• 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!

Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

Last two years beginning of a downward slide for Public Sector Unions?

  • Yes, their power has waxed and now it shall wane.

    Votes: 40 62.5%

  • Unions will respond and their power will grow.

    Votes: 14 21.9%

  • It depends on November.

    Votes: 10 15.6%
  • Total voters
    64
Catawba said:
We were discussing public unions and you provided data for all unions.

That does not prove that public union workers make more than the private sector. Please try again.
Click to expand...
So you are stating that although
1. Public sector earn significantly more than private sector
2. Union workers earn significantly more than non-union workers.

But somehow, public sector union earn less than US average. That makes no sense, and the only reason you are denying it is because you are desperate.
 
Catawba said:
.............
Click to expand...

You didn't read very well

I asked how many you want to kill-I never claimed any died

as usually you misconstrued what I said

Catawba said:
You are the one that made the claim that rich people died due to the slightly higher tax rates in the 90s. So tell us, since you now admit that they didn't die, how did the rich suffer then like the working class is now?
Click to expand...
 
TurtleDude said:
Poor or LOW INCOME-not the same thing as poverty

and while my grandfather was a millionaire more than a few times over. he died without ever having a "remote control" an I-Pad, a plasma tv, a cell phone, a blackberry and most of his life he didn't live in a house with air-conditioning. All stuff that most of our "poor" take for granted.

Go and meet with the people living next to the runways at the Cali airport in Columbia or the nomadic tribesman on the plains of Tanzania and then get back to me what poverty really means
Click to expand...

Your right...they are not the same, but in the end they amount to the same. This is the issue here turtle, its not about people looking for something for free and I admit theres to many of those..I dont defend those bottom feeders...I loathe them as much as you...However,
This assumption that public workers that get up everyday and go to work are in that category ruffles my feathers. Many have a college degree requirment....some are providing a great needed service to society and they way they are being denigrated for political gain I find dispicable.
I know very well how intelligent you have to be to be where you are, knowing that I know you have to know that low income people and those in poverty are in the millions and growing, whether you want to pay taxs or not some one is going to have to pay to take care of them because they will NOT have the means do do it themselves...having them contribute to social security isnt a bad thing...they do contribute to it...and if the Politicians hadnt robbed OUR MONEY out of the fund and left it there it would be solvent for the next 100 yrs.
Somewhere along the line all the unemployed and underemployed and all these low paid service workers are going to have to be cared for and theres no way getting around that. Walmart turtle..frickin WALMART is the United States biggest employer that just sucks
 
Camlon said:
Public sector earn significantly more than private sector
Click to expand...

You have not proven your premise that unionized public workers make more than their private sector counterparts.
 
MaggieD said:
I don't know what you're talking about -- and neither do you.
Click to expand...

Uh, oh yes - you do know what I'm talking about and you now it. So, rather than brush it off: credibly refute it.
 
I would close for the night noting that maybe excusing failure and encouraging dependency has done more to create an income gap than the left would like to admit. Its hard to buy the votes of addicts by telling them they need to kick the addiction of dependency: its easier to seduce them by telling them if that vote for you, you will make others pay for their fix.

Public sector unions are an abomination to me-they don't guarantee quality (unlike real trade unions) and they don't bargain in good faith since those "bargaining" with them are often their stooges. They drive up costs and that penalizes hard working private sector people
 
Catawba said:
You have not proven your premise that unionized public workers make more than their private sector counterparts.
Click to expand...

You obviously are oblivious to the hundreds of reports that have come out in the last year demonstrating that to be true
 
TurtleDude said:
You didn't read very well

I asked how many you want to kill-I never claimed any died

as usually you misconstrued what I said
Click to expand...

Your implication was plainly that slightly higher taxes would kill the rich. Glad to hear you are now retracting that.


So tell us how the rich suffered in the 90's from paying a slightly higher tax rate?
 
TurtleDude said:
More evasions

a company would be idiotic to pay too much for labor-especially labor that contributes to enemies of the company
Click to expand...

Ya'know, I think that's the stupidest thing you've ever said. Change my mind.
 
TurtleDude said:
You obviously are oblivious to the hundreds of reports that have come out in the last year demonstrating that to be true
Click to expand...

Hundreds of reports and you can't find one to post to prove the point? Riiiigghhhttt!
 
TurtleDude said:
I would close for the night noting that maybe excusing failure and encouraging dependency has done more to create an income gap than the left would like to admit. Its hard to buy the votes of addicts by telling them they need to kick the addiction of dependency: its easier to seduce them by telling them if that vote for you, you will make others pay for their fix.

Public sector unions are an abomination to me-they don't guarantee quality (unlike real trade unions) and they don't bargain in good faith since those "bargaining" with them are often their stooges. They drive up costs and that penalizes hard working private sector people
Click to expand...

"Thhhhbbbbb" . . . . Will you please say something that we can atribute to a "thinking" opinion that shows us that you have some sort of connection to reality: ya'know, something you might think about off the toilet.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
I would close for the night noting that maybe excusing failure and encouraging dependency has done more to create an income gap than the left would like to admit. Its hard to buy the votes of addicts by telling them they need to kick the addiction of dependency: its easier to seduce them by telling them if that vote for you, you will make others pay for their fix.

Public sector unions are an abomination to me-they don't guarantee quality (unlike real trade unions) and they don't bargain in good faith since those "bargaining" with them are often their stooges. They drive up costs and that penalizes hard working private sector people
Click to expand...

If your idle speculation about dependency overcoming the positive effects of safety net spending were true, wouldn't we find that countries that spend more on poverty amelioration have wider income gaps? In actuality we find the opposite. The speculation about dependency seems to be the core of your entire belief system. Do you have any evidence to support it?
 
teamosil said:
Lets just take it back a step. Different societies split up the proceeds of people's labors differently. Some give the lion's share to the person actually doing the work, others give a larger share to the owner of the company. The US has the dial cranked as far in favor of the owner as possible. You seem to think that having the dial cranked as far that way as possible is some sort of god given right the super rich have. So, again, why is that? Why do you feel that they are owed so very much of our GDP?
Click to expand...

They earned it. What makes you think you have the right to take from them? Oh right, nothing.
 
teamosil said:
No. The Buffet rule, the estate tax, increasing capital gains, restoring financial regulation, regulating polluters, employers and producers, etc, all are overwhelmingly focused on the actual rich. But, that's great that you concede that we're right at least that far. If your only quibble is about the minor collateral damage to folks making $200k/year, then we essentially are in agreement. Minor nuances like that can certainly be worked out.
Click to expand...

I wonder if you are aware why Buffet supports such an idea.
 
Catawba said:
Hundreds of reports and you can't find one to post to prove the point? Riiiigghhhttt!
Click to expand...

Actually they are easy to find see: Average salaries for full-time teachers in public and private elementary and secondary schools, by selected characteristics: 2007-08

The gap seems to be closing slowly, yet private are still lower on average than public. The farther back you go the more the difference was, in the above link it is a bit over $11K/year on average, in favor of the public school teachers. I have not found more recent data yet.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
They earned it. What makes you think you have the right to take from them? Oh right, nothing.
Click to expand...

Why do the rich deserve to keep more of their money than the working class?
 
TurtleDude said:
I would close for the night noting that maybe excusing failure and encouraging dependency has done more to create an income gap than the left would like to admit. Its hard to buy the votes of addicts by telling them they need to kick the addiction of dependency: its easier to seduce them by telling them if that vote for you, you will make others pay for their fix.

Public sector unions are an abomination to me-they don't guarantee quality (unlike real trade unions) and they don't bargain in good faith since those "bargaining" with them are often their stooges. They drive up costs and that penalizes hard working private sector people
Click to expand...

How do trade unions guarantee quality
 
Catawba said:
Your report compares public teachers with those in private schools which make substandard wages compared to the rest of the private sector with comparable education. How do public employees compare with comparable education in the other private sector jobs.
Click to expand...

That is the lamest argument possible. Perhaps a CLUE is that teachers get about 3 months of the year OFF. Lets compare them to ANYTHING other than to what our OWN gov't does, in the stats that I provided for YOU. At least try to accept reality, e.g. teachers = teachers, not some OTHER occupation requiring a similar amount of college education; you are starting to sound like one of those ERA loons, that compares a daycare worker with a roofer. ;-)
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
That is the lamest argument possible. Perhaps a CLUE is that teachers get about 3 months of the year OFF. Lets compare them to ANYTHING other than our OWN gov't does in the stats that I provided for YOU. ;-)
Click to expand...

"This finding, and previous research by the same authors (Biggs and Richwine 2011), are at odds with a large body of research showing that public school teachers and other government workers have total compensation that is lower—or at least no higher—than that of comparable private-sector workers (see, for example, Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2004, 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010; Keefe 2010; Munnell et al. 2011; Schmitt 2010). Furthermore, the “teaching penalty” has grown, as teachers’ and other public-sector workers’ pay has declined relative to that of comparable private-sector workers (Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010).

Do public school teachers really receive lavish benefits?: Richwine and Biggs
 
Henrin said:
I wonder if you are aware why Buffet supports such an idea.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can enlighten us. Don't forget to cite your sources.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
You have not proven your premise that unionized public workers make more than their private sector counterparts.
Click to expand...
Seriously? You are now the emperor with no clothes.

In reality, you know public sector unions earn substantially more than US average. I have given very specific evidence for that. There is only one reason you are denying it. You are desperate. You are completely unable to respond to my arguments, and instead you deny facts that everyone knows is true.

You are a believer in trickle down economics. However, you believe in a liberal version of it. That increase union wages for the rich, will increase wages for everyone.
 
Henrin said:
They earned it. What makes you think you have the right to take from them? Oh right, nothing.
Click to expand...

What you're doing is just what is called "begging the question". You're assuming your premise in order to prove it. If we had a different sort of a system, say companies with profit sharing programs, then you would feel that the employees had earned those profits too. You just are assuming that whoever is collecting the money is the one earning it. That isn't an argument against a system where the earnings go to the people who work for them rather than the owners.

Henrin said:
I wonder if you are aware why Buffet supports such an idea.
Click to expand...

Oh course. Why?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom