Wisconsin recall election.


Off-Topic Discussions

101 to 150 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Kryzbyn wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
You should write a book called Trotsky Shrugged.

Can't smile now, Citizen Kryzbyn, I'm channelling my anger.

Trotsky got an ice-pick that made his ears burn.

Heh!

Alright, nerds, help me out:

So, I could never figure out who he says in between Trotsky and Sancho Panza. According to at least three sources, he says "dear old Lenny and the great Elmyra." The only hit I get for Elmyra is some kind of female Elmer Fudd, so I'm not sure if I believe the given lyrics.

I'd be tempted to make some kind of Trotsky-Lenin-Marx anagram, except it ends in Sancho Panza. But maybe that's intentional?

Help me OTD-Kenobi, you are my only hope!


Matthew Morris wrote:
A highly regarded expert wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:

No, amusing is supporting senators violating their oath of office.

Or reading the union spin on this. "We almost had him!" Yeah, like McCain almost had Obama...

What are unions made up of? People. What are corporations made up of? People. Who was exampt from the rules Citizens united overturned, unions...

...and corporations. Who has more money? Who spent more money? Who lied?

Also, Anklebiter's right. The plutocratization has been an ongoing thing. CU just sealed the deal.

Nope, The laws CU overturned did not apply to unions. Good try though.

Keep in mind, that without private money = speech, the Federalist papers would never have been written.

Hee hee!

America has been a plutocracy for much longer than The Federalist Papers!

EDIT: Which, come to think of it, were a pretty convincing argument for plutocracy.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

(Removed post because I can't cite sources at work, and I hate to post things I can't source.)


It's okay, Citizen Morris, I do it all the time!

Shadow Lodge

Is it true that there was 119% voter turnout in Madison WI? lol


Matthew Morris wrote:

What are unions made up of? People. What are corporations made up of? People. Who was exampt from the rules Citizens united overturned, unions...

Again, what part of "Congress shall make no law" do people fail to understand?

They are still not people. My apartment complex is made up of people but it isn't a person. Individuals can donate within the limits set by Congress. Corporations are not people and even if they were, they shouldn't have unlimited spending.

Corporations are not people and there is no justifiable argument for it.

Shadow Lodge

Is there a difference between when a corporation gives and a union?


Derekjr wrote:
Is there a difference between when a corporation gives and a union?

Volume. Sheer volume, amigo.

I think a lot of people still don't seem to understand what CU did. Think of it in PF terms: Fluff vs. mechanics.


Matthew Morris wrote:
(Removed post because I can't cite sources at work, and I hate to post things I can't source.)

You misinterpreted me, anyway, so you had no point to make, sourced or not.


Derekjr wrote:
Is it true that there was 119% voter turnout in Madison WI? lol

Not sure. I saw a report that said that.

Not a big deal though. Same day registration was allowed, so all that would mean is that a lot of unregistered voters registered and voted.

Shadow Lodge

I am not asking as far as CU goes. I am saying in a blanket statment, if it is wrong for corporations to donate even a dollar, is it also wrong for a union to donate even a dollar?

thejeff wrote:
Derekjr wrote:
Is it true that there was 119% voter turnout in Madison WI? lol

Not sure. I saw a report that said that.

Not a big deal though. Same day registration was allowed, so all that would mean is that a lot of unregistered voters registered and voted.

But how is it possible for it to go over 100%?

To me it states that 19% more voted than the population of Madison, same day registrations or not. To me (and believe me I am not claiming to be right at all) it says that there are 100 people here, and 119 voted. Again, I am asking to educate myself, not to yell fraud. I am trying to understand how it works.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You guys are still kicking this topic around? Walker won because a substantial majority of Wisconsin voters believe that his policies are improving the state by lowering taxes and lowering unemployment. As Clinton said, "it's the economy, stupid". There seems to be a clear correlation between very liberal, high government interference, high tax states leading to higher state spending, higher unemployment and state bankruptcy. Various other explainations have been offered on this board including corruption, computer hacking of the election process, etc; but many people just refuse to accept whats clearly in front of them- to recognize that they lost because the more "liberal" position was rejected by the voters.


That's not entirely fair Martin.
The idea of recalls being rejected would have the same effect.
I've seen this first hand.


Martin Kauffman 530 wrote:
You guys are still kicking this topic around? Walker won because a substantial majority of Wisconsin voters believe that his policies are improving the state by lowering taxes and lowering unemployment.

Whether that's actually true is another question, entirely...

Messaging. It works!


Derekjr wrote:

I am not asking as far as CU goes. I am saying in a blanket statment, if it is wrong for corporations to donate even a dollar, is it also wrong for a union to donate even a dollar?

thejeff wrote:
Derekjr wrote:
Is it true that there was 119% voter turnout in Madison WI? lol

Not sure. I saw a report that said that.

Not a big deal though. Same day registration was allowed, so all that would mean is that a lot of unregistered voters registered and voted.

But how is it possible for it to go over 100%?

To me it states that 19% more voted than the population of Madison, same day registrations or not. To me (and believe me I am not claiming to be right at all) it says that there are 100 people here, and 119 voted. Again, I am asking to educate myself, not to yell fraud. I am trying to understand how it works.

I believe the turn out is percentage of registered voters, not of the whole population.

Liberty's Edge

As far as I am aware, there have been two prior recall attempts against sitting Governors-incidentially, both successful. Walker survived these odds. Lots of voters in Wisconsin must like what he's doing up there to improve things. In the end, if the economy is bad, worsenig and/or not improving, a sitting candidate will lose unless their district is totally gerrymandered so as to make being unseated a near impossibility. Even then, the challenger sometimes wins. For example, a Republican recently won a congressional seat in a New York City district in which registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by a six to one margin.


Derekjr wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong as I do not live in WI, but aren’t they starting to add school programs back in that they could not afford before? I thought I heard it in an interview with a teacher before, but was only half listening.

Also, in the LT gov race, didn't the Dem challenger far outspend the Repub incumbent and she still won? This would tend to question the "those who spend the most win" argument as being 100% true.

Also, was it possible for people not from WI to sign the recall petition or did you have to prove residence?

Again, I am not from WI so I may have some facts incorrect. These are jsut honost questions I am interested in.

It's possible that in some districts some programs are being added in that were previously cut. In most, however, anything that isn't state mandated is being cut. In other words, extracurriculars, music, and tech ed. In almost all school districts funds are severely cut, at the state level, basically forcing those districts to lay off teachers or make pay cuts. All in the name of a 5% property tax decrease for homeowners.

I don't know about the Lt. Gov race I didn't see an ad from either.

Anyone could sign the recall petition, in theory, but along with your name you had to include your address, phone number, and optionally email. They just didn't count those whose address wasn't in WI.


Derekjr wrote:
Is there a difference between when a corporation gives and a union?

There are differences but for the purpose of donations, I think that they should both be considered non-persons.


Well...it's Official...Osama Bin Laden and Muommar Ghaddaffi are dead...they have just been registered as Democratic Voters in Chicago.


Martin Kauffman 530 wrote:
You guys are still kicking this topic around? Walker won because a substantial majority of Wisconsin voters believe that his policies are improving the state by lowering taxes and lowering unemployment. As Clinton said, "it's the economy, stupid". There seems to be a clear correlation between very liberal, high government interference, high tax states leading to higher state spending, higher unemployment and state bankruptcy. Various other explainations have been offered on this board including corruption, computer hacking of the election process, etc; but many people just refuse to accept whats clearly in front of them- to recognize that they lost because the more "liberal" position was rejected by the voters.

Incorrect on pretty much every level. Just because someone wins does not mean that the people liked what he did. It can mean any number of things. You are reading more into it than reality allows.

Also, red states take more from the federal government than they give back. They cut so deeply that the only way they can continue to provide is to take from other states. When I get home from work this evening I can post links to support this unless someone else posts first.


Derekjr wrote:


But how is it possible for it to go over 100%?

To me it states that 19% more voted than the population of Madison, same day registrations or not.

Then you don't comprehend voter turnout numbers.

The numbers are numbers of votes cast in a ward vs. registered voters in that ward. Lots of people registered day of. In fact, where I voted, there was no line to vote but a long line to register. Reports were coming in of polling places running out of ballots by early afternoon.


Matthew Morris wrote:


What I see from the Buckeye state

Wait, when did we start talking about Ohio?


Derekjr wrote:
I am not asking as far as CU goes. I am saying in a blanket statment, if it is wrong for corporations to donate even a dollar, is it also wrong for a union to donate even a dollar?

As an if:then statement, yes.

As it happens, IF you want to propose legislation preventing all organizations from contributing to a campaign OR buying advertising OR organizing on behalf of a political campaign, THEN I'd support it, as long as it came with strong public funding rules.

I think a base amount, paid through public funding, as well as individual citizen donations with a, let's say $1k cap per person, per candidate, per election cycle, would suffice. And you can only contribute to candidates you would be able to vote for, so no out of state money.

Shadow Lodge

Do you think that corporations or unions should be able to fund their own adds to show potential problems with legislation then? This is a bit different as it is not going toward a specific person.


Derekjr wrote:

Do you think that corporations or unions should be able to fund their own adds to show potential problems with legislation then? This is a bit different as it is not going toward a specific person.

Possibly, with extreme limitations. It's probably a bad idea, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
meatrace wrote:
I think a base amount, paid through public funding, as well as individual citizen donations with a, let's say $1k cap per person, per candidate, per election cycle, would suffice. And you can only contribute to candidates you would be able to vote for, so no out of state money.

There are stringent rules like this in Europe, along with shorter campaign periods and equal time requirements.

You know, like in a democracy.


A highly regarded expert wrote:
meatrace wrote:
I think a base amount, paid through public funding, as well as individual citizen donations with a, let's say $1k cap per person, per candidate, per election cycle, would suffice. And you can only contribute to candidates you would be able to vote for, so no out of state money.

There are stringent rules like this in Europe, along with shorter campaign periods and equal time requirements.

You know, like in a democracy.

Also, why aren't polls open on the weekend? Or open for a whole week? I mean if the idea is to see what the people want, make sure they all get a chance to vote.

Regardless, the point is that special interest money in politics is toxic.

Shadow Lodge

A highly regarded expert wrote:


You know, like in a democracy.

America is a republic. Not a Democracy.


Derekjr wrote:
A highly regarded expert wrote:


You know, like in a democracy.
America is a republic. Not a Democracy.

Not even that.


You'll notice the troll avatar Derek.
Obvious troll is obvious.

Shadow Lodge

Didn't even pick up on that... clever :)


Derekjr wrote:
A highly regarded expert wrote:


You know, like in a democracy.
America is a republic. Not a Democracy.

It's not a republic either. The two terms were basically synonymous throughout history. Republic is a representative government, and a democracy is a government in which the people rule. What we have is a representative democracy, or democratic republic.

We are a democracy. The people rule, which is all it means. We rule through intermediaries, it's true, but that doesn't change the fact that the people in the end are the decision makers.

The only way you can make an argument for us being a republic but NOT a democracy is if you argue that our representatives are not beholden to us but are instead appointed by a separate power. There can certainly be a case for that.

The point is that just trying to win "points" by claiming it's a republic? You're just starting fights to start them.

Shadow Lodge

Really? Im stating a fact.

Do they still say the pledge in WI?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

DEMOCRACY:

A government of the masses.

Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.

Results in mobocracy.

Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights.

Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.

Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

REPUBLIC:

Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.

Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.

A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.

Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy.

Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.

Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So when every president in the last mumble mumble years has talked about spreading democracy and encouraging democratic reforms and all the other uses of democracy that show up as buzzwords in foreign policy speeches, he's really been talking about spreading communism and mob rule?


We're spreading democracy all over the middle east, even as we speak!


Derek, a word of advice, especially here in the Off Topic section of the boards:
Don't take everything that is said as a personal attack on your core belief(s). have some temperance, and really decide if a post taht does indeed offend you warrants a response.
Meatrace is a good guy. Most people here are. There are a lot of different views as well. Hell, even Doodlebug is a good guy, he's just commie as they come.


meatrace wrote:


It's possible that in some districts some programs are being added in that were previously cut. In most, however, anything that isn't state mandated is being cut. In other words, extracurriculars, music, and tech ed. In almost all school districts funds are severely cut, at the state level, basically forcing those districts to lay off teachers or make pay cuts. All in the name of a 5% property tax decrease for homeowners.

This is very misleading as the only places where these kind of things are happening is where those school districts rushed and signed contracts right before Act 10 was passed leaving those districts very little choice in how to balance their budgets. (beyond firing students and cutting services)

In fact many places are hiring additional teachers, adding programs, and in addition don't even have to apply for federal grants to keep the programs they had (where in years past if the grants didn't come through they would have had to be cut)

As always, results vary from district to district, but that is the point. Those districts now have the ability to decide how to make it all work.


Tangible Delusions wrote:


This is very misleading as the only places where these kind of things are happening is where those school districts rushed and signed contracts right before Act 10 was passed leaving those districts very little choice in how to balance their budgets. (beyond firing students and cutting services)

In fact many places are hiring additional teachers, adding programs, and in addition don't even have to apply for federal grants to keep the programs they had (where in years past if the grants didn't come through they would have had to be cut)

As always, results vary from district to district, but that is the point. Those districts now have the ability to decide how to make it all work.

Districts are hiring new teachers. They are NOT, however, hiring MORE teachers. There was a flood of teachers (and other public workers) retiring last year, many early, in hopes of retaining their pensions before Walker can privatize them. Furthermore, now that unions cannot bargain for anything other than BASE pay (which Walker has decided to interpret as the lowest any employee in a bargaining unit is paid, rather than simply wages), school districts are summarily firing teachers based on how much they get paid and hiring new teachers fresh out of college for about 26k/yr.

As you say, and is true, that with contracts locked in school districts are unable to make budgetary constraints without cutting teacher pay or services. This is basic economics, you can't reduce your fixed costs, only your variable costs. One way you can deal with this, and has been dealt with time and time again in Wisconsin, is going to the table with the teachers unions and working out a pay cut, which the teachers unions have time and again acquiesced to. What you DON'T do is change the rules so you just don't have to listen to teachers anymore.

The public sector unions are utterly neutered and will soon go the way of the dinosaur. Walker's agenda is not only anti-union but anti TEACHER which is simply unacceptable.

Shadow Lodge

meatrace wrote:


school districts are summarily firing teachers based on how much they get paid and hiring new teachers fresh out of college for about 26k/yr.

No way. Unions would never allow the teacher to get fired no matter how good or bad they are... oh wait.. never mind :)


meatrace wrote:


Districts are hiring new teachers. They are NOT, however, hiring MORE teachers. There was a flood of teachers (and other public workers) retiring last year, many early, in hopes of retaining their pensions before Walker can privatize them. Furthermore, now that unions cannot bargain for anything other than BASE pay (which Walker has decided to interpret as the lowest any employee in a bargaining unit is paid, rather than simply wages), school districts are summarily firing teachers based on how much they get paid and hiring new teachers fresh out of college for about 26k/yr.

As you say, and is true, that with contracts locked in school districts are unable to make budgetary constraints without cutting teacher pay or services. This is basic economics, you can't reduce your fixed costs, only your variable costs. One way you can deal with this, and has been dealt with time and time again in Wisconsin, is going to the table with the teachers unions and working out a pay cut, which the teachers unions have time and again acquiesced to. What you DON'T do is change the rules so you just don't have to listen to teachers anymore.

The public sector unions are utterly neutered and will soon go the way of the dinosaur. Walker's agenda is not only anti-union but anti TEACHER which is simply...

Any state worker that retired early because of their fear of their pensions were foolish as there is no way for Walker or anyone else to take them away from existing state employees. They can offer different options that they could choose, or possibly force new state employees to choose different options, but it is against the law to take away existing benefits.

I would like to see your proof that these firings are happening as I haven't seen that in either of the two school districts I have lived in the last two years, or in any of my friend's, and I just emailed 3 of my teacher friends and they haven't heard that happening.

And again, you are being misleading about the "willingness" of the unions to take a pay cut. The last 10 years (5 biennium contracts) before Walker none of those involved a paycut and at best involved a small pay raise (less than 2%). The State Employee unions were telling all their state employees that no concessions were going to happen even before he was elected. Only after Walker announced what Act 10 would do were they weakly trying to claim they would have conceded the changes.

In addition,WEA Trust formed by the teacher's union was criminally (in my opinion) ripping off the state and its taxpayers with their health care scam.

You and others may feel this is anti teacher (it is definitely anti union) but not everyone who is in state service believes as you and they actually believe things have improved.


Tangible Delusions wrote:


Any state worker that retired early because of their fear of their pensions were foolish as there is no way for Walker or anyone else to take them away from existing state employees. They can offer different options that they could choose, or possibly force new state employees to choose different options, but it is against the law to take away existing benefits.

I would like to see your proof that these firings are happening as I haven't seen that in either of the two school districts I have lived in the last two years, or in any of my friend's, and I just email 3 of my teacher friends and they haven't heard that happening.

And again, you are being misleading about the "willingness" of the...

They weren't foolish. It's true the state can't take away money in the pension accounts. Many pensions, as has been brought up earlier, have payouts determined by the last year employed. If they stayed an extra year during times where their salaries were being slashed they'd have reduced retirement benefits for the rest of their lives. Regardless, public employees DID retire in droves last year.

Just anecdotally? My friend Steven is a tech ed teacher and was let go and replaced by someone just out of college (about 26 years old) with no experience.

A pay raise LESS than the change in the CPI IS a pay cut.

Where in Wisconsin do you live?


meatrace wrote:

.

They weren't foolish. It's true the state can't take away money in the pension accounts. Many pensions, as has been brought up earlier, have payouts determined by the last year employed. If they stayed an extra year during times where their salaries were being slashed they'd have reduced retirement benefits for the rest of their lives. Regardless, public employees DID retire in droves last year.

Just anecdotally? My friend Steven is a tech ed teacher and was let go and replaced by someone just out of college (about 26 years old) with no experience.

A pay raise LESS than the change in the CPI IS a pay cut.

Where in Wisconsin do you live?

Actually pensions are the average of your three highest paid years in your work history, which is why you see a lot of worked overtime towards the end of people's time as state employes as the final years tend to be the highest earning years (in the last 6 years or so with furloughs and slow to non existent pay increases that hasn't always been the case). So even if something like slashing pay in your last year, it wouldn't matter.

Public employees did leave in droves because the union leadership were sending email and flyers out deceiving their members in saying Scott Walker was planning to take away pensions. I got those emails at the time. In addition, before Walker was even elected it was expected to have a high retirement rate in the years of 2008-2013 and plans were being made to be able to transition for that. Those retirements came a couple years early for many people in the last year as they either panicked or realized that they weren't going to have a better three year average than they already had.

I can't disagree that not at least getting rate of inflation raises reduces take home pay, I won't call it a pay cut. Its disingenuous as much as saying when the federal government only gives a 5% increase to budget vs 7% that it is a cut to a program.

Actually, if the deficit and revenues continue to increase and there is a surplus, I would like to see state employees get a nice raise to make up for their increased contributions this last year. It probably won't happen, but I would be for it.

I work in Dane county and live just outside of it


Well, my friends teach for the Deerfield, Stoughton and Portage school districts mainly. Though I have acquaintances that teach all over. I live in Madison.

Walker IS planning on taking away pensions. Just that, as we agree, he can't take pensions away from people who have them. He can however decide to roll all new employees into some other scheme.

Public employees left in droves because they feared getting their pay cut. If someone comes to you and says "tell you what, you keep doing your job, we're just going to pay you far far less" would you sit and take it?

Again though, if the problem is with the unions deal with the unions. Don't attack teachers. A great deal of the rhetoric on the right has been denigrating the work that educators do and reducing them to some glorified babysitter.

If your pay doesn't increase with CPI you make less from year to year. Ignorance of economic forces doesn't help your argument. Saying that agreeing to a contract in which you will make less real money ISN'T a pay cut is disingenuous. Disingenuous would be saying employment is up when it doesn't even increase at the rate of population growth, as has just happened. Same thing.

Where do you game?

Again, though, the teachers thing is a big deal but it's not even the majority of my problems with Walker. We'll see if he escapes indictment.


Oh, yes, one of the other things was denial of pension and other benefits for part time state employees. The thing is that there are a lot of jobs that are only 8 hours a week or something, and thus employees would fill 4-5 of these positions and be essentially full time employees, but have 5 different job codes. Thus they would be ineligible for benefits. Which is a crock of s&%+, and that provision essentially targeted forestry and park rangers.


I understand economic forces quite well, thank you very much. You know and I know we are talking semantics anyways so I am not going to restate once again why I don't think it should be called a pay cut and why it is deceiving to call it that.

All public state employees were taking furloughs and paying union dues in the 4 years before Act 10 came along. The contributions to pension and health care is more than those two combined, but it really wasn't too much more. Granted anything less you take home hurts.

Living through the Doyle years where I saw friends and co-worker's jobs cut, and even had a friend move to Australia because he lost his job with the state, I would take a little less money per paycheck to keep my job and remain fully staffed in my office. We lost 3 people in my section because of layoffs during Jim Doyle which meant more work for me and less time with my family and friends.

Look, as always the issues aren't as clear cut as any party would like to claim and lie somewhere between them and can even be different from location to location.

Now to a better subject, I only pretty much game now in my home or at friends' homes. My new house I moved into last year has a huge furnished basement which was immediately claimed by me before my wife started any plans for it. In the past however I gamed regularly at Misty Mountain, Pegasus and Last Square, and still do occasionally when something special is going on.


meatrace wrote:
Oh, yes, one of the other things was denial of pension and other benefits for part time state employees. The thing is that there are a lot of jobs that are only 8 hours a week or something, and thus employees would fill 4-5 of these positions and be essentially full time employees, but have 5 different job codes. Thus they would be ineligible for benefits. Which is a crock of s%&#, and that provision essentially targeted forestry and park rangers.

That has been going on for decades, long before Act 10.

101 to 150 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Wisconsin recall election. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.