State Supreme Court reinstates union law; Assembly delays budget debate; Concealed carry clears Senate
June 15, 2011 at 2:28 am in River Falls Journal
Wisconsin Legislature
Most collective bargaining powers will soon disappear for thousands of unionized public employees in Wisconsin.
“Most collective bargaining powers will soon disappear for thousands of unionized public employees in Wisconsin.”
And many more thousands of WI taxpayers will be able to keep some of their hard earned money.
DANIMAL, I didn’t want my question from the Kind article discussion to disappear before you answered, so I pasted it into this discussion.
danimal said: On June 14, 2011 at 4:00 PM
Flat tax is easy to comprehend, which is why most people buy it on the surface, but when you look at it more closedly you find it benefits the wealthy way, way, way too much. Do some more reading on it.
However, I do think there’s merit moving away some from income and instead tax purchases. This we can negotiate, gs, but negotiation’s no longer an option.
*
g s said: On June 14, 2011 at 7:34 PM
danimal, please define “wealthy†in specific terms of income/year.
Who uses the most government services? The poor or wealthy (as per your definition.)
There are a lot of people in this country who have become ‘wealthy’ as a result of their determination, long hours of work, and taking risks. If you think the government should have more of their money through taxes, what incentive is there for a person to put in those long hours or take the risk?
Aren’t never-ending taxpayer funded social safetynets an incentive for people NOT to take the risk, work (80 hours or 10 hours/week), and remain taking handouts?
My parents generation believed it was shameful to take government handouts if a person was physically able to work, even if it meant pitching manure, picking vegetables, digging ditches.
There were jobs available during the extended unemployment benefit period passed by the Dems that weren’t being filled because the work was “too hardâ€, or paid less than govt money. How do you view the people who took the “free†govt money and sat on the couch? Are they good people? Do they deserve free handouts?
(added today) you said: “This we can negotiate, gs, but negotiation’s no longer an option”. How can a person negotiate if it (negotiation) is no longer an option? That sounds like something a bully says!
please answer with specifics. thank you
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
35
One guy, thank you for the statistics, and the sources of those stats.
Actually, I don’t “fear” this state or this nation being dragged into bankruptcy, probably because I was raised by parents who lived through the depression and taught financial responsibility. I am also one of those entrepreneurs hit hard by “life”, and today would qualify for all sorts of assistance. I don’t go looking for it because I’m sure there are others more in need. But, I also don’t have a cell phone, cable TV, go out to eat, take vacations, etc. Poverty is a manageable lifestyle when “wants” and “needs” and responsibilities (property taxes, business taxes, utility bills, etc) are correctly prioritized.
The $20/household (very rough guesstimate for illustration purposes) saved because now my school district can shop for cost effective health insurance for teachers is a big deal when that is a week of grocery money.
I don’t begrudge helping those who need help. I do have a problem with people who “need” a cell phone to text while shopping while tax dollars go to pay the food bill. Or people who have been unemployed for 2 years, on all sorts of assistance, and suddenly their house has a satellite dish.
There is a portion of the population who wants something for nothing, and think living in this country entitles him/her to all sorts of “rights” paid for by others.
Some of those people really do need help; others just want everyone to pay for a bike path or grant money so one family can have their own personal wind turbine.
Where is the point “helping people” changes to the government taking and redistributing? That is the question I raise, and that is the question no one on the left will answer with specifics.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
46 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
21
One Guy, I’ve climbed out of the search engine black hole that yielded surprisingly little specific info, the best I could do to find a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story from April, 2011. There is a link in the article to a very long WI Audit Report, 2009-2010.
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/120550974.html
I do agree with you many honest people use public assistance, and I imagine for many of them it is a hard decision to “take a handout.” But, as usual, it is the bad apples that spoil everything.
I do like your suggestion anyone receiving public assistance provide some productive labor back to our society. I think such a mandatory requirement would weed out the lazy abusers, and personally I’d feel he/she was earning the money for the “help.” But is it politically possible?
“Do people make poor choices with their money? Absolutely. Is it the government’s job to police those decisions? I’m not so sure.”
The government is telling people all the time how they must spend their money. Why will I be forced to buy health insurance or be penalized by the IRS? Because the government says so.
Why can’t I take part in privatized social security? Because the government says I can’t. And yet, Galveston Co, TX opted out of SS in the 1980′s, and given today’s market conditions are getting greater monetary benefits. (Congress closed that loophole)
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v62n1/v62n1p47.pdf
One Guy, I really prefer the government have less impact on everyone, of every economic class. My parents taught me life isn’t fair, and sometimes it stinks. They taught me to look within for answers, not put my hand out expecting others to put something in my hand. They taught ME to give to people who needed help.
It seems those old values have been replaced with: the government has to give the help, and the only way the government can give the help is to take money from others and then hand it out according to how some government employees think it should be handed out according to some criteria some government employees designed. (Many of these people are not are elected representatives and answer to….who????)
Is this part of some nefarious plan? I don’t know. This is where people need to utilize their curiosity, ask him/her self if the information being given is accurate and complete, and challenge their own beliefs. I do believe everything should be questioned, regardless of the news source or person. I do believe money trails need to be exposed, and people confronted with questions why they are accepting that money and for what purpose.
Want a challenge? search “agenda 21″.
I enjoy discussing with you One Guy. I think we share common values and concerns, but thankfully and respectfully disagree enough that I feel challenged.
And still my question is unanswered: How much income/year does a person have to make to be “wealthy?” (specific details on what is included in that number, i.e. salary, benefits)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
“Capitol Police report three arrests – two for possessing drug paraphernalia and one for disorderly conduct.”
2 out of 100? Sounds like they need to conduct randomn drug testing on the workers.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
5
Let’s rewrite this story as if it were not just paraphrased by a left wing hack. The lead would be “The State Supreme Court voted Tuesday to overturn a Dane County Circuit Judge who overstepped her constitutional authority in halting implementation of the law.”
Rather than attempting to highlight the “divisiveness” of the decision by characterizing the court as “sharply divided” (in fact, only Judge Abrahamson was strongly opposed, two other justices concurred in part and dissented in part) it should be acknowledged Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi’s erroneous and partisan decision actually enabled much of the acrimony and conflict in Madison.
The editorial-as-news story goes on to suggest Judge Sumi’s decision was justified because the joint Senate-Assembly conference committee approved it without the public notice it is not required to give. This is unbelievable bias. The point of the Supreme Court’s decision was to invalidate the lower court ruling because the open meetings law was not violated. A County judge with a political agenda “invaded the legislature’s constitutional powers” and “erred in enjoining the publication and further implementation of the Act.”
What part of Judge Sumi was dead wrong about the legal process and the state constitution does our aspiring opinion writer not understand?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45 
9
Breaking News: Sec of State La Follete is attempting to “delay publication” of the CB law until June 28.
information at Althouse.blogspot.com, along with her lawyer-based opinion on La Follete’s actions.
(don’t click on comments if you can’t tolerate free speech)
unbelievable…..
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
7
Truly unbelievable, but I think the most bizarre quote in this article is:
“Assembly Democratic leader Peter Barca said the court found that the Legislature is above the law.”
What? His logic is too tortured to be considered circular, so I can only conclude that he is just barking mad.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
33
I can see that you may not have heard of circular logic before. Circular logic is a faulty form of reasoning in which X is used to prove Y, and Y is used to prove X.
There’s another form of reasoning that can be found on discussion forums. I call it “shotgun reasoning.” This occurs when a person posts a reply that at first appears to be relevant to its parent post, but quickly degenerates into a series of unrelated, disconnected, and unsubstantiated rants. Kind of like slinging a shovelful of crap against a wall to see what sticks.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
1
Un Believable,
Thanks for the chuckle and “technical” term that covers most of Saul Alininsky’s Rules for Radicals.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
2
>>The court’s four conservative justices voted to reinstate the union limits.
Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson gave a stinging dissent, accusing the majority of making a hasty decision and setting forth facts without evidence.<< (from the original article)
It'll be eight long years before Wisconsin voters will have the chance to remove Abrahamson's stinger, according to http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Shirley_Abrahamson .
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
3
Of course, she is 77 years old. Just sayin.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
I suppose it’s possible that she’ll carc it before the end of her term…after all, she’s already been on the supreme court 35 years.
Someone should inform her that she has retirement benefits….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
31
The new data shows that the top-earning 25% of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5% of the nation’s income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86%). The top 1% of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2% of the nation’s income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4% of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1% of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95% of tax returns.”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
3
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
30
Wait…I get 100% true…see how I did that? “danimal the independent” knows exactly what I did, and it should be obvious to everyone.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/scott-walker/statements/byruling/true/
Are you paid by the post “danimal?”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
5 
19
I’d like to play too!
Using the “Obama rule” (blame the previous administration) for Doyle. He comes out pretty well, batting .750 on the positive side….not bad for decent economic times and a Democrat majority legislature. But the falsey rated a pants on fire, IMO.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/jim-doyle/
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20 
3
I assume you missed the point of my post pointing out the obvious clipping of Politifact’s Walker page in order to make it seem 100% of his claims were lies. The only claim I was making was that “daminal” purposely wanted to mislead people with that post.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
3
No, we got it and know you were sincerely trying to balance his fairy tale story. You seem to be a person interested in presenting truthful facts; dan….well, I think he’s just regurgitating the latest DNC/union email talking points.
There are times when he writes clearly and succinctly. Other times I just fondly ignore him. I’m still waiting for his answers to my questions…..
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
1
danimal, if you spent 1/10 of your time working as you do regurgitating CNN’s & MSNBC’s talking points you wouldn’t need to rely on your neighbor’s to support you. Take some of that bitterness and envy and do something productive, you’d feel a lot better about yourself. The rich that you despise are the people who create jobs. As long you radical libs keep making the cost of doing business more expensive, you’re punishing the very people you say you want to help.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
34
I’m a middle class, tax-paying citizen and I’m glad Walker’s not stealing as much of my salary to pay for another public worker’s benefits and pensions. I’m still required to contribute to 88% of their benefits and 95% of their pensions, but what Walker accomplished is a baby step and good start. Now, let’s working on making these public workers contribute 20% to their own benefits and 10% to their own pensions. I pay 100% of my pension, no reason the entitled public employees don’t do the same.
A majority of the tax-paying citizens who are upset with Walker’s administration never voted for him to begin with. Neither he nor the 6 Republican’s up for recall disenfranchised any of these people. They did what they campaigned on and they won their elections. The same goes for the 3 democrats up for recall. They didn’t disenfranchise the voters that recalled them. I’m sure none campaigned on fleeing the state and neglecting their duties, but they represented the people that voted them into office. These recalls are a joke and the law needs to be corrected.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
4
The “Blutarsky/Feingold Philosophy” (“It’s not over until we say it’s over”) recently posted at Althouse.blogspot.com along with the Constitutional Law professor’s opinion on the lawsuit filed by several unions against the CB law in federal court.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
3