New poll shows majority support Walker recall

AdamT · Nov 23, 2011

I never claimed there wasn't a budget problem. My point is that Walker is taking advantage of the situation, which could be handled any number of ways, for purely political purposes. How clear is it? Even the guys on Fox News couldn't put lipstick on that pig.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

AdamT said:
I never claimed there wasn't a budget problem. My point is that Walker is taking advantage of the situation, which could be handled any number of ways, for purely political purposes. How clear is it? Even the guys on Fox News couldn't put lipstick on that pig.

There are many options to handle the budget deficit. Walker chose the way that I happen to agree with. Cutting the spending on items that make up well over 50% of the total WI budget is not just political its a good idea and should help into the future. Yours and shepard's belief is merely a different opinion. Your opinion is hardly special. Just because SHep agrees with you doesn't make it more impressive.

Take the facts and work from there. Walker didn't gin up a budget problem to get his changes through. The budget problem was real. The budget problem had to be dealt with. I assume you would agree that looking where the majority of state spending goes is a good idea when trying to get the budget under control.

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
Actually, yes. They looked at education when doing the study. The authors of one of the studies even found that teachers that leave their career and go to the private sector make much less in total compensation and people that leave the private sector to go into teaching make much more in total compensation. Salary was about equal. The largest difference was in benefits. It's one of the reasons that you have not seen a mass exodus of teachers (except for some retirements) to the private sector in WI.

"However, even with better benefits calculated into the equation, a number of
analyses have found that public employees receive less total compensation
than their private sector peers."
Powered by Google Docs

"However, the data indicates that state and local government employees in Wisconsin are not overpaid. Comparisons controlling for education, experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, and disability reveal that employees of both state and local governments in Wisconsin earn less than comparable private sector employees."
Are Wisconsin Public Employees Over-compensated? | Economic Policy Institute

"Consider this analysis the Economic Policy Institute conducted comparing total compensation -- that is to say, wages and health-care benefits and pensions -- among public and private workers in Wisconsin. To get an apples-to-apples comparison, the study's author controlled for experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship and disability, and then sorted the results by education. Here's what he got:

"Wisconsin public-sector workers face an annual compensation penalty of 11%. Adjusting for the slightly fewer hours worked per week on average, these public workers still face a compensation penalty of 5% for choosing to work in the public sector."
Ezra Klein - Are Wisconsin's state and local workers overpaid?

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
"However, even with better benefits calculated into the equation, a number of
analyses have found that public employees receive less total compensation
than their private sector peers."
www.eoionline.org/state_economy/fact_sheets/public-employee-compensation-mar11.pdf+Teachers+total+compensation+less+than+private+sector&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiFHDw1AZ78Bz8a9NEVc3dbqS3_ArqFxj108yyw-QnKK-o-nXo6Z0qhRONsjQDeeuv1PUfPKRsIAvm7CzGRVvZa2jh3CL54rnRgTFh5sYLg0O32MtF2Gt3KEttDnWgEz8eYprCf&sig=AHIEtbSuYzLDJkE-tDU5lY2zj1_B-6L44Q]Powered by Google Docs[/url]

"However, the data indicates that state and local government employees in Wisconsin are not overpaid. Comparisons controlling for education, experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, and disability reveal that employees of both state and local governments in Wisconsin earn less than comparable private sector employees."
Are Wisconsin Public Employees Over-compensated? | Economic Policy Institute

"Consider this analysis the Economic Policy Institute conducted comparing total compensation -- that is to say, wages and health-care benefits and pensions -- among public and private workers in Wisconsin. To get an apples-to-apples comparison, the study's author controlled for experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship and disability, and then sorted the results by education. Here's what he got:

"Wisconsin public-sector workers face an annual compensation penalty of 11%. Adjusting for the slightly fewer hours worked per week on average, these public workers still face a compensation penalty of 5% for choosing to work in the public sector."
Ezra Klein - Are Wisconsin's state and local workers overpaid?

I believe I indicated long ago, that there are studies showing both cases. There are even studies that show it's pretty darn equal. You have chosen which study you want to believe. I have chosen the ones I want to believe.

It has been shown that people that leave public sector to go to private often take pay cuts, while the reverse is true when they go from private to public - not sure how that confirms that PS make less than private in your mind.

It has been shown that a PS pension has much higher payouts (and often for longer time periods) then a private 401K and requires far less in contributions - due to being able to retire earlier.

How do you think education degrees compare to degrees in the hard sciences in terms of difficulty and grading? There have been separte studies showing that it does not turn out to well for education degrees.

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
I believe I indicated long ago, that there are studies showing both cases. There are even studies that show it's pretty darn equal.

And yet, you think we should try to make up the 30% of revenues lost because of the recession on the backs of our teachers.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
And yet, you think we should try to make up the 30% of revenues lost because of the recession on the backs of our teachers.

Yes, I believe that public sector unions have created a situation where they are taking more in tax revenue then they should. Wether its overpaid PS employee's salary and benefits (not just teachers), double dipping teachers or overpriced WEAC health plans that districts used to be forced to take due to collective bargaining against someone that is sympathetic to their cause. I also believe that while the recession is a signifcant contributor, it is not the only contributor to the budgetary concerns states are facing. Lasty, I would like to see lower taxes. One way to accomplish that is to get a hold on spending at the federal, state and local levels. The best way to do that is to take a look at the biggest chunk of spending.

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
Yes, I believe that public sector unions have created a situation where they are taking more in tax revenue then they should. Wether its overpaid PS employee's salary and benefits (not just teachers), double dipping teachers or overpriced WEAC health plans that districts used to be forced to take due to collective bargaining against someone that is sympathetic to their cause. I also believe that while the recession is a signifcant contributor, it is not the only contributor to the budgetary concerns states are facing. Lasty, I would like to see lower taxes. One way to accomplish that is to get a hold on spending at the federal, state and local levels. The best way to do that is to take a look at the biggest chunk of spending.

I have already demonstrated that studies show that public employees do not have it any better than private sector employees. And you expect to gain public support for short changing education to make up for the recession?

The last part of your post I think gets closer to your real feelings, that you think education should be a lower spending priority than the tax cuts for the rich. Yet, you have no complaints over the middle class taxes being raised over the last 3o years so tax breaks could be provided to the super rich?

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
I have already demonstrated that studies show that public employees do not have it any better than private sector employees. And you expect to gain public support for short changing education to make up for the recession?

The last part of your post I think gets closer to your real feelings, that you think education should be a lower spending priority than the tax cuts for the rich. Yet, you have no complaints over the middle class taxes being raised over the last 3o years so tax breaks could be provided to the super rich?

There are also studies that show they are paid more when taking all benefits and salary (even education required) into account. There are studies that directly contradict the EPI study that you previously posted and said that EPI failed to take certain things into account. There are studies that show that education degrees are much easier then other degrees to obtain. So, I don't know why you think the studies that provide evidence on your side are the only studies that matter.

Yes, I think wasteful government spending should be cut and I find it quite wasteful the money that is spent on teachers and the unions in the public sector. The unions were screwing the state of WI for years with their WEAC health insurance plans. Only after collective bargaining was ended, did the unions finally lower the cost (providing same benefits) in order to compete with private insurance companies that were providing comparable benefits at lower premium.

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
There are also studies that show they are paid more when taking all benefits and salary (even education required) into account. There are studies that directly contradict the EPI study that you previously posted and said that EPI failed to take certain things into account. There are studies that show that education degrees are much easier then other degrees to obtain. So, I don't know why you think the studies that provide evidence on your side are the only studies that matter.

I have documented 3 studies that show you are wrong. You have documented none to show you are correct.

Yes, I think wasteful government spending should be cut and I find it quite wasteful the money that is spent on teachers and the unions in the public sector. The unions were screwing the state of WI for years with their WEAC health insurance plans. Only after collective bargaining was ended, did the unions finally lower the cost (providing same benefits) in order to compete with private insurance companies that were providing comparable benefits at lower premium.

I also agree that wasteful government spending should be cut, but it is not in teachers total compensation for arguably one of the most important jobs in our country. I think we should reverse the trend of the last 30 years of cutting revenues to continue tax breaks for the super wealthy.

Teachers negotiated in good faith for better benefits to make up for sub-standard pay. The rich (of which teachers are not included) possess 80% of the wealth in this country. You are barking up the wrong tree in going after the teachers.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
I have documented 3 studies that show you are wrong. You have documented none to show you are correct.

