ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Public Sector Unions

lligevets

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 777

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 4:29 am

[quote]


I - financial institution created a financial product, sold that product to pension plans that were created by Unions, then they lie about the value and worth of their financial product ... then they insure themselves against loses if the financial product does not succeed and then keep on pushing the bad product that they invented.


 Modern Unions operate no different than our government full of bureaucracy and billions of dollars to play with. Unions have some of the biggest lobbyists on capital hill. Playing golf with senators, vacation in the Bahamas with the congressman. The Unions are part of our problem in America.


In my opinion you left out some important information within the above paragraph


 - financial institution created a financial product, sold that product to pension plans that were created by modern Unions and government, then they lie about the value and worth of their financial product ... then they insure themselves (with the power of the government Via laws and regulations) against loses if the financial product does not succeed and then keep on pushing the bad product that they invented. With major help from Government while our leaders Dem. and Rep. gives them (Private business, Union via. contracts) Billions upon billions of dollars. 

 


 



 Now you have to admit that takes some serious balls to pull this on off. Our government, our very leaders, have given away over a trillion dollars to the largest and most wealthy people in the entire world. They did not give this money to the middle class, or even the poor. They gave all the money to the filthy rich.  Including the Unions with huge contracts that no other American citizen is even allowed to bid on within the private sector.  All those regular people that we continue to hear about loosing their lifesaving their homes and property. These people get $0.00 money while the very people you propping up as saviors take the whole lot.

caltrek2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2654

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:09 am

BamBam:


Very interesting links that you provided in previous post about problems in the election process. I never disputed that such problems exist. What I asked for were “links that actually show involvement of Democratic Party operatives or politicians in massive voter fraud or stolen elections within the last 25 years?”


Sorry, but your links utterly failed to produce any such evidence.


You did reference the 2008 Minnesota election for U.S. Senator in which an estimate was presented which stated that 341 felons illegally voted in the election. The link notes that Al Franken’s margin in the election was 312 votes. To come to the conclusion that the election was therefore tipped by those felons, you would have to conclude that 312 of the 341 felons voted for Franken, a highly improbable statistic.  



More to the point I was making, nothing in your article gives any evidence or even  suggests that “Democratic Party operatives or politicians” in any way encouraged those felons to illegally vote. In fact, as the author of the link I cited in response indicated, “it was Franken’s legal team during the recount’s election contest trial that raised the prospect that felons voted in the election”.

In your link to the story about the Colorado U.S. Senate race in 2010 it states that




Of those non-citizen registered voters, nearly 5,000 took part in the 2010 general election in which Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet narrowly defeated Republican Ken Buck.”


This may very well be true, but what that story fails to mention is that Bennet won that race with 851,590 votes versus Ken Buck’s 822,731 votes. Clearly the estimated number of 5,000 non-citizen registered voters could not have made the difference in that election. That is not to say that any non-citizen voters illegally voting is a good situation, just that it did not tip that election. Moreover, nothing in the linked story points to any activities by “Democratic Party operatives or politicians” to encourage such an illegal activity.


Contrast this with the 2000 election where Bush’s brother and the Republican Secretary of State actively engaged in policies to disenfranchise voters who should have otherwise been allowed to vote:


http://www.thenation.com/article/floridas-disappeared-voters-disfranchised-gop


Moreover, there were the actions of Republican appointed members of the Supreme Court, some of whom should have recuesed themselves for conflicts of interest, that led to the votes that were cast not being properly counted:


 http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/111201a.html


 So, when Corwin tells me to stop trying to blame it on one party, I think he greatly misses the point of how disdainful the Republican Party was proven to be of democratic processes and the right to vote in the 2000 election.


Now, in Wisconsin we see a Republican Governor and other Republican elected officials disdainful of proper procedure in their rush to attack on unions that represent a segment of the working class. No doubt they were encouraged by huge amounts of campaign contributions made to them by fat cat anti-union multi-millionaires and billionaires. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court, still populated by some members who were around in 2000 and reinforced by members appointed by the very same Bush who benefitted from the stolen election, suddenly reverses decades of precedents in order to protect the “right” of corporations to contribute to political campaigns. This after several decades in which unions in the private sector have shrunken due to the onslaught of anti-union activities as well as exportation of jobs to such non-union countries as China.


Make no mistake, Governor Walkers actions are an act of class war against the working class people of this country. An act sponsored by an elite who have shown disdain for the democratic rights of any that oppose their hand selected leadership. That you, Corwin, and Yanks can’t seem to connect all these dots is of deep disappointment to me.


 


 


As Americans, we sometimes suffer from too much pluribus and not enough unum. - Arthur Schelsinger, Jr.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:31 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>- in America the top 400 earners make as much as the lowest 150 million people. so when we talk about burden and sacrifice and the taxpayers (plural) we need to be clear as to who and what.


Strike #1


Supposedly, the top 400 wealthiest own more than the poorest 150 million people in America. That's completely different than how you worded it.  Their wealth is an accumulation over a lifetime (or several lifetimes if inherited) and compares that to total wealth of "poor" Americans (including children who haven't even entered the work force.)


Also, if you actually look at the information on government spending - even if you got your wish to steal 100% of their wealth, it would only fund the government for just a few weeks.  And then what?  The money would all be gone and those titans of industry wouldn't have any money to invest into business and hire people or create new products, etc.  What then?!?!


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:36 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>- here is where bam bam will trot out "redistribution of wealth", as if that is so unacceptable. well just look at the redistribution of wealth that happened a few years ago.

>- financial institution created a financial product, sold that product to pension plans that were created by Unions, then they lie about the value and worth of their financial product ... then they insure themselves against loses if the financial product does not succeed and then keep on pushing the bad product that they invented.

>- they invent a "sh*tty deal" (their own words) and pay evaluators to lie about the worth of the product and sell that product to companies that manage Union pension funds.

>- the Unions and the other middle-class people lose all their money, in products they were told were as safe as government securities, and that money does not disappear, it went directly into the pockets of those that invented the products.

>- then they get paid AGAIN using money the government borrowed from China and then again when they get fired, and then again when WE, the United States Taxpayer, have to hold up the contractual obligations we entered into with them. (we have to honor contracts with CEOs but not teachers or the elderly).

>- so redistribution of wealth is bad when you are honest about it, but good when you rip off widowed old ladies and others that paid into a contractual system their whole lives.

>- i doubt the libertarians can even see this, let alone understand it. 

>- when the government screws people bad, but when people screw people good. so let's just lassie-faire it up and get rid of the FDA and EPA, and enjoy a world of sky-rocketing infant mortality and such. 


Strike 2....  And Strike 3!!!!  You're out!!!


Just because the government screws people out in the open (via law), doesn't make it right.  And when a company purposefully mislabels a product to screw someone, that's equally as wrong - they should be prosecuted.


And speaking of breaking contracts - that's exactly what the government did with GM - they broke contracts to help the unions.


What Rusty doesn't realize is that those people with intergrity - who believe in honesty - have the same values regardless of whether its public or private.  The government shouldn't steal and neither should a company.


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:43 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>That election had massive issues - made the 2000 Florida look like child's play.

>- thanks bam bam

>- two wars and trillions of dollars and that election was child's play?

>- Florida was an atrocity that i will never forget, I remember watching the election results that night and when Bush was told that it looked like Gore was going to win Florida Bush had a look on his and face said "that can't be right."

>- how would he know what to expect? oh yeah, his own brother was the governor of the state and the elections official just happened to be a republican that would later profit from her actions.

>- child's play indeed. as for felons voting, what about non-felons being prevented from voting just because they had a similar name as a felon; and the no-vote lists were generated by a company hired and run by republicans? yeah, sure? that election was so badly stolen it was child's play. get real.

>
Once again - you assume too much.  I didn't specify demrat or repugnant - both sides played games - which is why it had to go through the court system.


And non-felons aren't "prevented from voting" because they have a similar name as a felon - they just cast a provisional ballot.  The officials have to verify who they are to confirm that the person is NOT a felon.  Once it's confirmed, the ballot is accepted.  This is a very common occurrence.


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:51 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>- bam bam

>- your own table shows the point i am trying to make.

>- the top 25% pay ~85% of taxes

>- the lowest 50% pretty much pay no tax

>- and the people in the middle, from 51-74% pays the remaining 15% and these peoples only crime is literally being "middle-class"

>- oddly the facts you present are the same facts fox news uses to rationalize attacking unions. they say that the average worker makes less than 32,000 a year and that teachers are bad because they make 51,000 dollars a year. This is insane! so we are attacking the middle-class for being the middle class?

>- so the top 25% (actually the top 1%) have convinced the lowest 50% of workers to attack the next highest group in the table, the 25% above them, as the source of the budget woes and not the tax breaks for the top 1% that were given, etc.

>- so the argument goes that if you don't have enough revenue then tax the people that contribute 15% to the revenue and not the people that contribute 85% of the money. this is ridiculous.

>- if the government needs money then they should not look for it where most of the money actually is? it is this kind of thinking that got us where we are today.

>- punishing teachers for working hard, going to school and doing all we told them they should do to become middle class; and then say, you are middle class unlike most everyone else so you are bad, and is insane. you don't deserve what you worked for. like bill gates worked his own way through Harvard and paid for it all himself and that is why it was not a waste of his parents money when he dropped out.

>- if more politicians and others that talk about keeping what you earn actually ever earned what they have instead of inheriting it, their argument would be stronger; but as is obvious with this thread, they only trot out anecdotes of such success and not any data.

>
As I said - it's the IRS' table, not mine - and it shows quite well how the government penalizes those who earn or have more.  And a huge number of the wealthiest people earned it themselves.  You Marxists just don't think they should keep what they have.


The problem is NOT revenue - the IRS takes in way too much revenue as it is... The problem is government growth and spending. 


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:53 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>- i am this way because i am still learning the new political tactics, but it seems the new world is not one of reasonableness or compromise; but of extremes.  
Exactly as Marxists want it.


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 11:55 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>Most of you guys forget that the reason the public sector jobs look so cushy is that the private sector SUCKS. They have squeezed more and more and more productivity out of their workers while forcing down their wages, cutting their benefits, and simply eliminating their jobs. So now the public sector jobs look great in comparison because they have not had their wages and benefits savaged by a company looking to increase its profits.

>- bingo, Jedi must ACTUALLY be a jedi.

>- public sector unions are not getting the sweet deal, they are the only ones left getting a fair deal.

>- and republicans hate fair trade, but love free trade. (it is free because they don't actually have to pay people what their wok is worth). 

>
Amazing the arrogance - you think you can determine what people's labor is worth instead of the market....  As I keep saying - if someone doesn't think they're getting paid what they're worth, they can go somewhere else - or invest their own money and risk it all for a better paycheck.


caltrek2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2654

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 2:24 pm

caltrek: Make no mistake, Governor Walkers actions are an act of class war against the working class people of this country. An act sponsored by an elite who have shown disdain for the democratic rights of any that oppose their hand selected leadership. That you, Corwin, and Yanks can’t seem to connect all these dots is of deep disappointment to me.


 


Yanks: Make no mistake, He isn't done yet and other states are following suit.


 


No " Rights" were violated. Just unfair privalages accepted for years under the false pretence of faithful government service. We will end the unending unfair pipeline of money to corrupt Democrats.


caltrek: Read it and weep Yanks:


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/31/wisconsin-judge-declares-union-law-effect/


 


A Wisconsin judge ruled Thursday that the state's explosive new union law that would severely limit the collective bargaining power of most public-sector employees is not in effect.


 


 


...and in Ohio:


 



http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/01/us-ohio-unions-governor-idUSTRE72U62W20110401


 


Ohio Democrats want to overturn the new law through a referendum on the November ballot. Under Ohio law, the measure does not take effect for 90 days. If opponents are able to secure the approximately 231,000 signatures needed to place a referendum on the ballot during the 90 days, the law will be on hold until the election in November.


Public opposition to the bill was intense and the Democrats' chances of getting a referendum are "very good" but it's hard to say how it will do in November, said Ohio State University political science professor Paul Beck.


"If the vote were held right now, the bill would be overturned," said Beck. "The real question is will the intensity survive between now and November."


 



 


 


 




 


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 3:26 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>As I keep saying - if someone doesn't think they're getting paid what they're worth, they can go somewhere else - or invest their own money and risk it all for a better paycheck.

>- this cliche and axiom and talking point is so impractical; it is risible. 

>- this is not practical for so many; eg. a single mother with two kids.

>- you have no empathy bam bam; that is not a good sign ... but i understand. 

>
Rusty, it may not be easy or painless, but tt's practical for EVERYONE.  And empathy doesn't set wages at a macro level.  If an individual chooses to pay more than market value for someone because they have "empathy", then that's their choice, but forcing it on the American taxpayer is impractical and unethical.


FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46297

Report this Apr. 02 2011, 3:54 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>

>As I keep saying - if someone doesn't think they're getting paid what they're worth, they can go somewhere else - or invest their own money and risk it all for a better paycheck.

>- this cliche and axiom and talking point is so impractical; it is risible. 

>- this is not practical for so many; eg. a single mother with two kids.

>- you have no empathy bam bam; that is not a good sign ... but i understand. 

>
Rusty, it may not be easy or painless, but tt's practical for EVERYONE.  And empathy doesn't set wages.

- so just screw women and children and let them suffer?

- worth sets wages and when i see a CEO actual do a worthy job or get up off his butt and mow his own lawn; then maybe i will start to believe.

- then again, anecdotes are not evidence ... America has LESS social mobility than Great Britain ... we have less chance of social change in this country than in a country that has royalty.

- so keep on living in a dream guys.

- In America the poor see themselves not as exploited but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires (paraphrased) John Steinbeck Jr. - a great American writer.

 

And there it is - the "victim" card!  (Standard socialist mentality - big oppressive government there to save the "victims" from the "villains" because the government knows what's best for everyone...)  I never said to "screw" them - but don't blame the taxpayer for someone's situation and don't make the taxpayer responsible.  Are there sad situations?  Yes, but the government is NOT the answer.  There's nothing (except excessive taxes) stopping you from helping them - by choice.


Like every other employee, what a CEO makes is what the company and the CEO agreed to.  Do I think there are bad CEOs?  Sure, but it's none of my business if I'm not a shareholder.  If you don't like what they make, buy stock and say something at a company meeting.  Ultimately, it should be the shareholders that determine the CEO's salary.


Lieutenant_Jedi

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1728

Report this Apr. 03 2011, 7:35 pm

Like every other employee, what a CEO makes is what the company and the CEO agreed to.  Do I think there are bad CEOs?  Sure, but it's none of my business if I'm not a shareholder.  If you don't like what they make, buy stock and say something at a company meeting.  Ultimately, it should be the shareholders that determine the CEO's salary.


 


When the primary shareholders are the board of directors that set the salary of the CEO, and those shareholders control the majority of the stock and the votes, then your advice is unlikely to be successful. 


And time and again, your calls for personal responsibility run hollow. Each and every person is supposed to work hard to benefit him or herself. 


Yet we are not alone, on our own island. We are part of a society of people. We are not isolated. So if we look to only our only well-being, and reject any responsibility for the well being of others, than we are fools. 

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum