Wisconsin Union Bashing Bill Passes

[Booster4324]

So money in pocket they make less, but damn it. They have job security and a solid pension. I hate them, because my 401(k) sucks and I have no job security. In other words... MOM THEY HAVE BETTER TOYS THAN ME - TAKE IT AWAY FROM THEM. WHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! And really the funny part about that is now we're weighing in the cost of being fired. Seriously, that's pathetic. If anyone loses their job union or non-union it sucks.

 

Now that this is done in Wisconsin. Let's hope the Republicans go after churches and military families. Let's make military families pay more for their benefits too!!!

 

 

 

 

Yes, moron... those air traffic controllers went against the no strike clause in their contract. Giving him the opportunity to do.

 

 

 

 

Yes, let's privatize everything. I'm sure that will work out just fine. HAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

Wow, I really think you are taking all this way too personally. That all caps bit you do, especially the HAHA bit, makes me cringe. I still somewhat identify with certain liberal tenets, and when you go on your rants, it makes me feel bad. Please stop.

[DC Tom]

So money in pocket they make less, but damn it. They have job security and a solid pension. I hate them, because my 401(k) sucks and I have no job security. In other words... MOM THEY HAVE BETTER TOYS THAN ME - TAKE IT AWAY FROM THEM. WHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

 

And then we can call it a "windfall tax"...

 

It is highly entertaining to watch you go apoplectic over practices that you entirely support when applied to others.

[Nanker]

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how is it grossly unfair to ask someone to contribute a small % to their own pension and medical premiums.

 

Anyone?

 

Simple. To argue against their government-given right is to spit in the face of all the dead teachers and government workers that were slaughtered on the picket lines in the last century at the hands of the corporate robber barons and evil special interest groups - like taxpayers. Those selfless public employees willingly sacrificed themselves in order that their poor and humble peers would have a better tomorrow. I equate this with the enormous loss of life by our Marines on Iwo Jima and Okinawa in the war against VietNam and the sacrifice of our troops in the Normandy invasion to overthrow the Polish hordes that had overrun Switzerland and Spain.

 

Not one red cent should they have to pay. Ever!

[pBills]

And then we can call it a "windfall tax"...

 

It is highly entertaining to watch you go apoplectic over practices that you entirely support when applied to others.

 

 

Sorry Tom again you are wrong

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok to protect the contractual agreements Wall Street had in place for their bonuses, and then at the same time it's ok to go after and alter contractual agreements state employees have?

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. of Wisconsin to use 1,500 teachers as pawn in his battle against the unions? Even though the concessions he asked for WERE given. Putting those families through an emotional hell for nothing but his game.

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. to NOT have discussions with the Democrats. Yet, he would love to talk to his billionaire donors-so he thought. (Funny how no one on the right will stand up and say that the ideas and tactics he exposed during that call were crap).

 

I would also love for someone to tell me why it's ok to go after the public service employees, when at the same time they are giving obscene tax breaks to big business and the super-rich? Note that in Wisconsin, 60% of corporations making more than $1 million per year in revenues pay zero taxes. Zero.

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/10/watching-uproar-wisconsin-protests-time-remember-unions-make-lives-better/#ixzz1GPjfXS78

 

 

Thank a union for the benefits you have today!!! Hopefully Republicans will honor democracy and actually discuss policies before they break laws... again.

[3rdnlng]

Sorry Tom again you are wrong

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok to protect the contractual agreements Wall Street had in place for their bonuses, and then at the same time it's ok to go after and alter contractual agreements state employees have?

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. of Wisconsin to use 1,500 teachers as pawn in his battle against the unions? Even though the concessions he asked for WERE given. Putting those families through an emotional hell for nothing but his game.

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. to NOT have discussions with the Democrats. Yet, he would love to talk to his billionaire donors-so he thought. (Funny how no one on the right will stand up and say that the ideas and tactics he exposed during that call were crap).

 

I would also love for someone to tell me why it's ok to go after the public service employees, when at the same time they are giving obscene tax breaks to big business and the super-rich? Note that in Wisconsin, 60% of corporations making more than $1 million per year in revenues pay zero taxes. Zero.

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/10/watching-uproar-wisconsin-protests-time-remember-unions-make-lives-better/#ixzz1GPjfXS78

 

 

Thank a union for the benefits you have today!!! Hopefully Republicans will honor democracy and actually discuss policies before they break laws... again.

 

All of this wouldn't have been made possible without our fine rookie president setting a precedent with the General Motors gift to the unions.

[pBills]

All of this wouldn't have been made possible without our fine rookie president setting a precedent with the General Motors gift to the unions.

 

 

Wow, you are going to criticize bailing out GM (who has paid their bailout money back) and not criticize wall street? I'm sure you're ok with the bailed out banks handing out huge bonuses too.

[3rdnlng]

Wow, you are going to criticize bailing out GM (who has paid their bailout money back) and not criticize wall street? I'm sure you're ok with the bailed out banks handing out huge bonuses too.

 

Do you have any clue as to what I was referring to?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052502135.html

 

Get someone to read the article to you and you might get it. Then again, you might not.

Edited March 12, 2011 by 3rdnlng

[Fezmid]

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok to protect the contractual agreements Wall Street had in place for their bonuses, and then at the same time it's ok to go after and alter contractual agreements state employees have?

Softball! The bill doesn't change CURRENT contracts, it limits collective bargaining for FUTURE contracts. Nothing is changing instantaneously.0

 

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/forum/topics/wisconsin-officials-rush-to-1?xg_browser=iphone

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. of Wisconsin to use 1,500 teachers as pawn in his battle against the unions? Even though the concessions he asked for WERE given. Putting those families through an emotional hell for nothing but his game.

Pawns? Umm, yeah, sure.

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok for the Gov. to NOT have discussions with the Democrats. Yet, he would love to talk to his billionaire donors-so he thought. (Funny how no one on the right will stand up and say that the ideas and tactics he exposed during that call were crap).

Do you choose to ignore everything you read? Did you not read any of the links I posted that showed the republicans WERE negotiating with the AWOL Democrats? And when the dems were caught red handed, they said, "No, we weren't negotiating, we were just having DISCUSSIONS!"

 

I would also love for someone to tell me why it's ok to go after the public service employees, when at the same time they are giving obscene tax breaks to big business and the super-rich?

 

I don't know all of the details around this -- but if another state offers low tax rates and businesses move out, then the state gets less revenue because they don't get to tax the employee wages. I know Iowa and South Dakota are trying to pull businesses from Minnesota with this tactic.

 

Thank a union for the benefits you have today!!!

Yes, thanks to the unions we have some good employee protection laws. But that was the past. You sound like a typical union employee -- "I've given 20 years to this company! They can't be mean to me now!" Guess what, you're paid for what you're contributing to the company NOW, not what you contributed a few decades ago.

 

Or do we have to keep thanking the French for our independence too? Viva la France!

[pBills]

Do you have any clue as to what I was referring to?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052502135.html

 

Get someone to read the article to you and you might get it. Then again, you might not.

 

 

Of course, many morons believe that the GM bailout was a buddy-buddy thing between Obama and the union. Nothing new there. Sooo, are you're ok with the bailed out banks handing out huge bonuses?

[pBills]

Softball! The bill doesn't change CURRENT contracts, it limits collective bargaining for FUTURE contracts. Nothing is changing instantaneously.0 I love how your news is coming from the Patriot Action Network. Classic.

 

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/forum/topics/wisconsin-officials-rush-to-1?xg_browser=iphone

 

 

Pawns? Umm, yeah, sure. I would say so. There was NO need to send out 1,500 notices AFTER the unions already gave concessions. No reason what so ever. I know, protect the low class Governor and his horrible actions.

 

 

Do you choose to ignore everything you read? Did you not read any of the links I posted that showed the republicans WERE negotiating with the AWOL Democrats? And when the dems were caught red handed, they said, "No, we weren't negotiating, we were just having DISCUSSIONS!" SOME Republicans were, the main Republican there (the Governor) wasn't willing to talk to them AT ALL unless they came back in State. And guess what? If they would have done that, State Police would have dragged them to the Cap and the Governor would have pushed through his union busting, oh wait, I mean fiscal agenda. HAHAHA... fiscal agenda. Laughable.

 

 

 

I don't know all of the details around this -- but if another state offers low tax rates and businesses move out, then the state gets less revenue because they don't get to tax the employee wages. I know Iowa and South Dakota are trying to pull businesses from Minnesota with this tactic. Ok, sosome would say unions hold States / companies hostage when in talks, etc. Yet, Republicans are more than happy to be held hostage by business? HAHAHA!!

 

 

Yes, thanks to the unions we have some good employee protection laws. But that was the past. You sound like a typical union employee -- "I've given 20 years to this company! They can't be mean to me now!" Guess what, you're paid for what you're contributing to the company NOW, not what you contributed a few decades ago. Yeah, those items may have been set in place a while ago. Do you honestly believe that companies wouldn't resort to low down dirty tactics against their employees now? If you think it doesn't happen you're a fool. I believe that some things in collective bargaining can be adjusted. I also believe in workers being held accountable for their work in the present time. I for one and many of my union friends work our asses off every day - earning our paychecks. So if you think I am a typical union employee, thank you. Goes along with everything I have always said, no one should say union workers are horrible by the actions of a few.

 

Or do we have to keep thanking the French for our independence too? Viva la France!

 

 

Another thing... when are Republicans going to start worrying about jobs? Instead of womens rights, gay marriage, unions, changing voting laws.... well basically anything that can hurt the democratic base. I do agree with Trumka... Gov. Walker should be named union mobilizer of the year.

[/dev/null]

I do agree with Trumka...

Big surprise

[pBills]

Big surprise

 

 

Sorry, should have I agreed with the Koch Brothers?

[DC Tom]

Sorry Tom again you are wrong

 

I would love for someone to tell me why it's ok to protect the contractual agreements Wall Street had in place for their bonuses, and then at the same time it's ok to go after and alter contractual agreements state employees have?

 

Conversely, why is it not okay to go after the unions, but okay to go after Wall Street? (Or as was already pointed out, GM's lenders.)

 

Like I said: practices you entirely support when applied to others.

[pBills]

Conversely, why is it not okay to go after the unions, but okay to go after Wall Street? (Or as was already pointed out, GM's lenders.)

 

Like I said: practices you entirely support when applied to others.

 

 

Not going after Wall Street... more less stating a fact that they are getting away with murder. Pointing that out to the many hypocrites here on the this site.

[pBills]

Look at those union thugs... those people who have given 20-25 years maybe more to educating our children and helping their families. Spending their own hard earned money on supplies for their classrooms. Damn you union teacher thugs.

 

 

 

Sounds pretty dumb to call teachers union thugs huh? Recall those lying pieces of garbage in Wisconsin.

[Fezmid]

I love how your news is coming from the Patriot Action Network. Classic.

I like how you don't know how to use the internet to do research. The same stuff is being said on all of the sites. But I guess it's easier for you to just B word and moan instead of actually LEARNING about things on your own (for example, your comment that Walker was probably still going to layoff 1,500 employees).

 

There was NO need to send out 1,500 notices AFTER the unions already gave concessions. No reason what so ever. I know, protect the low class Governor and his horrible actions.

So you're against the governor dictating terms, but it's ok for the union to? Like I said before, the governor didn't say, "Pay more for pension and health care," wait for the union to say ok, and then come back and say, "Oh, and also remove collective bargaining!" It was part of the ENTIRE bill from the beginning. The union coming back and saying, "We'll do these two things" doesn't mean they already gave all of the required concessions.

 

SOME Republicans were, the main Republican there (the Governor) wasn't willing to talk to them AT ALL unless they came back in State. And guess what? If they would have done that, State Police would have dragged them to the Cap and the Governor would have pushed through his union busting, oh wait, I mean fiscal agenda. HAHAHA... fiscal agenda. Laughable.

Wrong again on SOOO many counts. It's one thing to have a difference of opinion. It's another thing to ignore the FACTS just to make your arguments sound better. FACT: The republicans were giving concessions, including Walker. FACT: The governor's staff met with Miller (democratic senator) at a McDonalds in Kenosha, WI. They also met with other democrats in Beloit. So the statement that State Police would have dragged them to the capitol was wrong as well. The two sides WERE negotiating, but the democrats clearly wanted it 100% their way. Try to do some research on your own. Like I said, I live here and have been following the news closely.

 

Is the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal a better source for you? It even has a sensational title for you and everything!

 

http://election2010....mocratic-leader

 

"Walker said the meeting in the McDonald’s had gone so well that his staff had called just before midnight to wake him up and brief him on the talks. But he said Miller is “standing in the way” of compromise by preventing a deal discussed with Jauch and Cullen from going forward."

 

k, sosome would say unions hold States / companies hostage when in talks, etc. Yet, Republicans are more than happy to be held hostage by business? HAHAHA!!

Huh? Your statement makes no sense at all. How is enticing a business to move to a state the same as taking the state hostage by striking and closing down schools...? :unsure:

 

 

Yeah, those items may have been set in place a while ago. Do you honestly believe that companies wouldn't resort to low down dirty tactics against their employees now? If you think it doesn't happen you're a fool.

Well, considering only a very small percentage (I think I read 9%?) of WI employees are public union.... Meaning 90+% work for private companies... I don't think those 90% are getting screwed, and I don't think the 9% are "saving" the rest of us.

[Fezmid]

Another thing... when are Republicans going to start worrying about jobs? Instead of womens rights, gay marriage, unions, changing voting laws.... well basically anything that can hurt the democratic base. I do agree with Trumka... Gov. Walker should be named union mobilizer of the year.

 

I doubt you'll pay any attention - but this is a good article that confirms what the Milwaukee paper was saying: Reps and Dems WERE negotiating, including Walker's staff.

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/wisconsin_554095.html

[jjamie12]

Wow, you are going to criticize bailing out GM (who has paid their bailout money back) and not criticize wall street? I'm sure you're ok with the bailed out banks handing out huge bonuses too.

It's amazing how absolutely wrong someone can be inside of one post.

 

1- GM has absolutely NOT paid their bailout money back. They've paid a piece.

2- Most 'Wall Street' (maybe all -- not completely sure) HAVE paid ALL of the money back, WITH the required interest. The US Treasury has actually MADE money on most of the 'bailouts'. It is highly likely that the US Taxpayer will have made a ton of money 'bailing' out the banks.

3- 'Bailed out' banks -- who haven't paid their 'bailout' money back -- are under very, very strict regulation as to what their compensation packages can be. No huge bonuses for them.

 

To recap -- wrong in the first sentence, implied something incorrect in the first sentence, completely wrong in the second sentence. It is really amazing. I don't think I've ever actually seen a post that was so thoroughly wrong as this one above. You should really, really, try and learn something, pbills. We are 3 years deep into this -- the least you could do would be to learn something about the things you so adamantly advocate.

 

It's time for you to grow up and have real conversations -- your emotional reactions are so infantile.

Edited March 13, 2011 by jjamie12

[Keukasmallies]

pBills, let me take a crack at telling you why Gov Walker may have chosen to hold 1,500 teachers "hostage" (your word). He may have witnessed the countless times that teachers held students and parents "hostage" as pawns during negotiations for new bargaining agreements between school districts and the unions . He may have been put off when coaches refused to coach teams, when teachers refused to chaperone events they initially set up, when teachers refused to attend Parent - Teacher meetings until there was a new agreement in place. Or he may have been embarrassed when teachers wouldn't write letters of recommendation for students seeking to complete their college applications...until a new contract was signed.

[....lybob]

It's amazing how absolutely wrong someone can be inside of one post.

 

1- GM has absolutely NOT paid their bailout money back. They've paid a piece.

2- Most 'Wall Street' (maybe all -- not completely sure) HAVE paid ALL of the money back, WITH the required interest. The US Treasury has actually MADE money on most of the 'bailouts'. It is highly likely that the US Taxpayer will have made a ton of money 'bailing' out the banks.

3- 'Bailed out' banks -- who haven't paid their 'bailout' money back -- are under very, very strict regulation as to what their compensation packages can be. No huge bonuses for them.

 

To recap -- wrong in the first sentence, implied something incorrect in the first sentence, completely wrong in the second sentence. It is really amazing. I don't think I've ever actually seen a post that was so thoroughly wrong as this one above. You should really, really, try and learn something, pbills. We are 3 years deep into this -- the least you could do would be to learn something about the things you so adamantly advocate.

 

It's time for you to grow up and have real conversations -- your emotional reactions are so infantile.

The reason the banks could pay the Bailout back was that the FED bought trillions of dollars of toxic assets from them at pre housing collapse values - also they lent the banks trillions of dollars at .25% interest.