on last night's action by the state Legislature. As you know, I am not a lawyer and do not play one on TV. These are difficult issues to parse. But a few points can be made:

The Open Meetings Law, at 19.84(3), states: "Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting."

There is no dispute that yesterday's meeting was not noticed 24 hours in advance and I see no way it could be argued that giving 24 hours notice was "impossible or inpractical," three weeks into a budget stalemate. There is also some question as to whether a full two hours notice was given, in that it was arguably not posted in a location to which media and others have unfettered access. The Assembly Dems say they did were not notified until 4:10 pm, and the Senate meeting purportedly began at 6 pm.

The Senate Chief Clerk, Robert Marchant, has advanced the argument that the notice was sufficient under Senate Rule 93, which holds that the Senate can convene in special session without giving advanced notice. Others have pointed out that this rule pertains to the Senate, whereas last night's meeting was a Joint Committee of Conference, a.k.a. Joint Conference Committee. They say Rule 93 would not apply in such a case.

The council’s position is that, whether or not a viable legal challenge can be brought, this action merits the condemnation of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council as contrary to the spirit, at least, of the Open Meetings Law, as well as to the state's traditions of openness.

We believe the meeting was hastily convened without adequate public notice because the people convening it felt they needed an element of surprise to prevail -- making it precisely the sort of action the state's Open Meetings Law was intended to preclude.
 
Bill Lueders
President, Wisconsin FOIC
(608) 251-5627



It appears to me that the open meeting LAW is a LAW, not a rule.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/10/954905/-Wisconsin-legislator-files-complaint-over-Walkers-stealthy-union-busting-vote

Keep an eye on the recall petitions. If the polls are anywhere near accurate, these efforts will be successful.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 03:45 PM
Tom, not that I disagree with you or the content of what you posted. I would like to point out that what you posted is just another opinion. This is going to be settled in the courts for sure.
Wow--lots of comments. Some of them less than accurate. Here's some information about the legality of last night's move:

Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council weighs in on open meeting controversy
 
On Thursday, March 10, at 10:50 a.m., Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders issued the following statement:
 
I have been asked whether the Wisconsin FOIC has a position on last night's action by the state Legislature. As you know, I am not a lawyer and do not play one on TV. These are difficult issues to parse. But a few points can be made:

The Open Meetings Law, at 19.84(3), states: "Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting."

There is no dispute that yesterday's meeting was not noticed 24 hours in advance and I see no way it could be argued that giving 24 hours notice was "impossible or inpractical," three weeks into a budget stalemate. There is also some question as to whether a full two hours notice was given, in that it was arguably not posted in a location to which media and others have unfettered access. The Assembly Dems say they did were not notified until 4:10 pm, and the Senate meeting purportedly began at 6 pm.

The Senate Chief Clerk, Robert Marchant, has advanced the argument that the notice was sufficient under Senate Rule 93, which holds that the Senate can convene in special session without giving advanced notice. Others have pointed out that this rule pertains to the Senate, whereas last night's meeting was a Joint Committee of Conference, a.k.a. Joint Conference Committee. They say Rule 93 would not apply in such a case.

The council’s position is that, whether or not a viable legal challenge can be brought, this action merits the condemnation of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council as contrary to the spirit, at least, of the Open Meetings Law, as well as to the state's traditions of openness.

We believe the meeting was hastily convened without adequate public notice because the people convening it felt they needed an element of surprise to prevail -- making it precisely the sort of action the state's Open Meetings Law was intended to preclude.
 
Bill Lueders
President, Wisconsin FOIC
(608) 251-5627

perldog007
03-10-2011, 03:46 PM
Wonder what Former Speaker Pelosi has to say about this quote from the article linked above, a threat against a WI Republican
“This is how it's going to happen: I as well as many others know where you and your family live, it's a matter of public records. We have all planned to assault (sic) you by arriving at your house and putting a nice little bullet in your head. However, this isn't enough. We also have decided that this may not be enough to send the message. So we have built several bombs that we have placed in various locations around the areas in which we know that you frequent…"


Who ever said this one must be a republican because Eugene Robinson went in front of MSNBC's cameras and said that all the violent rhetoric was coming from the right, and we know that MSNBC is always factual unlike FOX...


"We will hunt you down. We will slit your throats. We will drink your blood. I will have your decapitated head on a pike in the Madison town square. This is your last warning."

There was an election, when the "center" uses obstructionist tactics and violence, threats of violence they are lauded by progressives.

When the tea party peaceably assembles, the same progressives call them dangerous racists. When a left wing ( oops, I mean dope smoking liberal centrist ) nutball shoots a conservative Democrat, progressives try to blame it on Palin. The dishonesty is becoming very transparent.

Don't like what Walker is doing? Fair enough, take him to the polls, that's why we have elections. Running out of state, mobbing legislators, telling a fellow legislator "Your F*****g dead", death threats against lawmakers, Oh yeah, that tea party is a real concern.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 03:48 PM
What windows?
The windows on the first floor of the Capitol. This has already been clarified. Just one more thing John. An honest question. Could you identify what union you belong to that you referenced above? Thank you. Jim..

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 05:08 PM
Update. The state assembly has passed the bill 53-42. 4 Reps voted against, the one independent voted for it.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 05:32 PM
Elitist?

I sure did dun use that thar fancy google machine to search for "Wisconsin protesters break windows", yew know us elitists and ar search engines.

Got absolutely nuffin ceptin for that thar Breitbart fellow and a few nut job fora rantign on about ugly union thugs, just like yu.

