How much are you worth?

Why does anyone have a job? It is not complicated. You and everyone has a job for one reason, and only one reason.  Someone has a great idea for something, say they want to produce food, people need food and want a variety of it. So this one person (lets call him Stan) figures out a way to produce his food product, and lots of people like it. But now he has a problem, more people like his product than he can produce by himself, so here is where your job comes in. He needs to have someone help him produce his product, so he finds you to help him (we'll call you Joe). In exchange for helping him produce, you agree to take X amount of dollars as compensation for your labor. So we now have an exchange of something (usually a wage) for something of value to him (your labor). TA DA! the first job is created.

This is the only reason you or anyone else has a job, there is too much work for one person to do for himself, so he finds other people to handle the excess labor. In our small world everything is working great. Stan now can produce enough, and Joe has negotiated a price for his labor that he thinks is "fair". Until..... the day that Joe sees another person (Phil) doing a similar job and making X+1 dollars. So you now feels slighted because you are not making the same wage as Phil. So you ask Stan for an increase in your compensation (a raise), Stan says okay, because he has more customers and can pay more for your labor. Yippee! you are now compensated more for your labor.

But now Phil finds out that you are getting the same as he is getting, only he is actually doing more labor, so now he feels that he is making less than he is worth, so he goes to his boss to get a raise. Competition has now been entered into the whole labor market. And it works, Stan is happy, Joe is happy, and Phil is happy.  The system works. It is called Capitalism.

Now we add the labor union leader (Norma) into the picture. Norma thinks that Joe is being wronged, and should be making the same  as Phil, it doesn't matter that Joe is happy, all that matters is that Norma thinks he is not being treated "fairly". So Norma convinces Joe to have her represent him in labor negotiations where she will guarantee better wages and better working conditions. She believes that Joe should be making X+3, but Stan cannot afford to pay Joe X+3. This, of course, doesn't stop Norma from demanding x+3, in fact she will make it impossible for Stan to make any money because she will have Joe not do any work (a strike) for a time to force Stan to pay Joe x+3.

Before Norma came in our little system was happy. Nobody felt slighted that they were not being paid less than they were worth. But Norma now introduces class envy into the labor exchange process. "Stan is making his money off the back of Joe's labor, and isn't sharing sufficiently," Norma whispers in Joe's ear. Stan negotiates with Norma and is forced to pay Joe X+3, but it puts him at a great disadvantage in the market in which he is competing. Eventually Stan cannot afford to pay Joe anymore and lays him off. Now Joe isn't even making X, much less the X+3 Norma negotiated for him. So who get the fingers pointed at them? Stan the "greedy, selfish Capitalist". But who is really to blame in this scenario? I think its Norma, who thought that she could demand more for Joe than Stan could pay.

So that leaves us with today's dilemma, labor unions have been demanding higher wages and more benefits from the taxpayers for years. They have told workers that they are worth X+10 ( it doesn't matter that the society cannot continue to pay them X+10 any longer), they are worth it and feel slighted if they do not get it, because of their "intrinsic value to society".  Who is to say that a teacher, or a firefighter or cop has more "intrinsic value" to society than a farmer, or a truck driver? We cannot continue to demand that one portion of society (non-union labor) continue to sacrifice more each year for another, smaller, portion of society (unionized labor).

Just because the labor union says you are worth X+10 dollars, doesn't mean that the society can pay you X+10 dollars. So what happens when society says, "Enough, we can only pay you X+8 dollars"? Well look at the Capital Square in Madison, WI to see what happens. We the people are not saying you are not worthy of our compensation, what we are saying is we don't have the resources that you believe, and we cannot continue to give you more of those resources than we ourselves need.

This is not a fight over a pile of excess money laying around (as the labor unions would like their members to believe), this is about an ever decreasing pool of money, that we all need access to.  Just because you are a member of a labor union doesn't mean you get more access to it than I do. If you think Phil will willingly chip into Joe's wages when he is now getting less compensation than Joe, you are not thinking clearly. Phil is tapped out, and now he is outraged as well.

We cannot continue to listen to Norma and have Joe get mad at Phil. Both Joe and Phil are laborers, even Stan is not evil and corrupt because he wants to keep the fruits of his labor as well. Nope! Our problem is Norma's class envy, and meddling into a system that has worked for a very long time.  The enemy is not Capitalism, it is class envy! Have we sold our souls for a bowl of cheap oatmeal?

Epiphany

I have just realized that I have a VERY big heart. I heard a woman on the radio saying she has gone through some horrible things in her life and it has softened her heart, and she has a soft spot for the poor, and the underprivileged. She claims that she has more concern and feels worse than anyone else for these poor people. I disagree with her. I don't think she cares more for people than I do.

For example:

I feel horrible for the Amish farmer in Wisconsin who had his farm raided by the FDA and may lose his farm and his livelihood because some government agency decided that the product he sells is not approved. http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/wisconsin-judge-rules-against-raw-milk-farmers/ And the organic farmers whose meal was destroyed by health inspectors. http://www.adistinctiveworld.net/?p=6091

I feel horrible for the elderly on Medicare whose benefits will be cut to pay for Obamacare. http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/04/hhs-secretary-sebelius-admits-to-double-counting-in-obamacare-budget/

I feel horrible for the veterans whose Tri-care benefits will be cut. http://www.cnjonline.com/articles/tricare-45618-prime-john.html

I feel horrible for the senior citizen who was made to remove her Depends to get through airport security. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tsa_checks_grandma_depends_oDXrPMOaC4ZAiXKGEtKXsJ

I feel horrible for the young mother whose daughter was told her children's lunch didn't meet the government standards. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2101354/Food-police-reject-preschoolers-homemade-lunch--favour-chicken-nuggets.html

I feel horrible for patients who are told by their government insurer that a medication that could save their lives will not be covered. http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/medicare-coverage-for-breast-cancer-drug-ends-in-some-states/

I feel horrible for the Marine who was arrested because he wanted to know where to store his gun when he was in the Empire State Building. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/marines-rallying-around-former-pfc-arrested-for-trying-to-check-gun-at-empire-state-building/

And then had his named dragged through the mud by the liberal media. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/nyregion/ex-marine-facing-gun-charge-had-bad-record-manhattan-prosecutor-says.html

I feel horrible for the teachers who win awards for excellence and then are laid off because the unions have to protect the tenured teachers. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2009/10/honored_in_february_sacked_in.html

I feel horrible for the parents who are told their school district cannot fire a teacher for surfing porn on the web while at the school, on school computers because he is in the union. http://m.host.madison.com/mobile/article_a47a943e-6309-11e1-be00-001871e3ce6c.html

I feel horrible for the people of WI who saw the State Capitol building ransacked and broken into. http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_260247e0-4ac4-11e0-bfa9-001cc4c03286.html

I feel horrible for the teachers who took a political stand for reform and then was threatened by the unions. http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/134517958.html

I feel horrible for the young girls and boys who try to sell lemonade outside their homes only to be told they need to spend hundreds of dollars to get a permit before they can continue. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/02/iowa-police-shut-down-4-year-olds-lemonade-stand/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/08/03/the-inexplicable-war-on-lemonade-stands/

I feel horrible for the property owners who are badgered to give up their properties for pennies on the dollar to make room for development. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20060108/NEWS01/601080395/Eminent-domain-case-goes-court

Or just told they cannot live on their properties period. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw3RiMdS7sE

I feel horrible for the women who take an unpopular stand on issues and have all kinds of unspeakable labels attached to them. http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/05/the-lefts-respect-for-women-a-look-back/

I have a VERY big heart. I cannot stand to see the citizens of this country treated like criminals in the airports, like interlopers on their own property, like morons who cannot take care of their own kids, like greedy back-water hicks who don't pay enough taxes, like ignorant rednecks because they attend church and carry a gun. The responsible citizens are called bitches and sluts because those good citizens have values.

I have enormous amounts of compassion for all the regular folks who just want to go to work, raise their kids, sell their goods, live on their land, want to pay for their health care, who deserve respect for serving this country, and who do a good job. I hate to see them being defamed and denigrated for being the kind of Americans they have always been. I feel for the rugged individualist, I feel for the proud mom, I feel for the military veteran, I feel for the cancer patient, I feel for the farmers, I feel for the down-trodden, I feel for the abused, I feel for the neglected.

I don't believe the progressives when they call me a racist, bigoted, homo-phobe who wants to throw old people off a cliff, who wants dirty air and dirty water, who wants fat kids, who hates immigrants, who wants women to be bare-foot and pregnant. Because I have a big heart. I have way more compassion for the little people who are being trampled by government intrusion, than you. So don't tell me I don't care, it is you who really doesn't care.

Why is Act 10 Working?

Why is Act 10 working?

The Labor unions have been against this thing since the beginning saying it would destroy our state. We would be balancing the budget on the backs of working class families who would up and leave our state. We would be putting millions of dollars as kick backs into the hands of a few rich industrialists and evil corporate owners. So what really happened? And why is it actually working like Walker said it would from the very beginning?

Walker promises us that he would close loop holes and remove some unnecessary drains in the budget. Closing some departments and selling off some buildings that were unneeded, and privatizing some superfluous components, like the electrical plant. He wanted to make the government lean and mean and more able to handle the future. Act 10 and the 2012 budget did all that, just as promised.

So why the uproar? Because Act 10 did exactly as it was supposed to do. The unions knew exactly what it would do and they screamed like little girls the second they found out what it would do. So in a nutshell what did Act 10 do? The only thing it did was cut out fraud, waste, and abuse. And the people depending on that money had a hissy fit.

Fraud as in the case of the University professor that retires but still comes back after a short vacation to teach and then pulls in his retirement and a salary. That is double dipping and it is fraud, plane and simple. Waste as in the case of the power plant that was not being cost effective anymore. And abuse as in the case of the WEA Trust that because they were an entity only used by union teachers could charge anything they liked for their coverage; but now they have to compete with other insurers and what is the result, the cost for their coverage has come down, and the fat they had accumulated in their company trimmed. Clearly an abuse of the taxpayers.

So the defrauders, wasters, and abusers are ticked off royally and have taken to the streets. They are not getting their piece of the pie illegally anymore. The cockroaches have picked up picket signs. But Act 10 is working despite the protests. Simply because it has finally cut out the fraud, waste and abuse that the lefties had voted for themselves. That is why Doyle couldn't balance the budget even with double digit tax increases, not only did he overlook the waste in the system, he simply fed the defrauders and abusers.

Despite the call for the recall, Act 10 is working. And only the defrauders, wasters and abusers are unhappy. We have cut the scraps being thrown to the scavengers. Eventually they will get tired and give up, but not until the drag this state down with them. The recall will cost somewhere between $9 million and $20 million. More abuse. Yet they decry the voter ID bill because it could add a couple million to the budget.

It was the right time for Act 10 and that is why it is working. The scavengers will have to find some other carcass to feed on from now on.

How do you define compassion?

The next time a progressive calls you greedy try this argument. How compassionate is it to take resources from a worker and give it to those who do not work. Notice I didn't say those who "cannot" work. There are jobs available. McDonalds is hiring, but most people who are unemployed will not take that job because they somehow feel the job is beneath them.

The Bible says if a man will not work, he should not eat. Notice it doesn't say if a man cannot work. It is not about ability or aptitude, it is about will. If a man chooses not to work because he can get more resources from not working, then we have the problem with entitlement. How compassionate is it to let a man take from the resources of others who contribute, when he is able to contribute himself, but refuses to? That is not compassion that is greed, and it is happening all the time with the current poor.

Many of them are poor because that is the path they have chosen. The welfare mom who keeps popping out babies to increase her monthly allotment from the workers while giving nothing back to the world. The OWS protesters who have college degrees but will not work for a company that doesn't give them a six figure salary. The union laborer who demands a larger salary and extreme benefits packages while the taxpayers cut corners and scrimp and save to put money away for a retirement that they may never be able to afford. The illegal alien who takes cash payouts with no paper trail and pays nothing in taxes, and has children born on our soil only so he can claim citizenship for his child.

All of these are a drain on our society, and this is what God was saying when he said a man who will not work should not eat.

So the progressive will pull out the whole compassion argument at this point. "How can you be so greedy and not share with those who aren't able to work?" But I made sure to point out this is for the man who chooses not to work, not those who through some physical or mental incapacity cannot work. The system itself is broken, because some think that it is our responsibility to take care of everyone. But how compassionate is a system that takes what someone has duly earned through hard work and gives it to someone who refuses to work?

So then the, "But through no fault of their own, they cannot find a job." diatribe will come out. If they are willing to take a job that makes less than they feel they are worth, then I have no problem helping them out. But if they refuse to work because they think a job is beneath them (can you hear me OWS?) than once again; how compassionate is it to take from the hard working individual to give to those who will not work?

"But you have greater advantage, these people have so much more to overcome to get a decent job." Oh really, so the fact that I had to work for $.50 per hour take home, after paying for child care is good enough for me but not for thee, then I have no compassion for those who think minimum wage is not enough. Work is not a guarantee, it is a privilege. Many more people need to realize that they are not "owed" a job; you need to work for it, and work hard for it, especially if you want the six-figure salary.

My contention is that it is actually harmful to just allow people to scrounge off the hard work of others. It disincentives work and removes the sense of self-worth people need to feel good. The whole movement of equalizing outcomes is harmful to the nation and the people, it makes work anathema. If you don't get to keep the fruits of your labor, what reason is there to work? This is not compassion, it is actually more harmful to the people to let them continue to sponge off of society.

The solution is not an easy one, for the most part people believe that they are entitled to a living; whether that be through a job, where there is no need to actually work hard, or to an entitlement program where they need not work either. So how do we again instill a sense of worth to employment? I don't know if there is anyway to do it other than to rip the band-aid off in one quick rip. Yes it will hurt in the short run, but we have to do it. We have a whole segment of society that will scream at the top of their lungs, but if we are to have any compassion, we need to do it fast and we need to do it soon.

No more kicking the can down the road. No more false compassion.

What part of NO don't you understand?

We the Bank of America (i.e. the taxpayers) say no we will not increase your credit limit. You have not wisely spent the trillions of dollars we have already loaned you, what makes you think we can trust you with even more money. You have reached your credit limit, that is all there is to it. You can either stop spending so much borrowed money, or you can default, the choice is yours. The answer is NO.

I am also tired of everything being a "crisis" in the eyes of the Democrats. Oh for crying out loud, first it was global warming, then health care, and now the debt ceiling. It is not a crisis, you just don't want to be responsible so you make it look like the responsible party, the people who are saying no, are nothing but a bunch of party poopers who don't want to give you what you want. Suck it up, stop the temper tantrum already. SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME ON YOU!

We saw a huge temper tantrum in Wisconsin this spring, the unions were all over the place with their "Walker=Hitler" signs, the "F**k Walker" signs and all kinds of Communist slogans marching on the Capitol square. So what has happened? Why hasn't the world ended already, collective bargaining was the holy grail. The schools were going to implode, the teachers were going to get shafted and end up on the streets, the unions were going to dissolve in to piles of liquid goo, patients were going to be piled three or four to a room, and nobody was going to get their meds.

Well guess what, none of this has happened. The world goes on, in fact, of the 18,000 new jobs created in the United States this last month, 9500 or so were in Wisconsin. So unions, how is that drumming working out for you? How is "recall Walker" going to bring jobs back? Guess what, the jobs are coming back because of Walker's budget, even though you think all he did was give tax breaks to the rich. So the rich just decided out of the goodness of their hearts to hire people this last month? The companies that are hiring are doing this because they feel the pain of the unemployed and want to contribute to society. NOPE!

They are hiring because the climate to hire is more positive here in Wisconsin, they don't need to worry about taxes being raised so they can now use some of the capital they were sitting on due to the uncertainty of taxes and use it to hire some new people. That is how capitalism works, that is how profit motive works, that is how private industry works. And guess what, when private industry works, so do private industry employees who consequently are paying the taxes that pay your sorry a** wages.

Maybe someday you will also be able to grow up and become mature adults who pay their own way instead of demanding that someone else sacrifice so you can live high on the hog. The government unions have become the bane to society that was predicted so many years ago, by none other than FDR.

This video explains it so well.

The unions are disgusting!

They don't want to offend the special olympians? But they have no shame and no respect for anyone. When will the people of Wisconsin wake up and realize that the unions do NOT have their best interest at heart?

How to fight a fire without corporate influence

At the beginning of the fight over the collective bargaining privilege, there were calls from the leftists to try to live in this world without government influence, with that they meant to cow us into admitting the government workers are necessary and are worth their weight in gold. Thus, unless we ordinary taxpayers wanted to forgo the use of the police or the fire department or streets, then we should simply shut up and take our medicine. And then the whole argument sunk to the depth of the Koch brothers hatred and calls for boycotts of the companies that refuse to show support for the unions. Now we are getting the usual screech to "tax the rich" and by the rich, they mean the corporations like the Koch's own. So lets use their age old argument and see where it leads.

The unions members hate corporations, so much so they want them to give up all their profits to the union employees, if it isn't in the employees pockets, it doesn't count. So the government employees, having no corporations to be beholden to, can get away with not using anything that a corporation has produced. Or can they?

So how do you fight a fire without corporate influence. The fire is only two blocks away from the firehouse, so response time should be quite quick. However...... no corporate products can be utilized.

No alarms can be sounded at the firehouse because the alarms were made by a corporation, the electricity provided by another corporation, and the phone call wouldn't get through due to the telecommunications being a corporate entity.

You cannot use the fire truck, it was made by a corporation, and the fuel used to move the fire truck, another corporation.

The road, which may have been constructed by government union labor, was made with corporate concrete extracted from corporate gravel pits, utilizing corporate-made heavy equipment.

But the fire is only two block away, no need for the roads or alarms, we can see and smell the smoke, we can run to the location. BUT.......

Although there is plenty of city water available, the fire hydrants are made by a corporation, so they are off limits. The hoses are another corporate product. So how about an old fashioned bucket brigade? Not possible, the buckets were made by a corporation, and don't even begin to think you could use your helmets, boots, or any other protective gear, corporate products also.

So how then do you fight a fire without corporate influence, the only weapon you have left.......

you piss on it.

Try doing any government job without the corporations. Before you hate on anything and everything corporate, remember the corporations are what is keeping this country running, they sell their products to everyone so we can all do our jobs. And as a bonus they hire us to do the jobs that pay for the products we need to buy from them. So how is taking more from the evil corporations going to benefit the working families? Maybe the liberals need to answer some tough questions before they begin screeching for a recall. Which side of the bread is the butter on?

Sarah Palin comes to Wisconsin

Walker v. Unions: the truth told

Wisconsin Interest
Volume 20, No. 1
March, 2011

By now, the political lore is familiar: A major political party, cast aside by Wisconsin voters due to a lengthy recession, comes roaring back, winning a number of major state offices.

The 43-year-old new governor, carrying out a mandate he believes the voters have granted him, boldly begins restructuring the state’s tax system. His reform package contains a major change in the way state and local governments bargain with their employees, leading to charges that the governor is paying back his campaign contributors.

Only the year wasn’t 2011 — it was 1959, and Gov. Gaylord Nelson had just resurrected the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. Certain of his path, Nelson embarked on an ambitious agenda that included introduction of a withholding tax, which brought hundreds of protesters to the Capitol. Nelson also signed the nation’s first public-sector collective bargaining law — the same law that 52 years later Gov. Scott Walker targeted for fundamental revision.

Two different governors, two different parties, and two different positions.

Ironically, their assertive gubernatorial actions may produce the same disruptive outcome. By empowering the unions, Nelson’s legislation led to public-sector strikes and work stoppages. By disempowering the unions, Walker’s actions might lead to public-sector strikes and work stoppages.

In Walker’s case, union members reluctantly agreed to his pension and health-care demands, but have fought desperately to preserve their leverage in negotiating contracts. That raises the basic question of the Madison showdown: Why is Scott Walker so afraid of collective bargaining?

The answer can be found in the rise of the state’s teachers unions.

After the 1959 Municipal Employees Relations law passed, the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association became, in 1964, the state’s first certified teachers’ bargaining agent. Slowly, more teacher groups across the state began to organize in their districts. And in 1969, Ashwaubenon teachers became the first Wisconsin educators to hit the bricks and strike, as 83 teachers walked out for four days.

Part and parcel with these developments, a venerable professional group founded in 1853, the Wisconsin Education Association, transformed itself into a tough-talking trade union in 1972 called the Wisconsin Education Association Council, with the authority to bargain on behalf of teachers all over the state.

WEAC began collecting funds from its members ($3 apiece) to spend on supporting political candidates. According to the union, 88% of its endorsed candidates won in the 1974 elections. The union had arrived on center stage as a major player in Wisconsin politics.

Unionized teachers routinely flexed their muscle. Between 1969 and 1974, there were 50 teacher strikes in Wisconsin, despite a state law declaring public employee strikes illegal.Because there were no penalties outlined in the law, WEAC’s leadership frequently convinced its members to walk out anyway.

A turning point came in March 1974, when a bitter teachers’ strike in the small town of Hortonville prompted a resolute school board to fire and replace 88 striking teachers. All hell broke loose.

The strike, one of the longest in the history of American education, garnered national media attention and was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the justices affirmed the school board’s right to fire the strikers.

Asked later if it was wise for WEAC to pick a fight in conservative Outagamie County, its former executive director Morris Andrews said: “I would have chosen a better place.”

Determined to use the Hortonville defeat as a rallying cry for solidarity, Andrews began pushing for a stronger, more galvanized teachers union. Under his leadership, WEAC hired collective-bargaining and arbitration experts and implemented “pattern bargaining” strategies. The idea was to extract as much salary and benefit increases as possible from teacher-sympathetic school boards, then use that data to pressure more stubborn boards to cough up better pay and benefits.

Notably, WEAC’s post-Hortonville muscle led to passage of a 1977 mediation-arbitration law that guarantees settlement of deadlocked collective-bargaining disputes.

The new law essentially ended public employee strikes. According to the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, the state has had 111 municipal employee strikes since 1970; 90% took place prior to the 1977 med-arb law. Since 1982, there has only been one strike, in 1997 by Madison Metropolitan School District teachers.
The end of strikes, however, didn’t mean teachers were any less aggressive in negotiating. Aided by the new law, teachers redoubled their efforts to improve compensation. And they succeeded, judging by the costs of total pay and benefit packages.

For instance, statewide average teacher salaries increased 6% per year in the 16 years before the Hortonville strike. In the 16 years after the strike, the increase is pegged at 7% annually. Not a big difference, for sure.

But salaries are only a part of the picture. Consider that in the 16 years prior to Hortonville, average state per-pupil spending increased 6.7% per year. Post-strike, it jumped to 9.6% per year in the 16 years following the Hortonville clash.

Through collective bargaining, WEAC obtained concessions from management that appeared to have little fiscal effect, but in the long run greatly benefited its members.

It was in the early 1970s, for example, that local government employees across the state started to see taxpayers picking up the full cost of pension benefits — the very practice Gov. Walker fought against in his budget-repair bill.

In the ’70s, union leaders were figuring out the value of benefits; many of labor’s decision-makers were older and needed health and pension benefits more than the rank and file. They recognized that benefits were often not taxed, meaning that teachers usually got more bang from a buck in benefits than from a buck in pay.

Other provisions benefiting unions followed. In 1973, Wisconsin enacted the “Educational Standards Bill,” establishing that all teachers must be certified by the state Department of Public Instruction, that every school district must provide kindergarten, special education, guidance counselors, and other measures.

Also in 1973, Milwaukee teachers negotiated a benefit that paid their health care premiums when they retired — in 2016, this benefit will be worth $4.9 billion, or more than four times the size of the Milwaukee district’s current budget.

Teachers represented by WEAC often demanded that their health premiums be provided by WEA Trust — their own health insurer — at a cost often greater than insurance on the private market. (Started in 1970, WEA Trust is now the fifth-largest health insurer in Wisconsin.)

In none of these cases of advancing teachers and their union were the long-term fiscal costs known. While Capitol protesters in February offered to give up some short-term financial considerations, it is this slow, steady, tectonic shift towards enriching and empowering public employees that Walker sought to decisively reverse.

Bottom line: Even in giving up ground on a few major points, the negotiating tide on work rules and other matters still favors government labor.

Today, K-12 education funding dwarfs the next-highest state spending program by a measure of 4-to-1. In 2011, Wisconsin spent $5.3 billion on public school aids, compared to $1.3 billion on Medical Assistance.

Give WEAC credit for having the most aggressive and most sophisticated bargainers. Give it credit for executing a long-term strategy to enrich its members. But the union has been so successful for so long that it has sown the seeds for a humbling comeuppance.

It was this seemingly inexorable march toward higher spending that Walker is trying to halt by disassembling an overly powerful and deeply entrenched union machine.
Upon taking office in 1959, Gov. Nelson called on politicians to “think and act anew.” And that’s exactly what Gov. Walker is doing.

Christian Schneider is a senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute.

A letter to Governor Walker

Dear Governor Walker,

I have recently heard news reports that you may be ready to compromise on the collective bargaining of wages with the unions. Please I urge you to remain strong, to not back down now, it is too critical to the future of the state of Wisconsin.

I know you have taken a lot of heat from the unions and from the media, but we the conservatives need to know you will not give into the intimidation and extortion of the liberals. I continue to fight for you, I continue to defend you, I am in this for the long haul, and I hope you will also continue to keep the faith.

In the recording of you that has been circulating with the phony David Koch, I heard you mention a story of your belief that this was a defining moment for the state of Wisconsin and you wanted to emulate your hero President Ronald Reagan. I was really inspired by that story and felt that finally we had a man who would stand up to the liberal mindset that is destroying this country. Please do not be a leader like William Clinton who checked the polls to decide what direction the country should be turned. Ronald Reagan was hated by the left, the Democrats and the Media, and he didn't care, he lead this country like he was proud of it, because he was profoundly proud of it. I know you are facing a huge backlash right now, but remember your hero, and mine, faced even worse backlash, and he remained strong because he knew he had the support of the people. You have the support of the majority, even though we cannot be marching constantly on the steps of the Capitol. We have to work to fund the state. I have worked too hard to get off and stay off welfare to see it all go down the drain to someone who doesn't care about their own future, much less that of this wonderful state and country.

When I signed up for military service, I took an oath, much like you did when you took office, to uphold the Constitution and defend this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. And simply because I no longer am a member of the military doesn't mean I can turn my back on my oath. I will continue to fight all enemies, even if they turn out to be well-meaning but selfish union members. If what they are doing is to the detriment of this state and country, I will not back down.

If you give in now, you will only be reinforcing the idea that mob rule is acceptable. This is not what democracy looks like, no matter how loudly the protesters catterwall, this is what anarchy looks like, and we cannot let the few loudest shriekers determine the course of the future of our great state. Please the voters gave you a majority of both houses in a previously very red state, we continue to fight in the trenches for you. Please do not let us down by giving into the rabble.

Anne M Winrich

The tax man cometh!

General Purpose Revenue (GPR) Taxes By Source

GPR Tax Collections

($ Millions)

% of % of Change %

Tax Source FY 09 Total FY 08 Total FY09-FY08 Change

Individual Income $6,222.7 51.4% $6,713.7 51.5% $-491.0 -7.3%

General Sales & Use 4,084.0 33.7% 4,268.0 32.7% -184.0 -4.3%

Corporation Franchise & Income 629.5 5.2% 837.8 6.4% -208.3 -24.9%

Excise 647.6 5.4% 540.2 4.2% 107.4 19.9%

Inheritance, Estate & Gift 20.9 0.2% 158.8 1.2% -137.9 -86.8%

Public Utility 320.1 2.6% 297.5 2.3% 22.6 7.6%

Insurance Companies 136.3 1.1% 156.6 1.2% -20.3 -13.0%

Miscellaneous 52.1 0.4% 70.3 0.5% -18.2 -25.9%

TOTAL GPR $12,113.2 100.0% $13,042.9 100.0% $-929.7 -7.1%

Taken from the Annual Fiscal Report FY2009 http://www.doa.state.wi.us/docview.asp?docid=7830&locid=3

What all these numbers add up to is the amount of money that the taxpayers put into the running of the state of Wisconsin.

The total we need here is 12.1 billions dollars, this is the total amount that the taxpayers contributed to the legislature. And what kind of influence did we buy with our money? A big fat ZILCH. We still don't have a seat at the collective bargaining table. The unions are spending money to get into the taxpayers pocket, and we have NO say? Maybe big business and the labor unions are no different, they are all trying to screw us. But at least I can choose to not spend my money at a business if they offend me, I have no recourse with the public sector employee contracts. The tax man tells me what to pay or go to jail. Some choice.

Labor Unions are big business for Legislature

It's very interesting to see who spent the most trying to influence our electors to vote their way. This is not something the lefties would like to admit, but it seems as if the Koch brothers have a long way to go before achieving the amounts that the labor unions have spent. Oh and look at the ground the corporations have to make up to achieve the influence of the "teachers union". The very same people who are trying to make us feel sorry for them because they are so down-trodden, and misunderstood, the teachers union outspent their nearest competitor by nearly 100%. Sounds like they are lying to you teachers. When it comes to influencing politicians, the unions have a few more hands in the cookie jar.

The Top 10 Lobbying Organizations in 2009 were:

1. Wisconsin Education Association, 7,239 hours, $1,511,272

2. Wisconsin Insurance Alliance, 1,427 hours, $777,430

3. Forest County Potawatomi Community, 1,492 hours, $756,512

4. Altria Client Services Inc., 1,321 hours, $755,733

5. Wisconsin Hospital Association, 5,126, $605,033

6. Wisconsin Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association, 1,379, $560,544

7. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, 4,967 hours, $508,023

8. RAI Services Company (formerly Reynolds American Inc.), 186 hours, $466,253

9. Wisconsin Independent Businesses Inc., 7,939 hours, $458,414

10. Wisconsin Energy Corporation, 1,547 hours, $387,222.

The Government Accountability Board, State of WI February 22, 2010

http://ethics.state.wi.us

Taxes going up again.

Look here is the plain and simple truth. I am a taxpayer, I have not jealousy about your benefits package. I couldn't give a rip what you make, and how it is funded. But I will be damned if I am going to be told that you teachers need a raise this year, and I MUST make the sacrifice to pay you.

Okay, this is what it boils down to. I am told I will not be getting a raise, this year, so now I have to make adjustments for inflation, I have to figure out how I am going to continue to make ends meet with less money. How am I going to afford the rent, the car payment, the food, the utilities, not to mention anything left over for fun. And then I turn on the news and am told that the teachers will be getting a 4% or 5% raise, the number doesn't matter. Now I have to figure out how am I going to make a car payment that I can no longer afford, while you get to go out and buy a new car if you want to this year. Once again realize I am NOT jealous of your benefits. I am sick of being told that I need to make sacrifices for because you, for some ungodly reason, are more important to this world than anyone else. All because you teach our children, bah!, and what exactly are you teaching our children right now; how to break the law by holding an illegal strike, how to cheat the system with phony doctor's slips, how to bully people by holding the government hostage, how to swear and disrespect others who don't agree with you. Some fine lesson you are teaching my kids. I am sick and tired of your bullshit and I am not going to pay for it anymore. If you want to teach someone kids to lie, cheat and steal from whomever you can con, than find another way of raising money. Your system is broken and very soon, if you continue this lunacy, it will also be broke. Do not think you are somehow more righteous than I am, that you are for some reason more important to society. The day you are ready to lay your life down for your country is the day you can claim that society owes you something. Our men and women in the armed services deserve more than you, and what do you have for them? Nothing but disdain. You are the maggots that are infesting our body, and if you continue down this path, the maggots infesting the rotting corpse of what used to be a damn fine country.

The Taxpayers say "no!"

This is getting out of hand, Scott Walker needs to take the upper hand and get control back. Here is how he should handle the situation. I don't know if anyone has taken this bent or not yet. Demand that the union employees get back to work. If they do not show up at their positions tomorrow then he has no recourse but to follow this plan:

1. the union have broken their contracts by staging an illegal strike/walkout/blueday, which is strictly forbidden in their contracts. And because they cannot be trusted to sign any more contracts, this will negate the need for curtail collective bargaining; the unions will never be allowed to have a seat at the table again because they will never be allowed to sign another contract with the state into perpetuity.

2. All the current union employees that are on the picket/protest lines will be fired, and they will never be allowed to hold another government job because they cannot sign a contract because they cannot uphold a contract.

3. Let them know that there will be no coddling them. They have made a decision to break their contracts, they will be held accountable for their actions and the restrictions will be severe.

Of course they can prevent these actions from being taken by simply going back to work and allowing the democratic process to run its course.

Also, the legislature needs to deal with the runaway Senators harshly.

WI statue: 946.12 Misconduct in public office. Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony:

946.12(1)
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the officer's or employee's office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law.

This law declares that the actions of the Senators is a felony. They are not simply playing a waiting game, they are breaking the law (not that that bothers the liberals), and in a nation that follows the rule of law, they simply cannot be allowed to get away with their actions. They are felons, the penalties are harsh, and not only are large fines involved, but prison-time is mandated.

We give them one more opportunity to return to the state to do their job or they will be investigated and impeached. They will lose their seats, and their pensions, they will lose their freedom to participate in society, they will lose their right to vote and hold public office, to carry firearms, to protest and to assemble. By not returning immediately, it will be determined that they have vacated their seat voluntarily and will be immediately replaced with appointments made by the governor until an election can be held. And the business of the government will be carried out with the replacement Senators.

Now is not the time to play nicey-nicey with these law breakers. Make them fully aware that they lost the last elections, and that no matter how they FEEL, they are in the minority and majority rules is the law of the land. They will lose their privilege to sit at the bargaining table either way, there is no middle ground, they will not be allowed to get away with their illegal actions.

Who is actually paying these people?

Have you driven by this gang on the side of the road? We see this every year during construction season. Maybe this is why these projects cost so much money, and who is paying for this, you me and all the other taxpayers. And if that isn't enough, these people all probably make more than you do, even the guy in the hole doing the only, actual work.