Point of information RE: Wisconsin

christiefan915 said:
Conservatives bleated constantly that they weren't given a seat at the table during negotiations over various laws. For example, they said Obama rammed HC through and they weren't given a voice. Yet the WI governor wants to do the very same thing and conservatives back him. Why the discrepancy?
Click to expand...

thats because dems have had closed door sessions....you do realize the difference between federal lawmaking and state lawmaking in Wis. right?

your analogy is not accurate.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You should READ, Yurtle....the Walker proposal SPECIFICALLY states that unions can only collectively bargain on salary, NOT benefits or pensions. This is in DIRECT VIOLATION of the 50 year old Wisconsin law, which DOES NOT SEPARATE SALARIES FROM BENEFITS AND PENSIONS WHEN IT GRANTS WORKERS (public and private)THE RIGHT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAIN.

Not if it's in contradiction to subsequent legal precedents connected to the Constitution. Had Yurtle actually READ the links I provided, he would have access to the actual law....which goes to show that Yurtle is operating on his opinion, supposition and conjecture and NOT legal precedent and proceedings.



It's fascinating that the teabaggers, neocons and the like all ballyhooed that they did NOT want gov't to tell them what to do...yet here they are supporting a proposal that tells them YOU THE PEOPLE don't know whats good for you in this instance...we the gov't know best and will tell you what to do.

Teabagging fools would shoot themselves in the foot if the Koch brothers, Dick Armey and Limbaugh told them to.
Click to expand...

Taichiliberal said:
I stand corrected on one point.....changing of a law through legislative process is not a "violation" of a previous law.

What Gov. Walker's proposal does is essentially gut the previous law...WHICH DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SALARIES, BENEFITS AND PENSIONS IN GRANTING WORKERS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) WHEN IT GRANTS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.

And by the way, the "referendum" on COLA adjustments can ONLY be made by NON-UNION paying members, according to Walker's proposal.

Also, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CLOSING THE BUDGET GAP, AS IT WAS GOV. WALKER'S MASSIVE TAX BREAKS TO LOCAL CORPORATIONS THAT IS THE DEFICIT CULPRIT.

This is an attempt to bust unions and thus deprive the DEMS of a major fund raiser and organizer for upcoming elections.
Click to expand...

at least you finally admit you're wrong. it took a few tries, a few different people, but you finally saw the error of your statements....:)
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually, it was a lower voter turnout that put the GOP in......traditionally, Republicans do well with low voter turnouts in elections.

But as our Constitution and Bill of Rights emphasizes, it is the right and duty of the people to challenge the laws and leadership that they feel is unjust....regardless of which political party is in power.
Click to expand...

In the race for most believable pinhead on the board, you've dropped to forth.....Jarod, Bjgrn, Christiefan and Topspin are ahead of you....

You need some "chronology", "neocon", "willfully ignorant", and the ever popular, "teabaggers" lines to spice up your idiot comments....
put a little effort into it, Clarabell....
 
Last edited:
Yurt said:
thats because dems have had closed door sessions....you do realize the difference between federal lawmaking and state lawmaking in Wis. right?

your analogy is not accurate.
Click to expand...

It wasn't an analogy between fed v. state. It was pointing out the repub hypocrisy of wanting negotiations only when they specify.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I stand corrected on one point.....changing of a law through legislative process is not a "violation" of a previous law.
Click to expand...

Cool.

What Gov. Walker's proposal does is essentially gut the previous law...WHICH DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SALARIES, BENEFITS AND PENSIONS IN GRANTING WORKERS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) WHEN IT GRANTS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.
Click to expand...

Yes, the law changes the existing law. The new law DOES differentiate between what can be bargained for collectively. AND?

And by the way, the "referendum" on COLA adjustments can ONLY be made by NON-UNION paying members, according to Walker's proposal.
Click to expand...

The referendum is if UNION members want MORE than the COLA. If there is a restriction on who can request that, I have not seen it. Please post a link.

Also, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CLOSING THE BUDGET GAP, AS IT WAS GOV. WALKER'S MASSIVE TAX BREAKS TO LOCAL CORPORATIONS THAT IS THE DEFICIT CULPRIT.
Click to expand...

Let me guess... you listened to some left wing nut who spouted the same crap and you believed it?

1) The tax reciprocity agreement with MN is now GONE. That will cost WI $60m more per year. That is NOT included in past numbers. It is a new budget shortfall that must be covered.

2) The so called 'surplus' was smoke and mirrors. The previous admin TOOK $200m from other dedicated funds and transferred them into the general fund. THAT is why it looked like there was a 'surplus'. However, for those who actually read up on it... the WI Supreme Court ruled that $200m now had to be paid back with interest to the fund it was taken from.


This is an attempt to bust unions and thus deprive the DEMS of a major fund raiser and organizer for upcoming elections.
Click to expand...

Funny... but aren't those union members still able to contribute to PACs and to candidates directly? Oh wait... you mean they might now have a CHOICE as to who they fund? Damn that does suck.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And the neocons were even lying about the HC Reform being "rammed through", as it was the CHOICE of the Party of No NOT to participate, so the Dems USED THE SAME PROCEDURES that the GOP did under the Shrub to pass laws along with a straight out vote in the Senate.

Bottom line: the neocon parrots are tripping over the hypocritical mantras of their masters.
Click to expand...


bravo said:
:palm:Thats not even a reasonable attempt to re-write history....
Thats not even a logical lie....

:rofl:


You get a E- for effort....

Jarod could have come up with more believable bullshit than that....
Click to expand...

And once again Bravo blows a lot of neocon smoke, but can't logically or factually disprove what I say. To do that would require Bravo doing some honest research and/or actually knowing WTF he's talking about.

Laugh, my Bravo clown, laugh.....it's all you're good for. To date folks, neither Bravo or any of his like minded compadres can dispute the information put forth in the opening post of this thread.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You should READ, Yurtle....the Walker proposal SPECIFICALLY states that unions can only collectively bargain on salary, NOT benefits or pensions. This is in DIRECT VIOLATION of the 50 year old Wisconsin law, which DOES NOT SEPARATE SALARIES FROM BENEFITS AND PENSIONS WHEN IT GRANTS WORKERS (public and private)THE RIGHT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAIN.

Not if it's in contradiction to subsequent legal precedents connected to the Constitution. Had Yurtle actually READ the links I provided, he would have access to the actual law....which goes to show that Yurtle is operating on his opinion, supposition and conjecture and NOT legal precedent and proceedings.



It's fascinating that the teabaggers, neocons and the like all ballyhooed that they did NOT want gov't to tell them what to do...yet here they are supporting a proposal that tells them YOU THE PEOPLE don't know whats good for you in this instance...we the gov't know best and will tell you what to do.

Teabagging fools would shoot themselves in the foot if the Koch brothers, Dick Armey and Limbaugh told them to.
Click to expand...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
I stand corrected on one point.....changing of a law through legislative process is not a "violation" of a previous law.
What Gov. Walker's proposal does is essentially gut the previous law...WHICH DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SALARIES, BENEFITS AND PENSIONS IN GRANTING WORKERS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) WHEN IT GRANTS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.

And by the way, the "referendum" on COLA adjustments can ONLY be made by NON-UNION paying members, according to Walker's proposal.

Also, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CLOSING THE BUDGET GAP, AS IT WAS GOV. WALKER'S MASSIVE TAX BREAKS TO LOCAL CORPORATIONS THAT IS THE DEFICIT CULPRIT.

This is an attempt to bust unions and thus deprive the DEMS of a major fund raiser and organizer for upcoming elections.




Yurt said:
at least you finally admit you're wrong. it took a few tries, a few different people, but you finally saw the error of your statements....:)
Click to expand...

:palm: I admitted that it's not a "violation" of the law when changed through legislative process......that does NOT change the other FACTS I put forth above. Also, Yurtle old thing, you should learn to comprehend what you read, because you highlighted two different responses...... YOU stated, "and if it is a law....then guess what...a new law can change the old law
it happens quite frequently in the legislative process..." To which I responded in the first sentence you highlighted above.

Two different things, Yurtle. If you weren't so busy trying to play "got'cha", and instead tried to comprehend WTF is going on, you'd know that....but then again I forget Yurtle's cognitive reasoning skills are not his strong point.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually, it was a lower voter turnout that put the GOP in......traditionally, Republicans do well with low voter turnouts in elections.

But as our Constitution and Bill of Rights emphasizes, it is the right and duty of the people to challenge the laws and leadership that they feel is unjust....regardless of which political party is in power.
Click to expand...
bravo said:
In the race for most believable pinhead on the board, you've dropped to forth.....Jarod, Bjgrn, Christiefan and Topspin are ahead of you....

You need some "chronology", "neocon", "willfully ignorant", and the ever popular, "teabaggers" lines to spice up your idiot comments....
put a little effort into it, Clarabell....
Click to expand...

Notice folks, that Bravo just has a mental seizure when faced with a simple set of FACTS appropo to the situation in Wisconsin that totally contradicts the mantras and edicts that Bravo mindlessly parrots. Bravo can't logically refute, deny, disprove or dismiss what I stated, so he just throws a hissy fit. I almost feel sorry for the little Bravo bumpkin....almost.
 
Superfreak said:
Cool.

What Gov. Walker's proposal does is essentially gut the previous law...WHICH DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SALARIES, BENEFITS AND PENSIONS IN GRANTING WORKERS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE) WHEN IT GRANTS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS.
Click to expand...

Yes, the law changes the existing law. The new law DOES differentiate between what can be bargained for collectively. AND?

And just how in the hell does banning people from collectively bargaining ONLY on benefits and pensions guarantee a better state budget? That move DOES NOT address the lack of funds derived from INVESTMENTS by state and the fed after the recent Wall St. debacle, does it? That move DOES NOT address the bonehead move by Gov. Walker to give a shitload of tax breaks to local corporations which deprived the state of millions in revenue, does it? To date, the only reason for this stipulation by Walker was to bust the unions, NOT save automatically save money. Thereby, it's not only a bogus move by Walker, but an unjust one that will be challenged by the people, as is their right and duty under our Constitutional laws.

And by the way, the "referendum" on COLA adjustments can ONLY be made by NON-UNION paying members, according to Walker's proposal.
Click to expand...

The referendum is if UNION members want MORE than the COLA. If there is a restriction on who can request that, I have not seen it. Please post a link.

Nice try, but you're trying to skip over the fact of WHO can join the referendum, not "why".....which incidently raises the issue as to why "referendum" is preferred to straight up negotiation. Walker's proposal restricts the advocates to NON-UNION paying members....another shot at distabilizing unions. From his own website:

Collective bargaining – The bill would make various changes to limit collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Contracts would be limited to one year and wages would be frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units are required to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers would be prohibited from collecting union dues and members of collective bargaining units would not be required to pay dues. These changes take effect upon the expiration of existing contracts. Local law enforcement and fire employees, and state troopers and inspectors would be exempt from these changes.

http://walker.wi.gov/journal_media_detail.asp?prid=5622&locid=177

Quote:
Also, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CLOSING THE BUDGET GAP, AS IT WAS GOV. WALKER'S MASSIVE TAX BREAKS TO LOCAL CORPORATIONS THAT IS THE DEFICIT CULPRIT.
Click to expand...
Let me guess... you listened to some left wing nut who spouted the same crap and you believed it?

You guessed wrong as usual, you SuperFreak-ing dummy. It's called common sense coupled with cognitive reasoning and honest research. Let's see how you fair in that department.

1) The tax reciprocity agreement with MN is now GONE. That will cost WI $60m more per year. That is NOT included in past numbers. It is a new budget shortfall that must be covered.

Well, the tax breaks that Walker gave corporations is between $117 - 140 million (depending on latest estimates for this and next year)....so there's your money.

2) The so called 'surplus' was smoke and mirrors. The previous admin TOOK $200m from other dedicated funds and transferred them into the general fund. THAT is why it looked like there was a 'surplus'. However, for those who actually read up on it... the WI Supreme Court ruled that $200m now had to be paid back with interest to the fund it was taken from.

Again, for those who read up and thought it through, since the unions have stated that they are willing to take cuts to make the contributions to closing the deficit, the major burden should not be put on them for the sake of enacting failed reaganomic policies. Again, NO ONE has explained how freezing out unions from bargaining on their pensions and benefits automatically helps closes a financial gap.


This is an attempt to bust unions and thus deprive the DEMS of a major fund raiser and organizer for upcoming elections.
Click to expand...

Funny... but aren't those union members still able to contribute to PACs and to candidates directly? Oh wait... you mean they might now have a CHOICE as to who they fund? Damn that does suck.
Click to expand...

:palm: If you're going to try and be sarcastic and condescending, you Super Freak-ing dunce, get your act together. Any grade school kid will tell you that organized group are stronger than individuals in may respects. The corporate and wealthy entities that YOU toadie to don't like competition or contrary voices in how to treat employees, and therefore seek to eliminate THE PEOPLES RIGHT to match their funding influence by busting unions. However, you have that nasty old Constitution, Bill of Rights and labor union history and laws to deal with. Leaving things up to the corporate bosses to determine everything and do right doesn't always work out...as the S&L scandal, Enron, and the recent Wall St. and mortgage banking debacle should have taught you. As usual, you SuperFreaking fool, you've learned NOTHING from recent history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top