• 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!

Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mach said:
The poor spend it on consumer goods.
The wealthy invest it into economic growth and on consumer goods.

Both spend it. Where do you get these ideas?
Click to expand...

Yes they invest it as to make more $$$ for themselves
 
MaggieD said:
Wisconsin Budget Battle Underscores History of Hand-Wringing Over Public-Sector Unions

Read at this link.
Click to expand...

I don't get it. Why aren't liberals sticking up for the little guy instead of the teachers union?

Wisconsin Budget Battle Underscores History of Hand-Wringing Over Public-Sector Unions

Taxpayers who generally have less generous pensions may have to pay tax increases to fund benefits for public sector employees with much more generous pensions than they have themselves," says Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute.
The demands of public sector unions come at a time that taxpayers are over a barrel. The government has a monopoly on services such as police or teachers, giving the unions the power to force concessions.
In some cases, officials are inclined to go along because they were elected with considerable help from public sector unions, which give large sums to friendly political candidates, mostly Democrats.
In fact, the American Federation of State and County Municipal Employees spent more than any other outside group in the last election, according to analysts.
"They spent $91 million on the last election campaign. They are the 800-pound gorilla of state and local government politics," Sherk says.
Click to expand...
 
whysoserious said:
But what makes the market right? Why is the market infallible?
Click to expand...
Reality. Please look at centrally planned markets compared to relatively free markets in large nations.
The historic and present day evidence is not even remotely controversial. This isn't a partisan issue, it's a science issue.

As to infallible, that's a red herring, all that matter is what works *best* while simulatneously maximizing *liberty*.
Why did centrally planned china stagnate for years, and to grow their economy, middle class, and standard of living, introduce free market initiatives?

The only thing worse than the inferior performance of central planning, is the fact that you have those in power, dictating how others must lead their lives. It's worse economically, and in terms of individual freedom, it can't get more clear cut than that.

Last time I checked, we bailed the market out because of how dead wrong it was.
Click to expand...
Who bailed it out? Government. <- that's not the market function

Also, please cite your stats. Its common decency.
Click to expand...
It's trivial stuff
Executive pay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Executive PayWatch: Trends in CEO Pay
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
What is scaring you? That I asked why the market is infallible? That I question why someone is worth 2150 times another person (not including bonuses and fringe benefits)?
Click to expand...

The market is created by individuals willing to pay the prices and support companies that pay those salaries. That is freedom of choice. You don't like what a company pays its CEO's then don't buy from that company. The market determines value and the public determines whether that salary is worth it. Think that Bill Gates is worth billions? How about Albert Pujols, Lebron James, Justin Bieber? Who sets their wages? If there was no interest in computers Gates wouldn't be worth what he is worth today. The market decides and you influence the market by your buying habits.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
Yes they invest it as to make more $$$ for themselves
Click to expand...

Last I checked investment is what drives economic GROWTH:
1. it creates the jobs
2. it creates the rates that fund your pension/IRA/401K, interest rates, etc.

Lol. I think just about every employee or owner makes money "for themselves". To argue otherwise is absurd.
 
Conservative said:
The market is created by individuals willing to pay the prices and support companies that pay those salaries. That is freedom of choice. You don't like what a company pays its CEO's then don't buy from that company. The market determines value and the public determines whether that salary is worth it. Think that Bill Gates is worth billions? How about Albert Pujols, Lebron James, Justin Bieber? Who sets their wages? If there was no interest in computers Gates wouldn't be worth what he is worth today. The market decides and you influence the market by your buying habits.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The market is created by individuals. Individuals who aren't perfect. So why would you leave it to its own devices and assume everything is going fine? Why do I have to accept that just because the market has allowed it that it must be good?

What has school taught me? To not believe everything I hear and use common sense and logic to form thoughts. To do my own research.

So yes, pardon me for not accepting, "because the free market says so" as a valid answer.
 
Barbbtx said:
I don't get it. Why aren't liberals sticking up for the little guy instead of the teachers union?

Wisconsin Budget Battle Underscores History of Hand-Wringing Over Public-Sector Unions
Click to expand...

That's a straw man. Who said liberals want to raise taxes on people who can't afford it?

MaggieD said:
Almost without exception, Barb, the posters who are most vehemently arguing for the teacher's union are union members themselves - or retired and receiving public pensions. What can we expect?

Before some start jumping on me, I know here are some who are NOT....but most? Are.
Click to expand...

Do you have any stat on that?
 
whysoserious said:
What is scaring you? That I asked why the market is infallible? That I question why someone is worth 2150 times another person (not including bonuses and fringe benefits)?
Click to expand...

I answered it above.

Here's an analogy to show you how absurd your line of reasoning is:

If I buy a car for $40K tomorrow, who should determine if I can, or cannot make this purchase.
You. or Me.

If Me, you support free market. If You, then you're just kidding, I'm sure.
Then you follow up with "How are you infallible!?!"

How does "fallibility" relate to the purchase price I agree to for a car I want to purchase? It doesn't, does it.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Invisible said:
Yes they invest it as to make more $$$ for themselves
Click to expand...

The wealthy buy far more goods and services than the less wealthy which means their share of sales taxes, property taxes, luxury taxes and every other tax on goods and services puts the middle class to shame. If it weren't for those "wealthy people" in your very own community who lived in those huge houses paying those huge property taxes, yours would be through the roof. If it weren't for the wealthy buying new cars every few years, our car makers and their union employees would be out of business. If it weren't for the wealthy investing in hair-brained schemes that might someday be popular, you wouldn't even have cable TV. If it weren't for the wealthy putting their money in the banks, you wouldn't be able to borrow a nickel to buy a house. If it weren't for the wealthy flying first class, it'd cost YOU double to fly. If it weren't for the wealthy, we'd have five times the homeless and no shelters to put them in. I could go on and on and on and on....
 
Conservative said:
What you or I think at this point is irrelevant, his words are there for all to see and he got it right.

As for Democrat Party here is why I use it

"Democrat Party" is a political epithet used in the United States instead of "Democratic Party" when talking about the Democratic Party.The term "Democrat Party" was in common use with no negative connotations by Democrats in some localities during the 1950s.[9] The Dictionary of American Regional English gives numerous examples of "Democrat" being used as an adjective in everyday speech, especially in the Northeast.[10]
Click to expand...

Your little rant about the Democrat party also shows you are stuck in the past and everybody is wrong except you. It is a Limbaughism used in 2011. I could not care less about who used it and where it was used sixty years ago. For the last several years, DEMOCRATIC PARTY was the rule. It was right wingers like Limbaugh who adopted the crusade for Democrat Party.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
I answered it above.

Here's an analogy to show you how absurd your line of reasoning is:

If I buy a car for $40K tomrrow, who should determine if I can, or cannot make this purchase.
You.
Me.

If Me, you support free market. If You, then you're just kidding, I'm sure.
Then you follow up with "How are you infallible!?!"

How does "fallibility" relate to the purchase price I agree to for a car I want to purchase? It doesn't, does it.
Click to expand...

That's a terrible analogy. That is what is called a straw man. You simply took my point of view, packaged it and turned it into something else, and then tackled that argument.

Guess what? I never asked whether or not you could buy a car. I asked why I should believe the free market is correct in deciding compensation for a CEO that makes 2150 times the amount of most his employees? That was my question.
 
Barbbtx said:
Yes, unless you can prove that public union dues come from someone besides the tax payers who employee them.
You do know that we aren't talking about private sector unions?
Click to expand...

It comes from what they earn. In exchange for X amount of time/hour/minutes of work.When the work is done and the paycheck issued, it is now the property of the public sector employee(in other words it is no longer taxpayer dough) to do with it as he/she pleases.

Be it pay union dues, buy a six pack or a bag of pot. I realize it’s an inconvenient truth and a slap in the face of your winger beliefs but sadly(to you and other flat earthers) it’s a fact that at the time that the the public sector employee completed his chores, in exchange for the amount of money that it took him/her to pay the union dues, that money was no longer "public funds ".:2wave:
 
whysoserious said:
Exactly. The market is created by individuals. Individuals who aren't perfect. So why would you leave it to its own devices and assume everything is going fine?
Click to expand...
Because hopefully you prefer their freedom to choose what they purchase or work for or sell, as opposed to someone else dictating what they have to purchase, work for, or sell.

As a general rule for a society, being allowed to make your own mistakes is strictly better than being forced by someone else to make mistakes. How would you like it if Glen Beck and his cronies got to determine how you lived your life? You'd apparently love it based on what you're trying to do.
 
haymarket said:
Your little rant about the Democrat party also shows you are stuck in the past and everybody is wrong except you. It is a Limbaughism used in 2011. I could not care less about who used it and where it was used sixty years ago. For the last several years, DEMOCRATIC PARTY was the rule. It was right wingers like Limbaugh who adopted the crusade for Democrat Party.
Click to expand...

You are the one making a big deal out of the term Democrat Party, not me. It isn't right or wrong just what I used growing up. Sorry it offends you but tough. There was no Rush Limbaugh when I was growing up and a Democrat nor was their a Rush Limbaugh in 1980 when the Democrat Party left me. You always blame someone else for the Democrat failures.
 
whysoserious said:
That's a terrible analogy. That is what is called a straw man. You simply took my point of view, packaged it and turned it into something else, and then tackled that argument.
Click to expand...
It's just fine as an analogy. The fact that you are already needing to have this explained, apparently also means you need the analogy explained. Which is fine.

I asked why I should believe the free market is correct in deciding compensation for a CEO that makes 2150 times the amount of most his employees? That was my question.
Click to expand...

CEO enters into negotiation with the board of the fortune 500 company and is offered a job making 500x minimum wage in total compensation.

That's how the market decided. How do you propose we decide that CEOs pay if not the market? Please, I can't wait to see the response.
 
Mach said:
Because hopefully you prefer their freedom to choose what they purchase or work for or sell, as opposed to someone else dictating what they have to purchase, work for, or sell.

As a general rule for a society, being allowed to make your own mistakes is strictly better than being forced by someone else to make mistakes. How would you like it if Glen Beck and his cronies got to determine how you lived your life? You'd apparently love it based on what you're trying to do.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? There are words being put in my mouth left and right. Not completely trusting the free market doesn't equal communism or any other type of forced economical system. Ever heard of Sarbanes-Oxley? It, along with thousands of other free market regulations, are put into place because of a free-market failure. That's all I am suggesting, so please quit with the straw man attacks.

Mach said:
It's just fine as an analogy. The fact that you are already needing to have this explained, apparently also means you need the analogy explained. Which is fine.



CEO enters into negotiation with the board of the fortune 500 company and is offered a job making 500x minimum wage in total compensation.

That's how the market decided. How do you propose we decide that CEOs pay if not the market? Please, I can't wait to see the response.
Click to expand...

Which is why they could use a union. Don't you think that the people who make the company run should have a say in it? The board doesn't care how much the CEO makes, as long as they get their dividends. They don't care if he makes over 2000 times more than his employees.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Maybe you can tell me why we have a federal budget for education when it is also in the states and is a state and local responsibility. Teachers, firemen, and police are funded by the states, not the Federal govt.
Click to expand...

You are seriously asking why education is important to our country???

Not a fan of education huh? I should have guessed that from your posts. Our whole future as a country depends on education. If the the federal government did not place education as a priority, it would be shirking its responsibility under the Constitution to promote the general welfare.
 
Catawba said:
You are seriously asking why education is important to our country???

Not a fan of education huh? I should have guessed that from your posts. Our whole future as a country depends on education. If the the federal government did not place education as a priority, it would be shirking its responsibility under the Constitution to promote the general welfare.
Click to expand...

The great part is that I already showed him that we are 44th in spending for education in the world. #1 my ass.
 
whysoserious said:
Which is why they could use a union. Don't you think that the people who make the company run should have a say in it?
Click to expand...
They do have a say. They can purchase stock, they can get stock options, they can get voting stock, they can go to a different company.
They can work their way up, they can achieve all sorts of levels of influence within the company. They can join the board.

They could also start their own business and run it EXACTLY as you claim to want. You, right now, can start a business and make it function just how dream it should be. You are free to do this under our current system. How is this insufficient? You can't compete with it because it will be inefficient, but by all means, knock yourself out.

The board doesn't care how much the CEO makes, as long as they get their dividends. They don't care if he makes over 2000 times more than his employees.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's not important as long as the company is profiting, who cares? Maybe they had eggs for lunch. What business is it of yours?
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
The great part is that I already showed him that we are 44th in spending for education in the world. #1 my ass.
Click to expand...

He obviously doesn't understand the importance of education.
 
randel said:
they treat employees well?? seems to me i remember having read where their benefits suck, where they have locked in employees after hours 'till all the work was done, but tried to skate out of paying overtime.....yeah, sounds like a great place.:roll:
Click to expand...

Looks like better pay and benefits than a mom and pop shop could pay.

Wal-Mart - Sustainability Progress to Date 2007-2008 - Wages and Benefits
The average hourly, full-time wage for Associates in our U.S. stores is $10.76.
These wages, while competitive with industry, are in many cases entry level jobs
Every Associate is eligible to receive performance bonuses based on the performance of their store. In fact, earlier this year, 813,759 Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club hourly Associates in the United States were awarded more than $529.8 million in bonuses. A full-time, hourly Associate can receive bonuses of up to $1,800 at Wal-Mart Stores and $2,200 at Sam’s Club per year.
Health Benefits: All Associates – whether full-time or part-time – can become eligible for health benefits with Wal-Mart, and all children of Associates become eligible for coverage as soon as their parents do. We offer a wide variety of health plan options to meet their differing needs. Every Associate who works in the continental United States can become eligible for individual health coverage that costs as little as $5 per month in some areas and no more than $8 per month nationwide. Moreover, beginning in January 2008, those who participate in our plans will be able to get more than 2,400 generic prescriptions for $4. Read more about Health Care benefits.
401(k) Plan: Wal-Mart may contribute up to two percent of eligible Associates’ annual wages to a 401 (k) plan, after a 12-month waiting period. Contributions may be made even if Associates choose not to add money of their own.
Profit Sharing Plan: Every eligible Associate who has worked for the company for 12 months may receive a company contribution of up to two percent of their wages to a profit sharing account. Contributions are made even if Associates choose not to add money of their own.
Stock Purchase Plan: We contribute to Associates’ stock purchase by matching 15 cents for every dollar of stock purchased through payroll deductions, up to the first $1,800 in purchases each plan year.
 
Catawba said:
You are seriously asking why education is important to our country???

Not a fan of education huh? I should have guessed that from your posts. Our whole future as a country depends on education. If the the federal government did not place education as a priority, it would be shirking its responsibility under the Constitution to promote the general welfare.
Click to expand...

No, learn to read, I asked you why we have a Federal Education Budget and a state Education budget since education is a state responsibility.
 
Mach said:
They do have a say. They can purchase stock, they can get stock options, they can get voting stock, they can go to a different company.
Click to expand...

You want them to purchase stock on $8 an hour? Or, they can form a union and then bargain collectively. You know, like back around the turn of the 20th century when wealthy were taking advantage of the poor and making them work for next to nothing? They formed unions.

By the way, have you seen the numbers:

0329-biz-subTAXweb.gif


Looks like its happening all over again!

Mach said:
They can work their way up, they can achieve all sorts of levels of influence within the company. They can join the board.
Click to expand...

That's true. People can work their way up. It does not change the fact that the CEO is earning 2150 times most of the employees though.

Mach said:
They could also start their own business and run it EXACTLY as you claim to want.
Click to expand...

You think someone who makes $8 has the capital to start a business?

Mach said:
You, right now, can start a business and make it function just how dream it should be. You are free to do this under our current system. How is this insufficient? You can't compete with it because it will be inefficient, but by all means, knock yourself out.
Click to expand...

I find those making large salaries off of the backs of hard-working Americans to be insufficient. Again, I haven't received an answer:

How much would the CEO make if the cashiers, janitor, stock boys, etc didn't exist? Where would Wal-Mart be then? Are they not a vital part of the company?

Mach said:
Maybe it's not important as long as the company is profiting, who cares? Maybe they had eggs for lunch. What business is it of yours?
Click to expand...

I care.

Mach, I pose you this one question:

If the free market is so perfect, why do we have thousands of market regulations? Since when does perfection require regulation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom