Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Wisconsin Protests] 45% of the way to recalling 8 GOP state senators

DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
edited March 2011 in Debate and/or Discourse
188883_201928759832643_108038612554992_762751_8372371_n.jpg

Observe the native palm trees of Madison, Wisconsin. See the insane violence of the protesters, as reported by Bill O'Reilly of FOX News.

The [Unions] thread got itself locked for being well over 100 pages, so I thought I'd make a thread specifically about the Wisconsin protests; perhaps we can focus on the historic event unfolding here and not dwell so much on how much unions do (not?) deserve to exist. Faint hope, I know.

EDIT: I'm okay with wider picture stuff, because it does set the stage for what's going on in Madison right now, but I'm not really interested in broad generalizations over whether unions are all corrupt and all deserve to be destroyed. There are benefits and drawbacks of most systems, including unions. Now can we talk about what applies (even indirectly) to Wisconsin?

mjs-statebud27_-nws_-lynn_-f.jpg

The protests are going into their third full week.
It was Angela Aldous, a 30-year-old nurse from Madison, who drew the loudest cheers. She sought to cast doubt on Walker's suggestion, made last week, that many people from out of state were joining the large protest crowds in Madison.

"Governor Walker, I'm not faking this Wisconsin accent," Aldous said. "I was born in Wisconsin. I live in Wisconsin. And I came back early from my ice-fishing trip to tell you, 'You are not going to crush Wisconsin.' "

She then led the crowd in a chant: "We are Wisconsin."

Not since the anti-war protests of the Vietnam era has Madison been the scene of such sustained and large demonstrations. Wisconsin is at the center of an epic clash between a Republican governor eager to take on entrenched union power and public-sector workers battling to hold onto rights they have held for more than a half century.

Well, they don't seem to be going away.

On the legislative front:
Miller, speaking by telephone from an undisclosed location in Illinois, said he and other Democratic senators had reached out to Fitzgerald and other Republican senators on a daily basis.

"We continue to seek a resolution to this impasse," he said. "We have been communicating on a daily basis with our Republican colleagues."

Asked if he had reached out to Walker, Miller would only say the "governor is the key to solving this."

Walker and Republican legislative leaders say the measure must pass the Senate by Tuesday to avoid the layoffs of thousands of employees as early as April 1.

The crazy thing is, this guy who has a Pulitzer says that Wisconsin public employees already pay for all of their supposedly expensive pensions.
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, creates 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.

So what Walker really means by "contribute more" is: "Take a pay cut." That is, in addition to giving up collective bargaining rights and almost any hope of ever getting a raise above inflation.

Still confused? Let's let state assemblyman Gordon Hintz explain what happened:

Apparently this video keeps disappearing under mysterious circumstances.

EDIT: I suppose I should also mention the infamous prank call that Buffalo Beast editor Murphy made to Walker (after he found out that Walker was not taking any calls). Turns out he does take calls from Kansas billionares that donated the maximum amount to his campaign and whose PAC was running ads for the bill before it was even revealed to the state Democrats.
"Koch": We’ll back you any way we can. What we were thinking about the crowd was, uh, was planting some troublemakers.

Walker: You know, well, the only problem with that —because we thought about that. The problem—the, my only gut reaction to that is right now the lawmakers I’ve talked to have just completely had it with them, the public is not really fond of this…[snip] My only fear would be if there’s a ruckus caused is that maybe the governor has to settle to solve all these problems…[snip]…Let ‘em protest all they want…Sooner or later the media stops finding it interesting.

Dracomicron on
Gary Gygax wrote:
''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
«13456765

Posts

  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    I'm suprised how little coverage this seems to be getting over here in the UK, though we'll probably we waiting for the next set of proposed changes to the NHS or wave of privitisations for that.

    Not really that surprising. This is pretty much a US issue. It's not like every political event in the UK is covered here. Just the really big stuff.

    Spoiler:
  • psyck0psyck0 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Some aspects of things unions have negotiated in the past are not great. Teachers' unions make it extremely difficult to fire incompetent teachers, for instance. On the other hand, in BC, the teachers' union is the only group standing up for quality of education. The government has done its best to cut costs (because they refuse to raise ridiculously low taxes) and it has come at the expense of education, AKA at the expense of future tax revenue. The teachers were the only group to stand up to them and without a union, organised opposition would have been impossible.

    Big Man in training.
    steam_sig.png
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Pata wrote: »
    Tastyfish wrote: »
    I'm suprised how little coverage this seems to be getting over here in the UK, though we'll probably we waiting for the next set of proposed changes to the NHS or wave of privitisations for that.

    Not really that surprising. This is pretty much a US issue. It's not like every political event in the UK is covered here. Just the really big stuff.

    More that this seems to be fitting alongside the theme of protests throughout the world, we've had a lot of protests here recently with the raise of tuition fees and sell off of forests and it's related to the issues that may well come up over here with the governments stated desire of handing over as many public services to private companies as possible.

    I'm not expecting it to be big news, just haven't seen anything at all. Probably just seems a bigger story because I'm reading about it.

  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I spent two years working in a union environment, and nearly 8 years working as management alongside those same people. Yes, unionization makes it difficult to get rid of 'bad' employees, which (where legislation supports it) puts the onus on the entire group to try to weed the bad apples out in advance. In Ontario you can be fired without reason within the first 3 months of employment, as I understand it. After that they need a good reason, and even with a good reason getting rid of someone can be tricky.

    I say this without pride, but my crew ended up being responsible for weeding out a number of people while I was on the floor. We were short staffed, so new personnel often ended up with us, and as that 3 month period came up our opinions were asked and compiled with what our managers saw, and if they didn't measure up, those staff members were removed.

    Yes, there are people who work in the department to this day that have become lazier over the years, or who are troublesome or who just don't give a shit, but the protections granted by the union against employee misuse or abuse, and the advantages conveyed by their organization to ensure that each collective agreement (negotiated every 3 years) becomes a compromise between equals, rather than individuals fighting for themselves to varying degrees of success.

    Every time the "unions let bad _____'s stick around" argument comes out, I can't help but think that this is an acceptable price to pay in order to protect the 95% (pulled from ass) of staff who are just in it for the job or to support a family or because they enjoy yelling at people in a mall (or whatever they get to do).

    Perhaps I'm about to commit a crime against analogies, but I see it like setting 10 guilty men free to prevent one innocent man being wrongfully convicted. No system is perfect, so yes, I will accept that some asshole [Teacher/whatever] will occasionally slip through the cracks into a cushy spot of nigh-untouchability if it prevents dozens or hundreds of quality staff from being mistreated.

  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    ronya wrote: »
    This much is clear: Wisconsin's public-sector unions are not obviously excessively paid, their performance is not obviously dodgy, and Wisconsin's state finances are not obviously terrible. But we can't claim the reverse, either.

    But the state workers aren't overpaid. Anecdotal I know, but my mother is in management for the state medicaid fraud detection to stop medicaid fraud. Her department recently recovered/shut down $60,000,000 dollars of fraud across the whole state, and she has a salary of $30k. I think that's very fair, or maybe even a little low for office management in such a department. Added to that is a pension and great health insurance, something the private sector used to offer.

    Edit: She has also been there the least, and started at the lowest entry level position. She is good at her job and could make more in the private sector, but she is there because she wants the benefits. She wants to be able to easily retire after 25 years on the job, something I believe every American should have the ability to do, and she wants the better health insurance. If these benefits are needed to keep good workers in the state system making less than private sector workers, then they are a good thing.

    steam_sig.png
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Ketherial wrote: »
    im not too sure about about other public sector unions, but i cant say that the quality of public services has ever been good. or even consistent. on the other hand, private companies that offer the same or similar services are always much better.

    I work for the public defender's office here in NH Keth.

    We are much better than private attorneys who contract with the courts to represent the indigent accused.

    Much.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • EchoEcho staring is caring Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited February 2011
    Forar wrote: »
    Every time the "unions let bad _____'s stick around" argument comes out, I can't help but think that this is an acceptable price to pay in order to protect the 95% (pulled from ass) of staff who are just in it for the job or to support a family or because they enjoy yelling at people in a mall (or whatever they get to do).

    Is it just me or does this seem to be a deep-rooted conservative mindset? "Some people are cheating on welfare/bad at their job but impossible to get rid of/etc etc, so let's scrap the entire thing."

    The conservatives around these parts got sick of perceived welfare cheating and wanted to get rid of it. So far they've caught cheaters for a total of 0.17% of the cost of the anti-cheating initiative.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Well, it's the other way around. We want to scrap the entire thing, therefore people cheating with it are the worst thing ever.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Echo wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    Every time the "unions let bad _____'s stick around" argument comes out, I can't help but think that this is an acceptable price to pay in order to protect the 95% (pulled from ass) of staff who are just in it for the job or to support a family or because they enjoy yelling at people in a mall (or whatever they get to do).

    Is it just me or does this seem to be a deep-rooted conservative mindset? "Some people are cheating on welfare/bad at their job but impossible to get rid of/etc etc, so let's scrap the entire thing."

    The conservatives around these parts got sick of perceived welfare cheating and wanted to get rid of it. So far they've caught cheaters for a total of 0.17% of the cost of the anti-cheating initiative.

    Pretty much. It's easy to point at literally any law and say "This law isn't perfect, therefore it is entirely terrible and should be destroyed," laws being both under- and over-inclusive of their intended targets and all that. Just look at all the manufactured rage over illegal immigrants getting healthcare benefits.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Good Lord, Walker is a crazy person. This did get killed.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Good Lord, Walker is a crazy person. This did get killed.

    Haha.

    That reminds me of some crazy legislation Montana has been introducing. Though in their case they only wanted to end incentives for wind power.

    And legalize hunting with silencers.

    And take Obama off the 2012 ballot.

    And declare global warming 'good for business.'

    Erik
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Well, it's the other way around. We want to scrap the entire thing, therefore people cheating with it are the worst thing ever.
    Yeah, let's not confuse stated order of operations with the actual order.

    Anti-public sector rhetoric almost always follows causally from the presented endpoint, not from the stated problem.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Ego wrote: »

    And declare global warming 'good for business.'

    Won't somebody think of the air conditioner industry?

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Good Lord, Walker is a crazy person. This did get killed.

    On the scale from stupid to evil, I think Walker is much closer to stupid than he is to evil. If the republicans wanted to make this a key issue for them, they should have picked someone more evil and less stupid. Romney or Daniels maybe.

  • KeptinKeptin Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Veevee wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    This much is clear: Wisconsin's public-sector unions are not obviously excessively paid, their performance is not obviously dodgy, and Wisconsin's state finances are not obviously terrible. But we can't claim the reverse, either.

    But the state workers aren't overpaid. Anecdotal I know, but my mother is in management for the state medicaid fraud detection to stop medicaid fraud. Her department recently recovered/shut down $60,000,000 dollars of fraud across the whole state, and she has a salary of $30k. I think that's very fair, or maybe even a little low for office management in such a department. Added to that is a pension and great health insurance, something the private sector used to offer.

    Edit: She has also been there the least, and started at the lowest entry level position. She is good at her job and could make more in the private sector, but she is there because she wants the benefits. She wants to be able to easily retire after 25 years on the job, something I believe every American should have the ability to do, and she wants the better health insurance. If these benefits are needed to keep good workers in the state system making less than private sector workers, then they are a good thing.

    I don't think state workers are "overpaid". A lot of conservative folk keep walking out the idea that making $60,000 a year is extravagant and wrong. I don't think paying a teacher or a $60,000 a year is wrong. I wish they could make $100,000 a year. We just don't have the money to be able to pay people that much. The taxpayers also end up footing the bill for their pension plans which are actually pretty generous.

    The issue we're having is that we have to role back a lot of the extravagant plans that depend on massive growth and production to more realistic figures. This is the battle that is going on right now. Taxpayers want the benefits and want people to fairly compensated but don't want to pay more taxes.

    Somewhere there has to be some give. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world. There isn't much more to tax out of them without driving even more jobs overseas. In fact, we probably need to reel that back in because as the rest of the world closes the education gap we're going to lose companies that stay here for easy access to educated individuals.

    We could raise taxes on the rich, everyone across the board... I don't think either of those will work as is because the tax code is so damn complicated that the people with enough money can find loopholes. So, really it is the middle class (historically, small business owners and property owners) that takes the majority of the hit as the poor get public programs and the rich avoid paying too much more.

    Another issue is that a lot of areas around the world they are fighting over the retirement age. It has to go up. There is no way that people can only be productive members of society for less than half their lives and still expect to end up all right.

    The military, for example, offers people the prospective of 'retiring' after 20 years in and getting a pension. This is an extremely physical job with long term negative health effects from staying in their field. Even so, no one in the military should have the illusion that they will be able to legitimately retire after 20 years anymore. Often, it is suggested they start a second career at that point.

    As healthcare technology and life expectancy improves (over the next few decades) that age has got to be pushed further and further back. That is going to be a huge fight for people who were promised something at the start of their careers that is just not possible for them to have. They may be mentally exhausted from their jobs - but their bodies are still quite able to take on the jobs.

    Collective bargaining is going to make these fights incredibly nasty for the public sector. I think Wisconsin is looking at short time growing pains for long term flexibility.

  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I remember my years in Chicago...

    ...working as hired muscle for wind sheiks.

    JLPENwc.gif
  • devCharlesdevCharles Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Is there any kind of good polling regarding how people in Wisconsin feel about the public employees in their state? Also, was this plan for dealing with public employees made at all known during his campaign? I'm not that knowledgeable about Wisconsin politics being from Florida and all.

    Regarding the issue, I'm not a huge union fan, but I think Walker is making a poor decision by not compromising on the deal the Unions offered by taking the cuts, not collectively bargaining against the cuts for (I think) a couple of years. It just makes him look a bit petulant at this point.

    Xbox Live: Hero Protag
    SteamID: devCharles
    twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    There's a bunch of polls near the end of the old thread. Long story short: Wisconsinites like unions, but want their benefits cut for fiscal reasons, but do not want collective bargaining removed. The margin is 55%-45% even if you rig the poll for the conservative view.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited February 2011
    Teachers don't even make 60K a year in WI.

    Another excuse they trot out is that "they really make 100K + when you count benefits". Like that matters to folks like me who think those benefits should go to everyone regardless.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • BarcardiBarcardi All the Wizards Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    So how long until a recall vote? Or will that ever happen?

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    He has to serve a year or some such before that is even possible.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Keptin wrote: »
    The taxpayers also end up footing the bill for their pension plans which are actually pretty generous.

    This was disproven. State workers pay for their own pension plans by putting money aside. The only way that taxpayers end up paying for them is insofar as taxpayers pay for public salaries. Asking the public workers to pay "more" of their own pension is redundant. They pay it all already. What Walker really wants is for them to take a pay cut, and never be able to negotiate it back.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    This is interesting.

    "Anonymous" has apparently targeted the Koch brothers, claiming they are attempting to usurp American Democracy.

    Also can anyone verify this claim, made in the article?
    "Governor Walker's union-busting budget plan contains a clause that went nearly un-noticed. This clause would allow the sale of publicly owned utility plants in Wisconsin to private parties (specifically, Koch Industries) at any price, no matter how low, without a public bidding process," they explained. "The Koch's have helped to fuel the unrest in Wisconsin and the drive behind the bill to eliminate the collective bargaining power of unions in a bid to gain a monopoly over the state's power supplies.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    It's not really gone unnoticed.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    So the claim that they were basically trying to create a fire-sale of their public utilities is true?

    This whole thing is so many levels of fucked up.

  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Was said before in the last thread ages ago (that the no-bid sale of state assets was included in the bill), not seen a link pointing directly to the legislation.

    This is the bit I'm actually referring to when I was saying it hadn't got any coverage here, since the Torys plan to make it the role of the government to show they can't run a state service more efficiently than a private corporation if challenged. I doubt claiming that they hold the actual physical assets would do and expect this to end up with the Government paying corperations to take the assets and service over (or paying less than the assets are worth, and then paying the corperation pretty much what they spent on the service previously).

  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Al_wat wrote: »
    This is interesting.

    "Anonymous" has apparently targeted the Koch brothers, claiming they are attempting to usurp American Democracy.

    Also can anyone verify this claim, made in the article?
    "Governor Walker's union-busting budget plan contains a clause that went nearly un-noticed. This clause would allow the sale of publicly owned utility plants in Wisconsin to private parties (specifically, Koch Industries) at any price, no matter how low, without a public bidding process," they explained. "The Koch's have helped to fuel the unrest in Wisconsin and the drive behind the bill to eliminate the collective bargaining power of unions in a bid to gain a monopoly over the state's power supplies.

    As bum mentioned, it's not gone unnoticed, though it seems under-reported in the awful job the national media has done on the subject. We, here, and elsewhere on yon intarwebz are aware; it's not like the information is hiding; it's in the bill. It's just that the bill is 144 (or: one gross) pages.

    Anyways, Anonymous probably couldn't pick a better target than the Kochs.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • Xenogear_0001Xenogear_0001 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Keptin wrote: »
    We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world.

    Apparently half-true.

    "The United States has the highest corporate tax rate on paper. In practice, a third of the world's countries charge businesses more.

    That means the claim that we're the highest is only partly true.

    Truth Meter: 6"

    steam_sig.png
  • kdrudykdrudy Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Yea, it's not really at the forefront of most of the discussion, but people have seen it is there

    tvsfrank.jpg
  • KeptinKeptin Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Keptin wrote: »
    The taxpayers also end up footing the bill for their pension plans which are actually pretty generous.

    This was disproven. State workers pay for their own pension plans by putting money aside. The only way that taxpayers end up paying for them is insofar as taxpayers pay for public salaries. Asking the public workers to pay "more" of their own pension is redundant. They pay it all already. What Walker really wants is for them to take a pay cut, and never be able to negotiate it back.

    That article doesn't "disprove" it at all. In fact, it goes so far as to prove exactly what I said. When the pension plans end up coming short, the taxpayers foot the bill.
    while it is true that it is state employees’ own money that funds the pension plan, when the pension plan comes up short it is up to the taxpayer to make up the difference.

    There is some truth in this – but not as much as many seem to think.

    The article then, later on, blames the shortfall on the states for negotiating deals through collective bargaining which they could not actually fund.
    • failing to make annual payments for pension systems at the levels recommended by their own actuaries;
    • expanding benefits and offering cost-of-living increases without fully considering their long-term price tag or determining how to pay for them; and
    • providing retiree health care without adequately funding it

    ERISA ensures that private corporations have to be able to pay for their pension plans. The only thing ensuring that the government pays their share is the government itself. If the government fund runs out of money, the taxpayers have to pay up more to pay the difference or the employees get nothing.

    The issue is elected officials not taking responsibility for telling their employees the truth about what needs to be done. Governor Walker is trying to be balance the sheets and he is being keelhauled for it.

  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Okay so I read Keptins post above and one thing stood out for me:
    Somewhere there has to be some give. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world. There isn't much more to tax out of them without driving even more jobs overseas. In fact, we probably need to reel that back in because as the rest of the world closes the education gap we're going to lose companies that stay here for easy access to educated individuals.

    Specificaly the red part....

    Edit: Or in other words Citation needed.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Keptin wrote: »
    Governor Walker is trying to be balance the sheets and he is being keelhauled for it.

    Except it's long been established that money not the issue, as the Union and the Democrats and some of Walker's own Republican colleagues have suggested varying degrees of "sure, the teachers will help cover more of their insurance and pension, but they want to keep the right to collectively bargain" and he flipped them the middle finger.

    The ability to negotiate as a group is powerful, to be sure, but if the immediate problem is a budget shortfall (in part created by Walker's policies in the first place) then surely the concessions given should be enough.

    The budget and finances in general are, Clue style, a red herring. This is pretty much strictly about union breaking by any means necessary.

  • Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
  • KeptinKeptin Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Okay so I read Keptins post above and one thing stood out for me:
    Somewhere there has to be some give. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world. There isn't much more to tax out of them without driving even more jobs overseas. In fact, we probably need to reel that back in because as the rest of the world closes the education gap we're going to lose companies that stay here for easy access to educated individuals.

    Specificaly the red part....

    Edit: Or in other words Citation needed.
    Keptin wrote: »
    We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world.

    Apparently half-true.

    "The United States has the highest corporate tax rate on paper. In practice, a third of the world's countries charge businesses more.

    That means the claim that we're the highest is only partly true.

    Truth Meter: 6"

    I never said we had the highest. I'm not sure what your point was unless you're trying to indicate that I was being deceitful. I was suggesting having one of the highest is a problem - as is agreed on by both parties from the article you gave.
    One last thought about corporate taxes: Despite seeming agreement from Republicans and Democrats, don't expect approval of lower rates to be easy. Obama said he wants to "get rid of the loopholes, level the playing field and use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years -- without adding to our deficit."

    The problem is that the study shows the effective tax for those able to effectively use all the loopholes indicated. For businesses unable to acquire the most skilled book keepers, this is where the problem comes in. Lowering the corporate tax and simplifying the code are both necessary to encourage business.

    So... I'll put it out there again...
    Somewhere there has to be some give. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the world. There isn't much more to tax out of them without driving even more jobs overseas. In fact, we probably need to reel that back in because as the rest of the world closes the education gap we're going to lose companies that stay here for easy access to educated individuals.

    We could raise taxes on the rich, everyone across the board... I don't think either of those will work as is because the tax code is so damn complicated that the people with enough money can find loopholes. So, really it is the middle class (historically, small business owners and property owners) that takes the majority of the hit as the poor get public programs and the rich avoid paying too much more.

    What do you disagree with?

  • Dr Mario KartDr Mario Kart Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Our corporate tax rates are very high. Regardless of what it is though, if we had proper trade policy in place, they wouldnt be able to run from it no matter where they go. If you want access to American consumers, you have to pay the price of entry.

    Nobody wants to talk trade though. Unions dont matter much if corporations can get away from them by fleeing the country.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Higher than two thirds of the world doesn't mean all that much, considering how many countries hardly have any business in the first place. No, the last thing we need to do is slavishly slash even more taxes.

  • KeptinKeptin Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Forar wrote: »
    Keptin wrote: »
    Governor Walker is trying to be balance the sheets and he is being keelhauled for it.

    Except it's long been established that money not the issue, as the Union and the Democrats and some of Walker's own Republican colleagues have suggested varying degrees of "sure, the teachers will help cover more of their insurance and pension, but they want to keep the right to collectively bargain" and he flipped them the middle finger.

    The ability to negotiate as a group is powerful, to be sure, but if the immediate problem is a budget shortfall (in part created by Walker's policies in the first place) then surely the concessions given should be enough.

    The budget and finances in general are, Clue style, a red herring. This is pretty much strictly about union breaking by any means necessary.

    I'll agree that he is trying to bust public unions. I don't think anyone has any illusions about that. The financial problems are not caused by Governor Walker. That is not true. The belief that the $137 million shortfall is due to tax cuts is based mostly on Rachel Maddow's segment.

    http://politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/

    Basically, they were never on track for a surplus and the tax cuts that Governor Walker passed don't begin until next year.

  • Dr Mario KartDr Mario Kart Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    One down, two to go.
    This is a tough situation. We already know that Walker is willing to lie to bait them back. However, at some point you have to take them at their word, even if you're walking into a trap.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Keptin wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    Keptin wrote: »
    Governor Walker is trying to be balance the sheets and he is being keelhauled for it.

    Except it's long been established that money not the issue, as the Union and the Democrats and some of Walker's own Republican colleagues have suggested varying degrees of "sure, the teachers will help cover more of their insurance and pension, but they want to keep the right to collectively bargain" and he flipped them the middle finger.

    The ability to negotiate as a group is powerful, to be sure, but if the immediate problem is a budget shortfall (in part created by Walker's policies in the first place) then surely the concessions given should be enough.

    The budget and finances in general are, Clue style, a red herring. This is pretty much strictly about union breaking by any means necessary.

    I'll agree that he is trying to bust public unions. I don't think anyone has any illusions about that. The financial problems are not caused by Governor Walker. That is not true. The belief that the $137 million shortfall is due to tax cuts is based mostly on Rachel Maddow's segment.

    http://politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/feb/18/rachel-maddow/rachel-maddow-says-wisconsin-track-have-budget-sur/

    Basically, they were never on track for a surplus and the tax cuts that Governor Walker passed don't begin until next year.
    Politifact gets a 1.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • Niceguy MyeyeNiceguy Myeye Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Al_wat wrote: »
    This is interesting.

    "Anonymous" has apparently targeted the Koch brothers, claiming they are attempting to usurp American Democracy.

    Also can anyone verify this claim, made in the article?
    "Governor Walker's union-busting budget plan contains a clause that went nearly un-noticed. This clause would allow the sale of publicly owned utility plants in Wisconsin to private parties (specifically, Koch Industries) at any price, no matter how low, without a public bidding process," they explained. "The Koch's have helped to fuel the unrest in Wisconsin and the drive behind the bill to eliminate the collective bargaining power of unions in a bid to gain a monopoly over the state's power supplies.

    The most important thing I've learned from that is that "Georgia Pacific" paper company and vanity fair make the koch brothers money. I just hope I don't learn some evil shit about Kimberly Clark because they're the only paper products company left for me to buy from (I already don't do P+G).

    I did read the thing about the sale of Wisconsin assets before, but I think the source was something like KOS or MotherJones. I do think I remember they quoted the bill itself, though.

«13456765
This discussion has been closed.