• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wis. governor to Dems: Return or 1,500 workers will be axed

So the no-bid contract opportunities for Koch Brother owned companies and massive tax breaks for large businesses need to be in place? What do you think those are costing them (or in the case of the no-bid contract, what it's going to cost them)?

Bold part: I'm of two minds about no-bid contracts. Also it would depend on what the contract was for I would imagine. If it is for something that could bring in more buisnesses then it could generate more money. So in the long run it may be good. Even if at the outset it costs a bit more money. If not then it should be gotten rid of imo. Granted it would have taken less money if there were bidable contracts. However the old axiom of "you pay for what you get" applies here. If you award a contract to the lowest bidder then you could quite possibly end up with crappy work done. Which would drive potential buisnesses away thereby losing money in the long run. Which was one reason why the government started using no-bid contracts. The thing about having bidable contracts for government work is that the government generally cannot pick and choose, they have to pick the lowest bid for fairness/equality reasons.

Underlined part: Yes those should be in place as it will draw buisnesses into the area. Which means more money coming in. On a local area level this is a good thing.
 
where's miller?

Playing a game of political chicken, Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin to stymie restrictions on public-employee unions said Sunday they planned to come back from exile soon, betting that even though their return will allow the bill to pass, the curbs are so unpopular they'll taint the state's Republican governor and legislators.

Sen. Mark Miller said he and his fellow Democrats intend to let the full Senate vote on Gov. Scott Walker's "budget-repair" bill, which includes the proposed limits on public unions' collective bargaining rights. The bill, which had been blocked because the missing Democrats were needed for the Senate to have enough members present to consider the bill, is expected to pass the Republican-controlled chamber.

Wisconsin Democrats May Return Soon - WSJ.com
 
The Wisconsin democrats hiding from their jobs are ******s, and should be removed from office for dereliction of duty.
 
You seem to be missing the point. Name one company that is notably profitable (or sizeable) thats only workers are its owners. Sure, some may have started that way, but they never stayed that way.


My company is 100% employee owned. Says so right on the trailers.


j-mac
 
Originally Posted by TheBook
You seem to be missing the point. Name one company that is notably profitable (or sizeable) thats only workers are its owners. Sure, some may have started that way, but they never stayed that way.

ESOP Statistics

•There are approximately 11,500 ESOPs in place in the U.S., covering 10 million employees (10% of the private sector workforce).
•These employees draw in excess of 3% of their total compensation from ESOP contributions.
•The growth of ESOP formation has been influenced by federal legislation. While the rapid increase in new ESOPs in the late 1980s subsided after Congress removed certain tax incentives in 1989, the overall number has remained steady with new plans replacing terminated ESOPs. Currently, it is estimated that there are approximately 11,500 ESOPs in place in the U.S. However, there is no precise way to measure this figure accurately since the overwhelming majority of ESOP companies are privately held and do not file public reports with the SEC.
About 330 ESOPs - 3% - are in publicly traded companies. However, these companies employ just under 50% of the nation's 10 million employee owners.
•An estimated 7,000 of the 11,500 companies have ESOPs that are large enough to be a major factor in the corporation's strategy and culture.
•Approximately 4,500 ESOP companies are majority-owned by the ESOP.
Approximately 3,000 are 100% owned by the ESOP.
•About 2% of ESOP companies are unionized.
•While ESOPs are found in all industries, over 20% of them are in the manufacturing sector.
•At least 70% of ESOP companies are or were leveraged, meaning they used borrowed funds to acquire the employer securities held by the ESOP trustee.
•An overwhelming majority of ESOP companies have other retirement and/or savings plans, such as defined benefit pension plans or 401(k) plans, to supplement their ESOP.
•Of the 11,500 employee-owned companies nationwide, fewer than 2% were financially distressed when they established their ESOP.
•Total assets owned by U.S. ESOPs is estimated to be $901 billion at the end of 2007.
The ESOP Association | Employee ownership through employee stock ownership plans

TheBook, do your homework.
 
Which part don't you understand? Honest barganing? or the ability to undo what they promise today?


j-mac
so tell me j, they are willing to make concessions now to help the state, why not down the road, if the state situation is considerabley improved, why shouldn't they be able to ask for some of those concessions back???
 
There are plenty of right to work states. Instead of hollering the ole "doomsday" scenario how about you back up your assertions. Find even one such thing happening in any of the right to work states.

Sure, I'll give you one right now. I was laid off from a job back in 1985, 2 weeks before I was vested for retirement. I was doing a better job than people who were there a lot shorter time than I was, but my pension was axed for the sake of the company's bottom line. Still, I would rather have that experience than be stuck in a Union, which I was before I got this job in a right to work state, but I am only speaking for myself. Most people would see it differently, and would probably be pretty angry.

BTW, I don't get angry. I hustle, which is what I did. I ended up starting at the bottom in another field, and within 2 years, was making more than double the money I was making at the company that laid me off. However, I consider myself to be an exceptional person. And no, I am not conceited. Conceit is a fault, and I have none. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
so tell me j, they are willing to make concessions now to help the state, why not down the road, if the state situation is considerabley improved, why shouldn't they be able to ask for some of those concessions back???


Simple, it is those supposed concessions that have so far only been talked about, nothing has been put to paper, and in the end probably wouldn't be. It is a tactic. Secondly, it is the CB that pushed this situation to where it is today. You tell me, why should unions who give money to politicians for election be able to sit across from them to bargain their contracts? Tell me why one of the liberal, progressive heros, FDR hated PS unionization?


j-mac
 
because public employees collectively bargaining with representatives their organizations give hundreds of millions of dollars to is not only not analagous to employees negotiating with privately operated enterprises, it's just a really dumb idea
 
Simple, it is those supposed concessions that have so far only been talked about, nothing has been put to paper, and in the end probably wouldn't be. It is a tactic. Secondly, it is the CB that pushed this situation to where it is today. You tell me, why should unions who give money to politicians for election be able to sit across from them to bargain their contracts? Tell me why one of the liberal, progressive heros, FDR hated PS unionization?


j-mac
so you are saying that unions shoulder the entire blame for wisconsin's situation? what about those tax breaks for big business? the concessions the governor wants, and would get if he honestly were only interested in the budget, amount to only around 10% of the budget shortfall.....what about that other 90 or so % j? or is that the fault of the unions as well?
 
This is disgusting, playing with people livelihoods for what amounts to little more than political points, the Democrats should just do the job they're paid for and stop acting like 3 year olds.

They are, they're supporting the unions.
 
so you are saying that unions shoulder the entire blame for wisconsin's situation?

No, I didn't say that did I? Let's keep it honest here shall we?


what about those tax breaks for big business?

Ah yes, Big bad business....Tell me Randy, when business leaves the state looking for better states to do business in, what good do the workers for those companies think that higher taxes got them? Ask Boeing in the Seattle area....We in SC thank the state of WA for letting us have that company.


the concessions the governor wants, and would get if he honestly were only interested in the budget, amount to only around 10% of the budget shortfall.....what about that other 90 or so % j? or is that the fault of the unions as well?


No, which is why I suspect he left in CB for wages. It is about unfunded liabilities that will bankrupt the state. Putting it off until another poison pill can be injected is insane. Fix the problem and that means you can't get back what is a problem now.


j-mac
 
No, I didn't say that did I? Let's keep it honest here shall we?




Ah yes, Big bad business....Tell me Randy, when business leaves the state looking for better states to do business in, what good do the workers for those companies think that higher taxes got them? Ask Boeing in the Seattle area....We in SC thank the state of WA for letting us have that company.





No, which is why I suspect he left in CB for wages. It is about unfunded liabilities that will bankrupt the state. Putting it off until another poison pill can be injected is insane. Fix the problem and that means you can't get back what is a problem now.


j-mac
he could work to 'fix' what he percieves to be problems by sitting down at the bargaining table and negotiating....he is playing political games, and trying to union bust....
 
he could work to 'fix' what he percieves to be problems by sitting down at the bargaining table and negotiating....he is playing political games, and trying to union bust....

Not at all. In fact he is indeed trying to fix what he perceives as broken in the system, and that is the unfunded liabilities caused by unrealistic union pensions negotiated through a dishonest process of cronyism in the past that can not continue. Unions are mad that the gravy train is ending, but end it will.


j-mac
 
Not at all. In fact he is indeed trying to fix what he perceives as broken in the system, and that is the unfunded liabilities caused by unrealistic union pensions negotiated through a dishonest process of cronyism in the past that can not continue. Unions are mad that the gravy train is ending, but end it will.


j-mac
funny how current polls show that by a magin of 2-1, his constituents think he should compromise....one term governor here we come!! no, if he were serious about fixing his budget, this would have been over before it started, as soon as the unions said they would make concessions, he should have been at the bargaining table, hammering out the terms......he is putting his anti-union agenda ahead of the will of the wisconsin electorate.
 
so you are saying that unions shoulder the entire blame for wisconsin's situation? what about those tax breaks for big business? the concessions the governor wants, and would get if he honestly were only interested in the budget, amount to only around 10% of the budget shortfall.....what about that other 90 or so % j? or is that the fault of the unions as well?

He is trying to get control of an out-of-control system. He wants taxpayers to vote on any increase teachers get that's over and above the CPI. That's what this is about. The unions don't want the taxpayers to have a voice. What????

Tell me. What is the problem with taxpayers having a voice in how their money's being spent?
 
funny how current polls show that by a magin of 2-1, his constituents think he should compromise....one term governor here we come!! no, if he were serious about fixing his budget, this would have been over before it started, as soon as the unions said they would make concessions, he should have been at the bargaining table, hammering out the terms......he is putting his anti-union agenda ahead of the will of the wisconsin electorate.


On polls, it's funny how you libs like to use polls when they push the results you want to show, but in any other case you question the polls ability to accurately measure anything. For example, what polls? What questions were asked? How were the people chosen to participate? etc.

As far as Walker's "anti-Union" agenda, I would think you'd be smarter than that. If he truly had anti Union goals, then why allow CB to remain in any aspect? No, this is about the budget, and you know it. The childish thing here is how these PS Unions are acting when it comes to the sacrifice they know they have to give up....In the end it is about them, NOT the children.


j-mac
 
There are plenty of right to work states. Instead of hollering the ole "doomsday" scenario how about you back up your assertions. Find even one such thing happening in any of the right to work states.

Doomsday scenarios are the only sure way to get attention and trigger response, just like what you and I did.

ricksfolly
 
Quite frankly should this retreat by those politicians be tolerated? I don't.

Before posting your response, consider this:

Would you allow republicans to flee the senate whenever they disagree with a democratic vote?

Frankly, I don't think Democrats could stop Republicans if they were to flee to keep from voting on a bill.
 
Its going to make a big dent in Education for the state of Wisconsin.

Can they afford that? Already they have problems!
 
Assuming the politicians really plan on leasing or selling everything that the public now owns(infrastructure privatization), then the dismantling of the unions might be happening now in order to enable the smooth transition of these assets from the public to private sector.

Unions probably represent some of the workers at the facilities mentioned in this portion of the bill.

− 24 −
Jan. 2011 Spec. Sess.
2011 − 2012 Legislature LRB−1383/2
CMH/RAC/TJD:all:all
SECTION 44 BILL
16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling,and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may
contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is
considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).​
 
Frankly, I don't think Democrats could stop Republicans if they were to flee to keep from voting on a bill.

they couldn't.


but Republicans DON'T.

In Illinois, for example, the Democratic Congress and Governor committed what the Republians thought was state suicide by hiking tax rates to combat falling revenues in the middle of a depression. Republicans argued and shouted and promised that the result would be nothing but pain....

....but they stayed and voted. that's called "representative government".
 
he could work to 'fix' what he percieves to be problems by sitting down at the bargaining table and negotiating....he is playing political games, and trying to union bust....

well let's hope so.

because the problem is public unions.
 
Back
Top Bottom