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

Originally Posted by gugi

(the congress reelection rates are around 90%, same as always).

No, they're less than 80%, which is lower than in the recent past (facts are stubborn things!)

Originally Posted by gugi

Unfortunately it seems to be often producing the worst of both worlds - corrupt establishment and incompetent populists.

Voters need to be edumacated more better

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

No, they're less than 80%, which is lower than in the recent past (facts are stubborn things!)

Right, shall I quote from your fact checked post?

only 9% of those who ran for reelection lost

So (elementary school math),

Code:

reelection rate = 100%-9% = 91%

If somebody isn't even running for reelection by definition they can neither lose nor win, so those must not be counted as either.
Here are the historical rates:
Reelection Rates Over the Years | OpenSecrets


I don't know if edumcation is the answer. It certainly can improve things, but only if it teaches the edumcated how to do basic logic, simple math, as well as what the meaning of 'is' is.

Originally Posted by gugi

If somebody isn't even running for reelection by definition they can neither lose nor win, so those must not be counted as either.

I guess you're right if you want to stick to the wrong wording you used to convey your idea. Still, the retention rate was less than 80%, which is what you were talking about. If the public was so disgusted with Congress that none of them ran for reelection, would you say the reelection rate was 100% Sometimes I wonder what goes on upstairs in that hoglahoo mind of yours

Anyway, my point is if you edumacate the people to vote for more better representatives then you have less childrens in Congress playing games and breaking toys

Originally Posted by 32t

On the TV news tonight I was told that the average public/government employee in Wisc is paid 4.something percent less than the private sector. As a national average it is around 7% less. Gotta do more research but food for thought.

Tim

I doubt they're factoring in benefits, etc. Take home pay is only piece of the puzzle. When I worked a municipal job I had free healthcare, paid holidays including the government holidays that no one in the private sector gets off, two weeks paid vacation, roughly the same amount of paid sick days, automatic guaranteed "cost of living" increases, taxpayer contributions to my retirement fund, free access to higher education class opportunities while on the clock. It all added up to much more than what my actual hourly wage was (which was also easily equal to the private sector).

One more than one occasion while I worked there an employee would leave for what they thought were greener pastures in the private sector. In most of those cases, those employees would come back asking for their job back.

Chris L

That is exactly correct it is the benefits that are costing so much the legislation adjusts those areas to closer to private sector jobs. And the reason for removing collective bargaining is to fix it long term not just untill the next contract when they would just get it all back and more.

On another note Gov. Walker was just on the local news stating There will be layoffs starting on Monday if this bill is not voted on. Up to 1500 workers. He is not kidding money needs to be saved. You wanna have your cake and eat it to but the budget does not allow for it.

Money does need to be saved and unnecessary costs eliminated. Why in MN if one were to eliminate all (100%) of state emmployees you'd save a whopping 4% of the budget. Were those employees needed or not, you could save on a grand scale by getting rid of them, union or no union.

Eliminating unions is a poor choice as it completely emasultes (defeminizes?) the work force who have to deal with those in power. Don't forget that the individual without collective bargaining now must deal with those who make laws and regulatlion and can call the police forces out to bust uncooperative heads. Remember too that when the labor contracts were approved, they were approved by that same government which now decries the wages and benefits that were negotiated and accepted.

When I retire, I will have a pension that I contributed to. That plus Social Security, to which I also contributed, may be enough to live on. I will have to pay my own health insurance, probably several thousand dollars a year and I will have to pay tax upon tax to very hungry governments who wish to absorb moneys much and greatly.

The government (choose your level) has enormous power and will prevail. Why my house belongs to the government; I only rent it. Oh, I've fully paid for it, but if I stop paying property taxes, it will be seized and I'll have to find a cardboard box and a comfortable bridge.

One other thing, the same government which approved those labor contracts is the same government, through its poor and short-sighted planning, that got us into the financial fixes where we now find ourselves.

There really is no hope be you liberal or conservative them what gots, gets.

How would like to have your local utility farmed out to Joe Schmo for no apparent reason other than the Guvmint said it was going to be good for you.

Check this please...Courtesy of UrbanSurvival.com

Say, I assume you have figured out that republicorp gov. Scott Walker not only created the showdown with the unions in WisconSIN, but now we're learning of a backdoor bill in the legislature which (in its 144 pages, would allow the state - without review - to sell or farm out operations of state utilities to big corporations like the one owned by the Koch brothers.

My friend Howard sent this:
Here's the language from the bill. Note that it exempts the sales or operating contracts from any consideration whether the sales will be in the public interest or even economically justified.

[COLOR="rgb(255, 140, 0)"]"16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b)."
[/COLOR]
Sell power plants and such on the cheap? Oh sure! You bet'cha, I'll make enough leveraged investments by ways of...er... campaign contributions, eh? WTF people? Is anyone awake in WisconnedSIN? Where's the recall election to toss out Walker and his double-dealing ilk?

I would shy away from the big cities when the federal paper starts bouncing. I don't think we have even gotten started yet.

Originally Posted by Bladerunner

"16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b)."

Sell power plants and such on the cheap? Oh sure! You bet'cha, I'll make enough leveraged investments by ways of...er... campaign contributions, eh? WTF people? Is anyone awake in WisconnedSIN? Where's the recall election to toss out Walker and his double-dealing ilk?

That's a way to introduce private sector initiative and competition and keep costs and government size down

Originally Posted by Navaja

That's a way to introduce private sector initiative and competition and keep costs and government size down

Yeah. The very same thing was done for home ownership.

Originally Posted by PA23-250

Keep in mind, most of the unions agreed to the planned pay/benefit cuts. THey may have been vocal in their dislike of the way they were handled, but they're not out there simply because of cuts. The key thing is that the governor is trying to bust their unions altogether. That's what everyone is (rightly) worked up about.

Kasich did say he would get revenge on the unions for supporting Strickland.....