New poll shows majority support Walker recall

Catawba · Nov 21, 2011

buck said:
Please provide a listing of WI's biggest expenses so we can see where all of the tax payer money is really going. That is the only way in which we can all determine what cuts will have the biggest affect. In other words, I'm not sure how you can balance the 3.8 bil. dollar WI shortfall without making cuts to the category that is causing at least 40% of the state's spending and nearly 50% of the local government's spending.

BTW, I would agree in a sense. It really isn't just the public sector employee, it's also the public sector union bosses and the tax payer representitves at the bargaining table that enable them and give away the farm.

It is hard to fathom the stupidity that allows people to think teachers, police, and firefighters being "overpaid" brought about the Great Recession, which is real reason states were having trouble making budget.

Recession-bruised states' revenue sank 30 percent in 2009, Census Bureau reports

"The recession blew a huge hole in the already shaky finances of state governments, causing them to lose nearly one-third of their revenue in 2009, according to a Census Bureau report released Wednesday.

The severe drop in revenue resulted largely from the big investment losses experienced by state pension funds during the worst period of the downturn. Also, the report said, tax revenue slipped while surging demand from newly needy citizens drained the funds that back unemployment benefits, publicly funded health care and workers' compensation.

Overall, total state government revenue dropped 30.8 percent, to $1.1 trillion, between fiscal 2008 and 2009, according to the report."

Recession-bruised states' revenue sank 30 percent in 2009, Census Bureau reports - CFED News Clips

Renae · Nov 21, 2011

Catawba said:
It is hard to fathom the stupidity that allows people to think teachers, police, and firefighters being "overpaid" brought about the Great Recession, which is real reason states were having trouble making budget.

Strawman, no one believes that.

Catawba said:
Recession-bruised states' revenue sank 30 percent in 2009, Census Bureau reports

Yep, that means states have to be smart and look at where changes can be made, one of those areas is to look at pay and benefits packages. What was "affordable" in good times, isn't always in bad. And in bad times, the light of concern shines most brightly on, shall we say, wasteful spending.

Catawba said:
"The recession blew a huge hole in the already shaky finances of state governments, causing them to lose nearly one-third of their revenue in 2009, according to a Census Bureau report released Wednesday.

The severe drop in revenue resulted largely from the big investment losses experienced by state pension funds during the worst period of the downturn. Also, the report said, tax revenue slipped while surging demand from newly needy citizens drained the funds that back unemployment benefits, publicly funded health care and workers' compensation.

Overall, total state government revenue dropped 30.8 percent, to $1.1 trillion, between fiscal 2008 and 2009, according to the report."

Recession-bruised states' revenue sank 30 percent in 2009, Census Bureau reports - CFED News Clips

Yep, and when revenues shrink, you look at where spending is the most bloated. Thank you for making, after your strawman has been ignored as the silliness it is, the point for us. States were spending too much, and when the **** hit the fan... all bets were off.

Catawba · Nov 21, 2011

MrVicchio said:
Strawman, no one believes that.

Buck begs to differ:

"Please provide a listing of WI's biggest expenses so we can see where all of the tax payer money is really going. That is the only way in which we can all determine what cuts will have the biggest affect. In other words, I'm not sure how you can balance the 3.8 bil. dollar WI shortfall without making cuts to the category that is causing at least 40% of the state's spending and nearly 50% of the local government's spending."

As does MrVicchio:

Yep, that means states have to be smart and look at where changes can be made, one of those areas is to look at pay and benefits packages. What was "affordable" in good times, isn't always in bad. And in bad times, the light of concern shines most brightly on, shall we say, wasteful spending.

Yep, and when revenues shrink, you look at where spending is the most bloated. Thank you for making, after your strawman has been ignored as the silliness it is, the point for us. States were spending too much, and when the **** hit the fan... all bets were off

whysoserious · Nov 21, 2011

Catawba said:
Buck begs to differ:

As does MrVicchio:

LOL. Well done.

buck · Nov 21, 2011

AdamT said:
Yeah, I actually read it through before I posted it. :lol:

That's why I pointed out that Walker's tax cuts over the next three years equal roughly the entire deficit for this year.

That's not quite true either, but even if it is that's a silly thing to argue. The deficit in fiscal period 2009 to 2011 was roughly equaly to the tax cuts that Walker enacted for fiscal period 2011 to 2013. But so what? The reason the fiscal period 09 to 11 was as low as it was, was because Doyle and the other democrats illegally raided (as found by a court) other funds. The courts ordered the government to repay those funds. Which Walker inherited and had to do.

Doyle projected the 11-13 WI deficit to be 3.x billion dollars. This was before Walker was even elected. The roughly couple of hundred million in business tax cuts that Walker passed, would not have "solved a good deal of the problem" and have the potential of paying for themselves, as businesses move to WI - and I know for a fact that some businesses have moved there.

buck · Nov 21, 2011

Catawba said:
It is hard to fathom the stupidity that allows people to think teachers, police, and firefighters being "overpaid" brought about the Great Recession, which is real reason states were having trouble making budget.