;)

I can explain that, as I was watching MSNBC earlier when you posted that. They were covering King's senate hearings, complete with a "Witch Hunt" graphic. They weren't reporting on the unruly crowd once they moved beyond peaceful protest. :D

artman
03-10-2011, 05:43 PM
You know, if this was in reverse and the dems had done this, most of the people bashing the Wisconsin GOP would not have much to say, But becouse the GOP won on this and gave the dem a taste of there own tactics in wisconsin everyone is in uproar. No one heard me and others in the past years when the democratic state senate members in my sweet state did nothing to help the money problems. In fact they voted themselves and others raises when the ship was sinking. Collective bargaining should have been on the table then. But of course the dem gov, and the dem assembly and senate did nothing. The media and the hype have it wrong. The silent majority in this state is fine with what is happening. they are the middle class of this state. Not the union guy crying because he might have to pay his fair share. Most wisconsin people have had to pay their fair share and then some and the average wage of the union workers is higher than the average wisconsin person. I voted for these guys in, and those guys out just for this reason. Bring on change.

wardd
03-10-2011, 05:46 PM
You know, if this was in reverse and the dems had done this, most of the people bashing the Wisconsin GOP would not have much to say, But becouse the GOP won on this and gave the dem a taste of there own tactics in wisconsin everyone is in uproar. No one heard me and others in the past years when the democratic state senate members in my sweet state did nothing to help the money problems. In fact they voted themselves and others raises when the ship was sinking. Collective bargaining should have been on the table then. But of course the dem gov, and the dem assembly and senate did nothing. The media and the hype have it wrong. The silent majority in this state is fine with what is happening. they are the middle class of this state. Not the union guy crying because he might have to pay his fair share. Most wisconsin people have had to pay their fair share and then some and the average wage of the union workers is higher than the average wisconsin person. I voted for these guys in, and those guys out just for this reason. Bring on change.

when you start loosing benefits you have because of what unions fought for you may feel differently

artman
03-10-2011, 05:49 PM
No unions in my past. My employer gives me perks for what i have earned.

TimH
03-10-2011, 05:49 PM
Anyone else notice how the Republicans keep bringing in partisanship as though it is more important than the issue at hand?

artman
03-10-2011, 05:52 PM
we'll see if its a myth. How do you think these people got elected? Because the union didn't run enough attack adds. we had plenty of those last fall. the Myth people put them in there. Including some Union people who decided to think for themselves!

wardd
03-10-2011, 05:54 PM
No unions in my past. My employer gives me perks for what i have earned.

your perks are based on more than your employers good will

they are probably based on the going rate for people in similar jobs

and the less people beneath you on the pay scale make the less it will take to keep you, that's what's in your future

wardd
03-10-2011, 05:55 PM
we'll see if its a myth. How do you think these people got elected? Because the union didn't run enough attack adds. we had plenty of those last fall. the Myth people put them in there. Including some Union people who decided to think for themselves!

in thinking for themselves they seem to have cut their own throats

i wonder if regan dems are having a second think

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 06:19 PM
Regardless of your position Artman. Welcome to the discussion. Though I see it is spiralling downward a bit it has been pretty civilized and educational so far.
You know, if this was in reverse and the dems had done this, most of the people bashing the Wisconsin GOP would not have much to say, But becouse the GOP won on this and gave the dem a taste of there own tactics in wisconsin everyone is in uproar. No one heard me and others in the past years when the democratic state senate members in my sweet state did nothing to help the money problems. In fact they voted themselves and others raises when the ship was sinking. Collective bargaining should have been on the table then. But of course the dem gov, and the dem assembly and senate did nothing. The media and the hype have it wrong. The silent majority in this state is fine with what is happening. they are the middle class of this state. Not the union guy crying because he might have to pay his fair share. Most wisconsin people have had to pay their fair share and then some and the average wage of the union workers is higher than the average wisconsin person. I voted for these guys in, and those guys out just for this reason. Bring on change.

Rich Jones
03-10-2011, 06:29 PM
It's now official. The union members are no longer required to pay union dues. THAT was the main objective of this union busting bill. The GOP is now hoping that union members will turn their backs on the union and give the GOP a huge financial advantage in the next election. The union busting along with that wacky Supreme Court ruling proclaiming that corporations are people might give the GOP an unfair advantage.

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 06:34 PM
Not quite yet. The Governor hasn't signed it yet and I'm sure there will be injunctions from both sides before the courts finalize something.
It's now official. The union members are no longer required to pay union dues. THAT was the main objective of this union busting bill. The GOP is now hoping that union members will turn their backs on the union and give the GOP a huge financial advantage in the next election. The union busting along with that wacky Supreme Court ruling proclaiming that corporations are people might give the GOP an unfair advantage.

perldog007
03-10-2011, 06:56 PM
And that is precisely the point.... trying to claim that the 49% of Wisconsin voters who didn't turn out in the last election, are somehow part of a 'silent majority', is an exercise is utter foolishness.

Well the silent majority is real, but I think Derek has come closer than anyone else in pegging their platform. Beyond being too apathetic to vote, what can we definitively know to be their values?

WI-Tom
03-10-2011, 07:58 PM
what can we definitively know to be their values?

Aren't Pew and other research polls some indication? I think they show well over 60% opposition to the Governor.

As for tactics, I can see some justification for thinking, "The Dems left to prevent quorum, now the Repubs held an illegal meeting", and considering the sides equal in their abuses. On the other hand, it appears that the Republicans' actions last night were ILLEGAL, as minority leader Barca pointed out clearly. The Democrats broke no laws in leaving the state that I know of. It was a relatively unprecedented procedural maneuver--tricky, yes. Illegal, no. (I think).

Also, it seems to me that leaving the state to prevent a quorum and give time for public debate (remember, well over 100,000 of people have now had a chance to voice their disapproval) is different (and FAR more responsible) from rushing an illegal meeting through to suppress debate. Democrat Peter Jauch reports over 4,000 constituents emailing him in support of their flight to Illinois, with only 778 (I think) emailing in support of the Governor.

Meanwhile, last night Republicans didn't provide proper advance notice of a vote, and then wouldn't even give a copy of the proposed bill to the legislators who voted on it! Secrecy usually means someone has something to hide. Openness is a prerequisite of true democracy.

Finally, I'm astounded that the Republicans passed this bill so stupidly. They could have done it legally, with a majority vote. They have really hurt themselves. Their whole anti-union, anti-worker strategy is a huge gamble, winner takes all. But after last night, donations to Democrats have increased so much that the Democratic legislators have joked about giving the Governor their "Mobilizer of the Year" award.

I think the Republicans are done. Some (maybe all 8) within months due to recalls, the Governor in early 2012.

Tom

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 10:16 PM
Aren't Pew and other research polls some indication? I think they show well over 60% opposition to the Governor.

I think they would be some indication if all 60% of them vote. Believe it or not quite a few folks will take polls and then not vote.

As for tactics, I can see some justification for thinking, "The Dems left to prevent quorum, now the Repubs held an illegal meeting", and considering the sides equal in their abuses. On the other hand, it appears that the Republicans' actions last night were ILLEGAL, as minority leader Barca pointed out clearly. The Democrats broke no laws in leaving the state that I know of. It was a relatively unprecedented procedural maneuver--tricky, yes. Illegal, no. (I think).

I can see no justification for either tactic. Whether what happened last night will be a matter for the courts unfortunately.

Also, it seems to me that leaving the state to prevent a quorum and give time for public debate (remember, well over 100,000 of people have now had a chance to voice their disapproval) is different (and FAR more responsible) from rushing an illegal meeting through to suppress debate. Democrat Peter Jauch reports over 4,000 constituents emailing him in support of their flight to Illinois, with only 778 (I think) emailing in support of the Governor.

I'm not surprised at Jauch's report. I just wonder who checked to see if they were all constituents.

Meanwhile, last night Republicans didn't provide proper advance notice of a vote, and then wouldn't even give a copy of the proposed bill to the legislators who voted on it! Secrecy usually means someone has something to hide. Openness is a prerequisite of true democracy.

I agree. That was a totally horseshyte move.

Finally, I'm astounded that the Republicans passed this bill so stupidly. They could have done it legally, with a majority vote. They have really hurt themselves. Their whole anti-union, anti-worker strategy is a huge gamble, winner takes all. But after last night, donations to Democrats have increased so much that the Democratic legislators have joked about giving the Governor their "Mobilizer of the Year" award.

I have to say I saw this coming and it shouldn't have surprised anyone in Madison or Illinois.

I think the Republicans are done. Some (maybe all 8) within months due to recalls, the Governor in early 2012.

Only time will tell. If they aren't recalled and done it will certainly change the landscape in this state.

Tom

dddddd

Iceboy
03-10-2011, 11:17 PM
Y>:DY> I agree!


I have my moments.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w211KOQ5BMI

Apparently RATM are talking about getting back together because of Wisconsin.

I could live with that.

There is some good to come out of it, right?

blindbrook
03-11-2011, 10:31 AM
I recommend a NYT article which I hope I have properly linked-( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper) It discusses the antiquated assumptions states are using in calculating their pension costs and the additional pain involved as these assumptions are recognized. I believe it illustrates how many people on this forum misunderstood and thus misused information gleaned from a Pew research piece to support their position that the Wisconsin Pension plan is fine.

Iceboy
03-11-2011, 11:35 AM
Well that is one article with a differing viewpoint compared to just about every other accounting entity saying we are fine here. Couldn't they have actually gotten a full professor to make some statements? Seems to me they searched out people that would tell them what they want to hear for their article. I did read the linked SWIB and ETF memos and follow this very closely. I have for the last 25 years. I'm not in fear of losing my retirement or afraid to contribute more. It really is a non isuue for the purposes of this discussion. Of course as always your opinion and mileage may vary. Thank you for your input. (that was not meant to be sarcastic but a true thank you.)
I recommend a NYT article which I hope I have properly linked-( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper) It discusses the antiquated assumptions states are using in calculating their pension costs and the additional pain involved as these assumptions are recognized. I believe it illustrates how many people on this forum misunderstood and thus misused information gleaned from a Pew research piece to support their position that the Wisconsin Pension plan is fine.

Nicholas Scheuer
03-11-2011, 03:47 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAfsIW6RY8Q

Here is the most intelligent thing I've read concerning Wisconsin's budget deficit. See it through, the association between States without collective bargaining for teachers and nationwide SAT rankings is worth noting.

Moby Nick

Iceboy
03-11-2011, 04:09 PM
But Nick, don't you realize that the rich are supposed to pay way more than their share? We have to redistribute this wealth and we have to do it now. (that was sarcasm for those that don't get it) The budget is the least important thing in this matter. Both sides new that going in but they are just now taking their respective masks off.

wardd
03-11-2011, 04:15 PM
But Nick, don't you realize that the rich are supposed to pay way more than their share? We have to redistribute this wealth and we have to do it now. (that was sarcasm for those that don't get it) The budget is the least important thing in this matter. Both sides new that going in but they are just now taking their respective masks off.

redistribution of wealth is how economies work

Iceboy
03-11-2011, 09:29 PM
Why thank you for that little bit of education Wardd. (snarkiness intended)
redistribution of wealth is how economies work

Nicholas Scheuer
03-11-2011, 10:40 PM
Whatzamatta, iceboy? Too cheap to pony up 32 bucks?

I'd heard that Repubs were cheap, but 32 bucks won't even buy two cases of premium beer, fercryinoutloud!

Moby Nick

WI-Tom
03-12-2011, 07:36 PM
the association between States without collective bargaining for teachers and nationwide SAT rankings is worth noting.

Moby Nick,

thanks for this, but that relationship isn't as close as it looks at first. Since midwestern colleges use the ACT test, very few (about 5%) Wisconsin students take the SAT. The states that score low (the ones without collective bargaining) have low SAT scores, but maybe about 70% of their students take that test. It stands to reason that SAT scores would be lower on average compared to Wisconsin's 5%, who are probably some of the best, most motivated students.

I still believe that losing collective bargaining will drastically decrease the quality of education in Wisconsin, though. It'll happen because the Governor's draconian measures will force school districts to cut costs in every possible way--fewer teachers; cut foreign languages; cut tech ed; cut art; cut music; cut everything but so-called "core" classes; bigger class sizes; requirements for teachers to teach more classes in a day; the list goes on and on, unfotunately.

Tom

WI-Tom
03-12-2011, 07:57 PM
the union guy crying because he might have to pay his fair share. Most wisconsin people have had to pay their fair share and then some and the average wage of the union workers is higher than the average wisconsin person.

artman,

your comment quoted above is really discouraging. If you wanted to add to the difficulties of a difficult time for me and my fellow workers, those kinds of comments will get the job done. Besides being designed to insult me and my fellow workers, your comment is also demonstrably untrue. Unions have been agreeing for weeks to pay more in benefits and pensions (effectively volunteering to take a wage cut), and in fact an argument can be made and supported that we already make about 4% less than private workers of equal education and training. Public workers earn more on average because they are better qualified on average. If you agree that a more qualified and highly educated worker deserves higher pay, than I'm not sure why you're against higher pay for public workers.

What bothers me most, though, is not that you disagree (there's room for that), but that you clearly don't respect me and my fellow workers. We're going to have to keep on living together as neighbors after this is all settled, which will be difficult if each side tries to provoke the other. Am I "a union guy crying about having to pay more"?

Maybe. But before you make up your mind about that, please consider that my fellow public workers and I may be sincerely motivated by a number of concerns other than our pocketbooks. First, I take my responsibility as a teacher very seriously, and I honestly believe that the Governor's plan will be disastrous for the quality of public education in Wisconsin. Students will suffer--students who I am supposed to look out for.

Second, the Governor's plan is aimed at destroying the political power of his opponents, the Democratic party. Do you honestly think it's good if he succeeds? The US was founded on the idea of checks and balances. Political opponents are necessary to moderate views that might otherwise grow ever more extreme. The USSR was a one-party system. My colleagues and I are concerned about losing the checks and balances necessary to good government.

We're also very concerned that the Governor is forcing this plan on the state, despite over 60% of citizens opposing it by some reports--and opponents include the very local governments and school boards the Governor claims he is trying to "help." The basis of democracy is that the will of the people should prevail--sadly, that is not how the Governor sees it. You may disagree and think we need to wait for the next election, but please understand that our motivations in resisting now instead of later might be good ones.

I'd love to hear more from you about what you think, but please--give me and my fellow workers the benefit of the doubt. Maybe there's more to all this than selfishness, don't you think?

Tom Pamperin
high school teacher, US Army and Coast Guard veteran
Chippewa Falls, WI

blindbrook
03-13-2011, 12:35 AM
Tom,
What is so discouraging is that you are so wrapped up in fighting for your specific self interest that you simply don’t have any idea of what people with opposing views think. I respect the teaching profession and you certainly seem to be nice caring person. I have no idea how effective a teacher you are. The studies I have seen don’t show much correlation between advanced educational degrees and effectiveness as a teacher. Furthermore, your view that more education and qualifications deserve higher compensation is meritless. There are untold numbers of overqualified over educated people who are lazy or ineffective but think they are entitled. I’m not suggesting you are one of these people. You just keep talking about what you deserve. You never talk about earning it. Compensation should be based on how well someone achieves his or her assigned objective. Period.
This is not the moral battle that you are trying to make it out to be. This is simply a group of people doing whatever they can to avoid having their compensation cut. Happens all the time. My company changed from a defined benefit program to a defined contribution program ten years ago. My option was to take it or quit. I don’t belabor you and your fellow teachers for trying to hang on to your benefits. But don’t make it into some kind of holy war- it’s not. Changing collective bargaining is simply a smart management tactic as it will make it all the harder for someone in the future to return the teachers to the existing unsustainably expensive benefit path. And per the Governor it will also give the school system the ability to fight seniority provisions.
Read the New York Times article I posted a few threads ago- http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/business/11pension.html?ref=todayspaper) -most commentators on this forum seem to ignore the implications stemming from Wisconsin’s 7.8% reinvestment assumptions for their pension fund. Great that it’s better than most states but most private funds use 6%. Why, because they are audited. While Wisconsin’s looks good against other states, as the public takes a harder look at the trillion dollar hole the states have they will realize that Wisconsin’s relative showing among states still doesn’t mean there is no unfunded liability, it simply means the states have all been using unrealistic assumptions in order to avoid dealing with the reality of their economic positions. My back of the envelope calculation suggest Wisconsin, using a 6% number, would need to contribute an additional 1 ĺ billion annually just to maintain the faÁade of being funded.
Hearing you discuss your efforts in getting recall signatures reminds me of just what a hypocritical position teachers have put themselves in. In my community the teachers put adds in the newspapers backing school board slates that they believe will grant the highest wages increases. You are doing essentially the same thing. While it’s rational and legal, I find it terribly unseemly. If you determine who negotiates with you for your wages, who protects the interests of the people. The fact that you believe you have to protect a major funder of the democratic machine (Unions) than you simply confirm that you want the party who will pay you the most to lead this country. Well that’s great if you are a teacher, but so far, across the country and I gather in Milwaukee, it hasn’t been too good for the kids. Nor, given the trillion dollar hole the states face, too good for the people. As for the Democratic Party parting from Unions, think about it. Think what the party could achieve if it didn't have to defend so many indefensible positions thrust upon it from the the uninons.
You talk about the lawmakers who left the state rather than attend their duties in a positive light. If they weren’t the ones giving you raises, I wonder how one might dispassionately view them in Civic's class? I believe they should be the first to be recalled. As for the senators who withstood the taunts of the mob ( yes the mob with the aggressive menacing signs) to cast their votes, they are the heroes of democracy- vote them out next election if you disagree with them, but don’t demonize them.
I appreciate your past service to your country and I esteem the teaching profession. But people weigh many things before making the decision to pursue teaching. The fact that we as a people can no longer afford the compensation scheme you now have is not personal, it is simply a reality that the private sector has already been grappling with for years and that the public sector has not yet dealt with. But the train is coming down the tracks quickly. The finance committee in our small town just calculated that the unfunded liability for public service pension and healthcare benefits when calculated, not on the state provided lala land assumptions, but using real market assumptions is around $80,000 per 4 person household. As the population awakes, I’m not sure your governor is going to be viewed as the evil duplicious monster you and your colleagues are making him out to be. He might be viewed as a municipal finance visionary.

Iceboy
03-13-2011, 10:48 AM
First off, not a republican. Second, it is going to cost me a heck of a lot more than $32 and I don't really mind taking my share of the load and more. Third, you can get two cases of premium beer in Wisconsin for $32.:)
Whatzamatta, iceboy? Too cheap to pony up 32 bucks?

I'd heard that Repubs were cheap, but 32 bucks won't even buy two cases of premium beer, fercryinoutloud!

Moby Nick

WI-Tom
03-13-2011, 11:06 AM
blindbrook,

thanks for the thoughtful post; I appreciate the chance to hear thoughts from the other side. I'll respond to a few in case anyone is still interested.


This is not the moral battle that you are trying to make it out to be. This is simply a group of people doing whatever they can to avoid having their compensation cut.

This view strikes me as quite cynical; public workers' weeks-old agreement to take severe wage and benefit cuts makes it pretty clear there are more important issues than compensation going on (although, like everyone else, we do care about being fairly paid). What is driving the strong opposition (80,000+ at the Capitol yesterday) to the Governor is a strong sense of moral indignation at an amazingly dictatorial ruler who is forcing his plan on a citizenry that by many measures is far more opposed than supportive. You say I don't understand the opposite side; that may be true. But if you don't accept that public workers and many other citizens DO see this as a moral battle, then you do not understand us either.


Compensation should be based on how well someone achieves his or her assigned objective. Period.

I agree with you. But how are we to judge how well teachers achieve their assigned objectives? Arguments for merit pay systems in lieu of seniority and education always fall apart here. I'm not saying it can't be done--and I'm confident that if we ever find a way to accurately measure a teacher's effectiveness, then I will qualify for merit pay and some hefty raises.

A fair analogy to the private sector--which, at its best, pays for effectiveness as you suggest--might look like this: You're a mid-level manager in charge of 125 workers. Obviously, you'll earn merit pay (in part, at least) according to how effective your workers are. Here's the catch--you have to accept anyone who wants to work for you. You have no say in who gets hired, and you are guaranteed a wide range of workers from the best and brightest to some who will not be able to read or understand complex reasoning. Not only that, you are not allowed to fire any of them, no matter what results they are getting. And to make it more interesting, let's say that about 30% of the workers don't want to be at work at all, but they show up because otherwise they'd have to be in jail. You have to take them, too. You also have to take the ones who are assigned to your department but never show up, even once, all year long. Their "results" are averaged in with all the rest.

How easy will it be to fairly measure your effectiveness as a manager in that situation? How would you do it? If you can answer that second question, you have figured out how to set up a merit pay system for teachers. I'd love to hear your thoughts about that. I'm all for merit pay in principle, but can you see how teachers are cautious about agreeing to it?

Finally, you've raised some intelligent points. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on my biggest concern: that by destroying the financial base of the Democratic party, the Republicans are putting the adversarial system of checks and balances at risk. This could be a de facto one party system. I do not always side with Democrats, however that may surprise you--but putting all power into the hands of either party strikes me as a terrible risk to democray. What do you think of that?

Thanks again for a reasoned debate.

Tom

wardd
03-13-2011, 11:10 AM
if we can set compensation for working people can't we set compensation for ceo's of failed banks and corporations?

perldog007
03-13-2011, 11:47 AM
if we can set compensation for working people can't we set compensation for ceo's of failed banks and corporations?
I'm in favor of that as far as minimums for the former group and maximums for the latter.

WI-Tom
03-13-2011, 11:50 AM
you want the party who will pay you the most to lead this country.

You talk about the lawmakers who left the state rather than attend their duties in a positive light. If they weren’t the ones giving you raises, I wonder how one might dispassionately view them in Civic's class?


In my community the teachers put adds in the newspapers backing school board slates that they believe will grant the highest wages increases. You are doing essentially the same thing.

blindbrook,

you have a very consistent focus on wages, as if that were the only issue. An honest question for you: do you believe that all people are motivated by money and nothing else? Or do you acknowledge that people may have other reasons for their political and idealogical views?

That may be at the heart of our disagreements. Perhaps money isn't as important to everyone as it seems to be to you.

Another question: if your view that this is all about money are correct, then how do you explain public workers and unions willingness to take steep wage and benefit cuts? That continued willingness to take cuts is an undisputable fact. Clearly, public workers must be fighting for something they consider even more important than money, and are willing to accept that present levels of compensation may be unsustainable, as you suggest. So if not wages, what are people still fighting for? What is their motivation, do you think?

Again, these are honest questions; I really do want to understand your perspective.

Tom

blindbrook
03-14-2011, 09:09 AM
Tom,
I do not believe money is everything. People make decisions for a host of different reasons and my sense is that many people teach because the satisfaction they derive from it. I applaud that. But this dispute is simply a compensation dispute. While the teachers apparently saw the writing on the wall and accepted the offer, the governor is just trying to make sure the compensation reductions ďstickĒ. Thatís the right thing for a cost cutter to do.
As to the fight at hand, let me take a stab at answering your question. First, I do believe that economic incentives are a strong driving force behind all decision making and that a good way to understand issues is to break down the incentives of all the players and Iím not sure that the interests/incentives of union leadership are aligned with that of the union members. The leadership makes a lot of money. Itís goals are to continue to collect dues from as many people as possible to insure that the revenues continue. To that end it contributes a lot of money to the democratic party to keep the game going. You, however, seem to believe you are an effective teacher and you sound willing to risk your compensation on the effectiveness of your teaching. So without unionization, your school could easily get rid of underperforming teachers, could pay good ones more, and could shift resources around as they are needed. And what about the kids? Every study I read says effective teachers are the difference- not classroom size, not educational background of the teachers. So get rid of tenure, because that decision seems to be made before management really knows who is good and who is bad. Let teachers feel the power of incentives- that successful ones can differentiate themselves from mediocre ones and the kids will win. Teachers will also get to keep their union dues. The only losers will be the union leaders, the ones throwing gasoline on this fire because their fat paychecks are really whatís at stake.
As to the Democratic party, I believe they would be stronger without the union backing. Think of the stupid decisions the party is saddled with as it bows to the unions. The Democratic party got more money from Wall Street and Hollywood last presidential election than the Republicans did. This is not the easy big business verses union equation that used to exist. Things are changing. Internet fund raising is gaining momentum. Any demise of union power is not a threat to democracy, it would be a boon to democracy as the Democrats could start to really address issues like educational reform which its marriage to the unions has forced it to cede to the Republicans. What exactly does union membership do for you?

wardd
03-14-2011, 09:47 AM
Tom,
I do not believe money is everything. People make decisions for a host of different reasons and my sense is that many people teach because the satisfaction they derive from it. I applaud that. But this dispute is simply a compensation dispute. While the teachers apparently saw the writing on the wall and accepted the offer, the governor is just trying to make sure the compensation reductions “stick”. That’s the right thing for a cost cutter to do.
As to the fight at hand, let me take a stab at answering your question. First, I do believe that economic incentives are a strong driving force behind all decision making and that a good way to understand issues is to break down the incentives of all the players and I’m not sure that the interests/incentives of union leadership are aligned with that of the union members. The leadership makes a lot of money. It’s goals are to continue to collect dues from as many people as possible to insure that the revenues continue. To that end it contributes a lot of money to the democratic party to keep the game going. You, however, seem to believe you are an effective teacher and you sound willing to risk your compensation on the effectiveness of your teaching. So without unionization, your school could easily get rid of underperforming teachers, could pay good ones more, and could shift resources around as they are needed. And what about the kids? Every study I read says effective teachers are the difference- not classroom size, not educational background of the teachers. So get rid of tenure, because that decision seems to be made before management really knows who is good and who is bad. Let teachers feel the power of incentives- that successful ones can differentiate themselves from mediocre ones and the kids will win. Teachers will also get to keep their union dues. The only losers will be the union leaders, the ones throwing gasoline on this fire because their fat paychecks are really what’s at stake.
As to the Democratic party, I believe they would be stronger without the union backing. Think of the stupid decisions the party is saddled with as it bows to the unions. The Democratic party got more money from Wall Street and Hollywood last presidential election than the Republicans did. This is not the easy big business verses union equation that used to exist. Things are changing. Internet fund raising is gaining momentum. Any demise of union power is not a threat to democracy, it would be a boon to democracy as the Democratic could start to really address issues like educational reform which its marriage to the unions has forced it to cede to the Republicans. What exactly does union membership do for you?

of the top 10 campaign contributers only 3 give to democrats and they are unions

the democratic party needs unions to balance the republicans funding, and that is what this is about, to defund democrats

perldog007
03-14-2011, 11:32 AM
of the top 10 campaign contributers only 3 give to democrats and they are unions

the democratic party needs unions to balance the republicans funding, and that is what this is about, to defund democrats

So Blindbrook is lying about the Wall St. and Hollywood donations?

ccmanuals
03-14-2011, 11:59 AM
blindbrook wrote:

But this dispute is simply a compensation dispute.Sure it's a compensation dispute. Wanna buy a bridge in Brooklyn?


Wisconsin GOP Leader Admits The Truth ó Itís All About Obama

Mar. 10 2011 - 8:42 pm | 4,139 views | 2 recommendations | 28 comments (http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/03/10/wisconsin-gop-leader-admits-the-truth-its-all-about-obama/#post_comments)
By RICK UNGAR
Itís not like we didnít know it Ė but who would have thought they would be so brazen as to voice it out loud?
Appearing on Fox News, Wisconsin Sen. Majority Leader, Scott Fitzgerald had this to say-
If we win this battle, and the money is not there under the auspices of the unions, certainly what youíre going to find is President Obama is going to have a much difficult, much more difficult time getting elected and winning the state of Wisconsin.

Full story and video here:

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/03/10/wisconsin-gop-leader-admits-the-truth-its-all-about-obama/

wardd
03-14-2011, 12:03 PM
So Blindbrook is lying about the Wall St. and Hollywood donations?

top 10

WI-Tom
03-14-2011, 03:24 PM
blindbrook,

thanks; I appreciate your perspective, and I can see where you're coming from--although I don't agree with all you said. Economics are important for sure, so to say this isn't in some ways about compensation wouldn't be accurate, though I think it's mainly about other more important things (political advantage for Republicans). And unions have already agreed to compensation cuts and we're still fighting, so there must be more to it.

Yours is an interesting argument--and one I've heard from a few thoughtful conservatives--that getting rid of unions may be better for teachers and public workers, and democracy, in the long run. It's funny, though; from my perspective, the Union (Chippewa Falls Federation of Teachers) is not some politically motivated big-money conspiracy, the Union is my fellow teachers--Roger T., Mark I., others are the officers; John K., not an officer, has been a major mobilizer and motivator; Aime D., same thing, me, same thing. We've had no communication from the national leadership--I think this all may be much more grass roots than you realize. In this case, everything we've done has been member-driven, NOT leader-driven.

The reason the loss of collective bargaining worries teachers so much is that it gives ALL power to the administration. Tenure WILL be gone (that could be good, arguably); due process will be gone; seniority will be gone (and though credentials don't guarantee a good teacher, experience makes every teacher better); I could be forced to teach 6 or 7 classes a day instead of 5 to save money; class sizes will go up; extra-curricular assignments and coaching could be forced on teachers (it already happens in some districts). Essentially, teachers are being asked to trust administrators to do the fair thing. That is VERY scary! Especially because administrators will be facing SEVERE budget cuts, and will be forced to take every advantage they can from their teachers. All of this, of course, will be bad for students.

So unions aren't perfect, but I'm not willing to give them up.

Your point about internet funding protecting Dems (even with unions gone) is interesting too, but I'm not sure I agree. Republicans will still have their big money, AND they will have caught on to internet use from the Howard Dean/Obama campaigns. I still see a very dangerous imbalance developing with the destruction of unions. It may weight things so heavily in favor of Republicans that the adversarial checks and balances disappear. Concentration of power is bad.

Thanks again,

Tom

WI-Tom
03-14-2011, 03:40 PM
You, however, seem to believe you are an effective teacher and you sound willing to risk your compensation on the effectiveness of your teaching. So without unionization, your school could easily get rid of underperforming teachers, could pay good ones more, and could shift resources around as they are needed. And what about the kids? Every study I read says effective teachers are the difference- not classroom size, not educational background of the teachers. So get rid of tenure, because that decision seems to be made before management really knows who is good and who is bad. Let teachers feel the power of incentives- that successful ones can differentiate themselves from mediocre ones and the kids will win. Teachers will also get to keep their union dues.

blindbrook,

again, I agree in principle. I've seen a terrible teacher protected by our union at great financial cost to the district, who was unable to prove good cause despite 2-3 years of documentation.

But how will we measure the success of teachers so we know who to fire, and who to pay more? How can that be done? How can it be fair to teachers to use test scores (the only proposals for merit pay I've heard use these) when they will depend on student performance, which the teacher does not control? Remember, I can't (by law) throw non-performers out of my classroom.

What do you think? Do you see how teachers feel the present seniority/credentials pay system isn't as bad as the alternatives might be? Do you have ideas about how to create fair merit pay, anyone?

Tom

BrianW
03-14-2011, 03:56 PM
...But how are we to judge how well teachers achieve their assigned objectives? Arguments for merit pay systems in lieu of seniority and education always fall apart here. I'm not saying it can't be done--and I'm confident that if we ever find a way to accurately measure a teacher's effectiveness, then I will qualify for merit pay and some hefty raises.

...You're a mid-level manager in charge of 125 workers. Obviously, you'll earn merit pay (in part, at least) according to how effective your workers are. Here's the catch--you have to accept anyone who wants to work for you...

...How easy will it be to fairly measure your effectiveness as a manager in that situation? How would you do it? If you can answer that second question, you have figured out how to set up a merit pay system for teachers.

Your scenario, where you're evaluated by your students performance is not all the different from many companies evaluation reports. It's not as far removed from the "private sector" as you are suggesting. Except in few cases, where performance can be measured exactly, all evaluations are based on opinion, conjuncture, prejudice, some fact, and lots of fancy references from book on how to right an effective evaluation. In others words, they are most often bull****. ;)

Teacher careers aren't all that different from the rest of the world. Except they get more days off.

WI-Tom
03-14-2011, 04:10 PM
Your scenario, where you're evaluated by your students performance is not all the different from many companies evaluation reports. It's not as far removed from the "private sector" as you are suggesting.

Actually, there is one BIG difference; the private sector can fire non-performing or under-performing workers. Teachers can't fire anyone. Teachers can't even fire a student who never bothers to show up. Even if a student goes to jail for murder, I have to teach him (yes, that happened to me in my first year--had to go to his cell and provide private lessons).

The private sector is free to pick the best they can get; teachers are not. Many of my "workers" only show up so the truant officer doesn't send them to jail, or to a group home.

That's such a huge difference that it's not fair to compare them at all.

But your point about evaluation reports being mostly BS--yes, that's why merit pay is so problematic. I think the system COULD be set up to recognize good teachers, but who will pay the evaluators? Who will have time to watch me for long enough to see how good I am?

Tom

John Smith
03-14-2011, 04:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAfsIW6RY8Q

Here is the most intelligent thing I've read concerning Wisconsin's budget deficit. See it through, the association between States without collective bargaining for teachers and nationwide SAT rankings is worth noting.

Moby Nick

Excellent; Thanks

John Smith
03-14-2011, 04:23 PM
redistribution of wealth is how economies work

Redistrution is a poor term. Keeping money in circulation is how economies work. The tax code should "pump it down" to the middle class, who will spend it, and it will trickle up.

BrianW
03-14-2011, 04:48 PM
Actually, there is one BIG difference; the private sector can fire non-performing or under-performing workers.

Many mid-level managers cannot just fire employees. They simply aren't given that much stroke. Often times the best they can do is conduct counseling sessions, file reports, and hope someone higher will intervene.

I'm not insensitive to your position, if only because it's little different than most peoples.

wardd
03-14-2011, 04:57 PM
Redistrution is a poor term. Keeping money in circulation is how economies work. The tax code should "pump it down" to the middle class, who will spend it, and it will trickle up.

yes, money moves from one person to another to perform it's function

the cause of that movement is almost irrelevant

one of the current problems with money flow is it is flowing into financial instruments that are little more than a ponzi scheme

WI-Tom
03-14-2011, 06:33 PM
Many mid-level managers cannot just fire employees.

True enough; but do you think a private company would hire a worker who doesn't show up--ever? Or would the company keep a worker on the payroll when he is in jail and not attending work? Or would a company hire a worker who couldn't read, or one with severe reasoning and cognitive disabilities? In schools, it's not just the middle managers who can't fire anyone--the whole system is set up, by law, to make it virtually impossible to keep anyone out.

Tom

wardd
03-14-2011, 06:48 PM
government and it's functions are not like a private company and making comparisons is a silly exercise

the purpose of a company is to make a profit

the purpose of government is to serve the needs of it's citizens

gee, that sounds sorta socialist

BrianW
03-14-2011, 07:20 PM
True enough; but do you think a private company would hire a worker who doesn't show up...

That would be a fair enough example, if we were talking about individual employee behavior. Instead, we're discussing the ability to effectively rate a teacher. A teacher whose students don't show up, would in a fair system, not be negatively rated.

BrianW
03-14-2011, 07:23 PM
government and it's functions are not like a private company and making comparisons is a silly exercise

the purpose of a company is to make a profit

the purpose of government is to serve the needs of it's citizens

gee, that sounds sorta socialist

Actually, it sounds very narrow minded. In an intelligent conversation, the participants could find examples of similarities between business and government.

BrianW
03-14-2011, 07:25 PM
http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=2919033#post2919033) government and it's functions are not like a private company and making comparisons is a silly exercise

As a matter of fact, this subject is one in which we have both government, and private sectors. There are private schools, which are generally accepted to be better than public (government) schools.

wardd
03-14-2011, 07:26 PM
Actually, it sounds very narrow minded. In an intelligent conversation, the participants could find examples of similarities between business and government.

similarities can be found between rocks and trees

the dissimilarities are greater

Cuyahoga Chuck
03-14-2011, 08:48 PM
You know, if this was in reverse and the dems had done this, most of the people bashing the Wisconsin GOP would not have much to say, But becouse the GOP won on this and gave the dem a taste of there own tactics in wisconsin everyone is in uproar. No one heard me and others in the past years when the democratic state senate members in my sweet state did nothing to help the money problems. In fact they voted themselves and others raises when the ship was sinking. Collective bargaining should have been on the table then. But of course the dem gov, and the dem assembly and senate did nothing. The media and the hype have it wrong. The silent majority in this state is fine with what is happening. they are the middle class of this state. Not the union guy crying because he might have to pay his fair share. Most wisconsin people have had to pay their fair share and then some and the average wage of the union workers is higher than the average wisconsin person. I voted for these guys in, and those guys out just for this reason. Bring on change.

How come you capitalize GOP but do Dems in lower case?

wardd
03-14-2011, 08:51 PM
what was the last union the dems tried to bust?

blindbrook
03-14-2011, 08:53 PM
Tom,
I understand this is somewhat of an abstract discussion for me and it’s very real to you and I appreciate the fact that your union colleagues are your friends. I also understand your reluctance to enter a more competitive workplace. It’s different and scary. But I think BrianW makes an excellent point. Many teachers thrive in the competitive work places- private schools. Let’s avoid comparing and contrasting those environments now, but if the entire public school system allowed more competition than I think it would be a lot easier for good teachers to make the jump out of the union/tenure cocoon because there would be alternative schools creating demand for their services which would lead to more demand and compensation for more effective teachers. It’s tough now because performance measures are untested and over the short run you would place yourself at the mercy of an administration in which you the teacher have no leverage. But it has to change. From a macro perspective the system is unsustainably expensive and not working very well.

BrianW
03-14-2011, 10:49 PM
Tom,
I understand this is somewhat of an abstract discussion for me and it’s very real to you and I appreciate the fact that your union colleagues are your friends.

Likewise Tom, I'm done, before I get over my head. I'm not an educator, nor play one on TV. :)

BTW, I'm another Army then USCG retiree. ;)

WI-Tom
03-15-2011, 11:38 AM
Thanks, blindbrook and Brian,

I appreciate your thoughtful and respectful critiques; I don't think you need to be an educator (or even play one on TV!) to have a voice in this. I do think it will prove incredibly complex and expensive to measure teacher effectiveness fairly in lieu of aligning wages with seniority + credentials, though, which maybe anti-tenure people haven't considered. But you might be interested to hear that Wisconsin's largest teachers' union (not my union) has agreed in principle to merit pay systems and other reforms (from the Feb 8 Journal Sentinel website):


Taking an unusually aggressive step into the education-reform debate, the president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council on Tuesday announced the union's support for new measures to improve teacher and school quality across the state, including performance pay for educators and the splintering of Milwaukee Public Schools into smaller districts.
WEAC President Mary Bell also outlined the details of what a new statewide teacher evaluation system should look like - including how to counsel ineffective educators out of the system.

An effort is already under way on that front as part of State Superintendent Tony Evers' push to reform evaluations statewide, but WEAC made specific proposals to advance that discussion.

You may be right; more competition could end up being good. Unions are starting to show some willingness to consider it.

Tom

perldog007
03-15-2011, 12:16 PM
Not only do teachers thrive in private schools, according to Dr. Perry ( University of Michigan ) their children too, as public school teachers are twice as likely as the general public to send their children to private schools.

WI-Tom
03-15-2011, 05:12 PM
There are private schools, which are generally accepted to be better than public (government) schools.

Brian,

I don't think everyone agrees that private schools are necessarily better.

But even so, one thing to consider when comparing public vs. private schools is that private school students generally have parents able and willing to pay tuition costs. Parents who send children to private schools value education, have lots of books around the house (research shows that the mere physical presence of books in the home is VERY important to children learning to read), are a fairly well-educated segment of the nation, and most likely have the means to provide many more opportunities for their children outside of school than many public school students ever get.

The relationship between poverty and poor school performance is very clear. In a sense, you are arguing that schools with better-prepared students from better-funded and better-educated families will be better schools.

Sure, I agree. On average that's probably true. It just doesn't have much to do with public school performance.

Tom

WI-Tom
03-15-2011, 05:14 PM
public school teachers are twice as likely as the general public to send their children to private schools.

Yes, this fits with what I said in post #169 above!

Tom