You documented 2 studies. The Ezra article was commenting on the left leaning EPI group's study. You didn't have to post any, though. I knew of those studies. I also know of studies that show that the compensation difference is much greater. I would suspect that since you seem to be as interested in this topic as me, you would know of the studies that came to different conclusions. That you don't, seems to indicate that you are only looking for confirmation. If you are actually interested, feel free to investigate. I seem to recall that the far left HuffPo posted details on a bunch of the studies (covering both conclusions).

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
You documented 2 studies. The Ezra article was commenting on the left leaning EPI group's study. You didn't have to post any, though. I knew of those studies. I also know of studies that show that the compensation difference is much greater. I would suspect that since you seem to be as interested in this topic as me, you would know of the studies that came to different conclusions. That you don't, seems to indicate that you are only looking for confirmation. If you are actually interested, feel free to investigate. I seem to recall that the far left HuffPo posted details on a bunch of the studies (covering both conclusions).

I provided documentation for my position. I have no interest in doing homework for someone that puts tax cuts for the wealthy as a higher priority than education.

Sig · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
That was just state's spending. It does not include the local government's spending. the 40% figure is the local and state spending on PS union employees combined. You just want to ignore the 50% of the local's budget that goes to PS employees.

First of all, the state cannot really be blamed for how municipal governments decide to spend their allotment of state funding.

Secondly, while it may be true that some "rotten boroughs" are so corrupt that they spend 50% (or better) of their state funding and local tax revenue lining the pockets of a small circle of political cronies, this is certainly NOT true of all municipalities, nor even most of them.

Thirdly , you are painting all government employees with the same brush, when you damn well know (or at least should know) how insidiously distortive and irresponsible it is to do so.

Lastly, WHERE THE HELL DID YOU COME UP WITH 50% ACROSS THE BOARD????? Show us your math, if you don't mind.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
I provided documentation for my position. I have no interest in doing homework for someone that puts tax cuts for the wealthy as a higher priority than education.

Then you apparently aren't interested in the topic. I am not asking you to do homework for me. I already know the studies. I also know that if you were really interested in the topic, you would want to know all sides. Apparently, as I suspected, you are only interested in confirmation of your own opinion.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Sig said:
First of all, the state cannot really be blamed for how municipal governments decide to spend their allotment of state funding.

True. But the tax payer of the state still has to pay for it. And the states forward a lot of their budget to the local governments to help.

Secondly, while it may be true that some "rotten boroughs" are so corrupt that they spend 50% (or better) of their state funding and local tax revenue lining the pockets of a small circle of political cronies, this is certainly NOT true of all municipalities, nor even most of them.

That's the average. So, sure. Some spend smaller percentages others spend higher percentages. That's kind of how averages work.

Lastly, WHERE THE HELL DID YOU COME UP WITH 50% ACROSS THE BOARD????? Show us your math, if you don't mind.

I didn't come up with it. I did none of the math. I already provided links, 2 of them I believe. Basically, the state governments pay about 20% of their total budget in PS compensation. THe local governments pay some 50% of their total budgets in PS comp. The combined total is about 40% of local and state budgets go to PS comp.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
I provided documentation for my position. I have no interest in doing homework for someone that puts tax cuts for the wealthy as a higher priority than education.

I just looked up the information on WI's tax rating. In 2010, they were ranked 4th. I am not sure how much higher they should go before you are happy. But, IMO, there comes a point where it becomes a giant negative. again, IMO, I think being th ranked was already there. Apparently you disagree and would like to see it higher.

Catawba · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
I just looked up the information on WI's tax rating. In 2010, they were ranked 4th. I am not sure how much higher they should go before you are happy. But, IMO, there comes a point where it becomes a giant negative. again, IMO, I think being th ranked was already there. Apparently you disagree and would like to see it higher.

"One of the most pernicious myths surrounding the Wisconsin budget showdown is Gov. Scott Walker's claim that the state is "broke," there is nothing to negotiate and the only solution is to mandate massive reductions in public employee compensation and to abolish their collective bargaining rights.

This is nonsense. Wisconsin has not gone into the red because of excessively generous pay and benefits negotiated by unions for state and local employees. Our deficit has grown because the Great Recession blew a hole in the state budget, as it did in virtually every state in the country.

Nor are excessively generous compensation packages for state employees holding back the recovery: Careful studies by the Economic Policy Institute as well as University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee economists Keith Bender and John Heywood show clearly that public-sector employees are less well-compensated than comparably educated and experienced private-sector workers in Wisconsin.

