quote Originally posted by twofatguys: Is it OK if I keep half of my wealth? Do you think people would really be upset? I have worked really hard for it. Brad

You, personally, or rich people in general?

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: You, personally, or rich people in general?

What's your definition of "rich"?

quote Originally posted by GT86: What's your definition of "rich"?

one million is a nice round number. Most of us could live quite well on that.

What's YOUR definition of "rich"?

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: one million is a nice round number. Most of us could live quite well on that. What's YOUR definition of "rich"?

I suppose my definition of rich is never having to worry about money again. And I agree, I could live quite well on 1 million a year, but it's not up to you or me to determine what property should be taken from others.

I guess I just don't understand the mentality of penalizing success. Isn't that what we're supposed to strive for? Why take away the rewards of hard work and determination? What's the point of excelling if you know the govt is going to take away half or more of what you make? Why do you feel you're entitled to the fruits of other peoples success?

quote Originally posted by GT86: I suppose my definition of rich is never having to worry about money again. And I agree, I could live quite well on 1 million a year, but it's not up to you or me to determine what property should be taken from others. I guess I just don't understand the mentality of penalizing success. Isn't that what we're supposed to strive for? Why take away the rewards of hard work and determination? What's the point of excelling if you know the govt is going to take away half or more of what you make? Why do you feel you're entitled to the fruits of other peoples success?

I do not consider paying their fair share of taxes to be penalizing success. I would like to tell them, once you have climbed the ladder of success, DON'T BURN THE MOTHERF*CKING LADDER BEHIND YOU!!!!

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: I don't support subsidies for any industry. Whatever state they are in. Not for corn, not for tobacco, not for oil. And not for the film industry. See? you don't know me at all.

But you support personal subsidies?

And why are subsidies for a business inherently wrong in your view? If a state gives a tax break to a company, and that company decides to locate or stay in that state, wouldn't you think that's better for everyone? That company provides jobs, the workers pay income tax, they buy stuff so they pay sales tax, and it increases the economic base for other businesses in the area. Living in Michigan I would think you'd understand the benefits of trying to keep econmic engines located in your state.

quote Originally posted by GT86: You've made your idea of "fair share" quite clear, taking away half of more of someone's income doesn't sound fair to me. How does allowing someone to keep what they've earned equate to making other people unsuccessful?

What about taking away half of someone's inheritance? Or did they work real hard to earn THAT?

Because it takes away resources from the community like funding for education, paving roads and sidewalks, IOW promoting the general welfare. It keeps poor people poor, and erodes the middle class. BTW rich people also benefit from a better society, whether they like to admit it or not.

So could someone please give me the proper breakdown on this whole thing? NOT what Fox news is broadcasting and NOT what the Republican heads are spouting?

I didn't think so.

Ive been at ground Zero for the last few days writing articles and taking pictures, and ill lay it down for you. I already know that me typing this out will serve no purpose as it will be swept aside yet again by those that have deemed themselves "righteous" and "fair" with this whole thing but here goes.

Walker proposed this bill as a means to get back at the teachers that he felt have wronged him during his young learning life. How do i know? Because i had teachers that were the same way as his and yeah, i would want to take revenge upon them- if i was a weak man and cared about revenge. So think about it, when life hands you lemons don't you make lemonade? He has a budget shortfall- yes. But targeting public workers as a means to satisfy it makes sense in a sort. Busting unions however is nothing more than a cheap attempt at getting a woody.

I went to madison with a clear non partisan mind and after hearing the arguments, seeing the facts, seeking out the evidence and hearing what the news media is NOT broadcasting i can see why many Republicans on here would think that the protesters are no more than College kids, ex hippies, homeless and overpaid govt workers.

Fact: The USPS has not been a Federally funded organization since the adoption of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, the U.S. Postal Service functioned as a regular, tax-supported, agency of the federal government.

According to the laws under which it now operates, the U.S. Postal Service is a semi-independent federal agency, mandated to be revenue-neutral. That is, it is supposed to break even, not make a profit.

In 1982, U.S. postage stamps became "postal products," rather than a form of taxation. Since then, The bulk of the cost of operating the postal system has been paid for by customers through the sale of "postal products" and services rather than taxes.

Each class of mail is also expected to cover its share of the costs, a requirement that causes the percentage rate adjustments to vary in different classes of mail, according the costs associated with the processing and delivery characteristics of each class.

Fact: The avg postal worker is paid on a rate of how many years of service plan. Meaning, Unionized postal workers have the ability to make up to 45 an hour after working there for about as many years. Right now my Aunt who has worked with the Postal service for about 16 years only makes 32 an hour with overtime. Without only about $18-20. (overtime is also beginning to disappear but picks up little around Xmas.)

Yes the benefits are good, I get lower cost glasses and medical but it IS NOT FREE contrary to what many Republican supporters of the bill would have you think. I still wind up paying about 300 out of pocket for my glasses and i choose the cheap metal frames! Medical- I pay a 20 copay with Blue Cross and Shield for a regular doctors visit- ER being greatly more. Remember my money troubles from my stomach ulcer? I was in the hole 800 and about two weeks ago got sent another bill that was overlooked.

My dentist visit varies on what is being done, Having had great dental hygiene and never having had a cavity i get a slight break as im not labeled as a risk to the Insurance company but i still pay about 60 a cleaning with the insurance paying too.

Fact: Union Reps and teachers alike have said they will pay for the extra benefits out of pocket at the rate that Walker wants,
At first the Protest was about the entire bill, when the heads started to break the budget down it was realized that yes, there is a problem and yes, we can tighten our belts a little and pay for the things we want to have as security. The media however is trying to make it look like the money is ALL the protesters want.

We want the deformations of the Unions to be pulled from the Bill- a simple thing and the protests would be over, the Dem 14 home and the bill would proceed to a vote.
Walker however will not budge on it and wont even talk to anyone about it. He refuses to talk to anyone he does not like and members of his personal staff have been quoted as saying "he is a real ******* and acts like he owns the place" or "He thinks he is God" or My fav. "He has openly lied to members of our staff and when confronted told that he is the boss, don't like it? I don't have to talk to you. "

I challenge each and every one of you to go to Madison and see first hand what is going on at the capitol, Hell ill even let you stay here for the night or two if you want and make up a nice dinner. Until you see it all first hand, I don't think ANY of you have a place to speak about it.

And yes, i am only 19, have voted in only one election, and i HAVE paid attention to the world around me from an early age. I have seen what goes on with so called "adults in the right" and until this all went down i liked to view politics from a cynical point of view. Well almost each and every one of the things that Republicans have done the last few years Ive been Politically aware have at times infuriated me, causing me to speak out against them and even volunteer to help take their chances of being voted in again out. Well now, I can say that this whole thing has turned this Cynic into a Political warrior and i PROMISE that i will be spending my free time walking door to door with my notes and schpeel getting Recall votes on my Petition page (already up to 50 in my neighborhood alone and most voted Republican last election) o get Walker out, and someone more open minded into the Prestigious office of Governor of Wisconsin.

I have even considered running myself as a non affiliated candidate. I base my campaign on a new mindset, one on MY values- not the cookie cutter ones of the Democratic and Republican party. ME doing what I think is best for my Friends and Neighbors, asking that voters vote for who they feel is best, not voting based upon what political party they feel affiliated with. I ask that they vote like voting was done and how is should be done- Vote for the MAN, not the Party.

Ramsespride, thanks for the post. It helps to get the facts injected into this discussion.

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: Ramsespride, thanks for the post. It helps to get the facts injected into this discussion.

No problem, Its well worth the time to drive and the gas in the truck to go and make History. I also get really sick when i see a "turkey mentality" on here. By definition that means that everyone follows the same set because that is what they are ex> Turkey (republican supporter) posts angry about what the fox (democrat) is doing. Turkey2, follows suit and posts and angry post towards the fox and the rest of the flock joins in because they are turkeys and turkeys follow each other in a flock. But when a Hound steps in and defends the fox, the turkeys turn on the Hound and peck it near to death in the interest of the continuation of their anti-fox crusade.

Ever drive by a field and see a bunch of turkeys starring at the sky as the rain falls? Drive by an hour later and see a bunch of drowned turkeys- You will get the analogy if you think about it.

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: What about taking away half of someone's inheritance? Or did they work real hard to earn THAT? Because it takes away resources from the community like funding for education, paving roads and sidewalks, IOW promoting the general welfare. It keeps poor people poor, and erodes the middle class. BTW rich people also benefit from a better society, whether they like to admit it or not.

Did you do anything to earn any of that inheritance?

Perhaps if we didn't expect the govt to provide most everything, we wouldn't need to tax as much. You're right, everyone benefits from a "better society", but we've got to get away from the idea that govt should provide it.

quote Originally posted by GT86: Did you do anything to earn any of that inheritance? Perhaps if we didn't expect the govt to provide most everything, we wouldn't need to tax as much. You're right, everyone benefits from a "better society", but we've got to get away from the idea that govt should provide it.

Yes, I damn well did, and so did you. You and I bought whatever the decedent was selling, paid taxes to provide a society in which they were able to be successful (i.e. schools, roads, courts, etc.) the decedent didn't create money out of thin air... they did it with our help. Time to pay back the society which allowed them to thrive. Besides, as I previously said, they (rich) also benefit from a better society.

And we need to get away from the idea that govt has NOTHING to do with a better society. On the contrary, it is the glue that holds us together.

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: ??? What's a personal subsidy? Why should it be necessary to give tax breaks to businesses? If nobody does it (i.e. other states), then it wouldn't be necessary. A good thriving society should be a good incentive to want to live and work there.

All the taxes that others provide is a personal subsidy for those paying less (or no) taxes. I know quite a few people who are getting "refunds" far larger than the total amount they had withheld. That's a personal subsidy.

Business is the heart of an economy; taxing it doesn't help the business prosper, therefore it doesn't help you or I prosper. How many jobs has Michigan lost because other states were willing to provide a break? How much revenue has Michigan lost because those dollars went elsewhere? A "good thriving society" is great, but it doesn't exist if the underlying economic engine doesn't function well, or isn't there at all.

quote Originally posted by GT86: All the taxes that others provide is a personal subsidy for those paying less (or no) taxes. I know quite a few people who are getting "refunds" far larger than the total amount they had withheld. That's a personal subsidy. Business is the heart of an economy; taxing it doesn't help the business prosper, therefore it doesn't help you or I prosper. How many jobs has Michigan lost because other states were willing to provide a break? How much revenue has Michigan lost because those dollars went elsewhere? A "good thriving society" is great, but it doesn't exist if the underlying economic engine doesn't function well, or isn't there at all.

I disagree with your whole premise. If someone overpaid their taxes, they are getting their money back, not winning the lottery. That sounds like an issue of the tax laws being too complicated and needing to be rewritten.

Taxing businesses DOES help the business prosper, since part of those taxes go to improving our society, and doing fundamental research and development, which the businesses should do for themselves, but are often too short-sighted to do. Individuals like us rarely benefit directly from R&D, but businesses frequently do. I would not want to cut my taxes to stop paying for R&D, since, maybe, someday, a company that wants to hire me may have benefitted from that R&D. So I indirectly benefit from R&D. Same with the rest of improvements to society.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Fact: The avg postal worker is paid on a rate of how many years of service plan. Meaning, Unionized postal workers have the ability to make up to 45 an hour after working there for about as many years. Right now my Aunt who has worked with the Postal service for about 16 years only makes 32 an hour with overtime. Without only about $18-20. (overtime is also beginning to disappear but picks up little around Xmas.)

Ever been inside a USPS faciltiy during operational hours? I'm not talking about the retail places, I mean the large processing facilities. As someone with many years of experience working with the USPS (I'm not postal, I work for a private company), I wanted to comment on this. I know quite a few Postal employees with far less time in service than your aunt, and they make quite a bit more. It depends on which craft, and also which shift they are working.

But the bigger problem is the productivity the USPS gets for the wage, and it isn't much. It's absolutley amazing to watch how slow most of these people are. Combine that with a whole slew of incredibly restrictive work rules, and it starts to explain the problems the USPS has with it's wage structure. Most of what the USPS does is unskilled labor, and isn't worth the wages being paid.

quote Originally posted by GT86: Ever been inside a USPS faciltiy during operational hours? I'm not talking about the retail places, I mean the large processing facilities. As someone with many years of experience working with the USPS (I'm not postal, I work for a private company), I wanted to comment on this. I know quite a few Postal employees with far less time in service than your aunt, and they make quite a bit more. It depends on which craft, and also which shift they are working. But the bigger problem is the productivity the USPS gets for the wage, and it isn't much. It's absolutley amazing to watch how slow most of these people are. Combine that with a whole slew of incredibly restrictive work rules, and it starts to explain the problems the USPS has with it's wage structure. Most of what the USPS does is unskilled labor, and isn't worth the wages being paid.

Yes i have been inside a Facility during operational hours. I WORKED THERE lol. BETTER YET I WORKED AS A CLERK!!!!!! I made 9 an hour with 0 benefits as i was not only non unionized, but there are no benefits offered to temporary employees.

Something you don't seem to realize is that a great majority of the Employees of the postal service are ex servicemen and women and many have been Wounded in combat. The fact that everyday they walk after having taken a bullet or piece of shrapnel amazed me everyday. Im our local PO alone there were 4 people that had taken some shrapnel in the knee and still did a walking swing everyday.

People tend to see the postal worker as the guy driving the LLV and putting the mail into the box at the road. Not so, that is only about 15% of the total mail route each day. (note im not counting the Rural delivery).

I spent from about June of last year to October on the dock and working the night shift sorting mail and loading and unloading packages for 9 an hour, 4 to 10 hours a day in all the heat and rain Nature could throw at me. I lost the 10 lbs i tried so desperately to put on and gained a lot more muscle than i have need to use.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Yes i have been inside a Facility during operational hours. I WORKED THERE lol. BETTER YET I WORKED AS A CLERK!!!!!! I made 9 an hour with 0 benefits as i was not only non unionized, but there are no benefits offered to temporary employees. Something you don't seem to realize is that a great majority of the Employees of the postal service are ex servicemen and women and many have been Wounded in combat. The fact that everyday they walk after having taken a bullet or piece of shrapnel amazed me everyday. Im our local PO alone there were 4 people that had taken some shrapnel in the knee and still did a walking swing everyday. People tend to see the postal worker as the guy driving the LLV and putting the mail into the box at the road. Not so, that is only about 15% of the total mail route each day. (note im not counting the Rural delivery). I spent from about June of last year to October on the dock and working the night shift sorting mail and loading and unloading packages for 9 an hour, 4 to 10 hours a day in all the heat and rain Nature could throw at me. I lost the 10 lbs i tried so desperately to put on and gained a lot more muscle than i have need to use.

Thanks for making my point, casual employees make much less and tend to be much more productive than the unionized career employees. Why? Because casuals can fired at any time, for any reason. They have a much greater incentive to work hard. The facility I'm in had to greatly reduce it's casual staff because of union rules, and productivity and service scores have plummeted.

And I'm quite aware there are many veterans at the USPS, but that's true of many places. It's not the people so much that are the issue, it's the system in place. It doesn't encourage or reward personal initiative.

[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 03-01-2011).]

quote Originally posted by GT86: Read again. I know people getting more back than they had withheld, because of child tax credits, EIC, etc. One woman I know had about $1500 withheld all year, and she's getting over $9000 from the govt. That's not a refund, that's a subsidy and it happens all the time. Regarding your other point, do you believe that everything the govt spends money on improves society?

That still sounds like improperly written tax code: meaning, they should not have had anything witheld.

Can you provide a definition of subsidy that lists a personal tax refund? I can't find anything.

No I do not believe that eveything the govt spends money on improves society. Can I get my money back from Iraq? Is there a form I have to sign? JK I realize that not everything that gets spent is something I want. (I don't want any more F-22s, thanks) I can make my voice heard to my representative, but I don't make the final decision.

Do you realize the same thing?

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: That still sounds like improperly written tax code: meaning, they should not have had anything witheld. Can you provide a definition of subsidy that lists a personal tax refund? I can't find anything. No I do not believe that eveything the govt spends money on improves society. Can I get my money back from Iraq? Is there a form I have to sign? JK I realize that not everything that gets spent is something I want. (I don't want any more F-22s, thanks) I can make my voice heard to my representative, but I don't make the final decision. Do you realize the same thing?

Do you understand that a lot of lower-income people will get a check this time of year, even if they had little or nothing withheld? It's not a loophole, it's designed that way to be wealth redistribution. Read up on things like the child tax credit and the earned income credit. Many people will get a substantial check even if they paid absolutely nothing, and that's a subsidy. Aiding with govt money is a subsidy, whether or not you want to label it as such.

At what level of taxation do you feel we would not be getting value from the govt? And it's not about what you or I want, it's about what is good for the country. We've spent decades and trillions of dollars promoting and enlarging a welfare class. We've raised entire generations that believe that it's the governments job to hand them money every month. This welfare state, which was paid for with borrowed money, which has pushed us to the brink of bankruptcy, which we cannot sustain--do you think that was in the best interests of the country? Was it in our grandparents, our parents, ourselves, our kids or grandkids? Can we allow it to continue? Do we continually increase taxes to try and keep the illusion going for awhile longer? Do we continue to take more and more from productive members of society, and have it over to the non-productive?

quote Originally posted by GT86: Do you understand that a lot of lower-income people will get a check this time of year, even if they had little or nothing withheld? It's not a loophole, it's designed that way to be wealth redistribution. Read up on things like the child tax credit and the earned income credit. Many people will get a substantial check even if they paid absolutely nothing, and that's a subsidy. Aiding with govt money is a subsidy, whether or not you want to label it as such. At what level of taxation do you feel we would not be getting value from the govt? And it's not about what you or I want, it's about what is good for the country. We've spent decades and trillions of dollars promoting and enlarging a welfare class. We've raised entire generations that believe that it's the governments job to hand them money every month. This welfare state, which was paid for with borrowed money, which has pushed us to the brink of bankruptcy, which we cannot sustain--do you think that was in the best interests of the country? Was it in our grandparents, our parents, ourselves, our kids or grandkids? Can we allow it to continue? Do we continually increase taxes to try and keep the illusion going for awhile longer? Do we continue to take more and more from productive members of society, and have it over to the non-productive?

You bring up wealth redistribution; are you against ALL wealth redistribution? Including the last 3 decades of uninterrupted UPWARD wealth redistribution?

Also understand that every type of govt spending is wealth redistribution. It has to be. Otherwise, no roads would get paved, bridges bult, etc. NIMBY!!!

Oh, no, we HAVEN'T been spending decades building a welfare class. Repugs have been systematically dismantling what few welfare programs we have, for the past 30 years. Now they have their sights set on Soc Sec. They still want to privatize it. Watch your wallets.

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: Oh, no, we HAVEN'T been spending decades building a welfare class. Repugs have been systematically dismantling what few welfare programs we have, for the past 30 years. Now they have their sights set on Soc Sec. They still want to privatize it. Watch your wallets.

What about those that don't want social security at all? I really am not a fan of many government programs, and this is included. I am 19 and I have to pay into a social security fund that just isn't going to be around in 60 years. I would much rather opt out of social security, take that money and invest it, and then, I know its kinda crazy, but I would have to responsible for my own well-being.

Social security is a great idea when you have more people working and paying into it, but when more people are receiving social security than those that are paying into it, how do you expect a program like that to thrive?

We have met the enemy, and he is us.

-pogo

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: You say that it isn't about money, and about keeping the Unions. What do you think the unions do? I know you don't think someone who isn't there should comment on the situation, but I am pretty sure that unions are about making workers lives better by making them more money or monetary equivalents in the form of benefits. If this is completely wrong, please disregard.

You're pretty much right, there is more to a union but, the truth is they were initially conceived to protect workers from evil companies. The union roles have changed over time and as government intervention and guidelines were put into place, the "evil" companies are pretty much a thing of the past.

What is at the heart of the question is, does a public servant have the right to strike. After all, striking is really a union's biggest and only threat besides lobbying our government for labor friendly work rules and buying politicians. I would agree that any union representing employees of a company have the right to form a union and have that union represent them if, the majority of employees want it that way and they do have a right to strike if the situation warrants it. On the other hand, public servants work for the people by choice, they have benefits and security most companies can not guarantee. Now, I really don't care if public servants form a union but, they do not have a right to strike. They serve the public as a whole and do not have the right to hold an entire city, county or state hostage.

IMO, Right to Work States have the best of both worlds, employees can form unions but, they can not hold companies or the public hostage unless they have a skill set that makes them unique. In that case, they normally don't need a union to represent them because they are hard to replace and therefore are nomally well compensated for their efforts. The employees still have their protections but, if there is no need for a union, then a union will not be present. When a person makes the choice to apply for a public servant position, they do it for specific reasons and those normally include the state provided beneifts and security that is not nearly as subject to upheaval of economics.

There is no doubt that politicians have bought union votes by spending taxpayer's money and allowing unions in Wisconsin to be in control. That is no way to run a business or a government.

------------------
Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 03-01-2011).]

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: You say that it isn't about money, and about keeping the Unions. What do you think the unions do? I know you don't think someone who isn't there should comment on the situation, but I am pretty sure that unions are about making workers lives better by making them more money or monetary equivalents in the form of benefits. If this is completely wrong, please disregard.

yes the unions bring in better wages, that is obviously true and i dont deny that. What i mean is that the unions have already come to terms that they got the best they can get for now and are willing to take the cuts needed. Walker will not budge because of his complex and his lust for revenge. I am friends with a few people going into psychological fields and have talked about this with my Counselor and they ALL agree he is a Sociopath bent on revenge after some "wrong" done to him in his past.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: yes the unions bring in better wages, that is obviously true and i dont deny that. What i mean is that the unions have already come to terms that they got the best they can get for now and are willing to take the cuts needed. Walker will not budge because of his complex and his lust for revenge. I am friends with a few people going into psychological fields and have talked about this with my Counselor and they ALL agree he is a Sociopath bent on revenge after some "wrong" done to him in his past.

And, I'll bet your "friends" all share the same attitude towards what the Governor is trying to do.
Perspective, it's all about perspective.

Edited: BTW, your statement referencing, "they got the best they can get for now" is one of the reasons to dissolve the so called union rights. This situation will come back to haunt the state if not addressed. Your Governor is looking out for the state as a whole, not just the few who are benefiting from previous political mistakes.

------------------
Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 03-01-2011).]

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: What do you think the unions do? I know you don't think someone who isn't there should comment on the situation, but I am pretty sure that unions are about making workers lives better by making them more money or monetary equivalents in the form of benefits.

LOL If only it was that simple!

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: yes the unions bring in better wages, that is obviously true and i dont deny that. What i mean is that the unions have already come to terms that they got the best they can get for now and are willing to take the cuts needed. Walker will not budge because of his complex and his lust for revenge. I am friends with a few people going into psychological fields and have talked about this with my Counselor and they ALL agree he is a Sociopath bent on revenge after some "wrong" done to him in his past.

What is to stop the unions from taking back all those cuts as soon as the pendulum swings back and gov't is controlled by Dems again?
I think* that is the main reason he wants to remove unions, but we can agree to disagree on that as I guess I don't know the man personally, and am now starting to wonder why my neighbors to the right voted a sociopath into office, but I'm not here to discuss any singular person.

*yup, that means opinion

Look, you know when you are talking to someone face to face and you know that they are lying because you can see that look on their face and pick up on the little quirks that humans make when lying? Watch some of his interviews and commentary's on the questions he is asked.

I have dealt with ALOT of liars over the years and let me tell you, what i can see is a small pantywaist of a man that wants a legacy to his name, well he got one, and its quite possibly Wisconsin's worst Governor to date.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Look, you know when you are talking to someone face to face and you know that they are lying because you can see that look on their face and pick up on the little quirks that humans make when lying? Watch some of his interviews and commentary's on the questions he is asked. I have dealt with ALOT of liars over the years and let me tell you, what i can see is a small pantywaist of a man that wants a legacy to his name, well he got one, and its quite possibly Wisconsin's worst Governor to date.

I won't dis-credit your experience but, this is not an issue of your governor leaving a legacy, it's about a public union's ability to hold a state hostage for pay and benefits exceeding what the public can afford. That ability must be thwarted and not allowed to bankrupt an entire state now or in the future.

------------------
Ron

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: Hi there, welcome to planet Earth. What planet are you from, originally? Are you staying, or just here for a visit?

The voters spoke across the nation last election, and even in WI.
They elected this guy to straighten out the crap.
They even elected a bunch of others to help him.
That is how our world works, at least the part you were dropped into.
This is the US and we are ruled by the majority, who are elected by the people.
Get used to it!

quote Originally posted by blackrams: I won't dis-credit your experience but, this is not an issue of your governor leaving a legacy, it's about a public union's ability to hold a state hostage for pay and benefits exceeding what the public can afford. That ability must be thwarted and not allowed to bankrupt an entire state now or in the future.

Is this YOU speaking or are you standing up for Republicans? You ARE a republican supporter right?

Look at this:


Do you all (republicans) really think that you are right? Do you all think that standing up for the Republican mindset is right because you are a republican? Think for yourself for once and dont give in and be a mindless drone!

I mean ****! I am being ignored by those that will sit there and cluck their tounges and hemmm and haw over the protesting because that is the way an ignorant prick operates.

Ignorant prick= Republican.

That aughta cause a firestorm

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Is this YOU speaking or are you standing up for Republicans? You ARE a republican supporter right? Look at this: Do you all (republicans) really think that you are right? Do you all think that standing up for the Republican mindset is right because you are a republican? Think for yourself for once and dont give in and be a mindless drone! I mean ****! I am being ignored by those that will sit there and cluck their tounges and hemmm and haw over the protesting because that is the way an ignorant prick operates. Ignorant prick= Republican. That aughta cause a firestorm I have 52 ratings rightnow, lets see how many negs i get from that by Biggoted ignorant people.

Ah come on now, have you lost all perspective on this that now you're falling back to this tactic?
Show me where I'm wrong in what I've said.

------------------
Ron

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Ah come on now, have you lost all perspective on this that now you're falling back to this tactic? Show me where I'm wrong in what I've said.

Im not just talking about you, Im making a general observation. It seems daily that the younger more aware generation on here is brutally ignored and looked down upon. Not ALL of us want everything handed to us. Me? I would rather work for something to be proud of the work i did than be paid to do a "job". Hence why i want to run for Governor this November- and there WILL be an election this November.

We can continue this through PM if you like. Ill even tell you what my campaign will be run on if you want.