Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,770 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 871,172
Pageviews Today: 1,296,143Threads Today: 335Posts Today: 7,751
11:43 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1223457
United States
02/18/2011 08:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Walker gins up ‘crisis’ to reward cronies



More...

Wisconsin needs to be fiscally responsible.

There is no question that these are tough times, and they may require tough choices.

But Gov. Scott Walker is not making tough choices. He is making political choices, and they are designed not to balance budgets but to improve his political position and that of his party.

It is for this reason that the governor claims Wisconsin is in such deep financial trouble that Wisconsinites should view this as a crisis moment.

In fact, like just about every other state in the country, Wisconsin is managing in a weak economy. The difference is that Wisconsin is managing better -- or at least it had been managing better until Walker took over. Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 936840
United States
02/18/2011 08:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
link please. no data here
NegativeGhostrider

User ID: 1011642
United States
02/18/2011 08:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Union shill
Et sceleratis sol oritur.
ANNONYMOUS
User ID: 825313
United States
02/18/2011 08:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
bumpbumpbump
UnHinged Loon

User ID: 1250683
United States
02/18/2011 08:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Wisconsin realized they made a mistake at the polls. This governor is nuts.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1193833
United States
02/18/2011 08:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Walker gins up ‘crisis’ to reward cronies



More...

Wisconsin needs to be fiscally responsible.

There is no question that these are tough times, and they may require tough choices.

But Gov. Scott Walker is not making tough choices. He is making political choices, and they are designed not to balance budgets but to improve his political position and that of his party.

It is for this reason that the governor claims Wisconsin is in such deep financial trouble that Wisconsinites should view this as a crisis moment.

In fact, like just about every other state in the country, Wisconsin is managing in a weak economy. The difference is that Wisconsin is managing better -- or at least it had been managing better until Walker took over. Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1223457




aaahhhh more Union spin from the greedy teachers. Pay for your fucking pension and medical like every other fucking person. Union pigs.....
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1081433
United States
02/18/2011 08:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
they made a mistake at the polls
 Quoting: UnHinged Loon


ohappy
Mr. Toppit

User ID: 1158998
United States
02/18/2011 08:52 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Walker gins up ‘crisis’ to reward cronies



More...

Wisconsin needs to be fiscally responsible.

There is no question that these are tough times, and they may require tough choices.

But Gov. Scott Walker is not making tough choices. He is making political choices, and they are designed not to balance budgets but to improve his political position and that of his party.

It is for this reason that the governor claims Wisconsin is in such deep financial trouble that Wisconsinites should view this as a crisis moment.

In fact, like just about every other state in the country, Wisconsin is managing in a weak economy. The difference is that Wisconsin is managing better -- or at least it had been managing better until Walker took over. Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1223457


And maybe you'd like to account for the rest of the $2.7 Billion dollar deficit that occurred under the previous democratic governor?

Your assertion the crisis would not exist is total BS.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1063859
United States
02/18/2011 08:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Allowing people to keep their own money is not a "give away", asshat!
TheMacaroni
User ID: 1157311
United States
02/18/2011 09:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2banana2 [link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1255380
United States
02/18/2011 09:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
The people protesting the cuts are mentally unstable. They have an abnormality of the brain that allows them to believe that a government can spend more than it takes in forever without any consequences. They are like children that want to eat nothing but candy all day. Eventually, the mature adult has to step in and say "No". Because of this mental imbalance, these protesters are a danger not only to themselves but also the decent and civilized people that go to work everyday and whose taxes pay their bloated salaries. The governor is doing his job, standing up for the taxpaying citizens of his state instead of the parasitic union special interests. Unions are parasitic scum that need to be broken up and dissolved.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859


I'm sorry, you seem to misunderstand how the world works so please let me correct you.


The people whom are for the dissolution of organized labor are the ones whom are mentally unstable. Yes, if the situation was black and white as you describe, and these people had overspent money they didn't have, and were personally responsible for this, then perhaps forcing "austerity" upon them is justified. Unfortunately, and I know this may upset some of the selfish people who look to displace their rage onto a certain population segment i.e. unions, teachers, govt. employees., etc. but these people are NOT responsible for this mess.