Originally Posted by MrVicchio
Strawman, no one believes that.

Buck begs to differ:

I do? I don't believe for a second that PS unions brought about the recession.

I certainly believe that the total PS union costs were going to bury some states regardless of the recession and when times get tough, that is the bulk of the budget and where the cuts would make the most difference.

hazlnut · Nov 21, 2011

Erod said:
The unions are a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the United States of Socialism we've become.

Don't take this personally, Bush misused words all the time, but you don't understand the definition of 'Microcosm'..

Microcosm = anything that is regarded as a world in miniature. You can not have a 'world in miniature' of 'everything that is wrong with...' -- makes no sense.

Understand?

I think I know what you meant to say, but perhaps you should give it a try.

Catawba · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
I do? I don't believe for a second that PS unions brought about the recession.

I certainly believe that the total PS union costs were going to bury some states regardless of the recession and when times get tough, that is the bulk of the budget and where the cuts would make the most difference.

The states were doing fine meeting their obligations for teacher's meager compensation packages until the recession caused by the 1%, which slashed state revenues, and you think the teachers should be the ones to suffer because of that.

Its exactly the same as the rich who used social security to fund our wars so they could continue to get their tax increases, and now expect seniors to suffer cuts in benefits so the he rich don't have to give up their tax cuts to pay that money back.

buck · Nov 22, 2011

Catawba said:
The states were doing fine meeting their obligations for teacher's meager compensation packages until the recession caused by the 1%, which slashed state revenues, and you think the teachers should be the ones to suffer because of that.

Its exactly the same as the rich who used social security to fund our wars so they could continue to get their tax increases, and now expect seniors to suffer cuts in benefits so the he rich don't have to give up their tax cuts to pay that money back.

Pension obligations were an issue for some states even before the recession. Recession's fault or not, spending has to be cut. Tax increases alone will not take fix it. State's spent when the economy was going well. Now, they have to cut some of that spending when the economy is hurting.

I would argue that the cuts in the biggest expenses the states face are where the cuts will have the biggest impact. It's going to be difficult to balance a state's budget without touching a full 50% of the state's costs.

Lastly, there are a couple of studies that indicate that total PS compensation is higher then that in the private sector, even accounting for education levels. Of course, as I am sure you will argue there is a study that argues the opposite and yet another study that puts the private/public compensation at about equal. I tend to believe the studies arguing that it is higher.

Catawba · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
Pension obligations were an issue for some states even before the recession. Recession's fault or not, spending has to be cut. Tax increases alone will not take fix it. State's spent when the economy was going well. Now, they have to cut some of that spending when the economy is hurting. I would argue that the cuts in the biggest expenses the states face are where the cuts will have the biggest impact. It's going to be difficult to balance a state's budget without touching a full 50% of the state's costs.

No state that was well run was having trouble meeting its obligations meeting teachers meager compensation for their service. Education, for which our economic future depends, is the last places you want to make cuts to make up for the wall street recession and tax cuts to the wealthy.

AdamT · Nov 22, 2011

The fact is that Wisconsin didn't have a budget problem before the recession. As the Republicans like to say -- never let a crisis go to waste....

buck · Nov 22, 2011

Catawba said:
No state that was well run was having trouble meeting its obligations meeting teachers meager compensation for their service. Education, for which our economic future depends, is the last places you want to make cuts to make up for the wall street recession and tax cuts to the wealthy.

Whether you feel that the states were well run or not makes no difference to me. It doesn't change the fact that some sates were having problems with pension obligations even before the recession. The recession simply made it more obvious and more critical.

Public sector union employees, according to some studies are compensated (wage and benefits) at higher levels then similar private sector jobs. Your opinion that they are not means much less then the studies I reviewed.

buck · Nov 22, 2011

AdamT said:
The fact is that Wisconsin didn't have a budget problem before the recession. As the Republicans like to say -- never let a crisis go to waste....

So what? They had problems after the recession due to all the spending the state did before the recession. They had to bring the spending under control once the revenues dried up. 3.x billion in deficit is not something that WI could have taxed their way out of.

AdamT · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
So what? They had problems after the recession due to all the spending the state did before the recession. They had to bring the spending under control once the revenues dried up. 3.x billion in deficit is not something that WI could have taxed their way out of.

Like almost every state, they had problems after the recession due to a dramatic loss of revenue coupled with a rise in the need for services.

Donc · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
So what? They had problems after the recession due to all the spending the state did before the recession. They had to bring the spending under control once the revenues dried up. 3.x billion in deficit is not something that WI could have taxed their way out of.

Kinda makes one wonder how the states fiscal bureau (the badgers answer to the CBO)came to the conclusion that wiconsin didn’t need austerity measures eh?

buck · Nov 22, 2011

AdamT said:
Like almost every state, they had problems after the recession due to a dramatic loss of revenue coupled with a rise in the need for services.

