Page 132 of 198 FirstFirst ... 3282122130131132133134142182 ... LastLast
Results 1,311 to 1,320 of 1973

Thread: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights withou

  1. #1311
    Sleeper Agent
    iamitter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NY, NY
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    That wasn't the question, people in Wisconsin are FORCED to join a union and pay them dues IF they want the job. You don't have a problem with that? What kind of choice is that?
    I mean, IF I want to play (to use Ikari's example) Rift, I need to join the group of players and am forced to pay the monthly fee IF I want to keep playing. I am, at all points in time, free to stop playing.
    Give a man a fish, or he will destroy the only existing vial of antidote.

  2. #1312
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Not really, you're just being ridiculous and taking comments out of context when I clearly identified it as saying that once taxpayer money has been used as compensation for someone's labor, it ceases to be taxpayer dollars and now belongs to the individual. But if you ever want to engage in this debate with any shred of intellectual honesty, let me know.
    No dishonesty at all... I'm simply taking your view to the logical conclusion which you apparently don't like. Nothing you've identified changes the taxpayer's mandatory funding of unions, and the teachers payroll is the money laundering step. You're okay with that, I'm not okay with that.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  3. #1313
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
    I mean, IF I want to play (to use Ikari's example) Rift, I need to join the group of players and am forced to pay the monthly fee IF I want to keep playing. I am, at all points in time, free to stop playing.
    That seems to be Irari's belief as well, anyone that doesn't want to join a union can not take a paying job. I am sure the 15 million unemployed Americans wouldn't have a problem with a few more joining them.

  4. #1314
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    No dishonesty at all... I'm simply taking your view to the logical conclusion which you apparently don't like. Nothing you've identified changes the taxpayer's mandatory funding of unions, and the teachers payroll is the money laundering step. You're okay with that, I'm not okay with that.
    Yes, there is because you are purposefully taking something out of context when it had clearly been stated what was intended in follow up sentence. But nice try. Try to be a bit more honest and we'll have a better debate. As for this other thing, it's another ridiculous claim because it is not tax payer dollars going to the union, it is the teacher's money. They can be upset about having to pay, and there is a debate all to itself on that subject. But taking it as it is, this is not laundering money into the unions, that's just an absurd statement. Teachers have to join the union in Wisconsin, they do so willingly when they accept the contractual obligations of the job. They are adults and are free to exercise their right to contract. But they are then held to the terms of the contract they agreed to. Which in part says they need to be in the union. The union has dues, if you're in the union you have to pay dues. Thus the teachers have to pay union dues. But that is THEIR money. Not mine, not yours, not the government's, not the taxpayers; THEIRS. They are the owner, they got that money as compensation for labor.

    I'm not ok with distortion, hyperbole, or intellectually dishonest debate. To engage in such behooves no one.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #1315
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Yes, there is because you are purposefully taking something out of context when it had clearly been stated what was intended in follow up sentence. But nice try. Try to be a bit more honest and we'll have a better debate.
    I'm sorry you don't like it, but my example stands. Ownership is 9/10 of the law you said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    As for this other thing, it's another ridiculous claim because it is not tax payer dollars going to the union, it is the teacher's money. They can be upset about having to pay, and there is a debate all to itself on that subject. But taking it as it is, this is not laundering money into the unions, that's just an absurd statement. Teachers have to join the union in Wisconsin, they do so willingly when they accept the contractual obligations of the job.
    I'm not claiming it's no voluntary... doesn't change the fact that union dues are laundered to pay for Democrats and political favors for the unions. Show me evidence I'm wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    They are adults and are free to exercise their right to contract. But they are then held to the terms of the contract they agreed to.
    Agreed - no one is arguing they are forced into a contract or that they are not shown the terms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Which in part says they need to be in the union. The union has dues, if you're in the union you have to pay dues. Thus the teachers have to pay union dues. But that is THEIR money. Not mine, not yours, not the government's, not the taxpayers; THEIRS. They are the owner, they got that money as compensation for labor.
    That payroll came from the taxpayer and is paid for a service. Part of that payroll is used for political favor to increase the power of the unions. In order to stay a teacher the teacher must pay the dues which is fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I'm not ok with distortion, hyperbole, or intellectually dishonest debate. To engage in such behooves no one.
    You feel the need to ignore my points, while I agree with some of yours and disagree with others and tell you why. If you want honest debate, it's time you engage in all the points. What's intellectually dishonest is not acknowledging the nepotistic and potentially corrupt use of that money, which is identified as revenue by the State and came from... the taxpayer. As soon as something changes hands does not mean you forget where it came from - which is what my example (which you do not like and also do not acknowledge and instead call ridiculous) exemplified and shows. Honesty is a two way street - you seem intent on winning internetz points instead.

    Tell you what - you win. Feel better? When you want to step up and walk the walk you seem to talk - let me know.
    Last edited by Ockham; 03-16-11 at 09:33 PM.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  6. #1316
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    I'm sorry you don't like it, but my example stands. Ownership is 9/10 of the law you said.
    I did, and in the next sentence I qualified that with stating that taxdollars paid as compensation for labor is no longer taxpayer dollars, but private dollars. This is in fact the definition of dishonesty. You are purposefully distorting and taking out of context one sentence to try to make it seem like I am saying something else. If you refuse to be honest, there is no point in debating. Liars will just lie and distorters will just distort to try to make their opinion seem like fact. But it is not honest. All I asked was for a bit of honesty. Can you provide it? There is no point in continuing if you can't.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #1317
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You mean Koch? Did any of Koch's money come in the form of taxes paid by the taxpayers?
    Show me some taxpayer’s money the unions dumped in the Wisconsin race. The Republican Governors Association, managed to run $5 million worth of ads in the state after Koch wrote a million-dollar check for them though. Then Koch Industries, through its PAC, donated $43,000 to Mr. Walker's campaign.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  8. #1318
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    WORKERS $86,256 1.55% Labor See Records INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS & ALLIED TRADES $43,528 0.78% Labor See Records ELECTRICAL WORKERS $43,000 0.77% Labor See Records WISCONSIN AFSCME $42,100 0.76% Labor See Records WISCONSIN LABORERS DISTRICT COUNCIL $35,400 0.64% Labor See Records WISCONSIN DEMOCRATIC PARTY $33,640 0.60% Party See Records WISCONSIN DENTAL ASSOCIATION $32,500 0.58% Health See Records WISCONSIN COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS $22,500 0.40% Labor See Records WISCONSIN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS $18,000 0.32% Labor See Records WISCONSIN FEDERATION OF NURSES & HEALTH PROFESSIONALS $11,550 0.21% Labor

    BARRETT, TOM | Follow The Money

    All but 2 are from labor unions. The very first one is DOUBLE the 43,000 donated by Koch ind.



    Koch Industries gave Walker $43,000 in direct contributions, then looked in the other pocket coughed up another $1 mill for the Republican Governors association. So what did the govs do you ask? Do what Repugs do best, run lying adds mostly against Walkers opponent, to the tune of $5 mill.

    One of the first shots in the drive for a CORP AMERICA headed by the heirs to the principal founder of the John birch Society, David and Charles Koch.

    Wake up America, or you will be a working for Koch Industries or one of its subsidiaries, such as the “Americans for Prosperity Foundation”. Who has tentacles in 32 states so far and growing. Whose main job is reversing environmental laws, eliminate unions.That is all.

    http://www.followthemoney.org/databa...phtml?c=116585
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  9. #1319
    Don't Mess With Texas
    mertex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    10-14-14 @ 03:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    2,382

    Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    Please explain how the rich "receives" checks? being allowed to keep more of what you earned is not a handout or a check from the government.
    Special loopholes, lower tax rates and extending tax cuts are.
    Fairness to you is taking from those who earned it and giving to those who didn't lift a finger for it.
    Yeah, like some of my tax money going to protect the assets of some rich dude vacationing 24/7?


    That's the mindset of a socialist.
    Better than the mindset of a fool.



    "I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them."
    --Adlai Stevenson, Politician





  10. #1320
    Don't Mess With Texas
    mertex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    10-14-14 @ 03:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    2,382

    idea Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    What loopholes do the rich have that you don't? Sounds a lot like class envy and jealousy to me. You have the same opportunity to become one of those evil rich people but one thing is holding you back, attitude.
    Is that what the Republican machine has engrained in you? That you have the same loopholes available? That you have the same opportunity to become one of those rich people (evil is your adjective, not mine) but your attitude is holding you back?

    Ha,hahahahahaha!

    An inheritance is income, and the fact that it's treated differently than other income is based less on a principled argument and more on tradition and feelings that giving money to family members is different somehow. In a country that prides itself on self reliance and "self made" men and women, we could probably honor our country's founders' wish to keep stagnant wealth from accumulating in family dynasties. In any case, property rights are philosophically derived from the right to life, and the wealthy are free to do as they wish with the money while alive.

    Now, you may wonder how the wealthy get to pay a lower rate than the rest of us. They get it by using their wealth to lobby for laws that change the rules to favor them. These tax loopholes for the rich are usually justified as being for some good purpose (and they often do serve some good purposes despite their unfairness). Of course, given that many in congress are in the ranks of the rich, their is an element of self interest at play in the law making too.

    For example, capital gains rates are lowered to "encourage investment," and they probably do that. But should a government be trying to influence how money is used by citizens? In any case, this is the primary reason Warren Buffet pays a lower total tax rate than his secretary. He gets much of his income in the form of capital gains.

    Then there are the myriad of laws that try to alter behavior in other "good" ways. Deductions for charitable contributions, for example, allow a wealthy family to deduct from income the value of a painting they give to a museum. Here's how to play this game, if you're interested: Buy a painting for $10,000, hold it for a year or two, get a friendly appraiser to say it's worth $60,000, and you deduct that from your reported income. That saves you more on taxes than the $10,000 you actually paid.





    Tax Loopholes For The Rich



    "I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them."
    --Adlai Stevenson, Politician





Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •