- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
yes, if the government authorizes them to do so
you are quite welcome. any time
That's funny! :lamo
yes, if the government authorizes them to do so
you are quite welcome. any time
It also says to defend this country from all threats foriegn and domestic.
Other approaches could be used e.g., emergency spending recissions (targeted or across-the-board, the latter being the easiest to achieve as the sacrifice is spread widely). Refinancing savings are not the only way deficits can be closed.
The government has opened a sleeping giant.....the ramifications of Walker's refusal to negotiate and to dictatorally push this corporatist agenda is going to be widespread.
monopoly status?...that's a good one. What you are really saying is that government should have complete control and the workers should have no representation.
So much for that small government you guys love to claim you love.
People are not going to sit back and allow government to have complete control without the workers having representation. It completely goes against the fundamentals of this country.
The sleeping giant that's been awakened goes by another name: the taxpayer.
Public sector unions should not have the right to collectively bargain their wages and benefits. Federal employees do not have this right. Neither should state workers.
These "people" you refer to make up 11.9% of the workers in the United States....with public-sector employees making up over 50% of that total. The may have big mouths, but they most positively are soundly in the minority.
Yeah but a lot of americans dont like having laws stating what they can and cant do. IE preventing collective bargining in this case
Instead of being a coward he should stand up and negotiate a very hard contract or fire the lot
Yeah but a lot of americans dont like having laws stating what they can and cant do. IE preventing collective bargining in this case
the Americans you are speaking of are now looking at what these contracts are, and don't like the fact that these people with similar jobs, and education levels are making on average 20% more than they are, and have golden pensions, and health care.
I don't think you're correct in this at all.
j-mac
Which is why a tougher new contract should be signed or fire the bunch. Making a law that prevents people from collectively bargining is limiting peoples freedoms. It is also the cowards way
Which is why a tougher new contract should be signed or fire the bunch. Making a law that prevents people from collectively bargining is limiting peoples freedoms. It is also the cowards way
Firemen take that oath? I never knew that.
The sleeping giant that's been awakened goes by another name: the taxpayer.
Public sector unions should not have the right to collectively bargain their wages and benefits. Federal employees do not have this right. Neither should state workers.
These "people" you refer to make up 11.9% of the workers in the United States....with public-sector employees making up over 50% of that total. The may have big mouths, but they most positively are soundly in the minority.
The sleeping giant that's been awakened goes by another name: the taxpayer.
Public sector unions should not have the right to collectively bargain their wages and benefits. Federal employees do not have this right. Neither should state workers.
These "people" you refer to make up 11.9% of the workers in the United States....with public-sector employees making up over 50% of that total. The may have big mouths, but they most positively are soundly in the minority.
No...what you are really saying is that you want government to have complete control....and that they workers should have no voice. Very anti-american values.
You have very little understanding of our political process if you think what you wrote has any basis in reality. Especially in light of the activist decision in "Citizen's United" that essentially allows corporations to have unlimited ability to contribute to political candidates.
How does "privatization" "End the corrupt cycle of political pandering"? If anything, it increases it.
I would much rather individual workers have a voice in political pandering than corporations.....
cor•rupt[ kə rúpt ]ADJECTIVE
1. immoral or dishonest: immoral or dishonest, especially as shown by the exploitation of a position of power or trust for personal gain
Sooo.. Limiting the corporate voice is NOT Anti-American, but limiting the workers voice is?
Absolutely...ding ding ding ding.
People have rights under our Constitution. Unfortunately right-wing judicial activism has now twisted the Constitution to find that corporations are "persons" under our constitution, even though they cannot be held accountable in the same manner than real people can.
You are spouting off right-wing talking points without knowing the facts. Most federal employees actually do have collect bargaining rights. Reagan exempted some of them by signing their rights away, but most federal workers retain their bargaining rights.
And why should public employees not have the right to bargain in the same way private employees do. Why should the government have complete power without giving the people the right to a voice?
He can be recalled after one year. I'd be surprized if he sticks around that long. I look for him to take the Sara Palin way out.
didn't notice disney insisting that federal employees should be entitled to negotiate their compensation. i did see you insist that all public sector employees should notDisney, you are wrong. Federal employees, none of them, can collectively bargain their salaries or their benefits. All you have to do is Google instead of wasting people's time here educating you.
i can assure you that if the public sector employees held such influence, the shrub would not have been elected - twiceI have no problem with public-sector unions as long as they cannot bargain their salary or benefits. Union contributions elect the very poliicians who are sitting across the negotiating table with them. Wrong-wrong-wrong. These negotiators give away the store at taxpayers' expense in order to keep themselves in office. It's incestuous.
i strongly disagreePS: I don't spout talking points. I'm as well-versed on this subject as any DP'r on these boards. You are not.
didn't notice disney insisting that federal employees should be entitled to negotiate their compensation. i did see you insist that all public sector employees should not. Members on both sides of the aisle seem not to be aware of that difference, nor do many realize that that defined benefit retirement packages are a thing of the past in the federal sector (except for those grandfathered in)
I strongly disagree
you are imagining things if you believe the unions get to choose who sits across from them at the bargaining table...
"The real struggle is about power." Yes, it probably is. And what is wrong with that? If I have to choose who gets the power, well, I'm sure you've heard this before, Power To The People!
To postulate that negotiations went forward with teachers on the basis of "accept less in compensation in return for better pensions and healthcare benefits" is dishonest on its face. Negotiations went forward on the basis of "We'll scratch your back, if you scratch ours." And everybody scratched -- with taxpayer funds.
The whole world is watching.
I think there's a win win here... Walker lays off 1,000 workers - they become the Fed's problem on unemployment... the State cuts their budget and the Unions get to cry victim.
Both sides are getting tax payer funds... why isn't the Governor's benefits on the chopping block too?