• 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.
Catawba said:
An unfunded tax cut = debt.
Click to expand...

I have gone through the budget of the United States and don't see an expense line item for tax cuts. Please point that out for me. Do you think your parents keeping more of what they earn is an expense to the govt?
 
QUOTE Conservative;
Since public unions are funded by the taxpayers they are the ones that should decide whether they want public unions and in November they supported Walker who is doing exactly what he said he would do.
Click to expand...

First show me a Union that is funded by taxpayers. I’ve been a Union member longer than most at DP have been alive and I can’t recall any that have been taxpayer funded.

I take that back I helped organize for a local in Chicago burb once, that was indirectly funded by taxpayers. It seems this Repug politician skimmed off enough cash and started up a small drayage company…Rather than the Teamsters, he comes up with this lame ass company union. Lets just say he wasn’t in biz long; Oh…he got off with a couple of years parole and had to pay the unnamed burg back all their dough.

Oh…by the way, learn how to use the quote function.:mrgreen:



Apparently you don't know the difference between public and private unions.
Click to expand...

Tell me your theory on the difference between the two.


So union shops don't pollute? Interesting, where is your proof?
Click to expand...

Where did i say that?
 
Catawba said:
I remembered what you said about not trusting "facts" from a biased organization. Got anything credible to show the plight of the middle class is improving in relation to increase in wealth by the super rich?
Click to expand...

So you only watch videos produced by Fox if Media Matters has them on their website?

No wonder you think Fox is so biased you can't trust anything from that channel. :)

I'm starting to think the plight of the middle class will only go downhill. Too many think the rich have all the money and it's a zero sum game.
They're to stupid or brainwashed to realize there's enough pie for everyone. They don't have to steal it through redistribution of wealth.

Back to the topic. So how do you feel about the Unions trying to call all the shots and hurting those who don't belong to unions?
Don't you think they have a bit too much power when the union dues they collect buys politicians? SEIU gave 60 million to Obamas campaign. What he said to them was "I know how much more we could accomplish as partners in an Obama administration" Andy Stern former Union Boss was the most frequent visitor to the WH in the beginning. Now we have Union Boss Trumka visiting there 2-3 times a week and talking to someone there daily. Doesn't that give you a warm fuzzy feeling?
 
Amazed said:
Very serious flaw here...you see it's the SPENDING that causes dabt.....

Allowing someone to keep more of THEIR money does not increase debt...
Click to expand...

So when you give unfunded tax breaks to the rich which we have done since Reagan, and that amount is added to the debt, it is suddenly not debt anymore????

On my budget I have to cut spending and increase revenues to pay off my debts. How is it different with the country? If you decrease revenues and increase spending what happens?
 
Amazed said:
Oh god.....nobody can make this up.

Spending = Debt.
Click to expand...

They both do. The reason we have the debt now is that revenues have beeb cut through tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans without the spending cuts, by the same party during most of the last 3 decades. This is what you want more of?????
 
donc;1059305299]First show me a Union that is funded by taxpayers. I’ve been a Union member longer than most at DP have been alive and I can’t recall any that have been taxpayer funded.

I take that back I helped organize for a local in Chicago burb once, that was indirectly funded by taxpayers. It seems this Repug politician skimmed off enough cash and started up a small drayage company…Rather than the Teamsters, he comes up with this lame ass company union. Lets just say he wasn’t in biz long; Oh…he got off with a couple of years parole and had to pay the unnamed burg back all their dough.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I thought, you don't know the difference between a public union and a private sector union. Who do you think pays for the unions in Wisconsin? Where do the people working for those unions get their money?


Tell me your theory on the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

My theory? LOL, public unions are funded by the taxpayers and private sector unions are funded by the companies. You don't seem to understand the concept. Unions are funded by the employees, and the employees get their money from either the taxpayer or the private sector revenues. The taxpayers fund pensions and all other benefits in the public unions. Compare that to the private sector. Now you can run as you usually do.
 
Catawba said:
They both do. The reason we have the debt now is that revenues have beeb cut through tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans without the spending cuts, by the same party during most of the last 3 decades. This is what you want more of?????
Click to expand...

