What groups are going to be affected by the recent Supreme Court ruling?

[Mai72]

The recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on ending contribution limits is going to affect certain industries. Personally, I think the Republicans are going to benefit from this recent decision. Right away I see two groups who are going to affected.

1. Unions
2. Teachers.

The political landscape is going to be shaped by money. This is something that favors the Republicans. As everybody knows, they are against unions, and they don't like teachers.

 

[Greenman]

The recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on ending contribution limits is going to affect certain industries. Personally, I think the Republicans are going to benefit from this recent decision. Right away I see two groups who are going to affected.

1. Unions
2. Teachers.

The political landscape is going to be shaped by money. This is something that favors the Republicans. As everybody knows, they are against unions, and they don't like teachers.

This is based on the assumption that republicans have more money than democrats? Or that business supports R's over D's? I don't think either of those are correct, what's your reasoning?

 

[brandonb]

Is going to be? It has been for a century, if not millennia.

Also. Not sure if there is some political dogma for Republicans that says they don't like teachers. Can to enlighten me?

 

[Mai72]

Is going to be? It has been for a century, if not millennia.

Also. Not sure if there is some political dogma for Republicans that says they don't like teachers. Can to enlighten me?

It seems to me that the policies that are endorsed by Republican candidates are anti-union and anti-teacher. I live in New Jersey and Chris Christie who is a Republican has waged a war against the NJEA and our public schools.

Scott Walker, who is the governor of Wisconsin, is another Republican. His actions in 2011 have decimated the teacher's union. http://www.westernjournalism.com/wisconsin-teachers-unions-in-full-collapse/

I just gave you two examples. Do a search online. Educators should be very wary of the Supreme Courts decision.

 

[Anarchist420]

I really dont see how it will make much difference given that everyone but the ruling class will still be restrained by the Constitution.

 

[drebo]

Anyone who thinks teachers' unions actually help teachers is a fucking moron.

 

[brandonb]

It seems to me that the policies that are endorsed by Republican candidates are anti-union and anti-teacher. I live in New Jersey and Chris Christie who is a Republican has waged a war against the NJEA and our public schools.

Scott Walker, who is the governor of Wisconsin, is another Republican. His actions in 2011 have decimated the teacher's union. http://www.westernjournalism.com/wisconsin-teachers-unions-in-full-collapse/

I just gave you two examples. Do a search online. Educators should be very wary of the Supreme Courts decision.

Why has Christie waged war against the NJEA and the public schools? Whats his beef about it?

 

[JockoJohnson]

It seems to me that the policies that are endorsed by Republican candidates are anti-union and anti-teacher. I live in New Jersey and Chris Christie who is a Republican has waged a war against the NJEA and our public schools.

Scott Walker, who is the governor of Wisconsin, is another Republican. His actions in 2011 have decimated the teacher's union. http://www.westernjournalism.com/wisconsin-teachers-unions-in-full-collapse/

I just gave you two examples. Do a search online. Educators should be very wary of the Supreme Courts decision.

Teacher unions...not teachers. There is a big difference.

 

[Mai72]

Anyone who thinks teachers' unions actually help teachers is a fucking moron.

New Jersey teachers would tell you otherwise.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Anyone who thinks teachers' unions actually help teachers is a fucking moron.

As someone who was once married to a teacher, I'll tell you you're an idiot.

 

[bradly1101]

The Roberts court has repeatedly ruled that corporations are people and money=free speech. The more money you have, the louder your voice is.

The groups that lose are the ones less well off (which amazingly doesn't mean they're less worthwhile), and great, prospective candidates without stellar funding.

 

[drebo]

As someone who was once married to a teacher, I'll tell you you're an idiot.

As someone who is married to a teacher and works extensively with school district administrators and principles...no, I'm not.

They take take take, offer nothing back to the teachers except extremely high insurance premiums, and are, overall, a detriment to progress in schools. They protect teachers who should not be teaching while those who should be shining are stifled. The stop at nothing to halt innovation and upgrades for the sake of not having to retrain old-ass teachers who'd prefer to still use world maps that have the USSR on them.

Education should be about teaching kids. Instead, it's about keeping bad teachers in jobs.

Teachers' unions are bad for education. If you can't see that, you're a willfully ignorant moron.

 

[cubby1223]

Older teachers who have secured their fat income and fat tenure and fat pensions love the unions.

Younger teachers who have horribly pitiful salaries because the available money is going to the greedy who have gamed the system over the course of their lives... not so much love there for the unions.

 

[cubby1223]

They protect teachers who should not be teaching while those who should be shining are stifled.

The is the same for most union workplaces nowadays.

Unions are dying because the union structure encourage unproductive workers. Non-union workers out produce union workers, translating into union workplaces not being competitive.

While I do believe unions are necessary to grow a middle class, unions cannot grow the middle class until the unions themselves make drastic changes that rewards worker productivity.

The only play unions ever made to grow was to eliminating competition. This doesn't fly anymore. Unions must change. We need productivity rewarded.

 

[DCal430]

The recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on ending contribution limits is going to affect certain industries. Personally, I think the Republicans are going to benefit from this recent decision. Right away I see two groups who are going to affected.

1. Unions
2. Teachers.

The political landscape is going to be shaped by money. This is something that favors the Republicans. As everybody knows, they are against unions, and they don't like teachers.

This ruling is positive for unions. They can force more money from employees against their will to "donate."

 

[DCal430]

The only reason I am anti union is they took hundreds of dollars from my pay check for political contributions against my will, and make me jump though all kinds of hoops each year to prevent further taking of monies.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

As someone who is married to a teacher and works extensively with school district administrators and principles...no, I'm not.

They take take take, offer nothing back to the teachers except extremely high insurance premiums, and are, overall, a detriment to progress in schools. They protect teachers who should not be teaching while those who should be shining are stifled. The stop at nothing to halt innovation and upgrades for the sake of not having to retrain old-ass teachers who'd prefer to still use world maps that have the USSR on them.

Education should be about teaching kids. Instead, it's about keeping bad teachers in jobs.

Teachers' unions are bad for education. If you can't see that, you're a willfully ignorant moron.

You have the wrong unions. The ones I saw protected my ex-wife from an abusive admin. She made the mistake of not joining them on her first job and got dog-piled by the administration because of it (you'd think they'd love her for not supporting the union?). Guess what the first thing she did was on her second job?

 

[drebo]

You have the wrong unions. The ones I saw protected my ex-wife from an abusive admin. She made the mistake of not joining them on her first job and got dog-piled by the administration because of it (you'd think they'd love her for not supporting the union?). Guess what the first thing she did was on her second job?

Sounds like your ex-wife is either weak-willed or useless. Exactly the kind of person who loves and is loved by unions.

Grow a spine and there won't be "admin abuse." What, did they make her do her own grading? Her copier quota too low? lol.

 

[sportage]

When ever you have "candidates gone wild" on money you open a can of worms.
What people should be concerned with now is that the "process" itself has been further damaged.
Lets just say all the Richard Nixon wannabes have a new best friend.
Let the corruption begin. Again. Bigger than ever before.

The system has already rigged the US house thru district gerrymandering, so that it doesn't matter who or what the majority want, they get the candidate paid and owned by the wealthy few.
Now that one single person of riches can buy and fully fund unlimited senate candidates, well... at least you won't have to bother voting anymore. It will no longer matter.
So I guess there is an up side. We all can just stay home come every election day.

 

[piasabird]

I guess you are talking about campaign donations. I don't see why campaign donations are not taxed when most of the candidates are millionaires.

So it might be nice if you had a link to the decision or something. I am not just taking your word for it. In the past there were court decisions and often the ruling was mixed and parts of laws get thrown out. It is odd because often both sides claim the ruling is in their favor. That is why a discussion like this needs a link.

 

[piasabird]

Everyone knows liberals have no money -- NOT!

 

[poofyhairguy]

What groups are going to be affected by the recent Supreme Court ruling?

I expect Oil and Gas and Health Professionals to jump up this list, and retired to drop:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.php

In regards to teacher unions, they are screwed anyway. The mainstream Democratic establishment from Obama on down have stepped away from these unions because they prevent reform.

 

[piasabird]

I thought Unions were suppose to represent the Employees?

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Sounds like your ex-wife is either weak-willed or useless. Exactly the kind of person who loves and is loved by unions.

Grow a spine and there won't be "admin abuse." What, did they make her do her own grading? Her copier quota too low? lol.

*roll eyes* OK

 

[Fern]

The recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on ending contribution limits is going to affect certain industries. Personally, I think the Republicans are going to benefit from this recent decision. Right away I see two groups who are going to affected.

1. Unions
2. Teachers.

The political landscape is going to be shaped by money. This is something that favors the Republicans. As everybody knows, they are against unions, and they don't like teachers.

I don't think it will do much of anything.

Congressional campaigns costs run into the millions. This ruling just lets individuals contribute the limit of $2,600 to more people/candidates.

Fern