Wisconsin Revolt

[UncleBuck]

You are aware that you can send a donation directly to the IRS. I'm sure if you truly "wish i was paying income taxes", the IRS would be glad to take your money. I'll even help you get started, go to www.irs.gov.

thanks for the link, bro.

but before i tip off the irs as to my creative source of income, or even give them any suspicions, i will work towards making my profession legitimate and legal.

as it should be.

 

[JoSixChip]

See, we can find common ground!

thanks for the link, bro.

but before i tip off the irs as to my creative source of income, or even give them any suspicions, i will work towards making my profession legitimate and legal.

as it should be.

 

[NoDrama]

We got alot better results out of teachers before they all unionized. Seriously, the US education system is in the dumps and has been on a downturn since the 80's. In fact the more money they pump into the education system the more expensive everything gets and the less educated the kids get. Hell my youngest kids school wants to get rid of letter grades for the first 4 grades so all children can achieve together. IE so the dumb kids can be allowed to pass no matter how fucking stupid and the teachers can all pat themselves on the back and how no kid gets left behind. You have kids graduating high school who can't read for god sake.

When I was out of the Marine Corps I took a Job where I worked up to 110 hours a week, and got NO overtime pay, and a year later when I got furloughed I got NO unemployment. I was pretty disappointed, because I really enjoyed that job and was good at it.Guess what, I was in the Union, think they gave a shit? nope.

 

[UncleBuck]

We got alot better results out of teachers before they all unionized. Seriously, the US education system is in the dumps and has been on a downturn since the 80's. In fact the more money they pump into the education system the more expensive everything gets and the less educated the kids get. Hell my youngest kids school wants to get rid of letter grades for the first 4 grades so all children can achieve together. IE so the dumb kids can be allowed to pass no matter how fucking stupid and the teachers can all pat themselves on the back and how no kid gets left behind. You have kids graduating high school who can't read for god sake.

When I was out of the Marine Corps I took a Job where I worked up to 110 hours a week, and got NO overtime pay, and a year later when I got furloughed I got NO unemployment. I was pretty disappointed, because I really enjoyed that job and was good at it.Guess what, I was in the Union, think they gave a shit? nope.

brool story, co.



where did you work for 110 hours a week (basically 16 hours a day, 7 days a week)? oil fields? deadliest catch? i can't think of too many others that would require such hours.

my dear old dad was a union carpenter for years, much happier once he started his own renovation biz. but i can't imagine him being so much of a dad to me if he were working 16 hours a day like before unions existed. granted, that is not so much the role of unions nowadays...but whatever.

for the record, i am against the type of nonsense in schools you describe. i think some healthy competition would do our schools well.

 

[NoDrama]

LOL Not sure if its Brool enough, but to answer your question I worked as a conductor for a giant Railway Company. You got paid by the mile. The medical/dental/eyecare benefits were better than anything you can imagine. Some days a fella could make $3,000 bringing in trains that turned into pumpkins after their crew had been working for more than 12 hours straight. Work was usually 16 hours a day 7 days a week, but there were occasional weeks where you would get stuck for a day or 2 in some pisshole mountain town waiting to get assigned to work on a train to take you back home. The entire system of Railroading works on a seniority and contract benefits basis so its completely different than just about any job you could imagine. My longest Work week was 144 hours.Most of the time was spent sitting in a big black chair rocking back and forth going down the tracks while you bullshitted with the engineer and watched out the windows.

 

[mastertow]

Whoever said they "know" teachers because they almost married one. You sir, are an idot. I have actually been married to an attorney, and since I actually married him, does that make me an attorney or atleast an expert on them? I too know a bit about teachers as my Mother, Father, and sister are all teachers. I get the feeling teachers are looked at as very expensive babysitters. This is not mine but,

Are you sick of high paid teachers? Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - baby sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.

That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan — that equals 6 1/2 hours).

Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children.
Now how many do they teach in day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.

LET’S SEE…. That’s $585 X 180= $105,300 peryear. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).
What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.

Wait a minute — there’s something wrong here! There sure is!
The average teacher’s salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!

 

[mastertow]

From the looks of things it could get really silly around here as the teabaggers are headed in. What happens when Wisconsin protests happen in Ohio, New Jersey, and Florida? Will they listen then?

For all you fucks that think this is about wages, bennies, or anything other than union busting. The unions have said they will agree to wage and bennie cuts, exactly as Gov. Walker has proposed, but not Collective bargaining. HE SAID "NO", isn't this an admission of union busting?

 

[mastertow]

Thank you for responding. Perhaps you could clarify your response or misunderstood my question. You first state that "this is not forced redistribution". Then in your second paragraph, you say "sorry to tell you but we are all "forced to fund" public servants." That sounds like you responded with two opposing answers.

I don't expect anyone to work for free. I'd prefer that the people that purchase the "services" have a say in which service they want to purchase and the ability to say no thank you if they decide not to purchase that service or seek other solutions. As you point out many salaries are high. If there were competing fire departments do you think the consumer would benefit?

What if I or somebody else would rather not "overpay" for a service, or if we don't use the service? Should people be force to pay for things they do not want or do not use ?

Since you think axing bargaining is wrong, shouldn't the persons doing the paying be able to "shop" for different services or people to provide the services ? What would happen if you could only purchase groceries from one store? Where would your ability to bargain be then?

"forced redistribution" and "forced to fund" IS different. The former being redistribution the latter being taxes.

If there were competing fire departments? I think the very nature of emergency service is the ability to work together and work toward the common goal. Unless you meant the privatization of departments, then there certinly would be quality issues.

About your question if a "consumer" or taxpayer should be allowed to "purchase" or "fund" only the exact services the "use".
So I know a fella whom has never obtained a drivers license, should he have to pay any portion of a road tax? Yes, because he more than likely travels the roads as a passenger, and if not, all of his goods and services come by way of road travel.
The school argument is about the same. You can spend the tax money on education, prisons, police services, and welfare. Your choice, but education in my belief is the better value.

So you think if you busted all the unions and had unprotected workers things would be better? What might happen if your local Burger King unionized? I can assure you prices would rise, but so would the quality. Get rid of all union employees in government offices and hire the flunkies at minimum wage and what would you expect to happen.

I do not particularly care for the governments control over my life, but it is the price I have to pay for living here. I also believe the "race to the bottom" has caused much of the mess we are in now. Things can be cheaper, but all one has to do is look at the quality that comes from places like China. Now ask yourself if you would rather have the department of motor vehicle clerk, or the building inspector be a low wage employee from China, or your neighbor down the street. Ok, building inspector was a bad choice is a forum like this with the legals of growing, but you should be able to see what I mean.

 

[Rob Roy]

i wish i was paying income taxes on my side business, hopefully soon to be my only business.

but alas, the voters of oregon decided against it last year on prop 74.

they could have had $1000 of my money so i could get a producer license. they could have had 10% of my income from what i produced. they could have also had the state and federal taxes from the rest of my income.

but they said no. i voted yes, to no avail.

so my income will be untaxed.

but at least i won't need to use any public services or social safety nets. and i will still pay my property taxes, gas taxes, and all the other fees and taxes that come with our confounded modern day life.

Nobody is "forcing" you not to calculate the taxes as if it was legal and send it to your beloved government as a donation. Or do you only give up the green when the nanny state demands it from you? That seems so selfish of you.

Yes keep paying so that the nice policeman can have a fat budget to come arrest you and his retired friends that work as court bailiffs
can lead you away to jail, after the bloated salary prosecuter and judge combine to fuck you over...

Then you can sit in jail, costing thousands of dollars a month to keep you in jail for a victimless crime. Is that the kind of social safety net you like?

Meanwhile those poor government school teachers suffer thru a hot summer and another potential tax payer has been taken from the pool of worker bees that will make them some honey. It's just horrible. No wait...I've got it, send that $1,000 you would have paid
if prop 74 had passed to those poor suffering teachers in Wisconsin.

 

[Rob Roy]

Whoever said they "know" teachers because they almost married one. You sir, are an idot. I have actually been married to an attorney, and since I actually married him, does that make me an attorney or atleast an expert on them? I too know a bit about teachers as my Mother, Father, and sister are all teachers. I get the feeling teachers are looked at as very expensive babysitters. This is not mine but,

Are you sick of high paid teachers? Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - baby sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.

That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan — that equals 6 1/2 hours).

Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children.
Now how many do they teach in day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.

LET’S SEE…. That’s $585 X 180= $105,300 peryear. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).
What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.

Wait a minute — there’s something wrong here! There sure is!
The average teacher’s salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student–a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!

...is it a "deal" for the person that never used that system or wanted it and is forced to pay for it anyway ? How is it a "deal" when one party has no say in the terms? Please explain that to me.


If Walmart is having deals that you don't want and sends you a bill are you obligated to pay them?

What if Walmart opened up daycare / schools and their deal was cheaper but they promised a better value, should you be able to send your kid there and should you still have to pay for something you no longer use?

 

[Rob Roy]

"forced redistribution" and "forced to fund" IS different. The former being redistribution the latter being taxes.

If there were competing fire departments? I think the very nature of emergency service is the ability to work together and work toward the common goal. Unless you meant the privatization of departments, then there certinly would be quality issues.

About your question if a "consumer" or taxpayer should be allowed to "purchase" or "fund" only the exact services the "use".
So I know a fella whom has never obtained a drivers license, should he have to pay any portion of a road tax? Yes, because he more than likely travels the roads as a passenger, and if not, all of his goods and services come by way of road travel.
The school argument is about the same. You can spend the tax money on education, prisons, police services, and welfare. Your choice, but education in my belief is the better value.

So you think if you busted all the unions and had unprotected workers things would be better? What might happen if your local Burger King unionized? I can assure you prices would rise, but so would the quality. Get rid of all union employees in government offices and hire the flunkies at minimum wage and what would you expect to happen.

I do not particularly care for the governments control over my life, but it is the price I have to pay for living here. I also believe the "race to the bottom" has caused much of the mess we are in now. Things can be cheaper, but all one has to do is look at the quality that comes from places like China. Now ask yourself if you would rather have the department of motor vehicle clerk, or the building inspector be a low wage employee from China, or your neighbor down the street. Ok, building inspector was a bad choice is a forum like this with the legals of growing, but you should be able to see what I mean.

If you make a distinction between "forced redistribution and taxes" , I believe you are rationalizing. The means of acquiring or doing either is the same, backed by the threat of force. Taxes are forced redistribution. Euphemisms don't change that.

The "common goal" is not a given. The fact that you and I disagree is an example of that. Wouldn't it be best if you were free to meet your goals absent any threat of harm and others that had different goals be granted the same thing?

Why should a person have to get a driver's license? Do licenses bestow some magical power to prevent traffic accidents?
Certainly people should pay for that which they use. That implies they shouldn't have to pay against their will for that which they don't
use right?

If Burger King employees unionized and drove the price up, in a truly free market a nonunion competitior would come in and clean their clock. In the world of public schools, without any opportunity for the competitor to exist, where is the incentive to the public school to perform or provide value?

I would rather not have a DMV from anywhere, it is parasitic and doesn't add value.

How can a person truly "own" a physical property if they are subject to an outside source, a building inspector imposing restrictions?
It must be something less than 100% ownership right?

 

[mastertow]

If you make a distinction between "forced redistribution and taxes" , I believe you are rationalizing. The means of acquiring or doing either is the same, backed by the threat of force. Taxes are forced redistribution. Euphemisms don't change that.

You are implying redistribution is the same as taxes not me.

The "common goal" is not a given. The fact that you and I disagree is an example of that. Wouldn't it be best if you were free to meet your goals absent any threat of harm and others that had different goals be granted the same thing?

Yes, but we do live in a democracy. If you want the pleasure to spend your portion of tax money where you decide, good luck, as you already have that. You do not directly spend the money, you elect leaders. If the people revolt against said leaders, that is also part of the system.

Why should a person have to get a driver's license? Do licenses bestow some magical power to prevent traffic accidents?
Certainly people should pay for that which they use. That implies they shouldn't have to pay against their will for that which they don't
use right?

NO. Are you so anti-government you cannot see the benefit of have drivers trained and tested? Not sure how it works where you live, but in Wisconsin that is the way it works. Of course, no license, no drive. Sorry, agian elect a leader that will take that fight on for you.

I would rather not have a DMV from anywhere, it is parasitic and doesn't add value.

Again, are you sure the DMV has no value? In Wisconsin, they do much more than issue a plastic useless card.

If Burger King employees unionized and drove the price up, in a truly free market a nonunion competitior would come in and clean their clock. In the world of public schools, without any opportunity for the competitor to exist, where is the incentive to the public school to perform or provide value?

Sure, that is why unions existed as long as they have... Do you realize union employees are usually trained significantly more than non-union?
Where are you from? In my area, private schools are allowed and in fact I know for 6 within, 20 miles. But guess what, they are damn expensive. Why so expensive, the educators in this private schools get paid better than the public schools. Than info might have been posted already, but I could post it.

How can a person truly "own" a physical property if they are subject to an outside source, a building inspector imposing restrictions?
It must be something less than 100% ownership right?

How about building codes. Should people be allowed to build and maintain a building as they choose without regard to neighbors,or safety of visitors?

Again, your anti-government stance is unusual. You ask the government to crush the values most Americans count on as a freedom one minute and not the next.

Obviously you want the gov. out of your life, and so do I. In the current protest, so do those people.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

in that case, i take it you have never worked a job with PTO benefits.

when i used to call in sick, legitimately or not, they automatically paid out the PTO.

perhaps your jobs were all more flexible, in that you would have to choose to take the PTO.

in any case, point is that you should watch out when wishing for someone to be fired for using their own sick days as they please. perhaps these teachers were 'sick' of getting railroaded by union busting tactics, even after making some sacrifices and offering more.

it also seems difficult to reconcile your indignant outrage at someone using their own accrued time off as they see fit with your spirited defense of letting people keep more of their own money to use as they see fit.

Teachers abused the sick-day benefit to shut down your precious public schools, Buck. And you are defending them.

Obama himself said "elections have consequences." What you are seeing is the consequences of the Teabagger surge you scoffed at on Election day. Remember when you crowed because the Republicans only managed to take the House of Representatives?

At the time I informed you of the enormous success the Teabaggers had in flipping state Legislatures across the nation. This is one of those cases.

Now we have a situation where a bunch of over-compensated worker bees are marching on their state capitol whining because they are being asked to fund part of their own generous retirement packages and part of their Cadillac health care benefits.

They are throwing a tantrum in a pretty crappy economy where the average Schmoe is laughing at them. Because they obviously have little idea of what life is life in the real world.

The real world where calling in sick means you don't get paid for that day. The real world where you fund 100% of your retirement. The real world where you are responsible for your own health care.

If their jobs are so horrible they are free to find work elsewhere.

What's that? There are no other jobs?

Well, then... perhaps they should be grateful for the jobs they have and shut the fuck up because my sympathies lie with the taxpayers.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

Guess who said this?

When school children start paying union dues, that's when I will start representing the interests of school children.

Albert Shanker, former President of the United Federation of Teachers.

Coming April 15th, Atlas Shrugged, Part One.

[video=youtube;6W07bFa4TzM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W07bFa4TzM[/video]

Tax day. I'll be there.

 

[ink the world]

...is it a "deal" for the person that never used that system or wanted it and is forced to pay for it anyway ? How is it a "deal" when one party has no say in the terms? Please explain that to me.


If Walmart is having deals that you don't want and sends you a bill are you obligated to pay them?

What if Walmart opened up daycare / schools and their deal was cheaper but they promised a better value, should you be able to send your kid there and should you still have to pay for something you no longer use?

Comparing consumer spending to how tax money is spent is laughable and you are intelligent enough to know it. I dont want my tax money spent on the Drug War, Iraq, Afghanistan, tax breaks for oil companies, farm subsidies, the financial support for foreign dictators, etc. etc.
That really doesnt matter and we both know it, we elect people and they spend that $ how they see fit. We get the government we deserve.

On the original topic at hand, this is CLEARLY not about saving tax payers any money, it never has been. The union has conceded the cut in pay and the increases in employee contributions. They have given the Governor supposedly what he wanted.

His response? No deal.

If this was only about saving the tax payers $ the problem would be solved. His refusal to accept collective bargaining is clear evidence that this is purely about union busting. There is no deal simply because he will not accept their right to collective bargaining. Like Ive said before, I feel bad for the Tea Party supporters. Their cause and movement got hijacked.

Instead of job creation we have gotten "so be it", abortion bills, health care repeal bills, bills to end child labor laws and more bullshit. So serious about balancing the budget, make oil companies actually pay taxes instead of giving them tax refunds. Stop spending $ on wars without any real victory to be had and then the idea of being some kind of budget savior will actually have merit.

Union busting, abortion bans, child labor repeal and more bullshit isnt gonna get us out of the hole and we all know it.

 

[BudMcLovin]

Whoever said they "know" teachers because they almost married one. You sir, are an idot. I have actually been married to an attorney, and since I actually married him, does that make me an attorney or atleast an expert on them? I too know a bit about teachers as my Mother, Father, and sister are all teachers. I get the feeling teachers are looked at as very expensive babysitters. This is not mine but,

What’s an idot? Do you mean idiot? I’ll let that speak for its self.

I never said pay the teachers less or cops or firefighters. The problem is the benefits program. The pensions for public sector retirees are going to be a heavy burden to bear before long. Private industry realized this a long time ago that’s why pension programs started dying off. Public sector unions are having a hard time with that realization. Why should the public employee get paid more that the people they work for?

Last time I checked public sector employees are supposed to work for the people. Why should public sector employees be allowed to retire after 20 years and receive almost the same pay and benefits for the rest of their lives? The only group of I believe should be giving those kind of benefits are active military or if you’ve been in combat you should be given health care for life for free.

The systems that worked 30 years ago no longer work. We have to adapt or watch the slow decay of America.

 

[TheDemocrat]

In these poor economic times if you have a job you should do whatever you have to to keep it. For instance, if your employer says ''lick my balls'', you should lick his balls.

 

[doc111]

in these poor economic times if you have a job you should do whatever you have to to keep it. For instance, if your employer says ''lick my balls'', you should lick his balls.

have fun with that!!!!!!!!

 

[Rob Roy]

You are implying redistribution is the same as taxes not me.

No. I'm not implying it. I'm calling a spade a spade. You accept government wordsmithing, I do not.

Yes, but we do live in a democracy. If you want the pleasure to spend your portion of tax money where you decide, good luck, as you already have that. You do not directly spend the money, you elect leaders. If the people revolt against said leaders, that is also part of the system.

Constitutional Republic, not Democracy. Althought nobody alive today agreed to the original terms, which was sort of a unilateral contract. Shouldn't all parties to a contract agree to the terms? What other contracts that other people made do you feel obligated to?

NO. Are you so anti-government you cannot see the benefit of have drivers trained and tested? Not sure how it works where you live, but in Wisconsin that is the way it works. Of course, no license, no drive. Sorry, agian elect a leader that will take that fight on for you.

Safe drivers are a good thing. If you forget your wallet and that magical piece of plastic called a drivers license is left at home are you any less safe? The driver's exams don't make people safe drivers...explain all the traffic accidents.
You admit no license, no drive. Another example of how your government imposes itself into people's lives. DMV's and their cops are not their solely for safety....they are their to generate revenue.

Again, are you sure the DMV has no value? In Wisconsin, they do much more than issue a plastic useless card.

I'm sure they do impose in people's lives in other ways.

Sure, that is why unions existed as long as they have... Do you realize union employees are usually trained significantly more than non-union?
Where are you from? In my area, private schools are allowed and in fact I know for 6 within, 20 miles. But guess what, they are damn expensive. Why so expensive, the educators in this private schools get paid better than the public schools. Than info might have been posted already, but I could post it.

Private schools are ALLOWED? Who would disallow them? Of course they get paid more, they typically offer a better product. Is it fair to ask somebody that doesn't want to send their kid to a public school to ask them to continue paying for it?
If you send a package via fed-ex should you have to send the U.S. Post Office a check too?

How about building codes. Should people be allowed to build and maintain a building as they choose without regard to neighbors,or safety of visitors?

If you "own" something, you don't need permission or "be ALLOWED" to use it. If you need permission, you don't own it.

Funny, how on a pot forum, that irony of "owning your body" doesn't enlighten more people about prperty rights. Your body is your "property. If you should have ownership of your body without seeking permission, why should you beg for permission to paint your house or replace your windows? Don't you "OWN" your house? Please explain if you "own" your house how it can be taken from you to fulfill an obligation you never agreed to in the first place?

Again, your anti-government stance is unusual. You ask the government to crush the values most Americans count on as a freedom one minute and not the next.

No. My values are consistent, yours are not. I ask the government not to steal from my neighbor to fund my needs or wants. You imply tyranny of a majority is acceptable. I do not. I advocate freedom consistently. YOU say if 51% of a gang wants to legalize theft and call it taxes, then it is no longer theft. Magic?
Obviously you want the gov. out of your life, and so do I. In the current protest, so do those people.

No, you want the government in your life. You want them to steal from your neighbor on your behalf. Then you want to tell your neighbor, how much society will benefit from this theft. Society is not a collective. It is a group of individuals, all possessing rights. The right to be left alone is at the core. You ask government to violate that right, in that regard you are consistent.

 

[Carne Seca]

Guess who said this?

Albert Shanker, former President of the United Federation of Teachers.

Nice little bit of Obfuscation there. Here is the reality and background of that quote, Representing schools and students was not Shanker's job. He was the representative for the teachers. That's a fact. No scandal there. Just as when CEO's say that their responsibility is to shareholders, not the wider public. That was his job. Plus when you say "former president" you should give the dates to make it more relevant. He was president between, 1964 to 1984. It's not even a related issue and taken completely out of context. No surprise there.