Public Sector Unions vs We the People.
This new divide doesn't have anything to do with what a rich CEO is given as compensation at a private publicly traded company. This has nothing to do with what the compensation packages are for the executives who work at an average fortune 500 corporation. This has nothing to do with the "wealthy 2% of Americans supposedly exploiting the other 98% in order to make and retain their wealth. This has to do with a certain percentage of Public Sector Employees and their unions believing that they are entitled to make more, have more and retire with more then the average tax payer private sector employee.
This is what Ronald Reagan said about the Air Traffic Controllers who put Americans at risk by striking in August of 1981. The government isn't like the private sector. He made that point known.
This is what Ronald Reagan said about the Air Traffic Controllers who put Americans at risk by striking in August of 1981. The government isn't like the private sector. He made that point known.
posted by Alpha Conservative Male at 1:21 AM
7 Comments:
Continuance of the facade Tyrone?
What you don't know is that at the "low-end" (those with less education and expertise) of government employ, generally make "more" than those in the private sector with a comparable job and job skills. Conversely, those at the "higher end" (white collar and college educated) by far make less, and in some areas considerably less, than those in the private sector with comparable skills and education.
Your title, "Public Sector Unions vs We the People", is exactly what the conservative movement wants to occur. They want the average worker to attack his neighbor.
However it doesn't appear to be working as well as many conservatives would like. POLL afer POLL after POLL shows that "MOST" Americans are against Walkers union busting tactics.
Whats really insane is your outlook on this subject. Just a few months ago you noted that; "It only begs to reason that the out comes between the two groups are going to unequal". Yet when it comes to the average worker you reverse that idea so that it does not apply to public sector workers and private sector workers.
Unequal outcomes are the policeman that risk's his life for $40-50k a year, and the congressman/governor/senator who caters to lobbyists and rich donors for $150k plus benefits, kickbacks and other perks. Yet you have no concern nor a disparaging word for the "tax payer paid" salary of the politician??
But the teacher, policeman, firefighter (who's union negotiated a pension and health benefits as part of their salary) should not have these benefits because it's "tax payer" money that pays their salary and supports their lifestyle.
That is precisely how the rich conservative works his madness through the politician. (cont.)
(cont.)
The "rich conservative" has much to gain from the idea of pitting the average worker against one another. If he can keep those in the 9 to 5 workforce vying for the trickled-down crumbs, he can keep the attention off of his tax-breaks, outsourcing to foreign countries, government granted perks and incrementing profits.
This two-fold attack can have beneficial outcomes for both the conservative politician and the rich conservative. To one end the politician see's a cut-off of funding for the competing Democratic Party. On the other end is the huge tax breaks, privatization of public facilities and the financial opportunities, plus the deprivation and regression of workers wages, benefits in the private sector for billionaire businesses.
It's just wildly confusing how you negate self interest to satisfy an ideology to which you aspire. You've even taken to insult (pigs, swine, etc...) certain tax payer paid, (teachers, firefighters, police, etc...) but leave those who inspire you (politicians, military and the Pentagon waste, oil company subsidies, Haliburton, Blackwater, the billions of dollars wasted, missing, stolen in Iraq) unscathed.
You're not rich like Limbaugh, Hannity, Levine, Coulter, Palin etc...(you don't even earn 250k). You're not paid by, own anything, are subsidized or paid by government contracts (Haliburton, Blackwater, etc..). You're not an elected politician (Alan West, Walker, etc...). Apparently you live and work in one of the worse cities in the country (like me). Yet, you look upon people who "WORK FOR A LIVING JUST LIKE YOU" as being "selfish, greedy living high on the troff PIGS?"
I honestly agree with the assertion that, "It only begs to reason that the out comes between the two groups are going to unequal". What's crazy though is that you apply it only when it suits an political ideology that berates the opposition, regardless of your own "self interest." If the conservatives are allowed to win on this one, no matter what or how it is you make your living, it's only a matter of time before you become a "pig at the troff."
p allen "The "rich conservative" has much to gain from the idea of pitting the average worker against one another. If he can keep those in the 9 to 5 workforce vying for the trickled-down crumbs, he can keep the attention off of his tax-breaks, outsourcing to foreign countries, government granted perks and incrementing profits."
How exactly do rich conservatives gain from public employee unions fleecing taxpayers? What you want allen as usual is for people to stick their heads into the ground and pretend all is right evnthough it's clearly not. The fact of the matter is that public union compensation has become an enormous fiscal burden on municipality and states across America. Another fact is that the "the golden goose has been cooked", and the can can't no longer be kicked down the road, the end of the road is here. You do know the definition of broke right? This isn't about tax breaks, the rich etc. Trying to side swipe the main issue isn't working allen.
P Allen "This two-fold attack can have beneficial outcomes for both the conservative politician and the rich conservative. "
I got it allen,create illusion that there are no such thing as "rich democrats and rich liberals" right allen? ;-) You are so transparent, it's too funny. Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire liberal and even he is trying to rain in some of the NYC Public Union's unsustainable perks. So try again and again and again.
p allen "To one end the politician see's a cut-off of funding for the competing Democratic Party. On the other end is the huge tax breaks, privatization of public facilities and the financial opportunities, plus the deprivation and regression of workers wages, benefits in the private sector for billionaire businesses. "
People in union regardless of whether they are public or private should have a say in how their dues are being spent. Are you against that allen? If union members want to give to the Democratic or Republican Party, they should be allowed to contribute out of their money.You liberals talk about republicans and their "special interests", well now is the time to come out and acknowledge that unions are a "special interest" group of the Democratic party. Honesty is the best policy, is it not?
I respect the working man and I worked around government workers when I was just private sector and always thought they were good jobs. But it won't harm anyone to read about FDR and former Union Boss George Meany's outlook per the NY Times no less .
You can read it for yourselves.
Also, per the private sector, Organized Crime has been involved in Unions forever and these recent arrests in New York in fact, proved the Mob was still involved.
Lots of imperfections, all we can do is roll up our sleeves and fix things.
CB;"How exactly do rich conservatives gain from public employee unions fleecing taxpayers?".
First an foremost, by making people like you believe that the public employee is somehow "fleecing" the tax payers. As long as they can imply that it's the average worker "fleecing" the tax payer, the onus can stay off of them.
Scapegoating the public employee is what the "fake David Koch" call was all about. If the rich guy wants to pay less taxes, someone has to take up the slack...right? What better plan is there than to make one worker believe that another is getting something you're not getting! Keep them at each others throats and the thought that the rich guy got his way will never enter their minds. If you're successful in doing it, you can eventually take whatever you want from them both!
Do you really believe that the tax cuts Walker gave to the corporations equates to "more" money for the state? There's no way possible in today's economy his tax cuts will generate any revenue.
Under Walkers plan a business that moves to Wisconsin could essentially get their corporate and personal income tax obligation in Wisconsin erased for a two-year period. To qualify for the tax break the corporation must pay at least $200,000 in wages. Thus, a company could hire 20 workers at a wage of $10,000 per year, or 10 workers at $20,000, which are both well below the national average, the former being below the poverty level!
Additionally, what would prevent a company from moving out after the 2 year period??? Furthermore, there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF THAT TAX CUTS INCREASE REVENUE....NONE!.
CB;"I got it allen,create illusion that there are no such thing as "rich democrats and rich liberals" right allen?.
No...you're creating a "diversion." I've never said there's no rich liberals...you're saying it. I'm saying that it's "rich conservatives" that are mounting the attack on unions. That's something you're trying to divert from the issue. Why?? Because it's TRUE!! (care to deny it Tyrone?)
I've shown you that all the polls taken over the last few days shows that MOST Americans are against Walkers position of breaking the union. Thus, your essay should be titled, "Public Sector Unions vs. We the Conservatives."
Post a Comment
<< Home