I was going to comment on everything being said and the arguments being made for and against unions. But the examples using the USPS is a joke. I have family that's worked for the USPS in excess of 20 years and hate the place, specifically because of the union. No, they are not management, they work in field maintenance and are bound by contract to do their job and ONLY their job. They are a level 10 maintenance mechanic and if they see a small issue (that may only take 10 minutes to fix, but falls into the job description for a level 5) that's going to turn into a major PITA and time consuming fix if left alone, they can't touch it "because it's below them", they have to wait until it becomes a major problem and costs 10 times it's original estimate in time and money. This happens DAILY. Yeah, the pay is good, but if you're a hard worker, that's the only thing good about it.

I said earlier that I have turned down jobs because of union affiliations, and I have even left jobs that was going union. Not having the choice to join a union is a lynch pin in my decision to work somewhere. I am all for right-to-work legislation, I don't want to join a union, and I will never work at a place where I am forced to join a union and/or pay dues. Screw that.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Ignorant prick= Republican. I have 52 ratings rightnow, lets see how many negs i get from that by Biggoted ignorant people.

Keep saying crap like that, and you'll have more negs. Make that 53 ratings and one more neg.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Keep saying crap like that, and you'll have more negs. Make that 53 ratings and one more neg.

Ill countinue saying it if i feel like it sir. I have nothing to lose and will speak my mind freely. Oh wait that is me being DEMOCRATIC AND NOT A NAZI REPUBLICAN

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: 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.

Thanks but, no. Nothing personal but PMing won't solve the issue. I noted in another thread that you hope to become a police officer at some point in the future. Do you believe that police should have the right to strike, how about fire departments? Think about the mayhem that would ensue if both those unions went on strike. Your governor would then have to call out the National Guard and declare Marshall Law to maintain order and emergency assistance. What makes other state employees any better than LEO and Firemen? They all work for the public good, they are public servants. Let's go one step farther, how about forming a union within the National Guard of your state. Now there's a great idea. Sorry but, I can't see a good reason for public employees to be unionized that doesn't go against the best interests of the state they are supposedly serving.

As with any employer, it is in the state's best interest to provide a decent wage scale and benefit package to it's worker or risk not having employee's worthly of keeping. But, as with any employer, the employer must weigh what it can give and maintain versus what it can afford now and in the future.

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

Ramsespride, you talk about being unbiased, yet you rail the Republicans and I have heard you say nothing against the Democrats. You have railed against the Republicans from square 1, and I have seen nothing of you throwing against the Democrats in the same manner.

I have to wonder: What ticket are you running on this November?

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Ill countinue saying it if i feel like it sir. I have nothing to lose and will speak my mind freely. Oh wait that is me being DEMOCRATIC AND NOT A NAZI REPUBLICAN

Sure. You can say anything you'd like. And will likely keep getting more negatives with crap like "NAZI REPUBLICAN" and "republican pricks" or whatever. Knock yourself out.

quote Originally posted by Rallaster: Ramsespride, you talk about being unbiased, yet you rail the Republicans and I have heard you say nothing against the Democrats. You have railed against the Republicans from square 1, and I have seen nothing of you throwing against the Democrats in the same manner. I have to wonder: What ticket are you running on this November?

I like to stand up for the little guy so to speak.

In November im running Non affiliated. Meaning, im running with values I hold to be good and not running only trying to gain votes from the Democratic or Republican voters.

I dont want people voting for me based upon the party i represent or the party that they feel they belong to. I want them to vote for me based upon what i stand for and if they feel the same way as i do on a certain subject. I want them to vote the way it used to be when people voted for the Man, not the party. Vote to show what you stand for, not to piss off the other party.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: I have even considered running myself as a non affiliated candidate.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: We can continue this through PM if you like. Ill even tell you what my campaign will be run on if you want.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Ignorant prick= Republican.

You look like you would be a perfect politician already with the double-talk.

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: You look like you would be a perfect politician already with the double-talk.

How so?

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Vote to show what you stand for, not to piss off the other party.

I may be wrong here but, I'm thinking that's exactly what the voting public did when they elected your present governor.


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

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

quote Originally posted by blackrams: I may be wrong here but, I'm thinking that's exactly what the voting public did when they elected your present governor.

I share THE EXACT SAME VIEW. good to see we agree on something. NOT lol

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

sorry, that was bad logic. But I guess its hard for me to see someone as non-affiliated to any party, when they are throwing out blanket statements/insults like that.

Once you guys grow up, are a little less green, and more responsible, you will understand what really is going on. The Democrats aren't right, the Republicans aren't right, either extreme is not right. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. Anything that strays futher away from the center is just a power grab.
If the Liberals are left unchecked they will tax us at a rate that would be greater than half of what we earn. At that point we all effectively work for the government no matter what company we work for, even if we own it. All companies would be forced to unionize. Churches would be abolished. Abortions would be free and available when wanted for any reason. Entitlement programs would increase and people would just let government take care of their needs while giving up their rights to free speech, rights to bear arms, rights to assemble, rights to property, etc.
If the Conservatives are left unchecked there will be no more abortions, Government would be reduced in size, but never so small that we wouldn't still need to pay taxes, Unions would cease to exist, there would be no entitlements, and people would be left to fend for themselves more often, etc.
Neither extreme is fair to most of the people or their beliefs. That is why the answer lies in the middle.

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: sorry, that was bad logic. But I guess its hard for me to see someone as non-affiliated to any party, when they are throwing out blanket statements/insults like that.

Eh i get where you are coming from. At a young age i started to see the world around me as it was. I didnt get into the Cops and Robbers stage many kids were playing and TV shows like Power rangers seemed silly to me. Unsolved Mysterys on the otherhand was a daily favorite. I try to look at everything from multiple angles until find one that i like and stick with it.

Even in school it was nearly impossible to get me to "conform" and because of that i was the kid everyone knew, respected, and stood up for because at some point, i could stick up for them and outsmart the bad guy.

Stand up for the littleman and make friends that stay friends.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: And hey, isn't it wrong to give a negative to someone based upon the fact you don't agree with what they are saying or view? Isn't that a bit Nazi like?

Giving a neg based on the fact that I don't agree with you is ridiculous. The idea of negging you because of childish insults isn't quite as ridiculous. But for the most part you've stayed civil, so no negs are warranted at all. Its just discussion.

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: Giving a neg based on the fact that I don't agree with you is ridiculous. The idea of negging you because of childish insults isn't quite as ridiculous. But for the most part you've stayed civil, so no negs are warranted at all. Its just discussion.

Well where is it childish? Its my opinion and that is what i feel a republican is at that point. Loose connections i know.

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: Did that once- Knocked myself out, it was the winter i was 8 years old and went sledding down one of our numerous ravines here in NE Wisconsin. Took a running leap as fast as my little legs could go and hit that hill like a bullet! Next thing i know there is another kids snowboot in my face and i wake up a few hours later with a splitting headache, a nasty gash in the side of my head and since then i have had nasty migraines here and there that will cause me to puke and be in intense pain.

And your posts are becoming just as much of a train wreck. But at least you're "having fun with this".

quote And hey, isn't it wrong to give a negative to someone based upon the fact you don't agree with what they are saying or view? Isn't that a bit Nazi like?

No, it's when you do things like calling people names, not your political opinion. Basically, it's not what you say buy how you say it.

quote BTW im having fun with this.

That's not helping your case.

Ramspride,
I would still like to know the answer to the questions I asked.

quote Originally posted by blackrams: I noted in another thread that you hope to become a police officer at some point in the future. Do you believe that police should have the right to strike, how about fire departments? Think about the mayhem that would ensue if both those unions went on strike. Your governor would then have to call out the National Guard and declare Marshall Law to maintain order and emergency assistance. What makes other state employees any better than LEO and Firemen? They all work for the public good, they are public servants. Let's go one step farther, how about forming a union within the National Guard of your state. Now there's a great idea.

Should LEOs, Firemen, Emergency Personel have the ability to strike? If so, what makes them any better than any other government employee?


Edited: Gotta go for now but, I will be back to read your response on this.
------------------
Ron

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

Yeah, I'm with Ron, back to discussion at hand.

And here's my question.

If the unions agree to all the cuts that Walker proposed, and Walker agrees to let the unions remain in power, what is to stop the unions from taking all of those cuts back as soon as Walker is out of office?

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Ramspride, I would still like to know the answer to the questions I asked. Should LEOs, Firemen, Emergency Personel have the ability to strike? If so, what makes them any better than any other government employee? Edited: Gotta go for now but, I will be back to read your response on this.

Personally, yes i feel that everyone should have the right to strike. Would a Firefighter or Police officer strike? It really depends, i know of a few cops that are happy with their wages and benefits that they and their family's enjoy solely because they are out everyday taking the bad guys off the streets and trying to make the world a better place.

Have any of you ever walked in 3 feet of snow for 8.5 hours and still done your job? Walked in 90+* weather, been chased by Rottweilers, and had to deal with hurricane force wind slapping you in the face with rain and hail? Wouldn't YOU want to be paid a decent wage to do this obviously needed job? I sure as heck would! Then again i would be happy with a 10 an hour job as long as i came home everyday safe and sound to my family, enjoyed a meal and maybe played a game or took a walk hand in hand with the missus.

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: Yeah, I'm with Ron, back to discussion at hand. And here's my question. If the unions agree to all the cuts that Walker proposed, and Walker agrees to let the unions remain in power, what is to stop the unions from taking all of those cuts back as soon as Walker is out of office?

In truth, nothing. But what is stopping anyone from picking up a rock and throwing it through a window? Same thing nothing. Do you see the point?

The problem with any union agreement is that it requires that the members to approve it. The union leaders can say that the union agrees all they want, but it doesn't mean squat until it's members actually vote to approve it. So who is the liar now?

quote But what is stopping anyone from picking up a rock and throwing it through a window? Same thing nothing. Do you see the point?

Flawed logic there. That is destruction/damaging of someone elses property and is against the law. How can you say there is nothing wrong with it? How would you feel if it was your property that was damaged?

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 03-01-2011).]

quote Originally posted by avengador1: The problem with any union agreement is that it requires that the members to approve it. The union leaders can say that the union agrees all they want, but it doesn't mean squat until it's members actually vote to approve it. So who is the liar now?

Ive spoken with Nathan the local Postal Union President and he has already said that IF Walker was to say, ok we will pull that part, then he would call a meeting of the branch and a vote would be taken for an set of regulations that would in turn make it fair for both sides involved.

You are so naiive.

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Ramspride, I would still like to know the answer to the questions I asked. Should LEOs, Firemen, Emergency Personel have the ability to strike? If so, what makes them any better than any other government employee? Edited: Gotta go for now but, I will be back to read your response on this.

Where I live Police and Fire personell are considered essential and don't have the right to strike however in a labour dispute. An independent arbitrator must be brought in and their decision must be agreed to no matter what they decide so it's very risky for both parties to let it go that far.

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

quote Originally posted by newf: Where I live Police and Fire personell are considered essential and don't have the right to strike however in a labour dispute. An independent arbitrator must be brought in and their decision must be agreed to no matter what they decide so it's very risky for both parties to let it go that far.

I can see that as a viable solution and one that my need to be considered by the State of Wisconsin but, the problem still exists, there's only so much money in the bucket and the bucket is being emptied faster than it can be filled. Unions with bad leadership tend to do that, they'll kill the cow giving the milk, eat the beef and then wonder why they are going hungry.

So, Ramspride, I guess we'll have to disagree on this one, Police, Fire and Emergency Personel are essential to the public's safety.

I would tell you that the vast majority of state employees are essential or, we shouldn't have them on the payroll. Just my perspective and opinion.

quote Originally posted by newf: Hmmmm maybe a contract?

Yep, that's correct but, it still doesn't solve the issue of politicians buying union votes with lucrative contracts. We all know the next election in Wisconsin will have a Dem. proposing the restoration of all Union "rights". It's not about rights, public servants do not have the right to strike, it's about what the employer can afford to do now and in the future. If Wisconsin was a company, they would have been out of business long ago.
------------------
Ron

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

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: And hey, isn't it wrong to give a negative to someone based upon the fact you don't agree with what they are saying or view? Isn't that a bit Nazi like?

Hehehe, I've got about 80 negatives, which is more than most people here have in total ratings. All of them were "awarded" because I don't toe the right wing line nor drink the Conservative KookAid (tm). However, political bannings are relatively rare, hopefully you don't end up being one of them. I liked what you wrote about your direct real experiences WRT the WI debacle, and appreciate the real report of facts on the ground. Thank you for that, it added real value to this topic that is otherwise devoid of real meaning or value.

I also appreciate and respect the fact that you've been civil and haven't resorted to personal attacks, innuendo, and other rancorous means to communicate your opinion.

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

Even if the governor signs an agreement with the union, how long will this agreement last? It will only allow the problem to repeat sometime in the future.
Lets talk about the real problem and follow the money.
The state of Wisconsin has a deficit of $3.6 Billion, so it is going to take some major work to resolve this. The governor says "The difference here is, with this budget repair bill, we give those schools and local governments more — almost a billion and a half dollars worth of savings. So the savings they get from our budget repair bill exceed the amount."
How is this possible? The savings are made by letting the school districts shop for their own health insurance instead of the union owned WA trust. Walker said: "In Wisconsin, a great example of that is, we have, in many of our school districts, a requirement through collective bargaining contracts that they have to buy their health insurance from a company that's owned by our state teacher's union, WA Trust. Because of that, it costs them up to $68 million more than if they could just buy it from the state employee healthcare plan. Those are real costs about putting real money in the classroom instead of into these collective bargaining agreements."
They get the same coverage at a competitive price, not the inflated WA Trust price. The union doesn't like this because now they don't have captive clients or that source of revenue for the union. It also means they have less money for their political campaigning. Given the choice, most school districts would probably go for the better deal the competition would make available.
The union does not want to lose the income it makes from WA Trust and will say and promise anything to try and keep it. The problem of the deficit does not go away if they keep this.

quote Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: Yeah, I'm with Ron, back to discussion at hand. And here's my question. If the unions agree to all the cuts that Walker proposed, and Walker agrees to let the unions remain in power, what is to stop the unions from taking all of those cuts back as soon as Walker is out of office?

They get a chance to re-negotiate. Does that mean the next governor HAS to say yes?

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

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Yep, that's correct but, it still doesn't solve the issue of politicians buying union votes with lucrative contracts. We all know the next election in Wisconsin will have a Dem. proposing the restoration of all Union "rights". It's not about rights, public servants do not have the right to strike, it's about what the employer can afford to do now and in the future. If Wisconsin was a company, they would have been out of business long ago.

I hear ya, don't let my answers confuse the fact that I believe that many many big unions need a major restructuring as they have become way too powerful and have allowed too much worker ineffeciency and apathy. I've mentioned before I've worked in both atmospheres (Union and nonUnion) and both have their pros and cons.

quote Originally posted by blackrams: I can see that as a viable solution and one that my need to be considered by the State of Wisconsin but, the problem still exists, there's only so much money in the bucket and the bucket is being emptied faster than it can be filled. Unions with bad leadership tend to do that, they'll kill the cow giving the milk, eat the beef and then wonder why they are going hungry

As to this, I would ask how much of the states financial issues are due to the recession and/or poor management? Without the recession is it possible that these problems wouldn't have been an issue and the fact that the unions are willing to take the financial hits that the Governor want seems to be fair IMO. If the Governors goal was to reorganize the structure and ineffeciency of the Unions I would be happy to see it but it appears to be a attempt to dissolve them completely which I am suspect of. Too bad that as usual they can't seem to find a happy medium.

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

quote Originally posted by Ramsespride: 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.

So because I support Governor Walker I'm an ignorant prick? Because I understand that our state is in serious trouble I'm bigoted? Because I actually looked into the budget-repair bill I'm ignorant? Because I pay a whole lot of tax money to the state to help support state employees pension and healthcare benefits ( along with a ton of other benefits ) I'm wrong? My personal income has been reduced, the cost of my healthcare has increased and my current employer doesn't offer a 401K ( I don't get a pension ) and as a taxpayer I have to help support these benefits. Why do I have to suffer the pains of the economy and not the state employee that I have to financially support? When do I pay enough? When do I get a break for my family? When will I get a chance to have a savings account? When will I be able to relax and not have to worry if I'll be able to fix whatever breaks during the next pay period? Why do people like you expect people like me to give until I bleed even more? I'm bleeding.....I'm bleeding enough. When is enough for you? Do I have to give up my house? My car? Any small travel excursions that I take here and there like the Dells Run? Do you want me to give up my Dells Run? Would that make you happy? Just so a state employee won't have to put into their own pension? When will I pay enough to make you happy?

You are 19 years old. Wow. You know it all. Buy your own house. Try to live the American Dream. Get a grip on reality. You call me names and I struggle to survive every day. You don't know what it means to struggle yet. I have the right to support our Governor just as much as you have the right to oppose him. You expect that your 'side' is right and my 'side' is wrong. Well, that's why we have elections. When you are older you may understand that ( or maybe not ). You want to argue fact? Fine....use facts. Don't you dare call me names and belittle me just because you think you know it all.

Mark

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: They get a chance to re-negotiate. Does that mean the next governor HAS to say yes?

Well if he is a Democrat and wants to be reelected, he will have to say yes.

quote Originally posted by Firefox: So because I support Governor Walker I'm an ignorant prick? Because I understand that our state is in serious trouble I'm bigoted? Because I actually looked into the budget-repair bill I'm ignorant? Because I pay a whole lot of tax money to the state to help support state employees pension and healthcare benefits ( along with a ton of other benefits ) I'm wrong? My personal income has been reduced, the cost of my healthcare has increased and my current employer doesn't offer a 401K ( I don't get a pension ) and as a taxpayer I have to help support these benefits. Why do I have to suffer the pains of the economy and not the state employee that I have to financially support? When do I pay enough? When do I get a break for my family? When will I get a chance to have a savings account? When will I be able to relax and not have to worry if I'll be able to fix whatever breaks during the next pay period? Why do people like you expect people like me to give until I bleed even more? I'm bleeding.....I'm bleeding enough. When is enough for you? Do I have to give up my house? My car? Any small travel excursions that I take here and there like the Dells Run? Do you want me to give up my Dells Run? Would that make you happy? Just so a state employee won't have to put into their own pension? When will I pay enough to make you happy? You are 19 years old. Wow. You know it all. Buy your own house. Try to live the American Dream. Get a grip on reality. You call me names and I struggle to survive every day. You don't know what it means to struggle yet. I have the right to support our Governor just as much as you have the right to oppose him. You expect that your 'side' is right and my 'side' is wrong. Well, that's why we have elections. When you are older you may understand that ( or maybe not ). You want to argue fact? Fine....use facts. Don't you dare call me names and belittle me just because you think you know it all. Mark

You say you support Walker; did he announce during his campaign that he would be trying to destroy unions, and tricking Dems into helping him, and lying to his own staff? If he had, would you stll have supported him? If so, why?

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: You say you support Walker; did he announce during his campaign that he would be trying to destroy unions, and tricking Dems into helping him, and lying to his own staff? If he had, would you stll have supported him? If so, why?

He's not trying to destroy unions. Get your facts straight. Do your own research and stop listening to the union leaders and you'll be suprised at the truth. He's handling the state just like he did Milwaukee County when he was my County Executive. He didn't break any unions....he did what was necessary to balance his budget. He tried to negotiate with the Parks Department union because there was a shortfall in the budget and asked for wage concessions. If wage concessions were not offered then he would have to lay off workers. The union refused to negotiate. County Executive Walker then laid off workers as he stuck to his guns....just as the union officials did. But he got the budgets under control. That was his job. Unions don't want to negotiate? There are consequences....and they are necessary. This isn't a game.

During his campaign he said he was going to balance the state budget and the state unions were one of his focuses. He has already stated he supports private unions because they are dealing with their employers as necessary. Harley-Davidson, Mercury Marine, Sub-Zero.....the companies negotiated with the unions and struck their deals. The private unions are not a problem for the State of Wisconsin and Governor Scott Walker isn't involving private unions. The private unions are negotiating and compromising. The public unions are not. The state unions have been 'negotiating' for almost 2 years over healthcare and pension concessions and they have been refusing to budge. Now that Governor Walker is removing collective bargaining the unions are squealing and now that THEIR backs are to the wall they'll deal. So much for negotiating in good faith. Too late. The unions had their chance. They pushed the State of Wisconsin into a corner and now the State will respond.

Do your homework. I'm called names as a Republican. I expect an apology. My best interest and the 85% of Wisconsinites that are not in the public sector unions have voted to get the balance the budget and most support Governor Scott Walker and his budget-repair bill. I do not want to see anyone laid off but if this isn't handled today then state employees will lose thier jobs.

I've heard rumors that the state employuee unions cannot change their contribution amounts because of State law. Without the budget repair bill passing, there cannot be a change in the employees contrubution in healthcare or pension payments. So, if Governor Walker were to agree to the 'negotiations' of accepting the concessions the unions are talking about it would not happen because of that State law. The unions saying that they are conceding is bogus....and it's a trick to keep the bebefits at the current levels. You may want to look into that and let us all know if that's true or not.

I do want to ask, though. How much of MY income is enough so state workers can have nice pensions and pay little for their healthcare?

Mark

"Younger more aware"

What about the majority that voted for Walker to do just this?

You remember the majority right? They are the ones that are out working while the Union thugs are out rioting.

I'm still waiting to find out if I can keep half my wealth here.

Brad