Star One Smart Blog's

Usually the musings of NYT's token Republican are soft and gooey RINO droppings; today's essay is a bit more pointed (comparatively speaking). Brooks gently prods the Wisconsin protesters ("amusingly Orwellian"), then lectures the New York Times' mostly-far-left readers (elitist lefty snobs) about the differences between public sector and private sector unions...

Even if you acknowledge the importance of unions in representing middle-class interests, there are strong arguments on Walker’s side. In Wisconsin and elsewhere, state-union relations are structurally out of whack.

That’s because public sector unions and private sector unions are very different creatures. Private sector unions push against the interests of shareholders and management; public sector unions push against the interests of taxpayers. Private sector union members know that their employers could go out of business, so they have an incentive to mitigate their demands; public sector union members work for state monopolies and have no such interest.

Private sector unions confront managers who have an incentive to push back against their demands. Public sector unions face managers who have an incentive to give into them for the sake of their own survival. Most important, public sector unions help choose those they negotiate with. Through gigantic campaign contributions and overall clout, they have enormous influence over who gets elected to bargain with them, especially in state and local races.

As a result of these imbalanced incentive structures, states with public sector unions tend to run into fiscal crises. They tend to have workplaces where personnel decisions are made on the basis of seniority, not merit. There is little relationship between excellence and reward, which leads to resentment among taxpayers who don’t have that luxury.

Structurally sound, Brooks, but I notice you didn't dare mention that ALL the unions, public and private sector alike, contribute ALL of their political donations to Democrats...something that doesn't happen with contributors to 'our side'. Corporations and the 'evil rich', groups Democrats so like to tie to Republicans, tend to contribute to Democrats as well as Republicans. You'd be hard-pressed to find ANY union that contributes to a Republican candidate (if you do, that Republican is likely of the Meghan McCain variety, and as vapid and useless as twit Meghan). I posted on this yesterday.

These public-sector unions need to be demolished nationwide. It's just not right for public employees to have their union dues monies taken from them without consent then spent on political contributions to only one party. Public officials are elected, and government employees are supposed to be indifferent as to the outcome of elections. But these government public-sector employee unions not only give monies to Democrats but also contribute on-the-job time and work for 100% Democrat-only candidates; that money and time adds up to that candidate owing the unions for whatever the unions demand, be it pay and benefits increases that are well above private-sector pay and benefits, and more subtle but just as troubling, they have an unfairly-constructed shield that private sector employees don't have for to shelter them from economic downturns.

As Brooks' NYT essay today 'splains, we should ALL be hurting. Unionists should not seek political shelter from economic downturns, using purchased Democrats, to create for themselves and their members unsustainable contracts at the expense of taxpayers.

So, today, we might find Wisconsin Senators (the Republican sorts who, you know, come to work) vote in the union-busting legislation by means of attaching it to another bill that doesn't require the cowardly Democrats to come forth (19 Republican Senators are on hand in the capital; 14 Democrat Senators are shivering under beds in Rockport, IL, at a Best Western; I hope the bedbugs are feasting well on their mangy asses). The Orwellian union thug - Democrat protesters still circle the capital in Madison (aka "Moscow West" and "Berkeley on the Prarie") trying to get their Egyptian - Tunisian faces on correctly. Inside, Republicans may well, and deservedly so, vote the public sector unions dead. Case closed, the people win, democracy is restored.

Move to the next state. Let's get this train rolling.

---

Union Thugs: "Please, please, we'll take the cuts, we'll accept the financial concessions, but leave us our rights to hold a gun to your heads and take monies from your budget whenever we feel like it!"

Governor Scott Walker: "Fuck off, assholes."

But Walker repeated that he would not back down.

Photo taken by protein wisdom's bh

Tea Partiers and 'real' people joined the fray today (this photo taken by pw commentator bh, who attended the rally).

The New York Times reported, chillingly, that police snipers were on hand today as well. Where were these snipers for the past few days, when the Union Thugs were threatening Governor Scott Walker and Republicans?

What do you want to bet these police snipers were watching the Tea Partiers more closely than the 'good guys' of the Left?

How many police snipers were on hand in Cairo I wonder? Why do we get the police sniper treatment here in the U.S.?

Barack Obama sides with the Unions. I wonder why?

The 'good guys' of the Left were even passing fake doctor's excuses around. Fire the lot of 'em, break this unholy alliance of Unions and Democrats. This has gone on long enough (h/t Joy McCann).

This is the best possible showdown that could've happened in America today: a stand off between Democrats backing their government unions, vs. regular American taxpayers. From the WSJ...

Mr. Walker's very modest proposal would take away the ability of most government employees to collectively bargain for benefits. They could still bargain for higher wages, but future wage increases would be capped at the federal Consumer Price Index, unless otherwise specified by a voter referendum. The bill would also require union members to contribute 5.8% of salary toward their pensions and chip in 12.6% of the cost of their health insurance premiums.

If those numbers don't sound outrageous, you probably work in the private economy. The comparable nationwide employee health-care contribution is 20% for private industry, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average employee contribution from take-home pay for retirement was 7.5% in 2009, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute.

Mr. Walker says he has no choice but to make these changes because unions refuse to negotiate any compensation changes, which is similar to the experience Chris Christie had upon taking office in New Jersey. Wisconsin is running a $137 million deficit this year and anticipates coming up another $3.6 billion short in the next two-year budget. Governor Walker's office estimates the proposals would save the state $300 million over the next two years, and the alternative would be to lay off 5,500 public employees.

In order to thwart the Democratic process, Democrat Senators fled the State capitol at noon, heading to a resort in Rockford, Illinois...

MADISON, Wis. – A group of Democratic Wisconsin lawmakers blocked passage of a sweeping anti-union bill Thursday, refusing to show up for a vote and then abruptly leaving the state in an effort to force Republicans to the negotiating table.

As ever-growing throngs of protesters filled the Capitol for a third day, the 14 Democrats disappeared around noon, just as the Senate was about to begin debating the measure, which would end a half-century of collective bargaining rights for most public employees.


Hours later, one member of the group told The Associated Press that they had left Wisconsin.

"The plan is to try and slow this down because it's an extreme piece of legislation that's tearing this state apart," Sen. Jon Erpenbach said in a telephone interview. He refused to say where he was.

Democrats hoped Republican Gov. Scott Walker and GOP lawmakers would consider revisions to the bill.

Walker, who took office just last month, urged the group to return and called the boycott a "stunt."

Cowardly Democrats refused a floor debate, instead heading out of town to the "Clock Tower Resort" (a Best Western ! ) in Rockford.

These Democrat Senators should be arrested, cuffed and taken back to Madison, then chained to their seats until they do their jobs: debate and vote. What kind of men and women are these cowardly Democrats?

A lefty editorial in a Wisconsin bird cage liner finds comments, written mostly by the protesters and their supporters, but I found a gem of a comment amongst the coal ash. One poster, obviously a unionist who would 'suffer' a $5,000 yearly setback due to the 'unfairness' of Gov. Walker's modest proposals, whined and whined and carried on about how she would have to give up things, goods and services, that would cost the economy of Wisconsin. This reply to that is a cogent response to the whiner...

econamike said on: February 16, 2011, 4:04 pm
@hrt

Not to be cold, but welcome to the “real world”.

We’ve never had cable and only recently got our first TracPhone.

We’ve already been shopping at Walmart (and Aldi’s) for years. We only eat out (including fast food) a few times a year and go to movies far less than that.

We make less than $30,000, have no health insurance, no pension and don’t get Martin Luther King day off. If I were to take the health insurance offered by my company, I’d have to pay 40% of the premiums. On top of that, I took a 20% pay cut for over a year when we were knocked down to 4 days a week.

Yet 10% of my income is taken from me in the form of property taxes so that “you” can have all these things leaving me unable to afford them. And another 7% is taken from me so that I can pay for the people on Social Security & Medicare (that money is not set aside for my retirement), another 5% for sales tax…

What percentage of people do you think are in my situation?
And can you see why people like me see “you” as a bunch of ungrateful whiners?

You ask “Where will your private sector profits come from when you cut back on your spending?”


Here’s your answer: The $5,000 you won’t have doesn’t just disappear… it stays in the pocket of the original person that earned it. Wow, I bet you never though of it like that.

Believe it or not, other people will get to keep more of their paychecks and they will spend that $5,000 instead of you.

There are “tax payers” and “tax takers”. The “tax takers” need to understand that every dollar they receive is taken directly from someone else.

Is life easy? NO
Is life fair? NO

But if people like me can’t afford people like “you” all I have to say is sorry, the gravy train is slowing down – deal with it like the rest of us have had to for the last 2 years.

Times are tough. Get a helmet.

Oh, this spotted at SondraK's...

Nice civility you've got there, leftards. Didn't learn much from Baracky's speech in Tucson, did you?

Video footage of one of the protesters in action (h/t Burge on the Twitter)...



Whining bastiches. Get back to work, all of you, especially you elected 'officials'. Face the music. You've been dodging this for years.

Your chickens are flocking home to roost.