.
.
.
I have watched and listened in stunned silence as the reports flow out of the events surrounding the Wisconsin Legislature’s attempts to bring its state budget deficit under control. For those of you living on Mars, Wisconsin’s new Governor ran on a platform that promised to balance the budget without raising taxes and he was elected handily. To carry out these campaign promises (I know, we aren’t used to that kind of promise keeping here in California Governor Brown), the Governor has floated a proposal that is evidently supported by both houses of the state legislature that would 1) eliminate some collective bargaining rights, 2) increase the employee portion of their pension by 5%, and 3) increase the employee contribution for health care by 12.5%. Both of these added employee contribution requirements would still be less than employees working for private companies are required to pay.
Facing certain passage of this bill in both houses, Democratic members of the legislature took action – they left the state. Here is where things get funny. According to Democrat State Senator Jon Erpenbach “we will return when the democratic process is restored to Wisconsin.” I had to read that a couple of times myself to make sure that I understood “the words coming out of his mouth.” Let’s see if I have this straight, right now with the Democrats cowering in a Chicago hotel so that there will be NO vote and NO exercise of the democratic process that makes the Republicans seeking a vote “undemocratic?” That gives me brain freeze. Evidently the Democrats think that this nasty voting thing is undemocratic. Silly me, I thought VOTING was the democratic method – had I known that RUNNING AWAY was actually more democratic it would have saved me from all of the pesky trips to the ballot box.
It then gets even funnier. In violation of their contractual obligations and perhaps in violation of Wisconsin law, teachers have been “calling in sick” in such record numbers that Madison and Milwaukee have had to shut down a large percentage of their schools. These teachers have lost such touch with reality that some of them have actually taken students along with them to protest as part of the “educational experience.” Other public employees have similarly played hookey from work to “protest” the proposed law in violation of their contracts. Wait, that’s not the best part – these illegal strikes have been coordinated by the Democratic National Convention and Obama’s Organizing for America have helped to coordinate these illegal and immoral actions by helping to coordinate the strikes, hire bussesto transport union workers to Madison to protest and building phone banks to organize support for the strikes and opposition to the proposed legislation. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/DNC_playing_role_in_Wisconsin_protests.html?showall
What I find most appalling is the arrogance of the Democrats and unions who are clearly saying that they are “right” and that the majority of Wisconsin voters just got it wrong when they elected fiscally conservative Republicans. The funniest broadcast moment of all happened when the CNN anchor genuinely asked if the protestors were representative of the views of ALL of Wisconsin’s citizens. Yeah, that’s it, the 58 Republican members of the assembly and the 19 state senators took power through secret action and, along with the Governor, are the only 77 Wisconsinites in favor of dialing back public employee benefits.
Rather to engage in meaningful dialogue, the unions have likened Wisconsin’s new governor to Hitler, called his legislation a form of rape and other similar scare tactics. To create the appearance of broad support, Union activists have actually recruited protest participants from union members in outlying states. Ironically this atmosphere of violence and hate is always decried by the left as the exclusive domain of the right. Well, the unions have sure dispelled that myth.
Union Words of Vilence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsnLfsbbM&feature=player_embedded
I really hope that the lunacy of all of this causes a backlash heard ’round the country. I hope that unions in other states pick up the placards and start to preemptivelyprotest wage and benefit roll backs. At a time when the private sector has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs, when people have had to take any work that they can get just to make ends meet I hope that folks can see the selfishness and myopia of Union Bosses whose primary goal is to line their own pockets with ill gotten tax payer dollars. I hope that the backlash from this protest and the ill advised actions of Wisconsin’s Democratic party is the first step towards bringing the crippling impact of public employee union power into balance with the rest of the workforce.
Is Governor Walker’s Proposal
the “End” of Collective Bargaining
in Wisconsin?
A number of the comments to this story have alleged that I am sweeping the impact that the proposed legislation will have on the collective bargaining process under the table. Of course I correctly highlighted this impact in the very first paragraph of the post – and accurately portrayed those impacts as well “the Governor [Walker] has floated a proposal that is evidently supported by both houses of the state legislature that would 1) eliminate some collective bargaining rights . . ..” The posters have either explicitly stated that the legislation WILL end collective bargaining rights or clearly implied that conclusion. So what is the truth?
Interestingly none of the major news sources have provided any real analysis of the real impact the proposed legislation would have on the collective bargaining process – I have to go to the source itself and review the language of the proposed legislation. First, NOTHING in the proposed legislation would impact the collective bargaining rights of any private unions in any way – its impact is limited solely to PUBLIC unions. Second, the proposed legislation would remove workers’ rights, in place since a 1959 court decision, to negotiate over pensions and health insurance, both of which are being cut. Workers would be allowed to continue bargaining over wages. The bill means state workers will have to pay half their pension costs and at least 12.6% of their healthcare coverage. The legislation also weakens the unions by dictating elections and changing rules on collecting union dues. These changes are a far cry from the claims of total repeal of collective bargaining.
I have searched far and wide for any rationale for the need for public unions. The case law emerging from the union case from the first 50 years of the past century focused on the tactics of intimidation and harassment from management to employees in the private sector. Physical battles and physical intimidation were common and created something far less than a level playing field. These same arguments simply don’t apply to public unions and certainly not in today’s world. Instead we have created behemoths of highly funded lobby groups that can dump millions of dollars into state and local campaigns to have a huge and often decisive impact on those elections. Dues are collected virtually involuntarily and are taken directly out of a members paycheck. 90+ percent of the dues collected go directly into lobbying efforts with less than 5% spent on actual wage and benefit discussions.
Public sector salaries have grown virtually unchecked for the past several decades without any real counterpressure. Now that people are waking up to the fact that their future is being mortgaged because of these spiraling salaries, benefits and pensions, these union thugs are responding like cornered animals. The truth is that they are not cornered animals but simply children caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
For an excellent analysis of all of these issues please see CNN (I can’t believe they actually published something good) at: http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/21/avlon.wisconsin.unions/index.html?hpt=T2
Fraudulent Phone Call From Electronic “Fish Wrap” Editor of ‘Buffalo Beast’ Comes Up Empty
Until today you have probably never heard of an “online only” Buffalo publication called the “Buffalo Beast” or its hapless editor Ian Murphy and for good reason – the “Beast” folded up its print tent two years ago when it failed to find its place in the not very crowded Buffalo, New York media marketplace. Today the “Beast” got some minor coverage because of a stunt pulled by its editor the hapless and evidently shameless Ian Murphy that would have been a multiple felony had he done the same thing in California. Mr. Murphy called Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker posing as a Walker supporting political activist David Koch and tried every dirty trick in the book to mislead Governor Walker into making disparaging remarks or to get the Governor to tip his hand as to strategy – to Governor Walker’s credit he is s straight shooter and did not take the bait. I will admit that the left is partially justified in its laughter and finger pointing over the incident – the Governor took the call and evidently was never aware that he was talking to an imposter. During a critical time like the one the State of Wisconsin is going through right now, a statewide elected official might want to do a tad more call screening and authentication than occurred today.
The substance of the phone call ended up much less interesting than desired by scumbag Murphy whose repeated baiting of the Governor went unrewarded. First, Mr. Murphy tried to bait the Governor into talking about “planting” troublemakers among the protestors, an action the Governor said he did not consider and did not feel was necessary because of the “overwhelming support” of the Wisconsin citizenry. Scumbag Murphy then made a horribly sexist and offensive remark calling MSNBC reporter Mika Brzezinski “a real piece of ass.” The Governor sat in silence refusing to respond in any way to the comment. Still fraudulently posing as Mr. Koch, supposed editor Murphy then asks the Governor to reveal his endgame strategy. The Governor does discuss efforts to get the Democrats to return to the state (and I admit to cringing hearing his naivete in assuming the caller is who he says he was without authentication), but all of the tactics discussed by the Governor were all perfectly legal and appropriate. The call ends with the scumbag fraud Murphy inviting the Governor out to California to celebrate after passage of the legislation to which the governor makes a non-committal response. Given the multiple ways the phone call could have gone wrong or disclosed “politics as usual” dirty tactics, I walked away from listening to the phone call impressed with the integrity of the Governor and his real belief in the cause.
Now lets look at Mr. Murphy’s actions. He calls the Governors office and lies saying that he is someone he is not. In California that would be a felony, unfortunately it is ambiguous in both Wisconsin and New York as to whether this conduct constitutes as crime. Scumbag Murphy then RECORDS the conversation without the knowledge or permission of the Governor. Again, in California this would be a felony but this questionable act is not a crime in either Wisconsin or New York. Mr. Murphy then makes sexist and horrible offensive remarks about an MSNBC reporter. Had a Fox reporter made those same comments, regardless of the reason, the media throughout the country would be skewering them on a regular basis. Next, under false pretenses scumbag Murphy tries to get the Governor to reveal his strategy.
The little press that this action has received to date all deals with “fooling” the Governor – as if it is perfectly appropriate for a reporter to play what amounts to a practical joke on a Governor during a state of crisis. Not a single story points out the horrible ethics, the sexist and offensive language and justify the dirty tricks as if just and appropriate when trying to uncover a non-existent right wing Wisconsin conspiracy. Not a single report talks about the fact that the Governor’s responses were all appropriate and shows his belief in the cause and his refusal to engage in similar “dirty tricks.”
The Origins and Severity of the Public Pension Crisis
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/pensions-2011-02.pdf
Conclusion
The shortfalls facing most state and local pension funds have been seriously misrepresented in public debates. The major cause of these shortfalls has not been inadequate contributions by state governments, but rather the plunge in the stock market following the collapse of the housing
bubble. Given the low PE ratios in the stock market, pension fund assumptions on the future rate of return on their assets are consistent with most projections of economic growth and past experience.
Furthermore, when expressed relative to the size of their economies, most states are facing shortfalls that appear easily manageable.
From the Mercury News:
“California teachers’ pension system headed toward insolvency”
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_17446295?source=rss&nclick_check=1
From the LA Times: “The pension haves vs. the have-nots”
State of California Assistant Legislative Analyst Jason Sisney said in a recent report, “Can the substantial disparity between public and private sector retirement benefits be sustained much longer? We think that it probably cannot.”
In 1999, the Legislature and Gov. Gray Davis, indebted to unions for his election the previous year, opened the vault to future state retirees.
http://www.latimes.com/news/columnists/la-me-cap-pension-20110224,0,6972201.column?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20GeorgeSkelton%20%28L.A.%20Times%20-%20George%20Skelton%29&utm_content=Google%20Reader&utm_source=feedburner
anonster said: “Unions are one of the most democratic institutions this country has, those “union bosses” are ELECTED.”
It is a fixed election. The upper level union bosses are elected by the local business manager bosses.
The local business manager bosses are elected by their cronies who show up to union meetings and elections.
The local union thug bosses know who supports the party-line and those who don’t. Those who don’t support the head comrad are bullied into not attending union meetings and not voting for the local thug boss.
It is all rigged.
Views like junior’s that are held so strongly and seek to discredit any alternative perspective are not that uncommon on many issues. It may feel good to voice that kihnd of discrediting perspective, but other than the benefit of self-therapy it is of little value except, perhaps to torque a few people. I know, I know – that is one of the functions of blogs!
Not one of the better functions of blogs.
What shock – and a violation of some sort – to have a strongly held personal belief based on many years of education and experience.
I guess that your philosophy is that if your cannot win a debate based on the arguments then attack and belittle your opponent.
I thought that this blog had improved – I guess that I am wrong in that belief.
My brief comment there was simply a response to BAAW’s “…perhaps to torque a few people. I know, I know – that is one of the functions of blogs!”
Anonster,
I know all about the coruption of unions. I own and manage a union business. Vern can verify that.
Funny – when we had lunch a couple years ago, I seem to remember you telling me that you appreciate unions and the work they do, and how even though you’re not a member, you’re often on the same page as them.
You sure you’re not just getting caught up in the latest right-wing two-minute-Hate du jour?
There is that hate word again. You don’t hear me saying that left wingers hate this country or anything.
I recall that Art Pedroza and Sean Mill used to acuse those they disagreed with of being haters. I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.
I think the left is very frightened that the harm they have caused this country is coming back to bite them in the butt – they are right.
junior,
“It is a fixed election. The upper level union bosses are elected by the local business manager bosses.”
Please provide proof of this allegation and please, please include an explanation of “local business manager bosses”.
As in any democratic institution, a union will only be as good as its members, but EVERY eligible union member gets to vote and that vote is secret.
By law;
Local unions must hold secret ballot elections of officers at least every three years.
Union Member’s Bill of Rights
Free Speech and Due Process
The Union Member’s Bill of Rights, Title 1 of the LMRDA, guarantees the following democratic rights to all union members:
Equal rights and privileges to nominate candidates, to vote in elections or referendums, and to attend and participate in union meetings and vote on the business of the meeting, subject to reasonable rules in the union constitution and/or bylaws;
Freedom of speech and assembly, including the right to:
criticize union officials;
express any viewpoint at union meetings (subject to reasonable rules of conduct);
distribute literature outside the union hall or inside the hall if members cannot reasonably be reached from outside;
hold separate meetings without interference from union officials;
The right to secret ballot vote on rates of dues, initiation fees, and assessments;
The right to sue the union, without reprisal, if internal appeals do not produce a satisfactory result within four months, or if you disagree with the union’s decision;
You are protected from improper union discipline. Due process is required in internal union disciplinary hearings, including:
the right to specific, written charges;
the right to confront and cross-examine accusers;
adequate time to prepare a defense;
the right to a full and fair hearing and a decision based on the evidence.
Note: The union may not discipline you for exercising protected rights, however you may be disciplined for the following activities:
participating in wildcat strikes,
advocating decertification of the union,
nonpayment of dues or agency fees, and other acts which interfere with the legal or contractual obligations of the union or which threaten the existence of the union as an institution,
crossing picket lines.
You have the right to receive a copy of your collective bargaining agreement (union contract) along with all riders and supplements, and to inspect copies of all contracts that your local union administers. (This may include hiring hall rules.)
Notification of Rights: A recent appeals court decision supports what AUD has long argued, that, under Section 105 of the LMRDA, unions are obligated to inform members of their rights under the LMRDA and how to enforce those rights. (Note: In order for this important decision to become the norm in every part of the country, it is important that union members try to enforce Section 105. Please contact AUD if you are interested in helping enforce this important part of the LMRDA. For the text of the appeals court decision: http://www.heretics.net/105.html)
Enforcement
In most cases, you must exhaust internal union procedures before you can take the union to court. The internal procedures are described in the Union’s constitution and/or bylaws. If you do not agree with the result, or if the process takes more than four months, you may file a lawsuit in federal district court for injunctive relief, restoration of your rights and money damages. You must hire your own attorney to represent you in a lawsuit. Check with AUD for more information and advice.
If you are denied a copy of your contract, you may file a complaint with the Department of Labor which will investigate and has authority to bring a lawsuit on your behalf.
Elections
Under Title IV of the LMRDA, international unions must elect officers, either by a direct vote of the members or by a vote of delegates to a convention, at least every five years. Local unions must hold secret ballot elections of officers at least every three years.
Any member in good standing is eligible to run for office, subject to reasonable and equitable rules. According to the Department of Labor, meeting attendance rules which “disqualify a large portion of members from candidacy…may be [held by the DOL to be] unreasonable.” (Note: AUD urges any person who has been disqualified by a meeting attendance rule to contact us immediately.)
Candidates are entitled to mail campaign literature, as often as they are financially able, to the union’s entire membership list or to reasonable selected portions of the list, such as members in one company or geographical area. Unions may not abridge this right by restricting it to the time period after nominations. Candidates may inspect the membership list once during a campaign.
All members must be allowed to vote, nominate candidates, run for office and campaign without interference or retaliation. Candidates are entitled to have observers present at each stage of the election process, including literature mailing, balloting, and counting.
Union officials cannot use union resources for their campaign. Unions and all employers, not only interested employers, are prohibited from contributing money and resources to any candidate.
Enforcement
Candidates for union office may file suit before the election if their rights to a membership mailing are violated or if the union is discriminating in the use of the membership lists. Pre-election relief in other circumstances is extremely limited.
After the election; protests must first be filed with the union, in a timely manner (check the union constitution for time limits). Your protest must contain all complaints you have about the election. If you have not obtained relief from the union within three months, you must file your complaint within the next month. If you get an answer within the three months, you must file with the DOL within one month of the final decision by the union.
The Department of Labor investigates your charges and decides whether to file a lawsuit on your behalf. The DOL has wide discretion whether or not to sue on your behalf. If the DOL does decide to overturn the election, a candidate has a limited right to intervene in the lawsuit with private counsel. The remedy is usually a federally supervised election.
Anonster,
One word – “intimidation” by union thugs – tough to prove and it is effective.
Want to keep your job? – then toe the union line.
Junior,
“One word – “intimidation” by union thugs – tough to prove and it is effective.”
It is also EASY to throw around words like “thugs”, “intimidation”, “corruption” and “fixed”, to slime an institution and then DODGE when asked to back up your charges, either there is provable corruption or there isn’t. Put up or shut up.
And you forgot to explain “local business manager bosses” who they are and how they manage to vote in a union election, that shouldn’t be too”tough”.
The same thing could be said for politics Anonster.
Geoff,
If I said the Republican leaders were violent goons who were corrupt and were fixing elections and intimidating voters wouldn’t you expect me to have some sort of who/what/where type of evidence?
Example in the form of a riddle – whose chopped body parts are buried under the Meadowlands?
Geoff,
We’re talking current events, junior is making concrete allegations about intimidation in local union elections, he’s also saying that “local business manager bosses” are voting in these elections, he at least needs to clarify his statements and at the very least tell us what union he’s talking about.
It is common for people who are dissatisfied with things to throw around words like thugs, corruption and intimidation when they are jaw-boning with their pals, but when push-comes-to-shove they REALLY don’t have any facts to back up their claims. What junior is talking about is illegal, union members have a structure for redress, but they have to use it. A union is only as good as its members and if those union members aren’t willing to stand up against corruption then they are also to blame.
There has been no shortage of union bashing on this post…greedy union bosses, thugs, goons, bastards etc. all said without any facts to back them up.
I just read your totally bogus piece on that corrupt, greedy thug, John Thune, who’s up to his eyeballs in earmarks for his special fat corporate friends, he’s one of the biggest slime ball bastards in the senate.
Any one can string those words together, hard to disprove.
And let me just say…Florida and Ohio.
Vern said: “Funny – when we had lunch a couple years ago, I seem to remember you telling me that you appreciate unions and the work they do, and how even though you’re not a member, you’re often on the same page as them.”
I am on the same page as my industry union on several matters Vern – no change there. However, I do have an intimate knowledge of how they run their union and much of it is not pretty.
Public employee unions are very different – they bribe their employers (legislators) on the backs of taxpayers.
Let’s stick to the agruements and leave out the name calling – ok?
anoster could you add about 6 more pages to your writtings zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
And could you add some substance to yours? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Anonster said: “We’re talking current events, junior is making concrete allegations about intimidation in local union elections, .. he .. needs .. tell us what union he’s talking about.”
Anonster,
It is not only the union workers who suffer from the intimidation and thug tactics of the union bosses.
junior,
You made allegations about how union elections work, AGAIN, who are these “local business manager bosses” and how are they voting in a union election?
Anonster – what I meant to say is that the local union bosses manipulate their own elections by intimidation tactics used against their local membership.
Clear now?
junior,
This is what you did say;
“It is a fixed election. The upper level union bosses are elected by the local business manager bosses.
The local business manager bosses are elected by their cronies who show up to union meetings and elections.
The local union thug bosses know who supports the party-line and those who don’t. Those who don’t support the head comrad are bullied into not attending union meetings and not voting for the local thug boss.
It is all rigged.”
I agree it is all rigged, IF YOU DON’T SHOW UP TO VOTE!
You hear this crap all the time, by people who don’t bother to participate, “it’s rigged”, “they’re all crooked” and “why bother, we’ll never win”
I wonder why, if there really is enough “intimidated” union members why they don’t band together, field a candidate and show up and vote or if the reality is is that they are just spouting sour grapes because they are in the minority and won’t admit it or because they are too lazy to work for the change they want.
Anonster,
Easy enough – for you to say. That is not the real world.
The sanity of Mitch Daniels vs. the insanity of Gov. Walker;
“Here in Indiana we have a very extensive 2011 agenda that these critics, if they took the time to look, would strongly applaud: another no-tax budget, an automatic refund to taxpayers past a specified level of state reserves, sweeping reform of archaic and anti-taxpayer local government, reduction of the corporate income tax, and the most far-reaching reform of education in America, including statewide vouchers for low and moderate income families. We laid all this before the public during last year’s elections.
Into this a few of my allies chose to toss Right to Work (RTW). I suggested studying it for a year and developing the issue for next year. No one had campaigned on it; it was a big issue that hit the public cold. I was concerned that it would provide the pretext for radical action by our Democratic minority that would jeopardize the entire agenda above, with zero chance of passing RTW itself. And that is exactly what has happened. We’re not giving up on the agenda we ran on, but this mistake presents a significant obstacle. RTW never had a chance this year and now the task is to make sure that it doesn’t take a host of good government changes down with it.”
anon,
Mitch Danieles for President in 2012 – I like that too.
I’m not prepared to go quite that far, at least not yet. I don’t know enough about him. But he does seem to have avoided being captured by the crazies on the far right of his party. That’s a good start in my book.
His comment above aptly points out the difference between a relatively serious, pragmatic politician and one who is willing to engage in a blatant, heavy-handed power grab.
I expect the Daniel’s power grab to come – it will – the system we have now is not fair, equitable or sustainable.
One can address pension contributions, wages and healthcare contributions without virtually destroying collective bargaining. I would expect Daniels to take an approach more like that.
anon – I don’t think so – Right to Work will be spreading through all 50 states very soon.
See, junior, you can’t get your story straight over whether you respect unions or wish their total demise.
That’s because – I contend – you rightwingers get caught up in what I called the latest “Two-Minute-Hate.” No, I’m not using “hate” in the way Art does regarding immigrants, I’m making a reference to a ceremony depicted in Orwell’s “1984” where everybody gets together and yells and curses against … whoever is the latest enemy their leaders have demonized. And somebody somewhere has convinced you guys that the latest enemy is public employee unions.
Pity. The ideological purists are already beginning to pile on Daniels.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/23/mark-levin-to-indiana-gov-mitch-daniels-youre-not-presidential/#ixzz1Eq4Scucw
Vern,
Get this straight – I support private sector unions. I fervently hope for the demise of public sector unions.
If I was king of all (maybe someday) – I would allow public sector unions to exist, but not allow them to make campaign contributions (bribes) to their employers, the legislators.
We should be co-kings then. No contributions from unions and none from corporations. I could live with that easy.
And this “private sector unions good, public sector bad” thing is just the latest Republican BS that I wish you wouldn’t parrot so unquestioningly. Of course they’re not worried any more about private sector unions, they’ve spent the last few decades slowly destroying them!
Vern said: “No contributions from unions and none from corporations. I could live with that easy.”
That is a red herring argument Vern. There are no significant competing interests between public sector unions and corporations.
Whereas there are significant competing interests between public sector unions and taxpayers – AND there are incestuous interests between public sector unions and legislators.
Oh really? Do individual taxpayers enjoy seeing their taxes go up while corporate taxes go down?
And if you don’t think that there are incestuous relationships between corporate interests and legislators, well, you are in a severe state of denial.
anon – I am REALLY tired of debating ……….. “individuals” who either don’t have the facts or invent their own facts.
California’s Corporate Income Tax Rate is the Highest in the West
Corporations looking to relocate, or even establish, a business in the West may shy away from California, as the state’s 8.84% flat rate is the highest corporate tax rate in the West. Nationally, only 7 states have a higher top corporate tax rate than California. In 2008, state-level corporate tax collections (excluding local taxes) in California were $325 per capita, which ranked 6th highest nationally.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/15.html
I am done with you anon – blather on my friend.
Percentages of Federal tax collections by individuals and corporations;
1940s
Corporate share = 33%
Individuals = 43%
1960s
Corporate share = 27%
Individuals = 57%
1990s
Corporate share = 15%
Individuals = 73%
Source: Bartlett and Steele, “America: Who Really Pays the Taxes?”
Vern – You should put up an Econ 101 course article or better yet do an Econ 101 webinar for your lib pals.
anon – Corporations do not pay taxes, they raise prices – and we all pay for that.
The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Do you want the US to become even more non-competitive worldwide?
junior,
It is not a coincidence that our deficits have skyrocketed and our infrastructure and schools have crumbled at the same time corporate taxes have dropped.
From the Tax Policy Center;
“Revenue from the corporate income tax fell from between 5 and 6 percent of GDP in the early 1950s to 2.1 percent of GDP in 2008.”
That’s the number that really matters.
From Smart Money;
“The truth is that while the 35% corporate income tax rate is high indeed, the creativity and global reach of U.S. corporations make them among the most LIGHTLY LEVIED.
Between 2000 and 2005, U.S. corporate taxes amounted to 2.2% of the GDP. The average for the 30 mostly rich member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development was 3.4%.
U.S. companies’ total tax rate is below that of major trade partners like China, Brazil, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, Australia, and India, according to the World Bank.
One good way to see how hard corporate taxes really hit is the percentage of GDP. That rate has been halved over the last sixty years in the U.S., well below that of the rest of the developed world.”
The sorry truth is that average americans are subsidizing these corporations and it doesn’t matter how good or useful they are, but who has the best tax lawyers.
Do you like subsidizing the gaming industry, which has an effective tax rate of 13%, or how about Goldman Sachs which got a TARP bailout and paid an effective rate of 1% in 2008 due to off-shoring?
From Bloomberg;
“I was definitely taken aback,” Willens said. “Clearly they have taken steps to ensure that a lot of their income is earned in lower-tax jurisdictions.”
“This problem is larger than Goldman Sachs,” Doggett said. “With the right hand out begging for bailout money, the left is hiding it offshore.”
Or how about the Carnival Cruise line?
From the NYT;
The Paradox of Corporate Taxes
By DAVID LEONHARDT
February 1, 2011
The Carnival Corporation wouldn’t have much of a business without help from various branches of the government. The United States Coast Guard keeps the seas safe for Carnival’s cruise ships. Customs officers make it possible for Carnival cruises to travel to other countries. State and local governments have built roads and bridges leading up to the ports where Carnival’s ships dock.
Thanks to an obscure loophole in the tax code, Carnival can legally avoid most taxes.
But Carnival’s biggest government benefit of all may be the price it pays for many of those services. Over the last five years, the company has paid total corporate taxes — federal, state, local and foreign — equal to only 1.1 percent of its cumulative $11.3 billion in profits. Thanks to an obscure loophole in the tax code, Carnival can legally avoid most taxes.
Maybe YOU should do a bit more reading;
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1311
High Corporate Tax Rate Is Misleading – Investing – Economy – SmartMoney.com http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/high-corporate-tax-rate-is-misleading-22463/#ixzz1F54ETcjT
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/business/economy/02leonhardt.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=business
I agree, corporations don’t pay taxes.
The people who work for corporations pay taxes.
Stockholders pay taxes on corporate dividends (profits).
And finally consumers pay taxes for corporations in the form of increased prices for the goods and services which corporations provide.
junior,
Why is it that the deficit has been growing for the last 30 years, exactly corresponding to the amount of taxes NOT paid by corporations.
“I agree, corporations don’t pay taxes.”
That’s an overstatement, but the point is, they used to. And we’ve had periods of booming economy when they did…which puts the lie to the notion that raising taxes on corporations is necessarily going to slow economic growth.
Always on the part of the story that you want to tell anon. We have never had personal income taxes at the levels we have today coupled with significant corporate taxes – always viewed as double taxation – isn’t it?
In the wake of Citizens United, if corporations are “individuals”, then they can pay the taxes that we pay.
Anon,
I like your comments, it would be nice to be able to distinguish your comments from other anons ( it’s how I became anon-ster), think about it.
I told him that once a couple years ago and he got all pissy. “If you don’t like it go to some other blog,” I think he said. That was before he knew me well though.
What other anons?
Vern, I never said that in relationship to using anon. I said that to Sean Mill because he was always carping about anonymous commenters. Whenever he felt under fire, he’d want to know who I was, as if that even matters.
Well, sometimes there are others. Back in 2008 there were FOUR anon’s, but you were the most prolific, and the most sensible. Every now and then some JERK would come on as anon, and I would feel bad that they were quasi-sullying your reputation.
Geoff,
“We have never had personal income taxes at the levels we have today”
You are right, TAXES HAVEN’T BEEN THIS LOW FOR 80 YEARS.
From Bloomberg Business 12/2010;
It’s a Great Time to Be Rich
If the tax cuts become law, the next two years will be the best in living memory for many wealthy Americans to shield their income and fortunes.
A bonanza of new and extended tax benefits could make it as easy as ever for the rich to stay that way.
Under legislation approved by the U.S. Senate on Wednesday, Dec. 15 (2010), and now moving on to the House, savvy wealthy Americans would be able to capitalize on an environment in which their tax rates on income and investments remain at historic lows.”
From USA Today;
Tax bills in 2009 at lowest level since 1950
Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman’s presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.
*************
“significant corporate taxes”
False, the EFFECTIVE (that is the amount of taxes actually paid) corporate tax rate is one of the lowest in the developed world.
From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities;
Putting U.S. Corporate Taxes in Perspective
The U.S. corporate tax burden is smaller than average for developed countries. Corporations in 19 of the member states of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development paid 16.1 percent of their profits in taxes between 2000 and 2005, on average, while corporations in the United States paid 13.4 percent.
I think Geoff has spent most of his life in a conservative echo chamber hearing nothing but cherry-picked stats. That’s why it’s good for him to be here with us now.
Yes, to hear the propaganda from the censoring myopic media.
Geoff,
Why don’t you back that last statement up with some facts, I’d love to hear the economic stories supporting your viewpoint that were censored by our “myopic media”.
anon – More reasons why corporations don’t and shouldn’t pay taxes:
They reinvest profits (build more ships in your Carnival Cruise example) in order to build their businesses and employ more people who do pay taxes.
In years they do not make a profit they are not required to pay taxes – like when the economy is down and people are not taking cruises – or the company is selling cruises for less than their cost in order to keep the business going and their people employed in hope for better times ahead.
There are many good reasons why corporations don’t and shouldn’t pay taxes.
junior,
Obviously you MISSED THE POINT about the Carnival Corporation, they DON’T PAY TAXES because they are headquarted OFFSHORE, they are making big profits using our infrastructure but not contributing to their upkeep.
From NYT Business;
The Details on Corporate Taxes
By DAVID LEONHARDT
“Carnival. Tim Gallagher, a spokesman for Carnival Corporation, the cruise ship operator, pointed out that Carnival operates in many countries beside the United States. The company also pays fees to ports, which are typically operated by state and local governments in this country.
But neither of the explanations is the main reason Carnival pays so little in tax. Many other companies that pay far more in taxes also operate in other countries and also pay fees for specific aspects of their business. What sets Carnival apart, as I mentioned in the column, is that it is a shipping company incorporated in Panama. United States law allows some shipping companies incorporated elsewhere to avoid most taxes, even if they have their headquarters in the United States, operate in the United States and pay little foreign taxes — all of which apply to Carnival.”
Correction; Carnival Corporation is headquartered in the US but incorporated in Panama, the difference being; a whole lot of money.
If the corporate tax rates were not so onerous in the US, those corps and their money would stay in the US. People and corps vote with their feet.
Yeah junior. Let’s have 2$ a day slave labor in this country. Then I guarantee you the corporations vote with their feet, and bring jobs back here.
junior,
So, you are admitting that these corporations are dodging their tax obligations, that begs the question; why are you defending them?
After all they are STEALING from you and me.
junior,
“They reinvest profits (build more ships in your Carnival Cruise example”
Carnival Cruise Lines started in 1972 with the TSS Mardi Gras. The ships have grown considerably, from 46,000 tons in 1985, to over 130,000 tons 14 years later. The ships are built at the Fincantieri shipyard in Monfalcone, Italy.
Actually, in case you hadn’t heard, many corporations are now hoarding cash and NOT hiring new employees. They always, always lead with self-interest.
. . . as opposed to the union bosses that have the state collect union dues from a largelybunwilling union membership living in constant fear that union members may actually be given the choice of paying dues knowing the results would not be good for the union bosses.
Red herring-yeah, union dues are mandatory (but they were voted on ) because human nature being what it is, we all know that there are people who want the benefits of the union but don’t want to pay for them.
How long do you think a homeowners association would last if the association fees were optional?
From Union Member’s Bill of Rights;
The right to secret ballot vote on rates of dues, initiation fees, and assessments
A union member can be disciplined for;
nonpayment of dues or agency fees, and other acts which interfere with the legal or contractual obligations of the union or which threaten the existence of the union as an institution
You say “self interest” like it is a BAD thing. Self interest is what has made this country great.
Yup, and the corporations’ self-interest, the billionaires’ self-interest, is not the same as the majority of ours’ self-interest.
Which is why we need to fight so hard, using unions and whatever other tools we have at our disposal.
junior,
We give these corporations tax breaks, 0% government loans, subsidies and taxpayer guarantees and all they’ve done is feathered their own nests at the expense of the american taxpayer and the country.
We should ALL be outraged, but our corporate owned media would prefer that you take your anger out on other working people, the poor, the elderly and the sick.
Nice of you to oblige them, junior.
Great line from S Greenhut:
“Union employees held a pointless Tuesday rally at the Capitol to show solidarity with Wisconsin government workers. In California, there’s no need for union members to storm the Capitol, given that they already own it.”
Hm.. All true enough except the word “pointless.”
Vern Nelson posted:
“Yeah junior. Let’s have 2$ a day slave labor in this country. Then I guarantee you the corporations vote with their feet, and bring jobs back here.”
NOW we are getting somewhere Vern – we may have found some common ground. The use of slave labor to manufacture goods in foriegn countries for sale in the US should be investigated, documented and exposed.
Then we would see if the people of the US care more about cheap goodies or the living conditions of fellow human beings.
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/what-should-corporate-tax-reform-look-like/
The irony of that report anon, is that the “actual” corporate tax rates are low because of Obama subsidies to corporations for the development of “green” energy, “green” vehicles and other similar subsidies. I have no problem eliminating all of those programs and bringing the “actual” corporate taxes in line with historically high (according to your own story) statutory corporate taxes.
I agree that these loopholes, subsidies and preferential treatments need to be scaled way back and tax revenue from corporations needs to rise in order to help address the deficit. But to only highlight Obama is patently absurd.
Why is highlighting Obama “patently absurd” when he has approved and ratified existing corporate give away programs?
I note that you disingenuously omit anon’s operative word “ONLY.”
Thank you Vern. Sometimes, people just see what they want to see.
Geoff doesn’t seem to understand that not all corporate subsidies are wrong, he picks Obama’s green energy subsidies as an example of corporate welfare when the exact opposite is true.
When you want to encourage the growth of an industry that is when you DO provide subsidies, tax breaks and incentives, it is an investment in the future.
There does come a point when it is “welfare”, like Exxon, they are the most profitable corporation in the history of the world, making billions of dollars a year, why should US taxpayers provide them with tax breaks? Carnival Corporation is another example, they are heavy users of our infrastructure and government services, yet they generally don’t hire americans and their ships are built in Italy, there is no benefit to taxpayers when we allow them to dodge their tax obligations.
“Attacks on Civility” by Wisconsin dems:
Male dem rep to female reep rep: “You’re fucking dead”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW7JYn3fH0Y
Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-WI) was attacked by an angry mob of protesters in Wisconsin.
http://www.foxnewsinsider.com/2011/03/02/caught-on-tape-gop-senator-attacked-in-wisconsin-rally-rescued-by-dem-congressman/
Were is the outrage? Double standard much …?
junior,
I would add this “civil discourse” to the mix from union members across our country. Don’t worry, I won’t expect any admission or outrage from many of the lefties on here:
http://www.breitbart.tv/government-unions-gone-wild/
I’m glad the unions have come so far since the left’s plea for civility following Arizona.
“Every once and a while ya godda ged down to da streets and get a little bloody when necessary.”
yeah Newbie – Bad to the bone!
And VERY civil – NOT !!
“You just don’t ever hear threats of violence from the Left.”
Bill Maher
“Don’t worry, I won’t expect any admission or outrage from many of the lefties on here”
I will! I’ll say that there are crazies on both extremes of the political spectrum who use violent rhetoric and that it’s wrong no matter who does it.
Will you say the same thing? Will you acknowledge that there are crazies on the right using violent rhetoric and that it needs to end and that people like Breitbart present a rather adolescent “well they do it too” argument?
Anon – Newbie and I have both admitted that their are violent idiots on the right and that we disagree with both their thinking and their tactics – those are both wrong.
I have heard you change the subject and tap dance around the issues but the left never admits any fault. Hypocrits
It’s just simply untrue that nobody on the left has acknowledged violent rhetoric on both sides of the political spectrum and that we all need to be more civil. Completely untrue.
You really should be careful about using words like “never”.
You still haven’t
Are you blind? Did you not read my 9:38 comment?
Geoff,
You only hear what you want to hear;
Keith Olberman on the Tucson shooting;
“Here, once, in a clumsy metaphor, I made such an unintended statement about the candidacy of then-Senator Clinton. It sounded as if it was a call to physical violence. It was wrong, then. It is even more wrong tonight. I apologize for it again, and I urge politicians and commentators and citizens of every political conviction to use my comment as a means to recognize the insidiousness of violent imagery, that if it can go so easily slip into the comments of one as opposed to violence as me, how easily, how pervasively, how disastrously can it slip into the already-violent or deranged mind?”
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/03/stupidity-knows-no-party-or-clique.html
I watched the tape, poor,poor Sen. Grothman had people yell SHAME,SHAME, SHAME at him, the horror (I hope you noticed the chant then went to PEACEFUL, PEACEFUL, PEACEFUL).
Bottom line; there have been NO ARRESTS, Faux news and congenital liar Breitbart want these protests to be violent in the worst way.
And speaking of outrage, where is the right when Faux news runs misleading footage about the protestors in WI., BO showed footage of “violence” with palm trees in the background?
Faux News has been nailed for this kind of non-factual footage several times over the past year or so. Just last week they got busted for twisting the results of a Gallup Poll inaccurately. At some point, “mistake” doesn’t quite explain it. It’s really quite pathetic.
Anonster,
So if a Democrat legislator had been pinned in a small doorway, with no escape, surrounded by dozens of angry, shouting conservatives, you’d say the same thing? Don’t worry, it was rhetorical.
And in case you missed my earlier post, it already has been violent, unless you believe a union supporter (disregarding the police warning to stay on his side of the street) hurling a Tea Partier, who did nothing to the union supporting goon, against a metal fence is not violent. So, Breitbart doesn’t have to wish, the union supporting goon has already obliged. Oh, and the only reason the union supporting goon wasn’t arrested is because a police officer cowardly used his authority to prevent the Tea Party folks from having him arrested, and let the union supporting goon escape down the sidewalk. But don’t take my word for it, check out the link in my post above and tell me that was manufactured by Breitbart.
I’m very curious to hear your take on the verbal assault against the female representative junior references below.
Oh, and here’s a nice little story about where all those union dues from New Jersey firefighters is going:
http://biggovernment.com/dloos/2011/03/03/union-bosses-order-off-duty-firefighters-to-march-today-at-union-rally/
I’m so glad to see that a union boss can threaten to withhold union support from his members if they don’t attend a rally on their day off, a rally that has nothing to do with their job duties. But union bosses don’t strong-arm any of their members. Nah. No wonder their pushing so hard for card check.
For the record, from Media Matters;
EXCLUSIVE: Photographer Slams Fox News’ Distortion Of His WI Protest Footage
March 04, 2011 by Justin Berrier
As Media Matters noted, on March 3, 2011, Fox News used footage shot by a local Wisconsin photographer to falsely label Wisconsin union protesters as “violent.” The video showed protesters confronting Republican State Senator Glenn Grothman as he attempted to enter the Wisconsin capitol building. Although the video clearly showed no violence being committed, and in fact, the protesters breaking into chants of “peace” and “peaceful,” Fox falsely depicted the crowd as “violent protesters,” and an “angry union mob,” who “ambush[ed]” Grothman.
In a statement to Media Matters, Phil Ejercito, the photographer who shot the video, responded, slamming Fox News’ distortion of his material:
It sickens me to see the truth so willfully distorted. In deciding to release this video, I considered how it would be used, but I (perhaps naively) believed that the facts in the video would speak for itself – the people of Wisconsin are angry, Senator Grothman got a well-deserved ribbing, the Walker administration’s lockdown of the Capitol is misguided, and Representative Hulsey acted honorably. It is simply astounding that the same faction of the right-wing that would claim that torture in Abu Ghraib was “fraternity hazing” would equate heckling as a “violent attack.”
I have been covering these protests 24/7 from the outset, with no legal team or anything to guide me other than a dedication to truth and the people of Wisconsin. I believe I represent a growing grey area between citizen journalism and professional journalism. While I pride myself on the experience and professionalism with which I approach my job, I will admit to being somewhat starry-eyed upon dealing with national media. I initially refused to license my footage to Fox News, politely citing “qualms about the quality of Fox’s reporting from here in Madison.” Only upon receiving assurances that both Sen. Grothman and Rep. Hulsey would be available to provide context did I acquiesce.
Let there be no ambiguity: I condemn the use of my work to distort the truth about the spirited but non-violent protests here in Madison. I believe that this is a genuinely dangerous narrative that Fox News is helping to create. Prior to Gov. Walker’s Feb. 11 unveiling of his budget repair bill, the last time a Wisconsin governor invoked the National Guard in response to labor, seven demonstrators were shot dead in front of the Bay View Rolling Mill. I am deeply disturbed to consider that my work is being misused to establish a fictional narrative of violence by the working families of Wisconsin, and I encourage people to watch the entire clip on YouTube for themselves to understand the full context and decide for themselves what truthfully took place.
You’re right Anonster, no violence was committed. Of course, that’s because a Democrat representative stepped in to make sure that the situation was defused. The fact is, you had an angry (note I agree it wasn’t violent at the time) pro-union mob of dozens cornering a Republican legislator trying to reduce their benefits, with the legislator having no escape because he was locked out. So yes, no violence occurred, but it was a tense situation regardless.
Oh, and I’m sure MSNBC and CNN would never do something like add a controversial label to a situation…
Anonster,
How would you like some one to tell you, with extreme malice – “You’re fucking dead” ?
Nice – really fucking nice!
Oh my, a republican suffered a “verbal assault”, yeah it’s not nice but that’s the reality of being a politician or a public figure today.
I don’t think anyone has ever claimed that there isn’t over the top comments on both sides, but to try and make the claim that these protests have been violent is just hyperbole.
Anonster,
I have not said that dems & public union supporters have been particularly violent.
I have called them extemely uncivil – fetid – corrupt – loathsome – mephitic – offensive – repugnant & repulsive, but not particularly violent; “yet.”
“Every once and a while ya godda ged down to da streets and get a little bloody when necessary.” said by some fucking idiot democrat legislator.
“You’re fucking dead.” said by democrat legislator.
Who said this ? ” I urge politicians and commentators and citizens of every political conviction to use my comment as a means to recognize the insidiousness of violent imagery,”
Please provide examples of similar “violent imagery” expressed by any conservative anywhere in regard to this issue.
If I recall, it was the left that issued the call for “civility” in the discourse following the Arizona shooting. I don’t think either junior or myself claimed that the verbal assault was violent. However, I have provided a link that proves that several union supporters have assaulted individuals during the protests that have occurred in the past couple of weeks. You just choose to ignore it. Plus, as memory also serves, the left has often blamed violent rhetoric for real violent acts (Rush and Bill-O for two have been blamed for using strong words and the left claims that the words led to actual violence – see “Tiller the killer” as an example). So, shouldn’t the libs be consistent on this and condemn all violent rhetoric, or is “You are f—-ing dead” not violent enough for you?
One ass of a state senator (who has apologized) shouldn’t reflect on the behavior of thousands of peaceful protestors.
As to whether or not you have tried to smear the union protestors (remember these folks are teachers, cops, firefighters and retirees) one only has to look at the language used to describe them, the top two favorites;
goon [guːn]
n
2. (Business / Industrial Relations & HR Terms) US informal a thug hired to commit acts of violence or intimidation, esp in an industrial dispute
thug
[thuhg]
–noun
1.
a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
Anonster,
I have reserved my goon labels for those pro-union supporters who have been proven, by video, to have assaulted Tea Partiers, conservatives, and even Fox reporters. When you throw an individual against a metal fence (also caught on tape) without provocation, you are a goon. You either haven’t watched the video, or you are still in that blissful state of constant liberal denial.
Newbie,
But you did call them union thugs, BEFORE the alleged incidents and I DON’T see ANY language singling out ONLY the “proven” assaulters;
Newbie
Posted February 25, 2011 at 12:02 PM
Hence, the UNION THUGS taking to the streets in Wisconsin, complete with very uncivil signs (remember the pleas from Democrats post-Arizona?), racist slurs, even assaults (but what else would we expect from unions?)
thug
[thuhg]
–noun
1.
a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
Ah, so even though I mentioned the assaults in the very post you quote, that doesn’t count? Whatever.
Oh, and I am happy to call anyone (liberal, conservative, or other) a thug (though I do like ruffian) if they feel they have to use violent signs, racists slurs, or ASSAULTS to make their point. And by the way, there had already been at least one assault by that time, and maybe more from the protestors:
http://biggovernment.com/eyeblasttv/2011/02/24/union-thug-attacks-freedomworks-tabitha-hale/ (note it was posted on February 24 – BEFORE my post)
But don’t let the facts get in the way of your bogus argument.
Newbie,
Except the for the DATES;
Newbie; “union thugs” 2/25/11
Union member throws tea party member…
Union thug at Atlanta moveon rally 2-26-11
“There is hate in their eyes.”
That’s the eerie description Fox News national reporter Mike Tobin gave of the Wisconsin protesters in Madison on Saturday night. By Sunday afternoon (2/28/11) that hate manifested itself in the form of an assault on Tobin, who was hit during a live broadcast from the Capitol amid chants of ‘Fox News lies!”
Right Newbie,
That was the “assault” you were referencing, LOL.
Newbie,
I did a little research, pal, and that “assault” (and really nothing is shown, did the Freedom works people shove their camera in that guy’s face?) happened outside of Tabitha Hale’s DC(?) office.
Your words; 2/25/11;
“the UNION THUGS taking to the streets in Wisconsin”
Anonster,
If it had been a male Republican legislator who told a female Democrat legislator that she was “Fxxxxng dead” – an apology would not have been acceptable to you.
You and other dems would have demanded the ouster of the Republican. An apology would not have sufficed.
Anonster – You are a hypocrite.
junior,
When accusing someone of a specific behavior, in this case hypocrisy, one should have a concrete statement or phrase to back up that accusation. Your “would have” supposition, is just that, supposition and not proof of anything other than your own prejudices.
On the other hand, I can call you a jerk, because I, unlike you, have your own statements to back up the accusation;
” I have called them extemely uncivil – fetid – corrupt – loathsome – mephitic – offensive – repugnant & repulsive, but not particularly violent; “yet.”
And not only a jerk, but a jerk who talks out of his ass;
“It is a fixed election. The upper level union bosses are elected by the local business manager bosses.”
I am a jerk and talk out of my ass.
I blame it on Jack Daniels.
I’m sure I’ll be convinced if you say scumbag just one more time.
I applaud the courage of the Wisconsin legislature to not let the Democrats end the democratic process.
Michelle Quinn (you must have some pretty big feet)
It’s 5:30am and I’m really not in the mood to write, but I will. We, in Wisconsin have a runaway corrupt “Scotty Walker” backed by ALEC. They are above the law, they have gone beyond the law and are now imposing a law that has not even been implemented lawfully. It is being taken up in the court system, it was jammed thru, it was a court order to “restrain” implementation, yet the Republicans have put it into effect and are acting as if it is a law. This to all of YOU Corporate “business owners” who call us the “shit in your shoes” Michelle, wouldn’t have shoes without the workers you employ.
We, are not fighting for the Union Bosses, you fools, we are fighting for our RIGHTS, we are fighting for what Martin Luther King was assassinated for in 1968, the right to organize, and the rights for collective bargaining.
We are fighting so that the top dogs such as the GE Corporation pay their fair share of taxes. We are fighting because we “the shit on your shoes” bailed out “banks to big to fail” and they gave our money to their “CEO’s in big bonus’s” rather than to “pay it forward” so now WE THE PEOPLE, are tired of being the shit on your shoes, the slobs, the unfortunate idiots that make YOU all the money, so WE the people you think are ignorent, are going to uprise and take back OUR country.
When we have professors at University’s that write blogs about ALEC the know secretive groups that try to run this country and have been know about since well before his blog, in article’s that came out prior to the year 2000. We lQQk down upon him becoming abused and having the republicans use laws to scare him off, so the thugs aren’t the Union Bosses, the Thugs are the Corporations and the Billionaires that have no respect.
The Legislature they are now implementing to tax the elderly, the poor, the sick, the disabled, and even the blind. You sick people, how do you do it, the hoax on Acorn, the Hoax on Planned Parenthood, while WI Senators claim we are in a financial bind yet move out of their districts with their mistrisses and hire them in a State job at $14,000 more a year than the previous worker. WE aren’t broke, it’s not about the money, it’s about the stripping of our rights, our dignity and the “brass balls you have” to think you are above the rest of the people around YOU. YOU are a low life and probably have to reach up to scratch the belly of a snake.
Take your business and pray you do well, because without your money you sure as hell have no heart or soul. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL, AND we will prevail, we will have our rights, we will have collective bargaining, and we will boycott all businesses that try to put their puppets in “OUR HOUSE”. I am not fighting for myself, but for my fellow citizens and will do so and bring on board people that are tired of being thought of as scum. That was a horrid statement coming from what is supposed to be a lady.