|
Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-08-2011, 05:49 PM | #31 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 6,674
|
And Walker still is not going to have a balanced budget in the long term without the unions' yielding, or without shrinking the State establishment until it is in line with revenue -- and that is going to put some few unions' members right out of work. Not wholly their own fault, but are they doing what's necessary to right things? There are those who say no, and point to evidence.
__________________
Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. |
03-15-2011, 08:26 AM | #33 | |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Quote:
It is unfair for the government to collect taxpayer funds paid to the government union and give them to a single party for support in general elections. The individual should be able to reserve the right to choose who that money should go to. Make a law that prevents public sector unions from giving money to PACs or in support of elections and they may get more support. Until then this is going to end. Many states are following the suit of WI and are not having half the battle that is being orchestrated by the Obama Administration and Democratic party on behalf of that 15% of the total Union work force in WI. They are spinning this as is it a Labor issue and they will fail again in the next national general election as these facts are discussed in the wider issue of the use of tax dollars in support of public sector Unions.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
|
03-16-2011, 06:06 AM | #34 | ||
Operations Operative
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
|
Quote:
The Federal Election Campaign Act and laws in many states prohibit unions from using general funds (dues) for political campaigns. They can create PACs for voluntary contributions from members. Quote:
The extremist (and misleading) libertarian views of Neal Bortz from your post are not shared by most Americans. From everything I have read, the public is on the side of the unions on this one, recognizing that the unions have demonstrated more concern for the middle class and working poor than Republican governors and legislators who are ready to cut numerous programs that go beyond the union's direct interest or the issue of dues check-offs and to the heart of millions of people living from paycheck to paycheck, while the wealthiest taxpayers and corporations get more tax breaks. more: On average, less than 3% of your state taxes support public employee pensions and the payback is significant, as I noted elsewhere: http://cellar.org/showpost.php?p=716231&postcount=54 The spin? The unions agreed to contribute a greater share of pension/health care costs even before the governor signed the bill. The Republican Leader of the Senate in WI made it clear that this fight was not about balancing the state budget, but busting the unions simply because union members lean towards voting Democratic. Last edited by Fair&Balanced; 03-16-2011 at 06:47 AM. |
||
03-16-2011, 09:55 AM | #35 | ||||||
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
||||||
03-16-2011, 10:31 AM | #36 |
Operations Operative
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
|
*shrug*
I dont intend to debate the facts or the law with you. And the law is clear, unions "may not make contributions or expenditures in connection with federal elections..." PAC contributions, while they may be deducted from their payroll, are voluntary. IMO, Wisconsin and other states have overplayed their hands on this and will see the backlash, which has already begun. |
03-16-2011, 10:54 AM | #37 | |
Operations Operative
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
|
Which side does the public support?
Quote:
|
|
03-17-2011, 10:52 AM | #38 |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Once the law is changed there is little they can do other than vote in new people and then lobby to have the rules changed back to what they were before.
Polls don't mean shat. It is the weakest form of statistical measure. As I stated earlier, you and others will have a hard time convincing all those people out of work or who contribute a significantly greater portion of their earnings to pay their benefits, or who have little to no benefits at all. And that is the majority of all workers in the US. Union workers make up a small amount of the work force and public sector unions make up an even small number of the total.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
03-17-2011, 11:14 AM | #39 | |
Operations Operative
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
|
Quote:
I never suggested, nor do I support, taxpayers paying a larger share of pension/health care cost for public employee unions. The workers in WI agreed to pay more of their own pension/health care costs and I thought that was certainly appropriate. I do support the right of those workers to bargain collectively as do a majority of Americans, by any recent measure. And I certainly support the right of any workers, including public employees, to participate in the politicial process by VOLUNTARILY contributing to the party or candidate of their choice. I really hope you dont want to take that away simply because they may support a party or candidate that may not be of your choosing. |
|
03-17-2011, 09:20 PM | #40 |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
You fail. Union members get no say in where the PAC dollars, as directed by the unions, dollars go.
The problem remains, Taxpayer Dollars are being used to support one political party.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
03-18-2011, 07:46 AM | #41 | |
Operations Operative
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
|
I dont know how to say it any other way that to again refer to the Federal Elections Campaign Act:
Quote:
The law refers to PACs as “separate segregated funds” because money contributed to a PAC is voluntary and kept in a bank account separate from the general union treasury. You are confusing mandatory dues to a union for general, non-political activities with voluntary contributions to a union PAC. Perhaps your confusing arises from the fact that both the union dues and PAC contributions may be collected as part of one check-off or payroll deduction....but then they must be segregated by law. afterthought: If you are suggesting that public employees should not have the right to VOLUNTARILY contribute to the candidate/party of their choice, whether through a union PAC or a direct contribution, because their salaries are paid by taxpayers, I would strenuously disagree. If a union member would prefer to not support the union PAC and instead, contribute to a different candidate/party, they have that right. I will say it again, PAC contributions by union members are voluntary. Every worker, public or private, should have the right to participate in the political process by contributing to a candidate/party of their choice. I'll give you this. One change that did result from the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case last year (a terrible decision IMO) is that unions (and corporations) can now use general funds for political advertising, but still cannot use those general funds to contribute directly to a candidate/party. Given that corporate PACs outspend union PACs by about 3:1, the playing field still significantly favors corporate interests over workers interests. Last edited by Fair&Balanced; 03-18-2011 at 08:28 AM. |
|
03-18-2011, 09:26 AM | #42 |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Union equates lavish benefits to black civil rights
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/politi...#ixzz1GxfFBvQv
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
03-22-2011, 09:47 PM | #43 |
King Of Wishful Thinking
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Posts: 6,669
|
Actually, there is a very involved discussion to be had about the rise of the black middle class and it's role in civil rights. Conversely, there can be a similar discussion about the erosion of the middle class and the loss of said rights.
__________________
Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE!I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama |
03-24-2011, 09:11 PM | #44 |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Hey, as long as the erode or eliminate the power of the Public Sector Unions I am good with whatever they come up with. Those people have been sucking on the teat for a long time.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
03-30-2011, 10:29 AM | #45 | |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
Quote:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,1209569.story
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|