Here, let me try to make this more simple for those who may not comprehend this. Anyone who has EVER, at ANY time, paid attention or studied economics of "capitalism" at ALL realizes that in capitalism there are only 2 segments of the population. These two, are Capital and Labor.

Since the majority of the population has little to no capital or access to means of productions, they sell their "labor" at a price to be able to use said means of production. Thus, this segment of the population is able to survive.

Capital, the other faction in the equation, are those whom own the means of production and possess "capital" for which to invest. Thus, Capital, employs the use of labor so that it may continue to thrive.

Now, notice how each of those descriptions end. One ends to survive, and the other to thrive. Inherently, since profit (for those uneducated, true profit is an act of creation and addition of value, not a high-speed trading program) in this physical world is inarguably limited, when either side gains an advantage it comes at the disadvantage of the opposing class.

Now to the point. Economics is governed by another law known as 'supply and demand'. How S&D fit into the equation is where our story truly begins in terms of globalization. I'm sure anyone reading this forum has been paying attention for a decent period of time so it comes as no shock to hear "our" (see Their) media exclaim of the benefits of globalization.

And Yes, globalization does have benefits, but only for the capital class. Back to the concept of S&D. In a free market, prices and wages are set by the consumer and the market based on value, and this is where the agreed upon compensation between employee (Labor), and employer (Capital) is formed. As history as well as statistics has shown, wealth tends to aggregate toward a small percentage over time thus providing leverage for which capital may negotiate their prices.

Imagine a small city, and in this city are 100 people. Now out of these 100 people, only 5 belong the Capital class, and the other 95 belong to labor. Now what do you suppose happens, when all of the other 95 people, with no means of production (see manufacturing)are able to survive, eat, and afford shelter only by becoming employed through said Capital class. No problems yet right?

Next we'll add an extra dose of reality to our example by saying that these 5 Capital owners only have a need for 85 employees and not 95. (See Unemployment rate of approx 10%)[Or if you really read between the lines, they do have a need for atleast 90, but will pronounce in various 'owned' media publications how times have been rough for them so they can only hire 85] Well the employees begin offering their services to Capital for lower and lower rates, because as we can see their is a heavy demand for such employment if it the only way to SURVIVE and eat. Now what happens one year later to our town? Well, Capital, has gone through the city and has searched the lowest bidders, and then proceeded to explain to the unemployed if they will not lower their bid (Wages) to meet the reductions of other citizens, than they will remain unemployed.

Now the whole town is awash with chaos as wages continue to decrease through demand, but prices remain the same and the people who now have employment, don't have enough resources. They must now choose, will they eat, or will they have a place to live... and thats just the beginning...




While I admit the above story could have been slightly more articulate, you'll have to forgive me as I incinerated a few plants prior to opening and reading this thread.

Now, the real question... How can this time tested fact/tragedy of the economics of capitalism in which Capital, using shortages (real or artificial) to take advantange of and exploit labor, be prevented.

Well for those of you who still haven't gotten it, its called COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. Now let me make this even more painfully clear. Here's how our example goes in our small town with COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (See unions). Well now, our 5 members of the Capital class have decided to go around town to find the lowest bidder so that their profit margins can be as high as physically attainable. Unfortunately, and to their suprise, Labor, as a society, rather than fighting amonst themselves, paid attention to what Capital did the last town they came through, and instead of fighting each other to see who can be paid the least, they decided to form a COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Agreement (See union).

All 95 of the towns people recognize the need to work and desire to do so. They also realize that capital maintains leverage while they are divided and competing amongst themselves, but should they be able to reconcile their (meaningless) differences with each other and if they ALL agree to REFUSE to work for any amount of $$ (money), less than said agreement, then the power of balance and leverage now swing in the opposite direction. Now Capital has two choices, let itself die (or as Gerald Celente likes to say, "take a hair cut" because production shuts down with out the needed labor input. Or Option 2, they agree to pay fair and reasonable wages. Now, while capital remains profitable(See Thriving), Labor, now has the resources it needs to not only afford shelter, food, and fuel, but now has capital of its own to use to invest in society, and perhaps escape the bondage known as wage- slavery. Now Labor AND Capital thrive!!

America, really the world, is like the above mentioned town. We have two choices, we can thrive together, or we can do as the poster I quoted and complain, blame, and displace our feelings of true cause of society's problems.

Sure its the "greedy teachers" or the "evil labor unions" or "those people who have a different skin tone or religion than 'us". Its all their fault.

Perhaps, rather than being critical of people whom have the spine and courage to stand up, shake off the chains of division and hatred, and truely fight for a better future, perhaps, you should rethink, whether or not you are the problem...NOT them.

One last point: The finances of all 50 states as well as the federal entity are beyond repair. Aside from a bankruptcy which clears the fiat debt heaped onto our society, there is little to nothing reduced benifits or spending cuts can do.

Yes, something must be done to fix our fiscal soundness. But, NO, IT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT the correct solution to force "austerity" on ANY segment of the population. We may have run into fiscal trouble, but our solution to this problem needs to come from an entirely different archetype.

For centuries, organized capital has exploited the divided common people and aggregated as much power and wealth as it could, from whatever source was easiest to take it from. Do you understand why the elite are referred to as INTERNATIONAL Bankers? Because they have no allegiance to any country.

Would you like to know why they are so eager to set up a one world government? Because they are AFRAID of the Power of the state (please do not associate our current fascistic regime with the word state, I am referring to "the state" as any free government that understands quite well the laws of economics and employs safeguards(and regulations) to level the playing field between capital and labor. The state is one of the only vehicles with enough wealth, resources, and power that can prevent the "Giant Vampire Squid" from sucking the life out of humanity.

Now second only to the state in power to protect citizens of the Labor class, are the unions. So if you want to erase one of the last vestiges of power that the Labor class has to defend itself, please feel free. But perhaps history may not agree with your interpretation of the solution.

So I rebuke you, and say that those fighting against the people protesting the cuts, are the ones whom are mentally unfit. No, it is not possible for a government or entity to spend more than it has forever, but asking the citizens of state to pay for this fiat "debt" is akin to this example.

Imagine a family, a father, a mother, and two sons sitting together around a dinner table (yes in America, I know this is a shocking concept that may be hard to imagine) discussing their new budget. As it turns out one of the sons recently placed some huge bets on a new gambling attraction in New York called Toxic MBS. Unfortunately he leveraged himself to the hilt prior to going and after losing, he now owes millions. Well like good parents they say, our child is "too big to fail" so we'll bail him out. And so they do, thus liquidating their retirement, 401k, IRA, and all other investments including a beach house and all of their property other than the house they live in.

The parents now have tough choices, as the amount they raised to cover the bad bets still was short of the figure necessary to clear the debt. They decide to take on emergency loans with astronomical interest, as there is no other way to raise capital, but they have no choice since those are all they are approved for. Now looking at their income statement and balance sheet, the family realizes they now have to cut back on their lifestyle drastically since the interest is so high on all of their loans.

Ok so what gets cut from the budget? Does dad cut his Martial arts classes? He swears they are for self-defense but the majority of the classes are really about aggressive and confrontational "interventionalism"?

Does mom cut her HomeYard Security Budget, which she swears prevents terrorists from destroying the garden, but she has no actual proof?

Ok well surely they wouldn't cut funding to little Johnny's music class would they? And they definitely wouldn't cut back on how much they pay for food for their children, not when they could cut back on just those two and have more than enough to at least temporarily alleviate the fiscal burdens, right?

Unfortunately though, The Answer, if you live anywhere in the western world is YES. The only items on the budget that are cut are ones whom affect the children. But hey who cares, we don't have to acknowledge their input, their just children, useless eaters really...


And that is what you are asking. You are asking the children of the American family (and please do not interpret that condescendingly, it is used only in relation to above story), to stop their education, and deal with "eating a little less", because they don't want candy, they just want to achieve atleast slightly above sustenance.


Conclusion: Read the REAL history of labor day. And since certain people seem to be incapable of understanding, I'll use your own example. Guess what? If you want to sacrifice your own and others well being and dissolve society's protection against exploitation, then please, LET ME BE THE MATURE ADULT and step in and say:

"NO"
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1248143
United States
02/18/2011 09:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
I think the gov. should just get it over with and fire the teachers - once he relaxes the child labor laws Wisconsin kids will all be working in factories anyway.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1100531
United States
02/18/2011 09:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Wisconsin realized they made a mistake at the polls. This governor is nuts.
 Quoting: UnHinged Loon


bsflagbsflagbsflagbsflagbsflagbsflagbsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1063859
United States
02/18/2011 09:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
The people protesting the cuts are mentally unstable. They have an abnormality of the brain that allows them to believe that a government can spend more than it takes in forever without any consequences. They are like children that want to eat nothing but candy all day. Eventually, the mature adult has to step in and say "No". Because of this mental imbalance, these protesters are a danger not only to themselves but also the decent and civilized people that go to work everyday and whose taxes pay their bloated salaries. The governor is doing his job, standing up for the taxpaying citizens of his state instead of the parasitic union special interests. Unions are parasitic scum that need to be broken up and dissolved.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1153822
United States
02/18/2011 09:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Lets have a link for this otherwise its just a steaming pile of Horse shit.


bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1248143
United States
02/18/2011 09:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Allowing people to keep their own money is not a "give away", asshat!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859


Scott actually spent the money on programs. These aren't tax cuts. The only people keeping that money are the wealthy and corporate interests that helped get him elected and now benefit from the spending.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1248143
United States
02/18/2011 09:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
The people protesting the cuts are mentally unstable. ... Unions are parasitic scum that need to be broken up and dissolved.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859


This protest isn't about "cuts". The protests are an attempt to keep the governor from eliminating the right to remove the right to collective bargaining. Unions of course have tremendous problems - but do you also spend a proportional amount of time focusing on the incredible corporate malfeasance and welfare in this country?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1063859
United States
02/18/2011 09:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Unions are not "middle class". They are "government-protected class". They have formed a mafia-like cabal with democrat politicians who have conspired with them to continue their crooked quid pro quo relationship in perpetuity, funded with taxpayer dollars from private sector citizens. The REAL "middle class "is the unprotected private sector workers who Democrat politicians prey on to support their cabal. You can equate the Democrat / union cabal to a pack of unquenchable zombies who's sole function is to seek out and suck the life blood out of the productive citizenry.

HERE COME SOME UNION WORKERS NOW! RUN FOR YOUR WALLETS!!!!
oniongrass

User ID: 1193082
United States
02/18/2011 09:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Those talking about the "dignity of labor" probably haven't had recent contact with public school administrators and teachers. They act like upper class these days!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1012292
United States
02/18/2011 09:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Unions are not "middle class". They are "government-protected class". They have formed a mafia-like cabal with democrat politicians who have conspired with them to continue their crooked quid pro quo relationship in perpetuity, funded with taxpayer dollars from private sector citizens. The REAL "middle class "is the unprotected private sector workers who Democrat politicians prey on to support their cabal. You can equate the Democrat / union cabal to a pack of unquenchable zombies who's sole function is to seek out and suck the life blood out of the productive citizenry.

HERE COME SOME UNION WORKERS NOW! RUN FOR YOUR WALLETS!!!!

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859



Hey, Buddy, WAKE UP, I promise you it is not the "evil" labor unions that have caused the problems we are in today...Why are people letting "them" divide and conquer us like ALWAYS. When are idiots in this country going to wake up and realize that we (progressives, conservatives, liberals, tea-baggers, etc...) have way more in common than the media and TPTB want us to know. Their worst nightmare is seeing the American people come together like they did in Egypt.

Not that it will ever happen, but it's frustrating to see the same misguided hate day in and day out.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1207306
United States
02/18/2011 09:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
The people protesting the cuts are mentally unstable. They have an abnormality of the brain that allows them to believe that a government can spend more than it takes in forever without any consequences. They are like children that want to eat nothing but candy all day. Eventually, the mature adult has to step in and say "No". Because of this mental imbalance, these protesters are a danger not only to themselves but also the decent and civilized people that go to work everyday and whose taxes pay their bloated salaries. The governor is doing his job, standing up for the taxpaying citizens of his state instead of the parasitic union special interests. Unions are parasitic scum that need to be broken up and dissolved.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859


I'm sorry, you seem to misunderstand how the world works so please let me correct you.


The people whom are for the dissolution of organized labor are the ones whom are mentally unstable. Yes, if the situation was black and white as you describe, and these people had overspent money they didn't have, and were personally responsible for this, then perhaps forcing "austerity" upon them is justified. Unfortunately, and I know this may upset some of the selfish people who look to displace their rage onto a certain population segment i.e. unions, teachers, govt. employees., etc. but these people are NOT responsible for this mess.

