Not-so Secret GOP Plan

[maxx]

http://blogs.reuters.com/james-petho...-smash-unions/
"Congressional Republicans appear to be quietly but methodically executing a plan that would a) avoid a federal bailout of spendthrift states and b) cripple public employee unions by pushing cash-strapped states such as California and Illinois to declare bankruptcy. This may be the biggest political battle in Washington, my Capitol Hill sources tell me, of 2011..."

[oladub]

SPENDTHRIFT
A spendthrift [[also called profligate) is someone who spends money prodigiously and who is extravagant and recklessly wasteful. -wikipedia

[ghettopalmetto]

SPENDTHRIFT
A spendthrift [[also called profligate) is someone who spends money prodigiously and who is extravagant and recklessly wasteful. -wikipedia

You mean like states who get more in federal aid than their residents pay in federal taxes? South Carolina receives $1.35 in federal money for each $1 its residents pay in federal taxes. That sounds pretty spendthrifty to me! NO MORE SUBSIDIES!!!

[jiminnm]

You mean like states who get more in federal aid than their residents pay in federal taxes? South Carolina receives $1.35 in federal money for each $1 its residents pay in federal taxes. That sounds pretty spendthrifty to me! NO MORE SUBSIDIES!!!

This is always brought up and it is a totally meaningless comparison. States don't exist to receive money from the feds [[or send it to the Feds, for that matter).

There are 3 primary reasons that states receive money from the Feds:
1. Number of retired folks [[social security & medicare)
2. Amount of land/facilities owned by the Feds [[Fed employee salaries and payments in lieu of property taxes)
3. Number of poor folks [[medicaid & other welfare)

If any state has a disproportionate percentage of any of these, then the numbers will be skewed from the average.

[ghettopalmetto]

This is always brought up and it is a totally meaningless comparison. States don't exist to receive money from the feds [[or send it to the Feds, for that matter).

Oh, is that why we have a federal system of government with both national and state mechanisms--to do nothing???

Funny how our pro-Constitution crowd always cries about the Bill of Rights, then do every damned thing in their power to restrict the rights of everyone not like them. What the hell does Nikki Haley [[or any other crackpot in the GOP) care if workers want to organize? I always thought it was the job of government to protect rights and a certain sense of dignity. Clearly this is not the case.

Gov.-elect Nikki Haley has moved to protect Boeing Co., the state’s recently arrived aerospace giant, nominating a union-fighting attorney to head the agency that oversees business licensing, professional boards and the labor law enforcement.
Haley said she chose Charleston attorney Catherine Templeton — whose Ogletree Deakins bio lists “union avoidance” as a specialty — as director of the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation to prevent organized labor from gaining a foothold in the 787 Dreamliner plant now under construction. Boeing executives said South Carolina’s anti-union history was a key factor in their decision to open a new plant outside their long-time home in the Seattle area.

Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2010/12/09/1...#ixzz18hdfLbnb

On one hand, government bribes a company to show up for cheap labor. On the other hand, government strokes the company's cock. Yeah, that's "free-market"--free market prostitution.

“We’re going to fight the unions and I needed a partner to help me do it,” Haley said of Templeton, according to the Associated Press.

Now, Donna DeWitt, who runs the state chapter of the AFL-CIO, says she is asking the organization’s Washington, D.C., office to look into whether Haley’s comments crossed any lines under the Palmetto State’s right-to-work law.

“In the right-to-work laws, it says unions can’t intimidate people in joining unions and employers can’t either,” DeWitt says. “This is an open violation of that. It’s an open statement made publicly by our [incoming] governor.”

Hoyt Wheeler, a retired professor of business management at the University of South Carolina who taught classes on collective bargaining and works as a part-time labor arbitrator, says DeWitt might be onto something.

“It’s really up to workers whether or not they have a union — and that’s the federal law,” Wheeler says. “It’s not up to the governor; it’s not even up to Boeing.”

The state labor agency’s mission is to promote the health, safety and economic well being of the public through regulation, licensing, enforcement, training and education, according to its website.

That mission is in contrast to how Haley outlined the agency’s thrust in a statement to Free Times.

“Catherine understands that [the agency’s] mission should be to serve the businesses and taxpayers of our state,” Haley said.

http://www.free-times.com/index.php?...41512101999232


Wake the fuck up, America.

[gdogslim]

Good, let them go bankrupt and let the politicians pay for their dastardly deeds.

[lincoln8740]

Good, let them go bankrupt and let the politicians pay for their dastardly deeds.

After watching 60 minutes last night I have to say it will be bad ass to see all of those bureaucrats out of job when their states go bankrupt

If that's what it takes to wrestle control of the state from the lazy unions--so be it.

[ghettopalmetto]

After watching 60 minutes last night I have to say it will be bad ass to see all of those bureaucrats out of job when their states go bankrupt

If that's what it takes to wrestle control of the state from the lazy unions--so be it.

Yes, won't it be great fun to resort to a barter economy and nonexistent government. As long as the "lazy" unions cease to exist, everything will be perfect.

[lincoln8740]

Yes, won't it be great fun to resort to a barter economy and nonexistent government. As long as the "lazy" unions cease to exist, everything will be perfect.

oh no!!
no more unions-- the world is coming to an end!!!

What about the children!!
The children!!!!

[ghettopalmetto]

oh no!!
no more unions-- the world is coming to an end!!!

What about the children!!
The children!!!!

Hey, if you want to raise a family on 15 bucks an hour while the State gives away the farm to your employer, knock yourself out. The children, indeed.

[lincoln8740]

Hey, if you want to raise a family on 15 bucks an hour while the State gives away the farm to your employer, knock yourself out. The children, indeed.

Sorry, no one is buying the 15$ an hour crap anymore. We are talking about state employee unions not some poor greased up guy in a factory somewhere. We are talking about people that have 4 weeks vacation a year, free health benefits and job security that would make the UAW look like participants in a work camp.

Oh and did I mention the their productivity requirements are, shall we say, quite low?

The freight train is coming and there is nothing the unions can do about it. Either they get with the program and become more realistic or they go bust via bankruptcy.

I so prefer them going bust though!!!!

[oldredfordette]

I never in my life expected to hear so much sustained hatred for American workers than I have in the last 15 years. It's chilling.

[gdogslim]

At least the Republican are open with what they want to do.

The democrats ahve to wait until a lame duck session to try to push through
- don't ask if i'm gay, - legalize all illegals, - trillion dollar stimulus pork projects, - keep taxes the same for two years, - and let Russia have power over US nucleat weapons..
Remember Pelosi, you'll have to pass Obama Don't Care before you can see whats in it?

I love the american worker, i detest union leader thugs and them getting bailed out by taxpayers.

[ghettopalmetto]

Sorry, no one is buying the 15$ an hour crap anymore. We are talking about state employee unions not some poor greased up guy in a factory somewhere. We are talking about people that have 4 weeks vacation a year, free health benefits and job security that would make the UAW look like participants in a work camp.

Oh and did I mention the their productivity requirements are, shall we say, quite low?

And you base this on what? Your own experience as a government employee?

Many government employees are degreed professionals who *choose* to give up more lucrative salaries in the private sector in order to serve your whiny ass. If you're not going to pay them market-rate salaries, you have to commensurate for that somehow.

Of course, you offer no solutions other than calling for the utter ruination of something you think you don't like. Sure, get rid of government employee unions. Then come tell us about the quality and competency of the public servants who are willing to be enslaved in your service.

[oladub]

http://blogs.reuters.com/james-petho...-smash-unions/
"Congressional Republicans appear to be quietly but methodically executing a plan that would a) avoid a federal bailout of spendthrift states and b) cripple public employee unions by pushing cash-strapped states such as California and Illinois to declare bankruptcy. This may be the biggest political battle in Washington, my Capitol Hill sources tell me, of 2011..."

I'm all for union. They are the working man's collective equivalent to rich people hiring personal lawyers and accountants to look after their interests. However, unions have to be responsible enough to not overreach. If they do, in an contrived atmosphere of companies moving jobs offshore and cheap foreign laborers allowed to compete here, union workers wind up suffering. Unions should pay more attention to such a hostile operating environment if they choose not to change it.

I don't see anything wrong with the federal government not bailing out 'spendthrift' states. We are not addressing misfortunes that some states encounter such as Louisiana with Katrina. The operative word in the OP is 'spendthrift". States have the right and responsibility to make their own decisions. This is not something new. When the savings and loan crises took place, the federal government bailed out CA and TX which had lax banking laws that allowed their banks to attain larger national market share when times were good. States with strict banking laws with no S&L's going bankrupt, had to pay to bail out CA and TX S&L's. If California voters supported voter initiatives and politicians who similarly borrowed and spent, Californians, at least, should have more than the rest of us, better schools, better infrastructure, better health, whatever... to show for all the borrowing and spending they chose.They have made their choices and have to live with them.

