Dems Target GOP State Sens For Recall

[pBills]

So f'ing what? Of course his agenda is clear. I am sorry but government employees don't deserve special status. And they sure as hell don't deserve to create a situation that amounts to blatant bribery and/or coercion and/or corruption of our political system.

 

Giving up money doesn't address the root cause of the problem. I smell lawyer on you, so of course you have no idea, or no interest, in identifying real root causes of problems, because actually doing that faithfully and honestly means you don't get to sue people as often.

 

The question is: how did things get so bad, that the entire state is about to go bankrupt? The root cause of this is the shameful contracts that the politicians were coerced into signing. Or, face "100k people in the street".

 

The collective bargaining changes are how we stop this same problem from happening every time the economy isn't booming. Giving back money doesn't solve that problem, it only exacerbates it, because it puts the unions in control of a process they should be nowhere near: politicians making budget decisions that are the best for ALL people in the state, not just the union people. After all, they are elected to represent EVERYONE. This isn't the USSR, where only members of the party get special treatment.

 

Corporate tax breaks didn't bankrupt the state. The state was already bankrupt, BEFORE the tax breaks. The tax breaks are part of a solution to the problem. The problem that was created specifically by these unions.

 

If you are going to argue cause and effect, it's helpful to actually get the order down properly.

 

 

So let me ask you this... do the wealthiest 2% deserve special status? Why not change their tax status? Why is it the middle-class taking the hit and not them? To say that people who disagree don't care about the real root causes and fixing problems is dumb... equally as dumb as just using an ax to solve budget problems. If one side comes to the table and gives concessions in order to do their part. Why is that not good enough? So you believe that everything has become so bad because of one thing... union contracts. Sorry, that just makes you a fool. How about the dumb idea of never raising taxes? How about the dumb idea of always giving in to the large corporations and giving them huge breaks, because if you don't then they will leave. Isn't that bullying?

 

These union workers recognizing that need to do more and alter their contracts is a great move. It PROVES they care about the budget. If Walker is worried about the future... bargain with them about making that a longterm deal. Don't just throw his hands in the air and say it's my way or your fired. Sorry that is not how a democracy works.

 

All in all, I am not arguing cause and effect... I have been saying the unions/employees have offered their help, he won't take it. Most people with a brain realize when they are looking for what causes budget problems like this that it's not just one thing. It's MANY!!!

[OCinBuffalo]

So let me ask you this... do the wealthiest 2% deserve special status?....

Let me answer this: they have either earned it, through the course of their own actions, or, they were handed it, through the course of their relative's actions, or, they were handed something, and made it a lot better, or, they were handed something and made it a lot worse. So it's simple really: the people who have done something useful with their lives have earned a special status. The people who have done nothing but collect checks, no.

 

What pisses people like me off is: I am most assuredly the first guy, yet you, for reasons passing understanding, want to lump me in with some pissant trust fund baby, and his sycophantic investment banker lackeys. They put me through hell to get the investment I need to create the very taxes you think you are entitled to, while you want to put me through hell paying for people who add 0 value to the economy, but who you have to pay off for electing you. All of you want crazy returns/taxes on an idea none of you in a million years could have developed. F all of you. Without me, none of you have jobs.

These union workers recognizing that need to do more and alter their contracts is a great move. It PROVES they care about the budget. If Walker is worried about the future... bargain with them about making that a longterm deal. Don't just throw his hands in the air and say it's my way or your fired. Sorry that is not how a democracy works.

It proves only that unions know that their entire existence is dependent on one thing: public opinion. A union is not a natural state of existence. One worker is NOT THE SAME as the next worker. Most workers are mediocre. The unions, talking AFL here, used to be about an earned status for only the elite workers so that they could personally benefit from their ability.

 

Treating every worker the same, when they aren't.

Expecting the entire wage structure to be based on time in the union, not performance.

Telling everybody that everybody on the job is entitle to the same results, when they clearly do not put out the same effort.

 

These are blatant fallacies. However, if public opinion is on your side, people are willing to TOLERATE them. Nobody believes that any of the above is true, but, we are willing to tolerate it as long as you provide results. Bankrupting the state with overblown pensions and salaries != results, and hence that marks the end of our tolerance of your BS.

All in all, I am not arguing cause and effect... I have been saying the unions/employees have offered their help, he won't take it. Most people with a brain realize when they are looking for what causes budget problems like this that it's not just one thing. It's MANY!!!

Let's get this straight: I kick you in the nuts, then offer to help you out, then you refuse my help, then I say you're bad for refusing my help, and finally you say, "I need to stop you from being able to kick me in the nuts whenever you want", and I then I go out and protest for my right to kick you in the nuts?

 

This is what you are selling?

Edited March 4, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[DC Tom]

So let me ask you this... do the wealthiest 2% deserve special status?

 

No, they don't. So let them pay the same, lower rate as the middle class.

[pBills]

Let me answer this: they have either earned it, through the course of their own actions, or, they were handed it, through the course of their relative's actions, or, they were handed something, and made it a lot better, or, they were handed something and made it a lot worse. So it's simple really: the people who have done something useful with their lives have earned a special status. The people who have done nothing but collect checks, no.

 

What pisses people like me off is: I am most assuredly the first guy, yet you, for reasons passing understanding, want to lump me in with some pissant trust fund baby, and his sycophantic investment banker lackeys. They put me through hell to get the investment I need to create the very taxes you think you are entitled to, while you want to put me through hell paying for people who add 0 value to the economy, but who you have to pay off for electing you. All of you want crazy returns/taxes on an idea none of you in a million years could have developed. F all of you. Without me, none of you have jobs.

 

It proves only that unions know that their entire existence is dependent on one thing: public opinion. A union is not a natural state of existence. One worker is NOT THE SAME as the next worker. Most workers are mediocre. The unions, talking AFL here, used to be about an earned status for only the elite workers so that they could personally benefit from their ability.

 

Treating every worker the same, when they aren't.

Expecting the entire wage structure to be based on time in the union, not performance.

Telling everybody that everybody on the job is entitle to the same results, when they clearly do not put out the same effort.

 

These are blatant fallacies. However, if public opinion is on your side, people are willing to TOLERATE them. Nobody believes that any of the above is true, but, we are willing to tolerate it as long as you provide results. Bankrupting the state with overblown pensions and salaries != results, and hence that marks the end of our tolerance of your BS.

 

Let's get this straight: I kick you in the nuts, then offer to help you out, then you refuse my help, then I say you're bad for refusing my help, and finally you say, "I need to stop you from being able to kick me in the nuts whenever you want", and I then I go out and protest for my right to kick you in the nuts?

 

This is what you are selling?

 

 

 

Ok, so they top 2% EARN their money and the middle-class workers don't? If we're really looking balance budgets shouldn't EVERYONE take a hit or are they special enough not to? So in your words the middle-class workers aren't worthy because they simply collect checks... they aren't part of the decision making process. What about those execs that make millions of dollars per year that just delegate? Nothing special about that? What about those execs who make very bad decisions that cripple the economy or their industry they are within... still all of the workers fault?

 

I love how you believe that these workers add 0 to the economy. They don't work hard, spend that cash on various items... hence helping to boost the economy? Without workers you don't have a product being made. People always don't bite the hand that feeds you... which goes along with don't cut off the hand that does the work.

 

Public opinion is actually high right now for unions. Many people believe that collective bargaining should not be taken away from them and that people have the right to organize. I have always said one worker is not the same as the next. I do find it funny that when it's good for an discussion, all union workers are the same - lazy. I do believe that their should be some performance scales put in place, as long as their is due process to fire someone. Can't have people simply saying... eh, I don't like you - your fired without cause.

 

It is not a fallacy that union workers making concessions DO CARE about doing their part. Offering to pay more toward their pensions and benefits. You do realize that most union workers, paycheck wise make less than others in a private sector right? So if they are contributing MORE, and willing to give concessions, why is that not good enough?

 

 

I'm not selling anything... the governor is acting like a dictator. His way or nothing.

 

No, they don't. So let them pay the same, lower rate as the middle class.

 

 

They should roll back taxes to where they were when Clinton was in office. Everyone pays more.

[OCinBuffalo]

No, they don't. So let them pay the same, lower rate as the middle class.

Oh, dude, come on. There's no way that basic piece of logic is going to compete the vast menagerie of BS emoti-tales this guy has created for himself. I would have posted that, but I decided to play on his "class warfare" battlefield, and hit him with the specifics that blow up his generalities because I thought I might get somewhere with it.

 

Edit: Reading his post now, looks like I got nowhere with it. He didn't even get the context. Cripes.

 

Ok, so they top 2% EARN their money and the middle-class workers don't? If we're really looking balance budgets shouldn't EVERYONE take a hit or are they special enough not to? So in your words the middle-class workers aren't worthy because they simply collect checks... they aren't part of the decision making process. What about those execs that make millions of dollars per year that just delegate? Nothing special about that? What about those execs who make very bad decisions that cripple the economy or their industry they are within... still all of the workers fault?

 

I love how you believe that these workers add 0 to the economy. They don't work hard, spend that cash on various items... hence helping to boost the economy? Without workers you don't have a product being made. People always don't bite the hand that feeds you... which goes along with don't cut off the hand that does the work.

 

Public opinion is actually high right now for unions. Many people believe that collective bargaining should not be taken away from them and that people have the right to organize. I have always said one worker is not the same as the next. I do find it funny that when it's good for an discussion, all union workers are the same - lazy. I do believe that their should be some performance scales put in place, as long as their is due process to fire someone. Can't have people simply saying... eh, I don't like you - your fired without cause.

 

It is not a fallacy that union workers making concessions DO CARE about doing their part. Offering to pay more toward their pensions and benefits. You do realize that most union workers, paycheck wise make less than others in a private sector right? So if they are contributing MORE, and willing to give concessions, why is that not good enough?

 

 

I'm not selling anything... the governor is acting like a dictator. His way or nothing.

I'm giving you the opportunity to re-read what I wrote. Before I call you an unmitigated moron. If you do, then you will realize the folly of your post above. Let's start with the easiest hint: The "check-collectors" I am referring to are NOT the middle class, or union employees.

 

Consider: your brain is so addled you can't even comprehend the written word of someone who partially, if not wholly, agrees with you properly.

Edited March 4, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[DC Tom]

Oh, dude, come on. There's no way that basic piece of logic is going to compete the vast menagerie of BS emoti-tales this guy has created for himself. I would have posted that, but I decided to play on his "class warfare" battlefield, and hit him with the specifics that blow up his generalities because I thought I might get somewhere with it.

 

Edit: Reading his post now, looks like I got nowhere with it. He didn't even get the context. Cripes.

 

 

I'm giving you the opportunity to re-read what I wrote. Before I call you an unmitigated moron. If you do, then you will realize the folly of your post above. Let's start with the easiest hint: The "check-collectors" I am referring to are NOT the middle class, or union employees.

 

Consider: your brain is so addled you can't even comprehend the written word of someone who partially, if not wholly, agrees with you properly.

 

Oh, don't wait. He is an umitigated moron.

[pBills]

Oh, don't wait. He is an umitigated moron.

 

 

Bottom line. If these Republicans are SOOOOOO for balancing budgets. Ask everyone to pay more, to do their part. That is not what is happening here. Understand?

 

and Tom... go F yourself.

 

 

 

OC... based on this statement

 

Let me answer this: they have either earned it, through the course of their own actions, or, they were handed it, through the course of their relative's actions, or, they were handed something, and made it a lot better, or, they were handed something and made it a lot worse. So it's simple really: the people who have done something useful with their lives have earned a special status. The people who have done nothing but collect checks, no.

 

You believe that policemen, firemen, train / subway operators, truck drivers, teachers, nurses, etc., etc., etc. aren't worth anything. They simply collect a check.

Edited March 4, 2011 by pBills

[Joe Miner]

Bottom line. If these Republicans are SOOOOOO for balancing budgets. Ask everyone to pay more, to do their part. That is not what is happening here. Understand?

 

and Tom... go F yourself.

 

You are one brainwashed retard.

[OCinBuffalo]

Bottom line. If these Republicans are SOOOOOO for balancing budgets. Ask everyone to pay more, to do their part. That is not what is happening here. Understand?

 

and Tom... go F yourself.

 

 

 

OC... based on this statement

 

 

 

You believe that policemen, firemen, train / subway operators, truck drivers, teachers, nurses, etc., etc., etc. aren't worth anything. They simply collect a check.

Ok, let's try this again: this time, go back and re-read the question you asked me. In it, you refer to the top 2%, yes? Now, imagine that I am not you, and that I know how to respond to a condition question per the one you asked, the condition being that my response is limited to the top 2% and discusses the groups within that percentage.

 

Prove Tom wrong if you can.

[DC Tom]

Bottom line. If these Republicans are SOOOOOO for balancing budgets. Ask everyone to pay more, to do their part. That is not what is happening here. Understand?

 

I agree. But the topic under discussion was the one your brought up. You're the one arguing that the rich get special status...which is technically correct, since they pay a greater percentage of income as taxes, AND pay a greater percentage of the income tax receipts. Of course, your specific complaint was that they get treated BETTER than the middle class, which is why...

 

and Tom... go F yourself.

 

...you're an unmitigated moron.

[pBills]

Ok, let's try this again: this time, go back and re-read the question you asked me. In it, you refer to the top 2%, yes? Now, imagine that I am not you, and that I know how to respond to a condition question per the one you asked, the condition being that my response is limited to the top 2% and discusses the groups within that percentage.

 

Prove Tom wrong if you can.

 

 

 

The tax rate of the top 2% I believe should be raised. I wouldn't say raise it as high as it was under Reagan. But it could easily be raised a few percentages without breaking any of their banks. Instead, it believed by many that we should lower the benefits and salaries for those this society really relies on... teachers, police officers, firefighters, etc. Guess what... lowering their salaries, also lowers the amount of taxes brought it.

 

I agree. But the topic under discussion was the one your brought up. You're the one arguing that the rich get special status...which is technically correct, since they pay a greater percentage of income as taxes, AND pay a greater percentage of the income tax receipts. Of course, your specific complaint was that they get treated BETTER than the middle class, which is why...

 

 

 

...you're an unmitigated moron.

 

 

Which is why I asked the question... if they are willing take more from the middle-class to help balance the budget, shouldn't the wealthy be asked to do the same?

[OCinBuffalo]

The tax rate of the top 2% I believe should be raised. I wouldn't say raise it as high as it was under Reagan. But it could easily be raised a few percentages without breaking any of their banks. Instead, it believed by many that we should lower the benefits and salaries for those this society really relies on... teachers, police officers, firefighters, etc. Guess what... lowering their salaries, also lowers the amount of taxes brought it.

Translation: You still don't get it do you, you unmitigated moron.

 

Why should I, somebody who has built a business from scratch, and is slowly, painfully slowly considering the hell I have been through, approaching your fabled 2%.....

 

....have to pay the same taxes as a pissant, "got my major in women's studies from Brown", then spent the next five years "traveling"(read: doing coke and acid in Europe), now is 30-something and nobody takes them seriously so they'll get involved in politics and PETA-like causes...the entire time living on family money that was made 4 generations ago?

 

Pissant and I have nothing in common. Nothing at all. I add exponential value every time I pick up a phone or write something. The pissant's only value has been added when they are eating something.

 

You want to treat us like we are the same. That makes no sense. Explain.

Edited March 4, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[Joe Miner]

Which is why I asked the question... if they are willing take more from the middle-class to help balance the budget, shouldn't the wealthy be asked to do the same?

 

They already are.

[DC Tom]

Which is why I asked the question... if they are willing take more from the middle-class to help balance the budget, shouldn't the wealthy be asked to do the same?

 

You asked the wrong question, dumbass. They're not taking from the middle class, they're restructuring contracts with public employees.

 

You make it sound like there's inequitable division of fiscal responsibility between all Wisconsin taxpayers...when it's not a taxpayer issue. It's a friggin' labor dispute, that in your inimitable stupidity you're somehow equating to a middle-class tax hike.

[UConn James]

Opening a door? Please, his agenda is clear. Look like you are helping out the state all the while, busting the unions and hurting the biggest donor to the Democratic Party. I am calling it an attack because that is what it is. Funny how most polls show at least 60% disagree with his attack on Collective Bargaining.

 

My pro-union blinders? I find that funny because the unions already agreed to paying more towards their pension and other benefits... EXACTLY what he asked for. Why can't he agree and be done with this? What is he gaining politically? If he is SOOO worried about being fiscally responsible why did he pass roughly $120 million in corporate tax breaks?

 

I'm also sure your friend would agree that paying more towards their pension is the right way to go and it's done and over.

 

Perhaps the governor is interesting in curing the ailment rather than treating today's symptoms.

 

What part of "a $3.6 BILLION deficit in FY 2013" isn't clear?

 

What good is it for the state's fiscal health to get a single year of givebacks, and then be beholden to kiss-'n'-make-up collective bargaining payouts when/if the tide turns back toward Unions-Democrat mutual backscratching.

 

These union workers recognizing that need to do more and alter their contracts is a great move. It PROVES they care about the budget. If Walker is worried about the future... bargain with them about making that a longterm deal. Don't just throw his hands in the air and say it's my way or your fired. Sorry that is not how a democracy works.

 

You want to know how a democracy doesn't work?

 

When the peoples' elected officials don't show up to debate or vote.

Edited March 4, 2011 by UConn James

[pBills]

Translation: You still don't get it do you, you unmitigated moron.

 

Why should I, somebody who has built a business from scratch, and is slowly, painfully slowly considering the hell I have been through, approaching your fabled 2%.....

 

....have to pay the same taxes as a pissant, "got my major in women's studies from Brown", then spent the next five years "traveling"(read: doing coke and acid in Europe), now is 30-something and nobody takes them seriously so they'll get involved in politics and PETA-like causes...the entire time living on family money that was made 4 generations ago?