Most assuredly, Wisconsin isn't "bankrupt" because public-sector unions here have the right to collective bargaining. There are 13 states with no collective bargaining rights for public workers; eight of them have larger budget shortfalls than does Wisconsin. In Texas, for example, a non-collective bargaining state whose low-tax, "open for business" economic policies are vaunted by the right, the state's deficit as a percentage of the total budget is over twice that of Wisconsin's.

Clearly, Walker is using the relatively modest fiscal strain facing Wisconsin as a pretext to roll back basic worker rights and undermine public employee unions as a political force. Moreover, beyond this indefensible demonization of public employees as the primary cause of the state's budgetary shortfall, Walker's plan makes no macroeconomic sense."
You heard it here first: Tax the rich and solve budget shortfall - JSOnline

Sig · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
I don't think anyone has claimed that a state that makes the decision to save money by elimintating CB for PS unions will never go into deficit. The politicans in those states still have to control spending on other items - otherwise whatever savings they had will be gone.

Interesting point, Buck; and one which I suggest you dwell upon with considerably more attention. In fact, you might want to take a good hard look at what our federal, state, and local governments pay for various goods and services from various private sector entities, and compare them to the going market rates of the very same goods and services. You might just discover that, in nearly all instances, the government is paying considerably, and quite inexplicably, more for such goods and services. In fact, it is the government's regular willingness to pay considerably more for such goods and services, as say.... healthcare... that artifically inflates the going market rate for such goods and services. Of course, the really sick thing is that such tales of the government paying $400.00 for $20.00 hammer have become more of a macabre comic cliche' than cause for serious outrage by the tax-paying citizenry.

Therefore, Buck, it is my suggestion that if you want to excoriate blatant government waste of tax revenue, in its most extreme, this where you, and those like you, need to focus your attention, not on the modest incomes of public employees.

The bottom line is that you can eliminate collective bargaining for public employees all you want---hell, even reduce them to the level of chattel slavery. In the long, it will not do a damn thing to cut back on government spending.

Why?

Because the fox in the hen house is not the middle-class public employee! It is the upper-class private sector businessman holding a pay-to-play sweetheart government contract, and he will simply steal that much more tax revenue!

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Catawba said:
"One of the most pernicious myths surrounding the Wisconsin budget showdown is Gov. Scott Walker's claim that the state is "broke," there is nothing to negotiate and the only solution is to mandate massive reductions in public employee compensation and to abolish their collective bargaining rights.

Do I need to go find an opinion piece to copy/paste in order to refute this? Not intersted.

Simply, the state is bankrupt due to spending being too high for the amount of revenue they have coming in. A lot of the state and local governments spending is on public sector compensation. I think it's perfectly reasonable to cut the biggest portion of their spending. I think it's even more reasonable when there is evidence that even accounting for education levels, their total compensation is higher then that in the private sector. Just because this guy decided to trust (left leaning) EPI over other possible studies, doesn't add any weight in my mind.

buck · Nov 23, 2011

Sig said:
Interesting point, Buck; and one which I suggest you dwell upon with considerably more attention. In fact, you might want to take a good hard look at what our federal, state, and local governments pay for various goods and services from various private sector entities, and compare them to the going market rates of the very same goods and services. You might just discover that, in nearly all instances, the government is paying considerably, and quite inexplicably, more for such goods and services. In fact, it is the government's regular willingness to pay considerably more for such goods and services, as say.... healthcare... that artifically inflates the going market rate for such goods and services. Of course, the really sick thing is that such tales of the government paying $400.00 for $20.00 hammer have become more of a macabre comic cliche' than cause for serious outrage by the tax-paying citizenry.

Therefore, Buck, it is my suggestion that if you want to excoriate blatant government waste of tax revenue, in its most extreme, this where you, and those like you, need to focus your attention, not on the modest incomes of public employees.

The bottom line is that you can eliminate collective bargaining for public employees all you want---hell, even reduce them to the level of chattel slavery. In the long, it will not do a damn thing to cut back on government spending.

Why?

Because the fox in the hen house is not the middle-class public employee! It is the upper-class private sector businessman holding a pay-to-play sweetheart government contract, and he will simply steal that much more tax revenue!

Yes, I am not in favor of that type of waste either. However, I think that doesn't occur as often as it used to. Or at least i've been led to believe that. Regardless, I seem to recall about 15-20 years ago, David Letterman had someone on his show and while I can't really remember the specifics, I know it had something to do with some largely expensive ashtray (I think) that the government bought. The government had all kinds of special requirements on the ash tray, which was the real reason it was so expensive.

However, while I am against such waste, as a percentage of the budget and what the government will really save total is peanuts compared to other areas of government spending. So, that waste should be eliminated, but that doesn't mean that other spending isn't going to have to be reduced.

AdamT · Nov 23, 2011

buck said:
There are many options to handle the budget deficit. Walker chose the way that I happen to agree with. Cutting the spending on items that make up well over 50% of the total WI budget is not just political its a good idea and should help into the future. Yours and shepard's belief is merely a different opinion. Your opinion is hardly special. Just because SHep agrees with you doesn't make it more impressive.

Take the facts and work from there. Walker didn't gin up a budget problem to get his changes through. The budget problem was real. The budget problem had to be dealt with. I assume you would agree that looking where the majority of state spending goes is a good idea when trying to get the budget under control.

Except, as you know, payroll doesn't make up anywhere close to 50% of the state budget.

But the bottom line is that the people of Wisconsin will decide. They didn't have a chance to decide when they elected Walker, because he somehow failed to mention that he intended to bust the public workers' unions (except of course the ones that supported his campaign) when he was running for office. During the election it wasn't important enough to merit a mention. After the election, apparently it's all important. This deceptive douchebag is going to get what he deserves.

Renae · Nov 23, 2011

AdamT said:
You posted a blog post by some guy no one's ever heard of. Even accepting what he says as true, it does not justify Walkers' actions. Wisconsin, like most states, periodically faces budget shortfalls. In their case it's primarily the result of tax cuts enacted under the last Republican governor. The state has faced bigger shortfalls in the past and managed to get past them without destroying the unions. Clearly they could do the same again.

Wisconsin's Political Crisis Is a Good Deal More Serious Than Its Fiscal Crisis | The Nation

LOL you went to "The Nation" for information? Is that a site you hit a lot? Hard hitting, lefty propaganda, blatantly lefty propaganda. I think we can dismiss you as a serious person now. :bye:

AdamT · Nov 23, 2011

MrVicchio said:
LOL you went to "The Nation" for information? Is that a site you hit a lot? Hard hitting, lefty propaganda, blatantly lefty propaganda. I think we can dismiss you as a serious person now. :bye:

As opposed to the virtually unheard of blogger you relied on above? :lol:

CaptainCourtesy · Nov 24, 2011

MrVicchio said:
You really don't read well do you?

I posted a break down of the budget problems, you post wacky left wing masterbation material. It's obvious WHAT you are.

Moderator's Warning:

Knock off the personal attacks.

Catawba · Nov 24, 2011

buck said:
Do I need to go find an opinion piece to copy/paste in order to refute this? Not intersted.

Simply, the state is bankrupt due to spending being too high for the amount of revenue they have coming in. A lot of the state and local governments spending is on public sector compensation. I think it's perfectly reasonable to cut the biggest portion of their spending. I think it's even more reasonable when there is evidence that even accounting for education levels, their total compensation is higher then that in the private sector. Just because this guy decided to trust (left leaning) EPI over other possible studies, doesn't add any weight in my mind.

An opinion piece would hardly refute the studies I have already documented. Yeah, you've already stated your opinion, you think that tax cuts for the rich should have a higher priority than education, we've got it.

I'll go with the experts I have documented.

buck · Nov 24, 2011

Catawba said:
An opinion piece would hardly refute the studies I have already documented. Yeah, you've already stated your opinion, you think that tax cuts for the rich should have a higher priority than education, we've got it.

I'll go with the experts I have documented.

No, there are studies on the other side. You just aren't interested in them. There are also studies refuting the studies you posted. Again, you aren't interested. You are obviously only looking for evidence that supports your position. It's the only thing that makes sense, since when the most recent study came out it was in all the news and came to the conclusion that PS unions were over paid compared to the private sector counterparts even accounting for education. It's hardly opinion. It's simply things you want to ignore.

However, it is opinion on which study, after reviewing them all, seems the most likely. But at least I reviewed them all, not just the ones that agree with my position.

Lastly, yes. It is simply my opinion that raising taxes in WI, where they are already ranked 4th in tax burden, would not be a good idea.

New poll shows majority support Walker recall

AdamT

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Sig

buck

buck

buck

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Sig

buck

buck

AdamT

Renae

AdamT

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

buck