WI schools save millions from collective bargaining changes

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:04 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:12 PM GMT
    There are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:18 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    He already thinks the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:21 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    Autocratic? Nonsense, the government itself curbed the collecting bargaining rights on the people who CHOOSE to work for the government. It's already that way on the federal level, why should it be different on the state level? This had nothing to do with reaching into anyone's business. People choose to work for the government and the people vote for which government they want.

    The government operates as a business and must remain solvent and operational.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:30 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    Autocratic? Nonsense, the government itself curbed the collecting bargaining rights on the people who CHOOSE to work for the government. It's already that way on the federal level, why should it be different on the state level? This had nothing to do with reaching into anyone's business. People choose to work for the government and the people vote for which government they want.

    The government operates as a business and must remain solvent and operational.


    I don't give up my civil rights when I got to work every day. Maybe you do.

    And your "choice" argument is a smoke screen for an autocratic regime, which didn't run on ending collective bargaining and did so despite the majority of Wisconsinites being against doing so. Can one teach at a public school in WI without working for the government? Can you be a cop or firefighter?

    And the government doesn't operate as a business. It operates as a government. icon_rolleyes.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:32 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    Autocratic? Nonsense, the government itself curbed the collecting bargaining rights on the people who CHOOSE to work for the government. It's already that way on the federal level, why should it be different on the state level? This had nothing to do with reaching into anyone's business. People choose to work for the government and the people vote for which government they want.

    The government operates as a business and must remain solvent and operational.


    I don't give up my civil rights when I got to work every day. Maybe you do.

    And your "choice" argument is a smoke screen for an autocratic regime, which didn't run on ending collective bargaining and did so despite the majority of Wisconsinites being against doing so. Can one teach at a public school in WI without working for the government? Can you be a cop or firefighter?

    And the government doesn't operate as a business. It operates as a government. icon_rolleyes.gif



    What you're saying is the equivalent of getting a pay cut at work because they are having financial difficulties and then accusing the business of being autocratic towards you, as though you weren't free to go elsewhere if you aren't happy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:37 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    Autocratic? Nonsense, the government itself curbed the collecting bargaining rights on the people who CHOOSE to work for the government. It's already that way on the federal level, why should it be different on the state level? This had nothing to do with reaching into anyone's business. People choose to work for the government and the people vote for which government they want.

    The government operates as a business and must remain solvent and operational.


    I don't give up my civil rights when I got to work every day. Maybe you do.

    And your "choice" argument is a smoke screen for an autocratic regime, which didn't run on ending collective bargaining and did so despite the majority of Wisconsinites being against doing so. Can one teach at a public school in WI without working for the government? Can you be a cop or firefighter?

    And the government doesn't operate as a business. It operates as a government. icon_rolleyes.gif



    What you're saying is the equivalent of getting a pay cut at work because they are having financial difficulties and then accusing the business of being autocratic towards you, as though you weren't free to go elsewhere if you aren't happy.


    No. I'm saying that if I and my colleagues decided to collectively bargain for our wages (which we do not) that would be our choice. This is not about one person seeking a raise or pay cut. It's about an entire profession being blamed and attacked for the outcomes of poverty and lack of government investment in public education.

    I also do not work for the government and, therefore, do not need to be protected from the politics of having such a job.

    Government is not a private entity and it's not a business. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2011 6:42 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 saidThere are many ways in which Democratic values are more expensive than Autocratic regimes. I'm sure ending voting would also save millions for WI. Maybe you'll support that next.


    Autocratic? Nonsense, the government itself curbed the collecting bargaining rights on the people who CHOOSE to work for the government. It's already that way on the federal level, why should it be different on the state level? This had nothing to do with reaching into anyone's business. People choose to work for the government and the people vote for which government they want.

    The government operates as a business and must remain solvent and operational.


    I don't give up my civil rights when I got to work every day. Maybe you do.

    And your "choice" argument is a smoke screen for an autocratic regime, which didn't run on ending collective bargaining and did so despite the majority of Wisconsinites being against doing so. Can one teach at a public school in WI without working for the government? Can you be a cop or firefighter?

    And the government doesn't operate as a business. It operates as a government. icon_rolleyes.gif



    What you're saying is the equivalent of getting a pay cut at work because they are having financial difficulties and then accusing the business of being autocratic towards you, as though you weren't free to go elsewhere if you aren't happy.


    No. I'm saying that if I and my colleagues decided to collectively bargain for our wages (which we do not) that would be our choice. This is not about one person seeking a raise or pay cut. It's about an entire profession being blamed and attacked for the outcomes of poverty and lack of government investment in public education.

    I also do not work for the government and, therefore, do not need to be protected from the politics of having such a job.

    Government is not a private entity and it's not a business. icon_rolleyes.gif


    But the government has to do what it can to remain solvent so that it can continue serving the people. How come you believe in full collective bargaining for state workers but not federal ones?

    I don't believe that unions were blamed for anything, they simply portrayed a picture that they were being blamed in order to look victimized.

    That being said, I do believe that Walker should have cut his own pay and benefits as well in order to be fair since everyone is talking about sacrifice.