There you go again, those evil rich people keeping more of what they earn. Did you ever consider that you have been brainwashed? It isn't the government's money. You relly are showing your age and lack of knowledge here.
 
Conservative said:
Do you always buy what someone that you agree with posts? Could make you look foolish
Click to expand...

Whysoserious provides facts, you provide your vision of a distorted reality with nothing whatsoever to back it up.
 
whysoserious said:
Did he say that he thinks the boss should earn less than his employees? Name one Fortune 500 company where that is even close to that happening. In fact, name one where the highest employee to lowest employee ratio is even remotely close.
Click to expand...

It seemed to bother him that the pie maker was going to be the main beneficiary...that's all.
 
Catawba said:
Income Gap Is Widening, Data Shows:

"Income inequality grew significantly in 2005, with the top 1 percent of Americans — those with incomes that year of more than $348,000 — receiving their largest share of national income since 1928, analysis of newly released tax data shows.

The top 10 percent, roughly those earning more than $100,000, also reached a level of income share not seen since before the Depression.

While total reported income in the United States increased almost 9 percent in 2005, the most recent year for which such data is available, average incomes for those in the bottom 90 percent dipped slightly compared with the year before, dropping $172, or 0.6 percent.

The gains went largely to the top 1 percent, whose incomes rose to an average of more than $1.1 million each, an increase of more than $139,000, or about 14 percent.

The new data also shows that the top 300,000 Americans collectively enjoyed almost as much income as the bottom 150 million Americans. Per person, the top group received 440 times as much as the average person in the bottom half earned, nearly doubling the gap from 1980."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html
Click to expand...

So you think overpaid union members with cadilac pension and medical plan will fix this?
 
Catawba said:
Because I happen to think a strong middle class is necessary for a healthy economy, and I don't much care for a corporate run society.
Click to expand...

So then why do we have so many rich democrats making laws?
 
Catawba said:
Whysoserious provides facts, you provide your vision of a distorted reality with nothing whatsoever to back it up.
Click to expand...

What facts, USA Today? CIA? Why would anyone believe what the CIA posts after the WMD debacle? Why do you ignore non partisan sites like BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and the U.S. Treasury sites? You buy what someone who agrees with you posts because that is what you want to believe. Trust but verify and you haven't done that.
 
Catawba said:
One sixth of the country being under the poverty line doesn't concern you huh?



How's that been working out since Reagan and Bush slashed tax rates for the wealthy and cut regulations? Are we better off now than we were during our 50 year period of progressive taxes and adequate regulatory oversight in this country?



Because your trickle down theory has proven not to work. Why would I possible want to continue practices that have only made our economy worse for the middle class?

We have been trickled on quite enough already thank you!
Click to expand...

Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama's poverty rate measure misleads
 
Conservative said:
I have gone through the budget of the United States and don't see an expense line item for tax cuts. Please point that out for me. Do you think your parents keeping more of what they earn is an expense to the govt?
Click to expand...

So a debt is not a debt if its called another name? If I reduce my income and continue to spend at the same level, what happens? That is what has happened for the last 3 decades, mostly under Republican rule. How has this helped us?
 
donc said:
I must have missed where you posted this and your explanation of how “collective bargaining will nullify the measures taken by union members to pay more into their healthcare and pension fund, and will put at risk the 120 million already approved in a bipartisan effort with the WI Senate ”would happen with a signed contract. How about giving me a synopsis?:2wave:
Click to expand...

No, it's all there, read the thread. Have fun.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
When did I ever say that the boss should earn less than his/her employees?

Please, show me.

Edit: Also the people at the top are the main beneficiaries because they are the one's who get major bonuses and stock options when the corp increases its value
Click to expand...
It sounded that way too me. Sorry, if I was wrong. Forgive me?
Now,
I wonder how those people got to the top.......
I guess they all were just lucky and it had nothing to do with education and hard work.
Also, there are some places who offer workers stock options etc. Not all are the evil people they are painted as.
In fact I think the evil Wal-Mart offers them.:)
 
Catawba said:
So a debt is not a debt if its called another name? If I reduce my income and continue to spend at the same level, what happens? That is what has happened for the last 3 decades, mostly under Republican rule. How has this helped us?
Click to expand...

