Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Wisconson – sign of more to come?

Login or register to post comments Last Post 52473 reads   312 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 231 through 240 (of 312 total)
  • Sat, Mar 05, 2011 - 11:43pm

    #231

    Wendy S. Delmater

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 13 2009

    Posts: 1418

    count placeholder

    Welcome back,

Welcome back, Soulsistersteph.

Yeah, that pesky human nature gets in the way of both the free market and socialist utopias, doesn’t it? And it’s made worse by each side painting the other side as cardboard villans.  The rhetoric on some of the other sites I frequent is amazing. Example: this from Facebook today:  Note how conservatives MOTIVES are assumed (incorrectly) to be all about corporate profits and religion.

#

Commenter One

Remember the big move for vouchers and merit pay? Republicans do not like public schools because they are supposed to teach, according to the National Standards, unadulterated history, actual science, and no religious preachings. The Conservatives are the same people who cannot get Creationism into the science books and their religion into the classroom. I see recent anti-union for public workers as another attempt to discredit public schools. Then all kids that can afford it can go to their private schools. The rest can…go the way of medicaid. They want to privatize education. They want more control over the curriculum.

5 hours ago · LikeUnlike

#

Commenter Two

Good points, (Commenter One). Sometimes I forget that that kind of conservative doesn’t care about what’s best for the country; they care about raising profits for private corporations. *sigh*

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 01:10am

    #232

    goes211

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 287

    count placeholder

    Credibility?

[quote=xraymike79]

Massive transfers of money to the already wealthy – Corporate Welfare destroying America.

[/quote]

The gist of his whole argument is that these government workers earn every dollar of their compensation because that is what they negotiated.  The circular logic required to come to that conclusion is stupendous.  I guess using that same logic corporations can claim that they deserve all the breaks that they get from government because that is what they were able to negotiate.

He even goes on to say he has no idea if these government worker are overpaid or not.  If he does not know this, why is he so eager to choose sides?  It is one sided pieces like this that hurt Democracy Now’s credibility.

ps. Why did CM.com start clearing out the Subject line when replying?  It really makes the system seem much more brittle.

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 02:08am

    #233
    plato1965

    plato1965

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 18 2009

    Posts: 86

    count placeholder

    These are people who solely

These are people who solely want to TAKE instead of GIVE.

If you can change that element of human nature, then you’ll solve most of the world’s problems.

 

 Absolutely… the way to change it is to make sure it doesn’t pay.. at the moment it does, handsomely.

 The sheep need to evolve strategies for dealing with wolves. Not merely hoping for a kindly, saviour shepherd to make wolf behaviour illegal.. the wolves have plentiful lobbying power.

 Adapt or perish.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 02:51am

    #234

    Travlin

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 15 2010

    Posts: 524

    count placeholder

    Spot on

[quote=plato1965]

These are people who solely want to TAKE instead of GIVE.

If you can change that element of human nature, then you’ll solve most of the world’s problems.

 

 Absolutely… the way to change it is to make sure it doesn’t pay.. at the moment it does, handsomely.

 The sheep need to evolve strategies for dealing with wolves. Not merely hoping for a kindly, saviour shepherd to make wolf behaviour illegal.. the wolves have plentiful lobbying power.

 Adapt or perish.

[/quote]

Sadly, both of these comments are spot on.  They reveal precisely why we are rapidly going down hill.  As long as destructive behavior is rewarded we can’t expect improvement.

Travlin 

 

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 03:40am

    #235

    goes211

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 287

    count placeholder

    Wisconsin: The Real Stakes of Walker’s Union War

From this weeks Time magazine a suprisingly decent perspective.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2056637,00.html

Wisconsin: The Real Stakes of Walker’s Union War

If you don’t look too closely, the battle lines between Wisconsin’s Republican governor, Scott Walker, and his state’s public employees’ unions seem to be clearly drawn. Walker wants public employees to pay more toward their health care and retirement benefits, while teachers and public workers howl that Walker’s plan to curb most collective bargaining is a malicious plot to bust up their unions.

Of course neither side wants to discuss what is really at stake in this battle: the public-sector unions are fighting for their shady ability to take millions of dollars from their members’ dues money without really asking, and the governor is not really owning up to his ambition to smash the political power of public employees’ unions to smithereens.

Walker has a strong case on the fiscal merits. The cost of state employees’ benefits has skyrocketed in tandem with the rising power of public employees’ unions. It has become a perverse and semicorrupt arrangement: the unions raise millions from dues, which are then used to elect labor-friendly politicians who cave at the contract-negotiating table, especially on long-term employment deals, whose cost really begins to crush the state or city budget in the years after the agreeable politician has left office. This is where public-sector unions lack the moral authority of their private-sector brethren. When the United Steelworkers negotiate with a steel company, they don’t also control the company’s board of directors.

And if Walker wins his battle in Wisconsin, it could become a game changer for the GOP as other states follow suit.

Both sides have polls showing they are winning, but the ground truth is murkier. Walker is prevailing in the argument over the budget. But the unions have cleverly begun to defend what they call the right of collective bargaining. That move is as politically effective as it is factually dubious. Collective bargaining for public employees didn’t begin to gain strength until the 1960s, when growing union power (and Democratic statehouses) conspired to adopt it. Two generations later, only 26 states allow collective bargaining for most public employees, and this “right” has largely not been extended to federal workers.

Like all political battles, the Wisconsin fight will come down to numbers. I’m betting on Walker. He has the votes.

 

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 08:01pm

    #236
    SteveW

    SteveW

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 21 2010

    Posts: 140

    count placeholder

    Time is just another corporate mouthpiece

[quote=goes211]

From this weeks Time magazine a suprisingly decent perspective.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2056637,00.html

 

Walker has a strong case on the fiscal merits. The cost of state employees’ benefits has skyrocketed in tandem with the rising power of public employees’ unions. It has become a perverse and semicorrupt arrangement: the unions raise millions from dues, which are then used to elect labor-friendly politicians who cave at the contract-negotiating table, especially on long-term employment deals, whose cost really begins to crush the state or city budget in the years after the agreeable politician has left office. This is where public-sector unions lack the moral authority of their private-sector brethren. When the United Steelworkers negotiate with a steel company, they don’t also control the company’s board of directors. 

[/quote]

False. It’s a biased report parroting the anti-labour line. I understand there is now a “Citizens United” ruling that allows corporations to also buy politicians. That could have been included in the interests of “fair and balanced.”

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 09:44pm

    #237

    dshields

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 25 2009

    Posts: 385

    count placeholder

    I’m Surprised

I’m surprised we keep going round and round with this.  This is all pretty simple.  It is not all about evil corporations.  It is not all about evil unions.  It is not about evil banksters.  It is not about evil anything.  What it is about is America is experiencing a forced reduction in the standard of living.  Socialism does not work because it can not be paid for.  Massively subsidized medical and retirement for anyone is over – public or private.  The private sector got the crap kicked out of it already.  The public sector was protected for a while due to the nature of the public sector.  Now the reduction has arrived there also.  It sucks having to pay big bucks for medial and retirement.  I know this first hand.  13 years ago when I started at the company I work at I used to pay 150 dollars a month for killer medical and now I pay 600 a month for decent medical.  I used to get 5% a year one time pop into my 401k and dollar for dollar matching up to the max legal limit.  Now I do not get anything – I have to pay it all – period.

The public sector is going to have to go through the same pain I have.  They are not a privileged class.  It is just the way it is.  They will be lucky to keep their jobs.  They better get off the I want loads of free stuff and start paying strict attention to keeping their jobs.  Keeping the job is the highest priority.  They better be going to work on time and working very hard every day and trying to not be the one who is going to get laid off.

 

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 10:27pm

    #238

    goes211

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 287

    count placeholder

    What are the unbiased sources?

[quote=SteveW]

False. It’s a biased report parroting the anti-labour line. I understand there is now a “Citizens United” ruling that allows corporations to also buy politicians. That could have been included in the interests of “fair and balanced.”

[/quote]

As opposed to the unbiased pro-labor sources on this thread.  Can you point to one that you think is unbiased?  Note, that if the source brings up the Koch’s brothers bugaboo, it is probably not unbiased.

What I find particularly amusing about Wisconsin is the way the Democratic Senators have fled the state.  This seems strange because I thought that Democrats believe that as soon as they have 51% of the votes, they can push massive changes on society like Obamacare or $700 billion stimulus.  Strange that when they loose an election, and are on the other side of that 51%, they suddenly see no shame in denying the winner their ability to change the system.

Which one is it going to be?   Do you believe that a 51% democracy can tell the other 49% what to do, or do you believe in a Republic where minority rights are protected?  How about a little consistency?

Personally I wish more of government could work the way it  is right now in Wisconsin.  A system that would allow the minority stop most changes very well might have kept us out of many of our current troubles.  It gives me hope for the day that believers in liberty have enough power to shut the leviathan down.

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 11:21pm

    #239

    Robert Gardner

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 24 2008

    Posts: 68

    count placeholder

    Well stated dshields, you

Well stated dshields, you hit it right on the head.

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2011 - 11:39pm

    #240

    dshields

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 25 2009

    Posts: 385

    count placeholder

    not that tough

[quote=r101958]

Well stated dshields, you hit it right on the head.

[/quote]

Thank you.  However, I really do not think this is that tough.  The nation simply can not affford to give away medial and retirement to untold thousands or millions of people.  We do not have the money so we can not pay it.  This is self fixing.  It will go one of two ways –

1) We will control spending and live within our means as a nation and hopefully avoid a financial disaster, or

2) We will be unable to control spending and have a financial disaster

One way we have a controlled reduction in the standard of living and the other way we have an uncontrolled reduction in the standard of living.  I prefer the controlled path.  But, either way there is going to be a reduction in the standard of living.  It has been happening for the last few years and it will continue for years into the future.

 

Viewing 10 posts - 231 through 240 (of 312 total)

Login or Register to post comments