Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's called deferred compensation plan. In other words, unlike board rooms who pay themselves up front in contracts for work they have yet to perform, union workers invested their lives in 20-30 yrs of labor for deferred compensation. No robbery on their part. Stop lying. If you drove a car for 30yrs and another bill is due as term and condition, you can't blame the car for where you steered it or how you failed to manage the terms of the agreement.
Interesting take. How about your take on union bosses who spend their lives strong arming taxpayers and corporations? How would they compare to these board rooms?
Why can't you just man up and say you support cutting taxes for the rich and powerful and that you support those tax cuts by firing teachers, police officers, and firefighters?
I support fiscal responsibility, and policies that encourage the growth of private sector jobs, aka taxpayers.
You know, the taxpayers you need to pay the public sector employees' overly-generous slaries and benefits. Unless you think the public sector creates enough wealth to sustain itself. And if that's the case, cite your source.
It all starts making sense doesn't it. You push to break the public sector unions and make them scape goats so you can give no bid contracts to your buddies when you privitize those services. No wonder the Senators left the state--to give people time to figure out just what Walker really wants to do with this bill.
Do any of you ever look at it from this side--who better to hold government officials and managers accountable than employees who also have a vested interest as tax payers? People have a way of doing some pretty sleezy things when they're not playing with their own money, and managers really have no incentive to create a productive and positive work environment if it's not their own business, where their bottom line depends on a quality work force. Unions--through labor management committees--can and do make serious contributions to making state and local government more efficient and well managed. If you want to find the problems, or figure out what works and what doesn't, ask the employees doing the work.
I support fiscal responsibility, and policies that encourage the growth of private sector jobs, aka taxpayers.
You know, the taxpayers you need to pay the public sector employees' overly-generous slaries and benefits. Unless you think the public sector creates enough wealth to sustain itself. And if that's the case, cite your source.
Your twisted beliefs of "fiscal responsibility" means that firefighters, police offericers, and teachers will have to lose their jobs so Wal-Mart can get tax cuts and the Koch brothers can take over Wisconsin's energy sector.
Why do you support tax cuts for the rich and for corporations being paid for by eleminiating the jobs of middle class Wisconsin workers?
This is where your ilk makes a HUGE tactical error. That "middle class" consists of millions oftaxpayers who are robbed at gunpoint by the employee public unions and their co-conspirator elected officials to pay for their overly generous salaries and benefits via property taxes, etc., confiscated from... the middle class.
The taxpayers are much more likely to see themselves as the victims in this dispute. They are the ones who have to pay through the nose for those public employees' salaries and benefits. They are broke. What about that do you not get? Serious question.
The unions are pitting themselves against the middle class, and Americans nationwide recognize that. The unions are DONE.
Your twisted beliefs of "fiscal responsibility" means that firefighters, police offericers, and teachers will have to lose their jobs so Wal-Mart can get tax cuts and the Koch brothers can take over Wisconsin's energy sector.
Cite your source that the public sector can sustain itself.
Given that the selfish unions won't face the reality that there is no money, the tough choices are:
- Lay off thousands of public employees to make up for a multi-billion dollar deficit Walker inherited from Doyle
- Tax corporations more, which causes more job losses, which results in fewer taxpayers, and end up with even more of a deficit than you had before due to further declining tax revenue ...which causes you to lay off those public employees anyway, only now you've amplified the problem.
Cite your source that the public sector can sustain itself.
Given that the selfish unions won't face the reality that there is no money, the tough choices are:
- Lay off thousands of public employees to make up for a multi-billion dollar deficit Walker inherited from Doyle
- Tax corporations more, which causes more job losses, which results in fewer taxpayers, and end up with even more of a deficit than you had before due to further declining tax revenue ...which causes you to lay off those public employees anyway, only now you've amplified the problem.
Pick one.
You already picked. Tax cuts for the rich and powerful. Get rid of teachers, firefighters, and police officers.
Disgusting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