Here, let me try to make this more simple for those who may not comprehend this. Anyone who has EVER, at ANY time, paid attention or studied economics of "capitalism" at ALL realizes that in capitalism there are only 2 segments of the population. These two, are Capital and Labor.

Since the majority of the population has little to no capital or access to means of productions, they sell their "labor" at a price to be able to use said means of production. Thus, this segment of the population is able to survive.

Capital, the other faction in the equation, are those whom own the means of production and possess "capital" for which to invest. Thus, Capital, employs the use of labor so that it may continue to thrive.

Now, notice how each of those descriptions end. One ends to survive, and the other to thrive. Inherently, since profit (for those uneducated, true profit is an act of creation and addition of value, not a high-speed trading program) in this physical world is inarguably limited, when either side gains an advantage it comes at the disadvantage of the opposing class.

Now to the point. Economics is governed by another law known as 'supply and demand'. How S&D fit into the equation is where our story truly begins in terms of globalization. I'm sure anyone reading this forum has been paying attention for a decent period of time so it comes as no shock to hear "our" (see Their) media exclaim of the benefits of globalization.

And Yes, globalization does have benefits, but only for the capital class. Back to the concept of S&D. In a free market, prices and wages are set by the consumer and the market based on value, and this is where the agreed upon compensation between employee (Labor), and employer (Capital) is formed. As history as well as statistics has shown, wealth tends to aggregate toward a small percentage over time thus providing leverage for which capital may negotiate their prices.

Imagine a small city, and in this city are 100 people. Now out of these 100 people, only 5 belong the Capital class, and the other 95 belong to labor. Now what do you suppose happens, when all of the other 95 people, with no means of production (see manufacturing)are able to survive, eat, and afford shelter only by becoming employed through said Capital class. No problems yet right?

Next we'll add an extra dose of reality to our example by saying that these 5 Capital owners only have a need for 85 employees and not 95. (See Unemployment rate of approx 10%)[Or if you really read between the lines, they do have a need for atleast 90, but will pronounce in various 'owned' media publications how times have been rough for them so they can only hire 85] Well the employees begin offering their services to Capital for lower and lower rates, because as we can see their is a heavy demand for such employment if it the only way to SURVIVE and eat. Now what happens one year later to our town? Well, Capital, has gone through the city and has searched the lowest bidders, and then proceeded to explain to the unemployed if they will not lower their bid (Wages) to meet the reductions of other citizens, than they will remain unemployed.

Now the whole town is awash with chaos as wages continue to decrease through demand, but prices remain the same and the people who now have employment, don't have enough resources. They must now choose, will they eat, or will they have a place to live... and thats just the beginning...




While I admit the above story could have been slightly more articulate, you'll have to forgive me as I incinerated a few plants prior to opening and reading this thread.

Now, the real question... How can this time tested fact/tragedy of the economics of capitalism in which Capital, using shortages (real or artificial) to take advantange of and exploit labor, be prevented.

Well for those of you who still haven't gotten it, its called COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. Now let me make this even more painfully clear. Here's how our example goes in our small town with COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (See unions). Well now, our 5 members of the Capital class have decided to go around town to find the lowest bidder so that their profit margins can be as high as physically attainable. Unfortunately, and to their suprise, Labor, as a society, rather than fighting amonst themselves, paid attention to what Capital did the last town they came through, and instead of fighting each other to see who can be paid the least, they decided to form a COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Agreement (See union).

All 95 of the towns people recognize the need to work and desire to do so. They also realize that capital maintains leverage while they are divided and competing amongst themselves, but should they be able to reconcile their (meaningless) differences with each other and if they ALL agree to REFUSE to work for any amount of $$ (money), less than said agreement, then the power of balance and leverage now swing in the opposite direction. Now Capital has two choices, let itself die (or as Gerald Celente likes to say, "take a hair cut" because production shuts down with out the needed labor input. Or Option 2, they agree to pay fair and reasonable wages. Now, while capital remains profitable(See Thriving), Labor, now has the resources it needs to not only afford shelter, food, and fuel, but now has capital of its own to use to invest in society, and perhaps escape the bondage known as wage- slavery. Now Labor AND Capital thrive!!

America, really the world, is like the above mentioned town. We have two choices, we can thrive together, or we can do as the poster I quoted and complain, blame, and displace our feelings of true cause of society's problems.

Sure its the "greedy teachers" or the "evil labor unions" or "those people who have a different skin tone or religion than 'us". Its all their fault.

Perhaps, rather than being critical of people whom have the spine and courage to stand up, shake off the chains of division and hatred, and truely fight for a better future, perhaps, you should rethink, whether or not you are the problem...NOT them.

One last point: The finances of all 50 states as well as the federal entity are beyond repair. Aside from a bankruptcy which clears the fiat debt heaped onto our society, there is little to nothing reduced benifits or spending cuts can do.

Yes, something must be done to fix our fiscal soundness. But, NO, IT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT the correct solution to force "austerity" on ANY segment of the population. We may have run into fiscal trouble, but our solution to this problem needs to come from an entirely different archetype.

For centuries, organized capital has exploited the divided common people and aggregated as much power and wealth as it could, from whatever source was easiest to take it from. Do you understand why the elite are referred to as INTERNATIONAL Bankers? Because they have no allegiance to any country.

Would you like to know why they are so eager to set up a one world government? Because they are AFRAID of the Power of the state (please do not associate our current fascistic regime with the word state, I am referring to "the state" as any free government that understands quite well the laws of economics and employs safeguards(and regulations) to level the playing field between capital and labor. The state is one of the only vehicles with enough wealth, resources, and power that can prevent the "Giant Vampire Squid" from sucking the life out of humanity.

Now second only to the state in power to protect citizens of the Labor class, are the unions. So if you want to erase one of the last vestiges of power that the Labor class has to defend itself, please feel free. But perhaps history may not agree with your interpretation of the solution.

So I rebuke you, and say that those fighting against the people protesting the cuts, are the ones whom are mentally unfit. No, it is not possible for a government or entity to spend more than it has forever, but asking the citizens of state to pay for this fiat "debt" is akin to this example.

Imagine a family, a father, a mother, and two sons sitting together around a dinner table (yes in America, I know this is a shocking concept that may be hard to imagine) discussing their new budget. As it turns out one of the sons recently placed some huge bets on a new gambling attraction in New York called Toxic MBS. Unfortunately he leveraged himself to the hilt prior to going and after losing, he now owes millions. Well like good parents they say, our child is "too big to fail" so we'll bail him out. And so they do, thus liquidating their retirement, 401k, IRA, and all other investments including a beach house and all of their property other than the house they live in.

The parents now have tough choices, as the amount they raised to cover the bad bets still was short of the figure necessary to clear the debt. They decide to take on emergency loans with astronomical interest, as there is no other way to raise capital, but they have no choice since those are all they are approved for. Now looking at their income statement and balance sheet, the family realizes they now have to cut back on their lifestyle drastically since the interest is so high on all of their loans.

Ok so what gets cut from the budget? Does dad cut his Martial arts classes? He swears they are for self-defense but the majority of the classes are really about aggressive and confrontational "interventionalism"?

Does mom cut her HomeYard Security Budget, which she swears prevents terrorists from destroying the garden, but she has no actual proof?

Ok well surely they wouldn't cut funding to little Johnny's music class would they? And they definitely wouldn't cut back on how much they pay for food for their children, not when they could cut back on just those two and have more than enough to at least temporarily alleviate the fiscal burdens, right?

Unfortunately though, The Answer, if you live anywhere in the western world is YES. The only items on the budget that are cut are ones whom affect the children. But hey who cares, we don't have to acknowledge their input, their just children, useless eaters really...


And that is what you are asking. You are asking the children of the American family (and please do not interpret that condescendingly, it is used only in relation to above story), to stop their education, and deal with "eating a little less", because they don't want candy, they just want to achieve atleast slightly above sustenance.


Conclusion: Read the REAL history of labor day. And since certain people seem to be incapable of understanding, I'll use your own example. Guess what? If you want to sacrifice your own and others well being and dissolve society's protection against exploitation, then please, LET ME BE THE MATURE ADULT and step in and say:

"NO"
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1255380


Bravo! Well put.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 651330
United States
02/18/2011 09:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
i have a vacation place in WI.... this is one ass backwards state....They have numerous ways to fix their budget problem besides the way they are....i agree make them pay more for their benefits, but going to the extent of what they are trying to do now, is causing way more problems then what it is worth.
UnHinged Loon

User ID: 1250683
United States
02/18/2011 10:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
This governor also wanted to make the WI Nat Guard his own personal army. This republican is nutcase!
Fearitself
User ID: 1271183
United States
02/19/2011 07:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
[link to host.madison.com]

That's a great read. Walker has no shame.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1252153
United States
02/19/2011 09:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
[link to host.madison.com]

That's a great read. Walker has no shame.
 Quoting: Fearitself 1271183



Yup. (That's the link for the piece the OP posted above...for those that were asking for said link.)

And for those on this forum that can actually read past an 8th grade level, here are the facts from the state's own legislative fiscal bureau....

[link to legis.wisconsin.gov]

Walker is a flat-out liar.
Lisha
User ID: 1271348
United States
02/19/2011 11:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
So people say we need to pay our fair share, lets talk about it, if that was the only issue than why has this not been resolved. I believe we have agreed 100 percent to the financial constraints in this bill, all we ask is for our right to bargain collectively. If this is just about a deficit why won't the governor negotiate.. why is this his way or no way...

Let's see what else, oh yeah lets talk about the fact that public employees on average make 25 percent less than their counter parts.. So even if these are modest changes they hit us a lot harder, but we are willing to concede. Scott Walker wants to balance the budget on our backs, and take our voices at the same time.. But the people of Wisconsin are not an means to his end of Union busting and controlling Health care in Wisconsin.. Let our voices be heard.. Come to the table and respect our right to bargain collectively.. I mean this is about the budget right...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1261315
United States
02/19/2011 11:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
This is all I will say on the entire matter...


Only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators and have deemed it illegal. Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores are as follows:

South Carolina -50th
North Carolina -49th
Georgia -48th
...Texas -47th
Virginia -44th

Wisconsin is currently 2nd.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1270448
United States
02/19/2011 11:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Walker gins up ‘crisis’ to reward cronies



More...

Wisconsin needs to be fiscally responsible.

There is no question that these are tough times, and they may require tough choices.

But Gov. Scott Walker is not making tough choices. He is making political choices, and they are designed not to balance budgets but to improve his political position and that of his party.

It is for this reason that the governor claims Wisconsin is in such deep financial trouble that Wisconsinites should view this as a crisis moment.

In fact, like just about every other state in the country, Wisconsin is managing in a weak economy. The difference is that Wisconsin is managing better -- or at least it had been managing better until Walker took over. Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1223457




aaahhhh more Union spin from the greedy teachers. Pay for your fucking pension and medical like every other fucking person. Union pigs.....
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1193833


lol you look really smart for not knowing that the people protesting are protesting because he wants to remove their right to bargain...they already said they would do everything else..

it is you you fucking shill that needs to go cry more because you were never loved as a child.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1252153
United States
02/20/2011 12:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
This is all I will say on the entire matter...


Only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators and have deemed it illegal. Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores are as follows:

South Carolina -50th
North Carolina -49th
Georgia -48th
...Texas -47th
Virginia -44th

Wisconsin is currently 2nd.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1261315


Great point. Thanks for bringing it up.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1270448
United States
02/20/2011 12:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
The people protesting the cuts are mentally unstable. They have an abnormality of the brain that allows them to believe that a government can spend more than it takes in forever without any consequences. They are like children that want to eat nothing but candy all day. Eventually, the mature adult has to step in and say "No". Because of this mental imbalance, these protesters are a danger not only to themselves but also the decent and civilized people that go to work everyday and whose taxes pay their bloated salaries. The governor is doing his job, standing up for the taxpaying citizens of his state instead of the parasitic union special interests. Unions are parasitic scum that need to be broken up and dissolved.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1063859



and you sound like a koch bother
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 990655
United States
02/20/2011 12:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: WISCONSIN GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER GIVES AWAY 137 MILLION, THEN CLAIMS DEFICIT FOR STATE
Just fire the useless pieces of shit. Why all the drama?