You mean under Democrat spending since they have had the majority more than the GOP
 
Catawba said:
So a debt is not a debt if its called another name? If I reduce my income and continue to spend at the same level, what happens? That is what has happened for the last 3 decades, mostly under Republican rule. How has this helped us?
Click to expand...

You do what the govt. does, create debt. Stop the damn spending and stop blaming only Republicans, Democrats controlled the purse strings the last 4 years and added 5 trillion to the debt. you seem to have more of a problem with people keeping more of what they earn and the question is why? You keeping more of what you earn means less need for that liberal help and that drives liberals crazy.
 
Wow.

Twisted logic.....

Reduce your spending Paisan....it will fix everything.

Catawba said:
So a debt is not a debt if its called another name? If I reduce my income and continue to spend at the same level, what happens? That is what has happened for the last 3 decades, mostly under Republican rule. How has this helped us?
Click to expand...
 
haymarket said:
This outright lie needs to be exposed. People who repeat it need to be publicly called out and the equivalent of getting a bucket of cold ice water in their face.

Just about every husband in America knows that if they came home one day and told their wife that they have made a choice to only work part time from now on and they will have to get by on half the income but its only a matter of adjusting their spending what would be the reaction. "Sorry baby, but its you problem and its not my fault." Cutting your income when you cannot now make ends meets is insanity of the worst order. The fact that it is right wing gospel taken as communion before their altar of worship rivals the Kool-aid of Jim Jones and his wacko religion.

There are TWO sides to every budget. Live with that knowledge.
Click to expand...

many households couldn't handle it, so you're right.
The governmnent has grown way too big. They need to shrink down to a manageble size. The more taxes they get the more they spend and the bigger they grow. It needs to stop.
 
Conservative said:
Good lord, Man, do you understand that benefits are income?
Click to expand...

I don't have a listing of median benefits nationwide, (I don't think).

I do have this:

May 2009 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
00-0000 All Occupations 130,647,610 $15.95 $20.90 $43,460 0.1 %
Click to expand...

In 2009, teacher's in Wisconsin were paid a median of $49,000, I think. So that's just over this average of all jobs. Again, since we've shown that income - expenses = profit/loss, and we've also shown that Walker decided tax breaks were more important than negotiating with teachers, I think the news that Walker is discussing politics with who he thought was a major campaign contributor should have destroyed what little credibility he had left.

However, if you do have some shocking statistic that compares teacher's salaries + fringe benefits to other salaries I would love to see it. I know they do have some excellent benefits since they are government employees.

Let me know where those WMD's are?[/QUOTE]
 
Barbbtx said:
Too many think the rich have all the money and it's a zero sum game.
They're to stupid or brainwashed to realize there's enough pie for everyone. They don't have to steal it through redistribution of wealth
Click to expand...

Insult noted. Do you want extra points for that?

Back to the topic. So how do you feel about the Unions trying to call all the shots and hurting those who don't belong to unions?
Click to expand...

I'll let you know should that ever be the case. How do you feel about busting the last defense against corporate domination of our government and workers?


Don't you think they have a bit too much power when the union dues they collect buys politicians? SEIU gave 60 million to Obamas campaign. What he said to them was "I know how much more we could accomplish as partners in an Obama administration" Andy Stern former Union Boss was the most frequent visitor to the WH in the beginning. Now we have Union Boss Trumka visiting there 2-3 times a week and talking to someone there daily. Doesn't that give you a warm fuzzy feeling?
Click to expand...

Yes, it does as I prefer worker protection to the corporate influence during the GOP rule. Without the unions, we are at the mercy of corporate rule, which definitely does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. A preliminary step to a dictatorship is dismantling the unions. I tend to be partial to freedom.
 
Amazed said:
Wow.

Twisted logic.....

Reduce your spending Paisan....it will fix everything.
Click to expand...

How is that twisted logic. Again, the equation is not:

spending = debt

The equation is:

income - expense = profit/loss

It's linear. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom