Jump to content

Wisconsin Senate to vote on anti-union bill


tom

Recommended Posts

I'm shocked at the anti-union sentiment reflected here. Workers in Wisconsin are up in arms and demonstrating in increasing numbers their displeasure with the plan to do away with some collective bargaining rights. I dunno, it's almost as if everyone posting is the CEO of a large corporation....(So many more unions than ones that protect teachers).

They are puppets of the CEO's of a large corporations. That is what the tea party has become. Sadly they are too ignorant to realize it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 603
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You didn't have a problem with Obama focusing on passing his health care reform for two years while the rest of the country was screaming jobs did you?

I did. That's why Republicans gained seats in the House. When will the Republicans in the House start focusing on jobs and the economy like they promised instead of wasting time on legislation that won't get passed by the Senate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are puppets of the CEO's of a large corporations. That is what the tea party has become. Sadly they are too ignorant to realize it.

 

Leftist drivel. You are a puppet of public employee unions. And sadly you are too ignorant to realize it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm shocked at the anti-union sentiment reflected here. Workers in Wisconsin are up in arms and demonstrating in increasing numbers their displeasure with the plan to do away with some collective bargaining rights. I dunno, it's almost as if everyone posting is the CEO of a large corporation....(So many more unions than ones that protect teachers).

 

It’s all about the children, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leftist drivel. You are a puppet of public employee unions. And sadly you are too ignorant to realize it.

The retort of an unprepared local woodchuck Tea Partier who is a puppet of billionaire corporations. I am an advocate for the middle class. You are an enemy of the middle class. You are the problem, not the solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The retort of an unprepared local woodchuck Tea Partier who is a puppet of billionaire corporations. I am an advocate for the middle class. You are an enemy of the middle class. You are the problem, not the solution.

 

Corporations at least hire people and provide paychecks unlike you liberal woodchucks who want to live off the wealth of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with government spending is that you eventually run out of other people's money. This public union gravy train has been pushed to the limit. Believe it or not there are plenty of us left who work hard and would like to keep what we earn. Shovelling money into the black hole of union pensions and benefits is not going to be an option anymore. The jig is up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm shocked at the anti-union sentiment reflected here. Workers in Wisconsin are up in arms and demonstrating in increasing numbers their displeasure with the plan to do away with some collective bargaining rights. I dunno, it's almost as if everyone posting is the CEO of a large corporation....(So many more unions than ones that protect teachers).

Why should you care anyway? Everyone knows you're on welfare. The only possible motivation for you to defend public unions is to tow the party line. Don't get your granny panties in a bunch, your check will be in the mail this month just like always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top leaders of two of Wisconsin's largest public employee unions announced they are willing to accept the financial concessions called for in Walker's plan, but will not accept the loss of collective bargaining rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, you are contradicting yourself. First you bring up Bush as someone who was liberal and spent money we didn't have. Now you seem to be saying 2006-2008 were not years where there were any rampant spending increases. Which is it? Do you think Bush was liberal in his spending (along with the 2006-2008 congress) or not?

I don't know about liberal, but I think Bush was an idiot. How dare he bail out the liberal idea that ''all people deserve a house, even if they can't afford it and will stiff the bank'' big mistake on his part. He should have let them crash and burn, homeless? took a hit on those stocks? economy just took a shit? too bad. Bush should have showed this country what liberalism and socialism gets you, I lost all respect for that man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The retort of an unprepared local woodchuck Tea Partier who is a puppet of billionaire corporations. I am an advocate for the middle class. You are an enemy of the middle class. You are the problem, not the solution.

Okay first let me start with your attempt at an insult. I am assuming that you are the same person that keeps posting about the "local rent a center woodchucks". You really should get some new material. It wasn't even funny to begin with and has no meaning other than you stereo typing people. It's just a rather lame attempt to be funny and relevant in a debate, when in reality all it does is show that you can not contribute anything worthwhile to a conversation.

Okay that being said, The term Middle class is an arbitrary term. What is the definition of Middle Class depends on who you ask. If you ask a person that makes 20k a year might say that 40k is middle class. Yet someone who makes 40 may consider 80 to 100k as middle class. So that is the first problem with those whole argument. An other thing to consider is that Unions did once have a purpose in the work environment and were very influential in creating a better work envrionment. However today they are worthless and do nothing but look out for themselves. they are destructive to both private and public sector jobs. As evident by the current situation in Wisconsin and the previous and ongoing problems with the auto industry. Not to mention locally how the FF union is holding JC for hostage. Unions need to have some of there "powers" taken away so that the public doesn't get taken advantage of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bill the Democrats in WI are so afraid of should more honestly be called "Pro-Taxpayer" noot "anti-union"

 

Just as a side note, does anyone here know what the very first thing to be negotiated when extortionists, excuse me, unions, get their tentacles on a new Company?

 

All these fine defenders of the working class, what is the First Demand they make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Union Babe

The Bill the Democrats in WI are so afraid of should more honestly be called "Pro-Taxpayer" noot "anti-union"

 

Just as a side note, does anyone here know what the very first thing to be negotiated when extortionists, excuse me, unions, get their tentacles on a new Company?

 

All these fine defenders of the working class, what is the First Demand they make?

 

 

What? Most of the population is "working class"..how many live drawing income from a trust fund??? What are you by the way, a member of the idle aristocracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as I was starting to develop a shred of sympathy for this nonsense, thinking about how I would feel if the government was suddenly changing the law in a way that might wreck up my (overly generous or not) retirement plans, I saw the stories about the doctors setting up desk to write these public workers fake sick notes so they can fraudulently collect sick pay while protesting.

 

Classy. Charges should be pressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as I was starting to develop a shred of sympathy for this nonsense, thinking about how I would feel if the government was suddenly changing the law in a way that might wreck up my (overly generous or not) retirement plans, I saw the stories about the doctors setting up desk to write these public workers fake sick notes so they can fraudulently collect sick pay while protesting.

 

Classy. Charges should be pressed.

 

Yeah, it's pretty outrageous. Unions had been necessary in the past to prevent egregious working conditions, such as the in 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire where 146 garment workers died because managers had locked the doors to the stairwells and exits to keep them from leaving early. It made sense then. Now the pendulum has swung the other way. Unions have driven many private sector companies into the ground. The only reason it hasn't happened to the public sector yet is because of the supposedly infinite revenues, taxes. Well now we know even the taxpayers have limits and we're about to reach it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALMOST: GM

 

 

Just the healthcare bennies alone for the retirees is unreal.

Can you give us examples of companies that unions have driven into the ground?

 

The benefits were decided upon by the companies and the unions at a time of extreme profitability with no recourse if the company started losing money. It was a screw up on the companies part, not the unions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you give us examples of companies that unions have driven into the ground?

 

The benefits were decided upon by the companies and the unions at a time of extreme profitability with no recourse if the company started losing money. It was a screw up on the companies part, not the unions.

 

Really? The unions are innocent of this? Go to bed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? The unions are innocent of this? Go to bed.

They were sharing the wealth when they had it and did not put clauses in the contracts for when they weren't. It was their screw up. They should have protected themselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were sharing the wealth when they had it and did not put clauses in the contracts for when they weren't. It was their screw up. They should have protected themselves

 

The unions took advantage and thumbed their noses. No wonder many were laid off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The unions took advantage and thumbed their noses. No wonder many were laid off.

as usual local simpleton woodchuck does not know what the hell they are talking about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were sharing the wealth when they had it and did not put clauses in the contracts for when they weren't. It was their screw up. They should have protected themselves

The unions took advantage and thumbed their noses. No wonder many were laid off.

 

You're both right. The companies should not have granted it, but were more interested in short-term profits and avoiding a protracted conflict than in long-term viability. The union leadership should not have demanded it, but were more interested in placating their members now, when they were getting paid, than later, when it would all be somebody else's problem.

 

Same reason many unions end up negotiating mass layoffs over pay cuts: if some people lose their jobs entirely, they aren't in the union anymore and can't punish the leadership, whereas if everyone loses 10% of their pay, they're probably going to be upset enough to rock the organization.

 

The incentives of labor negotiations are completely screwed up, and it leads to some pretty stupid results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...