More union bailouts

Cancel 2016.2

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...5421613093659730.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Specifically, the bill stipulates that federal funds must supplement, not replace, state spending on education. Also, in each state, next year's spending on elementary and secondary education as a percentage of total state revenues must be equal to or greater than the previous year's level.
Click to expand...

This bill reeks of a political payoff to the unions. It does little other than protect the unions. Forcing states to keep educational spending at high levels?

so essentially everyone else has to suffer the pains of an economic downturn, but heaven forbid the teachers unions should share in that pain. Just let them keep their unsustainable bene's.

Keep in mind that this teacher bailout also amounts to a huge contribution by Democrats to their own election campaigns. The National Right to Work Committee estimates that two of every three teachers belong to unions. The average union dues payment varies, but a reasonable estimate is that between 1% and 1.5% of teacher salaries goes to dues. The National Education Association and other unions will thus get as much as $100 million in additional dues from this bill, much of which will flow immediately to endangered Democratic candidates in competitive House and Senate races this year.
Click to expand...

and THERE we have the real reason the Dems want to bail out the unions...
 
I mean if he really wants change in D.C. Obama could just come out and say we are in an important time pre-election and these are some of my biggest supporters so I'm sending this money their direction. That would be a type of honesty we never hear.
 
cawacko said:
I mean if he really wants change in D.C. Obama could just come out and say we are in an important time pre-election and these are some of my biggest supporters so I'm sending this money their direction. That would be a type of honesty we never hear.
Click to expand...

If he did that, I would be tempted to ignore the other things he has done and cast my vote for him.
 
and notice that they seem more interested in buying union votes instead of helping the disadvantaged by plundering the food stamp program to pay for this.

how's that feel christie and apple?
 
Yurt said:
obama and the dems are buying elections...

why is it bad to bailout corps, but good to bailout unions?
Click to expand...

It's not like he's the first politician or President to send money to groups that support them. This act is pretty transparent though.
 
Superfreak said:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...5421613093659730.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop



This bill reeks of a political payoff to the unions. It does little other than protect the unions. Forcing states to keep educational spending at high levels?

so essentially everyone else has to suffer the pains of an economic downturn, but heaven forbid the teachers unions should share in that pain. Just let them keep their unsustainable bene's.



and THERE we have the real reason the Dems want to bail out the unions...
Click to expand...

You're quoting two right wing organizations who don't give one flying fuck about the middle class. The Wall Street Journal and the National Right to Work Committee. Two organizations vehemently opposed to free peoples forming trade unions. Yea.....right.

The contradiction I love to point here is that factory and industrial workers in northern union states earn substantially higher wages and benefits and thus have a higher standard of living then workers in southern Right to Work States.

Why do you folks hate the middle class?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You're quoting two right wing organizations who don't give one flying fuck about the middle class. The Wall Street Journal and the National Right to Work Committee. Two organizations vehemently opposed to free peoples forming trade unions. Yea.....right.

The contradiction I love to point here is that factory and industrial workers in northern union states earn substantially higher wages and benefits and thus have a higher standard of living then workers in southern Right to Work States.

Why do you folks hate the middle class?
Click to expand...

:pke:

did you miss the part that unions have needed BILLIONS in bailouts lately

obviously YOU hate the middle class because you think unions can extort any amount of money from corps and government and its all peachy keen
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You're quoting two right wing organizations who don't give one flying fuck about the middle class. The Wall Street Journal and the National Right to Work Committee. Two organizations vehemently opposed to free peoples forming trade unions. Yea.....right.

The contradiction I love to point here is that factory and industrial workers in northern union states earn substantially higher wages and benefits and thus have a higher standard of living then workers in southern Right to Work States.

Why do you folks hate the middle class?
Click to expand...

LMAO... more of your ignorance.... the COST OF LIVING is also higher in the northern union states than it is in the southern right to work states.

Funny how you attack the source of the information rather than commenting on the information they presented. I wonder why? Could it be because their information is accurate and yet it upsets you that most of this country is getting sick of hearing that union jobs need protection because they are soooo important, yet the rest of the public is fucked AND they get to pay to make sure the union workers aren't in the same boat.

Bottom line, for the unions to continue as they are in this economic environment is pathetic at best.

You can spout off all you want on unions... they have their place... it is time they are put back in it.

You wonder why the job environment sucks so bad in the upper midwest? Take a good look at the unions who continue to drive jobs out of that part of the country.
 
Good luck with this line of attack. People who aren't Republican voters don't really view teachers, police and firefighters as "special interests."
 
Last edited:
SmarterThanYou said:
how are those 'voters' going to react when they learn that the dems raided the foodstamp program to pay for this?
Click to expand...


So the Republicans that voted against the food stamp funding in the first instance are going to credibly argue that the Democrats shouldn't change the funding levels?

Doubtful.
 
:rofl:

But the bill also requires that $12 billion be stripped from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps, to help fund the new bill, prompting some Democrats to cringe at the notion of cutting back on one necessity to pay for another. The federal assistance program currently helps 41 million Americans.


Democrats just said fuck you to the poor, they need to keep supporting their union masters.
 
NigelTufnel said:
So the Republicans that voted against the food stamp funding in the first instance are going to credibly argue that the Democrats shouldn't change the funding levels?

Doubtful.
Click to expand...

not what i was talking about. the admin is already facing backlash from the far left and gibbs remarks didn't help them out any. whats the far left going to think about reducing food stamp funding?
 
NigelTufnel said:
Good luck with this line of attack. People who aren't Republican voters don't really view teachers, police and firefighters as "special interests."
Click to expand...

They view UNIONS as special interests. When the choice is between:

1) Teachers get a $17k year health plan instead of a $24k per year health plan

2) Teachers keep their $24k health plan and everyone else gets to pay for it.

Which do you think people are going to choose?

When teachers are getting raises during an economic downturn, while at the same time the private sector is suffering job losses and no raises... who do you think most taxpayers are going to side with?

Like every other government sector, there is vast amounts of waste within education. To pretend that it is ok with people to see the government not only bail out the teachers unions, but also mandate to the states that there spending on education remain neutral at worst is ridiculous.

But do campaign on 'they are not special interests and thus it is ok to continue giving them more and more of your money'.... see how far that takes you.
 
Superfreak said:
They view UNIONS as special interests. When the choice is between:

1) Teachers get a $17k year health plan instead of a $24k per year health plan

2) Teachers keep their $24k health plan and everyone else gets to pay for it.

Which do you think people are going to choose?

When teachers are getting raises during an economic downturn, while at the same time the private sector is suffering job losses and no raises... who do you think most taxpayers are going to side with?

Like every other government sector, there is vast amounts of waste within education. To pretend that it is ok with people to see the government not only bail out the teachers unions, but also mandate to the states that there spending on education remain neutral at worst is ridiculous.

But do campaign on 'they are not special interests and thus it is ok to continue giving them more and more of your money'.... see how far that takes you.
Click to expand...


Like I said, good luck.
 
Superfreak said:
As I said.... keep pretending it is not an issue... that should work out quite well for you.
Click to expand...

We had the stimulus which went heavily to public sector unions and now this second stimulus going to public sector unions all while the private sector is floundering. Will people notice? My guess is a lot will.
 
cawacko said:
We had the stimulus which went heavily to public sector unions and now this second stimulus going to public sector unions all while the private sector is floundering. Will people notice? My guess is a lot will.
Click to expand...

no no no.... teachers unions AREN'T special interests... they should get all the money they want and not have to sacrifice anything. :cool:

I wish the Dem leadership would come out and state the same nonsense that Dung just stated. It might give the Reps a shot at the Senate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top