[Magixion]

http://money.cnn.com...nn_bin&hpt=Sbin

Quote

...Dudley kicked off his speech with an apology.

"Since that accident, this is the first chance I have had to address such a large gathering of industry colleagues and the first thing I want to say is that I am sorry for what happened."

First thing that comes to mind:



I had to chuckle the second I read that headline because South Park immediately popped in my head.

To get the ball rolling on a topic:

Any other pop culture references or anything that immediately come to mind when you see something in the news/media/etc??

[CTphpnwb]

Well, every time I see what the Republicans are doing in Wisconsin I immediately think of the US becoming a third world country where the rich pay no taxes and there is no middle class.

[KYA]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You have to be trolling, otherwise it's just sad.

[macosxnerd101]

The unions are pissed because they will have to pay part of their retirement, healthcare, etc., like everyone else in the private sector. And taking away their abilities to bitch about it is a bad thing? These people should be happy to have a job right now.

[dorknexus]

fucking teachers. they get paid waaaaaaaaaaaay to much to do a really easy job.

[xclite]

One of the jackwagons I work with made that argument. I had to stifle my laughter. A teacher's job is far more important than your job, and you get paid 3 times as much TO START.

macosxnerd101, on 09 March 2011 - 11:24 PM, said:

The unions are pissed because they will have to pay part of their retirement, healthcare, etc., like everyone else in the private sector. And taking away their abilities to bitch about it is a bad thing? These people should be happy to have a job right now.

The unions offered a deal to take all cuts and keep the right to bargain, which was summarily rejected. Maybe it's not about the money?

[CTphpnwb]

While it's popular to claim that the corporate tax rate is high, it's well documented that corporations actually pay very little in taxes. So little that in the link provided a corporate spokesman needs to point to the taxes paid by workers as if it were coming from the companies:

Quote

Travis Windle, spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, points to a recent Penn State study that showed Marcellus Shale drillers generated $785 million for the state last year. That figure includes corporate taxes paid directly to the state as well as income tax and sales tax paid by employees.

As for teacher pay and easy jobs, there's two reasons I wouldn't be a teacher after having been a substitute: one is that it's a much harder job than it appears and the other is that the pay sucks.

Oh, and here's the definition of collective bargaining, without which you'd very likely be working on an unsafe factory floor right now, with no time (or money) to spend on frivolous things like the internet!

[supersloth]

macosxnerd101, on 09 March 2011 - 09:24 PM, said:

The unions are pissed because they will have to pay part of their retirement, healthcare, etc., like everyone else in the private sector. And taking away their abilities to bitch about it is a bad thing? These people should be happy to have a job right now.

you get upset about the small possibility that the very few people on charlie sheens show will lose their job but yet you are ok with MANY more people with MUCH harder jobs getting paid MUCH less having to take it up the ass? your priorities are fucked.

[macosxnerd101]

I may possibly have flawed information regarding exactly what the republicans want to do in Wisconsin. Please correct me if I do. From my perspective, this is my understanding. The republicans in Wisoncsin want to cut back on the amount they pay public employees, as well as increase the amounts the employees would contribute to things like healthcare, retirements, etc. I fail to see anywhere that Wisconsin is trying to lay more people off.

Regarding your comparison to my thoughts on Charlie Sheen, here's how I view things. CBS isn't in a major deficit or near bankruptcy. The show would go on with Sheen still there, and it was his selfish actions that could have jeopardized the jobs of others. In contrast, Wisconsin is in a deficit and is trying to cut back on spending. Governor Walker claims that without these cuts, he would have had to lay off 1500 people.

Police and firefighters would be exempt from the legislation, for the record.

Also, I'm in Virginia which is a right to work state. We don't have to deal with unions. Last year, the state employees suffered pay cuts and were put on furlow for a week. At the end of the year when we found a surplus, part of it went to bonuses for state workers. Chesterfield county had to lay off teachers and go for a pay cut. They recently gave a 2% bonus to help offset the paycut.

Do paycuts suck? Absolutely. If it is between a paycut for everyone (which unions usually complain about this), or laying people off (unions also complain here), which would you prefer see happen? I look at things from a utilitarian perspective: which scenario will have the greatest positive impact for the most people while limiting the negative impacts.

Quote

The unions offered a deal to take all cuts and keep the right to bargain, which was summarily rejected. Maybe it's not about the money?

Link please.

Links:
http://www.bloomberg...mails-show.html
http://www.timesunio...hts-1049142.php

[xclite]

macosxnerd101, on 10 March 2011 - 11:49 AM, said:

Regarding your comparison to my thoughts on Charlie Sheen, here's how I view things. CBS isn't in a major deficit or near bankruptcy. The show would go on with Sheen still there, and it was his selfish actions that could have jeopardized the jobs of others. In contrast, Wisconsin is in a deficit and is trying to cut back on spending. Governor Walker claims that without these cuts, he would have had to lay off 1500 people.

Wisconsin wasn't in a deficit. Walker and co caused the deficit. Wisconsin had a surplus before his measure took effect:
http://tpmdc.talking...rker-rights.php

Quote

Police and firefighters would be exempt from the legislation, for the record.

Are their rights more important than a teacher's?

Quote

Also, I'm in Virginia which is a right to work state. We don't have to deal with unions. Last year, the state employees suffered pay cuts and were put on furlow for a week. At the end of the year when we found a surplus, part of it went to bonuses for state workers. Chesterfield county had to lay off teachers and go for a pay cut. They recently gave a 2% bonus to help offset the paycut.

The lack of unions in one place is hardly an argument for outlawing them elsewhere. Surprise! Economies and priorities are different in different locations. Not that correlation is causation, but Virginia's education system is absolute shit.

Quote

Do paycuts suck? Absolutely. If it is between a paycut for everyone (which unions usually complain about this), or laying people off (unions also complain here), which would you prefer see happen? I look at things from a utilitarian perspective: which scenario will have the greatest positive impact for the most people while limiting the negative impacts.

It's not about paycuts, it's about worker rights, which may be the reason your ass isn't in a coal mine right now.

Quote

Quote

The unions offered a deal to take all cuts and keep the right to bargain, which was summarily rejected. Maybe it's not about the money?

Link please.

http://www.npr.org/2...ions-compromise

Quote

Links:
http://www.bloomberg...mails-show.html
http://www.timesunio...hts-1049142.php

One of the links you posted supports the idea that this isn't about the pay, but the ability to bargain, while the other notes his unwillingness to make concessions.

This post has been edited by xclite: 10 March 2011 - 10:11 AM

[supersloth]

well actually, that's really funny because when walker took over office in january he didn't have a budget shortfall.

then, he pushed thru $140 million in special interest spending

which includes

Quote

• $25 million for an economic development fund for job creation that still has $73 million due to a lack of job creation. Walker is creating a $25 million hole which will not create or retain jobs. [Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, 1/7/11]
  
• $48 million for private health savings accounts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. A study from the federal Governmental Accountability Office showed the average adjusted gross income of HSA participants was $139,000 and nearly half of HSA participants reported withdrawing nothing from their HSA, evidence that it is serving as a tax shelter for wealthy participants. [Government Accountability Office, 4/1/08; Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, 1/11/11]
  
• $67 million for a tax shift plan, so ill-conceived that at-best the benefit provided to job creators would be less than a dollar a day per new job, and may be as little as 30 cents a day. [Associated Press, 1/28/01]

THEN, he claimed that he had a deficit of $137 million and that busting the unions was the best way to solve this. it was a 'fiscal crisis' of his own creation, that had nothing to do with the union.

then yesterday, they decide to pass it by claiming this was no longer a fiscal matter.

so what's the point then?

and oh, they did agree to those cuts to begin with.

Quote

Earlier Friday, Marty Beil, head of the Wisconsin State Employees Union, said his members would agree to pay more of their pension contributions and health insurance benefits as Walker is demanding. But Beil said his union would never agree to give up decades-old bargaining rights.

Beil's union is part of AFSCME, the largest state and local employee union in Wisconsin, which represents 68,000 workers for the state, Milwaukee, Milwaukee County and other municipalities. An AFSCME spokesman said Beil was speaking for all the group's union locals in the state.

"We are prepared to implement the financial concessions proposed to help bring our state's budget into balance, but we will not be denied our God-given right to join a real union . . .  we will not - I repeat we will not - be denied our rights to collectively bargain," Beil said in a statement.

Mary Bell, the president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state's largest teachers union, said her group also would make the financial concessions to keep its bargaining rights.

"This is not about money," Bell said in a phone conference. "We understand the need to sacrifice."

edit: beat'd. high five to xclite.

This post has been edited by supersloth: 10 March 2011 - 10:20 AM

[macosxnerd101]

Quote

The lack of unions in one place is hardly an argument for outlawing them elsewhere. Surprise! Economies and priorities are different in different locations. Not that correlation is causation, but Virginia's education system is absolute shit.

Please clarify which schools you are referring to. My school system is really good. Northern Virginia is really good. I'm sure a lot of states have their good school districts and their crappy school districts.

Also, what is the need for unions nowadays? It's not like there isn't enough government involvement (imo) in worker safety and compensation laws, which were the big things unions brought about ~50 years ago.

Quote

Quote

The unions offered a deal to take all cuts and keep the right to bargain, which was summarily rejected. Maybe it's not about the money?

Link please.

Fair enough. I concede this point with a link,. I'll go one further and criticize Walker for putting Wisconsin in the deficit it is in, and applaud the unions for being reasonable and agreeing to the cuts. In this case, the government is chasing its tail I will concede.

Quote

Are their rights more important than a teacher's?

I was simply qualifying details.

Quote

It's not about paycuts, it's about worker rights, which may be the reason your ass isn't in a coal mine right now.

I'm not in a coal mine right now partly b/c we're not near any. My parents have also been in business for themselves since before I was born. There has never been a case of my dad treading on employees' rights, or treating the employees unfairly. My mom works from home and has no employees.

[dorknexus]

Quote

I look at things from a utilitarian perspective: which scenario will have the greatest positive impact for the most people while limiting the negative impacts.

If we continue to punish public education and take away from their, already, preciously small budget then pragmatically speaking, what are the long term effects and how many people does that impact?

If the government really tried hard, they could find better candidates to take wasted money away from. Teachers do not fit that category.

[xclite]

macosxnerd101, on 10 March 2011 - 12:33 PM, said:

Quote

The lack of unions in one place is hardly an argument for outlawing them elsewhere. Surprise! Economies and priorities are different in different locations. Not that correlation is causation, but Virginia's education system is absolute shit.

Please clarify which schools you are referring to. My school system is really good. Northern Virginia is really good. I'm sure a lot of states have their good school districts and their crappy school districts.

Nova is decent at best, and does not cover that much of the state. What are you comparing to? Have you been to other states? There are always going to be some stars, but the state as a whole is pathetic. It ranks 44th in education in the country.

Quote

Also, what is the need for unions nowadays? It's not like there isn't enough government involvement (imo) in worker safety and compensation laws, which were the big things unions brought about ~50 years ago.

The lack of necessity for something is a horrible argument for banning it.

Quote

Quote

Are their rights more important than a teacher's?

I was simply qualifying details.

Fair enough.

Quote

Quote

It's not about paycuts, it's about worker rights, which may be the reason your ass isn't in a coal mine right now.

I'm not in a coal mine right now partly b/c we're not near any. My parents have also been in business for themselves since before I was born. There has never been a case of my dad treading on employees' rights, or treating the employees unfairly. My mom works from home and has no employees.

The point was that without things like unions and striking we'd have a harder time getting fair labor laws enacted or enforced. Good people don't need the laws to be good employers, but many people wouldn't be fair or still aren't, even in the face of these laws.

I think we can all agree that creating a deficit to break unions is a questionable action, whether you think unions are a good thing or not.

This post has been edited by xclite: 10 March 2011 - 10:42 AM

[macosxnerd101]

Quote

Nova is decent at best, and does not cover that much of the state. What are you comparing to? Have you been to other states? There are always going to be some stars, but the state as a whole is pathetic. It ranks 44th in education in the country.

Henrico, Chesterfield, Northern Virginia.

Quote

The lack of necessity for something is a horrible argument for banning it.

The legislation woudn't dissolve unions. It would just mean the state doesn't acknowledge their complaints.

Quote

The point was that without things like unions and striking we'd have a harder time getting fair labor laws enacted or enforced.

So what laws nowadays do you think need to be enacted to protect workers? 50 years ago when people were being crippled and killed in factories on a regular basis, I can see the necessity. What do you think is so unfair that necessitates legislation.

@: Very true!