Middle Class Republicans Getting a Taste of Their Own Medicine -- And Not Liking It One Bit (Minnesota, financial)
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.
Not the same machine, but the same interests for sure!
You don't think the Republican war on union's springs eternal from its GOP counterparts in the House and Senate?
Come on. When the entire party is bought and paid for, their interests won't compete, they will work in unison to achieve their goals
If the taxpayers do not want higher taxes and the revenue is not there what are state governments supposed to do ?
Either the union has to concede for all their members or mass layoffs will occur.
You cannot continue BAU if the money is not there to support it.
Fire departments currently only respond to people that live in their assigned areas. In other words people that pay for them.
Unless a private fire company has a monopoly they cannot charge whatever they want. And no fire company would be able to create a monopoly. The laws of economics say so.
And Americans currently have to pay whatever the government says or they go to jail.
You're wrong. Outlying departments are often called in to assist in fires outside their ordinary jurisdiction. And no, people who don't pay don't go to jail. Sometimes they watch firefighters stand around letting their house and pets burn to ash because they didn't pay. But no jail time.
"State Pension. Teachers belong to the Wisconsin state pension plan. That plan requires a 6.8% employer contribution and 6.2% from the employee. However, according to the collective-bargaining agreement in place since 1996, the district pays the employees' share as well, for a total of 13%. "
So, if it's 2011, they have paid nothing for
15 years.
Four states have non-contribution public pension plans_ Florida, Utah, Oregon and Connecticut. Missouri until recently had a non-contribution policy for state workers, as did Michigan until 1997. Michigan workers hired before 1997 still don't pay toward their pensions, and some teachers in Arkansas don't have to contribute toward theirs. Tennessee doesn't require contributions from most workers and employees in the state higher education system.
"Those notable exceptions aside, most states require employee contributions. The midpoint for these contributions for all states and the District of Columbia is 5 percent of pay, according to academic and state-level research. That contribution rate climbs to 8 percent for the handful of states whose workers or teachers are prohibited from paying into the federal Social Security program"
So I stand somewhat corrected - I still don't think there should be public unions, and they should be paying a hell of a lot more toward their
own pensions.
As far as paying for their health care premiums:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/14/bu...4retirees.html
As they contend with growing budget deficits and higher pension costs, some mayors are complaining that their outlays for retiree health benefits are rising by 20 percent a year — a result of the wave of retirements of baby boomers and longer life expectancies on top of the double-digit rate of health care inflation.
The nation’s governors face a daunting $555 billion in unfunded liabilities to finance retiree health coverage.
The Pew Center on the States calculated those long-term obligations last year, saying New Jersey had the largest amount, $68.9 billion, with California second, at $62.5 billion.
In 14 states, the state pays 100 percent of the health benefits for retirees. That’s very generous.”
Over all, the Center for State and Local Government Excellence found that 68 percent of city and county officials surveyed said they were pushing to have retirees assume more of their health costs, while 39 percent said they had eliminated or planned to eliminate retiree health benefits for new hires.
I disagree. The government and Wall Street both committed fraud.
Nope.. there is nothing illegal about loaning amount money and then selling that note to another party.. Doing it once, or doing it 10,000,000 times, it remains legal
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
You said the GSEs were operating under the standards set by Congress.
Congress indeed sets the standards for the GSE's to operate under. They set maximum loan guarantees for example at $417K.. Congress passed the GSE Act in 1992 setting the requirements for GSEs.. This is on top of the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, again passed by Congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Apparently, Congressional operating standards permitted such book cooking to happen.
They didnt "cook" the books.. they simply encouraged a certain action to take place which had consequences.. Thats what happens.. Government wants something to happen.. they write bills encouraging that action to take place.. and those actions have consequences.. Well this one was a big one..
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Fewer would be able to get a mortgage, not no one. And as I said, as such, the housing bubble would not have been as extreme.
Only those who were able to pay cash would be able to get a mortgage.. i.e. I deposit $100K in the bank, the bank will then loan me $100K for a mortgage.. Is this really the standards you wish?
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
What's the problem with letting poorly run banks fail?
Nothing, but the banks in question were not poorly run. They again simply complied with the standards set by Congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
You're still not getting it. The shedding of bank held bad loans onto the taxpayers via selling them to the now taxpayer-backstopped GSEs continues to this day, and will continue for some time to come until nearly all the bad loans are purged from the banks. It's an ongoing covert back door bailout of the otherwise insolvent banks.
I know they continue and I dont support such actions.. I'd much rather banks hold the loans they provide because then it makes banks liable for their own standards.. But you cant blame a bank for complying with federal standards..
So if the police are privatized... They are now working for a corporation and not the people... Where is the letter of the law being followed?... Soon people will be getting arrested for any reason they see fit... You're going to see a lot of jam packed privately owned jails and prisons... This is the beginning of a corporate takeover of the public interests...
It will become corporate communism...
^Read the truth. Since everybody has to die sometime, I am glad I'm not a kid, or even in my 20s or 30s. I will have lived in the best of times and be out of here before this country is totally unrecognizable. This is the United Corporation of America.
Quote:
....(15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
So if the police are privatized... They are now working for a corporation and not the people... Where is the letter of the law being followed?... Soon people will be getting arrested for any reason they see fit... You're going to see a lot of jam packed privately owned jails and prisons... This is the beginning of a corporate takeover of the public interests...
It will become corporate communism...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DifferentDrum
^Read the truth. Since everybody has to die sometime, I am glad I'm not a kid, or even in my 20s or 30s. I will have lived in the best of times and be out of here before this country is totally unrecognizable. This is the United Corporation of America.
Looks like the endgame here is a privatized corporate government run by the bankers... This is going to get really bad...
The money was lost in the stock market. Too bad, sucks to be them. They aren't owed anything, that's the chances you take playing with the exchange.
So. it still is not the pesioner's fault that their money was invested in the wrong areas. Because of this mess I invest myown money, so if I make a mistake I cannot blame anyone but myself.
...the Repug's ANTI-American Class War on the Poor and Middle Income Americans.
You got the villain wrong; it's The Public Employees' and Their Unions' War On the Poor and Middle Income Americans.
Who do you think is forced to pay the property taxes (either directly, or via the rent they pay) that pay for public employees' overly-generous salaries and benefits? Yep... the poor and middle income Americans.
Why do you think we gave away a trillion dollars to Wall Street?
Those are Obama's campaign donors.
Quote:
And why are we now going after the last vestiges of a once strong Middle Class?
"We?" No. It's not "we" ...it's the public employees and their unions. They want to keep gouging taxpayers for all they're worth.
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.
- I still don't think there should be public unions, and they should be paying a hell of a lot more toward their