At any rate, the federal well is also dry and China is lecturing us on handling money while we resort to printing money like Zimbabwe and the Weimar Republic. To bail out spendthrift states is to make the federal government the larger spendthrift state. If states want to pay out huge pensions and salaries to their employees, that is their right but doing so is also their responsibility.

[lincoln8740]

And you base this on what? Your own experience as a government employee?

Many government employees are degreed professionals who *choose* to give up more lucrative salaries in the private sector in order to serve your whiny ass. If you're not going to pay them market-rate salaries, you have to commensurate for that somehow.

Of course, you offer no solutions other than calling for the utter ruination of something you think you don't like. Sure, get rid of government employee unions. Then come tell us about the quality and competency of the public servants who are willing to be enslaved in your service.

Oh god not the whole "they are giving up a salary to do a public service" line again. Do you really think that crap line is going to hold water when referring to STATE employees? How is that going to play out amongst the general electorate??? There is no more MONEY. At least with the UAW there might be shred of truth about blood sweat and tears but you can't apply the same rhetoric to bureaucrats that sit at a desk all day.
Watch 60 minutes from sunday.

[ghettopalmetto]

Oh god not the whole "they are giving up a salary to do a public service" line again. Do you really think that crap line is going to hold water when referring to STATE employees? How is that going to play out amongst the general electorate??? There is no more MONEY. At least with the UAW there might be shred of truth about blood sweat and tears but you can't apply the same rhetoric to bureaucrats that sit at a desk all day.
Watch 60 minutes from sunday.

It's difficult to tell what point you're trying to make, although I'm pretty sure you forgot to throw the word "terror" in there somewhere.

[lincoln8740]

It's difficult to tell what point you're trying to make, although I'm pretty sure you forgot to throw the word "terror" in there somewhere.

1. The general public is not buying the fact that STATE employees make less than private employees. I have always loved that line-- what comparables do you have for someone that works at a desk in The SOS office? High school teacher? Random bureaucrat that works on west grand blvd?

2. There is no more money for the current salaries benefits and pensions received by STATE employees

3. In the current political climate the general public does not share your romanticized view of STATE bureaucrats somehow giving up money for public service.

Can't make it any easier for you

[Detroitej72]

Why do cons always blame everything on union working stiffs, but have no problem letting Wall Street continue their large tax payer supported bonuses? I suspect that it is part of their long term class-warfare strategy.

[Detroitnerd]

They were showing the discussions of this at the American Enterprise Institute on CSPAN a few weeks ago. Same old bunch of pro-big-business, anti-union people figuring out how best to squeeze the people they disdain while giving away, what was it, 9 TRILLION DOLLARS to banks?

[Detroitnerd]

Reminds me of the old cartoon. A bunch of 20-ton capitalists riding on a little train that just can't carry them at more than a crawl. One of the fat cats points at the engineers, saying, "THERE'S the problem!"

[ghettopalmetto]

If my state, South Carolina, has millions of dollars to throw at BMW and Boeing, they have money to pay state employees who work for the actual taxpayers..

[oldredfordette]

What is really scary is these guys are allowed to breed and vote and drive. It makes you want to stock up on water and ammunition.

[Gistok]

This is always brought up and it is a totally meaningless comparison. States don't exist to receive money from the feds [[or send it to the Feds, for that matter).

There are 3 primary reasons that states receive money from the Feds:
1. Number of retired folks [[social security & medicare)
2. Amount of land/facilities owned by the Feds [[Fed employee salaries and payments in lieu of property taxes)
3. Number of poor folks [[medicaid & other welfare)

If any state has a disproportionate percentage of any of these, then the numbers will be skewed from the average.

It may be meaningless to your POV, but not the states that are on the short end of the proverbial stick.

Looking at history and political science books, you would also see that many of the House/Senate committe chairmen in the mid 20th century were southerners [[Wilbur Mills, Richard B. Russell, Sam Rayburn, et al) for an extended period of time. This was when the federal government was expanding with pet pork projects, and military/aerospace expansions taking place in many of the southern districts. So this [[your #2) is not some accident of nature... but a concerted effort by powerful committee chairmen to bring home the pork.

And these legacy costs continue to this day... thus providing a lopsided per capita federal spending by state.