 

Pissant and I have nothing in common. Nothing at all. I add exponential value every time I pick up a phone or write something. The pissant's only value has been added when they are eating something.

 

You want to treat us like we are the same. That makes no sense. Explain.

 

 

 

It's called a higher tax bracket you moron. That tax rate was lowered a while ago. I say put it back up to the beloved Ronald Reagan era tax rate - 70%. How's it that? Honestly, I was thinking 3% more than where it is now. Again.. your belief, I didn't start my own business therefore I should take cuts and do more to balance the budget than you? BS.

 

Besides your over inflated ego, the WORKER keeps your business going. After all, if you could do it by yourself you would. Again, don't break the hand that helps you and if you were any good the process wouldn't be as painfully slow as you proclaim. Just saying.

 

 

got my major in women's studies from Brown", then spent the next five years "traveling"(read: doing coke and acid in Europe), now is 30-something and nobody takes them seriously so they'll get involved in politics and PETA-like causes...the entire time living on family money that was made 4 generations ago?

 

HAHAHAHAHA!! That was a good one.

 

Perhaps the governor is interesting in curing the ailment rather than treating today's symptoms.

 

What part of "a $3.6 BILLION deficit in FY 2013" isn't clear?

 

What good is it for the state's fiscal health to get a single year of givebacks, and then be beholden to kiss-'n'-make-up collective bargaining payouts when/if the tide turns back toward Unions-Democrat mutual backscratching.

 

 

 

You want to know how a democracy doesn't work?

 

When the peoples' elected officials don't show up to debate or vote.

 

 

 

If the Governor wasn't to busy acting like a dictator he could be smart about it and go into negotiations for a longterm deal with the public service employees. Do you also know that democracy doesn't work when the governor says he will not listen to anyone. That being said, why should the dems come back? So that Republicans can get their quorum and he can bust he unions.

 

And since you brought it up... what about Republican-Billionaire backscratching?

[DC Tom]

If the Governor wasn't to busy acting like a dictator he could be smart about it and go into negotiations for a longterm deal with the public service employees. Do you also know that democracy doesn't work when the governor says he will not listen to anyone. That being said, why should the dems come back? So that Republicans can get their quorum and he can bust he unions.

 

Well, the Republicans and people of Wisconsin are in charge now; the Democrats can sit in the back seat.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

If the Governor wasn't to busy acting like a dictator he could be smart about it and go into negotiations for a longterm deal with the public service employees. Do you also know that democracy doesn't work when the governor says he will not listen to anyone. That being said, why should the dems come back? So that Republicans can get their quorum and he can bust he unions.

 

Why on earth should he talk to the unions? Because ALL they do is stonewall and fight to keep what's "theirs."

 

In other words, the TAXPAYER'S dollars.

 

And the Dems should show up to work...BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE BEING PAID TO DO!!

 

Oh, wait, I'm talking to a unionist. Hard work's beyond your comprehension.

[pBills]

You asked the wrong question, dumbass. They're not taking from the middle class, they're restructuring contracts with public employees.

 

You make it sound like there's inequitable division of fiscal responsibility between all Wisconsin taxpayers...when it's not a taxpayer issue. It's a friggin' labor dispute, that in your inimitable stupidity you're somehow equating to a middle-class tax hike.

 

 

Tom, believe me I know that they are altering the existing contracts. HENCE, theses union members are doing their part and the Governor states that it is not good enough... which causes labor dispute.

 

 

I asked the question about taxes to see what people would think about the wealthiest Americans throughout the U.S. having their tax rate go up. I would be happy with 3%. If politicians would be realistic and raise taxes, along with unions making concessions and other groups / areas adjusting their funding/expenses we would be well on our way to having balanced budgets.

 

So again F off.

[Dave_In_Norfolk]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/rasmussen-poll-almost-six-in-ten-wisconsin-voters-disapprove-of-gov-walker.php?ref=fpa

 

 

Oops! And this is a Rassussen poll, so the numbers are probably worse. This guy is a complete stooge. They pushed this little boy out there as a trial balloon and its completely being blown up. Go after muslism, works. Go after welfare people, works. Attack a faceless and skin colorless "government," works. Gays, check. Anyone with dark skin, check.

 

 

But teachers are a majority white and many of them are Conservatives, no check

 

 

Wonder how the Fox News guy who is governor of Ohio is doing?

 

There goes another bump in the road towards impoverishing the middle class of America.

 

Next topic, the Bush tax cuts