Thread: Protesting in Wisconsin....Just the beginning?

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Do you think there are any rational solutions to these types of problems, Ivan? I'd be interested to hear any that you may have.

Chris L

Well, I think it is possible in principle, but the reality is governed by politics and in the current political climate it most certainly isn't.

As we saw recently it's very easy to be a fiscal conservative when you don't have to address any single consequence of such policies.
Or, as we've seen for years, it's very easy to sign off on anything, as long as the bill isn't due before you've left the job.

The reality is that most of the budgets are entitlements, i.e. things that were already promised and signed off in the past. It seems to me that changing existing contracts is not going to be very easy thing (remember the bonuses in the many companies that didn't go bankrupt because the government bailed them out), and that's just the reality of leaving the subsequent generations pay for your irresponsible behavior come true. However current contracts will have to come with much more spartan benefits, higher retirement ages etc. That could probably naturally shrink the size of government since such government jobs would be less desirable. And if people really value various government services they have to accept that those don't come for cheap or for free, but cost money, therefore higher taxes.

So ideally I'd imagine a transition to something of the spend-only-what-you-have variety, and then to spend-less-so-that-you-can-pay-off-the-debt, the transition being necessary only to gradually train people into accepting lower quality lifestyle.

But this doesn't seem politically feasible at least not in USA 2011. There is too much populism, and the american culture is conductive to beliefs in economic BS such as 'open system', 'unlimited wealth'...

The problem I see is that the cost of changing the political climate into something more pragmatic is expending tools like the current low cost of borrowing and then you're much worse off than if you had made the same decision but without the need of a wake up call.

It's like needing a wakeup call to start living within your means, but the wake up call that can do it is a delinquency and costs you a 30% interest rate on the debt plus your house.

So, I really don't think any good solution is possible, but I hope that it doesn't have to end up through the worst possible scenario. After all that Ben Franklin quote about liberty and security is just a pretty phrase, the choices most people make should be the exact opposite.

Originally Posted by PA23-250

On a side note, where is the voluntary giving up of salaries/perks/bonuses by management (both public and private sector)when "times are tough"?

I remember Mr. Blankfein taking a 98% pay hit in 2008 and living only on a base salary And at the same time his company was making great profits (supposedly they didn't need any bailout and only took a small piece to show solidarity with everybody else, and then returned it back at the first opportunity along with a pretty nice profit).

I don't know much about all the politics involved in the issue, but perhaps someone can explain how it's ok for the non-government employees to retire and try to survive on Social Security, to which they contribute during their working life, but government employees need a private pension plan paid for by others.

And when some one tries to comment on how hard government employees work and how dangerous their jobs are, think about for a minute on our soldiers, on how much they get paid and what their retirement benefits will be.

I don't know that this has anything to do with 'the problem' but ..... I remember the press,during the Viet Nam war, saying 'you can't have guns and butter'. Saying that to say that the $ that were going to prosecute the war precluded any possibility of LBJ's 'Great Society' or his 'war on poverty' being successful. I've found it odd that I've not seen that admonition coming from the pundits of the press these past ten years.

A few nights ago there was a documentary on Ronald Reagan on TV. In the final segment a reporter from back in the '80s said that "our grandchildren would be paying" for the enormous deficits caused by the Reagan arms race and tax cuts for the wealthy .... sound familiar ?

Ten years later we had a surplus and ten years subsequent to that "our grandchildren will be paying" is what I'm hearing again. Having been around for this a couple of times in the past 60 years I knew the house of cards would come tumbling down eventually. I just hoped it would last another 15 to 20 years. By then I won't be around to see it anyway. What was that curse ....'may you live in interesting times.'

Originally Posted by Navaja

I don't know much about all the politics involved in the issue, but perhaps someone can explain how it's ok for the non-government employees to retire and try to survive on Social Security, to which they contribute during their working life, but government employees need a private pension plan paid for by others.

And when some one tries to comment on how hard government employees work and how dangerous their jobs are, think about for a minute on our soldiers, on how much they get paid and what their retirement benefits will be.

Where is it that Government pensions are paid for by others? I've been contributing roughly 9% of my paycheck for the past 22 years into the pension fund.

As for the military, granted the base pay leaves something to be desired, but housing and medical care are paid for. Also, after 20 years, military personnel can retire with a pension and will have medical care. I am a Reservist (made a trip to Iraq) with a number of active duty friends that look forward to retirement. Best check your facts

Originally Posted by gugi

I remember Mr. Blankfein taking a 98% pay hit in 2008 and living only on a base salary And at the same time his company was making great profits (supposedly they didn't need any bailout and only took a small piece to show solidarity with everybody else, and then returned it back at the first opportunity along with a pretty nice profit).

Unfortunately, he is just one small example. Many took token salaries of $1 a year, but kept their stock options (worth millions each). Nice gesture, certainly, but not totally the same. And in any case, they had a lot more in the bank than the average worker, so they could afford to do it and still keep their standard of living.

Many average workers have been barely hanging on for a long time, what w/ flatlined wages in real terms, combined w/ rising health care/college costs. For a while both adults (as opposed to just one) worked to make up for the shortfall. Then people worked longer hours to make more money. Then even that wasn't enough, so a lot of people turned to credit w/ disastrous results.

For a lot of average workers, it's not a question of buying Mcmansions & Escalades on credit--they've simply been barely hanging on w/ basic expenses & were forced to use their houses as ATMs to maintain a basic middle class standard of living. THe media however equates them all w/ people buying plasma TVs & exotic vacations using their overinflated home values as collateral. Not that such people don't exist (go to any shopping mall in the CONUS & you can probably found such posers!) Most however did not do this.

OT, I know, but I'm sick of hearing those soundbites repeated as fact nightly on all major TV networks...

Interesting to see people from other states comment on this. My dad has a contract with the department of motor vehicles. He had to take 8 furlough days because the state can't afford to pay its employees. Sure it sucks to have benefits lessened but less benefits or no job. Not that much is changing in this bill.
I agree it is horrible what this shows the children. I f I can't have my way then I am gonna take my toy and leave. The teachers walk out and the Democratic senators actually fled the state. In my opinion they should all lose their jobs if you cant show up to work no matter how difficult it may be you don't deserve the job. How many of us would still have a job if our boss asked us to do something we did not want to and we said no and did not come in the next day, or 4?

My company has taken benefits and pay and stopped paying our lunch break. So i work the same hrs a day but for less. I am glad I have a job and that my company is still in business because there are a lot of business in my industry going belly up.

Mostly I am upset that the elected Democratic senators Walked out before a vote that they can not win no matter what, they are out voted period. But if we do not have 19 to vote the vote can't happen so instead of voting and trying to fix things they stall everything this would have been over days ago if they DID THERE JOB.

They have the state patrol on alert to bring them to their job if they are found in the state, how pathetic.

I am not saying it is all ok and the bill is perfect but everyone should do the job they chose. No one forces these people to teach or to be a politician. You choose your lot in life if you don't like it make it change.

If your elected republicans were smart (and underhanded) they would pass a resolution affirming something emotional like that the state of Wisconsin supports raising healthy children.

Then, in the next election cycle they could say "senator x doesn't support healthy children", because senator x didn't vote yes on the resolution.

FWIW, I'm one of those retired active duty guys and trust me the pension is not huge. In fact it's not enough to live off of even if you were very, very conservative. Compared to what a one term congressman who has an 11% approval rating for a couple years will draw for the rest of his life, what I pull is totally chump change and Florida is full of retired NYPD and Fire Dept guys who pull retirements about 5 times the size of mine and all they have to do all day is fish, hang out at the beach and sling BS about how great NYC is. If they like it so much I wish they'd go back. And oh by the way, that free medical care for me and my family for the rest of my life that they promised me in 1980, that's not true either. If you want the same coverage you had in the military it costs a lot of money and of course goes up periodically. Just got a thing in the mail the other day saying federal income tax witholding for retirement checks will be going up too (what you're surprised we pay taxes?) Don't get me wrong, I don't regret spending 25 years in the military (in fact, I'd do another 25 if I could) I just wanted to keep the discussion grounded in fact. It wasn't a posh lifestyle when I was in the military in fact it was damn hard and damn uncomfortable most of the time, but I loved every damn second of it and would go back in a heartbeat. As strange as that sounds, if you've ever been in the military, you'll understand and if I have to explain it you probably never will. My point remains that the benefits I was promised in 1980, the benefits I actually recieved when I retired in 2005 and indeed the benefits folks retiring now are receiving are all very different animals and it doesn't get any better with time. The military has been the first target for budget cuts since day one and that's not likely to change anytime soon. Ain't no active duty GIs getting rich and those of us drawing a pension are making even less. Calling us retired isn't really fair. First I'm to young to be retired and second, I can't afford it.

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Do you think there are any rational solutions to these types of problems, Ivan? I'd be interested to hear any that you may have.
Chris L

The one and only answer is human population control. Take Egypt: 80 million people living off the Nile: non sustainable. Most Arab countries have a population that exceeds many times the amount of food you can reasonably produce in the desert. That means food has to be imported. Importing bulk produce is expensive, with a lower value of the dollar the oil revenues apparantly are no longer enough to foot the bill.

The new Tunisian and Egyptian governments will have a hard time to improve conditions for their people.

Corruption of course is another problem in those countries that cannot be eradicated at the stroke of a pen.