Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
bruce borland
152 Followers
requestfor
194 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
stonecircle
2052 Followers
anomaly100Feb 27, 2011
I'm not bending over while they screw us all. Let's put an end to this in Wisconsin.
eraptorFeb 27, 2011
They won't stop in Wisconsin. We'll need to confront these anti-American, seditious elements head on.
Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, Richard Mellon Scaife and other corrupting influences (i.e., financial services industry) must be confronted and opposed at every juncture. The best way to do that would be to hit them where it hurts most...their wallets. Deprive them of financial resources and their corrupting influence will rapidly deteriorate. After all, this is the SAME strategy they are using against the country, American people and unions.
marcamillionFeb 27, 2011
I know this is going to get voted down...but could it be that Unions really are killing the states ?
Look at what The Teacher's union is doing to the educational system. There is no longer a need for unions when there are labor laws to protect workers. If you haven't watched Waiting for Superman, you should before you downvote this comment.
Unions largely serve for the aggrandizement of their leaders - along with their large salaries and crazy perks.
For what it's worth, I am not fan of Murdoch and don't know enough about the Koch brothers to say whether or not I support them. But this hysteria around Wisconsin is kinda ridiculous.
Oh, and I supported Obama and would NEVER vote for Palin or any of the right-wing nuts. Just saying.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
marcamillionFeb 27, 2011
Btw for anyone that is interested in what's really happening with the Unions, just take a gander through the salaries of the state workers in California - http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/?name=&agency=&salarylevel=100000 (please note those are only for those salaries over $100K).
This is while California has been paying IOUs and cutting benefits to the least-among-us.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
chrisvazquez1Feb 27, 2011
I have seen Waiting for Superman. It's a GREAT documentary. It almost felt unbiased, although a little right-wing at times.
The thing is that it's not necessarily the fact that there are unions that the education system is a mess, it's that the unions ask for too much without granting something in return. Keep in mind that the union keeps the interests of its members as a priority and not of the actual company the members work for. The reason the teachers unions have gotten so much is because no one has had the balls to fight back and tell them that they are asking for too much.
With that said, I would not abolish unions because unions are usually a necessity to make sure that the worker is represented. I would limit union powers though. If it were up to me, I'd pass a law through congress to abolish tenure for a decade in the public school system.
Unions aren't necessarily bad. Here's a little tidbit my mother told me as a child; "every good thing in excess can be a bad thing."
marcamillionFeb 27, 2011
Thanks for the thoughtful reply Chris. Without spoiling the documentary, I have to ask a few questions about your response.
Did you not see what the commissioner of the DC district offered to the teachers at the end ? Did you also see how the union responded ? I don't want to spoil it for those that haven't seen it, so I won't say any more than that.
But your comment about it being a 'little right-wing at times' is quite ironic given that the director & writer is a major democrat. As a matter of fact, he was responsible for Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth". How more left-wing can he be? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0346550/
I do think that perhaps abolishing them altogether might be a bit much in most circumstances, but this time I think the states are dead-on.
How can you have a situation where in order for GM and Chrysler to renegotiate employment contracts and layoff a few workers they had to go through bankruptcy? Bankruptcy!?! Really ?
Something isn't broken with that system ?
I think, inside the unions, the incentives are mis-aligned. The people at the top of the unions make a lot of money, from the fees - so they have a vested interest to stay at the top. If there are no unions, they won't be able to stay at the top.
How else can you explain the Teacher's Union reaction to the commissioner's proposal in Waiting for Superman ?
That proposal was Pro-Teacher + Pro-Student. But Anti-Union.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
chrisvazquez1Feb 27, 2011
Yes, and I thought it was horrible how they didn't accept the proposal. My guess is that the union felt threatened and they didn't want to give up power.
I think I proposed the documentary as a little right-wing because it only stated how unions started, but not how they can be a positive influence in the sectors they serve. I'll state an example, being UPS. UPS is a successful business that is helped run by the unions. They exert their workers, but they get great pay and benefits as well.
I do agree however, that the unions incentives are completely misaligned. The union exists to serve itself, its members, and nothing else.
I would not ban unions, but I would definitely regulate them. You see, I'm not pro-union, but I see how a union can be beneficial and relevant to a corporation and its employees.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
marcamillionFeb 28, 2011
WoW...I am disappointed that these comments got so many downvotes. Not shocked...simply disappointed. Back to HN for me. Digg has really degenerated.
chrisvazquez1Feb 28, 2011
I'm guessing that your intro of, "I know this is going to get voted down...but could it be that Unions really are killing the states?," didn't help much lol. I do think something is weird here though. We're discussing on both ends of the political spectrum and we still got buried. I think I'm being followed by a bury brigade.
kingofweeFeb 27, 2011
I like that Librarians make 60-80k. Time for a move to CA and career change from fixing computers to filing books for me!
chilidogsFeb 27, 2011
Why shouldn't they you moron? They are college graduates in a very specialized field. What do you think that's worth? How do you think it compares to librarians in private universities?
peppermintpigFeb 28, 2011
It doesnt take a college diploma to put books on shelves. I should know, the public high school I attended made me take care of the library for one period because they were unable to put me in aM class. I guess they will take the free labor where they can. The prerequisite to being a decent librarian is to read books. No diploma necessary to legitimize an arbitrary salary increase.
theredwhynoFeb 28, 2011
The fundamental principle at work here is that unions, like any organisation (or bureaucracy, for that matter) are formed to address a problem. In the case of most trade unions which began in the 1930s, it was the boldfaced abuse of workers--low pay, dangerous conditions, long hours, etc.--that made unions a necessary development.
However, once a union grows to the point where people are given paid administrative jobs for the union itself (rather than the employer of the workers the union represents), not only does a power structure develop, but more importantly a shift in purpose. No longer does the union exist solely to protect the rights of the workers, but instead must perpetuate its existence for the sake of those supported by the union itself. Not all unions are bad (if they're filling a purpose), but not all unions are benevolent simply by virtue of being unions.
anakastFeb 27, 2011
Unions have nearly f**ked my socialist sympathetic country to the ground. The film industry nearly self-destructed because of them recently. There should be far tougher laws regulated them.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
paranor01Feb 27, 2011
Here I thought the demon destroying the film industry was P2P. And any country which isn't a dictatorship could be called socialist sympathetic. I smell troll dung coming from you.
dayal911Feb 27, 2011
There is absolutely nothing in the article backing the premise that Murdoch and Koch are colluding to end unions in Wisconsin.
kasha34Feb 27, 2011
Feedings the "rabble the anti-union line..."?
My property taxes almost all go to pay teacher salaries & benes.
They retire at 55 and we support them for the rest of their lives. I don't need convincing that's a problem for me.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
clvngodessFeb 27, 2011
That's not true.
kasha34Feb 27, 2011
What's not true? That my propperty taxes almost all go to pay teacher salaries and benes? It sure is in NY state.
timelessbwFeb 28, 2011
You are very fortunate to live in a community that requires you to pay almost no taxes for all the other things that must be maintained in almost any town or city. I pay taxes on two homes and have no children or grandchildren in public schools. I don't whine about it though. There are other services my property taxes go for that I do use and or appreciate that maybe others don't as much.
frayedknotjeffFeb 27, 2011
There's always home schooling your kids.
0_0
kasha34Feb 27, 2011
I'd still have to pay.
I have a friend in Albany NY. She pays $7,000/yr property taxes, mostly going to the schools. But the schools there are so dangerous she cannot send her son there. So she's going into debt to pay extra to send him to a private school.
frayedknotjeffFeb 27, 2011
I pay the same taxes, except I find an educated populace a good thing.
It does suck there are bad kids out there, making it hard for good kids to go to school. But the schools hands are tied when it comes to the discipline of other people's kids. They try to enforce zero tolerance rules, just to be lambasted by the public when they do.
No in, no out. What now?
kasha34Feb 28, 2011
You think you have an educated populace? Seriously?
See, we reject your presumption that the choice is between bankrupting ourselves and having an "educated populace."
We believe we could get a far better job done. And for a lot less.
sabz5150Feb 27, 2011
Okay, don't educate them at all.
Then the rest of us will pay.
kasha34Feb 27, 2011
Sigh. It's been proven that having a degree in education means nothing about how good a teacher you'll be. And there are plenty of qualified people that will be willing to teach school for a lot less than what we're paying now.
sabz5150Feb 27, 2011
"And there are plenty of qualified people that will be willing to teach school for a lot less than what we're paying now."
You mean less than the piss-poor salary that has been frozen for the past few years? My wife is a teacher and makes BELOW the median income in this country (fully accredited, graduated with a 3.8). You are seriously going to tell me that there are qualified instructors willing to work for less than that? s**t, most people avoid becoming teachers because of the horrible salary.
trdrstvFeb 28, 2011
@sabz5150
Multiply her salary by 125% and how does that number look ? That's her daily rate.
Average worker works 251 days a year (5 day weeks + 10 paid holidays) verses 190 (180 for school + 10 inservice days) for a teacher, so if she works 25% fewer days than I would expect salary to not follow 1:1
and before you talk about "The work done from home, and not in school" I'd like to point out how rare the 9-5 "40 hour" work week is in industry and how often people have to work longer hours and take work home/ vpn - work from home.
Teacher's aren't Paid less in aggregate as "compensation" is more than cash; they get a competitive wage for days/ hours worked, union negotiated benefits and retirement as well as copious amounts of time off.
kasha34Feb 28, 2011
@sabz
What state does your wife teach in?
rixar13Feb 28, 2011
The wealthy screwing the working poor again... I would like to communicate with them in person... Smile :-)