No class in WI as teachers protest union-busting governor

[Kurokikaze]

Oh god man. You think his posts are bad... You guys have got to read the last like 5 pages of comments on that video. My head hurts now.

By the way, it's only a problem because its a "democratic political scheme".

[archibaldcrane]

no guys, its totally okay to run a corrupt political scheme that costs tax payers money as long as teachers get the benefits!

So, getting billioinaire businessmen to pay for your election campaign and then immediately giving hundreds of millions in tax cuts to companies owned by billionaire businessmen, causing a budget deficit and then slashing public worker pay and benefits to make up for it is ok, but unions are the bad guys in this story...because they also finance elections.

Got it.

[archibaldcrane]

I'm just trying to figure out how unions in Wisconsin are so tewwible, when they agreed to furlough days to protect the state against the recession in the last term, and are now agreeing to an 8% cut in total compensation on top of that this term because of budget shortfalls even though they didn't create them.

UNIONS ARE SO UNREASONABLE! THEY'RE MILKING THE TAXPAYERS DRY! ALL THEY WANT IS TO RAPE TAXPAYER CHILDREN AND DRINK THEIR BLOOD IN THE FORM OF TAXES!

[Demosthenes11]

couple that with CA where public workers are getting buttraped by budget cuts and are really the first target when things go sour. Far from in bed together.

[Senoska]

no guys, its totally okay to run a corrupt political scheme that costs tax payers money as long as teachers get the benefits!

The teachers already cut their benefits. This is strictly about busting a union at this point. Personally speaking, as a left leaning independent, I'm glad that this is happening. At a time when the republican party is seemingly going through its death-throws, this will only empower voters in the next upcoming election to ensure the parties inevitable demise. Way to go, republicans. You keep polarizing more and more which only secures your base but turns people like myself off to you completely.

[guartz]

You seem to want to argue something else (that public unions are bad), while everyone else is focusing on the salient point (that the reason for messing with the public unions is bad).

They think I agree with their politician now. I fucked this up big time, Kuya.

[Kuya]

Well, yea, why wouldn't they think you do when you look like swamp.

[guartz]

UNIONS ARE SO UNREASONABLE! THEY'RE MILKING THE TAXPAYERS DRY! ALL THEY WANT IS TO RAPE TAXPAYER CHILDREN AND DRINK THEIR BLOOD IN THE FORM OF TAXES!

Unions are great, it is totally understandable for workers to organize and take collective action to increase their wages and benefits, because big businesses have huge amount of power over their employees and they have a profit incentive to keep their employee's wages down. It's a balance of power.

State employees however, don't have the same disadvantages. That's because politicians don't have a profit incentive as businesses do. In fact, because the funding is public, the advantage is reversed and doubly so when the workers can take collective action. They are able to pressure politicians for wage increases and in return they provide funding for political campaigns. Here is the problem, the whole thing becomes highly political and very corrupt. Historically, in America, fed workers were not able to organize for exactly this reason. The fed unions become a powerful special interest group at the expense of tax payers. ('but but economy was fine' is not a excuse for this theft)

What's happening now, that's the symptom of the political corruption, not a primary cause. These people are organizing in protest to perpetuate the system not change it.

[Restrat]

State employees however, don't have the same disadvantages. That's because politicians don't have a profit incentive as businesses do.

In this case they do have an incentive. The more money they can cut from public employees, the more money they can give to the corporate leaders who fund their campaigns, which is exactly what happened here.

[guartz]

In this case they do have an incentive. The more money they can cut from public employees, the more money they can give to the corporate leaders who fund their campaigns, which is exactly what happened here.

I'm glad you brought this up. The unions in this country only support one political party, the democratic party. Now, this is where it gets shady and speculative. The public sector labor unions are ran by a total of 2, thats two, organizations and they both support the democratic party. So the question becomes, why only the democratic party? Clearly it would be in the member's interests if both parties were supported, because a situation like this would be avoided. Kind of like big businesses do it, to cover both bases.

The truth is, it's practically a political suicide to cut funding from public services and takes enormous political will. Most politicians won't do it. Because, well, you see what happens on the news now. Some people might say, well, if one politician was elected despite opposition from public sector unions and decides to cut funding, well thats a form of democracy, the unions played their cards during election and lost.

But that's bullshit, because the whole thing is corrupt as all hell. You got union leaders who charge dues and use that funding to support their political friends. The same thing happens on the flip side, with big businesses.

[Kurokikaze]

I'm glad you brought this up. The unions in this country only support one political party, the democratic party. Now, this is where it gets shady and speculative. The public sector labor unions are ran by a total of 2, thats two, organizations and they both support the democratic party. So the question becomes, why only the democratic party? Clearly it would be in the member's interests if both parties were supported, because a situation like this would be avoided. Kind of like big businesses do it, to cover both bases.

Gee I wonder why the unions only support the democratic party... You think this is all out of the blue? Republicans have been trying to destroy labor unions for a long time now.

Of the top 10 financial contributors to political campaigns - THREE of them are for Democrats and they are all unions. So no big businesses don't cover both bases. This is all for favorable election results in the future, not whether or not these unions hurt taxpayers (um... they are taxpayers) or this deficit.

Also another thing to note is that the 137m in deficit for Wisconsin, while it took place in January, I don't think thats part of this year's deficit and would be something posted next year.

[archibaldcrane]

But that's bullshit, because the whole thing is corrupt as all hell. You got union leaders who charge dues and use that funding to support their political friends. The same thing happens on the flip side, with big businesses.

The point is, it's better when unions do it because they represent millions and millions of working class people, as opposed to when businesses do it, because they represent a few thousand millionaires and billionaires.

Money sucks in politics and it's not going away, but given that that's the case it might as well work to help prevent the severe income polarization of the past 40 years, not further contribute to it.

[archibaldcrane]

Also, we keep focusing on just the union portion of this bill - ignoring that the bill also gives the governor's office the ability to sell the state's power plants to private (and out of state) companies with no-bid contracts, and gives the governor control over the state's medicare (Badgercare) program, which I expect to be significantly cut in his budget which he'll release as soon as this "repair bill" is passed.

[guartz]

The point is, it's better when unions do it because they represent millions and millions of working class people, as opposed to when businesses do it, because they represent a few thousand millionaires and billionaires.

This is not a factual statement. They don't represent millions of workers, they represent public union workers, which do not number in millions in Wisconsin. How many of them are democrats? I bet you nearly half of those workers are registered republicans, where is their representation? They pay union dues just like everyone else.

You are right about one thing, the focus is entirely misplaced. Those people should be out there with pickets that say 'we are tired of this political bullshit' instead they act as political pawns to a different power.

[guartz]

Gee I wonder why the unions only support the democratic party... You think this is all out of the blue? Republicans have been trying to destroy labor unions for a long time now.

You have to make a differential account between public/private unions, both parties systematically go after the private unions, and as far as public, you really should consider how the public sector union came about before making that assumption.

[guartz]

i.e history book, open it.

[eunhye]

Rhode Island fired their teachers. 2,000 of em. heh.

[bigrougabagel]

IThe unions in this country only support one political party, the democratic party.

No. Police and firefighter unions both supported walker in his election and are now, shockingly, exempt from his union busting.

[Dezzimal]

Since there are a lot of experts in this thread, does anyone happen to have a breakdown of collective bargaining rights/labor union laws by state? All I've been able to find is a list of states that have right-to-work laws on wikipedia.

[guartz]

that just goes to show you, if the union leaders were less biased in the political affiliation this sort of thing could have been avoided. Oh the seeds people sow on your behalf without you having a say in it.