• 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!

Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights withou

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

You have got to be kidding me.

You have to admit, at least a good portion of libs believe that anyone whom has attained success in this country somehow "owe" what libs consider "excess" to be common property, and consider the wealthy to have stolen their wealth from the masses...Michael Moore said as much.


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

Have you paid any attention to Catawba's posts along with others here regarding tax cuts being an expense and having to be paid for? Maybe I should have said some liberals or even many liberals vs. the blanket statement of liberals.

I read the entire thread. Tax cuts are an expense in that, if we want a balanced budget, we need to cut spending by the corresponding decrease in revenue - that's it.

And yes, you should not have made the blanket statement. Some liberals you could maybe make a case for. "Many" I find highly doubtful and you'd have to back up your claims.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

You have to admit, at least a good portion of libs believe that anyone whom has attained success in this country somehow "owe" what libs consider "excess" to be common property, and consider the wealthy to have stolen their wealth from the masses...Michael Moore said as much.


j-mac
Oh, come on, Michael Moore is as representative of liberals as [insert someone who isn't representative of conservatives] is of conservatives.

There's definitely a number who believe that, but I don't know where you two get "a good portion" or "many".
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

I read the entire thread. Tax cuts are an expense in that, if we want a balanced budget, we need to cut spending by the corresponding decrease in revenue - that's it.

And yes, you should not have made the blanket statement. Some liberals you could maybe make a case for. "Many" I find highly doubtful and you'd have to back up your claims.

No, you have to grow your way out of a debt this size, you cannot raise taxes and put 15 million Americans back to work and paying taxes. If you are included in calling tax cuts an expense then you are part of the many that I should have said.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Oh, come on, Michael Moore is as representative of liberals as [insert someone who isn't representative of conservatives] is of conservatives.

There's definitely a number who believe that, but I don't know where you two get "a good portion" or "many".


Because you see it in here daily, what with all the "tax the rich" crap. One thing Obama has changed is that he has stoked class warfare to a fever pitch.


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

No, you have to grow your way out of a debt this size, you cannot raise taxes and put 15 million Americans back to work and paying taxes. If you are included in calling tax cuts an expense then you are part of the many that I should have said.

I don't know what logic you have that made you go from "I really don't think that liberals have any concept of personal income as apparently they believe it all belongs to the govt." to "thus allowing people to keep more of what they earn is a govt. expense.".
A tax cut is a loss in revenue and has to be paid for somehow - usually a spending cut.

I don't disagree with your first statement, as to the growing. Tbh, I don't see us getting out of this debt, ever. We're going to fold on it somehow, by defaulting, devaluing our currency to pay for it, or just collapsing our govt.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Because you see it in here daily, what with all the "tax the rich" crap. One thing Obama has changed is that he has stoked class warfare to a fever pitch.


j-mac
What you're saying now is different than "a good portion of libs believe that anyone whom has attained success in this country somehow "owe" what libs consider "excess" to be common property".
A progressive income tax places more of the burden on the wealthy, but I don't see anyone saying they necessarily owe the country it or say it is "common property".
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

To anyone who is interested, here's the mathematical, economic explanation for why it's a bad idea to allow teachers' unions. I've tried to keep it as simple as possible, but there are some economic graphs so if it's confusing, let me know.

Here we go: Imagine that there were no public unions, and the wages of teachers were allowed to rise and fall according to market forces. Under such a system, governments would naturally increase wages when there was a shortage of qualified teachers, and naturally decrease wages when there were lots of qualified teachers who couldn't find jobs. Here's how that would look on a supply/demand graph.

25rmlo2.jpg


As you can see, the quantity of people willing to supply their labor (i.e. teachers) increases as the price of labor (i.e. salaries) increases. The quantity of labor that the market demands (i.e. taxpayers who need to hire teachers to fill the classrooms) DECREASES as the price of labor increases, because they can't hire as many people if each of them costs more. The point where the supply and demand lines intersect is called the "equilibrium price." This is the wage that teachers would naturally earn in a free market system.

Under such a system, who benefits? The teachers or the taxpayers? They both do, as this graph illustrates:
x37psj.jpg


Why do they both benefit? Because even if the wage was lower than that, some teachers would still be willing to work. They benefit by earning a higher wage than they actually require in order to take the job. The amount that the teachers collectively benefit from such a system is the area of the yellow triangle. Conversely, even if the wage was higher than that, the taxpayers would still be willing to hire some teachers. They benefit by employing public servants who earn a lower wage than the taxpayers might be willing to spend. The amount that the taxpayers collectively benefit from such a system is the area of the blue triangle. The combined area of the yellow and blue triangles is the amount that society as a whole benefits. With me so far?

Now, what happens if we introduce a teachers' union into the graph? A teachers' union exists to try to negotiate an ABOVE-market wage for teachers. So let's assume that they're successful in doing so. What happens?

29bkakj.jpg


Under this system, the wage is artificially inflated above what the free market would naturally decide. This results in far more qualified teachers willing to supply their labor than there are schools willing to demand it. This causes unemployment, as the red arrow illustrates.

And who benefits from the union-negotiated wages? Well, the union succeeded in making teachers better off. As you can see, the yellow area (the amount that teachers benefit) is now slightly bigger than before. Unfortunately, the blue triangle (the amount that the taxpayers benefit) is substantially smaller than before. The taxpayers are the biggest losers. But that's not all - the overall benefit to society is actually smaller as a result of union-negotiated wages! See the gray area in the graph? That represents a deadweight loss. Neither the taxpayers NOR the teachers reap the benefits of it, and society as a whole loses out.

And all that extra unemployment among qualified teachers, that didn't exist before we introduced the union into the graph? That makes the students worse off.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

When the public employees can bargain for more money than the states can afford to spend it does destroy the states economies. The expectations are unrealistic. Where is the money to come from?

When Democrats gain control of a city or a state it almost always in recent years goes into a death spiral one aspect of which is the public employees gaining employment protections that undermine performance, pensions that are impossible to fullfill, benefits that bleed the budget. It's an evil, destructive partnership the Democrats have with the unions.


What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in
common?

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected a Republican
mayor since 1961;

Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;

Cincinnati, OH (3rd)…since 1984;

Cleveland, OH (4th)…since 1989;

Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor;

St. Louis, MO (6th)….since 1949;

El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican mayor;

Milwaukee, WI (8th)…since 1908;

Philadelphia, PA (9th)…since 1952;

Newark, NJ(10th)…since 1907.


How about the states? The map juxtaposes rather neatly with the red/blue map.

state-strain.png
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

I don't know what logic you have that made you go from "I really don't think that liberals have any concept of personal income as apparently they believe it all belongs to the govt." to "thus allowing people to keep more of what they earn is a govt. expense.".
A tax cut is a loss in revenue and has to be paid for somehow - usually a spending cut.

I don't disagree with your first statement, as to the growing. Tbh, I don't see us getting out of this debt, ever. We're going to fold on it somehow, by defaulting, devaluing our currency to pay for it, or just collapsing our govt.

Can you see any situation where tax cuts increase govt. revenue? How do you explain that happening during the Reagan and Bush tax rate cuts? Think about it and I am sure you will come up with something.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Can you see any situation where tax cuts increase govt. revenue? How do you explain that happening during the Reagan and Bush tax rate cuts? Think about it and I am sure you will come up with something.

Lets not derail the thread here. I've already discussed this with you many times. If you want, make a thread in Economics and I'll debate you there, so long as some ground rules are agreed upon.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Great post Kandahar, I think that should be clear enough even for people who don't have any background in economics.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Lets not derail the thread here. I've already discussed this with you many times. If you want, make a thread in Economics and I'll debate you there, so long as some ground rules are agreed upon.

It is quite appropriate to defend your position here as you and others claim that tax cuts cut govt. revenue when the reality is govt. revenue went up after the Reagan and Bush tax rate cuts. The question is why was revenue dropping before the tax cuts and went up afterwards? Hard for you or any other liberal to admit why?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

What you're saying now is different than "a good portion of libs believe that anyone whom has attained success in this country somehow "owe" what libs consider "excess" to be common property".
A progressive income tax places more of the burden on the wealthy, but I don't see anyone saying they necessarily owe the country it or say it is "common property".




I think this jack ass should start by giving up his millions, and put his money where his mouth is....Or at least where the three big mac's are.....lol....Socialism is for the people not the socialist.


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

It is quite appropriate to defend your position here as you and others claim that tax cuts cut govt. revenue when the reality is govt. revenue went up after the Reagan and Bush tax rate cuts. The question is why was revenue dropping before the tax cuts and went up afterwards? Hard for you or any other liberal to admit why?

That was not my claim. My claim was that your post saying you "really don't think that liberals have any concept of personal income as apparently they believe it all belongs to the govt." was idiotic, at best.
In any case, my economic views are anything but liberal. Call them libertarian if you wish.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

That was not my claim. My claim was that your post saying you "really don't think that liberals have any concept of personal income as apparently they believe it all belongs to the govt." was idiotic, at best.
In any case, my economic views are anything but liberal. Call them libertarian if you wish.

Libertarians that I know don't believe that tax cuts are an expense to the govt. and expect govt. to live within its means and allow people to do the same. Those Libertarians understand the value of keeping more of what they earn and also know that benefits personal responsibility issues which is big for Libertarians who basically want to be left alone.

As long as someone states that tax cuts are an expense or cuts govt. revenue I am going to challenge it by asking the same question I asked you, how did govt. revenue go up AFTER the Reagan and Bush tax cuts?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Libertarians that I know don't believe that tax cuts are an expense to the govt. and expect govt. to live within its means and allow people to do the same. Those Libertarians understand the value of keeping more of what they earn and also know that benefits personal responsibility issues which is big for Libertarians who basically want to be left alone.

As long as someone states that tax cuts are an expense or cuts govt. revenue I am going to challenge it by asking the same question I asked you, how did govt. revenue go up AFTER the Reagan and Bush tax cuts?

I'm not going to play silly games here with you. What I said still stands - if you want to discuss this in detail, make a new thread.

Your question is answered in parts.
Revenue directly decreased after the tax cuts, not increased.
It increased later, as it always does in time because of two reasons:
A) an inflating dollar
B) an expanding workforce

I know you won't accept these because you do everything in nominal rather than real dollars, or my favorite "80's dollars", so I'm not expecting anything.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

In 2005 on his first day in office, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels signed an order ending collective bargaining with public employee unions. He said it freed him to turn over some state jobs to private contractors.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels Is Tough On Budgets : NPR

in november of 08, as obama was matriculating to the white house, the gub of indiana was reelected by a plurality of EIGHTEEN

Daniels re-elected as Indiana governor - UPI.com

fyi

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

This is good, I am glad it was voted on and passed. It makes me laugh to see the protestors calling the Republicans cowards when their own democrats are running away and have fled like true cowards for almost three weeks now.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

This is good, I am glad it was voted on and passed. It makes me laugh to see the protestors calling the Republicans cowards when their own democrats are running away and have fled like true cowards for almost three weeks now.

Honestly I don't see the need for this kind of rhetoric. The Democrats took advantage of the only procedural loophole that was available to them. They delayed the legistlation and brought it to national attention. Nothing in that says "coward" to me. I could see the Republicans doing the exact same thing if the Senate numbers had been reversed and the Democrats had been ready to pass a 50% tax hike on the wealthy. I actually admire them because their only options were the safe bet of staying around and voting no and watching the bill go through anyway or taking off out of state, drawing the ire of the media, and putting their political careers on the line when all they could hope for was delaying the vote. If anything they chose the less cowardly option and the only reason conservatives hate them for it is because it made the issue into a much bigger deal than it would have been otherwise.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Honestly I don't see the need for this kind of rhetoric. The Democrats took advantage of the only procedural loophole that was available to them. They delayed the legistlation and brought it to national attention. Nothing in that says "coward" to me. I could see the Republicans doing the exact same thing if the Senate numbers had been reversed and the Democrats had been ready to pass a 50% tax hike on the wealthy. I actually admire them because their only options were the safe bet of staying around and voting no and watching the bill go through anyway or taking off out of state, drawing the ire of the media, and putting their political careers on the line when all they could hope for was delaying the vote. If anything they chose the less cowardly option and the only reason conservatives hate them for it is because it made the issue into a much bigger deal than it would have been otherwise.

If they wanted media attention all they had to do was call the media. I'm sure that each one of em has the media's number on a speed dial.

As it was they refused a quorum call, which is against the law, and those politicians fled the state. I don't know how you were raised but my folks taught me that fleeing from your responsibilities is the cowards way out.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Which is BS. The Teachers Union had already agreed to ALL of the monetary concessions. What this is really about is the Koch Brothers' influence over the Governor, who is breaking the unions, while lying that it is all about being fiscally responsible.

Mayor Snorkum is aware that state fiscal solvency cannot be gained for any state that denies workers the freedom to decline union membership. As long as the unions can extort dues from unwilling members, that union will continue to have a disproportionate influence in state politics.

Naturally, Walker's move was not a union busting move. All that has to happen for the unions to retain their current abusive position is for their membership to voluntarily remit the dues required for membership.

That'll mean, however, that the unions will have to start serving the union members needs, not those of the union leaders and politicians. Regardless, and decline of union membership will be the result of unions failing to attract members. One cannot count today's 100% membership as valid since that membership was extorted.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

False. The Police and Fire Departments formally backed Scott Walker for governor and then turned on him when he went after collective bargaining. The GOP is overreaching.

One thing I always thought conservatives could understand was that people don't like it when you take away their rights - aren't they always whining about gun rights and the like - they're done.

What right is being removed?

Mayor Snorkum sees that every single public employee still retains their right to join or remain in the labor union of their choice. They even still have the right to form competing unions.

They now have the right to decline union membership. They didn't have that before.

What, exactly, has any Cheesehead who isn't a union boss or Democrat politician lost here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom