Are public sector unions the problem with state budgets??

[HomerJS]

You know the narrative, we must get rid of union power in the states so we can manage our budgets. The following article charts the budget deficits of states vs their percentage of public sector unions. Results, no correlation between budgets deficits and union membership. No politics, rhetoric, just math.

http://www.themonkeycage.org/2011/02/the_relationship_between_union.html


Remember the battle in WI is not about finances since the unions agreed to contribute to their pensions and healthcare.

 

[Throckmorton]

This doesn't have any meaning because they're using percentage of all workers who are unionized, not state employees.

As far as I know, Hawaii is 100% union aside from managers.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

The choice for the budget deficit as the other variable is terrible too. Theres way too may variables that affect the deficit year to year to make it a useful measure. They should be looking at state expenditures as a percent of state GDP or similar.

 

[DaveSimmons]

The problem isn't unions, it's politicians spending money that they don't have on many things, including pandering to unions for votes.

Edit: Also, if unions are bad and budget-killers, why did the WI governor exempt police unions from his union-busting? Answer: he's pandering to the law enforcement union since it's more likely to vote Republican. As long as they keep voting for him, he doesn't care about their effect on the budget crisis.

 

[comptr6]

Yes. Get rid of the unions and fiscal problems will be solved. There isn't a country in the world that allows unions and isn't struggling. Coincidence? Only in the mind of a libtard. You never here about Chinese, Mexican or Indian Unions striking and look where all the jobs are going.

 

[Craig234]

No. Here's a very clip from Rachel Maddow today with some info that it's not.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Remember, it is as you say a 'narrative', that's how propaganda works, something that 'sounds good' but is inaccurate.

They're grabbing the fiscal crisis (their policies brought about) to pursue their agenda, shifting wealth from the people (unions) to the rich (note corporation tax cuts).

 

[BoT]

Yes. Get rid of the unions and fiscal problems will be solved. There isn't a country in the world that allows unions and isn't struggling. Coincidence? Only in the mind of a libtard. You never here about Chinese, Mexican or Indian Unions striking and look where all the jobs are going.

there are unions all over the place in Europe and north and south america.
unions used to be the backbone of the american worker, nowadays people rather sellout in hopes to get a shoot at the big buck .. today, not thinking about tomorrow.

the unions have no effect on the budget of a state or it's crisis in this case.
unions "should" ensure that a worker still can expect human treatment and a decent work environment even if employers would like to do otherwise in order to save money, which in turn is not invested to actually fix the crisis but to further enrich very few individuals.

 

[JS80]

The problem isn't unions, it's politicians spending money that they don't have on many things, including pandering to unions for votes.

Edit: Also, if unions are bad and budget-killers, why did the WI governor exempt police unions from his union-busting? Answer: he's pandering to the law enforcement union since it's more likely to vote Republican. As long as they keep voting for him, he doesn't care about their effect on the budget crisis.

Lol do you stupid libs actually believe this?

 

[BoT]

obviously you are oblivious to it

 

[Craig234]

The problem isn't unions, it's politicians spending money that they don't have on many things, including pandering to unions for votes.

Edit: Also, if unions are bad and budget-killers, why did the WI governor exempt police unions from his union-busting? Answer: he's pandering to the law enforcement union since it's more likely to vote Republican. As long as they keep voting for him, he doesn't care about their effect on the budget crisis.

The governor exempted the minority of unions *who endorsed him in the election*.

He has that bit or corrupt loyalty more than Reagan did, who got almost no union endorsements - an exception being the air traffic controllers.

Otherwise, this is an attack on the Democrats' funding - a raw power grab to repeal unions back to the pre-FDR days of a very weak middle class and a very large lower class.

And a very happy wealth class.

 

[cubby1223]

You know the narrative, we must get rid of union power in the states so we can manage our budgets. The following article charts the budget deficits of states vs their percentage of public sector unions. Results, no correlation between budgets deficits and union membership. No politics, rhetoric, just math.

http://www.themonkeycage.org/2011/02/the_relationship_between_union.html


Remember the battle in WI is not about finances since the unions agreed to contribute to their pensions and healthcare.

Really? Simple math says the less tax money going to unions, the less expenses the state pays out, and the less money must be collected from tax-paying citizens.

Your graph doesn't say anything anyways, other than states run at about a 20% deficit. How about union membership versus tax rate? Versus GDP? Versus total government spending?

 

[comptr6]

the unions have no effect on the budget of a state or it's crisis in this case.
unions "should" ensure that a worker still can expect human treatment and a decent work environment even if employers would like to do otherwise in order to save money, which in turn is not invested to actually fix the crisis but to further enrich very few individuals.

There might have been a time when unions served a purpose, but now they are just liberal run mafias that force workers to join and if employees or employers don't cooperate then they go on the offensive and attack. Unions will use whatever means necessary to achieve their goals (like a terrorist group). This inherently leads to higher costs because all labor in many sectors like teaching are tied up in extremist political organizations.

 

[BoT]

i agree that unions today are not what they used to be but i rather see them return to their prime then see them go altogether. it leaves core of workers unprotected and allows employers to expect and demand whatever they feel is good for the profit margin.

who would be left to enforce worker rights? who would be left to negotiate worker benefits?
with union leaving there would be a whole lot more leaving.

 

[cubby1223]

The governor exempted the minority of unions *who endorsed him in the election*.

He has that bit or corrupt loyalty more than Reagan did, who got almost no union endorsements - an exception being the air traffic controllers.

Otherwise, this is an attack on the Democrats' funding - a raw power grab to repeal unions back to the pre-FDR days of a very weak middle class and a very large lower class.

And a very happy wealth class.

Do you really continue to believe anyone listens to you? Is this why you continue posting on this forum? Because no one in real life is willing to put up with you?

You always take a hardline approach, defining not just a struggle between two sides, but portraying near every disagreement as a battle between good and evil.

Isn't it about time you snap out of your false reality? The Wisconsin government was elected by many, many, many, many more people that just "the rich". Think about it. Of course you'll just cry "propaganda!!!!!!" What is more likely, that 1.1million people were tricked by propaganda into following a devilishly evil plot to destroy their state? Or your one viewpoint is wrong?

 

[Infohawk]

Do you really continue to believe anyone listens to you? Is this why you continue posting on this forum?

LOL. Poor Craig. Think about all his posts that nobody's even bothered to read.

 

[novasatori]

No. Here's a very clip from Rachel Maddow today with some info that it's not.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Remember, it is as you say a 'narrative', that's how propaganda works, something that 'sounds good' but is inaccurate.

They're grabbing the fiscal crisis (their policies brought about) to pursue their agenda, shifting wealth from the people (unions) to the rich (note corporation tax cuts).

nice vid

 

[dmcowen674]

yes. Get rid of the unions and fiscal problems will be solved. There isn't a country in the world that allows unions and isn't struggling. Coincidence? Only in the mind of a libtard. You never here about chinese, mexican or indian unions striking and look where all the jobs are going.

wwybywb?

 

[Zebo]

Federal retirements cost 400 billion or 15% of budget. I assume states are the same since they also spend as much as Feds combined and have similar benefits.

 

[Red Dawn]

There might have been a time when unions served a purpose, but now they are just liberal run mafias that force workers to join and if employees or employers don't cooperate then they go on the offensive and attack. Unions will use whatever means necessary to achieve their goals (like a terrorist group). This inherently leads to higher costs because all labor in many sectors like teaching are tied up in extremist political organizations.

The Republicans want to bust the Unions because they know it will weaken their political opponents, Democrats and that's all this is about.

 

[PokerGuy]

Union membership is not the problem with state budgets, it's one of the problems. There are bigger problems, but you can't tackle everything at the same time, this is a good opportunity to take on the unions and solve one of the problems. There is absolutely no reason why union government employees should fare better than those who pay their salary in this current economy.

 

[piasabird]

Almost every public school district is unionized where I have been.

The real issue at hand is unfunded pensions.
On the other hand O'Bammah Care is probably bankrupting some school districts with raising costs of health care. Maybe when O'Bammah Care kicks in, the school districts will just opt out of health insurance. That should be fun!

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The Republicans want to bust the Unions because they know it will weaken their political opponents, Democrats and that's all this is about.

Try again.

 

[her209]

The Republicans want to bust the Unions because they know it will weaken their political opponents, Democrats and that's all this is about.

Exactly. How does requiring unions to vote every year fix a budget? It doesn't.

 

[IBMer]

Union membership is not the problem with state budgets, it's one of the problems. There are bigger problems, but you can't tackle everything at the same time, this is a good opportunity to take on the unions and solve one of the problems. There is absolutely no reason why union government employees should fare better than those who pay their salary in this current economy.

Who or what is the judge of how they are doing compared to the current economy. Since this economy dipped, I have recieved merit increases and a bonus every year. I am not in a governement job. Where do we judge that they are doing too well?

 

[rudder]

Just look at underfunded pension liabilities. In a state where the public workers are unionized this will be helluva lot harder to fix. The sooner it is done the better. One example is Illinois where the pension fund is predicted to run out of money in 7 years.

At any rate, public workers should not be in a union. Look at the Air Traffic controller strike in the 1980's. How many teachers in WI are getting fake doctors notes? they have a duty to the public and should not use their service as a bargaining chip.