Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11  [ show all ]
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do?
    #14097067 - 03/10/11 10:37 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

So I've read the news and listened to the news on the radio and heard interviews with people for and against the law but not once have I heard or read exactly what this is all about.

If collective bargaining is simply a group of people working together to negotiate, how can that be made illegal? In other words, how can you make it a crime for people to coordinate themselves to work together to do something which would be legal if they each did it as individuals?

This seems to me to be a completely un-American approach, so it made me think that the law must be more nuanced. Perhaps it forbids the government departments from negotiating with groups, only individuals? Or perhaps it forbids those departments from negotiating at all, just setting pay and benefits and that's the end of it?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom] * 2
    #14097652 - 03/10/11 12:43 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

to answer your question about what the new law in WI will do ..it will at the very least turn the country into a 3rd world sweatshop banana republic.. if not a hard-core dictatorship that would make its WW2-era precursors look like model democracies...if theres a silver lining..its that ppl wont laugh at you when you talk about "fascism" anymore...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14097706 - 03/10/11 12:51 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
So I've read the news and listened to the news on the radio and heard interviews with people for and against the law but not once have I heard or read exactly what this is all about.




Why not?  Google can be very useful.
Quote:



If collective bargaining is simply a group of people working together to negotiate, how can that be made illegal? In other words, how can you make it a crime for people to coordinate themselves to work together to do something which would be legal if they each did it as individuals?




Well the Sherman Anti trust act comes to mind but I don't really think that is relevant to this.  The government can just refuse to recognize the union, post job offers and interview candidates who then can negotiate for themselves their own deal.  Then there is the idea of compulsory union dues.  That you can certainly make illegal as it is coercion.  Then there is the matter of making strikes illegal.  Ask Flight Controllers about that beauty.  Even FDR recognized the threat involved in public sector unionization for precisely that reason.
Quote:



This seems to me to be a completely un-American approach, so it made me think that the law must be more nuanced. Perhaps it forbids the government departments from negotiating with groups, only individuals? Or perhaps it forbids those departments from negotiating at all, just setting pay and benefits and that's the end of it?




The law does several things.  It relieves the employer of the obligation to automatically deduct and hand over union dues from paychecks.  It requires that the union membership vote each year to remain in a union and it removes certain elements of compensation from collective bargaining.  Contrary to the hyperventilating nitwits it does not bust or make illegal a union.  It restores the freedom to union members.  THAT is very American, a nation founded on the notion of individual freedom and not servitude to a Kollektif.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14097715 - 03/10/11 12:52 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

collective bargaining is a childish means of holding hostage an employer and
demanding that they be given the right to work regardless of competency, work
ethic or dedication

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14097716 - 03/10/11 12:53 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
to answer your question about what the new law in WI will do ..it will at the very least turn the country into a 3rd world sweatshop banana republic.. if not a hard-core dictatorship that would make its WW2-era precursors look like model democracies...if theres a silver lining..its that ppl wont laugh at you when you talk about "fascism" anymore...



This would be an example of some of the hyperventilating I was referencing.  What could be more fascist than compelling people to join and pay for extra-governmental crap in order to pursue their chosen careers?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrenExplode
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/27/10
Posts: 65
Last seen: 12 years, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14097824 - 03/10/11 01:15 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

It's basically happening in Michigan too, and that's just where I happen to live. Woohoo Rick Snyder! Kill our freedoms under our noses! I'm waiting for Revofev to happen any day now here, in which I will enthusiastically play my part in.

http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/03/09/michigan-republicans-use-budget-crisis-to-make-outrageous-assault-on-democracy/


--------------------

There've been times when I wander, and times when I don't.
Concepts I'll ponder, and concepts I won't ever see.
God isn't one of these, former or latter.
Which did you think I meant?

It doesn't matter to me.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: BrenExplode]
    #14097862 - 03/10/11 01:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

the MI law will allow the governor to forcibly remove elected officials and replace them with his cronies.. even zappa would be hard-pressed to argue thats not dictatorial...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14097892 - 03/10/11 01:27 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> even zappa would be hard-pressed to argue thats not dictatorial...

That is me, not Zappa.  You are mixing up your fascist corporate shills.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14097921 - 03/10/11 01:35 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
the MI law will allow the governor to forcibly remove elected officials and replace them with his cronies.. even zappa would be hard-pressed to argue thats not dictatorial...



And I wouldn't argue in favor of that but it isn't what's happening.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billanalysis/House/htm/2011-HLA-4214-3.htm

Quote:

House Bill 4214 would repeal Public Act 72 of 1990--the existing Local Government Fiscal Responsibility Act.  The new act would have similar provisions to PA 72, enabling a state review and intervention, but it would increase the power and authority of the appointed emergency financial manager, changing the appointee's title to emergency manager to indicate the expansion of that authority beyond financial matters.  Among the proposed legislation's provisions that differ from the existing law, the new act would:

·                    List 18 explicit events that would trigger a financial review by the state (four of these are new, seven are in PA 72 but would be significantly changed, and four are in PA 72 but would be slightly modified.

·                    Include the director of the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget on the four-member review team (replacing the auditor general), and allow the governor to appoint more members to the team.

·                    Make explicit the differences between the municipal government and the school district review and intervention processes.

·                    Make explicit the parameters of the review team's evaluation (including 12 review criteria, six of which are new, and one that is in PA 72 but would be significantly changed).

·                    Allow the review team's evaluation report to be compiled by a firm (rather than an individual).

·                    Explicitly define the terms "financial stress" and "financial emergency."

·                    Allow for appointment of emergency managers by the state treasurer or state school superintendent after a financial emergency is declared by the governor (currently the emergency manager is appointed by a local emergency financial assistance loan board).

·                    Allow the state treasurer and state school superintendent to declare that a local government is in receivership, as they appoint an emergency manager. (Note:  the bill does not define "receivership"; according to the CRC report, under federal law "receivership" is a form of corporate bankruptcy in which the court appoints a receiver to run the company….under municipal bankruptcy, no receiver is appointed.  Instead the local government develops a plan for adjusting its debts and the court approves or disapproves that plan.")

·                    Specify that an emergency manager would be chosen on the basis of competence; need not be a resident of the local government; may be an individual or firm; and would serve at the pleasure of the state treasurer, with the concurrence of the state school superintendent if the local government is a school district. (Currently the emergency manager cannot be a firm). If the emergency manager were a firm, then a spokesperson would have to be employed by the firm to serve as the point of contact for the public.

·                    Require that an emergency manager (or at least one person within the firm if the emergency manager is a firm) have attained a degree in accounting, business, public administration, or a related field from an accredited institution and have a minimum of five years' experience in local or state budgetary or fiscal management.

·                    Explicitly identify an emergency manager's extensive power and authority by listing 32 actions a manager may take, 16 of which are new, two of which are in PA 72 but would be significantly modified, and seven of which are in PA 72 but would be slightly modified.

·                    Grant an appointed emergency manager the authority to abrogate existing labor contracts (currently the emergency financial manager may renegotiate contracts or enter into binding arbitration).

·                    Provide an explicit exit strategy to enable formerly struggling local governments to emerge from financial emergency status during which time local officials are prohibited from revising the emergency manager's two-year budget, labor contracts, or ordinances.

·                    Suspend collective bargaining for up to five years in local governments placed in receivership.

·                    A related bill (House Bill 4246) would allow collective bargaining agreements to be rejected, modified, or terminated under the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act.




Not for nothing but you seem to be supporting retarded local government officials against a larger, seemingly more responsible entity but have no problem with the federal government running roughshod over states' rights.

My take on this?  Fuck the whole town.  Let them rot.  They blew it, screw 'em.  No rescue, no takeover.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: BrenExplode]
    #14098241 - 03/10/11 02:24 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

BrenExplode said:
It's basically happening in Michigan too, and that's just where I happen to live. Woohoo Rick Snyder! Kill our freedoms under our noses!





no one is saying you cant be in a union, you're still free to do it but that doesnt mean you have a right to a job

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #14098257 - 03/10/11 02:26 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Indeed.  The taxpayers/voters have the right to tell you to go fuck yourself.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14098484 - 03/10/11 02:59 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> Indeed.  The taxpayers/voters have the right to tell you to go fuck yourself.

I'm always amazed at how the government tries to limit the bullshit that it has to put up with, but is more than willing to force private employers to deal with the pain.  If unions are harmful to the government, then they are harmful to private business as well.  I have nothing against unions being formed, but I don't believe they should have any protections (beyond protecting an employees right to voluntarily be in a union).  If an employer wishes to fire every single person that strikes, so be it.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14098508 - 03/10/11 03:03 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Indeed.  The taxpayers/voters have the right to tell you to go fuck yourself.

I'm always amazed at how the government tries to limit the bullshit that it has to put up with, but is more than willing to force private employers to deal with the pain.  If unions are harmful to the government, then they are harmful to private business as well.  I have nothing against unions being formed, but I don't believe they should have any protections (beyond protecting an employees right to voluntarily be in a union).  If an employer wishes to fire every single person that strikes, so be it.



I always did.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRebirtha
I really like bread
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/22/03
Posts: 5,680
Loc: over there
Last seen: 2 days, 1 hour
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14103075 - 03/11/11 09:33 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I think the difference is  that unions or any group have the right to come together to negotiate terms, with their employers, but it becomes morally and fiscally wrong when a group has legal power to press their views over their employer. It is one thing to negotiate, another to start litigation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelibertarian23
strangeranger
Registered: 06/16/10
Posts: 78
Last seen: 12 years, 10 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Rebirtha]
    #14104053 - 03/11/11 01:44 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

okay its been along while since i've posted but just stopped back gettin ready to do another grow...anyways nice to see ya zappa...so being an anarcho capitalist i must say that voluntary association of people coming together to make change in their workplace is something that i truly hold up as a good thing... people should be able to unionize and unions have done many good things...now my problem comes from this standpoint...i believe there should be no government or politicians therefore there should be no public sector employees and therefore no public sector unions... i was reading an interview from the 70s between murrray rothbard and some journalist and they were discussing on whether we as anarchists should participate in voting at all seeing as we disagree with the idea of government and some would consider this surrendering our values....murray rothbard disagreed saying that for lack of eliminating the state all at once we need to slowly chizel away at it(i paraphrased here) so how i feel about taking away collective bargaining rights in the public sector is that scott walker is doing a good thing in my view because it ties the politicians from being able to buy this large group of votes at our expense for their power... private sector unionism is fine with me so long as it isn't forced and isn't a protection racket(meaning if the union doesn't agree and the business owner can find other workers they're sol)...we need to be looking at other ways of tying the hands of interest groups from buying our polit bureau off...and keep chiseling away at all government...sorry if this was a little incoherent didn't get much sleep last night

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: libertarian23]
    #14104071 - 03/11/11 01:49 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Hi pal.  How does an anarcho-capitalist support Kompulsory Kollektivism?  Or any Kollektivism, for that matter?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinecommuneart
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/06
Posts: 1,021
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14104114 - 03/11/11 01:58 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

how do you fight organized people willing to slaughter not just you and your whole family, but your whole race/religion/nation for otherworldly historical mistakes of your ancestors?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: communeart]
    #14104250 - 03/11/11 02:23 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I'm not the anarchist.  Don't ask me.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelibertarian23
strangeranger
Registered: 06/16/10
Posts: 78
Last seen: 12 years, 10 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14104580 - 03/11/11 03:35 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

i support the ideal of private sector unions because of the doctrine of voluntarism...if a group of employees willingly join together to address contracts with their employers its really none of my business...and if that employer chooses to fire them all its really none of my business...if they think they are worth more than he can or is willing to pay they should find an employer that is willing to pay them what they want...the employer can make a contract with either a single employee or the group as a whole...using government to force the end of all unions is contrary to the idea of freedom of associatio

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejimbotron
Patty-Cake Enthusiast
 User Gallery


Registered: 02/24/09
Posts: 2,324
Last seen: 10 years, 5 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: libertarian23]
    #14104736 - 03/11/11 04:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

It intends to fuck over all public employees except for policemen and firefighters.

Why are they excepted? Fuck you, that's why. Oh, and because they were the only unions who gave most of their money to Walker.

Kinda like that union->politician->union feedback loop I keep seeing people blather about, except in this case it's a Republican making sure his personal union gravy train remains unbroken. Why?

Again, fuck you, that's why.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: libertarian23]
    #14104743 - 03/11/11 04:20 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

That is not how the current union law works.  But Walker is trying to make it in Wisconsin.  Freedom to associate and disassociate and freedom not to pay dues.  That's pretty much it


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelibertarian23
strangeranger
Registered: 06/16/10
Posts: 78
Last seen: 12 years, 10 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14107699 - 03/12/11 07:02 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

he did exclude firemen and police but that was so that this part could get through without the demagogury coming at him from all sides...the police and firefighters will always have us by the balls if we cant get past the fact that a lot of these services suck anyways...police left their mandate of protecting and serving a long time ago and now they're just another revenue stream for the state...read some of radley balko's postings and youll see how swat raids fuck us over and how the push for militarization in the wod is nuts

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: libertarian23]
    #14109036 - 03/12/11 01:29 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

The government can just refuse to recognize the union, post job offers and interview candidates who then can negotiate for themselves their own deal.  Then there is the idea of compulsory union dues.  That you can certainly make illegal as it is coercion.




its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...

i would agree that forcing the said worker to pay union dues to fund democratic candidates is not particularly palatable...but the flipside is that without the union.. the worker is forced to accept slave-labour wages.. which in turn become higher profits that go to fund repugnicans...

so simply eliminating the union wont save the worker from being forced to make political contributions against their will...in fact..doing so forces them to fund candidates that are openly promising to dig them deeper into a hole...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14109112 - 03/12/11 01:46 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  Ive done it before.  If your skills and ability truly do make you a vital asset, then its easy as hell to negotiate for yourself.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14109249 - 03/12/11 02:13 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  It isn't that hard.  The vast majority (77%) of the population does just fine without unions.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14109276 - 03/12/11 02:17 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
Quote:

The government can just refuse to recognize the union, post job offers and interview candidates who then can negotiate for themselves their own deal.  Then there is the idea of compulsory union dues.  That you can certainly make illegal as it is coercion.




its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  Millions of people do it whenever they change jobs including most government employees.  If the government doesn't get enough qualified applicants it sweetens the pot or it folds the program.  Some jobs are only worth so much.  At the point at which the cost of filling the job becomes too high you fold the job.  See GM.
Quote:



i would agree that forcing the said worker to pay union dues to fund democratic candidates is not particularly palatable...but the flipside is that without the union.. the worker is forced to accept slave-labour wages.. which in turn become higher profits that go to fund repugnicans...




This is, of course, a fantasy.  Nobody is forced to take any particular job and there is, sadly, a law against slave labor wages, called the min imum wage law, that fosters increased unemployment.
Quote:



so simply eliminating the union wont save the worker from being forced to make political contributions against their will...in fact..doing so forces them to fund candidates that are openly promising to dig them deeper into a hole...




Sadly this bill does not eliminate the union.  Even FDR knew that public work force unions were anathema.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14110087 - 03/12/11 05:20 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

seems like there should be equity of power. If the employer (government) can act as a group to negotiate, why not the the employee?

Interesting that no one here claims to know exactly what the bill does...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14110114 - 03/12/11 05:26 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
seems like there should be equity of power. If the employer (government) can act as a group to negotiate, why not the the employee?



There are hundreds of different school districts and police districts and fire districts in every state.  There are also hundreds of public works departments and numerous other private enterprises competing for the same employees.  There is not one government employer octopus.  Public sector unions are 100% about protecting incompetents, giving power and paychecks to union management parasites, and funding Democrat candidates.
Quote:



Interesting that no one here claims to know exactly what the bill does...




I believe I have presented it but if you want to know from somewhere else you can always just google it.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14110581 - 03/12/11 06:48 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  Ive done it before.  If your skills and ability truly do make you a vital asset, then its easy as hell to negotiate for yourself.




Your micro negotiation for a relative raise within the same pay scale is not analogous to the radical elevation of the working class

That is the goal of unions and the source of their pride. To make it so that working class people can actually live and work at a decent standard. Something we didn't have in our grand or great-grandfather's time in this country but now do - thanks to unions and progressivism. Something we're losing by the hour in the red-state political climate.

The issue of collective bargaining is educatory. Smart markets require educated participants and manual laborers generally don't know the value of the work they are selling - they lack the educatory equipment to truly price to the market.

Bonding in a union to offset this power isn't "blackmail of an employer" until that union has become exclusive in membership and stifled competition - then it stops being a union and starts being a guild or even a sort of trust in its own right.

The proper role of the capitalist is the role of lender. The bank loans me money to start in business, they are repaid by the terms of the loan - they don't become my boss.


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14111368 - 03/12/11 09:00 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




no it's not, I've done it on most jobs I've worked. a guy I worked with did
so as well, if an employer is in need of skilled labor then that employer is
willing to pay for that service. if they dont want to keep me on payroll to
handle 3 phase electrical or setup and repair of machinery then they can pay
for more to contract an outside company, in the mean time while I'm on
payroll I'll handle other duties to keep my time occupied

do we pay pris $28/hr to work his little butt off all day every day or do we
pay an electrician, hydraulic specialist, etc...  $150/hr for 3 days every week

when I waited tables I negotiated my hourly pay, I started at $1/hr more
than anyone else was making and I pulled more in tips as well, collective
bargaining only protects the weak, lazy and stupid

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14111397 - 03/12/11 09:04 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

JohnnyConverse said:
Your micro negotiation for a relative raise within the same pay scale is not analogous to the radical elevation of the working class

That is the goal of unions and the source of their pride. To make it so that working class people can actually live and work at a decent standard





so why do cops, fire fighters and teachers always claim they arent paid
enough, why do other professionals with similar degrees always make more?

are the unions working for the worker or are they working for themselves

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #14113106 - 03/13/11 06:36 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:

JohnnyConverse said:
Your micro negotiation for a relative raise within the same pay scale is not analogous to the radical elevation of the working class

That is the goal of unions and the source of their pride. To make it so that working class people can actually live and work at a decent standard





so why do cops, fire fighters and teachers always claim they arent paid
enough, why do other professionals with similar degrees always make more?

are the unions working for the worker or are they working for themselves




professionals with "similar" degrees "always" make more?

How much, in your opinion, should teachers and firefighters make? (cops as we know them pretty much need to just end, imo, but that's another thread)


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14113152 - 03/13/11 07:14 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> How much, in your opinion, should teachers and firefighters make? (cops as we know them pretty much need to just end, imo, but that's another thread)

No idea.  Pay should be determined by qualifications and market demand.  If a thousand people want to be cops, and they are all equally qualified, and only ten positions are available, then the job should only pay what the ten cheapest are willing to work for.  If some of those thousand are more qualified than the rest, better educated, more training, job experience, etc, then they should get hired first at a higher pay than the others.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14113599 - 03/13/11 10:45 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> How much, in your opinion, should teachers and firefighters make? (cops as we know them pretty much need to just end, imo, but that's another thread)

No idea.  Pay should be determined by qualifications and market demand.  If a thousand people want to be cops, and they are all equally qualified, and only ten positions are available, then the job should only pay what the ten cheapest are willing to work for.  If some of those thousand are more qualified than the rest, better educated, more training, job experience, etc, then they should get hired first at a higher pay than the others.



Win. 

I remember back in the eighties my friend was a union auto-worker at the Tarrytown GM plant (now long closed and derelict).  In order to get a job there you had to have a connection.  Not in the company.  In the union.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14113629 - 03/13/11 10:52 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  It isn't that hard.  The vast majority (77%) of the population does just fine without unions.




you dont have to be a union member to be represented by a union (or more correctly..unions)...you might not be in a union..but unions are still the reason that your not in a sweatshop either...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14113656 - 03/13/11 10:59 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
but unions are still the reason that your not in a sweatshop either...




Nope. The reason I'm not in a sweatshop is I worked my ass off, didn't piss my money away on shit I didn't need, saved, planned ahead and didn't look to others to hand me shit.

The unions played no part.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #14113857 - 03/13/11 11:39 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

For myself they have actually been a detriment.  In construction they interfere with production and competition.  Consider this idea.  If contractors were to organize to set prices against a disparate group of buyers they would be arrested for price fixing.  When a nationwide or statewide union conspires to fix prices charged to a varied group of clients, which is what each and every municipality is, the nitwits think it's good.  If contractors had their own installed stooges sitting on the council that negotiates against them they would be charged with bribery.  When unions install stooges in political office to sit across the table from them the nitwits like it.  Union membership in this country is 12% or so.  Private industry unionization is under 10%.  There are more members of public sector unions, which even FDR considered anathema, than there are private sector union members.  Why?  Because they destroy companies and jobs.  They increase costss for everyone else.  EVERYONE ELSE suffers to feed the union till.  They are our natural adversaries.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14115051 - 03/13/11 04:52 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  It isn't that hard.  The vast majority (77%) of the population does just fine without unions.




you dont have to be a union member to be represented by a union (or more correctly..unions)...you might not be in a union..but unions are still the reason that your not in a sweatshop either...




Unions are a cancer upon the hard working people that actually earn their money.  Claiming that unions somehow represent me, or other non-union workers, is a joke.  Unions care about one thing, and one thing only, making the union leaders filthy rich at the expense of others... both the union members, the employer, and ultimately the consumer.  I have nothing against union workers, as often they have no choice, but unions themselves, and especially union leaders, are a disgrace.  You should be ashamed for supporting them... and you have the audacity to call me a corporate shill.  Look in the fucking mirror.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14115144 - 03/13/11 05:10 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

There was a time imo when unions served a very important need. There was no organized crime in the unions at that time.  The Jimmy Hoffa's came later.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Icelander]
    #14115419 - 03/13/11 05:55 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Icelander said:
There was a time imo when unions served a very important need. There was no organized crime in the unions at that time.  The Jimmy Hoffa's came later.



:flowstone:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14115502 - 03/13/11 06:09 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I think I remember you saying yourself that any need of unions was long over.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14116574 - 03/13/11 09:30 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

Annapurna1 said:
Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

its absolutely rediculous to think that any one worker could negotiate a fair deal for themselves against a large govt or corporation without a union to represent them...




Why?  It isn't that hard.  The vast majority (77%) of the population does just fine without unions.




you dont have to be a union member to be represented by a union (or more correctly..unions)...you might not be in a union..but unions are still the reason that your not in a sweatshop either...




Unions are a cancer upon the hard working people that actually earn their money.  Claiming that unions somehow represent me, or other non-union workers, is a joke.  Unions care about one thing, and one thing only, making the union leaders filthy rich at the expense of others... both the union members, the employer, and ultimately the consumer.  I have nothing against union workers, as often they have no choice, but unions themselves, and especially union leaders, are a disgrace.  You should be ashamed for supporting them... and you have the audacity to call me a corporate shill.  Look in the fucking mirror.




anti-union rants like that are exactly what corporate shills get paid to do.. although i would agree that many unions are poorly run...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Edited by Annapurna1 (03/14/11 12:58 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 12 years, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Icelander]
    #14116774 - 03/13/11 10:06 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

The biggest flaw here is that these are public unions. Instead of two private entities with the same goal (profit for themselves), it is the teachers fighting for profit, and yet they elect those who they bargain with. Also, the politicians have no immediate financial/personal risk by making poor/horrible business decisions, so they don't hesitate to do what "looks" best or increases their chances of re-election.


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: 4896744]
    #14118896 - 03/14/11 11:27 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

iThink said:
The biggest flaw here is that these are public unions. Instead of two private entities with the same goal (profit for themselves), it is the teachers fighting for profit, and yet they elect those who they bargain with.




Where?  I know of no right of franchise for public employees. 

Whats the problem even if they do this?


Quote:

Also, the politicians have no immediate financial/personal risk by making poor/horrible business decisions, so they don't hesitate to do what "looks" best or increases their chances of re-election.





Why not?  This is only true if the populace is stupid or ignorant.  I'm not sure how you could get around that.  Stupid people and ignorant people can eventually learn or be convinced.  Corrupt and power-hungry people don't care.  I know of no solution to the former that doesn't empower the later- to our collective detriment.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 12 years, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14119085 - 03/14/11 12:10 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Where?  I know of no right of franchise for public employees. 

Whats the problem even if they do this?




Where? What do you mean where? You do know this thread is about the public teacher's union in Wisconsin don't you?

And the problem is that there is not enough vested interest in the actual feasibility of what is essentially a government run company. There is no immediate chance of failure due to the ability to borrow vast amounts of money. The only immediate threat the politicians face is not being re-elected.

Quote:

Why not?  This is only true if the populace is stupid or ignorant.  I'm not sure how you could get around that.  Stupid people and ignorant people can eventually learn or be convinced.  Corrupt and power-hungry people don't care.  I know of no solution to the former that doesn't empower the later- to our collective detriment.




The populace is pretty stupid or ignorant on most issues. Also, I agree with the last part of that statement, but my only point is that public union's inevitably lead to outrageous "business plans".


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: 4896744]
    #14119359 - 03/14/11 01:10 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

iThink said:
Quote:

Where?  I know of no right of franchise for public employees. 

Whats the problem even if they do this?




Where? What do you mean where? You do know this thread is about the public teacher's union in Wisconsin don't you?





No, I wasn't aware- I was taking the question asked in the title to be the topic of the thread.

Even with that, however; I remain skeptical: do WI municipalities grant suffrage to teachers in their city schools; WI state provide suffrage to teachers in schools within the legislative district?  Not the way it works around my neck of the woods: whether you have suffrage is granted statutorily with no dependable on your employment as a teacher or other government job.


Quote:

Quote:

Why not?  This is only true if the populace is stupid or ignorant.  I'm not sure how you could get around that.  Stupid people and ignorant people can eventually learn or be convinced.  Corrupt and power-hungry people don't care.  I know of no solution to the former that doesn't empower the later- to our collective detriment.




The populace is pretty stupid or ignorant on most issues. Also, I agree with the last part of that statement, but my only point is that public union's inevitably lead to outrageous "business plans".




Yeah, I don't care for the public's general shortsightedness and seeming willingness to believe platforms of people known to lie and ignore campaign positions (i.e. Obama), but its probably better now than it ever has been.  We've got ease of publishing and information dissemination the writers of the US Constitution would never have dreamed of.  Hopefully this will also allow people to become educated on fallacies and failings in logic so they vote for what is really in their interest. 

A bit of an offshoot, but note how the terrible attrocities and disasterous public movements in world history are invariably led by radical youth?  Those without life experience- often without much education?  Khmer Rouge genocide, China's various attrocities such as the cultural revolution and so forth, many of socialism's supporters during the russian revolution, rwandan genocide, et cet.

In interview after interview, and per other evidence gathering, the people who commited those terrible acts that were ultimately self-harming even to the perpetrators, they profess ignorance of the consequences of what they were doing and the cause they were supporting.  While some is likely to rationalize their bad acts, its pretty coherent in its basic message: young people without much practical clue whats going on with a monoculture of thought.

Hopefully with the better ways of reaching people and seeking knowledge, there will be less chance for such ignorance to spread in the future.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMr.Al
Alphabet soup
Male

Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 4 months, 18 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #14119464 - 03/14/11 01:35 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Anna, I was interested in your opinion regarding unions and the fact that they cause a higher unemployment rate.

Do you suppose that the auto unions may have had a bailout plan in the works before the last presidential election?

Have you heard any rumors involving unions and organized crime?

I care deeply about your input and await your response with bated breath...

:sherlock:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14119607 - 03/14/11 02:07 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:
A bit of an offshoot, but note how the terrible attrocities and disasterous public movements in world history are invariably led by radical youth?  Those without life experience- often without much education?  Khmer Rouge genocide, China's various attrocities such as the cultural revolution and so forth, many of socialism's supporters during the russian revolution, rwandan genocide, et cet.





Hmm, I've never noticed that.  Pol Pot was 50 when he took over Cambodia, Mao was 72 at the beginning of the cultural revolution, Stalin was 39, Lenin was 47, and Trotsky was 38 at the beginning of the Russian revolution.  I don't know who was involved in the Rwandan genocide, but I believe it was the Rwandan military.  Are you saying the Rwandan military was run by radical youth?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14119773 - 03/14/11 02:47 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

"Run by" and "committed by" are often different people, and often different demographics.  Its easier to build up a fervor in the youth.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14119864 - 03/14/11 03:10 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
"Run by" and "committed by" are often different people, and often different demographics.  Its easier to build up a fervor in the youth.



"Useful idiots".  Otherwise known as dupes and schmucks.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14119909 - 03/14/11 03:20 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
"Run by" and "committed by" are often different people, and often different demographics.  Its easier to build up a fervor in the youth.




Agreed, but that is not what was claimed:

Quote:

A bit of an offshoot, but note how the terrible attrocities and disasterous public movements in world history are invariably led by radical youth?



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14120221 - 03/14/11 04:29 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Back on topic, the WI law will lower the per student funding from the state.  This gives local school boards less money with which to pay teachers amongst other things. 

Further, it prevents collective bargaining, so instead of negotiating only one contract the school boards will need to negotiate many contracts, and inherently inefficient process.

It will prevent employers from deducting union fees from pay checks.  This will decrease the unions ability to collect fees, and put the an additional administrative cost on the union.

It caps raises at 1%  Since inflation is more then 1% it means that government employees will be paid less in real dollars when they retire then when they start.

It will increase government employee's contribution for their retirement and health care plans significantly.

Teachers have generally been prevented from striking through either law or contractual obligation so if they strike they risk being fired "for cause". 

At the end of the day it will do three things.  1) Make it more difficult for unions to organize, 2) Decrease unions ability to give value to their members by creating barriers in negotiating, 3) Cut salary and benefits from government employees automatically.

My mother who works as a secretary in a public school (for little more then minimum wage and benefits) stands to lose more then a $100,000 dollars in benefits, salary, and retirement over the next seven years because of this policy.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesnoot
look alive ∞
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/30/05
Posts: 9,644
Loc: 45º parallel Flag
Last seen: 7 hours, 8 minutes
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Icelander]
    #14120252 - 03/14/11 04:35 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I think what bothers me most is how Walker went about doing this, first by saying it was a necesssitity to passed said law cause it was needed to balance the budget, then goes and completely removes all mention of the budget to get it passed, and apparently breaks the law in the mean time.


--------------------



I am incapable of conceiving infinity, and yet I do not accept finity.
- Simone de Beauvoir -

Edited by snoot (03/14/11 04:38 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14120304 - 03/14/11 04:44 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Off topic:

If a corporation, partnership or other business has the right to organize in order to create a for-profit institution.  And part of creating a profit is to minimize the costs of creating a final product or service, then employees should have the right to organize and collectively bargain to maximize what they can sell their labor for.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14120327 - 03/14/11 04:48 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

That makes sense, but then the employer also has a right to fire the lot of them and hire new people.

I see nothing about this new legislation that say the teachers cant band together and all quit if they dont get what they want.  They are free to quit, nobody is making them work.  They are free to collectively demand a certain compensation package and collectively quit if that is not accepted.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offline4896744
Small Town Girl
Female User Gallery

Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 12 years, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14120597 - 03/14/11 05:29 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Off topic:

If a corporation, partnership or other business has the right to organize in order to create a for-profit institution.  And part of creating a profit is to minimize the costs of creating a final product or service, then employees should have the right to organize and collectively bargain to maximize what they can sell their labor for.




I would agree, except this doesn't work when the unions are negotiating with the government. Perfect example is the Wisconsin teachers. They were averaging 50k+ a year. They also had extremely good benefits. These wants would never be met in the private sector because it is completely unfeasible to run it efficiently with this much labor cost.

They employ the employers in a sense. They have lots of voting power and the politicians often rely on them for re-election.


--------------------
Live your Life! :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: snoot]
    #14120740 - 03/14/11 05:52 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

snoot said:
I think what bothers me most is how Walker went about doing this, first by saying it was a necesssitity to passed said law cause it was needed to balance the budget, then goes and completely removes all mention of the budget to get it passed, and apparently breaks the law in the mean time.



No.  The people who were nefarious were the Dems who fled.  A quorum was required for budget votes but there was no stricture against splitting the bill to carve out the money from the other aspects.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14120954 - 03/14/11 06:29 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

johnm214 said:
A bit of an offshoot, but note how the terrible attrocities and disasterous public movements in world history are invariably led by radical youth?  Those without life experience- often without much education?  Khmer Rouge genocide, China's various attrocities such as the cultural revolution and so forth, many of socialism's supporters during the russian revolution, rwandan genocide, et cet.





Hmm, I've never noticed that.  Pol Pot was 50 when he took over Cambodia, Mao was 72 at the beginning of the cultural revolution, Stalin was 39, Lenin was 47, and Trotsky was 38 at the beginning of the Russian revolution.  I don't know who was involved in the Rwandan genocide, but I believe it was the Rwandan military.  Are you saying the Rwandan military was run by radical youth?





I'm speaking of the political base, not the leaders.  I would assume that practically the leaders need to be at least middle age to have had the political connections to even push for power by whatever means they achieve it.  These people seemed to be largely supported by an uneducated and perhaps naive group of radical youth who could commit all sorts of atrocious acts under their fervent faith in their perfect philosophy- generally ignorant of the prior examples of such being attempted (not that their leaders were: I know Pol Pot was specifically warned by China not to try and achieve communism in a short period, but he just smiled and boasted  "we will be the first nation to create a completely communist society without wasting time on intermediate steps."  Yikes).

In the order you mention:


  • Khmer Rouge came to power through their revolutionary army composed mostly of young, rural, volunteers pushing for Mao-style Marxism.  The regime specifically exalted the youth and peasant "old people" (not referring to age- The Khmer Rouge regarded the capitalist swine in the cities "new people" as they were undergoing the "reeducation" process which would strip them of their past identity, life.)  Youth didn't have their memories tainted by pre-"year zero" Cambodia and were especially valued and recruited as politically more reliable. Pol Pot had some of his most fanatical devotees in the youth group called the Communist Youth League of Kampuchea.  Not sure if this is sufficiently sourced, but it matches what I've read elsewhere: 

    "Khieu Thirith's management of youth groups meant that Pol Pot had ample reserves of zealous young cadres, "the nucleus and wick of the struggle," committed to imposing the party center's will throughout the country....  Pol Pot considered Youth League alumni as his most loyal and reliable supporters, and used them to gain control of the central and of the regional CPK apparatus. The powerful Khieu Thirith, minister of social action, was responsible for directing the youth movement."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge_rule_of_Cambodia

      Additionally, the youth generally didn't have an opportunity to have yet produced any wealth, received any special education, learned a foreign language, gotten glasses, or to have advanced far in buddhism, and so were spared execution for those slights as well.  With so many people being imprisoned, crippled, and killed, this was not a trivial thing to simply be existent, and they often were recruited by the regime to work the "new people" in the work camps or as interrogators/executioners.

    "The use of children and young people as executioners in the killings of various strata of the population (including near relatives of the executioners) was a faithful copy of the Chinese cultural revolution.  Pol Pot and Ieng Sary's policy of relying mainly on the poor and lower-middle-class peasants to carry out revolution instead of on the working class was a product of Mao Tse Tung's thought."
    Genocide in Cambodia: documents from the trial of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary





  • Mao had the Red Guard that largely carried out the cultural revolution. See: description and cited sources at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Guards_%28People%27s_Republic_of_China%29 ; In the existing accounts and footage of these events, you see it is usually young folks destroying temples, beating people, shooting or burying people, .et cet for the state.  Additionally, Mao's army was composed of youth during their war for power, and the great changes Mao ordered were carried out relatively soon after seizing control- often by these same youth.  They also formed the troops and lower level officers of the groups who carried out the killings of the various groups Mao decided needed to die outright. (see the quote above in the Rwanda section)




  • Lenin had the mutinous armed forces troops, who killed their officers and disobeyed their commands to fire upon the revolting public during the Febuary revolution, which allowed the uprising to continue and gave Lennin a chance to return to Russia and start his revolution against the provisional government- bringing along many of these same young men from the armed forces.

    "To quell the riots, the Tsar looked to the army. At least 180,000 troops were available in the capital, but most were either untrained or injured. Historian Ian Beckett suggests around 12,000 could be regarded as reliable, but even these proved reluctant to move in on the crowd, since it included so many women. It was for this reason that when, on March 11 [O.S. February 26], the Tsar ordered the army to suppress the rioting by force, troops began to mutiny."Wikipedia, Citations ommited:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_Revolution




  • Rwanda's genocide was carried out by a significant portion of radical youth.  The more extreme agitators have been recognized as the Impuzamugambi, which was a group specifically composed of young people.  These people were regarded as the most extreme in their agitation, and methods, in carrying out the killings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impuzamugambi ; The larger group that led the genocide, the Interahamwe, was also composed of a youth movement, though supervised by older state actors who administered some kind of public work's campaign before they decided to focus their efforts on killing people.  http://www.massviolence.org/Interahamwe





It seems to me this is more than just a coincidence or a consequence of the fact that most armies are composed of young men.  In all these events it is not just the fact that there is a disproportionate amount of young committing the heinous acts and allowing radical regimes to come to power, but the fact that they often are seen as the most radical and unflinching in the execution of atrocities, as is the case with: Rawanda youth groups/militias, Chinese Red Guard, et cet

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14121229 - 03/14/11 07:15 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I don't disagree with that assessment, but that's not at all what you said...

I wonder if the political base of perhaps all revolutionary change is mostly effected by young people, regardless of whether there were atrocities involved, since it seems like young people are the least invested in the current system, are less likely to have connections within the current system, and/or the fact that most people in most countries tend to be young (or have tended to be in the past). 

I don't know what this has to do with the topic of the thread though...  :confused:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Mr.Al]
    #14122340 - 03/14/11 10:08 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Mr.Al said:
Anna, I was interested in your opinion regarding unions and the fact that they cause a higher unemployment rate.





and where did you get this "fact"?...

Quote:

Do you suppose that the auto unions may have had a bailout plan in the works before the last presidential election?




im not sure what their role in that bailout was either before or after the 2008 elections.. but its still better than bailing out the bankers so that they could keep gambling...

Quote:

Have you heard any rumors involving unions and organized crime?




i did mention that many unions were poorly run in my earlier post.. and cozying up to the mafia doesnt help much...OTOH..the mafia isnt any worse than dick cheney and halliburton either...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: 4896744]
    #14122927 - 03/14/11 11:47 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

I would agree, except this doesn't work when the unions are negotiating with the government. Perfect example is the Wisconsin teachers. They were averaging 50k+ a year. They also had extremely good benefits. These wants would never be met in the private sector because it is completely unfeasible to run it efficiently with this much labor cost.

They employ the employers in a sense. They have lots of voting power and the politicians often rely on them for re-election.




The starting salary averaged at $25,222 with inflation a starting teacher will retire making less in real dollars then they started, ie less then $25,222.  Thats pretty shitty.  More over the average salary of $46,000 per year plus the state's share of the benefits is not unreasonable.  To get a teaching degree in WI generally means 5+ years in college.  Plus the average teacher has a masters degree above that.  And that average salary is also for a teacher that has worked for at least a decade. 

I attended public schools in Wisconsin, the teachers put in significant amount of time outside of class, and quite frankly were motivated and engaging.  They were paid slightly above the national average, coming in 20th out of 50 states.

As for teachers "voting in" the people they negotiate with I think that is largely untrue.  First, teachers are a relatively small percentage of the population and their political might isn't as great as is commonly perceived.  Second, they did not all vote in lock step with how the union would have liked them too, just as any reasonable person doesn't vote because of one issue.  Moreover they negotiate with school boards that have far less discretion over teacher salary in Wisconsin, then the state and federal governments do.  As such there are substantial checks and balances in place to prevent conflicts of interest.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14124270 - 03/15/11 09:27 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI.  Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14124652 - 03/15/11 11:21 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Back on topic, the WI law will lower the per student funding from the state.  This gives local school boards less money with which to pay teachers amongst other things. 




As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.


Quote:

Further, it prevents collective bargaining, so instead of negotiating only one contract the school boards will need to negotiate many contracts, and inherently inefficient process.




It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.


Quote:

It will prevent employers from deducting union fees from pay checks.  This will decrease the unions ability to collect fees, and put the an additional administrative cost on the union.




The costs should fall on the union. Why should those not in a union, have to help support them?


Quote:

It caps raises at 1%  Since inflation is more then 1% it means that government employees will be paid less in real dollars when they retire then when they start.




Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work


Quote:

It will increase government employee's contribution for their retirement and health care plans significantly.




Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.


Quote:

Teachers have generally been prevented from striking through either law or contractual obligation so if they strike they risk being fired "for cause". 




Another very good thing. They should be fired if they strike.


Quote:

At the end of the day it will do three things.  1) Make it more difficult for unions to organize, 2) Decrease unions ability to give value to their members by creating barriers in negotiating, 3) Cut salary and benefits from government employees automatically.




All very good things for the taxpaying majority.


Quote:

My mother who works as a secretary in a public school (for little more then minimum wage and benefits) stands to lose more then a $100,000 dollars in benefits, salary, and retirement over the next seven years because of this policy.




Wahhh!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14124801 - 03/15/11 01:02 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I still don't see any any explanation of exactly what it means to end collective bargaining.

Don't you all see that what the law is exactly doing is more important than your opinion of unions?

For example if the law makes it illegal for more than one person to negotiate with the government, then this would appear to impinge on free assembly and free speech rights. Say I want to work with my friend Joe, and we both tell the employer "You either get both of us or neither of us.", how could you possibly justify making that speech illegal?

On the other hand if the law simply prevents government managers/supervisors from negotiating with Joe and me, then Joe and I can say all we like and that is still legal.

For me, my own personal opinion of unions has little to do with my evaluation of the law, what is more important is the exact nature of the law and whether it can be legally/philosophically justified.

It seems the argument should be less "Unions are a cancer vs. Unions are a boon" and more, "The government has the right to refuse to negotiate with groups vs. the government doesn't have the right to negotiate with groups".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14124822 - 03/15/11 01:06 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
I don't disagree with that assessment, but that's not at all what you said...




What I meant was led in the sense of advocating and carrying out the various revolutionary causes.  The young folks are the ones that make it happen, even if the old leaders are the head of the movement (though sometimes not until later, such as in the February Revolution, which lennin somewhat co opted.)


Quote:



I wonder if the political base of perhaps all revolutionary change is mostly effected by young people, regardless of whether there were atrocities involved, since it seems like young people are the least invested in the current system, are less likely to have connections within the current system, and/or the fact that most people in most countries tend to be young (or have tended to be in the past).


 

Possibly.  It would make sense, then, that the youtthful movements would be more likely to be dramatically different or extreme than the older movements for the same reasons they predominate. 

Do you think the youth who supported the Khmer Rouge really knew that much about communism, socialism, and the ways its been attempted?  Did they have a reasoned opinion that things needed to change: the cities all but evacuated and the skilled workers killed or made to work in professions they were incompotent at (farming), leading to widespread famine?


All these movements seem to be ran and justified by hatred and dehumanizing a particular class: often the old order.  I see the same thing in the justification for the war on drugs, especially in the way people continue to support it once their offered reasons are carefully and completely dismantled: its a bit hard to identify yourself as hating a class of society (druggies- doesn't matter if the class you imagine is coherent with that you are persecuting, of if it really exists: i.e. drugged out people with no morals who are different than the good people and rob to feed their habits, destroying society)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #14124879 - 03/15/11 01:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI.  Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.




We are not talking about unions in NYC, but about ones in WI.  Teachers compose one of the largest public service union in WI that is going to be affected by this law.  Contrary to your opinion, if raises are capped at either 1% or inflation, then they will not by necessity always compensate for inflation.  As a result people who start working will end up making less in real dollars then what they started making.

Quote:

As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.




Slashing teacher's salaries does affect quality.  Fewer qualified people will be willing to become teachers, teachers with experience and knowledge will quit, and considering only a percentage of those funds go to teachers the other materials that money is being spent on will also be cut to the determent of the students. 

Quote:

It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.




Actually, no one will get a raise in the traditional sense, at most get a standard of living adjustment.  I have never met an ineffective asswipe teacher, they probably exist, however I have met plenty ineffective asswipes in private practice and they get raises.

Quote:

Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work




This might be a legitimate point because I can't find the link anymore, and I might have got confused the maximum raise being inflation and the average raise expected this year being 1%  If thats the case my bad.

Quote:

Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.





Of course they pay less in health care then their private sector counter parts, because for 30 years they have negotiated for good health care at the expense of salary and other benefits.

Quote:

Wahhh




Hey if you want to try to strip cash out of my lower middle class family fine, but no one is going to put up with that kind of inequity for long.  Besides the real cry babies here are the greedy assholes that believe that, even though tax rates are at the lowest they have been in decades, they still don't want to pay, so instead balance the books on the backs of working class Americans.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14125184 - 03/15/11 02:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Quote:

The Teachers' union in NYC is extremely politically powerful and it wasn't just teacher union in WI.  Your other assessments about making less due to inflation are complete crap as well.




We are not talking about unions in NYC, but about ones in WI.  Teachers compose one of the largest public service union in WI that is going to be affected by this law.  Contrary to your opinion, if raises are capped at either 1% or inflation, then they will not by necessity always compensate for inflation.  As a result people who start working will end up making less in real dollars then what they started making.




They get raises just for putting in years.  Stop with the bullshit.
Quote:



Quote:

As spending is not related to results, this is a very good thing.




Slashing teacher's salaries does affect quality.  Fewer qualified people will be willing to become teachers, teachers with experience and knowledge will quit, and considering only a percentage of those funds go to teachers the other materials that money is being spent on will also be cut to the determent of the students.




Nobody is slashing anything, in spite of the hyperventilating nitwits assertions.  By far the greatest expense in education is salaries.  Why do you think if money is cut for salaries that will cut other moneys?  Seems to me the opposite would occur.  And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement.  What did we get for paying teachers more money?  Not a motherfucking thing.
Quote:



Quote:

It will help eliminate ineffective asswipes from the classroom. Only those who deserve a raise should ever get one.




Actually, no one will get a raise in the traditional sense, at most get a standard of living adjustment.  I have never met an ineffective asswipe teacher, they probably exist, however I have met plenty ineffective asswipes in private practice and they get raises.




I've met lots of ineffective asswipe teachers.  Ever heard of "rubber rooms"?  And no, they still get years of service raises.
Quote:



Quote:

Please link to this claim of 1% raises, as everything else I have read tosses around the phrase "rate of inflation". Also, people almost always make less when the retire than when they work




This might be a legitimate point because I can't find the link anymore, and I might have got confused the maximum raise being inflation and the average raise expected this year being 1%  If thats the case my bad.

Quote:

Boo fucking hoo. They still pay much less than the average private sector worker.





Of course they pay less in health care then their private sector counter parts, because for 30 years they have negotiated for good health care at the expense of salary and other benefits.




Unfortunately it has not been "at the expense of" anything.  They got both.
Quote:



Quote:

Wahhh




Hey if you want to try to strip cash out of my lower middle class family fine, but no one is going to put up with that kind of inequity for long.  Besides the real cry babies here are the greedy assholes that believe that, even though tax rates are at the lowest they have been in decades, they still don't want to pay, so instead balance the books on the backs of working class Americans.




The inequity is that your "lower middle class family" doesn't pay fuck all for anything.  The bottom 50% of the population pays almost nothing in income taxes and you are all a bunch of freeloaders on the backs of the competent and successful.  We have vastly different definitions of greed.  Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made.  You want more?  Work harder, better, faster, smarter.  Otherwise, get off my tit.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHippieChick8
seeker of justice
Female


Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14125459 - 03/15/11 03:16 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement.




I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility.  Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's?  I've had some not so inspiring teachers, but I learned anyway by reading the book or doing further research on my own at the library.  I've also had some great teachers.  Ultimately it's up to the student to learn.  You can't force an unwilling student to learn.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHippieChick8
seeker of justice
Female


Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14125472 - 03/15/11 03:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
You want more?  Work harder, better, faster, smarter.  Otherwise, get off my tit.



No, I don't want or need more.  But thanks for the free advice and entertainment.  I like free stuff. :grin:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
    #14125504 - 03/15/11 03:25 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:

And the ugly fact is that teacher salaries rose a great deal in the last thirty years and there has been ZERO improvement in student achievement.




I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility. 



And accountability.  We're paying them to do a job.  We have increased their pay for a few decades now and were promised better performance for our extra money.  We aint getting it.  Might as well knock their pay back because they are getting effs.
Quote:


Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's? 




OK.  Let's fire them all.  Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?
Quote:



I've had some not so inspiring teachers, but I learned anyway by reading the book or doing further research on my own at the library.  I've also had some great teachers.




Frankly I never gave a shit about them either.
Quote:



Ultimately it's up to the student to learn.  You can't force an unwilling student to learn.




No but you can try to minimize the number of unwilling students.  Regardless, as you say, the quality of teachers is essentially irrelevant.  Might as well get cheap ones, right?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHippieChick8
seeker of justice
Female


Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14125590 - 03/15/11 03:45 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

OK.  Let's fire them all.  Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?




Teachers are still needed to monitor and discipline the children with behavior problems while trying to inspire the whole class to learn.  It's not an easy job.  In my school district, they're not allowed to suspend or remove unruly kids from the classroom unless they are physically violent, and I hear it's a problem nationwide as well.  Why not cut administrator's salaries?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
    #14125599 - 03/15/11 03:47 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:

OK.  Let's fire them all.  Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?




Teachers are still needed to monitor and discipline the children with behavior problems while trying to inspire the whole class to learn.  It's not an easy job.  In my school district, they're not allowed to suspend or remove unruly kids from the classroom unless they are physically violent, and I hear it's a problem nationwide as well.  Why not cut administrator's salaries?



Fuck yeah, I'm with you on that one.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
    #14128175 - 03/15/11 11:25 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
I thought you were a huge proponent of personal responsibility.  Why isn't it the student's fault they didn't learn or the parent's? 





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14128209 - 03/15/11 11:32 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

We have vastly different definitions of greed.  Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made.  You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter.




Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money. 

Actually I want the same, and I want work the same, and I don't think that is unfair.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14128359 - 03/16/11 12:02 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money. 





Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14128826 - 03/16/11 02:03 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
So I've read the news and listened to the news on the radio and heard interviews with people for and against the law but not once have I heard or read exactly what this is all about.

If collective bargaining is simply a group of people working together to negotiate, how can that be made illegal? In other words, how can you make it a crime for people to coordinate themselves to work together to do something which would be legal if they each did it as individuals?

This seems to me to be a completely un-American approach, so it made me think that the law must be more nuanced. Perhaps it forbids the government departments from negotiating with groups, only individuals? Or perhaps it forbids those departments from negotiating at all, just setting pay and benefits and that's the end of it?




Well some different states pushing anti-union legislation have different approaches but there are some that are doing just that removing the employees ability to negotiate compensation and working conditions in a collective manor. As I am not american I can't really say that I think that this is anti-american. It's definitely fascist and corrupt, but I don't see any inconsistencies between this and the image that I see of american business/government.

Were you wondering about some specific anti-union legislation that was being pushed at the moment?
-------------
Quote:

iThink said:
The biggest flaw here is that these are public unions. Instead of two private entities with the same goal (profit for themselves), it is the teachers fighting for profit, and yet they elect those who they bargain with. Also, the politicians have no immediate financial/personal risk by making poor/horrible business decisions, so they don't hesitate to do what "looks" best or increases their chances of re-election.



This is a ridiculous notion, like all the teachers are voting the nations politicians in and out to get a raise, are you realy making these claims in all seriousness? In reality it is the wealthy private sector who is tipping the scales in elections to secure their pay raises (tax cuts).
Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money. 





Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,660
Loc: To the limit! Flag
Last seen: 7 hours, 44 minutes
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14128993 - 03/16/11 03:04 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Why don't we just fire all the teachers and let computers do it?


--------------------
This space for rent

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #14129100 - 03/16/11 04:11 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> Why don't we just fire all the teachers and let computers do it?

Better yet, why don't we stop using tax money to pay for education and let people dumb enough to have kids pay for their kids education.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14129770 - 03/16/11 09:42 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Quote:

We have vastly different definitions of greed.  Wanting to keep the money you make is far less a sign of greed than wanting to take the money somebody else made.  You want more? Work harder, better, faster, smarter.




Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money.




Yes it is.  It came from somebody else's pocket at the point of a gun.  THE STATE DOESN'T PAY ANYBODY ANYTHING!  It moves other people's money around.
Quote:


Actually I want the same, and I want work the same, and I don't think that is unfair.




Fair is for grade school.  Maybe you are already overpaid.  Maybe somebody unemployed would be willing to do your job for less.  Where is his "fairness"?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14129776 - 03/16/11 09:44 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




I dont think so.  Tax money is collected at the point of a gun, under the threat of prison or death.  That is very much 'taking'.  The private sector generally collects income voluntarily, one chooses to give them money or not for particular goods or services.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14129793 - 03/16/11 09:47 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:

Quote:

iThink said:
The biggest flaw here is that these are public unions. Instead of two private entities with the same goal (profit for themselves), it is the teachers fighting for profit, and yet they elect those who they bargain with. Also, the politicians have no immediate financial/personal risk by making poor/horrible business decisions, so they don't hesitate to do what "looks" best or increases their chances of re-election.



This is a ridiculous notion, like all the teachers are voting the nations politicians in and out to get a raise, are you realy making these claims in all seriousness? In reality it is the wealthy private sector who is tipping the scales in elections to secure their pay raises (tax cuts).




There is nothing the least bit ridiculous about his 100% accurate assessment of the situation.  A tax cut isn't a pay raise.  If I rob you for several years and then stop taking so much is that a pay raise for you?  No it is not.  Who pays almost all the taxes already?  Hint, it isn't the losers.
Quote:


Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money. 





Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




No it can't.  There is an element of compulsion lacking.  Nobody forces you to buy something from a private company (once the Supreme Court smacks that dumbass ObamaCare shit down).


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRogerRabbitV
Bans for Pleasure
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/26/03
Posts: 42,214
Loc: Seattle
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14129913 - 03/16/11 10:17 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:

No it can't.  There is an element of compulsion lacking.  Nobody forces you to buy something from a private company (once the Supreme Court smacks that dumbass ObamaCare shit down).




Interesting.  I could have sworn they made me buy car insurance from a private company or lose my drivers license and car tags. :shrug:

Of course collective bargaining is OK if your union supports the republican party.  That's why in Wisconsin, the State Troopers got to keep their collective bargaining, while those belonging to unions who endorsed Democrats lost theirs.  No dirty tricks there, obviously. :lol:
RR


--------------------
Download Let's Grow Mushrooms



semper in excretia sumus solim profundum variat

"I've never had a failed experiment.  I've only discovered 10,000 methods which do not work."
Thomas Edison

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: RogerRabbit]
    #14129989 - 03/16/11 10:38 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

I could have sworn they made me buy car insurance from a private company or lose my drivers license and car tags.




Thats still a choice.  The thread of losing your tags and ability to drive is not the same as violent threats against your freedom and life.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: RogerRabbit]
    #14130105 - 03/16/11 11:03 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

RogerRabbit said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:

No it can't.  There is an element of compulsion lacking.  Nobody forces you to buy something from a private company (once the Supreme Court smacks that dumbass ObamaCare shit down).




Interesting.  I could have sworn they made me buy car insurance from a private company or lose my drivers license and car tags. :shrug:




Nobody made you buy a car. 
Quote:



Of course collective bargaining is OK if your union supports the republican party.  That's why in Wisconsin, the State Troopers got to keep their collective bargaining, while those belonging to unions who endorsed Democrats lost theirs.  No dirty tricks there, obviously. :lol:
RR




Which union supported the Republican party?

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wisconsin-police-and-firefighters-didnt-endorse-walker/

Quote:

Among the many problems when a local debate goes national is that outsiders have little knowledge of the background facts and frequently labor under grossly mistaken ideas.

For example, in the Wisconsin showdown, most of us have been laboring under the notion that Republican Governor Scott Walker exempted police and firefighters from his plan to strip collective bargaining rights from public employees because they endorsed him for election whereas the teachers’ unions and others backed his Democratic opponent.

It turns out that this is completely untrue.  Walker tells CBS News’ Chris Wragge:

    There are 314 fire and police unions in the state. Four of them endorsed me. All the rest endorsed my opponent.

NewsBusters’ Noel Sheppard has an impressive roundup of newspaper headlines and other proof for those not inclined to take Walker’s word for it.

And it makes sense, once you get past the erroneous factoid that got us on the wrong track to begin with. After all, despite being exempted from the change in the law, firefighters and cops have been marching in solidarity with their union brethren.





Although he has exempted them it most certainly isn't due to their endorsement.  Facts are, as ever, your enemy, Roger.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: RogerRabbit]
    #14130233 - 03/16/11 11:34 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

RogerRabbit said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:

No it can't.  There is an element of compulsion lacking.  Nobody forces you to buy something from a private company (once the Supreme Court smacks that dumbass ObamaCare shit down).




Interesting.  I could have sworn they made me buy car insurance from a private company or lose my drivers license and car tags. :shrug:

Of course collective bargaining is OK if your union supports the republican party.  That's why in Wisconsin, the State Troopers got to keep their collective bargaining, while those belonging to unions who endorsed Democrats lost theirs.  No dirty tricks there, obviously. :lol:
RR





You chose to buy a car.
You choose which company to buy insurance from.
No-one else is forced to pay for your insurance.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14130244 - 03/16/11 11:36 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Facts are, as ever, your enemy, Roger.




The more things change...


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14131154 - 03/16/11 01:53 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




I dont think so.  Tax money is collected at the point of a gun, under the threat of prison or death.  That is very much 'taking'.  The private sector generally collects income voluntarily, one chooses to give them money or not for particular goods or services.




There must be something wrong with your tax collection system then because I receive what is called a payroll deduction where it is taken off my income automatically. Not unlike the automatic payment options for paying rent/mortgage.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14131167 - 03/16/11 01:55 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Yes, and if you dont get it deducted and dont pay the balance at the end people with guns will hunt you down and either lock you in a cage or kill you.  McDonalds doesnt do this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14131171 - 03/16/11 01:55 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

I could have sworn they made me buy car insurance from a private company or lose my drivers license and car tags.




Thats still a choice.  The thread of losing your tags and ability to drive is not the same as violent threats against your freedom and life.




It defiantly will affect your income more than a tax for the majority of people.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14131189 - 03/16/11 01:57 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




I dont think so.  Tax money is collected at the point of a gun, under the threat of prison or death.  That is very much 'taking'.  The private sector generally collects income voluntarily, one chooses to give them money or not for particular goods or services.




There must be something wrong with your tax collection system then because I receive what is called a payroll deduction where it is taken off my income automatically. Not unlike the automatic payment options for paying rent/mortgage.




That isn't the private sector extracting your money for taxes.  It is the government putting a gun to the head of your employer and forcing him to extract your money.  It is very much unlike those automatic deductions.  Nobody is forcing you to do it.  That's why they are called, wait for it, "OPTIONS"?
:facepalm:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14132536 - 03/16/11 05:58 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I found where we disagree.  I don't believe that taxes are theft.  Therefore government has an unqualified ownership interest in the funds they collect.  When they spend those funds they have an right to do so.  And when they pay people for selling their time to the government under a reasonably negotiated contract then that is just. 

However what I still don't understand is that in no way are taxes actual theft.  The government is constitutionally allowed to collect taxes.  Even if I am wrong about taxes not being theft, at most it is 'ethically' theft compared to an 'actual' theft.

Also, even if taxes were actual theft, the fact is that teachers and government employees in fact sell their time to the government. They have a contract with the government, fulfill their obligations under that contract, and therefore deserve to be paid.  If the government didn't pay them, then that would in fact be actual theft against teachers.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14132662 - 03/16/11 06:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Yes we do, government employees work for their money like everyone else and they should be able to keep it.  The state paying someone a salary for a job is not taking other peoples money. 





Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




Not in the same sense.  The state takes money from people to pay salaries.  People give money to companies that they use to pay salaries.  The state has coercive power to do its bidding, the private sector only has persuasive power.  Totally different animals.  You don't get that?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14132705 - 03/16/11 06:26 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
I found where we disagree.  I don't believe that taxes are theft.  Therefore government has an unqualified ownership interest in the funds they collect.  When they spend those funds they have an right to do so.  And when they pay people for selling their time to the government under a reasonably negotiated contract then that is just. 

However what I still don't understand is that in no way are taxes actual theft.  The government is constitutionally allowed to collect taxes.  Even if I am wrong about taxes not being theft, at most it is 'ethically' theft compared to an 'actual' theft.

Also, even if taxes were actual theft, the fact is that teachers and government employees in fact sell their time to the government. They have a contract with the government, fulfill their obligations under that contract, and therefore deserve to be paid.  If the government didn't pay them, then that would in fact be actual theft against teachers.




It has nothing to do with theft.  The point is that tax payers are paying every person on the government payroll.  Whatever you want to call it when the government coercively takes your property under threat of violence is kind of moot.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14132778 - 03/16/11 06:40 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

Yes it is.  Every dollar the state pays an employee is a dollar they took from other people.



The same could be said for the private sector.




I dont think so.  Tax money is collected at the point of a gun, under the threat of prison or death.  That is very much 'taking'.  The private sector generally collects income voluntarily, one chooses to give them money or not for particular goods or services.




There must be something wrong with your tax collection system then because I receive what is called a payroll deduction where it is taken off my income automatically. Not unlike the automatic payment options for paying rent/mortgage.





What does that have to do with anything?  If they take the money while it's under someone else's control then this somehow invalidates diecommie's description of it as being at the point of a gun and involuntarily?  If I rob your bank and take your stuff, then that wasn't an involuntar violent seizure because the wealth was in someone else's control at the time?  I'm struggling to understand what logic you could be invoking here.

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
I found where we disagree.  I don't believe that taxes are theft.  Therefore government has an unqualified ownership interest in the funds they collect.  When they spend those funds they have an right to do so.  And when they pay people for selling their time to the government under a reasonably negotiated contract then that is just. 





What does this have to do with anything?  Nobody claimed the government's spending of money is theft.  They claimed the government's taking of money is akin to theft.

Quote:

However what I still don't understand is that in no way are taxes actual theft.  The government is constitutionally allowed to collect taxes.  Even if I am wrong about taxes not being theft, at most it is 'ethically' theft compared to an 'actual' theft.




Yeah, I think people are using theft as a metaphor for coercive, violent, requisition.  Call it what you want.  The point is that there is no moral difference between acts commited by a government and an act commited by a person. 

Quote:

Also, even if taxes were actual theft, the fact is that teachers and government employees in fact sell their time to the government. They have a contract with the government, fulfill their obligations under that contract, and therefore deserve to be paid.




So what?  I may have a contract with you, how does that allow me to steal from the bank to satisfy it?  Even if you understood that the money I was satisfying our contract from would be taken from the bank violently, it doesn't somehow justify the seizure.  A debt between parties does not encumber people not a party to the transaction.


 
Quote:

If the government didn't pay them, then that would in fact be actual theft against teachers.





a) so what?  That's not what we're talking about, but even if we switch to this topic, it in no way encumbers a third party's assets, i.e. the taxpayer.
b) this situation is not theft.  Theft requires wrongful aquisition of goods, generally.  Labor given pursuant to a contract that is not satisfied is simply a breach of the contract.  This does not per se constitute theft under the common law system.

Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:

OK.  Let's fire them all.  Do you realize you have JUST MADE MY POINT that there is no reason to pay teachers more money and every reason to pay them shit?




Teachers are still needed to monitor and discipline the children with behavior problems while trying to inspire the whole class to learn.  It's not an easy job.  In my school district, they're not allowed to suspend or remove unruly kids from the classroom unless they are physically violent, and I hear it's a problem nationwide as well.  Why not cut administrator's salaries?




Why do we need teacher to monitor and discipline children with behavioral problems?  I still remember all the stupid crap I went through in grade school: it was dumb.

How about we have schools for learning and leave out the part about "inspiring" and "discipline" and "monitor"?  At least after elementary school or so, can we just let the kids learn and not have a whole apparatus that resembles daycare more than education?

And inspiration- bleh.  What are the rest of the kids supposed to do while the teacher is "inspiring" someone?  I'm pretty sure I would have done a bit better in school if it would have focused and graded on learning, rather than discipline and  stupid "inspiration" nonsense preparing me for a "real world" that didn't exist.  (I can still remember the threats of how college would be so much worse, only to see it all be nonsense).

Throughout school I was graded on things like whether I had recorded the teachers examples of crap we had allready learned, done pointless excercises about stuff we allready knew, and marked down for falling asleep or "because we expect more from you".

Thanks, but lets run an educational facility, and if anything, at least make the disciplinary, psychological, and inspirational facilities opptional and seperate so kids aren't wasting their time daydreaming while learning nothing.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSmackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14132921 - 03/16/11 07:06 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

The point is that there is no moral difference between acts commited by a government and an act commited by a person.


 

The point is that taxation is a legitimate thing, people do not have a constitutional right to tax, but governments do.   

The argument as I read it was that it is improper to value union labor highly, as the money paid to them is 'theft' (their word not mine).  However, it isn't theft, actually or imo ethically or morally.


--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
     
~H. L. Mencken~

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14133108 - 03/16/11 07:34 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Here's where the idea of theft comes in.  When both sides of the negotiating table represent only one interest and the actual people paying the bill get none then the individuals who are supposed to be representing the bill paying people (and being paid to do so) are only representing some of the people and giving them favors in return for political support.  That has a lot of names.  One of them is fraud.  Fraud is theft.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Smackshadow]
    #14133389 - 03/16/11 08:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Here's where the idea of theft comes in.  When both sides of the negotiating table represent only one interest and the actual people paying the bill get none then the individuals who are supposed to be representing the bill paying people (and being paid to do so) are only representing some of the people and giving them favors in return for political support.




What does this have to do with unions?  So far as I can see, there's no categorical difference here between union and nonunion employees in this regard.  I fail to see how the people of the state aren't represented, they're democratically elected representitives make the law, generally.

The problems here seem common to all government employment which is one of several good reasons disfavoring such.  I think the fascist states and communist states alike have illustrated the pitfalls of government entanglements with buisness.

Quote:

  That has a lot of names.  One of them is fraud.  Fraud is theft.




No, fraud required intentional misrepresentation, generally, in bad faith.  Someone giving teh states money to a union who supports him politically isn't fraud: it just sucks.  The same problem exists when hiring individual employees and in all of government's functions. 

Either way, I think its plainly a bad idea and an infringment on economic and first amendment rights to limit who can join a union and so forth, whether or not they are public sector or not.  To the extent any legislations restrict this right, it is bad policy.

Quote:

Smackshadow said:
Quote:

The point is that there is no moral difference between acts commited by a government and an act commited by a person.


 

The point is that taxation is a legitimate thing, people do not have a constitutional right to tax, but governments do.   
Quote:



?  I fail to understand how you derive that from my discussion.  You seem to just make a bare decleration that the point of my statement is something else with no justification.

Why is that the point?  What is incorrect about my reasoning and conclusion?

Additionally, please explain what "tax" is in your statement and how it is legitimate.  I'm inerested in what this concept that is per se legitimate is, and what bounds it has.  Seems to me a sweeping generalization that is unlikely to be correct.

Finally, please explain how the constitution has anything to do with the legitimacy of tax- however you define it?  That particular powers excercised may not be so wrong as to violate the bounds permitted by our constitution does not mean that they are thereby wise, legitimate, or legal.



Quote:

The argument as I read it was that it is improper to value union labor highly, as the money paid to them is 'theft' (their word not mine).  However, it isn't theft, actually or imo ethically or morally.




Please explain how you derive this argument from that stated here: I certainly don't recognize it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHippieChick8
seeker of justice
Female


Registered: 06/25/09
Posts: 869
Loc: Texas
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14135656 - 03/17/11 08:12 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

johnm said:
Quote:

Why do we need teacher to monitor and discipline children with behavioral problems?  I still remember all the stupid crap I went through in grade school: it was dumb.

How about we have schools for learning and leave out the part about "inspiring" and "discipline" and "monitor"?  At least after elementary school or so, can we just let the kids learn and not have a whole apparatus that resembles daycare more than education?

And inspiration- bleh.  What are the rest of the kids supposed to do while the teacher is "inspiring" someone?  I'm pretty sure I would have done a bit better in school if it would have focused and graded on learning, rather than discipline and  stupid "inspiration" nonsense preparing me for a "real world" that didn't exist.  (I can still remember the threats of how college would be so much worse, only to see it all be nonsense).

Throughout school I was graded on things like whether I had recorded the teachers examples of crap we had allready learned, done pointless excercises about stuff we allready knew, and marked down for falling asleep or "because we expect more from you".





You are actually agreeing with me.  I don't think teachers should have to constantly discipine the children with behavior problems, (kick them out) act as a psychologist and social worker, or have inspire the unmotivated student.  But in my school district, they are expected to do all these things. 

Teachers are expected to go above and beyond teaching the basics, so naturally they want to be compensated for this effort.  I have a friend who is a teacher to mostly poor hispanic students, and has to write a bureaucratic report on each child called an Individualized Education Program.  From Wikipedia: The IEP should describe how the student learns, how the student best demonstrates that learning and what teachers and service providers will do to help the student learn more effectively. Key considerations in developing an IEP include assessing students in all areas related to the known disabilities, simultaneously considering ability to access the general curriculum, considering how the disability affects the student’s learning, developing goals and objectives that correspond to the needs of the student, and ultimately choosing a placement in the least restrictive environment possible for the student.

I'm probably getting way off topic now, but do you know the U.S. spends 10 times as much money to educate the mentally retarded as they spend to educate the gifted?  I saw that in an article in Newsweek a few years ago.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesnitchelpowerz37
broke
Male

Registered: 08/10/09
Posts: 251
Last seen: 3 years, 20 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
    #14135844 - 03/17/11 09:16 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I am taking an education policy/philosophy class in school right now and it has been pretty helpful into opening my eyes as to what many of the problems are in public schools today as well as offering potential solutions.  I will agree with the posters saying that taxpayers shouldn't be spending more taxes for teachers salaries if the extra money isn't doing anything to improve the education of the students.  More money being spent on education doesn't automatically mean improved education if the methods being used to teach are ineffective,

As to what the previous poster was talking about, any form of authoritarianism has no place in school.  Education should be looking at students individually, realizing their interests and culture, and teaching them in ways that they are able to come to their own conclusions about the world.  This is not necessarily the case however, due to the capitalism imperative that calls for dumb people with no critical thinking skills to fill in the lower class working gap.


"Dewey believed that his contemporaries should recognize the importance of developing individuals who were citizen-workers; persons who were societally aware, civic minded, culturally aware, and politically empowered in ways that made it possible to maintain their citizen rights when entering paid labor sites.  For Dewey, work must be educative, meaningful, nonexploitative, and an extension of our central human roles as meaning makers."

We should be teaching our students how to operate in a truly democratic community, which is unfortunately impossible on a nationwide scale because the capitalistic forces simply dominate it. 

"Some of the forces that prevented the development of a democratic community...were...the unanswerability to public and democratic needs and wishes by private power centers, especially corporations, governments that are more answerable to capitalism and the logic of profit than to the democratic logic of human rights, class stratification, misinformation, and especially the failure to democratize both the scientific method and the technology resulting from it."


Quote:

"I'm probably getting way off topic now, but do you know the U.S. spends 10 times as much money to educate the mentally retarded as they spend to educate the gifted?  I saw that in an article in Newsweek a few years ago.





^^This quote fits the 2nd quote I posted perfectly

If you are interested in learning more read about John Dewey, progressivism, and pragmatism."

Sorry if off topic, just felt like adding some things that I feel are quite interesting and have been relevant to my studies.

Edited by snitchelpowerz37 (03/17/11 09:21 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: HippieChick8]
    #14136140 - 03/17/11 10:50 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
I'm probably getting way off topic now, but do you know the U.S. spends 10 times as much money to educate the mentally retarded as they spend to educate the gifted?  I saw that in an article in Newsweek a few years ago.




Ass-backwards priorities.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #14136268 - 03/17/11 11:23 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:

HippieChick8 said:
I'm probably getting way off topic now, but do you know the U.S. spends 10 times as much money to educate the mentally retarded as they spend to educate the gifted?  I saw that in an article in Newsweek a few years ago.




Ass-backwards priorities.




Seems like the gifted don't need much/any help learning, while the retards need a lot of help to even learn to tie their shoes.  I don't see how it could be 10 times more money though since they are each in school for about the same number of hours each day and teaching retards doesn't take any special equipment or facilities.  Even if retard teachers get paid 2x as much as normal teachers for some reason, 10x still doesn't make sense.  It does make sense that they'd spend somewhat more though, for the reason I just stated.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14136607 - 03/17/11 12:43 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Here's where the idea of theft comes in.  When both sides of the negotiating table represent only one interest and the actual people paying the bill get none then the individuals who are supposed to be representing the bill paying people (and being paid to do so) are only representing some of the people and giving them favors in return for political support.




What does this have to do with unions?  So far as I can see, there's no categorical difference here between union and nonunion employees in this regard.  I fail to see how the people of the state aren't represented, they're democratically elected representitives make the law, generally.




They are not acting in the interests of the vast majority of the electorate.
Quote:



The problems here seem common to all government employment which is one of several good reasons disfavoring such.  I think the fascist states and communist states alike have illustrated the pitfalls of government entanglements with buisness.




I am only referring to negotiations with public sector unions.  In private sector negotiations both sides are represented.  Not so much in public sector negotiations.
Quote:



Quote:

  That has a lot of names.  One of them is fraud.  Fraud is theft.




No, fraud required intentional misrepresentation, generally, in bad faith.  Someone giving teh states money to a union who supports him politically isn't fraud: it just sucks.  The same problem exists when hiring individual employees and in all of government's functions.




When you take a job to perform one function and instead perform another to the detriment of the original function you have fraudulently obtained your job.  Lots of politicians lose their jobs and sometimes even their freedom when they fraudulently give jobs to cronies and friends and family.  Why should it be different for unions?
Quote:

 

Either way, I think its plainly a bad idea and an infringment on economic and first amendment rights to limit who can join a union and so forth, whether or not they are public sector or not.  To the extent any legislations restrict this right, it is bad policy.




False.  For one thing, as FDR noted, public employee unions are a threat to the governance of the nation.  For another, what of a workers right not to join a union?  Finally there are many examples of public sector union prohibitions.  Most federal employees do not have collective bargaining rights.  Their pay is set by Congress.  Nothing I have said relates to private sector unions.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,660
Loc: To the limit! Flag
Last seen: 7 hours, 44 minutes
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14144520 - 03/18/11 05:49 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Why don't we just fire all the teachers and let computers do it?

Better yet, why don't we stop using tax money to pay for education and let people dumb enough to have kids pay for their kids education.




What a load of Bolognium.


--------------------
This space for rent

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #14147772 - 03/19/11 10:24 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I thought about this for quite a while since the last time I posted in this thread.

I think the disconnect here is most people think of unions in terms of what they represent in immediate benefit to the worker - the pay bargining from day to day, the infamous coffee breaks and hours policies and that kind of thing.

I think of unions in terms of what the workplace was like before they existed.

A reversion to this state is worse to me than a few occasional eye-rolling moments


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14147893 - 03/19/11 10:54 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

There is zero reason to believe that is even possible.  Less than 10% of the private workforce is unionized and despite the idiot ramblings of union hacks they are not slaves.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14148510 - 03/19/11 01:50 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Yes, and if you dont get it deducted and dont pay the balance at the end people with guns will hunt you down and either lock you in a cage or kill you.  McDonalds doesnt do this.




This is a great bogeyman argument. Clearly false but doesn't it scare people well? If you don't pay your taxes and do not submit fraudulent tax information you are about as likely to see a gun or the inside of a prison as you were if you did pay your taxes. Willy Nelson was an example, he just didn't pay his taxes and none of those things happened to him. He was simply billed for the money he owed, the worst that is likely to happen if you just don't pay your taxes is that the government will take some of your stuff (until they have payed your debt) away. In fact this is non coercive. If you want to avoid taxes or regulation move to Somolia, there is no reason why the rest of your countrymen ought to put up with your crybaby antics.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14148523 - 03/19/11 01:54 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Seems like the gifted don't need much/any help learning, while the retards need a lot of help to even learn to tie their shoes.  I don't see how it could be 10 times more money though since they are each in school for about the same number of hours each day and teaching retards doesn't take any special equipment or facilities.  Even if retard teachers get paid 2x as much as normal teachers for some reason, 10x still doesn't make sense.  It does make sense that they'd spend somewhat more though, for the reason I just stated.



Yea but if normal students can go 30 to one classroom/teacher and special kids need 5 or 10 to one plus other additional expenses it can be quite a bit.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14148540 - 03/19/11 01:58 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
Yes, and if you dont get it deducted and dont pay the balance at the end people with guns will hunt you down and either lock you in a cage or kill you.  McDonalds doesnt do this.




This is a great bogeyman argument. Clearly false but doesn't it scare people well? If you don't pay your taxes and do not submit fraudulent tax information you are about as likely to see a gun or the inside of a prison as you were if you did pay your taxes.




Every act of government is at the point of a gun.  Every single one.
Quote:


Willy Nelson was an example, he just didn't pay his taxes and none of those things happened to him.




Yes they did.
Quote:




He was simply billed for the money he owed, the worst that is likely to happen if you just don't pay your taxes is that the government will take some of your stuff (until they have payed your debt) away.




At  the point of a gun
Quote:



In fact this is non coercive.




So stunningly stupid it beggars belief.
Quote:



If you want to avoid taxes or regulation move to Somolia, there is no reason why the rest of your countrymen ought to put up with your crybaby antics.




And here we have one of the all time great crybaby panhandlers begging for more government largesse suggesting you, the person paying for his shit, move to Somalia if you don't like buying the baby his Maypo.  Unbelievable.  Irony meter pinned at 11.  Maybe 12.

Somebody quote this so she can see it.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinecommuneart
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/06
Posts: 1,021
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14150872 - 03/19/11 09:36 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seems like the gifted don't need much/any help learning, while the retards need a lot of help to even learn to tie their shoes.  I don't see how it could be 10 times more money though since they are each in school for about the same number of hours each day and teaching retards doesn't take any special equipment or facilities.  Even if retard teachers get paid 2x as much as normal teachers for some reason, 10x still doesn't make sense.  It does make sense that they'd spend somewhat more though, for the reason I just stated.




It's all those stupid human rights groups wasting our tax dollars on them, in reality it makes more sense to spend less than it hurts to take care of them. the fact is that they require special care, they need more money. The job is in itself bad though. i don't believe in raising the price of the job for the mentally retarded, as it attracts people who are only interested in money.

There are too many doctors,social workers who are there for money or who simply shouldn't be there because of their personality, those people are very important, they represent our society and represent moral values of our society.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: communeart]
    #14151178 - 03/19/11 10:38 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

communeart said:
There are too many doctors,social workers who are there for money or who simply shouldn't be there because of their personality, those people are very important, they represent our society and represent moral values of our society.




If you only had the ones who were in it for reasons for other than money, you'd have about 0.01% of the amount of doctors and social workers as we do now.  What then?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14151957 - 03/20/11 01:35 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

have you ever met a social worker or doctor?
I don't know how it is in the US but few do either of those professions in canada for the money... especially social work. Usually much more well paying professions take much less schooling and are less stressful.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14152272 - 03/20/11 03:48 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
There is zero reason to believe that is even possible.  Less than 10% of the private workforce is unionized and despite the idiot ramblings of union hacks they are not slaves.




I don't know that the person you're railing against exists. The shop model, even at its best, certainly doesn't work for every job, I don't know of any real union member or organizer that seriously advocates this.

It's fine for individual unions to bloom and die as needed - not all sectors need unions, they are best suited for a fairly unique set of working conditions, - as long as the right to form one exists, reforms brought into play by labor are hard to repeal.

I personally agree with some provisions of the bill - I think you should pay your dues to unions or professional groups out of your household income and not have your employer collect them. I support certain controls on strikes and stoppages, particularly for utilities and other vital services...but the right to unionize is a free association right, as is the right to donate to lobbying groups and causes...

People who campaigned on a platform of small, unintrusive government have no place legislating the course of negotiations between the employer and employee. It's not their business in any case and it's doubly hypocritical of the psuedo-libertarian right. 

Likewise, if I am subject to the rule of law, in a democracy, I have the right to petition my lawmakers, and an organization to do that collectively is the de facto system in this country - let teachers lose theirs after cops, after banks, after a dozen other less worthy interests.

Why should laissez-faire apply ONLY to the employer?


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14153393 - 03/20/11 11:45 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

JohnnyConverse said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
There is zero reason to believe that is even possible.  Less than 10% of the private workforce is unionized and despite the idiot ramblings of union hacks they are not slaves.




I don't know that the person you're railing against exists. The shop model, even at its best, certainly doesn't work for every job, I don't know of any real union member or organizer that seriously advocates this.

It's fine for individual unions to bloom and die as needed - not all sectors need unions, they are best suited for a fairly unique set of working conditions, - as long as the right to form one exists, reforms brought into play by labor are hard to repeal.

I personally agree with some provisions of the bill - I think you should pay your dues to unions or professional groups out of your household income and not have your employer collect them. I support certain controls on strikes and stoppages, particularly for utilities and other vital services...but the right to unionize is a free association right, as is the right to donate to lobbying groups and causes...

People who campaigned on a platform of small, unintrusive government have no place legislating the course of negotiations between the employer and employee. It's not their business in any case and it's doubly hypocritical of the psuedo-libertarian right. 

Likewise, if I am subject to the rule of law, in a democracy, I have the right to petition my lawmakers, and an organization to do that collectively is the de facto system in this country - let teachers lose theirs after cops, after banks, after a dozen other less worthy interests.

Why should laissez-faire apply ONLY to the employer?





this is exactly what I've been getting. Whatever your general opinion of unions is, that should not be the main thing in deciding whether to support the bill or oppose it. That would be like deciding if someones speech is legal or not based on whether you like it or not.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14153444 - 03/20/11 11:58 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I dont understand this complaint...  The teachers still have a right to collectively demand a certain compensation package and collectively quit en mass if they do not receive that.  They still have this right, every worker does.

What exactly can they not do now that they could do before this bill?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,660
Loc: To the limit! Flag
Last seen: 7 hours, 44 minutes
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14153543 - 03/20/11 12:23 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Here's a link to a link to a recent version of the bill.

http://www.defendwisconsin.org/2011/03/10/full-text-of-the-amended-budget-repair-bill/

It's 138 pages.


--------------------
This space for rent

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14153560 - 03/20/11 12:27 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
have you ever met a social worker or doctor?
I don't know how it is in the US but few do either of those professions in canada for the money... especially social work. Usually much more well paying professions take much less schooling and are less stressful.




You must at least concede that if we eliminated all doctors and social workers who weren't in it for money that there would be fewer doctors and social workers?  How would that be a benefit to society?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinecommuneart
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/04/06
Posts: 1,021
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14153682 - 03/20/11 12:48 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

If you only had the ones who were in it for reasons for other than money, you'd have about 0.01% of the amount of doctors and social workers as we do now.  What then?



it is not true, it is hard for nations who have through history been bent into a certain way to be able to have the talent to be part of all types of trades required for a nation. the money factor is important but mostly for certain types of trades, and doctors/social workers is not one of them though of course it does matter.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14153740 - 03/20/11 12:59 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
have you ever met a social worker or doctor?
I don't know how it is in the US but few do either of those professions in canada for the money... especially social work. Usually much more well paying professions take much less schooling and are less stressful.




You must at least concede that if we eliminated all doctors and social workers who weren't in it for money that there would be fewer doctors and social workers?  How would that be a benefit to society?



Eliminating social workers would definitely be a plus.  Then purge any notion that sociology is a degree program.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: communeart]
    #14154298 - 03/20/11 02:45 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
have you ever met a social worker or doctor?
I don't know how it is in the US but few do either of those professions in canada for the money... especially social work. Usually much more well paying professions take much less schooling and are less stressful.




You must at least concede that if we eliminated all doctors and social workers who weren't in it for money that there would be fewer doctors and social workers?  How would that be a benefit to society?




Doctors maybe, I've never met one that was in it for the money, but I can believe it as a possibility, mostly doctors here who are like that leave to the US anyway so our numbers would be mostly unchanged. However, social workers? Have you ever met a single social worker? IME the majority of them if not all are in it for personal reasons. The pay is usually shit, nobody gets into it for the money (at least in canada), where have you got this idea from?

Further you are discounting that money is not always the only factor in setting someone's carer someone can be motivated by money as well as interest or altruism. In fact that would be requisite for social work since it pays shit wages. Both those carers on a dollar value are lower paying than some alternatives which require less education time/cost.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14154886 - 03/20/11 05:04 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
I dont understand this complaint...  The teachers still have a right to collectively demand a certain compensation package and collectively quit en mass if they do not receive that.  They still have this right, every worker does.

What exactly can they not do now that they could do before this bill?




I take it you're referring to the right to simply quit?

I happen to live in a place with very weak worker's rights, and I'm here to tell you, it's almost impossible to organize any sort of collective action here - you're "let go" for some other reason the second you let it get at all above radar.

That's the very reason people unionized to begin with - to provide solidarity during bargaining. Otherwise, before any circumstances can change, they have to be bad enough to motivate someone working under debt, or to pay a family's bills, to quit - the employers just fire the most mobile, most rabble-rousing employees and keep the ones with the most need to work

To which some people say, "Fuck'em - I bargained with my job on my own, why shouldn't they?" But there are simply some jobs where everything you bargain on the basis of in a white collar or creative environment - attendance, promptness, skill in the work - is simply less applicable, or demanded of all. Yet, the work is hard, and it's the industry that moves our society forward - so it's somewhat disingenuous to say they "deserve" low pay or sneer like eric cartman that they should "just go to college"

It should be a decent and well compensated thing to do a hard and soul-numbing job to feed your family. Especially on behalf of a company that sends massive profits home with CEOs. Let suits go broke first, they do the least.


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14154908 - 03/20/11 05:08 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

ChuangTzu said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
have you ever met a social worker or doctor?
I don't know how it is in the US but few do either of those professions in canada for the money... especially social work. Usually much more well paying professions take much less schooling and are less stressful.




You must at least concede that if we eliminated all doctors and social workers who weren't in it for money that there would be fewer doctors and social workers?  How would that be a benefit to society?




Doctors maybe, I've never met one that was in it for the money, but I can believe it as a possibility, mostly doctors here who are like that leave to the US anyway so our numbers would be mostly unchanged. However, social workers? Have you ever met a single social worker? IME the majority of them if not all are in it for personal reasons. The pay is usually shit, nobody gets into it for the money (at least in canada), where have you got this idea from?

Further you are discounting that money is not always the only factor in setting someone's carer someone can be motivated by money as well as interest or altruism. In fact that would be requisite for social work since it pays shit wages. Both those carers on a dollar value are lower paying than some alternatives which require less education time/cost.




I never said it was the only factor, but it is a factor for everyone except the independently wealthy.  Remove money as a motivating factor for an activity while keeping everything else equal and you've reduced the number of people performing that task.  It's pretty simple. 

Is medical school free in Canada?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14155894 - 03/20/11 08:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Way cheaper than the US, but no. However I really don't see what you or communeheart's point is here.

Quote:

DieCommie said:
I dont understand this complaint...  The teachers still have a right to collectively demand a certain compensation package and collectively quit en mass if they do not receive that.  They still have this right, every worker does.

What exactly can they not do now that they could do before this bill?




If unions don't have a right to exist what right do companies or lobby/interest groups have to exist. These unions are not beggaring the state they are meeting the demands except the demands to disband their union. I don't see any reason states should leggislate away worker's rights to organise.

Further I don't see how dues deducted from payroll are any different than payed by the individual. Neither way is "wrong" but it does appear that trying to stop people from paying their dues by making them voluntary is an attempt to create additional unwanted friction in the workplace. I don't thinkit will be effective in whatever states were considdering it.

I agree with JohnnyConverse, not only is it difficult to organize collective action without a union but many of the serious problems like work safety or other work conditions cannot get addressed through individual or limited collective bargaining.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Edited by ScavengerType (03/20/11 08:20 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14155952 - 03/20/11 08:28 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I think it is wrong to force an employer to pay the dues out of the employee paycheck. This is basically performing a service for the employee. I doubt anyone would expect the employer to pay any other dues or bills for the employee.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14155955 - 03/20/11 08:28 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

I dont believe they have lost the right to organize or unionize.  You are claiming that the law prohibits them from getting together and organizing?  Bullshit!  Every worker in the US has the right to do that.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14156072 - 03/20/11 08:48 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
I think it is wrong to force an employer to pay the dues out of the employee paycheck. This is basically performing a service for the employee. I doubt anyone would expect the employer to pay any other dues or bills for the employee.



Yes haven't you heard of child support (in case of payment delinquency), or taxes. EI (unemployment) CPP (social security), banks will sometimes draw money from other accounts automatically sometimes in occasions of delinquent payments to mortgages/credit debt or whatnot. Hell some stores allow employees to buy the products with the cost deducted from their salaries. Tips in restaurants are often deducted and shared with restaurant staff.

Quote:

DieCommie said:
I dont believe they have lost the right to organize or unionize.  You are claiming that the law prohibits them from getting together and organizing?  Bullshit!  Every worker in the US has the right to do that.



It depends where you are talking about. Some of this legislation is preventing people from organizing. In actuality current laws do not protect workers right to organize in the workplace. If you can't organize in a break room how are you supposed to organize organize? Have a staff party? Some of the legislation is attacking workers rights to fight for non-pay issues like worker safety and other work conditions.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14156109 - 03/20/11 08:52 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Way cheaper than the US, but no. However I really don't see what you or communeheart's point is here.





I don't know what communeart's point is either.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14156336 - 03/20/11 09:25 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

sure taxes and wage garnishment in some cases. I'm talking about your boy scout dues or electric bill. Your union dues fall more in line with boyscout dues than taxes.

The other thing I don't get about the bill is how they can force people to vote on whether they want to stay in the union once a year. I can't believe conservatives of all people would support that. What's next, they're going to force cubscouts to vote once a year whether they want to stay in, or AARP members, the NRA or the society velvet painting restoration?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14158055 - 03/21/11 06:02 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

well, if I don't have the right to organize a strike, all I really have is the right to organize a mild attempt at price fixing. And while your employer can't always fire you DIRECTLY for organizing, in practicality in most "employment at will" states they can cut anyone at anytime - most of the exit procudures people thing are legal are actually just CYA in case of lawsuit, and in an E@W state they will risk a wrongful term. lawsuit to keep a union out


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14158081 - 03/21/11 06:16 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> If unions don't have a right to exist what right do companies or lobby/interest groups have to exist.

Personally, I have no problem at all with unions right to exist.  What I have a huge problem with is the protections that unions are given through legislation.  A union should not be able to force my  employees to join it in order to work for me.  If a union strikes, as an employer, I should be allowed to fire any employee that does not show up to work.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14158305 - 03/21/11 08:28 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Some of this legislation is preventing people from organizing. In actuality current laws do not protect workers right to organize in the workplace. If you can't organize in a break room how are you supposed to organize organize? Have a staff party? Some of the legislation is attacking workers rights to fight for non-pay issues like worker safety and other work conditions.




Of course they shouldn't be organizing in the workplace... they are supposed to be working.  They do have the right to organize, on their own time and on their own dime.  Also, I do not believe they have lost the right to fight for other issues either.  Every body still has the right to advocate, donate, volunteer and vote for non-pay related issues like worker safety and other work conditions.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14158781 - 03/21/11 11:06 AM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
A union should not be able to force my  employees to join it in order to work for me.





I think this is illegal. Not sure but if you had a source that would be great.

What I think does happen is the union negotiates with the employer to only higher union employees, or to pay a fine for highering non union employees. Why a company would agree to this I have no idea.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14159054 - 03/21/11 12:24 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> I think this is illegal. Not sure but if you had a source that would be great.

http://www.nrtw.org/your-rights-3-minutes:
Quote:

No employee in the United States can legally be required to be a full-dues-paying, formal union member. But in many states, an employee can be forced to pay certain union dues or be fired from his or her job.




http://www.examiner.com/libertarian-in-philadelphia/right-to-work-pennsylvania-is-a-forced-unionism-state:
Quote:

As shown on the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation's website, Pennsylvania is not a Right to Work State. Private sector companies that have Unionized and public sector employees as a whole are forced to join a Union.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law:
Quote:

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in 15 U.S. states, mostly in the southern or western U.S., allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which prohibit agreements between labor unions and employers making membership or payment of union dues or fees a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.




> What I think does happen is the union negotiates with the employer to only hire union employees

I believe you are correct, but it boils down to the same thing... In order to work, I have to join the union.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14159229 - 03/21/11 01:08 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:


> What I think does happen is the union negotiates with the employer to only hire union employees

I believe you are correct, but it boils down to the same thing... In order to work, I have to join the union.






and i think that is the same with paying dues, the union negotiates with the employer to make paying union dues a condition of employment, then during the hiring process the employee agrees to pay union dues (even if not in the union) as part of the negotiation with the employer.

As much as the end result is ugly, it seems like fair negotiation. The employer has every right to refuse to accommodate the union's requests during negotiation. Why the employer would agree to this I don't know.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14159379 - 03/21/11 01:46 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

And so it is now negotiated out.  And if they don't fucking like it they can call their Mommies.

You know how I treated unions?  I told them to fuck off.  Same thing I told community organizing shakedown artists.  My employees knew what those assholes were.  Just one step removed from a mafia protection racket.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14159446 - 03/21/11 02:00 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Seuss and freedom, both misunderstand. Employers can hire non-union employees (contractors) if it abides by the agreements that the union outlines. For example I used to work at a union mill where all the supervisor jobs were by contract and so was the janitorial duties (washrooms break rooms). As far as I know the only thing keeping employers from hiring people is their union agreements. Since all employees must pay-dues to be in the union and be in the union to remain employed under this framework there is no reason at all why the role of paying dues should not be done through payroll. Can you name a single practical reason why this should be so other than "the constitution" or some other vague bullshit?

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Some of this legislation is preventing people from organizing. In actuality current laws do not protect workers right to organize in the workplace. If you can't organize in a break room how are you supposed to organize organize? Have a staff party? Some of the legislation is attacking workers rights to fight for non-pay issues like worker safety and other work conditions.




Of course they shouldn't be organizing in the workplace... they are supposed to be working.  They do have the right to organize, on their own time and on their own dime.  Also, I do not believe they have lost the right to fight for other issues either.  Every body still has the right to advocate, donate, volunteer and vote for non-pay related issues like worker safety and other work conditions.




Nobody has to work in the break room (it's for breaks). Some of the legislation proposed by one state explicitly removes from workers the ability to negotiate for non-pay issues.

Advocating doesn't really do shit without a collective body to stand behind, but you already know this I assume.


Quote:

Seuss said:
Personally, I have no problem at all with unions right to exist.  What I have a huge problem with is the protections that unions are given through legislation.  A union should not be able to force my  employees to join it in order to work for me.  If a union strikes, as an employer, I should be allowed to fire any employee that does not show up to work.




You can trust me if you fired employees for striking, the consequences would probibly be much greater of a problem than the losses suffered from a strike. I don't think that this is at all practical as you claim. It's also illegal to commit suicide, wana complain that is unconstitutional?


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14159611 - 03/21/11 02:37 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:


You can trust me if you fired employees for striking, the consequences would probibly be much greater of a problem than the losses suffered from a strike. I don't think that this is at all practical as you claim. It's also illegal to commit suicide, wana complain that is unconstitutional?




ORLY, tough guy?  Ask the Air Traffic Controllers about that.  Any one of my workers goes on strike he is fucking terminated.  With extreme prejudice.  No unemployment either.  Just a nice bootprint on his ass.

Being a union shop is suicidal in a free market.  That's why they have union goons.  Unions hurt everybody not in a union.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14159670 - 03/21/11 02:48 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
As far as I know the only thing keeping employers from hiring people is their union agreements. Since all employees must pay-dues to be in the union and be in the union to remain employed under this framework there is no reason at all why the role of paying dues should not be done through payroll. Can you name a single practical reason why this should be so other than "the constitution" or some other vague bullshit?







if paying the dues out of the paycheck is part of the negotiated agreement, thats fine. In fact a law preventing the employer from paying the union dues or boy scout dues or the employees electric bill would be unjust. If the employee or union can negotiate an agreement where the company pays their electric bill from their paycheck, thats fine.

A law requiring a company to do this is what I object to. It may be practical or impractical but it should be up to the company to decide, like I said it is a service that the company is doing for the employee, making it easier for them to pay their dues.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14160293 - 03/21/11 04:49 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

You can trust me if you fired employees for striking, the consequences would probibly be much greater of a problem than the losses suffered from a strike. I don't think that this is at all practical as you claim. It's also illegal to commit suicide, wana complain that is unconstitutional?




I learned in engineering management that it is usually more profitable to shutdown a plant than to allow it to go union.  The instructor of the course was a retired VP from P&G with a lifetime of experience.

Quote:

Employers can hire non-union employees (contractors) if it abides by the agreements that the union outlines. For example I used to work at a union mill where all the supervisor jobs were by contract and so was the janitorial duties (washrooms break rooms). As far as I know the only thing keeping employers from hiring people is their union agreements.




Perhaps things work differently in where you live.  In the US, the laws vary from state to state.  There were no "right to work" laws where I grew up.  Unions could force an employer to only be allowed to hire union labor through threat of strike.  The same employer was unable to terminate striking employees because they were protected by law.  The playing field is far from fair in this situation.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14160453 - 03/21/11 05:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
The same employer was unable to terminate striking employees because they were protected by law.  The playing field is far from fair in this situation.




Wouldn't that just be contract law protecting the unions in that case?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14160740 - 03/21/11 06:36 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

> Wouldn't that just be contract law protecting the unions in that case?

Nope. The National Labor Relations Act (NRLA) protects employees from an employer "threatening, disciplining, or firing employees involved in protected concerted activities or in union activities."


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14161826 - 03/21/11 10:12 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
A law requiring a company to do this is what I object to. It may be practical or impractical but it should be up to the company to decide, like I said it is a service that the company is doing for the employee, making it easier for them to pay their dues.




As far as I know there are no laws that require this in US or canada. The only laws that affect this issue are the ones being proposed which would disallow payroll deduction of dues.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14162971 - 03/22/11 02:56 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

well IMO that is comppetely between the employee and the employer in general, but since the employer is the state of WI in this case, the law is just like a hard bargaining position.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14163118 - 03/22/11 04:33 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

> As far as I know there are no laws that require this in US or canada.

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US the law in question is called the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA).  You can read all about it at www.nlrb.gov.

Basically, the act says that unions can form and there isn't jack shit an employer can do to stop it.  Anything the employer does to stop a union from forming is illegal.  Once a union forms, there isn't jack shit an employer can do to the employees in the union for any union actions that they perform, such as striking.  Things like forcing the employer to only hire union employees, or forcing the employer to pay employee union dues (presumably as part of their pay), are enforced through civil contracts between the employer and the union.

Making matters even more interesting, each state has their own union labor laws.  Some states have "right to work" laws, which protect an employees right to work without having to join a union.  In these states it is illegal for the the union to force the employer to hire only union employees.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14163814 - 03/22/11 10:21 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Wouldn't that just be contract law protecting the unions in that case?

Nope. The National Labor Relations Act (NRLA) protects employees from an employer "threatening, disciplining, or firing employees involved in protected concerted activities or in union activities."




Hmm, yeah, that is fucked up.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger

Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14163895 - 03/22/11 10:38 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Unions are one of the few protections that the middle class worker has available in the United States, which is why the oligarchs have targeted their collective bargaining rights.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14163907 - 03/22/11 10:41 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Unions are one of the few protections that the middle class worker has available in the United States...




This gets parroted over and over, and hammered into our heads as youths in the union controlled schools - but its simply not true.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger

Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14163958 - 03/22/11 10:55 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
This gets parroted over and over, and hammered into our heads as youths in the union controlled schools - but its simply not true.




I guess you have some alternative explanation for why most workers have not seen real wage increases in 30 years while the share of wealth of the super-wealthy is increasing at unprecedented rates?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14164005 - 03/22/11 11:10 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Non sequitur.  As union membership has declined in the private sector have real private sector wages declined commensurately?  No, they have not.  The greatest drag on private sector wages is illegal immigration.  Union membership in the private sector is under 10%.  They aren't shit except that they still destroy companies where they persist and infest (GM, Chrysler).

What rich people make is irrelevant.  Unless you are an envious whiner.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14164092 - 03/22/11 11:26 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Alternative to what?

Regardless, those graphs dont support your claim nor does your claim necessarily have anything to do with unions.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14164187 - 03/22/11 11:50 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
What rich people make is irrelevant.  Unless you are an envious whiner.




That's pretty ironic considering your sig...Where do you think the money for those oh-so-needed Bush/Obama tax cuts for the wealthy is coming from?  If you think the wealth and power accumulated by the super-rich in this country over the last 30 years has no impact on your life, you must not pay any attention to government or the laws it passes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14164229 - 03/22/11 12:00 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
What rich people make is irrelevant.  Unless you are an envious whiner.




That's pretty ironic considering your sig...Where do you think the money for those oh-so-needed Bush/Obama tax cuts for the wealthy is coming from?  If you think the wealth and power accumulated by the super-rich in this country over the last 30 years has no impact on your life, you must not pay any attention to government or the laws it passes.




So having "too much" money is now a problem that the government needs to intervene in and "correct"?  Is that what you're arguing?  It sounds like it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14164263 - 03/22/11 12:06 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
What rich people make is irrelevant.  Unless you are an envious whiner.




That's pretty ironic considering your sig...Where do you think the money for those oh-so-needed Bush/Obama tax cuts for the wealthy is coming from?  If you think the wealth and power accumulated by the super-rich in this country over the last 30 years has no impact on your life, you must not pay any attention to government or the laws it passes.



Perhaps you haven't been paying attention.  Who do you think pays the taxes in this country?  They do.  Not you, them.  And me.  You should bow down and suck their dicks (and mine) because they are paying the bill.  Their share of the bill actually rose under the infamous tax cuts (which weren't tax cuts since revenue rose).

Numb.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14164886 - 03/22/11 02:16 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.

Quote:

Their share of the bill actually rose under the infamous tax cuts (which weren't tax cuts since revenue rose).




Can you clarify what you mean by this?  Gov't revenues are at historically low levels because of the recession, how have the tax cuts increased revenue?

Another graph for you to consider when you claim that rich people are the ones funding the government.  Note that the payroll tax is a regressive tax that has a relatively low income cap:




Edited by jebustrist (03/22/11 02:25 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14164928 - 03/22/11 02:24 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.





That is a lie invented to politically motivate lower wage earners.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14164945 - 03/22/11 02:28 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.





That is a lie invented to politically motivate lower wage earners.




The fact that you say this really shows that you are woefully uneducated on the issue and not equipped to discuss it - I'm sure the tea party has a spot for you though!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14165081 - 03/22/11 02:55 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.







To be taken seriously you will need to provide a source backing this up.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14165118 - 03/22/11 03:01 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.




Rates, baby, are not dollars and no, most of the rich do not pay lower rates than their secretaries, just those who only have capital gains income, which is a very small portion of the rich.  That also doesn't account for the taxes that are already taken out of their capital gains because corporations are taxed before dividends are even disbursed.  That meme is bullshit.  The corporate tax rate is around 28% and then they get taxed around 15% of what's left.  So, no, they don't pay a lower tax rate than their fucking secretaries.
Quote:



Quote:

Their share of the bill actually rose under the infamous tax cuts (which weren't tax cuts since revenue rose).




Can you clarify what you mean by this?  Gov't revenues are at historically low levels because of the recession, how have the tax cuts increased revenue?




The tax rates were reduced 10 years ago, not two years ago.  Until then the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest had been increasing faster than their share of income.  That has nothing to do with the recession.
Quote:



Another graph for you to consider when you claim that rich people are the ones funding the government.  Note that the payroll tax is a regressive tax that has a relatively low income cap:








Nice cherry pick from Mother Jones, no data between 2000 and 2010.  The fact is tax receipts had increased until 2007.  Then the recession. 

The payroll tax is 100% anti-rich.  First of all, benefits from soc sec are directly tied to payments made into soc sec.  What you get out when you retire is directly tied to what you paid in during your working years.  The fact that the socialist assholes embezzled the money is irrelevant.  It's also a terrible way to pay for retirement.  It wasn't the rich who elected those assholes who did that. Secondly, medicare medicaid is a program that any money taken from any rich person is pure charity.  They will never see any benefits from it.  And they just recently raised the payments from high income earners by removing the income cap.  It is now 2.9% on all earnings.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14165147 - 03/22/11 03:06 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Haven't you ever heard of capital gains?  At a certain point it becomes incumbent on people to actually educate themselves, I cannot do that for you and based on the reaction to the previous educational resources I have provided, I am quite certain that should I make an effort it will just defeated by the left hemisphere's propensity to deny reality in order to preserve a logical worldview.  "Well it wouldn't really make sense if the people with the least in our society payed a far higher percentage of their income to support the government, which in turn gives much of that money out to corporations and the already wealthy, so it must be a lie!"

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14165215 - 03/22/11 03:15 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Haven't you ever heard of capital gains?  At a certain point it becomes incumbent on people to actually educate themselves, I cannot do that for you and based on the reaction to the previous educational resources I have provided, I am quite certain that should I make an effort it will just defeated by the left hemisphere's propensity to deny reality in order to preserve a logical worldview.  "Well it wouldn't really make sense if the people with the least in our society payed a far higher percentage of their income to support the government, which in turn gives much of that money out to corporations and the already wealthy, so it must be a lie!"



As I explained above capital gains taxes aren't the only taxes paid on capital gains.  Before the money even gets to that point it is taxed at the corporate level.  At, I believe, the highest level in the developed world.  If not #1 then very close.

50% of the population pays almost nothing in income taxes.  Most of that 50% do pay nothing.  NOTHING!


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14165284 - 03/22/11 03:25 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> As far as I know there are no laws that require this in US or canada.

I can't speak for Canada, but in the US the law in question is called the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA).  You can read all about it at www.nlrb.gov.




I don't know why but that link is bugging out. The site seems to do that randomly sometimes.

Anyway, you are wrong, I did a quick search of the document and it does not require employers to deduct dues. Here's an excerpt from the section dealing with the employer giving money to organizations on the employees behalf:
[Title 29, Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, United States Code] Sec. 302. [§ 186.] (c)(4)
Quote:

with respect to money deducted from the wages of employees in payment of membership dues in a labor organization: Provided, That the employer has received from each employee, on whose account such deductions are made, a written assignment which shall not be irrevocable for a period of more than one year, or beyond the termination date of the applicable collective agreement, whichever occurs sooner;




So payroll dues collection is forbidden without the member signing for it, exactly as I had said. The proposed law would effective bar this arrangement for no reason. Would you mind terribly if I accused you of being a liar now?


Quote:

Basically, the act says that unions can form and there isn't jack shit an employer can do to stop it.  Anything the employer does to stop a union from forming is illegal.




You say that like union-busting tactics are unheard of. Why should an employer have any say in the unionization of it's workforce anyway? If an employer doesn't want a union all they really have to do is make sure safety and compensation is not so lax as to warrant the formation of one.

Quote:

Once a union forms, there isn't jack shit an employer can do to the employees in the union for any union actions that they perform, such as striking.  Things like forcing the employer to only hire union employees, or forcing the employer to pay employee union dues (presumably as part of their pay), are enforced through civil contracts between the employer and the union.




And? I fail to see your point. These are all contractual obligations the employer agreed to.



Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.





That is a lie invented to politically motivate lower wage earners.




lol yea right. This was an observation made by Warren Buffet which became repeated in a book or something (He said it in an interview on Real Time with Bill Maher once as well). It is based on his  actual tax rate and his actual secretary's tax rate. Anyway the graph doesn't lie. The interesting development in that time though has been the near abolition of corporate taxes. This has had people using companies as shells for their assets to prevent paying taxes on them and using several slippery methods of getting them out.

However this is getting off the topic of the thread. IMO even if you showed him statistical proof jebusttrist he would still not believe you.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14165322 - 03/22/11 03:34 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:


The interesting development in that time though has been the near abolition of corporate taxes.




Which is an all-time howler from this guy.  One of his biggest whoppers ever.
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/15/u-s-to-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world/

Quote:

Most of the time being number one is good. But when it comes to having the highest tax rate in the world, it is much better for a country to be bringing up the rear.

Currently Japan holds the inauspicious distinction of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the world (39.5 percent). The United States is a close second, only a few tenths-of-percentage points behind.

Japan will soon fall from the top spot because it has finally recognized what the rest of the industrialized world realized over a decade ago: A low corporate income tax rate is vital for economic growth in the global marketplace. As such, Japan just announced it will reduce its corporate income tax rate by 5 percentage points down to around 35 percent. This remains far above the 25 percent average rate of other industrialized countries, but for them it is a start.

Japan’s reduction will leave the U.S. in the uncomfortable position of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the industrialized world. Hopefully Congress will finally see fit to lower the rate now that we will hold that disreputable title.





One of the most egregious liars to ever grace the Politics Forum.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14168219 - 03/23/11 02:27 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
This gets parroted over and over, and hammered into our heads as youths in the union controlled schools - but its simply not true.




I guess you have some alternative explanation for why most workers have not seen real wage increases in 30 years while the share of wealth of the super-wealthy is increasing at unprecedented rates?






This is pretty amazing. 

Your graph clearly shows wages growing up, yet you object because people with higher income are seeing higher growth in wages than those making less.  What's the message here:  it's better for someone to make x amount of income without other people making more than for that same person to make more than x, but have other people people making more?  Better to be poor but have nobody to be jealous of than it is to be making more but have someone making more than you?


You're bizarre argument reminds me of this exchange:


Margret Thatcher:  What your saying is "you'd rather the poor be poorer as long as the rich were less rich"



How do you explain your complaining of people's income increasing on the sole ground that some other people made more

Note:  Does your graph actually back up your argument?  Seems it only clearly indicates the dollar-amount of increases since 1979, not the rate of increase in wages, which you seem to be arguing about.  Is this not so?.

As for the graph:  What is the reason for picking a particular year as the point of comparison for all future years? Is there any indication of the typicality of this year of refrence as opposed to other years?  If not, it seems suspect.
Additionally, the manner in which the first graph, especially, is constructed with the ordinate values for all but the rich being very close to the undefined lower bound (which I hope is $0) and with relatively large increments relative to income as compared to the rich values, makes it difficult to interpret these values and their rate of change, and makes them almost impossible to compare to the rich.  This is one tactic used in propaganda to give false impressions of statistical data, and I'm wondering what the justification for this odd choice is?  I'm also somewhat curious why the first graph represents the actual magnitude of income as opposed to clearly indicating the rate of change or other more-proportionate and comparable figure, given this seems to be the value of interest. 

Could you comment on this and explain these somewhat-troubling aspects of your graph?


Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually most of the rich pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.







What are you defining "rate" as?  Lower magnitude of tax, lower ratio of gross tax paid relative to gross income of all kinds, lower ratio of tax paid relative to gross employment wages/salaries (not capital gains et cet). 

What are you defining "tax" to be?

It certainly seems plain that the rich pay more tax, are you challenging this?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14169062 - 03/23/11 10:13 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

My first critique of the graph is that it presumes that wealth scales linearly with dollars.  That is, it presumes that an extra dollar a day has the same effect on wealth to a poor person than as it does to a rich person.  That is not the case.  A more accurate portrayal would be to graph the income on a logarithmic scale, that way it doesn't suppress the gains the poor have made by smashing them down at the bottom with thick lines.  The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting richer.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14169137 - 03/23/11 10:25 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Well, I think that's only the poster's argued interpretation of the graph- though I agree it is constructed to mislead in this way.

They bunch up the lower values right on the undefined lower bound and have very large increments in the ordinate values relative to income, but this is much less so for the rich category.

I don't know about the logarithmic (base 10?) graph- wouldn't that be kind of arbitrary?  Something proportionate to the magnitude of the refrence year or prior year would be good, in my opinon0- percent change or something.

As it is, while you clearly see the values going up, you can't tell the proportionate rise for any but the large value, given how bunched up and small the lower-income values are relative to the graph's increments.

It really seems highly misleading- it would be interesting to know the relevant values and to know what 1979 has to do with anything/ how typical a year it it is to be choosing as the refrence point.  (i.e. didn't the US go into somewhat of a recession in the early 80's?  I forget....)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14169259 - 03/23/11 10:48 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

I don't know about the logarithmic (base 10?) graph- wouldn't that be kind of arbitrary?




No more arbitrary than the linear scale.  What plotting it logarithmically would do is show changes in income relative to your income, rather than relative to the millionaire's income.  So somebody making 20 thousand dollars a year increasing to 22 thousand dollars a year would look the same as somebody making 20 million dollars a year increasing to 22 million dollars a year.  Each order of magnitude has the same scale, so that values below .5 million dont get suppressed like they are in that graph.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14169740 - 03/23/11 12:29 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

I think some of you guys need to brush out your third grade math books and reread those graphs.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist] * 1
    #14170295 - 03/23/11 01:56 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
I think some of you guys need to brush out your third grade math books and reread those graphs.




I think you need to advance your math skills past the third grade level.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFreedom
Pigment of your imagination
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 6,016
Last seen: 1 month, 21 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14170625 - 03/23/11 02:55 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

I think the question to ask about those charts is, who created the wealth?


If you can somehow show that the rich took advantage of the middle class to create the wealth, you may have a point.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14170664 - 03/23/11 03:00 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

*double post*

Edited by ScavengerType (03/23/11 03:03 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14170681 - 03/23/11 03:02 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
I think some of you guys need to brush out your third grade math books and reread those graphs.




Word.

I think you guys are missing something here, both the graphs show essentially the same data. The second graph shows the change in the data based on a percentage of the baseline year not adjusted for inflation. This makes the data on the lower income percentages actually readable. In the large format graph the data is barely readable but when portrayed as a percentage of an initial baseline you can see clearly that not only have the incomes of the poorest decreased overtime, but the incomes of the top one percent have skyrocketed. This relates to what he had said about the declining tax rate on the top one percent.

It's also notable that the 1% statistic is included in the top 20% and looking at the graphs you can see a clear correlation. It is possible that absent the top 1% there is no up ward mobility of the under 19% of the top 20th percentile.

It is notable that though other things occurred during that time american union membership also declined while the wages of 80%of the american population declined.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Freedom]
    #14170705 - 03/23/11 03:05 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Freedom said:
I think the question to ask about those charts is, who created the wealth?





I presume you propose that the top 1% waved a magic wand and *poof* "created" the wealth?
Or is it possible that they just took money they had and were given by tax breaks and under-paid others to create for them?


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Edited by ScavengerType (03/23/11 03:06 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14170716 - 03/23/11 03:06 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

you can see clearly that not only have the incomes of the poorest decreased overtime




The graph does not show that.  A lower percentage of the total income is not necessarily decreased income.  This is simple math (a little more advanced than third grade).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14170755 - 03/23/11 03:12 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

you can see clearly that not only have the incomes of the poorest decreased overtime




The graph does not show that.  A lower percentage of the total income is not necessarily decreased income.  This is simple math (a little more advanced than third grade).





Nothing looks at percentages of wealth the only data in percentages is the population data all the monetary data is in relation to the amount of average income. The second graph shows the income (apparently non inflation adjusted) of that year as a percent of the baseline year, so it is a percent of an already defined variable. It shows relatively the same data as the first graph in  more readable format.

Reading statistical graphs is not taught in math class where I come from, but reading comprehension is.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14170802 - 03/23/11 03:21 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Yes, all of that is apparent.  None of it substantiates your claim that the income of the poor has decreased over time.  A decreased share of income is not equivalent to decreased income.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14170839 - 03/23/11 03:28 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Yes, all of that is apparent.  None of it substantiates your claim that the income of the poor has decreased over time.




:picard:
Yes it does, the graph shows the average income in dollar amounts of the poorest 80% decreasing over the timeline of the graph. I know you are capable of colloidal ignorance, but where exactly are you seeing a disconnect between the statistically shown  average income of the poorest declining and the income of the poor decreasing over time?


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14170862 - 03/23/11 03:32 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

The graph is clearly labeled 'Share of Income' not 'Income'.  You can have a decreasing share of income while simultaneously having an increasing income.  That is precisely what is happening, it is a consequence of the exponential nature of growth.  If you dont understand that concept, make a post in the science forum and I will walk you through it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14170996 - 03/23/11 03:57 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Looks like 'ol Margaret Thatcher from my post was right on the money (as well as people being misled by the deceptive graph).

Lieing (misleading) through statistics strikes again.  If people understood what the data actually was, this kinda nonsense wouldn't be so pervasive.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14171247 - 03/23/11 04:38 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
The graph is clearly labeled 'Share of Income' not 'Income'.  You can have a decreasing share of income while simultaneously having an increasing income.  That is precisely what is happening, it is a consequence of the exponential nature of growth.  If you dont understand that concept, make a post in the science forum and I will walk you through it.



:thumbup:

Yep.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/27134.html

During my recent testimony before the Senate Budget Committee (found here), I cited an OECD statistic that the U.S. has the most progressive income tax system among industrialized nations.[1]  This prompted one Senator to point out that if the richest 10% of taxpayers earn the most of any OECD country, shouldn't it make sense that they bear the largest tax burden of any country? 

The answer can be found in the OECD table below. This table shows the share of taxes paid by the richest 10 percent of households, the share of all market income earned by that group, and the ratio of what that 10 percent of households pays in taxes versus what they earn as a share of the nation's income.

The first column shows that the top 10 percent of households in the U.S. pays 45.1 percent of all income taxes (both personal income and payroll taxes combined) in the country.  Italy is the only other country in which the top 10 percent of households pays more than 40 percent of the income tax burden (42.2%). Meanwhile, the average tax burden for the top decile of households in OECD countries is 31.6 percent.

By contrast, column #2 shows that the richest decile in America earned 33.5 percent of the market income in the country in 2005 - the year in which this snapshot was taken, but little has changed since then. But, a few other countries do have a greater or similar concentration of income as does the U.S. For example, the OECD table shows that the wealthiest decile of households in Italy and Poland earn a greater share of their country's market income than do our "rich" - 35.8 percent and 33.9 percent respectively - while the share of income earned by the top decile of households in the U.K. is about on par with those in the U.S. at 32.3 percent.

The table then adjusts for the underlying allocation of income by showing the ratio of income taxes paid to the share of income earned by the top decile in each country. The ratio for U.S. households is 1.35, far greater than the ratio of taxes to income in any other country. Even in the three countries with a comparable distribution of income, the ratio of taxes to income was less, 1.18 in Italy, 0.84 in Poland, and 1.20 in the U.K.

Interestingly, countries with top personal income tax rates that are higher than in the U.S., such as Germany, France, or Sweden, have ratios that are closer to 1 to 1. Meaning, the share of the tax burden paid by the richest decile in those countries is roughly equal to their share of the nation's income.

The US fucks the rich worse than the European socialistas.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14172095 - 03/23/11 07:12 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

OK you are right, but the measurements for individual income are indexed only to inflation, not CPI (real) inflation. So based on real inflation rates the incomes of the poorest have gone down.

The fact of the matter still stands that the richest one percent received gains during periods of massive deficits/tax cuts while the poor received no such relief from tax cuts.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14172241 - 03/23/11 07:45 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
OK you are right, but the measurements for individual income are indexed only to inflation, not CPI (real) inflation. So based on real inflation rates the incomes of the poorest have gone down.





What grounds do you have to say that the wealth earned by those demographics have gone down?  What is the "poorest" demographic, and how have you determined that their actual yearly income's value has decreased?  All you've actually stated is that the figures are defined in a particular year's dollars: are you saying this allows your conclusion or is there some other basis?




Quote:

The fact of the matter still stands that the richest one percent received gains during periods of massive deficits/tax cuts while the poor received no such relief from tax cuts.




Ok, if so, what is your point?  Would it have even been possible for the poor to match the rich's alleged decrease in taxes?  If you don't pay anything, its impossible to benefit from a tax cut, and if you pay little, a tax cut will proportionately represent a smaller reduction in money's paid and even smaller reduction relative to income.

You seem to just be declaring these things as if there is some particular reason the trends should be more similar, but you've not shown how this should be so in equity or in any other calculus.  It seems somewhat dubious to expect poor in america who pay so little in taxes allready to be able to match the rich's proportionate growth in relative income due to monies saved from taxes.  Even if the cuts were highly progressive and favoring the lower income earners, the simple fact that they pay little renders even large reductions in taxes due relative to previous years to be a small portion of their gross income.

Have you backed up your claim (I believe it was you, if not pardon me) that the secretaries are paying less in taxes than their bosses (rates, I presume)?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: johnm214]
    #14172801 - 03/23/11 09:40 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

I gave you guys a source for it yes and it was a higher tax rate not higher amount of taxes. It was an observation made by Warren Buffet. He was seen saying it on real time with Bill Maher, I can't find it on youtube but you might be able to find  it on the HBO site. I couldn't send you a workable link if I wanted because I'm Canadian and I can't access the american site.

CPI indexed inflation is a measurement of the buying power of money over time, when talking about income it is important to look in terms of CPI inflation instead of monetary inflation as far too many statisticians commonly do. Sure the income of the lowest bunch may be stagnant when you look at it in terms of the commodities that money can buy, the wages are lower. A role for unions in this equation is likely that union contracts often ask for raises that are some what on par with CPI inflation while IME raises given by employers are more often barely on par with monetary inflation, never-mind CPI.

The problem is that the richest are getting tax cuts and the poor are getting nothing and then when the budget is short it's the poor who have to pay the price. The rich should not get tax cuts until the budget is balanced. Not that attacking these unions will actually remotely balance the budget anyway. It's irresponsible to give out tax cuts while the deficit soars, the US has seen proof that tax cuts don't pay for themselves from the Reagan and bush years. What is hard to understand about this?


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14174042 - 03/24/11 03:24 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

ScavengerType said:


The interesting development in that time though has been the near abolition of corporate taxes.




Which is an all-time howler from this guy.  One of his biggest whoppers ever.
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/15/u-s-to-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world/

Quote:

Most of the time being number one is good. But when it comes to having the highest tax rate in the world, it is much better for a country to be bringing up the rear.

Currently Japan holds the inauspicious distinction of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the world (39.5 percent). The United States is a close second, only a few tenths-of-percentage points behind.

Japan will soon fall from the top spot because it has finally recognized what the rest of the industrialized world realized over a decade ago: A low corporate income tax rate is vital for economic growth in the global marketplace. As such, Japan just announced it will reduce its corporate income tax rate by 5 percentage points down to around 35 percent. This remains far above the 25 percent average rate of other industrialized countries, but for them it is a start.

Japan’s reduction will leave the U.S. in the uncomfortable position of having the highest corporate income tax rate in the industrialized world. Hopefully Congress will finally see fit to lower the rate now that we will hold that disreputable title.





One of the most egregious liars to ever grace the Politics Forum.




I don't think the issue is the statutory "corporate income tax" in the united states - I think it's the amount of business done here without paying that rate.

They could make the rate 80 percent and it doesn't matter, if the corp they're trying to tax doesn't pay taxes in the US, despite being a US company in every sense but legal.

also seriously I don't know if you can call people egregious when you're using the heritage foundation as a source.


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14174274 - 03/24/11 05:36 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

> I think it's the amount of business done here without paying that rate.

There are two issues...

1) If taxes are too high, companies will move somewhere cheaper

2) There are a ton of loopholes in the tax code that allow companies and individuals to avoid paying taxes.

Lower the tax rates to keep companies in the country and close the loopholes (simplify the tax laws) so that everybody (companies included) pay their fair share.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,660
Loc: To the limit! Flag
Last seen: 7 hours, 44 minutes
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14174338 - 03/24/11 06:11 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Quote:

Freedom said:
I think the question to ask about those charts is, who created the wealth?





I presume you propose that the top 1% waved a magic wand and *poof* "created" the wealth?
Or is it possible that they just took money they had and were given by tax breaks and under-paid others to create for them?





It is impossible to "underpay" someone, much the same as it is impossible to "overtax" someone.

The first can just work somewhere else, the second can just live somewhere else.


--------------------
This space for rent

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #14174346 - 03/24/11 06:19 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

> The first can just work somewhere else, the second can just live somewhere else.

According to the union shills, working and living someplace else is often not an option... thus, without unions to ensure decent pay, people will have to give up that third SUV and their families will starve.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14175348 - 03/24/11 11:46 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
My first critique of the graph is that it presumes that wealth scales linearly with dollars.




That referenced graph has nothing to do with wealth - it has to do with income.

Quote:

DieCommie said:A more accurate portrayal would be to graph the income on a logarithmic scale, that way it doesn't suppress the gains the poor have made by smashing them down at the bottom with thick lines.  The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting richer.




These figures are from the Census Bureau

Between 1970 and 2008:
- households at the 10th percent of household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from $10.02k to $12.16k (a 21.31% increase).
- households at the 50th percentile of the household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from 43.22k to 50.30k (a 16.4% increase)
- households at the 90th percentile of the household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from 91.41k to 138.30k (a 49.66% increase).

These changes have led to a dramatic share in income earned by the top 10% of US households.  There has been a dramatic increase in income inequality from what is commonly thought of as the “good old days” (1950s). 

Sex

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14175374 - 03/24/11 11:51 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

So what?  If rich people make less money do you think poor or middle class people are going to get any?  And if rich people make less money they won't be so screwed on their taxes and hence there will be a greater tax burden on the next group of schmucks.

You all should be goddamn happy rich people are making all that money. They pay the bills for you.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejebustrist
Stranger


Registered: 07/08/09
Posts: 79
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14175400 - 03/24/11 11:57 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Actually, no, the tax burden has been slowly shifting to the majority for some time now.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14175403 - 03/24/11 11:58 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
My first critique of the graph is that it presumes that wealth scales linearly with dollars.




That referenced graph has nothing to do with wealth - it has to do with income.






Exactly, that is my critique.  Though wealth does scale with income dollars, it does not linearly scale like the axis of that graph insinuates.


Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:A more accurate portrayal would be to graph the income on a logarithmic scale, that way it doesn't suppress the gains the poor have made by smashing them down at the bottom with thick lines.  The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting richer.




These figures are from the Census Bureau

Between 1970 and 2008:
- households at the 10th percent of household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from $10.02k to $12.16k (a 21.31% increase).
- households at the 50th percentile of the household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from 43.22k to 50.30k (a 16.4% increase)
- households at the 90th percentile of the household income distribution saw their real incomes increase from 91.41k to 138.30k (a 49.66% increase).

These changes have led to a dramatic share in income earned by the top 10% of US households.  There has been a dramatic increase in income inequality from what is commonly thought of as the “good old days” (1950s). 

Sex




So every body has seen an increase, every body is doing better.  The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting richer - everybody is getting richer.  Any complaint beyond that is simply jealousy and envy.  The modern american poor are the richest 'poor' that have ever existed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: jebustrist]
    #14175451 - 03/24/11 12:05 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

jebustrist said:
Actually, no, the tax burden has been slowly shifting to the majority for some time now.



Absolutely false.

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Share of taxes paid by top 10%

1999-----66.45%
2000-----67.33%
2001-----64.89%
2002-----65.73%
2003-----65.84%
2004-----68.19%
2005-----70.30%
2006-----70.79%
2007-----71.22%
2008-----69.94%

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125997180

Quote:

It turns out that nearly half of all Americans don't have to pay any federal income tax. In 2009, 47 percent of all filers paid nothing. It's a number that's gone up significantly in just a couple of years. Robert Siegel talks to Roberton Williams, who's been crunching the numbers at the Tax Policy Institute in Washington. According to Williams, millions escape filing because their incomes are too low or they're eligible for deductions, credits and exemptions.




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14175464 - 03/24/11 12:09 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

In 2009, 47 percent of all filers paid nothing.




That includes me.  :cheers:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14175834 - 03/24/11 01:28 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

In 2009, 47 percent of all filers paid nothing.




That includes me.  :cheers:




Lucky bastard.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14175845 - 03/24/11 01:30 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

I don't know about that.  I'd rather not be that fucking broke again.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14176008 - 03/24/11 02:04 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:So every body has seen an increase, every body is doing better.  The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting richer - everybody is getting richer.  Any complaint beyond that is simply jealousy and envy.  The modern american poor are the richest 'poor' that have ever existed.




Everyone is doing better, but the gains have not be evenly distributed. 

I is also not fair to say that the poor have been getting richer or the the modern american poor are the richest poor that ever existed.  The poverty rate now is higher than it was 40 years ago and most western industrialized countries have higher poverty thresholds than the US (they count people as poor that we wouldn't) and lower rates of poverty. 

On Wisconsin
The way I read the situation is that Scott Walker is trying to squeeze public sector workers so that he can claim that he is getting the same level and quality of public services for less $.  Getting more for less might work in the short-run of his tenure as governor (which will be brief IMO), but labor markets are competitive and over time the best workers will retire or leave their public sector jobs for private sector positions that pay more and, with lower levels of compensation, fewer of our best and brightest will choose to go into education and public service.  In the short-run, workers that are not mobile or who don’t have transferable skill, such as teachers, will be hurt.  In the long run the state will be diminished.  This has already manifest itself to some extent at the UW - Madison, which has lost a large number of prominent faculty in recent years due to the low relative level of compensation. 

Maybe there are some places were collective bargaining for public sector employees doesn’t work, but it seems like it was working pretty well in Wisconsin.

Sex

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14176047 - 03/24/11 02:09 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

There is no reason to believe that the totality of the state will be diminished by paying teachers and other public employees less money.  The majority of Wisconsinites will benefit.

By the way, did youknow that this bill doesn't bust the unions?  It's true.  Not a line it forbids organizing.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14176265 - 03/24/11 02:45 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Again, if you compare that data to the CPI inflation it's a substantial difference.
Here's a CPI calculator showing 1970 had a cpi at 38.8pts and the year 2008 had the CPI indexed at 215.303 that's over a 5x increase in cost of consumables. A similar interpretation is displayed on Wikipedia with both this graph:

and a table showing historical CPI from the invention of the USD, at 1970 it's value is .20 and in 2008 .04.

These people only do half the inflation if they only calculate for the inflation of the dolar value and not CPI.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14176428 - 03/24/11 03:10 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
There is no reason to believe that the totality of the state will be diminished by paying teachers and other public employees less money.  The majority of Wisconsinites will benefits




So you don't think think that there is going to be any sort of drain?  I think you are kidding yourself.  As I noted above the UW - Madison, one of the nations premier public universities, is not competitive on salaries and has already lost many prominent faculty.  The UW faculty are affected by the budget repair bill and will face a substantial pay cut.  Many of the most productive of them will leave for better paying jobs at other universities. 

The university is sort of a special case because (by-and-large) professors are pretty mobile and have transferable skills.  After all most of them moved to WI for a job in the first place.  For these reasons, the impacts are will be observed very quickly.  Teachers can't just pack up and move to greener pastures, so it will take some time, but I think it will be harder to decide that you want to be a teacher in WI relative to say 10-years ago.

Quote:

By the way, did you know that this bill doesn't bust the unions?  It's true.  Not a line it forbids organizing.




I know this, but it does (i) require an annual certification vote, (ii) forbids the state or municipalities from withholding dues, and (iii) dramatically limits the scope of union bargaining to wages below the CPI.  Walker could effectively say "I'll give state workers a wage increase equal to the CPI, but they are going to pay for 50% of their health insurance and 75% of their pension contributions."  This would result in a massive pay cut despite union bargaining.  You don't have to be a genius to realize this means an end to the unions.

If you read between the lines the sacrifices required by public sector workers in Wisconsin, particularly teachers, under the Walker budget will exceed what is mandated by the repair bill.  The concessions in the repair bill are only sufficient to close about 50% of the cut to local school aid contained in the budget; something else has to give.

Sex

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14176479 - 03/24/11 03:17 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
I don't know about that.  I'd rather not be that fucking broke again.




Good point.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14176511 - 03/24/11 03:22 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
There is no reason to believe that the totality of the state will be diminished by paying teachers and other public employees less money.  The majority of Wisconsinites will benefits




So you don't think think that there is going to be any sort of drain?  I think you are kidding yourself.  As I noted above the UW - Madison, one of the nations premier public universities, is not competitive on salaries and has already lost many prominent faculty.  The UW faculty are affected by the budget repair bill and will face a substantial pay cut.  Many of the most productive of them will leave for better paying jobs at other universities.




Yes, I know all about UW faculty.  I've been following Ann Althouse's very excellent coverage of the commie greedheads mobbing the capital.  She is a UW law prof.  Who are they going to lose faculty to?  Nobody else has any money either.
Quote:

 

The university is sort of a special case because (by-and-large) professors are pretty mobile and have transferable skills.  After all most of them moved to WI for a job in the first place.  For these reasons, the impacts are will be observed very quickly.  Teachers can't just pack up and move to greener pastures, so it will take some time, but I think it will be harder to decide that you want to be a teacher in WI relative to say 10-years ago.




What are we talking about, teachers or professors?  No matter.  The fact that they are mobile specifically argues AGAINST any exigent circumstances allowing unionization at all.  Free negotiation by individual professors and no interference from unions on firings will improve Wisconsin's prospects regarding retaining the teachers the state wants to retain (NOT the ones the union wants them to retain).  Then there is compulsory union membership, which I find abhorrent in all applications.
Quote:



Quote:

By the way, did you know that this bill doesn't bust the unions?  It's true.  Not a line it forbids organizing.




I know this, but it does (i) require an annual certification vote, (ii) forbids the state or municipalities from withholding dues, and (iii) dramatically limits the scope of union bargaining to wages below the CPI.  Walker could effectively say "I'll give state workers a wage increase equal to the CPI, but they are going to pay for 50% of their health insurance and 75% of their pension contributions."  This would result in a massive pay cut despite union bargaining.  You don't have to be a genius to realize this means an end to the unions.




Or it will mean personal negotiations and market based pricing instead of collusive threats by union thugs.
Quote:



If you read between the lines the sacrifices required by public sector workers in Wisconsin, particularly teachers, under the Walker budget will exceed what is mandated by the repair bill.  The concessions in the repair bill are only sufficient to close about 50% of the cut to local school aid contained in the budget; something else has to give.




I don't read between the lines of bills.  And yes, the pay concessions demanded of the unions is most definitely inadequate.  Face it, revenue is down all over.  Down for governments and down for taxpayers.  It's time it went down for government employees.  There's no money in the till.
Quote:



Sex




Is fun.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14176828 - 03/24/11 04:13 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said: Who are they going to lose faculty to?  Nobody else has any money either.




Many of the good UW faculty will go to other universities.  Many other top public university systems are in somewhat better shape because they have higher tuition models and private universities are in decent shape because they have much higher tuition models are well endowed. 

Quote:

What are we talking about, teachers or professors?  No matter.  The fact that they are mobile specifically argues AGAINST any exigent circumstances allowing unionization at all.  Free negotiation by individual professors and no interference from unions on firings will improve Wisconsin's prospects regarding retaining the teachers the state wants to retain (NOT the ones the union wants them to retain).  Then there is compulsory union membership, which I find abhorrent in all applications.




Professor = easy to gauge productivity, lots of mobility = competitive labor market

Teacher = lack of mobility because of state certifications, non-transferable skills, and difficulty gauging individual effectiveness=non-competitive labor market

UW – Madison faculty are not unionized because they don’t need to be.  They can move and find another job if they find things unfavorable.  It is also relatively easy to verify the productivity of a faculty member.  Because of state teacher certification requirements teachers are not mobile.  Moreover it is generally difficult to gauge their effectiveness.  For these reasons they need a union.

Quote:

And yes, the pay concessions demanded of the unions is most definitely inadequate.  Face it, revenue is down all over.  Down for governments and down for taxpayers.  It's time it went down for government employees.  There's no money in the till.




We could raise some more revenue and retain our excellent government, excellent schools, and excellent universities.  This would be my choice – to pay more and have what we have now.

Sex

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ScavengerType]
    #14177131 - 03/24/11 04:57 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
I gave you guys a source for it yes and it was a higher tax rate not higher amount of taxes. It was an observation made by Warren Buffet. He was seen saying it on real time with Bill Maher, I can't find it on youtube but you might be able to find  it on the HBO site. I couldn't send you a workable link if I wanted because I'm Canadian and I can't access the american site.





While I'm glad HBO is holding fast against Canadian intrusion into our homeland's resources, I'm not sure what your difficulties have to do with anything.

Quote:

CPI indexed inflation is a measurement of the buying power of money over time, when talking about income it is important to look in terms of CPI inflation instead of monetary inflation as far too many statisticians commonly do.





What are you defining "monetary inflation" to be such that it is different from "CPI indexed inflation"?

Far as I can see, when people speak of inflation in the US, to the extent they speak of a specific methodology or metric of measuring such they imply the CPI changes.  What am I missing here?  What is this "monetary inflation" you claim is used by "far too many statisticians" over "CPI indexed inflation"?


Quote:

Sure the income of the lowest bunch may be stagnant when you look at it in terms of the commodities that money can buy, the wages are lower.




Not what I said.  What I asked was is it even possible for the low income groups to have matched the increased income of the rich, adjusted for taxes, due to government tax reductions?  You imply the disparities amongst your undefined "rich" and "poor" classes result from inequtiable policy changes and concessions to the rich, but I wonder if your standard of equal changes in after tax earning relative to a given year's values is even possible? If you don't pay any taxes, fantastic tax breaks are not going to improve your income.  If you pay very little taxes, say $300 on $25,000 a year income, there's no way even slashing your tax rates by 50% can produce the proportion of savings the rich would see from even a measly %15 reduction, relative to income.

Take this example, even with a relatively low-value definition of "rich" wage earners at $200,000 gross, and a relatively high (middle class) "poor" of $25,000 gross, and without yearly wage increases or inflation factored in:


  • Low wage ($25,000/year; 1.2% net tax; cut by 50%): 
    Old wage after taxes:  24,700;  New Wage:  24,850;
    Proportionate increase:  0.607% increase (100.607% of old after-tax-income after 50% tax cut)

  • High Wage:  ($200,000/ year; 35% net tax; cut by 15% to 29.75%): 
    Old wage after taxes:  $130,000;  New Wage after taxes:  $140,500; 
    Proportionate increase:  8.077% increase net after-tax-income (108.077% of old income after tax)

  • Income-Relative Change in Net Income (Rich/Poor): 13.3 or 13,300%

    Low Wage:  0.607%;  High Wage 8.08%; 
    Ratio of High Income/Low Income after-tax-income increases relative to income:  8.08% increase in income/ 0.607% increase in income= 13.3 rich/poor increase, (13,300% rich/poor)
    - Note this is without a yearly growth in dollars earned: if such had been factored in, the disparity would have been even more dramatic


OMG!  The high wage earners are being treated so much better!  Look, they got 13 times more money, even relative to their already-high income levels!  Obviously the government must have favored the rich and gave them all sorts of loopholes, or they wouldn't have gotten 13 times more tax breaks/ savings (or "profits/gains" in the vernacular of some of the posters here)!

Only, guess what:  actually the low income people got a whopping 50% tax cut relative to the rich's comparatively meager 15% decrease. 


My question to you, which you've not answered and have ignored, was would it even have been possible for the poor class to have seen a proportionate increase in net income due to tax reduction- no matter how low the tax rate for them was cut?  You seem to be making a misleading argument here: that the fact the rich gained a lot more money proportionately over those years was a result of favoritism.  What I'm asking was would it even have been possible in theory for the poor to match those increases- even with the exact same growth in wages, yearly, no matter how radically their taxes were slashed?


Quote:


The problem is that the richest are getting tax cuts and the poor are getting nothing and then when the budget is short it's the poor who have to pay the price





The implicit presuppositionn here would have to be that the rich and poor should see similar levels of relative increase in income due to government action, or else it isn't fair- correct?  I see no other way your argument could make sense.

The problem is that you've not justified this presupposition. As the example above demonstrates, even when huge reductions in tax are given to the poor and much weaker reductions given to the rich, the rich will, obviously, still save much more even adjusted to their income as the poor aren't paying any taxes to begin with.

Why exactly should government action result in rich and poor seing proportionate changes in income level after tax?  Why is to deviate from this unfair?  You frequently charecterize reductions in tax as "gains" for the rich and so forth which must use the old tax levels as the refrence point: presuming they were somehow fair by default and that deviation from them does not reflect equitable adjustments but rather concessions.  Given that you don't feel this way about the poor, and constantly aruge that they should be making more than they are, how do you justify this lopsided analysis: treating the rich's taxes as justified by default and a boon to them if reduced, yet the poor inherently underpaid and unassisted by the government? 

Plaintly:  what calculus do you use to make these calls?  To me, it all looks very arbitrary and backward: you simply have the idea that the poor are repressed by govenrment and underpaid and fanangle the data into this wordview.  As the above example demonstrates: the argument syou use to finesse some evidence for this position seem to be faulty oftentimes.  Just how do you objectively determine what is fair or not? 

(Personally, I consider what the person voluntarily agrees to be paid through voluntary contract to be fair by default: only not being so when inequitable pressures are wielded against one of the parties.  In rejecting this definition, you seem to loose any obvious objective standard, which is why I'm asking you what that standard is)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14177407 - 03/24/11 05:39 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said: Who are they going to lose faculty to?  Nobody else has any money either.




Many of the good UW faculty will go to other universities.  Many other top public university systems are in somewhat better shape because they have higher tuition models and private universities are in decent shape because they have much higher tuition models are well endowed.




I don't know why you believe that.  many private university endowments took the same hit as every other investor and public universities all over are pinched, including NY where I live.  And who has money to pay tuition?  Markets, baby, markets.  And there is not one thing in this bill that prevents Wisconsin from aggressively pursuing fine professors.  Unions actually hamper quality teaching by stifling turnover.
Quote:

 

Quote:

What are we talking about, teachers or professors?  No matter.  The fact that they are mobile specifically argues AGAINST any exigent circumstances allowing unionization at all.  Free negotiation by individual professors and no interference from unions on firings will improve Wisconsin's prospects regarding retaining the teachers the state wants to retain (NOT the ones the union wants them to retain).  Then there is compulsory union membership, which I find abhorrent in all applications.




Professor = easy to gauge productivity, lots of mobility = competitive labor market

Teacher = lack of mobility because of state certifications, non-transferable skills, and difficulty gauging individual effectiveness=non-competitive labor market




There is no lack of teacher mobility even within the state.  There are hundreds of school districts in Wisconsin, each of whom can pursue teachers they want with whatever money they want to offer.  Once again, there is nothing about unions that is relevant to your point.  Non-competitive labor market exists as a result of unions.  If you care about teacher quality you should vehemently oppose teacher unions which exist to protect the inept.
Quote:



UW – Madison faculty are not unionized because they don’t need to be.  They can move and find another job if they find things unfavorable.  It is also relatively easy to verify the productivity of a faculty member.  Because of state teacher certification requirements teachers are not mobile.  Moreover it is generally difficult to gauge their effectiveness.  For these reasons they need a union.




Your reasons are fictions.  They are 100% mobile within the several hundred school districts within the state.  They could also get certified in another state.  You do know that is possible, right?
Quote:



Quote:

And yes, the pay concessions demanded of the unions is most definitely inadequate.  Face it, revenue is down all over.  Down for governments and down for taxpayers.  It's time it went down for government employees.  There's no money in the till.




We could raise some more revenue and retain our excellent government, excellent schools, and excellent universities.  This would be my choice – to pay more and have what we have now.




What you mean "we" Kemosabe?  Methinks it isn't your money you are spending.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #14177557 - 03/24/11 06:04 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
What you mean "we" Kemosabe?  Methinks it isn't your money you are spending.




Haha.  That reminds me of something that Milton Friedman once said about spending your own money on yourself vs. spending other people's money on other people:

The Four Ways to Spend Money

Other People's Money

For entertainment purposes only, I'm too lazy to paraphrase.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #14178684 - 03/24/11 09:18 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:Who are they going to lose faculty to?  Nobody else has any money either....many private university endowments took the same hit as every other investor and public universities all over are pinched, including NY where I live.




We are talking about institutions with billions in endowments.  No doubt they took a hit in 2008, but they are recovering nicely. 

Quote:

And who has money to pay tuition?


 

For a variety of reasons demand for college education from top universities is inelastic.  Tuition at UW is at least 3k lower than at UT - Austin, UCLA, Cal, and U. Mich.  There is lots of room for it to go up, but UW administrators are constrained by the legislature from raising tuition, despite the fact that the state only accounts for 25% of the UW's budget.  If the UW tuition was 16k per year (double what it is now) there would still be students lined up wanting to come.   

Quote:

Markets, baby, markets.  And there is not one thing in this bill that prevents Wisconsin from aggressively pursuing fine professors.  Unions actually hamper quality teaching by stifling turnover.


 

The thing that would keep the UW from pursuing faculty are the 13% budget cut that it is being asked to take. 

Quote:

There is no lack of teacher mobility even within the state.  There are hundreds of school districts in Wisconsin, each of whom can pursue teachers they want with whatever money they want to offer




Schools in Wisconsin are funded by property taxes and the state in a complicated formula that I don't understand that is supposed to equalize spending across districts.  According to SW the reason for the budget repair bill is to provide municipalities with the tools that they need to deal with the cuts he was handing them in the form of the state portion of school funding.  These cuts total nearly one billion.  Not does the Walker budget cut nearly one billion from state contributions from to school districts, it also restricts these districts from raising property taxes to offset the state cuts.  For these reasons, movement within the state isn't going to allow a teacher to capture a dramatically higher level of compensation. 

Quote:

What you mean "we" Kemosabe?  Methinks it isn't your money you are spending.




Well I live in WI, own a home, and pay property taxes and state income taxes, not to mention fees for things like my auto registration, license renewal, ect.  I am willing to pay more to keep quality public services and schools.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14178867 - 03/24/11 09:48 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

I am willing to pay more to keep quality public services and schools.




Feel free to donate directly.  Nobody is stopping you from paying more, put your money where your mouth is and do it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14179097 - 03/24/11 10:24 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

yeah, that's just a dishonest argument (just like Scavenger Types argument that if tax cuts give the rich a proportionately larger savings relative to income that it means they were unfairly helped rather than the poor not paying any taxes to begin with).

As you said: nobody cares whether individuals wish to pay more.  Just like with the healthcare debate, the argument is whether we want the government using violent force to take the money involuntarily.

Discussing what you prefer or would be willing to do is a seperate issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: DieCommie]
    #14179267 - 03/24/11 11:02 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:Feel free to donate directly.  Nobody is stopping you from paying more, put your money where your mouth is and do it.




Ever hear of the free rider problem?  Everyone donating on their own doesn't work for many government provided goods.

Quote:

johnm214 said:Discussing what you prefer or would be willing to do is a seperate issue.




I bring it up for two reasons.  First, this SW has refused to look at any revenue enhancement at the state level.  Secondly, the budget severely restricts the ability of municipalities to raise property taxes.  Even if everyone in my community wanted to pay higher taxes and all elected officials were on board, property taxes couldn't go up under the SW budget.  There is a real loss of local control. 
___________

On Wisconsin - Seems like the repair bill isn't going to go into effect unless they re-vote, in which case there will likely be amendments.  As of today the injunction against publishing the law remains and an appeals court has referred the case to the State Supreme Court.  There is an election April 5 that will likely result in a 4-3 liberal majority.  They will likely decide to not take the case or rule in favor of the Dane County DA, who is seeking to have the law thrown out.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14180385 - 03/25/11 04:16 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

> Ever hear of the free rider problem?  Everyone donating on their own doesn't work for many government provided goods.

Then perhaps it is not the place of government to be providing these goods.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14180409 - 03/25/11 04:39 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Ever hear of the free rider problem?  Everyone donating on their own doesn't work for many government provided goods.

Then perhaps it is not the place of government to be providing these goods.




Private roads/pds/fds/militaries have poor histories.

Not saying they're insurmountable issues per se

But the free rider issue is base diffusion of responsibility type psychology, it happens in churches and the like as well. There's never been a very large or complex nation where all needed taxation was volunteered, has there?

Side question:

What is the actual legal standard for a finding of "price fixing" in the US?


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Edited by JohnnyConverse (03/25/11 04:54 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14180520 - 03/25/11 05:39 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

> Private roads/pds/fds/militaries have poor histories.

I believe most things should be left up to the states to decide.  For example, "Private" roads should be maintained by the individual states.  How they decide to pay for them should be up to them.  Only interstates should be maintained by the federal government.  If the federal government stopped funding all the BS that it has no place funding, the federal tax rates could be lowered allowing states to raise their rates with no difference seen by the taxpayer.

> But the free rider issue is base diffusion of responsibility type psychology, it happens in churches and the like as well.

Ah, that explains why the Catholic church is so poor.  :grin:

> What is the actual legal standard for a finding of "price fixing" in the US?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00000001----000-.html:
Quote:

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.




--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: Seuss]
    #14180687 - 03/25/11 07:14 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

So what is the stated reason for exempting labor unions from this law? Please don't glibly say "corruption" or something other one word sound byte - why did lawmakers choose to exempt wage earners in a union from anti-trust law? And why has the almost unacountable supreme court defended that precedent, almost to the point of repugnance? And why do many other nations and codes of and calls for human rights attempt to enshrine the right to collective bargaining?

Is it just because large swaths of the world are liberal pussies?


And how does the local federal/dichotomy you bring up address the free rider problem? It's simply a unique wrinkle to the regional administration of the United States - your less federal system still certainly requires taxation...you can't simply handwave the fact that many problems of state require collectivism to solve efficiently, those solutions cost money, and that money is not handed over as needed through patriotism.


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesexondrugs
Stranger

Registered: 03/15/11
Posts: 20
Last seen: 12 years, 7 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: JohnnyConverse]
    #14180966 - 03/25/11 08:50 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

JohnnyConverse said:So what is the stated reason for exempting labor unions from this law? Please don't glibly say "corruption" or something other one word sound byte - why did lawmakers choose to exempt wage earners in a union from anti-trust law?




The exemption is legislated (Clayton Antitrust Act), not something that was decided by the courts. 

Quote:

And why has the almost unacountable supreme court defended that precedent, almost to the point of repugnance?




I don't think it is a court issue as the union collective bargaining exemption was legislated (separation of powers) and there are no constitutional issues.

Sex

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14181107 - 03/25/11 09:38 AM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:Who are they going to lose faculty to?  Nobody else has any money either....many private university endowments took the same hit as every other investor and public universities all over are pinched, including NY where I live.




We are talking about institutions with billions in endowments.  No doubt they took a hit in 2008, but they are recovering nicely.



ORLY?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/education/28endow.html

Quote:

Published: January 28, 2010

Reflecting the difficult financial environment for higher education, university endowments lost an average of 18.7 percent in the last fiscal year, the worst returns since the Great Depression, according to a study of hundreds of public and private institutions. 





Quote:


Quote:

And who has money to pay tuition?


 

For a variety of reasons demand for college education from top universities is inelastic.  Tuition at UW is at least 3k lower than at UT - Austin, UCLA, Cal, and U. Mich.  There is lots of room for it to go up, but UW administrators are constrained by the legislature from raising tuition, despite the fact that the state only accounts for 25% of the UW's budget.  If the UW tuition was 16k per year (double what it is now) there would still be students lined up wanting to come.




Well now I don't necessarily know the accuracy of that statement, nor do I think it is even knowable, but don't you think the legislature should just let them raise tuition?  As in let the willing payers who receive the service actually be the people who pay for the service?  What a fucking concept!
Quote:



Quote:

Markets, baby, markets.  And there is not one thing in this bill that prevents Wisconsin from aggressively pursuing fine professors.  Unions actually hamper quality teaching by stifling turnover.


 

The thing that would keep the UW from pursuing faculty are the 13% budget cut that it is being asked to take.




http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/li-officials-blast-cuomo-s-suny-cuts-1.2654879
"The college was particularly hard hit, with officials there decrying what they say is a 30 percent cut in direct state aid; Cuomo's proposal amounts to a 10 percent reduction overall."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/california-schools-face-1_n_807378.html
"The proposal would diminish money allocated for community colleges by $400 million, Cal State by $500 million and the University of California by $500 million -- making this the first time in the university's history when the bulk of funding will have to come from students ($2.8 billion, as opposed to $2.6 billion from the state)."

Like I said, their competition seems to be reeling just as much if not more.  Times are tough all over.  Tax revenues are down because the income of taxpayers is down.  Why you think these poindexter pets should be insulated from that is beyond me.
Quote:


 

Quote:

There is no lack of teacher mobility even within the state.  There are hundreds of school districts in Wisconsin, each of whom can pursue teachers they want with whatever money they want to offer




Schools in Wisconsin are funded by property taxes and the state in a complicated formula that I don't understand that is supposed to equalize spending across districts.  According to SW the reason for the budget repair bill is to provide municipalities with the tools that they need to deal with the cuts he was handing them in the form of the state portion of school funding.  These cuts total nearly one billion.  Not does the Walker budget cut nearly one billion from state contributions from to school districts, it also restricts these districts from raising property taxes to offset the state cuts.  For these reasons, movement within the state isn't going to allow a teacher to capture a dramatically higher level of compensation.




Who said they should capture a higher level of compensation?  All I said is that there is a market for their services that they can move within.
Quote:

 

Quote:

What you mean "we" Kemosabe?  Methinks it isn't your money you are spending.




Well I live in WI, own a home, and pay property taxes and state income taxes, not to mention fees for things like my auto registration, license renewal, ect.  I am willing to pay more to keep quality public services and schools.




Feel free to donate as much as you like.  Nobody is stopping you.

You seem to be arguing that Wisconsin can't afford to cut UW pay because they would lose their profs to better placed systems.  But those wealthy competitors do not really exist in any numbers.  Most universities are hurting, badly.  The problem with UWs budget seems to be more related to the artificially low tuition rates they charge.  Talk about free-riders.  That would be the students.  Further, that has no relationship to unionism.  Here's another group of free-riders.  Union management.  They do nothing, extract dues and line their pockets with what is left over from making political donations to irresponsible Democrats, who then sell the majority of their constituents out in return for campaign cash.  This bill is in actuality so weak that it doesn't even stop that, just allows the workers to elect to do it themselves.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJohnnyConverse
Stranger

Registered: 04/10/09
Posts: 268
Re: What exactly is collective bargaining, what exactly does the proposed law in WI intend to do? [Re: sexondrugs]
    #14182991 - 03/25/11 06:12 PM (13 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

sexondrugs said:
Quote:

JohnnyConverse said:So what is the stated reason for exempting labor unions from this law? Please don't glibly say "corruption" or something other one word sound byte - why did lawmakers choose to exempt wage earners in a union from anti-trust law?




The exemption is legislated (Clayton Antitrust Act), not something that was decided by the courts. 

Quote:

And why has the almost unacountable supreme court defended that precedent, almost to the point of repugnance?




I don't think it is a court issue as the union collective bargaining exemption was legislated (separation of powers) and there are no constitutional issues.

Sex



They've dealt with many union cases over the years. Free association if nothing else has provided an in to put it in their purvey.


--------------------
I wasn't an activist until I got put in jail. I sat there in jail seeing what was really going on in America and something changed. Now when people say, "Tommy what was jail like?" I say "You'll see" -- Tommy Chong

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Concentrates   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* the individual vs. the collective
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Anonymous 5,095 65 12/19/03 02:21 PM
by Anonymous
* Politicians who support the Right to Carry law
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 3,307 32 05/02/03 05:14 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Is There A Canadian Mushroom Law??? GratefulDread 1,495 11 03/05/03 12:40 PM
by pattern
* Individual Vs Collective Rights
( 1 2 3 all )
GazzBut 4,637 45 03/02/05 08:52 PM
by Psychoactive1984
* Possible legal challenge of psylocybe laws?
( 1 2 all )
Randolph_Carter 2,687 31 12/05/03 03:24 PM
by Annapurna1
* Court Backs Oregon's Law Allowing Assisted Suicide luvdemshrooms 839 5 06/01/04 12:27 PM
by Seuss
* dealing with law enforcement ChromeCrow 1,414 4 08/26/02 02:29 AM
by Lana
* Mush laws in Italy and Greece Ahab McBathsalts 912 2 05/25/03 02:09 AM
by zeronio

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
10,244 topic views. 4 members, 4 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.118 seconds spending 0.014 seconds on 14 queries.