Public Sector Union Beatdown Bloodbath Legismania 2011 Wisconsin-style

[Lemur]

So apparently my state is having a big brouhaha, a kerfluffle, a haymaker. Our new governor campaigned on a platform of slashing the public sector unions down to size, and lo, behold, once in office he's trying to do it, much to howls of dismay and anguish.

Anyway, a couple of questions:

If you're going to go after the public sector unions, why exempt police and firefighters (http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20110214/OSH0101/110214045/Exemptions-for-police-fire-fighters-in-Walker-budget-bill-sparks-questions-of-political-payback)? Is there any conceivable rationale for that? 'Cause to my eyes, it sure looks like it's okay to go after the chicks who work in the schools, but leave the dudes out of it! A friend has suggested it's because the policeman's union and firefighter's union endorsed him as a candidate. Who knows? It just seems very weird to me.

The dem legislators have fled the state (http://www.startribune.com/local/116399599.html) to prevent a vote on the subject. Subversion of democratic process or heroic last stand against tea party tyranny? Discuss.

Oh, and there are big protests. It's just like Egypt, except that it isn't. At all.

[HoreTore]

Can anyone explain to me how cutting teachers wages will give you better teachers, as opposed to worse?

[drone]

Can anyone explain to me how cutting teachers wages will give you better teachers, as opposed to worse?
The plan is not to cut the wages, but prevent what the public sector unions can negotiate for in their bargaining. It's an attempt to break the vicious cycle of unions funding Democrat candidates, who then give taxpayer dollars to the unions in negotiations. Targeted are the COL raises and extra-tasty benefits, I believe, to save the state of Wisconsin from going bankrupt.

I've been reading articles on this all day, and the comments sections are gold. There is a lot of knee-jerk anti-capitalist sentiment going around, which makes no sense since these jobs are not part of the capitalist system. :shrug: I'm happy I live in a right to work state.

[HoreTore]

Removing benefits and cutting pay is the exact same thing, as "benefit" is simply another word for "wage".

In order to save money, they are making it less attractive to be a teacher. How will that encourage the good ones to stay, and the bad ones to leave, opposed to the other way around?

[Crazed Rabbit]

So apparently my state is having a big brouhaha, a kerfluffle, a haymaker. Our new governor campaigned on a platform of slashing the public sector unions down to size, and lo, behold, once in office he's trying to do it, much to howls of dismay and anguish.

Anyway, a couple of questions:

If you're going to go after the public sector unions, why exempt police and firefighters (http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20110214/OSH0101/110214045/Exemptions-for-police-fire-fighters-in-Walker-budget-bill-sparks-questions-of-political-payback)? Is there any conceivable rationale for that?


Maybe because their jobs involve real danger?


The dem legislators have fled the state (http://www.startribune.com/local/116399599.html) to prevent a vote on the subject. Subversion of democratic process or heroic last stand against tea party tyranny? Discuss.

Subversion, says I.


How will that encourage the good ones to stay, and the bad ones to leave, opposed to the other way around?

Get rid of union protections, and you can easily fire bad teachers, thus making life easier for the good teachers. Plus, you can pay merit pay and not just more pay for being in the job longer, regardless of quality.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

Get rid of union protections, and you can easily fire bad teachers, thus making life easier for the good teachers. Plus, you can pay merit pay and not just more pay for being in the job longer, regardless of quality.

This is completely the opposite direction needed. Every time legislature comes up regarding teachers, people continue to talk about solutions that will make the problem worse.

1. Tenure is there because parents are idiots. I fully support removing tenure in favor of a more fluid and workable teacher's bill of rights, but without the union, teachers would literally become babysitters and not figuratively. 95% of parents don't keep track of their students, as long as the students comes home without bruises and passes classes, they don't care. But 5% of parents seem to think that they need to start telling teachers what books they can and can't teach, what grades their children should be getting etc... In fact your first statement does even make sense, by getting rid of bad teachers, good teachers have an easier life? Except for the fact that bad teachers don't affect good teachers, they only affect the students.

2. Merit pay is the most widely touted and least thought out education reform idea there is out there. There is no way to judge how good a teacher is quantitatively to a precise measurement. Merit pay is anything but. You are deciding the pay of the teacher based on the efforts and laziness of the student of their class. Not only will this basically create two tiers of payment (one for AP students who try and one for regular classes where students need extra help in getting their life going), but you will essentially cause all the "good" teachers to try and flood the AP teaching classes and no one except those who are the least knowledgeable or qualified or experienced will teach the regular students. The regular students are the ones who need the best and most inspiring teachers in the first place. All my AP classmates had their "life plan" already figured out and what they didn't get in class they already read from the book the day before. They don't need the best, they need a teacher to simply convey information into the packets they need to regurgitate on the test.

I am seriously going to have to start an education reform thread.

[Lemur]

Maybe because their jobs involve real danger?
That makes no sense, and doesn't even hold up to the slightest scrutiny. If danger is the measure of whether or not union organizing can take place ... dang it, Rabbit, do I need to walk through why that's hogwash? Prison guards face as much real danger as a beat cop, but their union wasn't given a pass. And since when has "danger" been the organizing principle of what workers can collectively organize? Should fishermen be unionized since they have one of the most dangerous jobs?

I don't really mind our governor going after the public sector unions, but it bothers me that everyone thinks it's fine to attack the girls (teachers) and save the plums for the boys (police and firefighters). Seems like some sort of reflexive sexist bullhockey. Your thoughtless response just reinforces that impression.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Well as we know from CR's reporting, the police have their own fraternal order! They simply made that guy an offer he could not refuse! We also know that firefighters do more than pose for hunk of the year, they are the fraternity's loveable face to the ouside world saving kittens from crazy cat ladies and so on... ~;)

More seriously though, I expect that slashing teacher's pay can be spoon fed to the voters as being good for finances and somehow good for that wretched education system you apparently have, but slashing cops' pay means being lax on law and order, slashing firefighter pay is being lax on public safety we can't have that, can we now?

[Crazed Rabbit]

1. Tenure is there because parents are idiots. I fully support removing tenure in favor of a more fluid and workable teacher's bill of rights, but without the union, teachers would literally become babysitters and not figuratively. 95% of parents don't keep track of their students, as long as the students comes home without bruises and passes classes, they don't care. But 5% of parents seem to think that they need to start telling teachers what books they can and can't teach, what grades their children should be getting etc... In fact your first statement does even make sense, by getting rid of bad teachers, good teachers have an easier life? Except for the fact that bad teachers don't affect good teachers, they only affect the students.

So what about those parents who want to tell teachers what to do? Don't listen to them.

Yes, getting rid of bad teachers, who teach students poorly, makes things easier for other teachers who don't have to deal with poorly taught students in other grades or classes.


There is no way to judge how good a teacher is quantitatively to a precise measurement.

It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.


That makes no sense, and doesn't even hold up to the slightest scrutiny.

It doesn't?

The public perception of police and firefighters is that they face dangers hardly anyone else does. That they sacrifice a lot for modest wages. So when the governor doesn't go after their unions he doesn't appear stingy with 'heroes', and by comparison he appears more reasonable when he tries to cut the other unions.


I don't really mind our governor going after the public sector unions, but it bothers me that everyone thinks it's fine to attack the girls (teachers) and save the plums for the boys (police and firefighters). Seems like some sort of reflexive sexist bullhockey. Your thoughtless response just reinforces that impression.

Oh, and prison guards aren't mostly men?

You accuse me of sexism while generalizing all teachers as women, and all police as men?

You assume I don't want police unions busted up simply because I offered a reason why they weren't included?

But why bother about all that when you can accuse me of sexism?

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

So what about those parents who want to tell teachers what to do? Don't listen to them.

Yes, getting rid of bad teachers, who teach students poorly, makes things easier for other teachers who don't have to deal with poorly taught students in other grades or classes.

You don't understand the school system. Parents get what they want because the school board in many cases are elected by the district public. They want to keep their job so they for the most part concede and force schools to accept the demands of parents. Same goes for school administration.

Example: The woman of this blog: http://fortheloveofya.blogspot.com/2010/10/this-is-not-me-backing-down_05.html
Originally posted this story (before she removed it because of reasons given in the first link): (this is a mirrow someone made btw)http://speakloudly.org/2010/10/censorship-at-its-finest-remembering-risha-mullins-story/

EDIT: Your second sentence there still doesn't make sense. How one teacher teaches does not affect another "good" teacher. If a math teacher is bad at teaching math, the students are not inherently dumber when they walk into their english class.



It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.
CR

But isn't for the reasons I described. Instead of treating teachers equally we would be shafting the majority of teachers stuck with the regular students. They will be angry at how teachers that do less work because their students are motivated get paid more. This means that more teachers both good and bad will leave the profession which means less for our students which means higher class room sizes which are already overcrowded etc... it is just a terrible idea that is actually worse than the status quo.

[Crazed Rabbit]

You don't understand the school system. Parents get what they want because the school board in many cases are elected by the district public. They want to keep their job so they for the most part concede and force schools to accept the demands of parents. Same goes for school administration.

You just said 5% of parents were the problem - how can such a minority force anyone to accept their demands? If that's the issue, there's bigger problems.


But isn't for the reasons I described. Instead of treating teachers equally we would be shafting the majority of teachers stuck with the regular students. They will be angry at how teachers that do less work because their students are motivated get paid more. This means that more teachers both good and bad will leave the profession which means less for our students which means higher class room sizes which are already overcrowded etc... it is just a terrible idea that is actually worse than the status quo.


It doesn't have to be perfect. But using student test grades (and scaling AP class grades as appropriate) is a lot better than the current union endorsed system.

That means (as a quick example only) teachers with students in AP classes averaging A's on state exams would get the same pay as teachers in non-AP classes with students averaging B's.

:rolleyes:

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

You just said 5% of parents were the problem - how can such a minority force anyone to accept their demands? If that's the issue, there's bigger problems.

I don't know CR, how does any group of people that are not a majority manage to get anything done in politics? The school board does what ever the public wants it to do. When the only members of the public that interact with them are the 5% that are crazy and selfish, then those are the only people they will listen to.

It is just like how come politicians don't respond to what the youth want, but love to cater to older people? Why is that? Because older people interact with government through voting a whole lot more than the youth do.




That means (as a quick example only) teachers with students in AP classes averaging A's on state exams would get the same pay as teachers in non-AP classes with students averaging B's.

:rolleyes:

CR

Except that correlation doesn't make sense. Why does an AP A equal an average B? Where is the correlation? You need some basis to go off of otherwise it is just pissing i nthe wind and would still be unfair. As I have already said, the quality of teachers cannot be quantitatively measured to the degree of precision you need to make a system like this work.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I don't know CR, how does any group of people that are not a majority manage to get anything done in politics? The school board does what ever the public wants it to do. When the only members of the public that interact with them are the 5% that are crazy and selfish, then those are the only people they will listen to.

It is just like how come politicians don't respond to what the youth want, but love to cater to older people? Why is that? Because older people interact with government through voting a whole lot more than the youth do.

It's because old people vote. Interaction has squat to do with it. And those 5% of crazies wouldn't control elections - even if they were all crazy in the same ways on the same issues. The school board wouldn't be that stupid.


Except that correlation doesn't make sense. Why does an AP A equal an average B? Where is the correlation? You need some basis to go off of otherwise it is just pissing i nthe wind and would still be unfair.

Good grief.

(as a quick example only)



As I have already said, the quality of teachers cannot be quantitatively measured to the degree of precision you need to make a system like this work.

Sure it can. It may not work perfectly, but it would work a heck of a lot better than the current "pay teachers more if they've been around longer, regardless of how well they teach".

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Where is the evidence that the problems in education are with the teachers? At all?

[Whacker]

Ahh, the backroom. Yet again I shall gaze into the abyss.

Seeing how I'm married to a 3rd grade teacher, I'd just like to say that ACIN has a very solid grasp of what's going on in the teaching world these days. I'm no fan of unions, but seeing what NC has been doing to it's teachers over the past year or two and what they've gotten away with because NC has no teachers union is appalling. On top of that, I'm to understand that RDU's board of education has made it on national news for all of the ridiculously stupid crap they've been pulling lately, and there's even talk of the local schools losing accreditation. There are a very, very few problem teachers that can and should be fired, but from what I've seen through my wife's eyes in trying to get rid of the trouble teachers, it's not a damn bit different than if there were a union or not. In short, I don't see unions or the lack thereof as the problem in terms of teaching. At least not here in this state.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Seeing how I'm married to a 3rd grade teacher, I'd just like to say that ACIN has a very solid grasp of what's going on in the teaching world these days.

Thank you. :bow:

[a completely inoffensive name]

It's because old people vote. Interaction has squat to do with it. And those 5% of crazies wouldn't control elections - even if they were all crazy in the same ways on the same issues. The school board wouldn't be that stupid.

Is not voting not an interaction between the public and the government? Every time we vote the government reacts to our demands (theoretically).

I am not going to say that the 5% "control" electrons. But this is the situation. Most parents don't care, like I said earlier. They will keep voting in the same people, time after time after time because they don't pay attention, like with a lot of local elections. The 5% that are crazy (I regret using that word), the 5% that are inadvertently undermining the system and teachers, will go that extra mile to smear by word of mouth to as many parents as possible. They portray a member as hurtful towards the future of your children or whatever emotional statement you can come up with involving children. People get worried over their children and start voting out people. School boards know this, so they go along with the extreme 5%. Why else has there been a "most banned books" list from the American Library Association for the past couple decades? It's because this extreme 5% holds a lot of power. (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged/challengesbytype/index.cfm)

The school board is actually very smart in this case. They know that parents are quite happy to vote out an incumbent if they feel their children's lives are in danger.



Sure it can. It may not work perfectly, but it would work a heck of a lot better than the current "pay teachers more if they've been around longer, regardless of how well they teach".

CR

Ok, maybe I have gone about this in the wrong way. Why exactly is this a better method? I have already given numerous reasons why it is worse. You have not countered them, but you insist that merit pay is somehow better. Please elaborate why. Please also elaborate on how you can measure the quality of teachers precisely enough to be able to create a weighing system that is fair for AP teachers and regular teachers alike. Please don't throw out "as a quick example", because if you recognize that your quick example has major flaws in it that need elaboration than elaborate before declaring again that your system is better.

I want to clarify. I think the current system sucks. I know first hand that older teachers can be worse from being burnt out for so many years and as such don't deserve the pay they get. But merit pay is even worse because it turns teachers against each other and forces a "weighing" system that from what I can tell is neither factually supported to be accurate or immune from manipulation.

[drone]

The biggest travesty here is the union's support of Democrat election efforts. Lemur and his fellow cheeseheads pay state income tax, sales tax, and property tax to the Wisconsin state government and municipal governments. A large percentage of these taxes goes to education, and the salaries of teachers. Automatically deducted from these salaries are union dues, and a fair amount of these dues goes to the political campaigns of Democrats across the state. This is something public sector unions should not be able to do.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The biggest travesty here is the union's support of Democrat election efforts. Lemur and his fellow cheeseheads pay state income tax, sales tax, and property tax to the Wisconsin state government and municipal governments. A large percentage of these taxes goes to education, and the salaries of teachers. Automatically deducted from these salaries are union dues, and a fair amount of these dues goes to the political campaigns of Democrats across the state. This is something public sector unions should not be able to do.

Why? I thought in America everyone has the ability to lobby their representatives?

[drone]

Why? I thought in America everyone has the ability to lobby their representatives?
Why should Lemur's tax dollars favor one party over another?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why should Lemur's tax dollars favor one party over another?

Because they are not tax dollars? They are union dues. The union collects them because you signed a contract with them to join. They are now the union's to spend. If they feel one party works for unions more than the other, than they are doing their job.

[drone]

Because they are not tax dollars? They are union dues. The union collects them because you signed a contract with them to join. They are now the union's to spend. If they feel one party works for unions more than the other, than they are doing their job.
I think you are missing my point. Lemur is not a teacher (to the best of my knowledge). He is not a member of the union. Teachers are paid in local and state tax dollars. Teachers salaries are docked union dues, hence the union gets Lemur's tax dollars. Union dues go to support candidates of the Democrat persuasion. Maybe Lemur does not like the Democrat candidate in his district, or other districts for that matter. Tough luck, he supports them anyway because his tax dollars go to them through teacher union dues. Lemur may or may not mind this arrangement, I'm sure Vuk is not happy about it at all.

What the UAW does with it's dues is between it and it's members. What teachers (and other public sector) unions do with their dues needs to be controlled, since these dues are public funds.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think you are missing my point. Lemur is not a teacher (to the best of my knowledge). He is not a member of the union. Teachers are paid in local and state tax dollars. Teachers salaries are docked union dues, hence the union gets Lemur's tax dollars. Union dues go to support candidates of the Democrat persuasion. Maybe Lemur does not like the Democrat candidate in his district, or other districts for that matter. Tough luck, he supports them anyway because his tax dollars go to them through teacher union dues. Lemur may or may not mind this arrangement, I'm sure Vuk is not happy about it at all.

What the UAW does with it's dues is between it and it's members. What teachers (and other public sector) unions do with their dues needs to be controlled, since these dues are public funds.

If you think that by the end of that chain of events that the money is still yours, there is a problem.

I paid X company to provide me with services. They took some of that money and paid their unionized workers. The unionized workers pay for their unions with union dues from their salary. Companies are spending my tax dollars on candidates I don't want.

None of what you said makes sense. The money is now the government's to spend at the discretion of the public wants. The public wants teachers. Government pays teachers. it is now the teacher's money he/she worked for. The teacher wants a union, teacher pays for a union. Somehow you now make the connection that paying taxes=supporting democratic candidates because of this long chain of events that serve only to highlight the life of a dollar. Your argument is completely false.

[drone]

The teacher wants a union, teacher pays for a union.
Since Wisconsin is not a right to work state, the teacher has no choice, the teacher pays for the union whether they want it or not. This is what make that chain of events a valid argument.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

It's a problem when politicians can grant money to unions and get the money right back in campaign donations. It's a conflict of interest. Much like when they can give tax breaks to businesses and then get money in campaign donations. But is the problem that politicians can raise teacher salaries and give tax breaks, or is it a campaign finance problem?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Since Wisconsin is not a right to work state, the teacher has no choice, the teacher pays for the union whether they want it or not. This is what make that chain of events a valid argument.

What Sasaki said.

[PanzerJaeger]

The backlash threatens to undercut one of the Democratic Party’s most stalwart backers — and upset a mutually beneficial relationship where the unions provided financial support and foot soldiers for Democratic campaigns, in return for political cover to protect their prerogatives in the U.S. Congress and state capitols across the nation.

The National Education Association, the largest teachers union, spent $40 million on the 2010 elections alone, making the union one of the largest outside funders of Democratic campaigns.

Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan sounded surprisingly like the Republican governors when he told teachers unions and administrators at a conference Tuesday in Denver, “Clearly, the status quo isn’t working for children.”

What’s remarkable now, however, is how closely some of the Republicans’ complaints mirror those of the Obama administration, whose Race to the Top education initiative includes programs that have long been anathema to the unions, such as merit pay for teachers and giving districts the ability to fire bad teachers.

Obama and Duncan have made clear that their vision for the country’s teachers includes getting tougher on them. “It is time to start rewarding good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones,” the president said shortly after taking office.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49706.html#ixzz1EISdbh1O

This is a critical point in American history. We can either bow to the unions, or take our fiscal future back. The GOP and the Obama Administration must work together to destroy the union stranglehold on America's children.

I hope Scott Walker breaks these corrupt unions and sends those throngs of leeches skulking around the capitol instead of working a message. This isn’t France and they need to learn their place.

They are state employees and if the state cannot afford their sweetheart benefits, they don't get to threaten the state's children's education. If they believe they are getting such a bad deal, they can give 30 days notice and try and find a better one in the private sector. Good luck to them on that. The sick outs are pathetic, childish, and a clear demonstration that this has nothing to do with the children.

Those Democratic state senators should be thrown in jail as well.

I've seen a lot of human interest non-stories about these people's ‘suffering’, but I have yet to hear a reporter ask them where they think the money is going to come from to fund their pensions. I suppose they expect the state to raise taxes on everyone else who actually has to save for retirement.

Is Pinkerton Security still around... or some of Mubarak's camel warriors?

'You will contribute a modest percentage of your healthcare and pension costs, or we will run you over with camels and then beat the hell out of you.'

Yes.

[Centurion1]

ACIN is right about teachers. My mother teaches middle school and its a nightmare. And she teaches at the good public school........... she maintains high grades on her state exams for her students and they score normally on benchmarks butt he stories she tells....... a bunch of little ***** they are. And as ACIN said it all comes back to that 5% Ignore them CR fat chance of that happening. Administrators are a bunch of tools for the most part and are afraid of lawsuits so they ignore the misbehavior of students and step all over their own teachers to appease parents insane demands. The accommodations my mother has to make are sickening. My mother is about as conservative as they come and she is grateful to the union at some point for standing up for her rights and fighting the state to pay her a decent wage.

Students, Administration and Parents are the problem not teachers

[Lemur]

The public perception of police and firefighters is that they face dangers hardly anyone else does. That they sacrifice a lot for modest wages. So when the governor doesn't go after their unions he doesn't appear stingy with 'heroes', and by comparison he appears more reasonable when he tries to cut the other unions.
So there is no rationale, just a set of political tactics. This is insane. Either Governor Walker is serious about moderating the power of the public sector unions or he is not. To exclude two of the most expensive groups of public employees with no rationale or logic is insane, and forces me to wonder what on earth he is doing. It clearly ain't reform.


You accuse me of sexism while generalizing all teachers as women, and all police as men?

You assume I don't want police unions busted up simply because I offered a reason why they weren't included?

But why bother about all that when you can accuse me of sexism?Your initial reply was, in fact, thoughtless, and your follow-up contained some short-stop political positioning and a predictable "How dare you call me sexist, you sexist!" Please. The vast majority of elementary-grade and high-school-grade teachers are female (http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/840094-196/male-elementary-school-teachers--are-a.html). The vast majority of police and firefighters are male. I would like to be able to observe this, and even speculate on the possible role of male/female stereotypes and prejudices, without being howled down by the typical counterpunch of "How dare you call me a racist for burning a cross? You're the racist for thinking a burning cross is racist, you racist!"

I would really like to hear if any rightwing Orgah can offer a cogent, reasoned rationale for excluding two major groups from the union-busting. It makes no sense.


Lemur Lemur Lemur Lemur Vuk
Surreal.


This is a critical point in American history. We can either bow to the unions, or take our fiscal future back.
Then, if this is a "critical point in American history," please explain to me why the police union and firefighter's union aren't on the table. Somebody, please, at least make something up and pretend you're serious.

-edit-

Okay, this just gets stranger. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau released a budget estimate showing that Wisconsin was on track for a $121.4 million surplus this year, but Governor Walker claims we're on track for a $137 million deficit. Linky (http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf). That's more than a quarter-billion accounting disagreement, and demands explanation.

Furthermore, according to one group (http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/editorial/article_61064e9a-27b0-5f28-b6d1-a57c8b2aaaf6.html) our new Governor has doled out $140 million in special tax breaks. Not sure if I believe this, but it bears examination:



$25 million for an economic development fund for job creation that still has $73 million due to a lack of job creation. Walker is creating a $25 million hole which will not create or retain jobs.
$48 million for private health savings accounts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. A study from the federal Governmental Accountability Office showed the average adjusted gross income of HSA participants was $139,000 and nearly half of HSA participants reported withdrawing nothing from their HSA, evidence that it is serving as a tax shelter for wealthy participants.
$67 million for a tax shift plan, so ill-conceived that at best the benefit provided to ‘job creators’ would be less than a dollar a day per new job, and may be as little as 30 cents a day.”

[ICantSpellDawg]

In general, you pay workers however much you need to in order to keep the job competetive and retain the talent. Pay is not designed to reward, merely retain. Everyone wants a government job. The pay, benefits, pension and security are lightyears beyond anything that the private sector offers. If everyone wants the job and is willing to do it for less, the competetiveness is not an issue. If nobody can find a good job anywhere then the logic for paying to retain doesn't exist. If they won't lose existing employees OR make the job un-competetive with new hires, it is time to cut salary/benefits/pension/ all of the above. For the best teachers, we can offset the hurt by taking more from the bad ones and supplementing the good teachers salaries with it.

The idea that the people and the government of the United States have precious little ability to regulate what they pay their employees in the public interest is a crap reality and it won't last much longer. GAME OVER, public unions. Screw with Cops and firemen when all of their potential allies feel betrayed and are out for blood. DIVIDE AND CONQUER

[ICantSpellDawg]

Lemur, I am dead serious. Public pay is going to be slashed. First support, then teachers, then Police, then the Military - in that order. Every agency can do more with less. Technology should be making the same crap levels of education cheaper per child, not more expensive. We are being hosed in every direction and Americans are starting to realize it. Khan Academy has helped me learn and retain more mathematical knowledge than any and all of my math teachers combined; all for the high price of a computer and the internet. 1 man, 2000 videos, public domain content and a great interface vs the insane cost of employing crap teachers around the country. The need for their jobs is coming to an end and they are screaming over a 4% pay cut. IMO, this reaction is sharpening the swords of the masses.

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees. SINGULARITY IS THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE END OF TIMES AND HEAVEN ON EARTH BRINGING THE DEAD BACK TO LIFE... did I lose you? Stay with me.

[Lemur]

I'll be honest here, I'm not very pro-union. I think a lot of what unions were instituted to fix has now been addressed in labor law. That said, I'm not terribly anti-union either.

Looks to me like a good argument can be made against public-sector unions. However, the way our Governor is going about it strikes me as ... ill-planned. Let's bust the teachers first? Really? And leave the police out and supposedly get around to them later? I don't believe it, not for a moment. Much more likely: Walker will succeed in busting the teacher's union, and then this whole "reform" process will grind to a halt. Net result: To hell with the teachers, but you, Mister Policeman, can have health care and a pension for the rest of you natural life. Thanks for voting Republican!

If I thought there were a realistic prospect of reform, I'd be much more generously inclined toward this experiment. But leaving the police and firefighters off the table turns it into a sexist little voyage of political payback.

-edit-

Okay, after your 10:05 edit your post became really epic. Respect!

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'll be honest here, I'm not very pro-union. I think a lot of what unions were instituted to fix has now been addressed in labor law. That said, I'm not terribly anti-union either.

Looks to me like a good argument can be made against public-sector unions. However, the way our Governor is going about it strikes me as ... ill-planned. Let's bust the teachers first? Really? And leave the police out and supposedly get around to them later? I don't believe it, not for a moment. Much more likely: Walker will succeed in busting the teacher's union, and then this whole "reform" process will grind to a halt. Net result: To hell with the teachers, but you, Mister Policeman, can have health care and a pension for the rest of you natural life. Thanks for voting Republican!

If I thought there were a realistic prospect of reform, I'd be much more generously inclined toward this experiment. But leaving the police and firefighters off the table turns it into a sexist little voyage of political payback.

-edit-

Okay, after your 10:05 edit your post became really epic. Respect!

Ha! I think I may have convinced my father that I was insane when I started talking about Singularity. I read an article in Time magazine and a few more in the Economist and I'm sold.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The backlash threatens to undercut one of the Democratic Party’s most stalwart backers — and upset a mutually beneficial relationship where the unions provided financial support and foot soldiers for Democratic campaigns, in return for political cover to protect their prerogatives in the U.S. Congress and state capitols across the nation.

The National Education Association, the largest teachers union, spent $40 million on the 2010 elections alone, making the union one of the largest outside funders of Democratic campaigns.

Oh yes, I remember now. The unions don't contribute so much directly as they use their mobilization ability to go out and drum up support. But I think unions can be allowed to do that. I mean, would you rather they strike?


Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan sounded surprisingly like the Republican governors when he told teachers unions and administrators at a conference Tuesday in Denver, “Clearly, the status quo isn’t working for children.”

Clearly the children aren't working.


This is a critical point in American history. We can either bow to the unions, or take our fiscal future back. The GOP and the Obama Administration must work together to destroy the union stranglehold on America's children.


Stranglehold on America's children? :dizzy2:

It's just a union. What exactly is it that's been passed that shouldn't have been?

[Ironside]

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees.

So... Which political system do you consider can handle this change? :scholar:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Which political systems today existed 100 years ago? Not too many. Times change and political systems arise as a result of them. The U.S. government in 2010 is not the U.S. government in 1911. Our current monetary system is merely a carrot and stick encouraging labor and morale. What happens when we no longer need human labor and it can be done better by our developed automations? What will we need the current monetary system for? It will have to change. What if home prices and entertainment fell at the same time as our income did? Would we need raises if the fall in cost of living fell? It has always risen, but it doesn't have to forever.

I see home prices around the country continue to decline. Wages are declining. And yet, life is getting better. Investments can be made abroad for growth, but the vast majority of us will see a slide forever until we meet the rest of the world. It will feel like a fall merely because of our monetary system, but if standards of living for everyone have increased, it would be foolish to consider it a real "decline".

gut the opposition to our decline. speed up the process.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Lemur, I am dead serious. Public pay is going to be slashed. First support, then teachers, then Police, then the Military - in that order. Every agency can do more with less. Technology should be making the same crap levels of education cheaper per child, not more expensive. We are being hosed in every direction and Americans are starting to realize it. Khan Academy has helped me learn and retain more mathematical knowledge than any and all of my math teachers combined; all for the high price of a computer and the internet. 1 man, 2000 videos, public domain content and a great interface vs the insane cost of employing crap teachers around the country. The need for their jobs is coming to an end and they are screaming over a 4% pay cut. IMO, this reaction is sharpening the swords of the masses.

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees. SINGULARITY IS THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE END OF TIMES AND HEAVEN ON EARTH BRINGING THE DEAD BACK TO LIFE... did I lose you? Stay with me.

I would just like to correct you on one thing.

Teaching can not be completely transferred over to technology. I get to listen in on a few committees as a student representative at my uni and all the professors in the committee I attend agreed that technology can only go so far to replace the human interaction that some people need. Kahn Academy is just absolutely fantastic, no doubt about that. But Kahn Academy is inherently restricted to what you can get out of a video (it doesn't change the explanation to a more simplistic view every time you watch the video as a teacher would if you were still confused about some concepts). MITOpenSource and Kahn Academy I think will allow those that are already motivated and/or interested and/or smart enough to go be able to gain this information on their own and further their education through technology. However, the demand for physical teacher-student interactions will never be replaced because the average student needs to ask questions, needs things clarified once if not multiple times. Technology should not be treated with the same philosophy that created No Child Left Behind. NCLB is a complete failure because it treats all students on an equal level, which even if you disregard the socioeconomic factors, anyone can tell you that not all brains are created equal. Just a fact of life. To treat technology as the same singular solution that will wash over all of education and make everything better is false as well.

That being said, the concept that in the future people will be volunteering to do things because things that "need" to be done will be done by robots is still applicable here. In this singularity future you have brought up, those that still require human interaction with teachers will be able to find those who have a passion for teaching, which is why many teachers are in it to begin with.

[Vuk]

Cause to my eyes, it sure looks like it's okay to go after the chicks who work in the schools, but leave the dudes out of it!

What world are you living in exactly Lemur?! That is one of the most desperate, ill-informed, generalizing statements that I have ever heard in my entire life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This bill is actually exactly what Wisconsin needs. The only thing I do not like is that a comprehensive overhaul of the education system is not on the table at the same time.
How is this? Instead of having a good-old-boys (I'm sorry Lemur, a good-old-girls) system, why don't they try evening out the pay of teachers. 40,000 a year (adjusting for inflation) is well above average, and considering how low the requirements of being a teacher are (If I remember correctly, you only need a 2.84 GPA to pursue an ED degree/intent at my Uni, as apposed to the 3.5X required for most other fields), and that you don't even need a bachelor's degree to teach, I honestly don't see why it should be any higher. (not to mention that a large part of the year many teachers will not be teaching)
If you lowered the pay to 40k for full-time teachers (with up to 10k incentive pay for those with better performance) a teacher, you would not have a bunch of teachers making peanuts and a bunch making outrageous salaries. Not only would they all make a decent salary, but you would probably be able to afford more teachers than you do under the current system. Also, make it illegal to refuse to hire someone on the basis of not being in a union. If you did that and only made them pay 5% of their benefits, you would probably save money.

[a completely inoffensive name]

What world are you living in exactly Lemur?! That is one of the most desperate, ill-informed, generalizing statements that I have ever heard in my entire life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This bill is actually exactly what Wisconsin needs. The only thing I do not like is that a comprehensive overhaul of the education system is not on the table at the same time.
How is this? Instead of having a good-old-boys (I'm sorry Lemur, a good-old-girls) system, why don't they try evening out the pay of teachers. 40,000 a year (adjusting for inflation) is well above average, and considering how low the requirements of being a teacher are (If I remember correctly, you only need a 2.84 GPA to pursue an ED degree/intent at my Uni, as apposed to the 3.5X required for most other fields), and that you don't even need a bachelor's degree to teach, I honestly don't see why it should be any higher. (not to mention that a large part of the year many teachers will not be teaching)
If you lowered the pay to 40k for full-time teachers (with up to 10k incentive pay for those with better performance) a teacher, you would not have a bunch of teachers making peanuts and a bunch making outrageous salaries. Not only would they all make a decent salary, but you would probably be able to afford more teachers than you do under the current system. Also, make it illegal to refuse to hire someone on the basis of not being in a union. If you did that and only made them pay 5% of their benefits, you would probably save money.

People are conflating the part of the bill teachers are rallying against so heavily (removing collective bargaining for the union) with the idea of cutting back on teacher salary. They are two different things here. The bill is bad because it strips the ability for the union to protect teachers, which is needed because teachers otherwise are going to get trampled by ignorant parents. Cutting back on salaries and/or asking to pay in 1-5% of their salary for the benefits they receive I agree might very well be a good thing for some states. Trying to strip teachers of the ability to organize and defend themselves? Not a good idea.

Also a couple of things to correct you on Vuk,

1. Since education is a state issue and not a federal issue, the point of what the qualifications are to teach are going to vary wildly across different states. Some states want higher GPAs than others, from what I can remember off the top of my head, California may actually require a college degree in the field you are planning to teach with the exception of those under the category of some education with a bunch of actual private industry experience.

2. This is partly a continuation of the first point, but sort of isn't since this does apply everywhere in some respects. The point you made regarding cutting the current salary and using that to hire more teachers, is mostly likely going to require more funding because of the rampant overcrowding there is. Right now I believe the average for California if not the country are classroom sizes of anywhere from 30-45 students (47 in one of my classes! The entire room was packed with chairs!). Ideally, it really should be about 20-25 students a class. Not only will you have to hire the extra teachers as well, but those teachers need classrooms, and there isn't enough space available right now to handle the overcrowding situation, so if you want to use the money to hire more teachers, you will need to find more money to build the classrooms needed for these teachers as well as the overhead expenses that go along with more buildings to maintain and operate. I am not saying this is an argument against reducing teacher salary or other cost cutting measures, I am simply just pointing out that the only real way of increasing the number of teachers in the amount that is needed is going to be more funding to support the expansion.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That being said, the concept that in the future people will be volunteering to do things because things that "need" to be done will be done by robots is still applicable here. In this singularity future you have brought up, those that still require human interaction with teachers will be able to find those who have a passion for teaching, which is why many teachers are in it to begin with.

Have you been to Khan Academy lately? Go there, create a profile and learn all of the math you've missed. I think the new math path is the future of scientific and mathematical education at the elementary and high school levels. It effectively makes teachers redundant. Get a room full of 50-100 kids with some low paid minders to make sure that they are doing their work and you will save a bundle.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Have you been to Khan Academy lately? Go there, create a profile and learn all of the math you've missed. I think the new math path is the future of scientific and mathematical education at the elementary and high school levels. It effectively makes teachers redundant. Get a room full of 50-100 kids with some low paid minders to make sure that they are doing their work and you will save a bundle.

Yes I have. I have used it, I am not ignorant on its implications or potential. I think that it will be a useful tool for many students but that being said, it is a tool not a solution to every student's needs. Low paid minders can't answer the questions that students ask for higher level courses. All the TAs in uni are grad students for a reason.

Just listen to the video on the front page:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuMTSU9DcqQ

"I want it to become the operating system of the classroom for what goes on in the classroom where every student is allowed to work at their own pace and the teacher actually becomes more of a mentor or a coach."

So even the founder doesn't intend for his academy to make teachers obsolete.

[ICantSpellDawg]

So, Khan wants to be the educator. From what I understand, if he is the one doing the educating, that would cut down on the amount of educating that a teacher would need to do. Hence, if he did a good enough job at it, teachers would need to work less that the 8 months that they currently work, hopefully; A. lowering their compensation or B. Lowering their numbers. No more lesson plans, just tutoring. People do that in school, they are called tutors. Last time I was in school, they were unpaid, mostly a year or 2 ahead or volunteers.

Classic strategic speak. He wants to get the backing of teachers who will find it easier to use him than spending time writting a lesson plan. Like the trainer who trains a trainer in India, or the Barnes and Noble employee responsible for selling the Nook reader or the Insurance agent who automates his methods and has customers doing everything online or over the phone. They are buying the noose that will be used to hang them and it is beautiful. It is the future. Accellerate redundancy. Pedal to the metal.

[a completely inoffensive name]

So, Khan wants to be the educator. From what I understand, if he is the one doing the educating, that would cut down on the amount of educating that a teacher would need to do. Hence, if he did a good enough job at it, teachers would need to work less that the 8 months that they currently work, hopefully; A. lowering their compensation or B. Lowering their numbers. No more lesson plans, just tutoring. People do that in school, they are called tutors. Last time I was in school, they were unpaid, mostly a year or 2 ahead or volunteers.

Classic strategic speak. He wants to get the backing of teachers who will find it easier to use him than spending time writting a lesson plan. Like the trainer who trains a trainer in India, or the Barnes and Noble employee responsible for selling the Nook reader or the Insurance agent who automates his methods and has customers doing everything online or over the phone. They are buying the noose that will be used to hang them and it is beautiful. It is the future. Accellerate redundancy. Pedal to the metal.

I agree. All I am saying is that there will still be a need for teachers. Whether not they are tutoring or actually teaching is besides the point. All I am trying to say is that technology can't replace human interaction 100% of the time. I agreed with the original point that it will be volunteers in the future.

[ICantSpellDawg]

My point is that their racket is nearing a close. They hold back education. Unions will oppose the technology to better educate children because it is the inevitable downfall of unions and paid teachers. Cutting their benefits is the first step to gutting the teaching force. They need to go and we need to accellerate their decline with a suitable alternative at the earliest opportunity. I can't stand teachers because they are a reminder of the broken past and the impediment to our future. Some are well intentioned, but the vast majority of teachers are people who see dollar signs, big pensions, and huge vacations. Hell, I'm a local insurance agent and we are nearing a breaking point where our customers are starting to wake up and cut us loose. Rightfully so, imo. We are essentially useless.

[a completely inoffensive name]

My point is that their racket is nearing a close. They hold back education. Unions will oppose the technology to better educate children because it is the inevitable downfall of unions and paid teachers. Cutting their benefits is the first step to gutting the teaching force. They need to go and we need to accellerate their decline with a suitable alternative at the earliest opportunity. I can't stand teachers because they are a reminder of the broken past and the impediment to our future. Some are well intentioned, but the vast majority of teachers are people who see dollar signs, big pensions, and huge vacations. Hell, I'm a local insurance agent and we are nearing a breaking point where our customers are starting to wake up and cut us loose. Rightfully so, imo. We are essentially useless.

You are overestimating the trend. Give it another 20 years before the actual decrease starts to happen. It is unwise to accelerate trends, especially ones that impact society as fundamental as education because sometimes society isn't ready for it. The teachers will bring about their own deconstruction by adopting Kahn Academy for themselves in the class. But before that happens, you need teachers who actually used Kahn Academy earlier in their lives during college. Once those people are the majority of teachers, then things will start happening on a fast past in regards to your projection. But like I said, that will be another 15-20 years before that majority happens.

I don't understand the anger at teachers. The system in which they function in is broken and of the past, not the function of teaching itself. Kahn is a teacher, you are not angry at him.

EDIT: Also, you characterize teachers in a general negative light using descriptions that could be applied generically to any worker. If anything, more teachers are there by % because of a passion for teaching then the % of cubicle workers there because they love doing...cubicle work.

[Ironside]

Sorry TuffStuffMcGruff, I meant economical system. My mistake. A simular question has intrigued me for years so I'm a bit curious about your thoughts on the subject.

And to be a bit more to the point. Can a free market system handle a large part of the working force being simply obsolete (aka not longer required for any important jobs)?

And do you think we're starting to approach this during your life time?

[ICantSpellDawg]

I love volunteer teachers. I wish that everyone was one (they are in reality). I hate the people who are paid to do it and throw temper tantrums when the people they are ripping off call them on it. Good points, though.

Ironside, I think that we are starting to approach this in our lifetime. I'm just a history major nobody, but the sheer number of people who seem to have exited the work force for good coupled with the likelihood that jobs won't be returning, coupled with the amazing willingness of people to volunteer their knowledge and assistance online, coupled with the obvious uselessness of most jobs, etc leads me to believe that the current system is failing. If you believe in exponential growth in technology, within the next 40 years we should have totally revolutionized the economy through automation. today we are talking about the realization that paid teachers serve a decreasingly useful purpose and their benefit is being clearly outweighed by their costs. Within 10 years, I suspect that attorneys and general practitioners will begin going through the same thing. As transparency increases, I would also imagine that the value of brands will decrease, eliminating usurious mark-ups of otherwise utilitarian commodities. Within 10 years we won't need to buy small parts because we will begin 3d printing them in the home. Within 20, the few of us who actually serve a traditional economic purpose won't need to travel to work due to insane increases in communication technologies (interactive holographic projections.). The future is limitless and it includes reduced manpower. Prepare to sit around simply consuming information for no other purpose than the faint hope that you will come up with something useful that a machine has skipped over, which will become increasingly unlikely. From there, watch Wall-e ;-)

I think that Capitalism is failing and a new economic system is growing.


Time Magazine on Singularity (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2048138,00.html)

Kurzweil on TED (http://www.ted.com/talks/ray_kurzweil_on_how_technology_will_transform_us.html)

3D Printing (http://www.economist.com/node/18114221)

Full color 3d demonstration (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0m1cVqNsRA)

[a completely inoffensive name]

I love volunteer teachers. I wish that everyone was one (they are in reality). I hate the people who are paid to do it and throw temper tantrums when the people they are ripping off call them on it. Good points, though.

Ironside, I think that we are starting to approach this in our lifetime. I'm just a history major nobody, but the sheer number of people who seem to have exited the work force for good coupled with the likelihood that jobs won't be returning, coupled with the amazing willingness of people to volunteer their knowledge and assistance online, coupled with the obvious uselessness of most jobs, etc leads me to believe that the current system is failing. If you believe in exponential growth in technology, within the next 40 years we should have totally revolutionized the economy through automation. today we are talking about the realization that paid teachers serve a decreasingly useful purpose and their benefit is being clearly outweighed by their costs. Within 10 years, I suspect that attorneys and general practitioners will begin going through the same thing. As transparency increases, I would also imagine that the value of brands will decrease, eliminating usurious mark-ups of otherwise utilitarian commodities. Within 10 years we won't need to buy small parts because we will begin 3d printing them in the home. Within 20, the few of us who actually serve a traditional economic purpose won't need to travel to work due to insane increases in communication technologies (interactive holographic projections.). The future is limitless and it includes reduced manpower. Prepare to sit around simply consuming information for no other purpose than the faint hope that you will come up with something useful that a machine has skipped over, which will become increasingly unlikely. From there, watch Wall-e ;-)

I think that Capitalism is failing and a new economic system is growing.


Time Magazine on Singularity (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2048138,00.html)

Kurzweil on TED (http://www.ted.com/talks/ray_kurzweil_on_how_technology_will_transform_us.html)

3D Printing (http://www.economist.com/node/18114221)

Full color 3d demonstration (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0m1cVqNsRA)

You forgot to mention that we have already reached the age where for all intents and purposes, anything that can be put in digital form is free. People don't pirate out of moral reasons, not economic.

When digital media is free and ubiquitous and all manufacturing/services is automated is within our lifetimes.

I am still struggling to see how lawyers and doctors will be able to keep up with demand. If we have everything that could be manufactured (basically money is not needed as much), a lot of doctors and lawyers are not going to be such. And I am pretty sure that those that will go through the work as a volunteer, will not be able to meet the demand.

Capitalism has a good chance of becoming more artificial and hollow, instead of being phased out completely.

[Hosakawa Tito]

From what I'm led to believe, haven't had the time to research it yet, Wisconsin teachers at job rate receive wage & health benefits worth about $89,000 per year plus a half pay pension. Not sure what the service time & age requirements for the half-pay pension are, probably 30 years service and 55 years old to retire. They contribute nothing toward the health benefits ($22,000 to 24,000 per year family plan) and nothing toward the half-pay pension. The Governor wants them to contribute 12.5% per year toward the health benefit & 5% toward their pensions. That's in line with many other state's public sector unions, mine included. It's reasonable and quite a good deal compared to the private sector without question.

Lem, I believe the Governor excluded the police & fire personnel from this for now because of the very likely threat to public safety. Closed schools isn't a good thing, but for the short term an inconvenience. Loss of police & fire protection, even in the short term, could be a real disaster, which is why most states allow collective bargaining for these departments in return for no strikes legislation. Most of the National Guard is probably being used, or will be soon, to man the state prisons if the corrections personnel strike.

I also know from experience that public sector union members only get the crumbs that fall from management's plate. If State leadership really wants to be honest about the need for "shared sacrifice" then they need to reduce staff & top-heavy redundent/useless management positions, perks like take home cars etc...patronage jobs for friends & family, double+ dipping on their pensions etc...contribute to their health care & pensions too. Cuts should start from the top on down, but never do.

[Lemur]

The Governor wants them to contribute 12.5% per year toward the health benefit & 5% toward their pensions. That's in line with many other state's public sector unions, mine included. It's reasonable and quite a good deal compared to the private sector without question.
If our governor were only asking for bennie contributions and pay cuts and so forth, I don't think you'd see quite the level of pushback that's going on. Legislating that the union may exist, but may only negotiate pay raises, and those circumscribed by COL, makes the union irrelevant. And my impression was that the teachers' union, for all of its evils, does some valuable work to protect the teachers from the idiot parents. Now, I am firmly of the belief that the teacher' union should be reofrmed and perhaps even done away with, but this is not the way.


Lem, I believe the Governor excluded the police & fire personnel from this for now because of the very likely threat to public safety.
The funny thing is, nobody is even making an argument for it. Seriously, I have yet to hear or read anyone from the governor's office even trying to make a case for the selectivity of the union-busting. I'm a little bit disgusted. If the governor would like my support, he could, you know, put forward an argument. A rationale. Something. But what are we getting? Nada. We're just gonna bust the unions that we don't like and leave the others alone. Pathetic.


Cuts should start from the top on down, but never do.
100% agreement from this end. There's plenty of state and county level reform that could and should take place. But picking out one union, that trends Dem, and is largely female ... I dunno, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And to not even bother explaining or justifying the move ...

[ICantSpellDawg]

To clarify it is 12.5% of the health care cost ($2750 - $3000 based on the average you've provided) , not 12.5% of salary. 5% of salary for pension on the other hand (an average $4450). Average total cost for a family with one federal employee in the household would be around $7200 - $7450, is my math right? Essentially an ~8% pay cut for the average family (my math is probably wrong). This will save tax payers a truck load. I've heard that it was closer to a 4% cut.

[ICantSpellDawg]

100% agreement from this end. There's plenty of state and county level reform that could and should take place. But picking out one union, that trends Dem, and is largely female ... I dunno, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And to not even bother explaining or justifying the move ...


I don't know, Lemur. That sounds like it could save alot of money for taxpayers to invest in more productive areas of education. The wages still sound awesome, don't they? I'm 26, make approx 40k with benefits included per year with a degree working 6 days per week in one of the most expensive areas of the country to live. Teachers work 8 months per year, get tons of holidays off, and have job security with the occasional blip like we are seeing. What do they really do? Aren't they really just glorified babysitters?

I fail to understand your argument that because the recent move targets teachers and not every other public union you arn't able to support it. Do you believe police are paid too well? Firemen? In NY and NJ we have started going after teachers. Everyone knows that police officers are about to be hit next. Abusive overtime, high-three manipulation to pad pensions. The abuses and the reaction are what spur movement against the organizations. I've been tryign to get a Federal job for closing in on 5 years now. I will work for half of that they are paying these people. I can assure you that employees are pulling their hair out because their free ride is over. I can only hope that they gut the pay and benefits enough that people will leave and make room for new jacks who will work harder for less.

Your argument sounds like if they don't take on all problems at once you won't support solving any problems. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Breaking the teachers union alone will pose the least resistance and create precedent to do it to others. do you believe that my argument is false or does it sound stupid? I've used every angle I could find. Please, let me know.

I do agree that top down approach to many organizations is where it should start. You need to be careful not to stop progress because it could be bigger. This is as big as I think they can handle right now. Calling more people into the opposition would be counter productive.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I don't know, Lemur. That sounds like it could save alot of money for taxpayers to invest in more productive areas of education. The wages still sound awesome, don't they? I'm 26, make approx 40k with benefits included per year with a degree working 6 days per week in one of the most expensive areas of the country to live. Teachers work 8 months per year, get tons of holidays off, and have job security with the occasional blip like we are seeing. What do they really do? Aren't they really just glorified babysitters?

I fail to understand your argument that because the recent move targets teachers and not every other public union you arn't able to support it. Do you believe police are paid too well? Firemen? In NY and NJ we have started going after teachers. Everyone knows that police officers are about to be hit next. Abusive overtime, high-three manipulation to pad pensions. The abuses and the reaction are what spur movement against the organizations. I've been tryign to get a Federal job for closing in on 5 years now. I will work for half of that they are paying these people. I can assure you that employees are pulling their hair out because their free ride is over. I can only hope that they gut the pay and benefits enough that people will leave and make room for new jacks who will work harder for less.

Your argument sounds like if they don't take on all problems at once you won't support solving any problems. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Breaking the teachers union alone will pose the least resistance and create precedent to do it to others. do you believe that my argument is false or does it sound stupid? I've used every angle I could find. Please, let me know.

I do agree that top down approach to many organizations is where it should start. You need to be careful not to stop progress because it could be bigger. This is as big as I think they can handle right now. Calling more people into the opposition would be counter productive.

The statement "everyone knows police are next." doesn't convince me one bit. Most of you guys probably never heard about this, but last year Southern California got all bent over a scandal breaking out about the City of Bell paying its City Council, City Attorney and Police Chief some of the highest politician salaries in the entire nation (including Congress) despite Bell only having a size of about 35,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_City_of_Bell_salary_controversy

Well the police chief basically faked being disabled (he has been publicly running marathons for the past 5 years) in order to not pay taxes on his pension which amounts to half of the $400,000 salary he got. This guy jumped from city to city apparently milking his way to the top ending up at Bell because they were the most corrupt with the city money. From the wikipedia entry: On February 14, 2008, it was revealed on CBS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS) nighttime news that Adams had allegedly exchanged e-mails with the assistant city manager on how they were going to arrange his over $400,000 salary and how to hide that fact from the citizens. The email's contents were presented in a humorous manner regarding bilking the city. "I am looking forward to seeing you and taking all of Bell's money," Adams wrote, according to the memo.

Police in Southern California have a strong hold with politicians, they are the military of the city and state. Despite all the outrage, mostly everyone in my hometown start justifying why the police chief there deserved his money and blah, blah, blah. From what I hear it was same across most of Ventura County. Police don't take hits in salary in state and city government just as the military/defense budget hasn't even been looked at for cuts until these extreme cost cutting measures.

I will not be surprised one bit if this is a one time union hit. Oh and that police chief I just mentioned hasn't been arrested at all or even charged with wrong doing.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Ok. In NYC police were making a starting salary of 25k 4 years ago. They are now making 41k to start. I think this is reasonable. Sure, the pensions can be looked at, but these guys are in danger. Last year a guy opened up with a tek-9 in times square. There was more than 1 real bomb close call. Suffolk County PC should be dragged out of their police stations and lampooned publicly. Local Northport police should be brought up on charges. all things are not equal. Root out waste and corruption where you can find it. I am a Republican and I am sharpening my balde, I promise you. Maybe we don't all think the same way, but almost every Republican I know is waiting for the opportunity to gut public wages. Across the board - I promise. Play along with us for once.

[Devastatin Dave]

Removing benefits and cutting pay is the exact same thing, as "benefit" is simply another word for "wage".

In order to save money, they are making it less attractive to be a teacher. How will that encourage the good ones to stay, and the bad ones to leave, opposed to the other way around?

Yes, giving the teachers union and administrators more and more money over the past 30 years have done so well with America's public education system. /sarc

[a completely inoffensive name]

Ok. In NYC police were making a starting salary of 25k 4 years ago. They are now making 41k to start. I think this is reasonable. Sure, the pensions can be looked at, but these guys are in danger. Last year a guy opened up with a tek-9 in times square. There was more than 1 real bomb close call. Suffolk County PC should be dragged out of their police stations and lampooned publicly. Local Northport police should be brought up on charges. all things are not equal. Root out waste and corruption where you can find it. I am a Republican and I am sharpening my balde, I promise you. Maybe we don't all think the same way, but almost every Republican I know is waiting for the opportunity to gut public wages. Across the board - I promise. Play along with us for once.

I would love to trust you, but the internet and recent history has made this once naive teenager a bit more on the cynical side when it comes to Republicans asking us to "play along".

[Devastatin Dave]

Stranglehold on America's children? :dizzy2:

It's just a union. What exactly is it that's been passed that shouldn't have been?

The "just a union" that brought their students out of the classroom to assist in the protest? Yes, a stranglehold on the children is an appropriate term for this issue.
I'm a product of public education. One year in history in my junior year our history teacher let us watch "Cops" every day. My government teacher in my senior year did the same thing. In fact, I could have skipped senior high all together because it was a complete waste. Sure, some of responsibility is on me but when a "professional" teacher offers you the choice of watching TV or protesting over actually learning anything, what is a teen going to choose...
Its time to stop this notion of the "honorable" profession known as the public school teacher. The majority are no less than you average welfare leach except they go to work half the year, recieve an offensively large pension paid by the tax payers, and still the US goes lower every year in tests compared to other countries. #### the public school teacher.

[Strike For The South]

Throw in the FD & PD but allow the union to continue to negotiate for everything, not just pay.

I think that will make everyone sufficently unhappy

I can't help by shake my head, these "demands" by the govener are putting no one over a barrell and are certainly not untennable. Sure no one likes tax increases or a pay cut but we are facing a serious budget shortfall and we are facing it everywhere.

I thought everyone was going to cut teh fat?

Asking these people for a pittance is not a big deal, granted it's more about the power than it is the money. There is always a power play somewhere. Granted it's hard to conjure up anger for someone who makes 60,000$ a year and who pays NOTHING in benifits when the average American makes 40,000 and has to pay both those things

Granted most of the teacher hate in this thread is lol, but at the end of the day this is something that needs to be done and can be done relatively painlessly

Edit:granted

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think this article tells a lot about what is going on. Watch the embedded video for the full argument.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/rachel-maddow-wisconsin-truth

[Fisherking]

This is about more than teacher pay.

It is about collective bargaining and Unions.

Allowing Police and Fire Fighters to bargain and not other public sector employees to do the same is unfair.

None are actually permitted to strike, though it is usually ignored.

Without some organization to represent employees they only have the rights to employment that the government says they have.

While I am dubious as to Public Sector Unions announcing support for political candidates, I don't think this whole plan is a good move.

[Husar]

The market is going to fix all the problems, reduce teachers to minimum wage, there are still enough people who have no education but would be willing to teach your kids for minimum wage.
If you can't find any, then look to Mexico, they should have some, think of all the tax dollars you can save!

More seriously, I think it's a delicate subject and whether the teachers are doing well is very much up to anyone's interpretation of what makes a good teacher. If you pay too badly, then you will most likely run out of teacher, similarly to what I just said above, just not as extreme. The measure taken to get more then will be to lower the entry requirements, you can easily see what that leads to.
Merit-based pay just means the clever teachers who know that they're not supervised 24/7 will give the students hints as to what to expect in exams, everybody will love them but the students won't have learned a lot. I've had a teacher who asked us to grade ourselves, I think everybody got exactly that grade, it wasn't the most important course and his pay didn't depend on it but now imagine that it would...
Before that last crisis the banks had merit-based pay, which is why all the employees gave loans to people who didn't deserve them, just to get bonuses and benefits, right?
That's not to say it can't be useful, but one has to think of all the consequences this can have, you can't just claim it's a universal problem-solver.

[Hosakawa Tito]

From the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704900004576152320132834818.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5).


Mr. Walker, elected last fall as part of a sweep that also gave the GOP control of both houses of the legislature, last week proposed a "budget repair" bill to address a deficit of $137 million in the current budget and a projected shortfall of $3.6 billion in the next two years.
The measure would limit collective-bargaining rights for most workers—except police, firefighters and others involved in public safety—and require state employees, who currently pay little or nothing toward their pensions, to contribute 5.8% of their pay to pensions, and pay at least 12.6% of health-care premiums, up from an average of 6%.
In exchange, Mr. Walker has pledged no layoffs or furloughs for the state's 170,000 public employees. He has said 5,500 state jobs and 5,000 local jobs would be saved under his plan, which would save $30 million in the current budget and $300 million in the two-year budget that begins July 1.


The math is simple enough. I don't agree that they must or should give up collective bargaining rights. Collective bargaining only guarantee's the right to negotiate terms "in good faith", it's not a gun held to either party's head. Blaming workers for using the system & rules that management bargained for and agreed to without management accepting their own responsibility and contribution to the crisis is typically political=deceitful. Management has the right to manage, however they have no right to mismanage.

Exempting Public Safety departments from the loss of collective bargaining is a typical "divide & conquer" management strategy. Hell, they try to do that within departments all the time. Try requiring different tiers of pay & benefits of management & politicians for doing the same job and listen to them howl.
There needs to be reform and true "shared sacrifice", top to bottom in state & federal government. Unfortunately, the top will try and take everything needed to cover the shortfall from the rest, and not give up anything themselves.

Pump That Irony: The lifeblood of the teaching industry is evaluation (A, B, C, etc.). In the history of teaching, there have been about 10 million 10 billion complaints by students that the grading was unfair, and virtually every single complaint was rejected, usually summarily. Now, U.S. News magazine (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/education/09teachers.html), and a higher-education advisory group are combining to evaluate the 1,000 U.S. teachers' colleges, and it seems there is no indignation quite like teachers' indignation at being evaluated. The criteria are unfair, they say, and not relevant to excellence. Their solution: All evaluators need to go away until they can come up with criteria that are perfect.


Devastatin Dave
The "just a union" that brought their students out of the classroom to assist in the protest? Yes, a stranglehold on the children is an appropriate term for this issue.
I'm a product of public education. One year in history in my junior year our history teacher let us watch "Cops" every day. My government teacher in my senior year did the same thing. In fact, I could have skipped senior high all together because it was a complete waste. Sure, some of responsibility is on me but when a "professional" teacher offers you the choice of watching TV or protesting over actually learning anything, what is a teen going to choose...
Its time to stop this notion of the "honorable" profession known as the public school teacher. The majority are no less than you average welfare leach except they go to work half the year, recieve an offensively large pension paid by the tax payers, and still the US goes lower every year in tests compared to other countries. #### the public school teacher. They can "collectively" :daisy:...

Taking personal responsibility for ending up licking the rear window on the short-bus of life. :laugh4:

[Lemur]

More seriously, I think it's a delicate subject and whether the teachers are doing well is very much up to anyone's interpretation of what makes a good teacher.
Side note: This is Wisconsin, so the schools are excellent on the whole. I have a very portable sort of career, and could live most anywhere. I choose to live here in large part because of the outstanding schools. We have the kinds of schools California used to have before they voted themselves out of them.

So some of the comments about how horrible and useless and outdated public education is ... well, they sound like they're talking about someplace else. WI still has a great eucation system.

[Tellos Athenaios]

And you're going the way of California, apparently. (The whole union can only argue for pay rise thing or whatever that was is a simple yet effective way of flushing it down the toilet: there's little that will get people riled up as much as saying you are not allowed to negotiate your own future...)

[ICantSpellDawg]

It would be interesting to see rioting over this. An actual battle royale in Madison, similar to Cairo. Taxed citizens using force to subdue the assembled teachers would be great for the cause of stopping the legislation.

Both sides would get something out of that arrangement. Teachers would get to keep their benefits the way they are now, citizens would be able to beat the ever living crap out of teachers. Fun would be had by all.

[Strike For The South]

If the Government had any balls they would fire the 1,100 teachers who called in sick and showed up to the protests

If I call in and my boss seems me out and about, I get fired

And why are public sector employees allowed to unionize?

[Strike For The South]

Hmmmm, The union is giving into the finanical concessions

Walker should take what he can get, if this was really about the budget he should be happy

Power you say? WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE GOVERNMENT IS OUT FOR ITS OWN POWER AND THE BUDGET IS (HOPEFULLY) SECONDARY. I'VE BEEN LIED TO ALL THESE YEARS! IS THERE NO GOD

[PanzerJaeger]

Madison Schools go to court to get the teachers to do their jobs. (http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/Madison_Schools_Prepare_For_Staff_Absences_116265614.html)

It's all about the kids!

[a completely inoffensive name]

Ugh, from the sound of everyone posting. The propaganda pushed by Walker is winning.

[Crazed Rabbit]

100% agreement from this end. There's plenty of state and county level reform that could and should take place. But picking out one union, that trends Dem, and is largely female ... I dunno, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And to not even bother explaining or justifying the move ...

Ah, I see your problem.

You came here with your opinion already formed about how this legislation was sexist and therefore anyone who dared to offer reasons for picking out specific unions was a sexist.

Bah.

If I could crush one public union it would be the police unions first and foremost.

And yet, because I merely offer a reason, I'm sexist? My reasoning would be political posturing, true, but what isn't in our government anymore? In DC both parties toss the constitution at each other to score points - and neither side really gives the tiniest care about the constitution and it's limits on their power. In such a climate, how is my reasoning not realistic?

Anyways, more lawyerly people than I talk about why public unions are bad:
http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-trouble-with-public-sector-unions

Even President Franklin Roosevelt, a friend of private-sector unionism, drew a line when it came to government workers: "Meticulous attention," the president insisted in 1937, "should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government....The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service." The reason? F.D.R. believed that "[a] strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied. Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable."

http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2011/02/public-sector-unions-should-not-exist.html

In the public sector, by contrast, a union is not bargaining for a greater share of the revenue produced by economic activity; it is bargaining for a greater share of revenue that is obtained by force of law – taxation – or, if not a greater share, at least for a constant share of those revenues extracted from the citizens. What a public sector union can and does provide in return is political support for the faction that chooses to increase taxes or the union’s share of existing taxes. If public sector unions deliver on their support, they will be rewarded by ever more generous payments. There is no market that acts as an external monitor of worker compensation; there is only a steady repetition of a corrosive bargain – tax the public ever more in order to maintain political power. That is inimical to responsible government.

http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2011/02/the-case-against-public-sector-unionism.html

A running blog on the protests:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/

Maddow is right in that without public unions, union groups can no longer funnel funds from the taxpayer to democratic politicians, through government employees. Good.

I hope this is only the first of many public-union beat-downs and a return to fiscal sanity.

CR

[ICantSpellDawg]

Ugh, from the sound of everyone posting. The propaganda pushed by Walker is winning.

You think it sounds more insane that government employees are ripping off taxpayers than it does to say that this has absolutely nothing to do with teacher pay and is actually a GOP plot to destroy the democratic party? Are you serious? I haven't watched any fox news, listened to any Rush Limbaugh. The only TV news I watch is Morning Joe on MSNBC Mon-Friday for 45 mins to 1 hour. The rest of my time I spend online, reading whatever I can and reading the weekly Economist front to back for good measure. I don't believe I've been brainwashed.

[jabarto]

I hope this is only the first of many public-union beat-downs and a return to fiscal sanity.

I agree. Workers should be kept under the heavy thumb of their benevolent overlords and be damn grateful for the opportunity.

[Husar]

Side note: This is Wisconsin, so the schools are excellent on the whole. I have a very portable sort of career, and could live most anywhere. I choose to live here in large part because of the outstanding schools. We have the kinds of schools California used to have before they voted themselves out of them.

So some of the comments about how horrible and useless and outdated public education is ... well, they sound like they're talking about someplace else. WI still has a great eucation system.

Well, it seems like your new governor wants to change the current system and save a lot of money.
That's not to say that you can't have a good education system without money but it will certainly change in some way. :shrug:

[a completely inoffensive name]

You think it sounds more insane that government employees are ripping off taxpayers than it does to say that this has absolutely nothing to do with teacher pay and is actually a GOP plot to destroy the democratic party? Are you serious? I haven't watched any fox news, listened to any Rush Limbaugh. The only TV news I watch is Morning Joe on MSNBC Mon-Friday for 45 mins to 1 hour. The rest of my time I spend online, reading whatever I can and reading the weekly Economist front to back for good measure. I don't believe I've been brainwashed.

Wisconsin was running a surplus when Walker got in. He gave 140 million in tax breaks and is now claiming there is a 137 million deficit that needs to be filled up by removing unions rights for collective bargaining? Come on man.

[Lemur]

Crazed Rabbit, I feel as though you saw the word "sexism" and all thought process stopped. Allow me to try to work in around your defense shields, tripwires and minefields: The union being singled out by our governor is the teachers union (yes, corrections is included in this round, but they're nowhere near as big). Teachers are overwhelmingly female. I think that's worth noting, as is the fact that the vast majority of people don't seem to have a problem with the weird selectivity of the union-busting. I realize that having the temerity, the face, the effrontery to suggest that gender roles might have something to do with the big "meh" puts me outside the realm of civil discourse. That said, however, I don't think it's an irrational observation.

Meanwhile, this is how we rock a protest Wisconsin-style (http://politifi.com/news/Madison-Puts-The-Civility-Back-Into-Discourse-1645555.html). You chuckleheads might want to watch and learn.


[T]he day was marked by a surprising civility when the shouting stopped and the one-on-one conversations began. [...]

[A]side from a few outsiders -- like AFL-CIO chief Rich Trumka here to back opponents of the measure, and Andrew Breitbart, the conservative provocateur who appeared at the Tea Party-backed rally to support Walker -- the people on hand were from Wisconsin itself and these neighbors were remarkably civil despite their sharp disagreements.

Wisconsonites are united, even in times like this, by many things, including a love of University of Wisconsin, Madison, athletics and the program's strutting mascot Bucky the Badger; a devotion to the Super Bowl champion Green Bay Packers NFL football team; and, of course, a love of beer.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Lemur, it seems as though you confused me offering a reason for the selectivity of union targets with supporting that reason.

You think there may be some sexism in the reasoning behind targeting the teacher's union. It's not an unreasonable thought. But what I think is unreasonable is thinking that everyone who supports this is doing so at least in part because of sexism.


Wisconsin was running a surplus when Walker got in. He gave 140 million in tax breaks and is now claiming there is a 137 million deficit that needs to be filled up by removing unions rights for collective bargaining? Come on man.

Part of the issue is not the immediate costs, but the near-future costs of pensions and the like, along with the trend of ever increasing public union wages (above inflation).

CR

[Lemur]

[W]hat I think is unreasonable is thinking that everyone who supports this is doing so at least in part because of sexism.
Hmm, I certainly do not think that, and if I left that impression then I communicated poorly. Sorry for my amateur hour. I do not think you are responding out of sexism, will repeat that as often as you like, and apologize unreservedly for causing this misunderstanding.

That said, there's a certain nihilistic glee in the lack of logic or rationale behind the selective union-busting. I realize almost nobody shares this concern with me, but what the heck, I have a vote and I live in this state, so I'm entitled to my befuddlement.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Ha! There is nihilistic glee in almost everything I've ever said in my entire life. While I agree with your concerns, Lemut, my concern is that even though half of the population has been talking about cutting compensation to government employees (particularly teachers, particularly in benefits) for years now, when they start going after the issue, you are accusing them of a sexist republican plot not based on any actual need, merely the desire to demolish working families and place Madison under one party rule. That is my nightmare as well, particularly because it doesn't exist in reality and seems to be merely a smokescreen created by a radical news anchor to obfuscate actual issues. You know how Beck has created a smokescreen to go after Google because they support the Obama administration?

Guestion the GOP by all means, but don't just question the GOP and then go to the Democratic shill anchors for the answer. Go to less radical sources for answers. Why is Cuomo doing a very similar thing in NY? Is he a right-wing sexist extremist now?

The idea seems to be to create a precedent to;
1. Eliminate the Public Unions ability to bargain over anything other than base pay and working hours.
2. Increase employee pension contributions for all employees.

Like I've repeated over and over - You can either go after them all without precedent at the same time OR go after 1 without precedent and, after success go after the others with better odds. Sure you'll have to deal with criticisms of "unfairness" in the short term, but will it hurt your chances as much as mass mobilization across the agencies? I would go with the second option.

[Lemur]

Guestion the GOP by all means, but don't just question the GOP and then go to the Democratic shill anchors for the answer. Go to less radical sources for answers.
Actually, I haven't seen any major new source anywhere raise the issue of selective union-busting. I mean, they mention it, and a couple of far-left sources suggest that it's because the public safety unions backed Walker, but that's about it. All kooky sexism conspiracy theories are home-grown. Sorry.

-edit-

And returning to my theme of high-class, well-mannered Wisconsin protests, this is pretty darn funny:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v489/Lemurmania/tumblr_lgvwegP7hu1qzz1qt.jpg

-edit of the edit-

Also, all of the conflicting claims about our state finances drove me over to Politifact (http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/), which draws the following conclusion:


There is fierce debate over the approach Walker took to address the short-term budget deficit. But there should be no debate on whether or not there is a shortfall. While not historically large, the shortfall in the current budget needed to be addressed in some fashion. Walker’s tax cuts will boost the size of the projected deficit in the next budget, but they’re not part of this problem and did not create it.

They've got a nice Wisconsin section (http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/) that's worth a looksee. Lots of people saying lots of false things, and it's nice to have someone keeping score.

[ICantSpellDawg]

The first article I had read about the "strike" was in the Economist. They clearly mention (http://www.economist.com/node/18178517) the likelihood that one of the reasons for excluding the PD and FD unions was political cronyism. It doesn't mean it's the only reason and it doesn't mean that those unions won't feel the burn. Like you've said, this will deal a blow to collective bargaining in the State of Wisconsin.You can doubt that they'll get hit, but If the GOP supports keeping inflated wages for public security and the budget can't stand it, they will have hell to pay.

Fact is - People want to become teachers and are doing so in droves nationwide. The demand for the job is at fever pitch, wages are suffering all over the private economy, the budget needs this, and the cuts proposed will do nothing to make teaching less competitive in the short term. In the long term you can be sure that they will go right back onto the "gouge the public for more money" track they've been on for years. I, for one, would love to see nearly all of the money saved in education go into education technology expenses rather than teacher salaries. I think we will get a much greater return on our investment that way than throwing more money into the pit of public employees demands.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Part of the issue is not the immediate costs, but the near-future costs of pensions and the like, along with the trend of ever increasing public union wages (above inflation).

And what everyone here is neglecting to talk about is how the union has been offering repeatedly to compromise on the issue. They have been saying we can go along with paying 1.5% of salary into services just don't cut union power. But the Republicans have been shutting them down, it's not about financial stability, it is just as Maddow said, a political war at the workers expense.
http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2011/2/18/republicans-reject-offer-by-unions-to-compromise-on-concessions



That being said, I enjoyed this: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=184550814914508&id=121949394485040

[Hosakawa Tito]

Haven't had time to search yet, but do school systems in non-union states produce students with higher national test scores, *ACT,SAT, NAEP* than schools in union states?

[Lemur]

Haven't had time to search yet, but do school systems in non-union states produce students with higher national test scores, *ACT,SAT, NAEP* than schools in union states?
Apparently not (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html).


Right-to-work states do not have higher scores than states with strong unions. Actually, the states with the highest performance on national tests are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire, where teachers belong to unions that bargain collectively for their members.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Apparently not (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/20/ravitch.teachers.blamed/index.html).


Right-to-work states do not have higher scores than states with strong unions. Actually, the states with the highest performance on national tests are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire, where teachers belong to unions that bargain collectively for their members.

That's not a serious article. It is written by someone with one opinion. She links no study suggesting her claims, has a pre-concieved bias and doesn't say whether the "results" are causal or associated. You would laugh an article that I posted out of the forums with those credentials.

Maybe the answer to our deficiency in education is to simply allow ALL teachers to bargain collectively?! What were we thinking, we were way off the mark there!

I've got waiting for Superman in my netflix queue for a quick summary from one angle (a childrens advocacy group). Here is a Harvard study (http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf) questioning the legitimacy of collective bargaining in education:

In fact, the results of the collective bargaining process are too often incompatible
with providing a high-quality education for all students. Growing public recognition of
this reality has prompted some reformers and visionary union leaders to embrace the socalled
“new unionism,” but unfortunately this high-minded approach has so far yielded
more wishful thinking than tangible policy changes.


Somebody is likely flat out wrong in their assertions as to whether collective bargaining is good or bad for students. Your article weakly suggests that it is good, my (questionable) common sense and nearly everything I've read have said it's not - except for that article you've posted.

[Lemur]

That's not a serious article.
I'm fully aware that it is an opinion piece; the reason I linked and quoted was that the author made a very specific, checkable claim: "states with the highest performance on national tests are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire," none of which are right-to-work states.

Furthermore, I was responding to a very specific question from Hosa, not making an overall argument about how public sector unions are great and must be preserved unchanged. Argue with what I have said, please.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Haven't had time to search yet, but do school systems in non-union states produce students with higher national test scores, *ACT,SAT, NAEP* than schools in union states?

Why should they? Centralised, standardised tests tend to be mostly about parsing the question correctly and a knack for predicting “what they're looking for”. It's little to do with actual ability or with how much you've been taught. Exams designed to test reading comprehension of foreign languages are probably the ultimate example of this: it's really quite possibly to score 9 out of 10 on such exams using only about an hour of the 3 you're allotted, then spend the rest of the time enjoying the rest of the evening in leisure. How, you ask? By reading the questions first and then only reading the specific bits of text material you're asked about.

That doesn't really test whether or not you understood the exam material, it only rewards people who apply heuristics and don't worry about the actual test.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That article used 1 line to say that the areas that have collective bargaining have the highest scores. ONLY 5 STATES DON'T HAVE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEES (http://bigeducationape.blogspot.com/2011/02/how-many-states-have-collective.html). Only 3 States have laws outlawing it. Thats like saying States have the greatest educational results in the U.S.

This statement is disengenuous because it pretends that there is a fair set of numbers to put results up against. The reality is that our system of education is not up to par with other developed nations based on the cost incurred and our economic prowess. That means that nearly everything we do across the board needs to be looked at with a fisheye lens.

Here (http://www.act.org/news/data/10/states.html) is a site that has a comprehensive review of ALL states ACT scores for example. Amazingly, the ignoramuses in Virginia still manage to fit enough in their puny non-collective bargained heads to score above the national average in English, Science, Readign, and Math. They were #12 on the list of attainment. North Carolina was #22 and Texas was #32. Ironically, the bottom 10 scoring states have collective bargaining for teachers...

[Xiahou]

I have to confess that I don't understand why public sector unions exist. All of their jobs are defined by legislatures and, by extension, the people who elected those representatives. Why do you need to band together to protect yourself from what is effectively the people? It's not as though you're dealing with the stereotypical greedy rich industrialist here. If voters don't think that teachers are paid enough or have a good enough pension, it should be an election issue at the state or local level.

[ICantSpellDawg]

If voters don't think that teachers are paid enough or have a good enough pension, it should be an election issue at the state or local level.

exactamundo

[Crazed Rabbit]

I agree. Workers should be kept under the heavy thumb of their benevolent overlords and be damn grateful for the opportunity.

I just agree with Franklin Roosevelt (http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-trouble-with-public-sector-unions):

Even President Franklin Roosevelt, a friend of private-sector unionism, drew a line when it came to government workers: "Meticulous attention," the president insisted in 1937, "should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government....The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service." The reason? F.D.R. believed that "[a] strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied. Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable."

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

If voters don't think that teachers are paid enough or have a good enough pension, it should be an election issue at the state or local level.

If voters think that teachers are paid too much and should have the cba taken away, it should be an election issue?

What's right is not the same as what voters think. There's a weird supposition that the teachers are all greedy, but the voters are selfless and won't vote to lower their taxes if they don't have kids in school.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That's som un-democratic cynicism right there. Education is the pillar that freedom is built on. There are plenty of other good ways of subjecting an electorate to stuff it is too stupid to know it needs than just dumping piles of money into the pockets of teachers with "seniority" and no talent.

We just don't buy the "our interests and childrens interests are intertwined" horsecrap that the unions are always on about - or the idea that without teachers unions our education is gone. I even gave you more credit than that.

Catholic schools pay their teachers garbage and we have higher standardized testing scores on average than most public schools.
Link1 (http://www.catholictranscript.org/subscribe/1024-catholic-high-school-sat-scores-beat-state-national-averages.html)
Link2 (http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/sat-public-schools-down-private-schools-up/)
link3 (go to page 6 for a breakdown of average scores) (http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/cbs-2009-national-TOTAL-GROUP.pdf)

Lower pay, no collective bargaining, "moronic religious fools" predominating, BETTER RESULTS.

My rock beats your scissors.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

That's som un-democratic cynicism right there. Education is the pillar that freedom is built on. There are plenty of other good ways of subjecting an electorate to stuff it is too stupid to know it needs than just dumping piles of money into the pockets of teachers with "seniority" and no talent.

We just don't buy the "our interests and childrens interests are intertwined" horsecrap that the unions are always on about.

Catholic schools pay their teachers garbage and we have much higher standardized testing scores on average than any public school in our area. My rock beats your scissors.

The problem with public education isn't the teachers or their salaries though. I don't want teachers to have good pay primarily because I think they'll teach better, I want them to have it because they deserve it. I don't think they are paid excessively in wisconsin are they?

Schools that can kick people out at will and recruit from specific demographics always have higher test scores.


I feel like the whole education debate is mixed up. People look at low verbal scores on tests and talk about teachers unions? How about parents not getting their children to read? Kids not reading, not doing their homework, and not caring is the parents fault (when they are young any way). When they are older it's often the teenagers fault.

[ICantSpellDawg]

My Catholic high school had higher minority student numbers, lower teacher pay, theology classes, and better average scores across the board than my local public high school. The families had a higher median income, sure, but the results are clear.

It is nonsense to suggest that teachers "deserve" their pay. They should be paid what the market is willing to pay, what taxpayers can afford, and what excellent results demand. This is where our opinions diverge on nearly every issue. I don't believe that anyone deserves anything other than, life, dignity, and opportunity. If they don't think it's a good deal and that they can get better, I challenge them to.

My point isn't to blame teachers unions for crap results, just to neutralize Lemurs seemingly false assertion that collective bargaining is associated with better results. Get us back to the crux of the matter at hand.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Kahn Academy is just absolutely fantastic, no doubt about that. But Kahn Academy is inherently restricted to what you can get out of a video (it doesn't change the explanation to a more simplistic view every time you watch the video as a teacher would if you were still confused about some concepts). MITOpenSource and Kahn Academy I think will allow those that are already motivated and/or interested and/or smart enough to go be able to gain this information on their own and further their education through technology. However, the demand for physical teacher-student interactions will never be replaced because the average student needs to ask questions, needs things clarified once if not multiple times. Technology should not be treated with the same philosophy that created No Child Left Behind. NCLB is a complete failure because it treats all students on an equal level, which even if you disregard the socioeconomic factors, anyone can tell you that not all brains are created equal. Just a fact of life. To treat technology as the same singular solution that will wash over all of education and make everything better is false as well.

That being said, the concept that in the future people will be volunteering to do things because things that "need" to be done will be done by robots is still applicable here. In this singularity future you have brought up, those that still require human interaction with teachers will be able to find those who have a passion for teaching, which is why many teachers are in it to begin with.

http://www.fastcompany.com/1728471/change-generation-bill-gates-favorite-teacher-wants-to-disrupt-education


How would he change education? By turning it upside down. First, he says, we should “decouple credentialing from learning.” Instead of handing out degrees, standardized assessments would be the measure of employee competence. Anyone could learn at their own pace in their own way: in an internship, as an entrepreneur, or at home on the Internet. Then, everyone, no matter how they were educated, would be equal before the evaluation. Additionally, he thinks the assessment could be more meaningful than whatever abilities a college degree actual signals to employers.

Second, lectures would become homework and teacher tutoring would occur during class time. In traditional classrooms “despite the fact that you 30 humans in the room, it’s a very unhuman experience.” Some of Khan's devoted following of teachers are already substituting his lectures for their own, and assigning the videos as homework. It saves them time and allows more personalized education during school hours.

I think we may be on to something...

[Lemur]

I don't think [teachers] are paid excessively in wisconsin are they?
Not surprisingly, this has come up locally a number of times. Apparently Wisconsin teachers are paid, on average, 10% less than the national average.

[drone]

George Will's take (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/21/AR2011022103190.html?hpid=opinionsbox1). My favorite part:

"I am convinced," he says, "this is about money - but not the employees' money." It concerns union dues, which he wants the state to stop collecting for the unions, just as he wants annual votes by state employees on re-certifying the unions. He says many employees pay $500 to $600 annually in union dues - teachers pay up to $1,000. Given a choice, many might prefer to apply this money to health care premiums or retirement plans. And he thinks "eventually" most will say about the dues collectors, "What do we need this for?"

Such unions are government organized as an interest group to lobby itself to do what it always wants to do anyway - grow. These unions use dues extracted from members to elect their members' employers. And governments, not disciplined by the need to make a profit, extract government employees' salaries from taxpayers. Government sits on both sides of the table in cozy "negotiations" with unions.
Automatic deduction of union dues from the paycheck is the worst thing employers can do, and they should never agree to it in the CBA. Make the union collect it themselves.

[PanzerJaeger]

George Will's take (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/21/AR2011022103190.html?hpid=opinionsbox1). My favorite part:

Automatic deduction of union dues from the paycheck is the worst thing employers can do, and they should never agree to it in the CBA. Make the union collect it themselves.

:bow:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Catholic schools pay their teachers garbage and we have higher standardized testing scores on average than most public schools.
Link1 (http://www.catholictranscript.org/subscribe/1024-catholic-high-school-sat-scores-beat-state-national-averages.html)
Link2 (http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/sat-public-schools-down-private-schools-up/)
link3 (go to page 6 for a breakdown of average scores) (http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/cbs-2009-national-TOTAL-GROUP.pdf)

Lower pay, no collective bargaining, "moronic religious fools" predominating, BETTER RESULTS.

My rock beats your scissors.

Except standardized tests mean nothing except how good the school was at teaching how to answer SAT questions. Going off of standardized tests to determine "who is learning more" is a joke that every uni knows which is why they ask for a written statement, volunteer hours, GPA etc...


http://www.fastcompany.com/1728471/change-generation-bill-gates-favorite-teacher-wants-to-disrupt-education

I think we may be on to something...

I don't get what you are trying to say. What you have just posted confirmed what I said to you in the first place. The technology isn't replacing teachers, it's going to restructure how teacher's teach. Instead of giving their own lectures, lecture time will now be tutoring time for those that still have questions.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Except standardized tests mean nothing except how good the school was at teaching how to answer SAT questions. Going off of standardized tests to determine "who is learning more" is a joke that every uni knows which is why they ask for a written statement, volunteer hours, GPA etc...

Universities will accept anyone, for the most part. They just pretend to be discerning. SAT and ACT scores are actually rather telling regarding basic intelligence.
What would you judge competency on? My high school made sure everyone had a good understanding of all of the basics. They were hard-core. no lounging around in commons areas, no leaving for lunch, no nonsense. I tried public high school - I decided that I was of the mindset that would take advantage - so I went back to St Anthony's. Trust me, the quality of education was better than the public schools for the majority (driven people can prosper in any environment, they are not the issue) - and the public district was top 5 in LI, NY.




I don't get what you are trying to say. What you have just posted confirmed what I said to you in the first place. The technology isn't replacing teachers, it's going to restructure how teacher's teach. Instead of giving their own lectures, lecture time will now be tutoring time for those that still have questions.

Yes - we were saying that teachers would become tutors and that would annihilate the pay structure, which will accelerate the decline in the teaching profession further until there are only a few math and science teachers for the entire country; those who teach from a distance using a comprehensive computer-based program. They will be backed up by lower skilled, on-site minders with a basic tutoring ability. These could even be volunteers with real world experience linked directly to the economy. We can use the windfall in savings from salary in order to fund further technological advancement.

This will bring a massive change to education. A revolutionary change that will destroy the existing teaching structure and eliminate a massive quantity of unnecessary jobs while creating new opportunities in the real economy for those otherwise bright teachers. Khan and Bill Gates are just being more diplomatic in how they say it. I'm doing it for effect to get everyone's attention. In the real world we have a tendency to carry those that have outlived their usefulness to be decent about progress (but we don't need to be too generous)

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I don't know why you say that SAT scores are telling as far as basic intelligence goes, and then say they are good measures of education.

AP test scores would be better.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Universities will accept anyone, for the most part. They just pretend to be discerning. SAT and ACT scores are actually rather telling regarding basic intelligence.
What would you judge competency on? My high school made sure everyone had a good understanding of all of the basics. They were hard-core. no lounging around in commons areas, no leaving for lunch, no nonsense. I tried public high school - I decided that I was of the mindset that would take advantage - so I went back to St Anthony's. Trust me, the quality of education was better than the public schools for the majority (driven people can prosper in any environment, they are not the issue) - and the public district was top 5 in LI, NY.

I could think of a couple of things to base competency on. As Sasaki said, AP test scores are probably better than SAT/ACT.



Yes - we were saying that teachers would become tutors and that would annihilate the pay structure, which will accelerate the decline in the teaching profession further until there are only a few math and science teachers for the entire country; those who teach from a distance using a comprehensive computer-based program. They will be backed up by lower skilled, on-site minders with a basic tutoring ability. These could even be volunteers with real world experience linked directly to the economy. We can use the windfall in savings from salary in order to fund further technological advancement.

This will bring a massive change to education. A revolutionary change that will destroy the existing teaching structure and eliminate a massive quantity of unnecessary jobs while creating new opportunities in the real economy for those otherwise bright teachers. Khan and Bill Gates are just being more diplomatic in how they say it. I'm doing it for effect to get everyone's attention. In the real world we have a tendency to carry those that have outlived their usefulness to be decent about progress (but we don't need to be too generous)

Alright, yeah I agree fully with you. I just think there will be more than a few teachers, since we are still talking about a student population in the tens of millions.

[Centurion1]

most students cant pass an ap test so lets start there....

[Lemur]

Well, it's looking like this prolonged fight is for the best. Turns out there are elements in our Governor's bill that don't seem terribly conservative or fiscally prudent. Enforcing no-bid contracts by law? What the gah?


16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state-owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).

So our Governor can't negotiate or talk with any unions, but he's going to cement no-bid energy contracts in law? Excuse me (http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/the-less-discussed-part-of-walkers-wisconsin-plan-no-bid-energy-assets-firesales/)?


The bill would allow for the selling of state-owned heating/cooling/power plants without bids and without concern for the legally-defined public interest. [...]

In case it isn’t clear where the naked cronyism comes in, remember which large, politically active private interest loves buying up power plants and already has considerable interests in Wisconsin. Then consider their demonstrated eagerness to help Mr. Walker get elected and bus in carpetbaggers to have a sad little pro-Mubarak style “rally” in his honor. There are dots to be connected here, but doing so might not be in the public interest.

It’s important to think of this battle as a larger one over the role of the state. The attempt to break labor is part of the same continuous motion as saying that the crony, corporatist selling of state utilities to the Koch brothers and other energy interests is the new “public interest.”

[ICantSpellDawg]

Good to know. I expect Republican minorities around the country to use the same stalling technique, since Democrats don't have a problem with it.

[Lemur]

TuffStuff, I'm in favor of reforming the teachers' union, make no mistake, but this process is extremely suspicious. Walker campaigned on fixing the state's finances; he never promised to take away collective bargaining altogether. Now the unions are coming back and saying that they're ready to deal on all financial fronts, but our governor is saying he is not willing to negotiate. At all. And now it turns out that he's encoding energy facility no-bid giveaways in the same bill. Ick.

I would like to see Republicans negotiate. Period. During the healthcare bill process, Dems kept giving Repubs elements they wanted, conditions they had advocated for years, and still no Repubs would negotiate seriously. President 44 pretty much begged and pleaded for Repubs to sit down and work on a fix for our healthcare. Instead they refused en masse, even when given every element of a deal which they claimed to want. The attitude seemed to be, "If you're offering 85% of what I want, that's 15% EVIL and I won't deal with you."

Now we have Walker claiming that this is all about finances. So the unions say, "Okay, we can work with that, let's talk (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/02/why_wont_governor_walker_accep.html)," and he says no (http://www.wkow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14071751). So the Dems say, "Let's go over this and work something out," and he apparently will not return any phone calls (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/20/wisconsin-democratic-senators-illinois_n_825748.html) or discuss any aspect of his bill. There's a certain "Give me 100% of what I want without condition or discussion or I won't deal with you" attitude. It does not strike me as productive or even very savvy. Public opinion in WI appears to be turning against the Governor (http://weaskamerica.com/2011/02/18/weirdness-in-wisconsin/), and I would argue this is because he is allowing himself to be seen as utterly inflexible.

I think the situation in my state is a little more complex than "Now we're all obstructionist jerks," but thanks for playing the false equivalence card.

-edit-

A very good summary (http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/02/19/more-hemlock/) of everything I think is wrong with the Teachers' Union in the USA (none of which is addressed by our Governor's current heavy-handedness):


[T]he problem isn't only the inability to fire bad teachers--and not just bad teachers, but even those who've been caught commiting crimes and hitting on students. The problem is that we are unable to reward good teachers.

The teachers unions have traditionally blocked that. And there are a myriad of other educational difficulties that result from the fact that the union bosses say they want to see teachers treated as professionals, but create systems of work rules that treat teachers like steelworkers. A good example is taking place in New York City right now, which, like many municipalities, is facing the harsh reality of teacher layoffs: the union insists they be laid off by seniority--last hired, first fired. This will remove from city classrooms some young, energetic inspirational teachers and retain others who are burned out and hanging on to make their pension. (Of course, not all young teachers are good and not all older teachers are bad--but school managers should be able to select their workforce just as magazine editors do, according to ability--especially if we're allegedly dealing with professionals here).

[ICantSpellDawg]

Lemur, the way the system works is that the legislature negotiates when they can't win. When they can win, they don't need to negotiate. If taxpayers elect a representative, they can lobby the rep to change his opinion, but if he does not they have to wait to vote them out of office (unless they want to do a recall/no confidence vote). It is nonsense to suggest that it is good sportsmanship to hold up a process becasue you know you are going to lose. Punish the reps at the ballot if you are so disgusted with thier position, don't obstruct the system. Democratic legislators should argue with them, protestors can picket - but in the end the vote needs to happen and the Republicans will live with the results. This will cost a number of them the next election and you know that the punishment is coming.

[Lemur]

When they can win, they don't need to negotiate.
I would argue that this is naive. If a politico goes for extreme change without a mandate, it's only fair to expect everyone and his dog to become obstructionist. Since the Wisconsin 14 are not actually breaking the law, they're within the boundaries of the game to flee. (Note that the filibuster in the Senate is not encoded by any law; it's a tradition.) Honestly, if Governor Walker wants to fix the state's finances I'm all for it. But his union-busting mania seems to be getting the better of him.


This will cost a number of them the next election and you know that the punishment is coming.
Indeed, which is why once again I'm irritated by the selectivity of the union-busting. There's no way Governor Walker or the Republicans in the state senate are going to go after the firefighters or the police unions. Ever. And the fact that they're unwilling to declare victory and call it a day (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/02/why_wont_governor_walker_accep.html) is telling as well.


It isn't clear that there's any public support for this position in Wisconsin. One key finding from today's poll by the Dem firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner is this one showing overwhelming support for this compromise: [...]

Nearly three fourths think the workers should keep their collective bargaining rights if they agree to concessions on health care and retirement. Even 47 percent of Republicans believe this. Yes, this is a Dem firm and the poll was bankrolled by unions, but if this is anything close to an accurate representation of public opinion, it's quite remarkable.

The real tell here, the one that clearly reveals the real game plan, is that Walker won't accept this compromise despite apparently overwhelming support for it in his own state. After all, so doing would allow him to declare victory. He could very plausibly argue that his hard line forced public employees to cough up the concessions he demanded. You'd think this alone would win him plaudits from more reasonable conservative observers.

There are only three imaginable reasons why Walker isn't doing this. The first is that he really believes that rolling back employee bargaining rights -- in addition to winning the fiscal concessions he himself asked for -- is the only way to put the state on sounder fiscal footing. But if this were the case, he would have agreed to GOP State Senator Dale Schultz's proposal to roll back those rights temporarily, until 2013. Walker didn't do this either.

The second reason for rejecting the union compromise is that his goal is nothing less than to completely break the unions, pure and simple.

[ICantSpellDawg]

You don't need direct domocratic consensus to govern in a Republic. It looks like Walker is prepared for the punishment from his decision. If you think you've got enough support for a compromise, bring it on when you inevitably wipe Republicans out of office next election, by your estimation. I'd imagine that if Republicans felt threatened they wouldn't do much hesitating and would have caved at this point - the opportunists in power are a better barometer of support than any biased poll.

Did you vote for Walker? I'll put money on no, but I've been wrong before about your positions, just not often.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Has this state-property-in-exchange-for-campaign-money scheme so far raised any questions in the state assembly or the like?

[HoreTore]

Out of curiosity:

Just why haven't the US employers unionised themselves and started collective bargaining as well?

[Lemur]

Did you vote for Walker?
Actually, I was out of state during the most recent local election, so I voted for neither Walker nor whomever he ran against. I know, I could have done a mail-in, but that would have been assuming I knew in advance about the business trip, which I did not.

Anyway, based on his campaign promises I might very well have gone with Walker. However he seems to be exceeding his promises by a wide margin. Unusual sitaution -- normally you have to kick, claw and shoo a politico to make good on a campaign promise.

[Xiahou]

If voters think that teachers are paid too much and should have the cba taken away, it should be an election issue?Yes.


What's right is not the same as what voters think. There's a weird supposition that the teachers are all greedy, but the voters are selfless and won't vote to lower their taxes if they don't have kids in school.Property taxes in my state seem to keep increasing, despite elected legislatures and school boards. We're not talking about direct democracy.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I understand why you are concerned with this issue, but I don't understand why you oppose the likely outcome. Do you really believe that the legislature is betraying the will of the people? You are the one of the ones it aims to benefit. I'm sure that you work hard and pay a substantially higher portion of your pension and health benefits and would like to see your State stay on a sensible financial path.

[Lemur]

Do you really believe that the legislature is betraying the will of the people?
That's a bit dramatic, isn't it? I think the mid-term election showed that Wisconsinites wanted a change, and wanted financial responsibility. I also think Governor Walker is taking things rather further than most voters thought he would.


I'm sure that you work hard and pay a substantially higher portion of your pension and health benefits and would like to see your State stay on a sensible financial path.
And I pay my property taxes and let me tell you, they're a deal. My children are in a state that (currently) has a great education system, so my tax dollars are a sound investment. (We are all clear on the concept that without taxes there are no roads, no public schools, no police, right?) If the governor does slash-and-burn reform, on the other hand, and we start to go down the same path California did, then my tax dollars won't feel like such a bargain.*

I do not feel the teachers in my community are overpaid, greedy or parasitic. They perform a valuable function. With my children. Every day. I pay their salaries, yes, and I don't resent them even slightly.

Do I think their union should be reformed? Yes. Maybe even busted? Yeah, possibly. But as anybody who's lived through a revolution will tell you, don't smash something apart unless you have a notion of its function and how to replace it. I get the impression that Walker and the senate Republicans believe that the teachers' unions serves no purpose. None. Nada. So no provision for teachers need be made, no structure need be invoked, no methodology needs to be created. Just bust the union and life will reek with joy!

-edit-

* A back-of-the-envelope moment: Let's say my annual property tax bill is $4000 (which is pretty average for my area). So $4k yields great public services and fantastic schools. I am happy. Now let's say Walker not only balances the budget but slashes costs in the state. Let's say my property tax is reduced to $3k, a 25% savings. Do I want to spend $3k on a junked school system with no budget, no supplies and irritable teachers? I do not. $3k for junk is not a bargain. $4k for a strong system is fine by this lemur. (And yes, I know this is a radical simplification and so forth, I just want to drive home the point that as a Wisconsinite I would rather pay for excellence than save for mediocrity.)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Lemur is going to be the only sensible one here. TuffStuff just because you think that teachers teachers will be obsolete in the near future doesn't justify this push to have everything change right now.

[Lemur]

Everybody should take a look at the concessions being offered (http://wistechnology.com/articles/8294/) by the teachers. This is not minor stuff. Seriously, the Governor should declare victory and call it a day.

Dropping a teacher pay schedule that rewarded longevity and advanced degrees but little else. The union now supports “merit pay” based on performance, national certification, leadership roles, and how teachers handle more difficult assignments such as bilingual or special education, or teaching in under-performing schools.
Adopting student test results, a peer review panel, mentoring and other factors to root out ineffective teachers.
Breaking up the state's largest school district, Milwaukee Public Schools, into six smaller units within four years.

These are the sorts of reforms I've been hoping to see for years. If this drama yields nothing else, it will have been well worth the disruption.

One analyst thinks this is a good road test (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/wonkbook_are_republicans_overr.html) of two different governing styles:


Republicans and Democrats, it seems, govern rather differently. Republicans are proving themselves willing to do what liberals long wanted the Obama administration to do: Play hardball. Refuse compromise. Risk severe consequences that they'll attempt to blame on their opponent. The Obama administration's answer to this was always that it was important to be seen as the reasonable actor in the drama, to occupy some space known as the middle, and to avoid, so much as possible, the appearance of dramatic overreach. This is as close as we're likely to come to a test of that theory. In two cases, Republicans have chosen a hardline and are refusing significant compromise, even at the risk of terrible consequences. Will the public turn on them for overreach? Applaud their strength and conviction? Or not really care one way or the other, at least by the time the next election rolls around?

[drone]

At this point, I'm pretty sure Walker is just out to bust the union. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing, if he takes the concessions the union will eventually just get them back when the political tides roll to the Dems again. But this seems more like a long-term political move than a cost-cutting measure, removal of public union funding from future Democrat campaign warchests.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Your position seems rather sensible here. I have no dog in this fight, except that I really want to see other states annihilate teachers unions so that we have more ammo against our own.

You are more of a conservative than I am, it seems. I beleive that radical changes need to be made to our government structure and that the past is holding us back in many areas.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Your position seems rather sensible here. I have no dog in this fight, except that I really want to see other states annihilate teachers unions so that we have more ammo against our own.

You are more of a conservative than I am, it seems. I beleive that radical changes need to be made to our government structure and that the past is holding us back in many areas.

I agree, but radical changes can not (maybe even shouldn't) be made in a radically small amount of time.

[Don Corleone]

I think the entire education, and funding of education questions are far more complicated and nuanced than most anyone seems to consider (present company excluded).

In good old "Live Free or Die" New Hampshire, my small town pays almost 150% the state average per-student, and close to 200% of the national average, and yet, despite small class size, and the rest, our district was found to be not in compliance with NCLB standards 3 years in a row, and now we've lost federal funding. We consistently have mediocre to sub-par results on standarized testing, and make negative progress on the at-risk groups identified.

But... our teachers haven't had a cost of living increase in 5 years!!! With the inflation going on in healthcare, energy and higher education, that amounts to a significant erosion of wages. Where the hell is all the money going?

I don't know the right answers. But I do know you're not going to get them from the mouthpieces for the NEA or for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. What the hell ever happened to common-sense meets in the middle?

Anyway, I'm off to learn more. Two questions I'll leave you with...

1) How do the Unions get away with forcing people to join a Public Employees Union and calling it a "Collective Bargaining Right"? It's such prosaic Orwellian thought-speak, I don't know where to begin.

2) And shame on the other side too. If this is really about financial liquidity and not about fulfilling backroom political promises to engage in union busting, why is the governor's office turning down offers from the union for more cuts than he asked for?

I get the impression I'm going to have to hold my nose start looking for the leper with the most fingers left...

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think the entire education, and funding of education questions are far more complicated and nuanced than most anyone seems to consider (present company excluded).
Absolutely.



In good old "Live Free or Die" New Hampshire, my small town pays almost 150% the state average per-student, and close to 200% of the national average, and yet, despite small class size, and the rest, our district was found to be not in compliance with NCLB standards 3 years in a row, and now we've lost federal funding. We consistently have mediocre to sub-par results on standarized testing, and make negative progress on the at-risk groups identified.

But... our teachers haven't had a cost of living increase in 5 years!!! With the inflation going on in healthcare, energy and higher education, that amounts to a significant erosion of wages. Where the hell is all the money going?
Look towards the administration. Administration from Vice Principle and up can make real bank, but no one looks at those people. Also, look at what the school budgets are. Make the system more transparent in where exactly the school spends its money. Most people would agree with this, but they are too busy pointing fingers at teachers and unions to really make a proactive decision that everyone would agree with.

I will give an example from my own life. This was when I was in 4th or 5th grade and my memory might not be the best to go off of, so take it or leave it. My elementary school was (idk why) built right next to a major freeway in Southern California (maybe the freeway came after it), and one of the main buildings had one of its more lengthy faces showing parallel to the freeway for the drivers to see. Well, the school raised a bunch of money from a bake sale, or some sort of fundraiser they had and omg, it was a lot of money! I distinctly remember how at that point, the playground which everyone played in was old and rusted. The swings were coated in rust, the monkey bars had rust everywhere except where friction from the hands of swinging children would contact the metal, the slide had rust, etc... basically, all the children generally agreed that the best way to use this money (the school announced it over the PA during recess so everyone started talking about it then). Maybe it wasn't, who knows, I am sure teachers needed supplies as well. All I know is that the equipment needed to be replaced and everyone who used it thought it should. But for some reason, to the best of my ability, I remember that instead of providing more supplies, or starting to replace rusted equipment, the school had the brilliant idea to spent it all on paint to paint that long side of the main building which faced the freeway so that "everyone would know that this is (school name) and how much pride we have for our school." And it was an ugly mural imo.

So yeah, I figure mismanagement of money happens a lot.



I don't know the right answers. But I do know you're not going to get them from the mouthpieces for the NEA or for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. What the hell ever happened to common-sense meets in the middle?
There is no such thing as common sense.
Anyway, I'm off to learn more. Two questions I'll leave you with...



1) How do the Unions get away with forcing people to join a Public Employees Union and calling it a "Collective Bargaining Right"? It's such prosaic Orwellian thought-speak, I don't know where to begin.

2) And shame on the other side too. If this is really about financial liquidity and not about fulfilling backroom political promises to engage in union busting, why is the governor's office turning down offers from the union for more cuts than he asked for?

I get the impression I'm going to have to hold my nose start looking for the leper with the most fingers left...

1.The union has the right, the union isn't the right. They shouldn't force people to join, but there is nothing Orwellian about saying that unions which forces people to join, have the ability to sit down at the table with the company.

2. Because it isn't about financial liquidity, it's about backroom deals to union bust. That is the truth.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I'm for taking the ability to collectively bargain from the unions because otherwise in the future they'll just demand all they offer to concede now.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

I'm for taking the ability to collectively bargain from the unions because otherwise in the future they'll just demand all they offer to concede now.

CR

-facepalm- That is the point. You give a little when times are tough, you get a little back when things are better.

[jabarto]

I'm for taking the ability to collectively bargain from the unions because otherwise in the future they'll just demand all they offer to concede now.

CR

At least be honest and say you want the unions abolished.

[Don Corleone]

I'm for taking the ability to collectively bargain from the unions because otherwise in the future they'll just demand all they offer to concede now.

CR

This is why I'm finding the expression "collective bargaining rights" and it's misuse so annoying...

Do you mean you're opposed to automatic union membership by employees and the government collecting the union's dues for them along with payroll taxes, i.e. you support the reforms proposed by the governor?

Or do you mean it literally, that two employees discussing their salaries amongst themselves should an offense worthy of discipline?

"Collective bargaining" is a very broad term. It can even mean explaining to a colleague why you personally believe you received a promotion/award, or that you even did in the first place.

I'm not building strawmen here. I work for a fairly enlightened company (but it's not non-union). Discussing salary, bonuses and even reviews is a big no-no.

[Lemur]

Well, if there were any doubt about our governor's intentions, this clears it up. Since our Guv is famous for not taking or returning calls, a small 'zine publisher pretended to be one of the Koch brothers (http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2011/02/23/did-scott-walker-reveal-his-crisis-ending-ruse-to-a-prank-caller.aspx) to see if he could get through, and recorded the whole thing. Brilliant. YouTube embeds below the spoil tag.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnSv3a6Nh4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3a2pYGr7-k&

I politely said hello, not knowing how friendly Gilkes and Koch may be. He was eager to help. "I was really hoping to talk directly to Scott," I said. He said that could be arranged and that I should just leave my number. I explained to Gilkes, "My goddamn maid, Maria, put my phone in the washer. I'd have her deported, but she works for next to nothing." Gilkes found this amusing. "I'm calling from the VOID--with the VOID, or whatever it's called. You know, the Snype!"

"Gotcha," Gilkes said. "Let me check the schedule here...OK, there's an opening at 2 o'clock Central Standard Time. Just call this same number and we'll put you through."

After getting Governor Walker on the line, the jokes pretty much wrote themselves (http://www.buffalobeast.com/?p=5045):


Murphy as Koch: Well, not the liberal bastards on MSNBC.

Walker: Oh yeah, but who watches that? I went on "Morning Joe" this morning. I like it because I just like being combative with those guys, but, uh. You know they're off the deep end.

Murphy as Koch: Joe--Joe's a good guy. He's one of us.

Walker: Yeah, he's all right. He was fair to me. [...]

Murphy as Koch: Beautiful; beautiful. You gotta love that Mika Brzezinski; she's a real piece of ass.

Walker: Oh yeah. [...]

The call ends with Murphy-as-Koch promising, "once you crush these bastards, I'll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time." "All right," the other man says, "That would be outstanding."

[Don Corleone]

While I find that amazingly entertaining, and good stuff, come on Lemur. It'd be easier to confirm things in the Onion. If he put that much thought into this prank, certainly he could have gone to Radio Shack and purchased a $10.00 phonecall recorder, which as long as he's one of the participants, he's entitled to do.

[Lemur]

While I find that amazingly entertaining, and good stuff, come on Lemur. It'd be easier to confirm things in the Onion. If he put that much thought into this prank, certainly he could have gone to Radio Shack and purchased a $10.00 phonecall recorder, which as long as he's one of the participants, he's entitled to do.
Not sure what your objection is, Don. I included the audio below the spoil, and the calls have already been confirmed (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/what_a_prank_call_proves_about.html) by the governor's office as legit. Here's a partial transcript (http://host.madison.com/wsj/article_531276b6-3f6a-11e0-b288-001cc4c002e0.html).

-edit-

A good take (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/what_a_prank_call_proves_about.html):


The critique many conservatives have made of public-sector unions is that they both negotiate with and fund politicians. It's a conflict of interest. Well, so too do corporations, and wealthy individuals. That's why Murphy -- posing as Koch -- was able to get through to Walker so quickly. And it shows what Walker is really interested in here: He is not opposed, in principle, to powerful interest groups having the ear of the politicians they depend on, and who depend on them. He just wants those interest groups to be the conservative interest groups that fund him, and that he depends on.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Seems like the buffalobeast site got slashdotted or something. :no:

[Lemur]

Seems like the buffalobeast site got slashdotted or something. :no:
Yup, they've been crushed by the traffic. However, the YouTube embeds are still good:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnSv3a6Nh4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3a2pYGr7-k&

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why are people still defending this guy?

[Don Corleone]

I didn't know the Governor's office had confirmed it, and I didn't see anything for the audio. Consider me updated...

Edit: By the way, given all the so-called "sting" operations against first ACORN, and then Planned Parenthood, regardless of your stance on what he's trying to do, shouldn't Walker get a nomination for dumbest person of the modern media era?

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/6458-wisconsin-protests-the-reforms-the-reality


About time someone had the balls to tell the teachers and others to start paying for their stuff.

[Motep]

The runaway politicians hid in my town...

Anyways, I thought this said "Bust the Onions", and I was on the verge of hilarity, but I read it again and...well...

*not aiding the discussion in any way. In fact, this post is pretty stupid. If you feel like deleting, oh moderating one,be my guest.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Here (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/magazine/27christie-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1) is another article on a similar situation in New Jersey, where Governor Christie has been fighting tooth-and-nail with our (really powerful) teacher's union ever since he took office. While it hasn't reached Wisconsin-esque proportions - yet - the battle's gotten pretty nasty overall.

Of particular note in the article on one of the pages is a bit about how governors are finally going after unions as a last resort. They've tried all the gimmicks like casinos and whatnot over the past several administrations and with the stimulus money slowly starting to dry up, it still isn't enough to fix the state budgets. I wonder if this is going to be a growing trend over the next couple of years, especially if the executives win out over the unions and other governors look towards their example.

[Crazed Rabbit]

-facepalm- That is the point. You give a little when times are tough, you get a little back when things are better.

That's not what happens. The unions never want a little when things are good, and they never want to give anything up when things are bad.

They want to raise taxes so no union people get fired when there's a recession. They want huge pensions that can not be supported in the future when times are good.

Huge union pensions could bankrupt states - the public unions have to be broken in addition to the pensions being cut so we don't get in this situation again.


At least be honest and say you want the unions abolished.

Just public unions.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

That's not what happens. The unions never want a little when things are good, and they never want to give anything up when things are bad.

They want to raise taxes so no union people get fired when there's a recession. They want huge pensions that can not be supported in the future when times are good.

Huge union pensions could bankrupt states - the public unions have to be broken in addition to the pensions being cut so we don't get in this situation again.

Where in this talking point did you decide to ignore all the articles/evidence highlighting how the union is willing to completely give the state the financial concessions it wants, just as long as collective bargaining is maintained?

[Tuuvi]

One thing this thread has got me thinking, If government employees can't trust the government to treat them fairly, and therefore need a union, how can the citizens trust the government to treat them fairly?

[a completely inoffensive name]

One thing this thread has got me thinking, If government employees can't trust the government to treat them fairly, and therefore need a union, how can the citizens trust the government to treat them fairly?

You can't fully trust anything. All you can do is put decent people in charge and hope for the best.

[ICantSpellDawg]

good question

[rory_20_uk]

Where in this talking point did you decide to ignore all the articles/evidence highlighting how the union is willing to completely give the state the financial concessions it wants, just as long as collective bargaining is maintained?

The Unions are most unhappy about:

Overturning the current practice of removing union subs without employee consent
Having to have in essence a vote of confidence on an annual basis

Y'know - giving the workers some clout over who represents them.

~:smoking:

[drone]

One thing this thread has got me thinking, If government employees can't trust the government to treat them fairly, and therefore need a union, how can the citizens trust the government to treat them fairly?
We don't.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The Unions are most unhappy about:

Overturning the current practice of removing union subs without employee consent
Having to have in essence a vote of confidence on an annual basis

Y'know - giving the workers some clout over who represents them.

~:smoking:

That's cool, but it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

CR says: They never give up financial concessions.
I say: They have already.
You say: Non sequitur about how flawed its internal structure is.

[Tuuvi]

We don't.

Ha yea maybe we need a revolution, but not a tea party one cause country music sucks

[Lemur]

Ha yea maybe we need a revolution, but not a tea party one cause country music sucks
How dare you (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?127500-Tea-Party-Music)!

[Lemur]

Aaaaaand ... now it looks as though Anonymous is involved (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/Anonymous_takes_down_Americans_for_Prosperity_website.html?showall). Well, that's it, game over. Remember how they utterly destroyed the Church of Scientology? Oh, wait, they didn't.

Whatever. Should increase the trash-TV quality of our home state's little drama, however:


The online activist group "anonymous," which has used coordinated denial of service attacks -- a crude but effective Internet weapon -- to temporary disable sites belonging to foes ranging from Scientology to WikiLeaks foes -- has turned its firepower on the Koch-backed conservative group Americans for Prosperity, making the group's site intermittently unavailable tonight.

From the typically immodest press release, which begins, "Dear Citizens of the United States of America":


It has come to our attention that the brothers, David and Charles Koch--the billionaire owners of Koch Industries--have long attempted to usurp American Democracy. Their actions to undermine the legitimate political process in Wisconsin are the final straw. Starting today we fight back.

Anonymous cannot ignore the plight of the citizen-workers of Wisconsin, or the opportunity to fight for the people in America's broken political system. For these reasons, we feel that the Koch brothers threaten the United States democratic system and, by extension, all freedom-loving individuals everywhere. As such, we have no choice but to spread the word of the Koch brothers' political manipulation, their single-minded intent and the insidious truth of their actions in Wisconsin, for all to witness.

Anonymous hears the voice of the downtrodden American people, whose rights and liberties are being systematically removed one by one, even when their own government refuses to listen or worse - is complicit in these attacks. We are actively seeking vulnerabilities, but in the mean time we are calling for all supporters of true Democracy, and Freedom of The People, to boycott all Koch Industries' paper products. We welcome unions across the globe to join us in this boycott to show that you will not allow big business to dictate your freedom.

The DNS attack appears to have made Americans for Prosperity's website intermittently unavailable, but it will likely also help establish AfP among conservatives as the key group at Governor Scott Walker's side.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Aaaaaand ... now it looks as though Anonymous is involved (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/Anonymous_takes_down_Americans_for_Prosperity_webs ite.html?showall). Well, that's it, game over. Remember how they utterly destroyed the Church of Scientology? Oh, wait, they didn't.

Whatever. Should increase the trash-TV quality of our home state's little drama, however:
The online activist group "anonymous," which has used coordinated denial of service attacks -- a crude but effective Internet weapon -- to temporary disable sites belonging to foes ranging from Scientology to WikiLeaks foes -- has turned its firepower on the Koch-backed conservative group Americans for Prosperity, making the group's site intermittently unavailable tonight.

From the typically immodest press release, which begins, "Dear Citizens of the United States of America":
It has come to our attention that the brothers, David and Charles Koch--the billionaire owners of Koch Industries--have long attempted to usurp American Democracy. Their actions to undermine the legitimate political process in Wisconsin are the final straw. Starting today we fight back.

Anonymous cannot ignore the plight of the citizen-workers of Wisconsin, or the opportunity to fight for the people in America's broken political system. For these reasons, we feel that the Koch brothers threaten the United States democratic system and, by extension, all freedom-loving individuals everywhere. As such, we have no choice but to spread the word of the Koch brothers' political manipulation, their single-minded intent and the insidious truth of their actions in Wisconsin, for all to witness.

Anonymous hears the voice of the downtrodden American people, whose rights and liberties are being systematically removed one by one, even when their own government refuses to listen or worse - is complicit in these attacks. We are actively seeking vulnerabilities, but in the mean time we are calling for all supporters of true Democracy, and Freedom of The People, to boycott all Koch Industries' paper products. We welcome unions across the globe to join us in this boycott to show that you will not allow big business to dictate your freedom.The DNS attack appears to have made Americans for Prosperity's website intermittently unavailable, but it will likely also help establish AfP among conservatives as the key group at Governor Scott Walker's side.

Have you even followed what anonymous has done? The attack on CoS was meant to deal as much damage as possible with the hope of "bringing it down". This was anon's first foray into political matters, so give it a little slack here. They ended up in the spotlight across the country, which is what the purpose of the entire thing was. Get people informed about Scientology, besides a south park episode, Scientology really wouldn't be in the public discourse if it wasn't for anon, perfect for a group willing to recruit. Look up their efforts on HBGary and how they embarrassed the company and its founder. Actually, why don't I just link to a video that says just that,

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/375428/february-24-2011/corporate-hacker-tries-to-take-down-wikileaks

Despite all of that, I don't understand why you sound indignant that anon is trying to clean up corporate corruption in your state in the first place. Don't tell me this is one of those, "Those crazy kids!" kind of thing.

[Xiahou]

Despite all of that, I don't understand why you sound indignant that anon is trying to clean up corporate corruption in your state in the first place. Don't tell me this is one of those, "Those crazy kids!" kind of thing.I doubt they're trying to do anything other than make a name for themselves. I've read about some of their less high-profile targets and this group has dogpiled on a number of defenseless people. (sorry, I looked for the links- but you try getting good results by googling for "anonymous" anything....)

In other news, thank goodness for the new tone of civility. You'd hate to see the union protestors acting like those nasty tea partiers.
Here's a video (http://dane101.com/current/2011/03/01/wisconsin_gop_senator_glenn_grothman_chased_trapped_by_hecklers_saved_by_dem_rep_) of an angry mob chasing down and cornering a GOP Wisconsin Rep. He's saved by a Democratic fellow Representative.

[Lemur]

A nice thing about this kerfluffle is that it's forcing me to pay attention to state politics, a subject about which I have existed in a condition of near-perfect ignorance. I had no idea about the "Wisconsin Veto," for example. So, if the legislature passes a law stating, "No sex with dogs," the governor can amend it to "Sex with dogs"? Fascinating.

The Wisconsin Veto (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/gov-scott-walkers-secret-weapon-the-wisconsin-veto/71816/)

What most people outside Wisconsin don't know is that our governor wields a veto power on appropriations bills so strong as to be frankly comic. It's not just a line-item veto; Walker has the power to veto individual phrases and words (PDF) -- like "not" -- from sentences. If the state Senate returns to session and passes a bill with time limits on Walker's favored provisions, he can strip out the new language and sign his own decompromised version into law. If that sounds crazy, keep in mind that until 2008 governors of Wisconsin could -- and did! -- veto multi-page sections of bills, leaving in place only eight or nine words spelling out a law the governor wanted to enact. And that, in turn, was a much-narrowed version of the so-called "Vanna White veto" power enjoyed by Wisconsin governors prior to 1990, when they could veto individual letters out of words and individual digits out of numbers.

Even in its defanged state, the partial veto makes it hard for the legislature to talk meaningfully about compromise, on this bill or on controversial legislation still to come.

According to a staffer at the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the legislators are well aware of the partial-veto problem in the current negotiations. Writing a "veto-proof" appropriations bill in Wisconsin is essentially impossible. The Senate could break the collective bargaining provisions off the rest of the bill, making it non-appropriations and thus sheltering it from the governor's black Sharpie -- but that would mean passing a budget repair bill without any mention of collective bargaining at all, a level of independence of which Senate Republicans, with the possible exception of Schultz, have shown no hint. In the end, the Senate would probably have to rely on a handshake agreement with Gov. Walker to leave the bill intact. At this point, what is a handshake from the Governor worth? That depends whether you think the governor would openly defy a bipartisan deal to get his way on collective bargaining. The partial veto is wildly undemocratic, but it's a Wisconsin tradition. I think Walker would probably do it; and it's not clear he would pay any serious political price.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I doubt they're trying to do anything other than make a name for themselves. I've read about some of their less high-profile targets and this group has dogpiled on a number of defenseless people. (sorry, I looked for the links- but you try getting good results by googling for "anonymous" anything....)

In other news, thank goodness for the new tone of civility. You'd hate to see the union protestors acting like those nasty tea partiers.
Here's a video (http://dane101.com/current/2011/03/01/wisconsin_gop_senator_glenn_grothman_chased_trapped_by_hecklers_saved_by_dem_rep_) of an angry mob chasing down and cornering a GOP Wisconsin Rep. He's saved by a Democratic fellow Representative.

Except how do a bunch of people who are anonymous try to make a name for themselves? No one here really understands what anon is. Anon isn't a bunch of dudes sitting at their computer trying to save the world. It's a bunch of dudes trying to embarrass HBGary and Bank of America, it's a bunch of different dudes making racist statements and symbols and raids on online sites like Habbo Hotel, it's a bunch of different dudes being reported on by Fox News as "hackers on steroids", it's a bunch of dudes trying to show the public what a joke against democracy Gov. Walker.

Anonymous is everyone and everyone can (is?) fly(ing) under the anonymous banner. One anon is not tied to another anon and one group isn't linked with any other.

EDIT; The second statement isn't really saying much. Angry people are angry people. They will harass the Republican state legislature just as Tea Party people harassed anyone not "freedom loving" at their rallies. The difference in civility is that the majority of Wisconsin signs are not swastikas, hammer and sickles and attacks about Walker's ethnic background.

[Xiahou]

The difference in civility is that the majority of Wisconsin signs are not swastikas, hammer and sickles and attacks about Walker's ethnic background.Well, I don't remember seeing swastikas on a majority of any protest's signs outside of a nazi rally.... so that's really not much a difference. There definitely was enough Walker=Hitler (http://boldcolors.net/?p=1309) references going around though.

I award bonus points to the person who put crosshairs on Walker's face though. :yes:


The Wisconsin Veto (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/gov-scott-walkers-secret-weapon-the-wisconsin-veto/71816/)That's awesome! :laugh4:
*It's important to note that I do not live in Wisconsin.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, I don't remember seeing swastikas on a majority of any protest's signs outside of a nazi rally.... so that's really not much a difference. There definitely was enough Walker=Hitler (http://boldcolors.net/?p=1309) references going around though.

I award bonus points to the person who put crosshairs on Walker's face though. :yes:


Pshhh. Get that right wing blog spam out of here and find some more credible sources. For all I know this blogger going on about "hurr durr all these liberals want to try and deny their socialist views..." made up all these pictures considering all of them are people posing with little view of the background.

EDIT: Even better, "I zoomed in on this sign, and LOOK! SOCIALISM.ORG! This can't be crudely photoshopped!"

[Xiahou]

Howabout the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (http://www.jsonline.com/multimedia/photos/116411054.html#id_46722484)? Or The New Republic (http://www.tnr.com/slideshow/83906/wisconsin-protest-signs-walker-unions?3)? Just google "walker hitler"- they're (http://www.flickr.com/photos/althouse/5456790062/) not too hard to find.

Here's a lovely video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=71gsnLfsbbM) that shows some of the protesters as well. But it's probably photoshopped.....

[a completely inoffensive name]

Howabout the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (http://www.jsonline.com/multimedia/photos/116411054.html#id_46722484)? Or The New Republic (http://www.tnr.com/slideshow/83906/wisconsin-protest-signs-walker-unions?3)? Just google "walker hitler"- they're (http://www.flickr.com/photos/althouse/5456790062/) not too hard to find.

Here's a lovely video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=71gsnLfsbbM) that shows some of the protesters as well. But it's probably photoshopped.....

Alright then, I concede the point that they are just as idiotic as right wing tea party protesters. Hopefully you learned to just site credible sources from the beginning.

Now what do the signs have to do with whether Walker's policies are right nor not?

[Lemur]

That's awesome! :laugh4:
*It's important to note that I do not live in Wisconsin.
I'm surprised you think it's awesome -- seems like an excessive power for the executive to me. Even worse the way it used to be, where a governor could eliminate individual numbers or letters. That's just insane. Renders the legislature almost useless.

A line-item veto as has been proposed at the federal level, where the exec can take out sections of bills, sounds a little more realistic. But allowing the executive to delete individual words and sign a bill into law? "Shall not drive intoxicated" can be changed to "Shall drive intoxicated," and that is the law as passed? Seems very, very contrary to the whole checks and balances thing that the founding fathers were so keen on. Whatever comes out of our current mess, I hope that gets reformed.

[Crazed Rabbit]

That Wisconsin veto thing is amazingly thoughtless. Individual letters and numbers? Madness! Though, is there a record of it being used extensively? The results would be interesting.

Also, lol at the stupidity of Anon. The Koch brothers donated $20,000,000 USD to the ACLU for the purpose of fighting the patriot act. Hardly anti-democracy.

Finally, are those stupid democratic state congressmen still hiding?

That is subverting the democratic process. It's like turning off the power so a vote can't be held. That's no reason to compromise.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

That Wisconsin veto thing is amazingly thoughtless. Individual letters and numbers? Madness! Though, is there a record of it being used extensively? The results would be interesting.

Also, lol at the stupidity of Anon. The Koch brothers donated $20,000,000 USD to the ACLU for the purpose of fighting the patriot act. Hardly anti-democracy.

Finally, are those stupid democratic state congressmen still hiding?

That is subverting the democratic process. It's like turning off the power so a vote can't be held. That's no reason to compromise.

CR

1. Anon is still correct in saying the Koch brothers are being anti-democratic. Very few people in this world are 100% evil or 100% saint. Good for them for trying to promote civil liberties, but they are still trying to game the government for financial profits. That is anti-democratic.

2. It's no different than a filibuster. Unless you want to condemn the Republican Senators from 2006-2010 for subverting the democratic process (since they filibustered more than any other session of Congress except I think for the one that presided over the 1964 Civil Rights Act), then really they are using the rules to their advantage just as much as the Republicans are by passing the bill with a 15 second opportunity to vote before they closed voting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZALlaMA9b0

[PanzerJaeger]

In other news, thank goodness for the new tone of civility. You'd hate to see the union protestors acting like those nasty tea partiers.
Here's a video (http://dane101.com/current/2011/03/01/wisconsin_gop_senator_glenn_grothman_chased_trapped_by_hecklers_saved_by_dem_rep_) of an angry mob chasing down and cornering a GOP Wisconsin Rep. He's saved by a Democratic fellow Representative.

Now that's a problem that requires a rubber bullet solution if I've ever seen one. :yes:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Now that's a problem that requires a rubber bullet solution if I've ever seen one. :yes:

Stay classy PJ.

[Crazed Rabbit]

2. It's no different than a filibuster. Unless you want to condemn the Republican Senators from 2006-2010 for subverting the democratic process (since they filibustered more than any other session of Congress except I think for the one that presided over the 1964 Civil Rights Act),

Yes, it is different. Filibusters are provided for in the rules of Congress. Running and hiding to prevent a vote because it will go against you is not.

CR

[PanzerJaeger]

Stay classy PJ.

Always. I'd keep the dogs and fire hoses back at the station.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, it is different. Filibusters are provided for in the rules of Congress. Running and hiding to prevent a vote because it will go against you is not.

CR

So one is a recognized form of subverting democracy and one isn't. Founding Father's never envisioned the filibuster, senators in the minority did. Just because the two parties sat and down and agreed that they should be able to stall everything out of spite when they are not in control doesn't really make it anymore democratic. If the next session allows for a running away and hiding technique in the rules, does that make it suddenly better in your eyes?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Always. I'd keep the dogs and fire hoses back at the station.

Sometime I wonder what it would be like if we hung out for a day.

[PanzerJaeger]

Sometime I wonder what it would be like if we hung out for a day.

I'm really quite pleasant in person. :grin:

[a completely inoffensive name]

I'm really quite pleasant in person. :grin:

Same here! :grin:

[Xiahou]

I'm surprised you think it's awesome -- seems like an excessive power for the executive to me. Even worse the way it used to be, where a governor could eliminate individual numbers or letters. That's just insane. Renders the legislature almost useless.It's absolutely an excess of power. I wouldn't be in favor of a line item veto either. The legislative branch makes the laws- not the executive. The Wisconsin version is completely ridiculous- almost comically so to me on the outside looking in. :yes:


So one is a recognized form of subverting democracy and one isn't. Founding Father's never envisioned the filibuster, senators in the minority did. Just because the two parties sat and down and agreed that they should be able to stall everything out of spite when they are not in control doesn't really make it anymore democratic. If the next session allows for a running away and hiding technique in the rules, does that make it suddenly better in your eyes?On the federal level, the Constitution dictates that the Senate sets it's rules. So yeah, it'd be ok if they all sat down and agreed to flee DC instead of filibuster.... I guess. :shrug:


Now what do the signs have to do with whether Walker's policies are right nor not? Very little. Its just that I'd be remiss if I didn't point out the blatant hypocrisy in the kind of coverage the tea part protesters got versus the public union protesters. :smile:

[Lemur]

Interesting factoid from the print version of The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/18231496): Budget shortfall of the nine U.S. states that prohibit all public sector unions: 25%. Budget shortfall of the 14 states that allow unrestricted public-sector unions: 24%. The more I read, the more this looks like a straight-up political fight, with no practical underpinning.

[Xiahou]

Interesting factoid from the print version of The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/18231496): Budget shortfall of the nine U.S. states that prohibit all public sector unions: 25%. Budget shortfall of the 14 states that allow unrestricted public-sector unions: 24%. The more I read, the more this looks like a straight-up political fight, with no practical underpinning.That really doesn't prove anything though. Breaking the unions will almost surely save money on pensions and benefits. But, just because a state may have saved some money there it doesn't make them fiscally responsible- they just wasted the money somewhere else.

Your source is trying to insinuate that states that prohibit public sector unions save no money in doing so- but their shortfall percentages aren't proof of that. A better stat would be one that compared costs per employee in the two groups of states.

[Lemur]

That really doesn't prove anything though.
"Prove" is such a slippery word; I save proofs for mathematics -- all else is voodoo lawyering. The data are indicative and informative, whether you choose to dismiss them or not.


A better stat would be one that compared costs per employee in the two groups of states.
Since I don't have that research handy, and a quick Google yields doubtful results, how about this one: What is the state employee union wage premium? (http://modeledbehavior.com/2010/08/09/the-power-of-public-sector-unions/)


The regression coefficients on page 8 of the report show that the union wage premium is between 15% to 16%, while the public sector wage discount is around 11%, meaning unionized public sector employees are paid 4% to 5% wage premium.

So the mere existence of public sector unions creates a 4% to 5% wage premium, a savings which non-unionized states demonstrably fail to capitalize. Moreover, the real budget-buster tends to be pensions, which are usually set by the legislature, not by the unions. As I said, this appears to be a purely ideological/political fight. Note the general exclusion of police unions (who tend to endorse Repub) and the pure partisan awesomeness of this conflict comes into sharp focus.

A good joke told to me this week: "A CEO, a tea partier and a union member are sitting at a table with a dozen cookies. The CEO takes eleven of them, and then tells the tea partier, 'I think the union guy is trying to steal your cookie.' "

-edit-

Delving a little deeper into the pension question (http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/page/dodging-the-pension-disaster-preview) (which seems like the real fiscal crisis, as opposed to this manufactured "we must bust the unions" one):


Lawmakers need to communicate—and public workers and their unions need to understand—that it is much better for everyone to plan and adapt now, in advance, so that cuts are orderly and focus on benefits not yet earned, rather than slashing the fixed incomes of people who are already retired.

Even though we are just starting to recover from the Great Recession, another fiscal crisis lurks around the corner. While the fight over reforming public-employee pensions has only just begun, state coffers are already running perilously low. What we need now are serious reforms—plans that focus on the underlying causes of pensions’ excessive costs and excessive risks. The good news is that the looming pension meltdown is still within our power to avert. The question, then, is whether lawmakers and public workers can muster the discipline and political courage to do it.

[drone]

The regression coefficients on page 8 of the report show that the union wage premium is between 15% to 16%, while the public sector wage discount is around 11%, meaning unionized public sector employees are paid 4% to 5% wage premium.

So the mere existence of public sector unions creates a 4% to 5% wage premium, a savings which non-unionized states demonstrably fail to capitalize. Moreover, the real budget-buster tends to be pensions, which are usually set by the legislature, not by the unions. As I said, this appears to be a purely ideological/political fight. Note the general exclusion of police unions (who tend to endorse Repub) and the pure partisan awesomeness of this conflict comes into sharp focus.
So this is saying public sector union employees get paid 4-5% higher than non-union? Is this before or after union dues are taken?

[Lemur]

So this is saying public sector union employees get paid 4-5% higher than non-union? Is this before or after union dues are taken?
Read The Friendly Article. The numbers are a bit complex, but the analysis seems sound.

[drone]

Read The Friendly Article. The numbers are a bit complex, but the analysis seems sound.
I did, and I also punted Econ 101 in college, so bear with me. I'm trying to determine if, in real take home dollars, public sector union members get more money in salary than comparable public sector non-union members. If, on average, their salaries (as paid by the government employer) are only 4-5% higher, and then the union takes it's cut, the union is therefore just siphoning off the difference.

As I posted a few days ago, what's going on in Wisconsin now looks to be just plain union-busting for the sake of it. But it still might not be a bad thing.

[Crazed Rabbit]

"Prove" is such a slippery word; I save proofs for mathematics -- all else is voodoo lawyering. The data are indicative and informative, whether you choose to dismiss them or not.


Since I don't have that research handy, and a quick Google yields doubtful results, how about this one: What is the state employee union wage premium? (http://modeledbehavior.com/2010/08/09/the-power-of-public-sector-unions/)


The regression coefficients on page 8 of the report show that the union wage premium is between 15% to 16%, while the public sector wage discount is around 11%, meaning unionized public sector employees are paid 4% to 5% wage premium.

So the mere existence of public sector unions creates a 4% to 5% wage premium, a savings which non-unionized states demonstrably fail to capitalize. Moreover, the real budget-buster tends to be pensions, which are usually set by the legislature, not by the unions. As I said, this appears to be a purely ideological/political fight. Note the general exclusion of police unions (who tend to endorse Repub) and the pure partisan awesomeness of this conflict comes into sharp focus.


I wonder if he isn't confusing premium and discount. I have to run now, but he might be very far off on the difference.

Also - pensions may not be set by the unions, but they sure fight like **** to make and keep them huge.

CR

[Xiahou]

So this is saying public sector union employees get paid 4-5% higher than non-union? Is this before or after union dues are taken?Well, further on it states:

There are other interesting issues here as well. I obtained the datasets from here and with the help of Dr. Bender, one of the study’s authors, I was able to recreate the results. One important point is that if you include occupation controls, and include average hours worked and hours worked squared (which you should) the union premium increases and the public sector discount drops, so that the total differential (union + public sector) grows to 18.1% for local and 15.2% for state.

Also, I'm not sure why they're subtracting out the public/private difference either- that shouldn't be part of the comparison if you're just talking about the union "premium". And wages are only one piece of the puzzle when looking at total compensation.


Also - pensions may not be set by the unions, but they sure fight like **** to make and keep them huge.And unless I'm mistaken, the amount that members contribute to their pensions is very much part of union negotiation.

But to Lemur's point that this is about politics- of course politics play a role. Public sector unions provide scads of cash to the Democrat party. It should surprise no one that the GOP would try to neuter them given the chance the same way that Democrats shower them with tax payer money when they have the opportunity.

Personally, I think they very idea of public sector unions is completely asinine to begin with. They should never have been allowed. So if someone wants to curb their power, I'm in favor- whatever their motives are in doing so.

[Lemur]

[T]he amount that members contribute to their pensions is very much part of union negotiation.
This "portion of contribution" meme is kinda weird, and I haven't seen it corrected often enough. First of all, the Wisconsin pension fund is 99.7% funded, according to independent review, so our state's pensions are not at issue. Secondly, a defined-benefits plan is 100% funded by the employees. It is not a gift from the gods or the taxpayers. You work, part of your compensation is in the form of your contribution to your pension or 401k or what-have-you. That's basic market capitalism 101.

A good overview of this subject (http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/UBEN-8EDJYS?OpenDocument):


Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to "contribute more" to their pension and health insurance plans.

Accepting Gov. Walker' s assertions as fact, and failing to check, created the impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not.

Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin' s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

How can that be? Because the "contributions" consist of money that employees chose to take as deferred wages – as pensions when they retire – rather than take immediately in cash. The same is true with the health care plan. If this were not so a serious crime would be taking place, the gift of public funds rather than payment for services.

Thus, state workers are not being asked to simply "contribute more" to Wisconsin' s retirement system (or as the argument goes, "pay their fair share" of retirement costs as do employees in Wisconsin' s private sector who still have pensions and health insurance). They are being asked to accept a cut in their salaries so that the state of Wisconsin can use the money to fill the hole left by tax cuts and reduced audits of corporations in Wisconsin.

So the real argument is not that the teachers and corrections officers aren't putting in enough; it's that they're being paid overall too much. That is the conversation we're having. Let's frame it within the bounds of reality, or we'll circle the drain of bad logic and economics.

[a completely inoffensive name]

On the federal level, the Constitution dictates that the Senate sets it's rules. So yeah, it'd be ok if they all sat down and agreed to flee DC instead of filibuster.... I guess. :shrug:
Well don't you think that the 14 state senators would be in trouble by now if what they are doing was illegal? Seems to me that part of the purpose of quorum is exactly for this tactic.



Very little. Its just that I'd be remiss if I didn't point out the blatant hypocrisy in the kind of coverage the tea part protesters got versus the public union protesters. :smile:
Meh, not really hypocrisy.

Tea Party coverage:
Fox News: Everyone join in this totally grassroots organization that is going to sweep america and is already taking the fight to the heartland!
Everyone else: Seems like a bunch of pissed off people complaining about losing the election and feeling like their way of life is challenged.

Union protest coverage:
Fox News: Seems like a bunch of pissed off people complaining about their socialist candidates losing the election.
Everyone else: Looks like a grassroots effort of pissed off people looking to challenge the extreme measures of Walker's policies.

No real hypocrisy. Fox News spins to whatever helps the conservative viewpoint and everyone else is a mixture of neutral to...whatever CNN is doing with their coverage.

[Lemur]

There's also an essential difference between the Dem fringe and the Repub fringe: Dems embracing the loons would result in instant political death. Repubs, on the other hand, seem to pay no political price for flirting with their own extremes (http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/83531/the-emerging-republican-birther-majority). And as ACIN says, the difference in coverage is remarkable, although apparently invisible and indistinguishable to the Fox News target demographic.

But seriously, imagine if someone as hard left as Sarah Palin is hard right were to be mounted as a national Dem candidate. Al Sharpton, say, or an avowed socialist. (Not a "secret socialist" as everyone to the left of Genghis Khan is labeled by some of the more muddle-headed formulations.)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Republicans can cater to the fringe more easily because the nation is full of "conservatives". We are the majority, so the far right ideas insult a smaller percentage of Americans than the far left ideas.

My question is this: Why can't we enact ideological legislation? Your obsession with "what is proven to work" seems to be more of an ideological roadblock to their ideology than a legitimate concern. You see "the right" and automatically get defensive. I see "the left" and do the same.

But the real question is: if the people elected these people, maybe they want to try some zany ideas out. The 3 states who outlaw collective bargaining can hardly be considered an adequate "dis-proof of the idea that public unions shouldn't be allowed to collectively bargain". These states are doing pretty well, so maybe it isn't the end of the world.

[Beskar]

But seriously, imagine if someone as hard left as Sarah Palin is hard right were to be mounted as a national Dem candidate. Al Sharpton, say, or an avowed socialist. (Not a "secret socialist" as everyone to the left of Genghis Khan is labeled by some of the more muddle-headed formulations.)

What about Bernie Sanders?

He seems to be a very good candidate. There should be more like him in the Senate and the House. :yes:

[Xiahou]

What about Bernie Sanders?What about Barack Obama (http://www.ontheissues.org/barack_obama.htm)? Libs seem to be a little delusional over how far right they think Palin (http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_palin.htm) is.

She's another case study on unbalanced media coverage... but that probably belongs in a different thread.

[HoreTore]

Barack Obama is european centre-right.

[Vuk]

Barack Obama is european centre-right.

Who cares about Eurowieners? You guys can never get anything right! ~;)

[HoreTore]

Who cares about Eurowieners? You guys can never get anything right! ~;)

When people talk about a candidate that is truly leftist, one would think of a candidate that is similar to the candidates of the european social democratic or socialist parties. That would be a candidate that is as far left to the americans as Palin is far right, which was the point being made.

Think before you write.

[Strike For The South]

Who cares about Eurowieners? You guys can never get anything right! ~;)

Excpet the last 500 years of human history. The western hemisphere is basically Europe-lite. Ask Meth.


Think before you write.

Like asking the sun not to rise

[Crazed Rabbit]

Who cares about Eurowieners? You guys can never get anything right! ~;)

Do you think the idea for a republic and liberty for man just popped up spontaneously in the minds of America's Founding Fathers?

:inquisitive:

CR

[Xiahou]

Do you think the idea for a republic and liberty for man just popped up spontaneously in the minds of America's Founding Fathers?

:inquisitive:

CR
I think he was just trying to be funny.....

[Lemur]

I think this sort of behavior (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/08/wisconsin-protesters-town-hall-meeting_n_832894.html) is unfortunate, and does nobody any good. Didn't like it with the Tea Partiers, don't like it with the Unionistas. Reps and Senators should be able to hold town hall meetings without getting shouted down.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This is coming to an end soon. The Senators will be back, the motion will pass and everyone will move on with their lives. I'm really impressed that the governor is willing to shaft his re-election chances with this. That is some courage right there that you don't see very often with public officials.

[a completely inoffensive name]

This is coming to an end soon. The Senators will be back, the motion will pass and everyone will move on with their lives. I'm really impressed that the governor is willing to shaft his re-election chances with this. That is some courage right there that you don't see very often with public officials.

It isn't courage when you know you are set for life financially and don't really care about the gravity of the position.

[Lemur]

Hmmm. I think Governor Walker's unyielding stand would make a great deal more sense had he campaigned on the issues of unions and collective bargaining. Which he did not. (http://www.wisconsinreporter.com/walkers-union-plans-unclear-during-campaign)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Hmmm. I think Governor Walker's unyielding stand would make a great deal more sense had he campaigned on the issues of unions and collective bargaining. Which he did not. (http://www.wisconsinreporter.com/walkers-union-plans-unclear-during-campaign)

It's pretty awesome. I'll tell you what - in a few years after your school system disintegrates and good teachers flock away from the field due to minimum wage pay and terrible hours, you can elect a democratic governor and legislature to undo the changes.

[Lemur]

[I]n a few years after your school system disintegrates and good teachers flock away from the field due to minimum wage pay and terrible hours
Like the song says, "California here I come."

[a completely inoffensive name]

It's pretty awesome. I'll tell you what - in a few years after your school system disintegrates and good teachers flock away from the field due to minimum wage pay and terrible hours, you can elect a democratic governor and legislature to undo the changes.

This statement is always disingenuous. If we ruin everything, then you can simply fix it all back again right? Not when the union's power are broken. Then the only campaign contributions are going to republicans, essentially establishing a monetary edge for as long as the status quo is held, which means the status quo will be held for a while since those that spend more money generally win the elections.

This is not difficult stuff, and it is pretty disturbing to try and pass off this lie knowingly with a **** eating grin.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This statement is always disingenuous. If we ruin everything, then you can simply fix it all back again right? Not when the union's power are broken. Then the only campaign contributions are going to republicans, essentially establishing a monetary edge for as long as the status quo is held, which means the status quo will be held for a while since those that spend more money generally win the elections.

This is not difficult stuff, and it is pretty disturbing to try and pass off this lie knowingly with a **** eating grin.

I hope this goes through. Unions aren't going anywhere. They can still rally people to support certain candidates who agree with them. My interest is in clipping their ability to collectively bargain for anything other than basic pay. For hours and benefits, they can lobby the government as an interest group, but they'll compete in the same arena as the rest of us interest groups - no special privelages, no ability to keep dissent out of the bargaining process.

[ICantSpellDawg]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS (The Senate requires a quorum to take up any measures that spend money. But Republicans on Wednesday split from the legislation the proposal to curtail union rights, which spends no money, and a special conference committee of state lawmakers approved the bill a short time later.)

Other States should be so bold!

[Xiahou]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS (The Senate requires a quorum to take up any measures that spend money. But Republicans on Wednesday split from the legislation the proposal to curtail union rights, which spends no money, and a special conference committee of state lawmakers approved the bill a short time later.)

Other States should be so bold!Check your link.
In the meantime, I think this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41996994/ns/politics-more_politics/) is probably similar to what you were linking. :yes:

[ICantSpellDawg]

damn it. Totally psyched. We haven't had a win in a long time. I wish this were the case in every State.

[Strike For The South]

Gutless by the Ds, absolutely gutless.

They have now concided more than they ever needed to because of some stupid stunt

[a completely inoffensive name]

Gutless by the Ds, absolutely gutless.

They have now concided more than they ever needed to because of some stupid stunt

Republicans would have done this no matter what.

[Strike For The South]

Republicans would have done this no matter what.

To an extent but giving up the whole hog when you could've at least gotten some bacon is stupid

[a completely inoffensive name]

To an extent but giving up the whole hog when you could've at least gotten some bacon is stupid

To what extent? If the Democrats stayed up they would have lost everything. They left, the republicans found a loophole and the democrats lost everything.

[Lemur]

Agree with ACIN. By staying and allowing the bill to pass right away, the Dems in WI would have done their cause no favors. Strictly from a political perspective, they did the smart thing by drawing this out and forcing the WI Repubs to do it solo.

Furthermore, with 24-hour hindsight, the actions of the WI Dems seem more in line with the classic usage of a filibuster than the current neutered, watered-down mess in the U.S. Senate, where a seantor need merely "indicate" that he's thinking about a filibuster to close everything down. A filibuster should be expensive and difficult and controversial, it should be a last resort, and it should have consequences. They really need to reform the filibuster in D.C. -- at the very least force people using it to stay and speak for hours and hours, as with the original example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster#Ancient_Rome).

[ICantSpellDawg]

Agree with ACIN. By staying and allowing the bill to pass right away, the Dems in WI would have done their cause no favors. Strictly from a political perspective, they did the smart thing by drawing this out and forcing the WI Repubs to do it solo.

Furthermore, with 24-hour hindsight, the actions of the WI Dems seem more in line with the classic usage of a filibuster than the current neutered, watered-down mess in the U.S. Senate, where a seantor need merely "indicate" that he's thinking about a filibuster to close everything down. A filibuster should be expensive and difficult and controversial, it should be a last resort, and it should have consequences. They really need to reform the filibuster in D.C. -- at the very least force people using it to stay and speak for hours and hours, as with the original example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster#Ancient_Rome).


Good, then we are all happy with the results.

[Lemur]

Yeah, this (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/03/was_what_scott_walker_did_lega.html) does a good job of summarizing my feelings:


It seems to me that the system worked. Democrats were able to slow the process down and convince both voters in Wisconsin and the national media that there was something beyond business as usual happening in Madison. National and state polls show they were successful in that effort. Walker and the Senate Republicans ignored the Democrats’ attempts at compromise and ignored the public turning against them and decided to pass the legislation anyway.

That was their prerogative, and now it’s up to the voters to decide whether to recall the eight Senate Republicans who are eligible for judgment this year, and to defeat Walker and the other Republicans in a year or two, when they become vulnerable to a recall election. That’s how representative democracy, for better or worse, works. The representatives can make unpopular decisions, but the voters can punish them for it. I thought that during the health-care debate, and I think that now — though I would be interested to see whether any of the conservative voices who were shocked and appalled by President Obama’s decision to ignore public opinion and finish health-care reform using the reconciliation process are calling for Walker’s head today. If not, I think they need to ask themselves what makes this case different.

[rory_20_uk]

The problem is that one can have a situation where one lot is popular and undertakes popular, vote winning initiatives. Then due to this the state goes massively into debt. Whoever is unfortunate enough to try to rectify this will be pilloried in the following polls - even if the action was required. Every politician cares mostly about their tenure and remaining there, not matters too far in the future. So the system is rigged towards unsustainable spending.

~:smoking:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Yeah, this (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/03/was_what_scott_walker_did_lega.html) does a good job of summarizing my feelings:


It seems to me that the system worked. Democrats were able to slow the process down and convince both voters in Wisconsin and the national media that there was something beyond business as usual happening in Madison. National and state polls show they were successful in that effort. Walker and the Senate Republicans ignored the Democrats’ attempts at compromise and ignored the public turning against them and decided to pass the legislation anyway.

That was their prerogative, and now it’s up to the voters to decide whether to recall the eight Senate Republicans who are eligible for judgment this year, and to defeat Walker and the other Republicans in a year or two, when they become vulnerable to a recall election. That’s how representative democracy, for better or worse, works. The representatives can make unpopular decisions, but the voters can punish them for it. I thought that during the health-care debate, and I think that now — though I would be interested to see whether any of the conservative voices who were shocked and appalled by President Obama’s decision to ignore public opinion and finish health-care reform using the reconciliation process are calling for Walker’s head today. If not, I think they need to ask themselves what makes this case different.

My sentiments exactly. The fight should be at election. I think that this move could be popular - just like the Democrats thought their move on health care could be popular. Just because they were dead wrong doesn't mean we will be.

[Don Corleone]

I had sort of asked a question a few dozen posts back that didn't get answered, so I guess I should have been more direct....

In terms of what the bill in Wisconsin actually covers, ending collective bargaining for public employees... what exactly does that mean?

1) Are unions now illegal, or just that membership is no longer mandatory?
2) If I were a teacher and I compared my salary with 4 or 5 of my colleagues, would that be illegal in Wisconsin, even if we weren't in a union? What if we were?
3) What recourse do teachers now have if they do not agree with proposed salary? Quit?
4) Given that it can be tough to attract talent to the education field in the first place, am I the only one that sees #3 as only making the situation worse?
5) For those advocating for smaller education budgets... let me ask you..... do you really want "they worked for the cheapest" to be the top criteria in deciding who shapes your child's future?
6) Going the other way for a minute, is there any way to funnel money to teacher's salaries... not administrators, psychologists, psychiatrists, astrologists, diversity specialists and the 'educational conferences' in Hawaii and Tahiti?

Seriously, there's a lot of issues to work through here. I don't see anybody trying to tackle all of it comprehensively. Each side seems to fixate on the wrongs of the other.

[Lemur]

1) Are unions now illegal, or just that membership is no longer mandatory?
Unions are not illegal, but restricted from most of the activities that we would associate with unions. Workplace safety and conditions, for example, can no longer be subject to collective bargaining. Automatic dues are now also illegal.


2) If I were a teacher and I compared my salary with 4 or 5 of my colleagues, would that be illegal in Wisconsin, even if we weren't in a union? What if we were?
Dunno about the legality; salary comparison has always been a business taboo, though. Don't know that union or non-union has anything to do with this.


3) What recourse do teachers now have if they do not agree with proposed salary? Quit?
Yep, quit.


4) Given that it can be tough to attract talent to the education field in the first place, am I the only one that sees #3 as only making the situation worse?
Nope. I know two graduate students here in WI who are going into science education. To call their attitude "damaged" would be a severe understatement.


5) For those advocating for smaller education budgets... let me ask you..... do you really want "they worked for the cheapest" to be the top criteria in deciding who shapes your child's future?
California here we come ...


6) Going the other way for a minute, is there any way to funnel money to teacher's salaries... not administrators, psychologists, psychiatrists, astrologists, diversity specialists and the 'educational conferences' in Hawaii and Tahiti?
Oh, getting pay right for any field is a PhD-level problem, and it's even harder with teachers than, say, electrical engineers. That said, none of the teachers I interact with on behalf of my children seem particularly overpaid in their '90s Subarus and Ford Tempos. "Lower middle-class" springs to mind.

I would love to see the Teachers' Union reformed and remade into a more flexible, useful tool. But as John Stewart pointed out, when you take away most all of the functions of a union, what you're left with is people who have matching shirts.

[Don Corleone]

I have no problem with seeing teachers paid more. None. I do believe they are underpaid, given the job they have and the qualifications required of them.

I have a huge problem with every time the NEA proposes raising teachers salaries by 3%, they raise adminsitrators' salaries by 15%, they hire more administrators, and they include the cost of a Palm Beach convention....

[Xiahou]

I can't speak for everywhere, but around here teachers are paid well. A teacher fresh out of college makes a minimum of $38K a year and it ramps up quickly with every subsequent year- it can jump by $2k a year or even more if they continue their education.

That's slightly higher than the average salary for the area and they only work 180 days a year. Let's not forget that in most places their pay is only for working 3/4s of a calendar year and they get almost every holiday in the book off as well. Add to that what is above-average to great benefits, and I think they're doing well enough.

Do they face hardships and challenges at their jobs? Of course. So do I. If you don't, I want your job. :yes:


I have a huge problem with every time the NEA proposes raising teachers salaries by 3%, they raise adminsitrators' salaries by 15%, they hire more administrators, and they include the cost of a Palm Beach convention....Here, at least, administrator raises are based on the same percentage as teacher raises. :shrug:

[Xiahou]

Oops. Double Post.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This law only considers public union collective bargaining rights, not private sector unions . On top of that, it merely limits their powers to collectively bargain to what many, even in opposition, believe is reasonable - it doesn't eliminate collective bargaining rights OR destroy unions.

Here is a great summary:
"Wisconsin state employees already have a strong Civil Service benefit that protects them from unfair practices. Collective bargaining has produced a veritable fourth branch of government with far too much power over legislatures everwhere. This bill still allows bargaining for wages."

[a completely inoffensive name]

Good, then we are all happy with the results.

No, we are not. Stop saying stupid things.

[Don Corleone]

Here, at least, administrator raises are based on the same percentage as teacher raises. :shrug:

Don't forget, most teachers hold master's degrees or are required to complete them within 5-7 years of starting work. That should put them somewhere above the 52% point, no?

As for administrator's salaries, not so bad here in NH, but in North Carolina, it was ridiculous. $.0.43 of every $1.00 went to those not directly involved in the education of students or the upkeep of the school. Shameless.

[Xiahou]

Don't forget, most teachers hold master's degrees or are required to complete them within 5-7 years of starting work. That should put them somewhere above the 52% point, no?A masters degree moves you to the right by several columns on the pay scale. Your pay would be several thousand higher.

And again, making a slightly above average wage for working less than 3/4 of the days most everyone else does isn't a bad deal.

[Tellos Athenaios]

A masters degree moves you to the right by several columns on the pay scale. Your pay would be several thousand higher.

And again, making a slightly above average wage for working less than 3/4 of the days most everyone else does isn't a bad deal.

As I understand it they spend the other 1/4 of their time in staff meetings and correcting/marking student assignments. At least over here it appears common practice for teachers to spend their school “holidays” on marking exams. It leaves the Summer and Christmas holidays (which admittedly are a few weeks more than everyone else gets), really.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A masters degree moves you to the right by several columns on the pay scale. Your pay would be several thousand higher.

And again, making a slightly above average wage for working less than 3/4 of the days most everyone else does isn't a bad deal.

You have no idea what teachers do. I don't blame you (or the public for that matter) since no one even bothers to connect with their students teachers anymore. When a school starts usually at 8AM the teacher is usually already there at 7 or at the latest 7:30 in order to prepare for that day's classes. When "school" ends at 2:30ish to say that that is the end for teachers as well is just moronic, hands down moronic. Teachers will spend anywhere from 1.5 to 3 hours after school has "ended" in order to either grade stuff, work with students who need extra help or babysit kids who have detention. Usually all of the above. This means that teachers at the bare minimum are at work from 7:30 to 3:30 which is a standard 8 hour work day just like the rest of hard working people. Teachers who go the extra mile will stay longer for the kids and arrive earlier to prepare more, so their work days look like 7:00 to about 4 or 4:30 which is now looking like 9 to 9.5 hour work days. This is not for a few teachers, this is reality for a majority of teachers. There is no 5-6 hour work days, period.

Of course you didn't think that the grading and the work was all finished did you? Nowadays (at least for my school) teachers can expect to be teaching 6 different classes at once in a school year. Overcrowding has made many classes about 35 students in size (some of my classes were 40 kids in size). That is about 210 students that are all turning in an assignment/homework. Usually every week, or perhaps every day if the teacher really wants the kids to be practicing their stuff (like math). My English teachers were the most exhausted since of course by trying to make sure you can write worth a damn they have to have you write a lot (it's really the only way to get better). Turn in that 3 page short story, what no parent seems to realize is that if every student is turning in a 3 page essay that is 630 pages (of usually horrific material) they must read. No wonder my english teachers all only had me do three essays the entire year (guess I know why my writing is ****). Then of course before any of this happens, they gotta make their lesson plan. You didn't think they made those on company time did you? Late august is probably when most teachers have to make their new school year schedule/guideline and plan out when they will teach everything (this happens sooner for AP teachers who usually have to give work out in the summer and grade it during the summer). This has to be re-done every year because the state always demands more now, the curriculum always changes hoping that students will "get it" faster, sooner, better if you just put it all in a different order or emphasize different things. Also of course they have to make more than one if some of their classes are different topics (which they almost certainly are).

But then everyone always points out the summer vacation, as if it is the pinnacle of the benefits that teachers get. They get paid to relax during the summer? Nope, because for many teachers who are just starting out and don't have tenure, they must work tutoring jobs or scrounging up some other second job in the summer to keep the income level at the bare minimum needed to live a good life. Depending on where you live, you could be making as low as $14,781 your second year on the job. (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/tcs2007/tables/table_17.asp)

What funny about it all is that the moment you actually try to get rid of summer vacation, since studies have shown that students lose a lot of information over the two months they essentially do nothing, parents start clamoring to keep it. Why does my kid have to suffer through constant schooling his entire life? When will he be a kid? Idk lady, ask the Europeans or even better, the Japanese and see if all the kids there are literally walking zombies.

In summary, teachers actually work a lot harder for a lot than most expect. What I just said, in a more comedic form: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-10-2011/crisis-in-dairyland---apocalypse-cow

EDIT: Forgot to mention about the faculty meetings that can run (in my experience) from 3-6:30. Oh and some of the kids are pieces of **** who make life miserable (think of a boss that constantly interrupts you and then is able to dock your pay because of your lack of productivity because No Child Left Behind essentially lets troublesome students do just that).

As I understand it they spend the other 1/4 of their time in staff meetings and correcting/marking student assignments. At least over here it appears common practice for teachers to spend their school “holidays” on marking exams. It leaves the Summer and Christmas holidays (which admittedly are a few weeks more than everyone else gets), really.

Correct, see what I just wrote above.

[Xiahou]

You have no idea what teachers do.Well, actually, I've been working in the K-12 education industry for almost 10 years... ~:handball:

I spent about 8 years doing IT work in school districts throughout the state and the last 1+ directly employed by a district. In my experience, schools are almost completely deserted within 30 minutes of the students' departure- with the exception of maintenance and administration staff. There are exceptions, but teachers that stay after for detentions and the like are all being compensated for it. If you want them to come in for anything outside their required hours, you have to pay them overtime. This is not the norm for professional salaried positions. They also get at least one prep period each day to work on grading, lesson plans, ect.


This means that teachers at the bare minimum are at work from 7:30 to 3:30 which is a standard 8 hour work day just like the rest of hard working people.I don't remember ever claiming that they don't put in a full day's work- they generally do. What I did say was that they only have to put in 3/4 as many days as most every other private sector professional would. Take that, combine it with a good salary, excellent benefits, and a pension that is completely unheard of outside of schools. What you have is a pretty good job. :yes:

Do they have to take their work home with them sometimes? Of course they do. So do most people who hold professional level jobs. No one is claiming teachers are rich fatcats, but assuming they actually chose to be teachers and derive some fulfillment from it, it is a very nice job to have.

There a certainly teachers who go well above what is required of them. And they should be recognized and compensated for it- but they usually aren't. Unions often stand in the way of that. They're great if you just want to do the bare minimum to stay employed. If you want to work hard and try to get ahead, they're not much help.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, actually, I've been working in the K-12 education industry for almost 10 years... ~:handball:

I spent about 8 years doing IT work in school districts throughout the state and the last 1+ directly employed by a district. In my experience, schools are almost completely deserted within 30 minutes of the students' departure- with the exception of maintenance and administration staff. There are exceptions, but teachers that stay after for detentions and the like are all being compensated for it. If you want them to come in for anything outside their required hours, you have to pay them overtime. This is not the norm for professional salaried positions. They also get at least one prep period each day to work on grading, lesson plans, ect.

Well, I apologize for my hostile tone, I misunderstood what you were saying (I thought you were repeating the false talking point that teachers end their job at 2:30 when you said they work 3/4th of the amount of time other people do). I respect that you have interacted with the school system, but forgive me if I still seem skeptical towards you. I can tell you about a woman who was in the PTA for 6+ years, but when she presented an idea on how to make the high school better (I sat in on a faculty meeting one day), it wasn't exactly a very seasoned proposal...

What state do you live in if you don't mind me asking? Were these school districts akin to Orange County or more poor urban areas? Obviously some states are more generous than others if you look at the data table I provided in my last post. I can't really say my experience trumps your experience, but just because the area seems deserted when all the kids flood out doesn't mean that teachers are gone as well. Many go off to make copies, congregate in one teachers room for a department meeting etc... I remember it being 4PM and it looked like no one was there until I saw the history department all walk out of one of the history teacher's classroom discussing what will be done next semester. I am not sure exactly the full job of an "IT guy", did you go into every classroom after school and check all the computers?

The prep period is insufficient for the work they have to do from my experience. The prep period for my teachers was 55 min (the length of one class) and that would be enough time (judging from my observations because I hung out with some of my teachers during lunch a lot) to grade anywhere from 20-45 papers. So about one class, with 4 or 5 more to go.

Your statement on overtime confuses me. It is not the norm in the private sector to pay overtime for someone who is putting in more hours to the company than their contract says they have to put in? If this is the case, then that policy in itself is wrong imo and not the fact that teachers are getting overtime for going beyond what they have to.



I don't remember ever claiming that they don't put in a full day's work- they generally do. What I did say was that they only have to put in 3/4 as many days as most every other private sector professional would. Take that, combine it with a good salary, excellent benefits, and a pension that is completely unheard of outside of schools. What you have is a pretty good job. :yes:

Do they have to take their work home with them sometimes? Of course they do. So do most people who hold professional level jobs. No one is claiming teachers are rich fatcats, but assuming they actually chose to be teachers and derive some fulfillment from it, it is a very nice job to have.

There a certainly teachers who go well above what is required of them. And they should be recognized and compensated for it- but they usually aren't. Unions often stand in the way of that. They're great if you just want to do the bare minimum to stay employed. If you want to work hard and try to get ahead, they're not much help.If no one is claiming that teachers are rich fat cats, then why are we even having this discussion in the first place? The point of removing collective bargaining was to lower the benefits and salaries of teachers because they were "outrageous" apparently. If you admit they are putting in a hard days work and are not rich fat cats, then why are we harping on how much they make? The mentality I seem to be getting is that what they are paid needs to be "on par" with the private sector. Except there is no reason why it should. Government needs the job done, if the government feels that teachers should be compensated well in order to get the best teachers, that is its prerogative. As long as they are not making bank here, then there should be no problem. And we have already established that teachers are not making bank.

Well, I think that except for some of the more...art centered classes, that teachers take work home with them every day. Math teachers usually gave homework every day. English teachers have to read 1-2 novels worth of student work every week. Science teachers usually (although I can't say this was the case for some of my science teachers) have to spend a long time going over their tests (unless they are scantron), my AP Physics teacher had to figure out if each student knew what they were talking about by looking at their diagrams, seeing if everything was applied correctly. Science homework itself is usually a lot of writing as well if you are learning about concepts (like Newton's 3 Laws). Obviously history teachers have to read a lot to see if the student actually read the book or not.

You just said that those who stay after are being paid overtime, so how is the union standing in the way of those who are going above and beyond? In all my time in the public school system, I have had great teachers and I have had bad teachers, but I have never had teachers that did the "bare minimum". What is the bare minimum? Just showing up? There has not been one teacher of mine who did not leave a personal contact number on the syllabus for you or your parents to call after school hours. Schools are slaves to No Child Left Behind and if the students don't do well, then funding is cut. Administrators will not tolerate a teacher who is doing the bare minimum because it costs them money.

If it comes down to, "well many just don't have to work as many days because of summer vacation", how about we go about this in a more proactive manner? Instead of punishing teachers because we still think Joey and Sue need to help out on the farm in July, how about we recognize that summer vacation is bad for our students and get rid of it? Make school year long like many other countries which are out competing us and stop wasting resources having to review last year's work for a week before starting new material. Then the teacher is performing a year long job and the salary is now completely justified.

[Lemur]

Latest development from cheeseland: Assembly and governor pass voter ID law, requiring a state-issued photo ID to vote. Can you guess the next bit? That's right, they close DMV offices (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OKSP800.htm) in townships which Dem lawmakers claim are Dem-leaning, and expand the hours for DMV offices in the redder towns and counties.

It's so shameless and brazen that I kinda admire the bare-faced meanness of it all. Oh, and just to add to the cartoony drama, the voter ID law was drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council (http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/alec-exposed-koch-connection?page=full), which is funded by ... oh, you know the answer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_family).

[Crazed Rabbit]

Latest development from cheeseland: Assembly and governor pass voter ID law, requiring a state-issued photo ID to vote. Can you guess the next bit? That's right, they close DMV offices (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OKSP800.htm) in townships which Dem lawmakers claim are Dem-leaning, and expand the hours for DMV offices in the redder towns and counties.

Well, one democrat claimed that. And they seem to have a good reason for closures;

The state currently operates 88 DMV centers but it would drop to 78 under the tentative plan, Newson said. Many of those targeted for closure, like the one in Fort Atkinson, are temporary sites and not leased spaces, like the larger office in Watertown, he said.


It's so shameless and brazen that I kinda admire the bare-faced meanness of it all. Oh, and just to add to the cartoony drama, the voter ID law was drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council (http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/alec-exposed-koch-connection?page=full), which is funded by ... oh, you know the answer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_family).

So that article says the Kochs have given an unspecified amount of money to ALEC, which may just be $10,000. And I just skimmed it, but nowhere did I see talk of Wisconsin or voter ID laws. :inquisitive:

CR

[Papewaio]

Teachers in Sydney are:
Four-year-trained teacher (eg BEd, BA/BTeach) –
Salary Step 5: $56,829

Highest salary-scale classification of classroom teacher – Salary Step 13: $84,759

Seems more like the wages outlined in the US are too low...

[Vladimir]

Well, one democrat claimed that. And they seem to have a good reason for closures;




So that article says the Kochs have given an unspecified amount of money to ALEC, which may just be $10,000. And I just skimmed it, but nowhere did I see talk of Wisconsin or voter ID laws. :inquisitive:

CR

It doesn't matter. Someone validated his bias and opinions. That's what matters.

A by office breakdown (with pictures!) would help. But, as always, I'm sure politics plays a roll, even inadvertently.

[Lemur]

Vladimir, to say you'd like to see an article (WITH PICTURES!) rather than doing any Googling on your own? That's confidence, that is.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0G01zbHGM8&feature=player_embedded

CR: Here's a rather long j'accuse (http://www.thenation.com/article/161969/alec-exposed-rigging-elections) about ALEC and voter ID laws. As time permits I'll poke around and see if I can find a more neutral source.

As the video above shows, unless a voter specifically asks for a voting card, rather than a state ID, they will be asked for a poll tax. I also find the scrutiny of bank activity very strange. Look, it does me no harm; I have a driver's license. This seems squarely aimed at students, shut-ins and low-income folks.

I think it's inarguable that if my state is going to make a photo ID a requirement for a basic right such as voting, then obtaining that ID should be streamlined for the lowest common denominator. Otherwise it looks a hell of a lot like voter suppression.

[Vladimir]

Vladimir, to say you'd like to see an article (WITH PICTURES!) rather than doing any Googling on your own? That's confidence, that is.

I love pictures. ~;)

On confidence: I would be more confident in your statement if there was more to back it up. And I'd trust it more if it didn't seem to confirm a personal bias. This issue is important to you, not me, so I hoped to see more information on it.

[Strike For The South]

You haven't spent enough money for this week

NO VOTE FOR YOU

[Lemur]

Yup, this looks like it's mostly going to affect students (http://www.thenation.com/blog/162214/youth-vote-faces-challenges-voter-id-legislation), deliberately or not. But then, people who go to college are known to be too dang smart for their own good.

The Wisconsin law does allow limited student IDs to be used as valid identification at the polls — but only those student IDs with signatures and expiration dates within two years on them. But IDs issued by the University of Wisconsin System to its 182,000 students do not have signatures. And no university has such an ID with expiration dates within two years, Heather Smith, the president of the young voter advocacy group Rock the Vote explained to The Nation.

Students would also have to jump through hoops to prove that they are current students, especially difficult for those living off-campus and those who must move every year among campus dormitories.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Add signatures as a requirement on student id cards

[Lemur]

I'm just glad we're getting a handle on voter fraud in WI. Some cynics might point out that we had more UFO sightings in WI last year (40) than confirmed cases of voter fraud (14), but that's just being blinded by facts.

[Strike For The South]

No university in Texas does either

But I have a drivers liscence and strip club recpits, so I should be good

[Xiahou]

Yup, this looks like it's mostly going to affect students (http://www.thenation.com/blog/162214/youth-vote-faces-challenges-voter-id-legislation), deliberately or not. But then, people who go to college are known to be too dang smart for their own good.Didn't you have a driver's license by the time you were in college? I know I did.

I don't see how we can say "it's mostly going to affect students", unless you mean beneficially. They can use a driver's license, same as you, but they also have the option of using a student ID if it meets certain requirements- as doubtless many soon will.

[Lemur]

Didn't you have a driver's license by the time you were in college?
Nope. City boy. They do exist.


I don't see how we can say "it's mostly going to affect students", unless you mean beneficially.
Yes, making it more difficult to vote will definitely help students. Now if only we could make massive changes in our governance to do something about those 40 UFO sightings ...

[PanzerJaeger]

Live results (http://menomoneefalls.patch.com/articles/live-blog-wisconsin-state-senate-recall-elections) of today's recall election, a big test of union power, the democratic machine, and the public's appetite for tough measures on government size and spending.

[Lemur]

My prediction: No matter the outcome, everyone will claim their perspective was vindicated. There, do I get a cookie?

[Crazed Rabbit]

So two democrats won, just short of the three they needed for Senate control. I've heard recent news on how school districts are saving money by not having to buy union approved insurance and other things helped the GOP.

CR

[ICantSpellDawg]

Phase 1: Destroy the United States Postal Service (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/usps-proposes-cutting-120000-jobs-pulling-out-of-health-care-plan/2011/08/11/gIQAZxIM9I_print.html)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Postal service was already destroyed as soon as e-mail came out. It was never a problem of efficiency or about too high union wages. The real key part of that whole article was this: "Over that period, mail volume dropped by 20 percent." In 4 years.

Doesn't matter how low you can get those wages or benefits, if the mailman has only 100 letters to deliver for the entire day, it's too expensive.

[Lemur]

WI Senate recalls are over. Net result: Dems narrowed Repub majority in the house to a one-seater. Don't know a lot about how the WI Senate functions, but some commentators are saying that this will slow down the hectic pace of legislation. Dunno.

The guvnor himself will be up next. That should be interesting.

[Strike For The South]

But I love my mailman :(

[Louis VI the Fat]

But I love my mailman :(What did I tell you about not flirting with Jeff again!? :furious3:

[Papewaio]

But I love my mailman :(

Just because he stuffs his packages into your mail slot doesn't mean it's exclusive... I've told you before a guy like that does the rounds... I thought you'd have learnt from the milk man.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Just because he stuffs his packages into your mail slot doesn't mean it's exclusive... I've told you before a guy like that does the rounds... I thought you'd have learnt from the milk man.

He probably still misses all the high quality cream..... Though I could be mistaken.

[Lemur]

Recall vote is tomorrow. I have no idea how it will play out; "I Stand With Governor Walker" signs are everywhere, but that's at least partly due to a 35-1 spending imbalance.

Polling is quite close, although consistently in favor of the Governor by a small margin. That said, the trend has been upward for his challenger, and I've learned that momentum is more important than absolute numbers when it comes to election polling. But that said, the momentum for Barrett is small.

If I were putting my own money on it, I'd bet on a Walker win for two reasons:


Recalls tend to work when a clear majority hates the incumbent. Many people dislike Walker. Hate? Not so much.
Due to finance loopholes, Walker has collected a double-digit lead in money, mostly from out-of-state donors. Money can't make an election, but it can squeeze a close one, and this will be close.

[Vladimir]

It's actually exciting. It's like living parts of an industrial era history class. Wisconsin's back in the news for politics.

[Major Robert Dump]

If anyone wants to make a friendly wager, I am a gambling man and I am fresh out of coke-head trannies.

[Vladimir]

If anyone wants to make a friendly wager, I am a gambling man and I am fresh out of coke-head trannies.

Dave, is that you?

[Centurion1]

Dave, is that you?

Oh he's completely serious he lives in Oklahoma; all the women there are drugged up trannies

[Major Robert Dump]

You guys need to stop derailing this thread, I have had enough of your shenanigans.

Apparently there is already people whining that tricksters are calling Democratic voters and telling them either:

a) the election is wednesday or
b) if you signed the petition you don't have to go vote


Man, if you fall for either of those tricks, you don't deserve a drivers license or the right to breed, much less the right to vote.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Politico has 11% of precincts reporting with us leading with 60.6 to 38.8... I hope that's a sample size, nearly a 22 point lead. It's supposed to be close, so it'll probably edge quickly.

EDIT: That was a big variance