That's not quite the entire reason, but for sake of argument. Fine. They lost a lot of revenue and were paying out more - resulting in a 3.x billion dollar budget. They had to balance it. The best way to balance it is to make cuts in the greatest percentage of their overall spending.

buck · Nov 22, 2011

treedancer said:
Kinda makes one wonder how the states fiscal bureau (the badgers answer to the CBO)came to the conclusion that wiconsin didn’t need austerity measures eh?

I am not positive of what you are speaking of, but I am guessing it's probably related to the already debunked meme that made its way around dem circles a while ago.

AdamT · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
That's not quite the entire reason, but for sake of argument. Fine. They lost a lot of revenue and were paying out more - resulting in a 3.x billion dollar budget. They had to balance it. The best way to balance it is to make cuts in the greatest percentage of their overall spending.

The best way to cut it was to NOT cut taxes when you know you have a budget shortfall. Spending cuts were agreed to by the unions. There is no sound financial reason to permanently cut off bargaining rights in response to a temporary problem. That ... was a pure political power grab.

buck · Nov 22, 2011

AdamT said:
The best way to cut it was to NOT cut taxes when you know you have a budget shortfall. Spending cuts were agreed to by the unions. There is no sound financial reason to permanently cut off bargaining rights in response to a temporary problem. That ... was a pure political power grab.

Someone posted a while ago why just agreeing to spending cuts was a bad idea. I also posted a while ago, that IMO, the agreement to contribute more was just a smoke screen so people like you could repeat it ad nauseum and provided evidence that many unions won't agree to contributions in order to save jobs. Lastly, it wasn't a temporary problem. The problem with funding of the pensions was real and long term. The recession just brought about that particular crisis faster.

Donc · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
That's not quite the entire reason, but for sake of argument. Fine. They lost a lot of revenue and were paying out more - resulting in a 3.x billion dollar budget. They had to balance it. The best way to balance it is to make cuts in the greatest percentage of their overall spending.

And taking collective bargaining away from state workers was the path to follow for fiscal nirvana then?:roll:

We can go on with this bull**** forever, but you and I know the truth, it’s a union busting tactic and this Nixon looking wannabe overstepped his hand,now he’s paying the price; the same price as the lame in the buckeye.But the buckeye lame cant get his ass recalled...for now.:2wave:

buck · Nov 22, 2011

treedancer said:
And taking collective bargaining away from state workers was the path to follow for fiscal nirvana then?:roll:

We can go on with this bull**** forever, but you and I know the truth, it’s a union busting tactic and this Nixon looking wannabe overstepped his hand,now he’s paying the price; the same price as the lame in the buckeye.But the buckeye lame cant get his ass recalled...for now.:2wave:

Act10 was a way to reduce spending on WI's greatest budgetary item and allow the state to send a lot less money to the local's without affecting education spending too much, since the locals would have to pay less in teacher compensation and could get away from the greatly overpriced union's health care plan (WEAC).

Donc · Nov 22, 2011

buck said:
Act10 was a way to reduce spending on WI's greatest budgetary item and allow the state to send a lot less money to the local's without affecting education spending too much, since the locals would have to pay less in teacher compensation and could get away from the greatly overpriced union's health care plan (WEAC).

If overpriced union's health care plan were the case, then why did walker exempt the public safety officer unions?

They have the highest salaries and benneys.how about the tax breaks the koch bros lackey passed soon after his perceived crowning as the badger king.

rocket88 · Nov 22, 2011

Erod said:
Statues of gold should be built in his honor.

That would be a strange way to save money.

rocket88 · Nov 22, 2011

The thing that bugs me about Walker is that the teachers had made the concessions he asked for, but it wasn't good enough. He had to fulfill some sick Con fantasy about busting a Union. He had to get everything his way or get nothing.

Donc · Nov 22, 2011

QUOTE buck

Someone posted a while ago why just agreeing to spending cuts was a bad idea.

Why would this be a bad idea?

I also posted a while ago, that IMO, the agreement to contribute more was just a smoke screen so people like you could repeat it ad nauseum and provided evidence that many unions won't agree to contributions in order to save jobs.

Its always nice when you have an opinion as long as you don't cite it as fact.

Lastly, it wasn't a temporary problem.

According to the states "fiscal bureau" they concluded that Wisconsin isn’t even in need of austerity measures,as a matter of fact they said that the badger could conclude the fiscal year with a surplus. Are you sure this isn't just another of your opinions?

The problem with funding of the pensions was real and long term.

No is wasn't.Hhmm...more opinions eh?

The recession just brought about that particular crisis faster.

NAH,.Time for my opinion..union busting. :2wave:

New poll shows majority support Walker recall

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Renae

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

whysoserious

buck

buck

hazlnut

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

AdamT

buck

buck

AdamT

Donc

buck

buck

AdamT

buck

Donc

buck

Donc

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist

Donc