The revolt is underway.

[FluffyMcDeath]

Military service (up to 4 years) counted toward state workers retirement. Tax payers, 0.

Makes sense since that is government work. Military personnel are government workers on the government payroll funded by the tax payer.

Still think it's fair to the tax payer footing the bill?

Hell no. The military should be paid for by those who benefit, i.e. the corporations that use those security services.

And, no, the army doesn't fight for freedom. They fight for control of wealth and resources but every single war that they have fought in has resulted in an erosion of freedoms at home. All the freedoms we enjoy have been won at home and people died fighting for them as they die in Egypt and Libya and Tunisia today.

Unfortunately, kids always squander the gifts their parents win for them.

 

[Fade]

Fade wrote:
Military service (up to 4 years) counted toward state workers retirement. Tax payers, 0.

and Fluffy flubbed:
Makes sense since that is government work. Military personnel are government workers on the government payroll funded by the tax payer.
-----------------------------------

Boy did that ever fly over your head.
See that real short sentence "Tax payers, 0.".

Those Military personnel were not on the State payroll nor were they working for the State.

If that were the case then all Military vets, not just those working for the State, should also be entitled to 4 years worth of retirement pay from the State!

 

[faethor]

Bridges– No they're not. http://roadwaystandards.dot.wi.gov/hcci/ Construction work is contracted out to private companies. State workers mow the grass.

The bill impacts State and Local Workers. There is bidding for road construction at the State level. At the Local level most of it is County workers. I'm sure there may be some bidding there too. However State workers build most of their roads. So, no your picture is incomplete. Your line that Local Highway workers are simply gloried lawnskeepers is offensive. Lawnkeeper or not these are people and they deserve the respect of management sitting down and working with them instead of dictating.

http://etf.wi.gov/faq/wrs.htm
Fire Fighters & Police– They retire at age 50, 15 years before the tax payers can.
Teachers– They retire at age 55, 10 years before the tax payers can.
Military service (up to 4 years) counted toward state workers retirement. Tax payers, 0.
State worker, gets disabled on or off the job, state pays salary for life.
Tax payer, gets disabled on or off the job, reduced pay through SSI.
State Attorneys– Usually end up running for political office!

Still think it's fair to the tax payer footing the bill?

'They retire' isn't complete either. What you have listed is the minimum age of retirement.

I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse here. The elected Republicans tanked their own budget as they gave away the budget surplus and put the State into a deficit. To offset this the Republicans demand labor give up salary and rights. Labor agrees that they'd be willing to give things up. The response was the Republicans refused sit down at the negotiating table. In fact Republicans made anti-labor ads in the media before they even had a bill for State Congress to review. I find it telling that it's not only a money issue as the Unions that are exempted are the Unions that backed the Governor in the last election.

So to your question of 'tax payer' footing the bill. Clearly the Unions don't feel that's fair and is willing to sitdown and talk about reducing that bill. It's the Republicans that refuse.

Haven't we seen enough of a downgrade in the middle class over the last decade? Instead of further breaking down the middle-class let's rebuild and get the private sector back to where they ought to be.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

See that real short sentence "Tax payers, 0.".

I was willing to take the chance of a technicality just to get my dig in.

BTW, "Tax payers, 0" ain't a sentence. :hammer:

Anyway, got anything substantive to say or are you just jealous you didn't get 4 years counted towards your retirement?

 

[cecilia]

That Abraham really knew his stuff

We filter history through rose coloured glasses. The Republicans want to declare themselves the party of Lincoln. Doing so neglects the major changes the Republicans went through in the 1890s, post Lincoln. As well as the major changes in the 1960s. Salon has a good read.

I know!

I saw when both parties were...well...better than today....about 30 years ago the republicans became infested with the religious right and the democrats with the political correct nursemaids. a total waste of time and energy.

and works against citizens.
feh to them all

 

[faethor]

I saw when both parties were...well...better than today....about 30 years ago the republicans became infested with the religious right and the democrats with the political correct nursemaids. a total waste of time and energy.

and works against citizens.
feh to them all

30 years ago is exactly right. It's with Reagan's inclusion of the religious right wing extremists that empowered that group of people. And yes it does work again citizens. Huzzah for the Dems that are fighting to keep the middle-class workers middle-class in Wisconsin.

Anyway, got anything substantive to say or are you just jealous you didn't get 4 years counted towards your retirement?

I see that as a point. Some are pissed that private sector benefits and wages have fallen. In a response they demand we drop down the public sector too. Why would Fade not move to Wisconsin and get a better salary and better benefits?

 

[cecilia]

I just caught this amusing statement:

Teachers– They retire at age 55, 10 years before the tax payers can.

I don't recall the exact age my mother HAD to retire from teaching but it wasn't what she wanted. and I'm fairly sure she was older than 55.

The school wasn't willing to give her a sabbatical - and mind you this is one of THE best teachers the system has ever had.
So she left teaching and found work elsewhere eventually working at the Ford Foundation. And because she worked there at least 10 years she has a pension from there - which she more than deserves.

Anyone who thinks teachers get special treatment is truly an asshole. My mother worked all year long - during the summer, fall, winter and spring - so she could send my brother and myself to catholic school. No vacations for years and years. And did all that on a shitty salary. And every time someone compliments me on my career I point out that I learned everything Important from my first and best teacher - my mother.

so anyone who thinks teachers are living high on the hog can go {bleep} themselves


and, btw, teacher ARE taxpayers...douchebag

 

[faethor]

so anyone who thinks teachers are living high on the hog can go {bleep} themselves

 

[cecilia]

yup!

and I'd like to point out that if you calculated the effect my mother had on society and the economy it would easily run into the millions. I know, because every week or other week I'd see my mothers former students run up to her whether we were walking down the street, in a restaurant, on a bus, etc and their faces would light up.

All these people went on to be contributing members of society in all sorts of careers, including teachers. All those people made this country run and the economy grow.

 

[faethor]

Do 25 Hedgefund managers = 658K teachers? Huffpo If Fade really thinks we shouldn't pay people that don't produce anything let's start w/ impacting 25 people vs 650K teachers.

 

[Fade]

Faethor blurted:
"If Fade really thinks we shouldn't pay people that don't produce anything let's start w/ impacting 25 people vs 650K teachers."
----------------------------------------

OK Faethor, let's start with you.
Since you're one of the ones that think you should have the right to take money from one of your rich neighbors and give it to one of your poorer neighbors, I'm claiming that right!

Knowing that there are poorer people than you in your neighborhood, tomorrow, I demand that you cough up 1/3 of your checking and savings account and take it down to your local homeless shelter, and tell them that Fade demanded that you do it!

Stings, doesn't it?

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

OK Faethor, let's start with you.
Since you're one of the ones that think you should have the right to take money from one of your rich neighbors and give it to one of your poorer neighbors, I'm claiming that right!

Knowing that there are poorer people than you in your neighborhood, tomorrow, I demand that you cough up 1/3 of your checking and savings account and take it down to your local homeless shelter, and tell them that Fade demanded that you do it!

Stings, doesn't it?

People with incomes over a million a year are taxed a lower percentage of their income than people who earn $30,000 a year even though people with the lower income have less disposable income. It's part of the way the tax structure is tilted. Sure, the rich actually pay MORE money than the poor but the poor pay A HIGHER percentage of what they earn.

In the case of the financial industry it is actually more egregious than that because not only do they have a lower tax rate than the average worker, they are also the main reason why the average worker is out of a job and on food stamps and losing his home - the financial industry is almost completely unproductive, in fact it is a drag on the economy and has sucked up a large part of the wealth of the nation (and the world) through fraud which is a criminal act and yet are these criminals being sent to jail for all the money they stole? No, and Fade doesn't think they should have to give up any of the money they stole because ... because they DESERVE that money.

Now, I'm not going to say that faethor couldn't afford to give a third of his income ... in fact he probably already does, because he is most likely middle class and that is pretty close to the rate he is taxed at (and don't forget to throw in the sales taxes etc) but that tax money isn't going to the poor, or at least mostly it isn't. No, it's going to subsidies for power companies, subsidies for pharma companies and argi-business, subsidies for aerospace and subsidies to oil and coal companies. That's what really stings - there is already a wealth transfer going on but it's not the one the TV tries to scare you with - it's more like Mark 4:25

 

[Fade]

I didn't ask for a third of Faethor's income, I demanded a third of his checking and savings account. Faethor won't pay up, therefor Faethor hates poor people. Now I demand that you pay Faethor's part because, he is so stingy, and you make more money, but pay less taxes than he does.

See what happens when one person thinks he should have the right to take one person's money and give it to someone else, when a third party get's to decide. You don't usually like the result.

 

[the_leander]

OK Faethor, let's start with you.
Since you're one of the ones that think you should have the right to take money from one of your rich neighbors and give it to one of your poorer neighbors, I'm claiming that right!

Heh, itt Fade writes off all education.

Perhaps we should go back to the days where education was purely optional and a pay on demand system like it used to be in the dim and distant past.

That way we could be sure that only the rich get educated whilst the poor whom he is implying he is siding with would be left as an illiterate race practically worthless to an advanced economy.

Way to go dude!

Stings, doesn't it?

What? Paying tax? Not really, but then some of us actually value education and view it as a right, not a privilege for the super rich.

 

[the_leander]

I didn't ask for a third of Faethor's income, I demanded a third of his checking and savings account.

Except taxes don't work that way.

Faethor won't pay up, therefor Faethor hates poor people.

Non sequiter.

Now I demand that you pay Faethor's part because, he is so stingy, and you make more money, but pay less taxes than he does.

And another.

See what happens when one person thinks he should have the right to take one person's money and give it to someone else, when a third party get's to decide. You don't usually like the result.

There is a whole world of difference between taxing someone on their oncome/purchases and demading that they hand over savings. But you already knew that.

 

[faethor]

Faethor blurted:
"If Fade really thinks we shouldn't pay people that don't produce anything let's start w/ impacting 25 people vs 650K teachers."
----------------------------------------
OK Faethor, let's start with you.
Since you're one of the ones that think you should have the right to take money from one of your rich neighbors and give it to one of your poorer neighbors, I'm claiming that right!

Knowing that there are poorer people than you in your neighborhood, tomorrow, I demand that you cough up 1/3 of your checking and savings account and take it down to your local homeless shelter, and tell them that Fade demanded that you do it!

Stings, doesn't it?

IMO, if you really believed that the world worked in such a way that the more affluent would be required to contribute more that would be a good thing. Instead you have the idea upside down. You require slightly higher paid state workers to be paid less than the lower paid private worker. However, for the top end (such as athletes and bankers) you demand no such exchange. Your ideas gut the middle-class while promoting the wealthy few in our society. Coming out of 8 years of the Bush era it's clear to me that this Republican idea has failed the masses. We now have some of the largest inequity of wealth between the worker and the upper management since the Robber Barron era.

I'd recommend you stop and think... The inequity of wealth is greater in the USA than it was in Egypt. Maybe it's time for Republicans to stop gutting the middle-class worker.

 

[redrumloa]

I'd recommend you stop and think... The inequity of wealth is greater in the USA than it was in Egypt. Maybe it's time for Republicans to stop gutting the middle-class worker.

Failed BLUE states.

 

[faethor]

Failed BLUE states.

The problem is not limited to one party or another. There are a number of failed RED States. For 2012 there is a projection of 46 out of 50 states with a deficit. If you base RED on the 2008 election there were 29 Red states. Giving you the benefit of the doubt that all 4 of the surplus states are RED this still leaves 25 RED in the deficit. So, no it's clearly not 'failed BLUE states'.

Getting back to Wisconsin what we see is the BLUE government was voted out. The BLUE budget for 2010 is roughly a $100Million surplus and employees are paid at current rates. Fall of 2010 REDs were put in power. The first thing they did was squander the surplus and a bit more. This is what pushed the State into a deficit. The revolt in Wisconsin being underway in this case is clearly a cause of giving the REDs power.

REDs are to blame just as much as BLUEs. And especially when we hit the federal level. We see Reagan tripled the national debt. GWBush doubled the national debt. So it's not as if REDs don't cause deficits.

 

[cecilia]

Do 25 Hedgefund managers = 658K teachers? Huffpo If Fade really thinks we shouldn't pay people that don't produce anything let's start w/ impacting 25 people vs 650K teachers.

sounds like a great idea to me :mrgreen:

 

[redrumloa]

Failed BLUE states.

The problem is not limited to one party or another. There are a number of failed RED States. For 2012 there is a projection of 46 out of 50 states with a deficit. If you base RED on the 2008 election there were 29 Red states. Giving you the benefit of the doubt that all 4 of the surplus states are RED this still leaves 25 RED in the deficit. So, no it's clearly not 'failed BLUE states'.

Getting back to Wisconsin what we see is the BLUE government was voted out. The BLUE budget for 2010 is roughly a $100Million surplus and employees are paid at current rates. Fall of 2010 REDs were put in power. The first thing they did was squander the surplus and a bit more. This is what pushed the State into a deficit. The revolt in Wisconsin being underway in this case is clearly a cause of giving the REDs power.

REDs are to blame just as much as BLUEs. And especially when we hit the federal level. We see Reagan tripled the national debt. GWBush doubled the national debt. So it's not as if REDs don't cause deficits.

There are certainly problems with both parties and in many states. That does not change the fact that the most spectacular failed states are historically BLUE states. You make the argument WI failed due to the recent new gov, that sounds far too simplistic. The best example will always be CA (please don't tell me Arnie is a Republican). When taking the left's ideology to the extreme, you get CA which is a spectacular failure. The right has problems for sure, but the ideology is sound when it is not just lip service.