Lets see what the leftys do during the recall of senators and the guv

BTW maybe scott should run for President in 2012, he's so popular with the people I am sure he would be the best frontrunner for the GOP

amen.

Get 'r done Scotty! Oh and by the way enjoy your time left in office.

Shame on the Democrats that ran away and took the side of the union rather than the tax payer. Shame on the unions that were greedy for all these years. Shame on those in the public sector that refuse to be willing to give up what the rest of us have had to. Shame on the protesters that are turning our capital building into Woodstock. There's plenty of shame to go around Linda.

It's same as a fillibuster silly. Anyway doesn't matter, Gov will be recalled as well as the other repubs.

Hope they enjoy what little time they have left in office :)

Fillibusters aren't allowed in the Wisconsin Senate either,but don't let facts get in your way

Greta,
The Democrats left, because they didn't feel this was right and hoped that Walker would negotiate, but that didn't happen. Is the public ever listened too? What else is going on that's illegal, is what I'd like to know.

Yea I voted for Walker on his campaign promise to "strip the public unions of their rights"...
not.

I couldn't think of a better candidate (except maybe Sara Palin)! It would ensure an Obama victory!

I say Gov Walker just handed Obama a 2nd term

Right on, Sam!

Sam, according to the IRS, the top 50% of wage earners pay 97% of the taxes. Buffet, while an investing genius, is nothing more than liberal schill when it comes to politics. There's nothing stopping him from writing a check to the Government, or fro you to do that. Oh, That's right, you leftys only like to be generous with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY

Fiscal Conservative, you've misstated the facts. The top 50% of TAX PAYERS pay 97% of FEDERAL INCOME TAX. If you take into account state and local taxes, the top 50% pay something like 80%.

An income of $33k is the dividing line between the top and bottom 50% (2008 data, probably lower now). So the richest family in the lowest 50% earns $33k. The poverty level, for a family of 4, is $22k (Census Bureau, 2009).

I ask you, earnestly, how much can you raise the taxes on these families to relieve the tax burden on the top 50%? I also ask, how much you would expect to relieve the tax burden on the top 50%?

Add to that the fact that Wall st. raided our treasury back in 2008 and caused the current recession under the careful watch of George W. Bush.

They got the $$ and we got the pain. This is all the fall out from that event (bailout) and we're blaming this all on teachers... pfffffff give me a break.

The guys on Wall Street walked away with a nice bailout AND bonuses! Maybe they can pay us back? No, lets just take more and more from our working class.

Amen Andy! I have been posting this all over - the unions have been PRIVILEDGED to get away with all of this for too long. Now it's time to reign them in and get our tax dollars back to something more helpful than viagra and life-partner benefits.

There is also no "right" to screw the taxpayers out of billions for the wall street bailout but yet, it happened, and no one was outraged enough.

Now we have neighbors pitted against neighbors with pension envy. People need to look at the big picture that corporate america is taking over.

Lucky for us, there is way more of us than them. Money is the fruits of labor.

Who are the laborers? We are. Teachers are not the enemy. Big Corp has everything to gain by union busting.

Bah State isn't "Broke" our Govt is broke. Apparently we're so broke we gave corporations big tax breaks!

Craig,
If we are going to solve the budget deficit it will require more than just cutting spending. We have to increase revenue also. Public employees collective bargaining rights have been significantly trimmed. We need to move on and talk about the actual biennium budget. This is where it gets real tough. I don't see a huge inrush of business coming in and I am afraid that the governor and state legislature has tainted Wisconsin. Nobody will move here if we have this much labor instability; I know I wouldn't.

The flaw in your reasoning is your apparent belief that education is a passive process. Open the kiddies' skulls and pour in the learnin'! Well, it doesn't work like that. The child has to actively participate. The parents have to actively participate. It's not all on the teachers . . . who are far from "elite, untouchable."

And how do you think this revocation of their collective bargaining rights will help to improve our children?

Lynne,
You are only half right. Government should not be controlled by unions or BUSINESS SPECIAL INTERESTS. You and I as citizens have the right to be heard, no matter what we have to say. What I object to is the manipulation of issues by people and special interests with the money to market their special interest and sway the uninformed public. The propaganda being spewed is some of the worst I've seen in my six plus decades. Remember this; control by the unions is socialism, control by business is facism.

Ah, so if you don't have these benefits, nobody should have them! That seems to be the rallying cry for the followers of these power mad Republican legislators. Trust me when I tell you, you're wrong! And they're wrong! and the motto of our state has just changed to BACKWARD!

Anne, you're saying everybody SHOULDN'T have these benefits??? Where's that Solidarity you leftys keep asking for? I guess it only applies to when YOU want folks to help your cause. Anne, do you drive an American made Union built car? How many of you teachers screaming for solidarity can say that you drive an American made Union built car? If not, where was your solidarity with the auto workers when you made that buying decision?

Damn straight. But look at it this way, Walker has united people here in the state like never before. Next election will be damnned interesting! Can't wait for the Democratic landslide.

As a retired CEO and entrepreneur, I don't understand your objections to public school teachers other than the fact they are unionized. I have managed union and nonunion companies, public and closed. If all companies were like SC Johnson there wouldn't be a need for someone to protect workers rights, but Johnson is the exception to the rule. To claim that collective bargaining drove companies out of the state is over stated. I have had to move companies and set up companies and unions are only one of the considerations. It is the relationship and expectations of the shareholder that drives many decisions. I don't hear many people screaming about if I want to sell into China that I have set up manufacturing there and have a government partner. Many companies have decided to participate in a market of over a billion people and will sleep with the devil and divert employment to the new markets to just gain access. I want the unions and business out of funding politics. I am also a business type that would welcome a single payer health care system as well as a single pension system. I got tired of all the time and money I had to spend on health and benefit issues. These are the hidden costs of doing business and extra personnel to manage it. Brian, make sure you are comparing apples and apples and stop beating up on people that haven't a way to defend themselves.

Your post makes no sense!

Whoo boy this one drank the kool-aid

Russetwil - not sure you are in the position to judge kool-aid drinking. Love how your posts are all hours or days after everyone else has posted. Talk about LOL. Might want to work on another defense other than blaming Wall Street for everything - makes you sound not very credible.

What opinion really matters is the next recall election, and I think all will be clear, even to you.

Big picture folks, the guys on Wall street took our money back in 2008 and we bailed them out, and now we're paying the price.

They got the $$ and we got the pain. Union schmunion, this is about big Corp. taking over. Labor and corporations have been battling since the dawn of time, because each wants more of what the other has.

But get what, there are more working people than billionaries in this country. Power to the people.

Naw, they won't get it. The working class will rise up for what is right, it's coming and we've got more boots on the ground and can pull more levers at the voting booth.

Scott Walker truly has awakened a sleeping giant,... look out!

Joe the Plumber was paid for by the organizations who hired him to speak.
Scott Walker bus tours? Scott Walker Campaign fund.
Duh.

pfffffff

unions controlling govt. what a hoot. Where do trillions of dollars sit right now as we speak?

Won't matter, senate repubs gone in a year and Walker gone by this time next year

**One of the biggest bargaining issues is class size. Teachers know that smaller classes are better for children. Even colleges say smaller class sizes in college allow more participation and are better for students. Class size is especially significant in special education classes.
Voucher schools do not provide special education classes and do not have to educate physically or mentally disabled students. **Public school teachers bargain to provide special services to students who need them. 20% of students in MPS high schools are exceptional education students from learning disabled to bipolar. This percent will go even higher as the vouchers are increased. The disabled will not be welcomed at voucher schools. Voucher schools can expel students who are discipline problems. Public schools must deal with them. ** Teachers bargain for such things as in school suspension and after school special classes and programs to help and counsel students.
Another issue is music, physical education, foreign language, libraries, art clases and extra curricular activities. These are the first to be cut. Most schools in Milwaukee no longer have band or chorus. Tosa East recently decided that they had to cut librarians so they could keep some foreign language classes. The Walker budget even cuts money from advanced classes, math and science.

Once again - CONCRETE. Tell me where all these terrible things have happened? What city denied services to special needs? What school district gained an inordinate amount of special needs students when a charter school came in their area? What charter school denied services or expelled students? Are the states without collective bargaining spinning out of control or are their children being educated despite it all? I taught in a private Christian school in Texas for minority children several years ago. We had no extra programs of any kind. I have kept in touch with my class of 25 students and 20 of them have gone on to complete a higher ed. degree and are successful citizens. Hmmm.....

A charter school is not a voucher school. http://dpi.wi.gov/sms/doc/mpcp_faq_2011_01.doc
A private school may not discriminate against a child with special educational needs in the admission process for the Choice program. As a private school, a Choice school is required to offer only those services to assist students with special needs that it can provide with minor adjustments. Parents should contact MPS for information on the services the school district provides to children with special needs who are enrolled in the public schools and the services that MPS provides children with special needs who are enrolled in private schools. Choice schools DO NOT have to provide special services. By law, public schools do. Note that MPS also provides special services to students who are enrolled in private schools.
Want terrible - read about voucher schools that stole tax payer money: Mandella Academy for Science and Math, school officials admitted signing up more than 200 students who never showed and then cashing $330,000 in state-issued tuition checks, which the principal used to buy Mercedes-Benzes for himself and the assistant principal. Alex’s Academics of Excellence received $2.8 million in voucher money over three years until it was reported that the school’s founder, James A. Mitchell, had served nearly a decade in prison for a 1971 rape. Most recently Dec 2010 Mills Christian Academy ($2 million) was closed when it was discovered no classes were being held.

Yeah I actually I would. I'd expect them to fight like dogs for my side of the argument, but I'd expect them to do it in the forum in which they're being paid to operate. Not run and hide.

See, I believe in majority rule, which is the basis of our system (whatever you want to call it). Even if my side isn't winning. Look at what your assembly Democrats did. They stayed and used the tactics available to them ON SITE.

And what has running away and hiding in Illinois actually done? It made it possible for precisely what happened last night to proceed without your representatives being there to, at the very least, witness and protest the action.

If that's what you want from you representatives, fine. A lot of good it did you.

Bill, you're darn right I would. I did not vote my representatives into office to make a mockery out of democracy. The time to address those issues is during election time. You will note that the Repubs did not flee whne Doyle was ramming through things, nor when Obama, Reid and Pelosi were doing the same. This tactic is shameful, cowadly and disgusting.

Guess you got your answer, Bill. Taking your toys and leaving the sandbox is certainly one way of dealing with conflict. I think what some of us are asking for is that these publicly paid supposed professionals stay in town and do the job they were "elected" to do, even if they don't win or get their desired outcome. That's what my public education taught me democracy is.

Agree completely Don. And funny how I haven't seen one blogger have a rebuttal for this very sound argument.

Rebuttal is simple; the Republicans weren't smart enough to think of it.

I repeat, all repub senators gone within the year and Walker gone by next.

Russetwil - your argument is old, tired and very uneducated.

working class has more boots on the ground and more arms to pull levers, period.

Apparently you don't have any kids in school who are going to get the brunt of the cuts. Wake up already.

Carol - couldn't agree with Brian more. I think we have all heard from people outside WI and tend to only listen to what we want to hear. I have heard that most states think we are a mockery and probably a good SNL skit. Russetwil - I actually DO have two kids in public school and luckily live in WFB where the school district is handling all of this in an incredibly professional manner and has already assured that the students won't suffer. Ironically we also didn't have school shut down due to teacher absences - see what professionals are capable of? Cuts can be made and don't have to affect the students. Your kool-aid has made you intoxicated by the scare tactic that the kids have to lose in this equation.

Scott Walker was not willing to debate the bill, or offer any sort of compromise at all.
And the media is a profit driven corporate media, not anything but. And to say it is PDLS is a stretch.

He released all the emails relating to his and the Republicans communication with the 14 Dems. He was trying to compromise, but they only want what the Union tells them to keep. Collective bargaining should not even have been granted to the public sector in the first.

I love seeing how our Capitol is full of mostly college students who feel they need to stand up for what their professors have taught them. It might be best to use there own life experiences to stand up for something, not something they heard sounded like a great idea in class.

Nicely stated Greta.

Lyle, clearly you are incredibly invested in people having college degrees. Anyone who has taken the time to give you information about the thousands who have been extremely successful without a degree, whether basic or advanced, have watched that information go sailing right over your head. Of all the forms of bigotry, perhaps educational bigotry is among the most insidious and repulsive. Do you associate with, work with, have friends without college degrees or are such cretans simply untouchable and below your caste?

Would you like to pose the same question to Bill Gates?

Lyle - I'm disappointed. You struck me as someone who didn't want to make this a personal attack. Asking Mark S where he went to college was a bit of a low blow, don't you think? As a college graduate myself, I don't judge people by where or if they went to college. Know many a genius who didn't, and many a dope that did. Please don't fall into the latter category. I have more faith in you than that. I'm fairly certain that Mark Zuckerberg didn't finish college (although he was attending Harvard) and last time I checked - he is a billionaire - and for Russetwil's benefit - also an incredible philathropist.

I said absolutely nothing wrong in my previous emails.

Kinda ironic that you would tell Andy to not read into things, but that is exactly what you want.
You say 'Just out of curiosity, what college or university did you graduate from?' How would someone not read into that question under the context of this discussion? It doesn't bother me in the least though, I answered.
You say 'I do wish you would tone down your passion and state your opinions more like Bob who shares your views.' How should we take that? You could have said, Mark, can you agree with me or at least not state your opinion so bluntly? Then I would have answered 'no'.

Lyle,
Thank you and I will continue to work on softening a bit. The island I live on gets a little lonely sometimes :)

Dang fellas, are we gonna clasp hands and start singing Kumbaya?? ;)

Oh Lynne, you hit on my pet peeve. My two oldest sons come home and, at least once every other week, tell me saw a movie in school today. And yes,they are hollywood theatrical movies (Which also means that to see the whole movie they use two full classes to see it). A couple weeks ago my oldest sone said "Hey Dad, guess what movie we watched in class today?". I said "What class?", he said "Algerbra", so I'm hoping at least it's "Stand and Deliver", a movie about a math teacher. Nope, he says "Back to the Future, Part 1". What the heck does that have to do with algebra?! I'm pretty sure they're not researching how many jigowatts it takes to fire a flux capacitor. This stuff makes me very angry.

Oh, now it's back to the ballot box. Why didn't we hear that from you the past three weeks?

I repeat, the working class has more boots on the ground and more arms to pull levers, period.

Yes, I don't understand why there is any problem with this. And my understanding of this part of the bill is that the tax cut is ONLY for the first 2 years. So this is strickly a measure to lure jobs (and business) to WI. I also can't understand why corporations as a whole are vilifed when the reality is we couldn't survive without them. Don't people get that ALL the other jobs other than the public sector are created by corporations? If it weren't for business, there would be no jobs! Businesses increase the tax base and their contributions do make a difference in what the state has money to do. More business = more tax revenue = better services for all.

Bewildered & Kathryn Ameringer;
It's much more complicated than just giving up tax breaks. Kathryn I want to address your assumptions first:
Corporations don't create the majority of jobs in the United States, it is small business. Small business has always been this nation's backbone and small businesses do not put the kind of fiscal pressure on government like corporations do. Big corporations put tremendous pressure on government to make concessions. There is a big game that corporations play putting one city and one state off against another. They might move in and within a short time move out. Most states and cities haven't been smart enough to have "claw back" provisions which recoup the lost tax revenues when the corporation shuts down their operation. Big risk to government and the taxpayer to play that game. Tax breaks alone will not attract business to Wisconsin. Businesses look at a number of factors including workforce skill levels; education levels; if they are manufacturing, they need to factor in the cost of energy (energy in Wisconsin is very expensive); the cost of living; transportation; government regulation, availability to ready capital and location of suppliers to support the logistics needs. Home grown businesses are safer and state capital would be better spent as loan guarantees to start ups. Large enough businesses rarely demonstrate any kind of loyalty except to the share holders.

continued:
Look at Mercury Marine and Harley Davidson, if you don't want us to leave then make concessions from both the government and the unions. By their nature corporations are amoral and seldom ever consider the social cost of their actions. Worst of all your representative equation of business = more tax revenues = better services for all could and probably should read: big business = less tax revenues = no better services or worse services. I know of what I speak; this used be the business I was in.
Kathryn two wrong assumptions; we could survive quite well without corporations, business would still be done. We currently have problems with manufacturing in the US because of corporations. To gain entry into the huge untapped markets of China, they have met the demands of the Chinese to move operations and jobs there and take the Chinese Government on as partners. If corporations were truly individual citizens they would be charged with treason. Senator Ron Johnson's single largest client is his father-in-laws business in China. The other issue is that the two year exemption can easily be turned into an open end agreement when the business threatens to leave. Look at Talgo Industries, no high speed rail, no Talgo. Both of you need to do some research or take some basic classes in business economics.

Lyle; First of all, I never made reference to this being easy or the temporary tax cuts being the entire solution. But in my opinion, a tax break for a company to come here and open up business and create jobs is part of the answer; it certainly can't hurt because we do have high tax implications here for businesses. I know first hard, I have a businesses here in WI. Which leads me to my my next point.

Frankly, for me it is just semantics; business, corporation, small business, etc. I completely agree that most jobs are created by "small businesses", but that doesn't necessarily mean they are not also corporations. Perhaps this wasn't clear, but none the less it was what I was saying. My point is that just because a business entity is incorporated, i.e. "a corporation", doesn't not mean it is evil and wants to screw the worker. In fact I would venture to say that most businesses, whether incorporated or not, large or small, strive to do good by their workers. Yes, I agree we have some super-large corporations that seem to forget that they wouldn't have their businesses if it were not for the workers. I also know this first hand, as I have worked for large corporations in the past and was "just a number".

I do disagree with you that corporations are the single reason we have lost jobs in the US - and China is not the bad guy here - our mass exodus of good paying jobs began long before China was even in the picture. I think there is plenty of blame to go around. I for one certainly can not fault a business (large or small) for wanting to make money and improve their bottom line. After all, that is why they started the business in the first place. You mentioned basic economics; well the most basic economic principal is that of supply and demand. So if these companies that want to produce products need to cut costs because otherwise these products won't sell, it only makes sense that they look to out sourcing both materials and labor. In my opinion, our answer lies in fixing the problems that create it impossible to produce competitively priced products here in the US, not to vilify the corporations because they want to make money.

Kathryn, I know that any size business can incorporate and the vast majority of corporations are indeed small business. Along with incorporation types are closely held and public. I fear that Walker's temporary tax cuts will become permanent. You as an owner and I as an owner need to remain competitive if we are to remain in business. One of the ways we remain competitive is that we have to treat our employees well. If we don't we won't have employees or our competitors will attract them away from us. As a small business owner you understand the impact your business has on your friends and neighbors within the community in which you live. That is social responsibility and understanding social consequences. As you well know that the cheapest price isn't always the best value. I couldn't disagree with you more about large public corporation being not responsible for the economic situation that we are in. GE started off-shoring in the 1960s and 1970s, first to Porto Rico, then to Mexico and then beyond. Huge multi-national corporations are really not citizens of anyone nation. They may have a headquarters in one country or another, but that's about the extent of their loyalty. But the situation is not only the bottom line, but survival for the future. With the big three American automakers, they should have gone out of business decades ago based on what they were manufacturing and putting on the market. I don't think government should be promoting business of business.

The role of government should be as a regulator to keep the excesses of business reined in. As far as making money; that's an entirely different matter. ROI is important as long it is earned morally and ethically following best business practice. Part of the business taxes need to cover social responsibility costs. Why is it when a company moves out or shuts down it falls back on the taxpayer to soften the blow to the effected worker. Fundamentally that is wrong is that a company can just walk away free and clear. That's why single payer health and retirement makes sense. As a business man I hated dealing with health insurance companies, it was a cost that couldn't be controlled. The older the work force the higher the premiums. Let's work together and correct the problems in business and not allow free hand economics to return the middle class to the working poor.

Lyle, I don't think that having a fear that the tax cuts might become permanent is a reason not to put them in place. I think it will help generate interest from companies, particularily if they were already considering a move here. And I doubt with our sad state of economic affairs any tax cut would become permanent. In reality, it is much more likely that if there were any new taxes, they would become permanent. The stadium tax is a good example; but I digress.

I agree that public corporations have done a great deal of damage, but up until now you haven't distinguished between public and private. I don't feel that way about most private companies. And you bring up exactly my point that this mess started many decades ago back in the '70's in particular. I completely agree, the automakers should never have received money. We should have allowed them to fail. But that arguement should be used for every "subsidized" business that gets government assistance - and you know that there are many! The free market system works best when left alone.

We do disagree on some very fundmental principles - I'm sure you're not surprised. In my opinion the government's roll should be limited to things like protecting our borders, providing safety of the citizens, maintenance of infrastructure, education and really have a limited roll (or no roll) in imposing rules, regulations, etc. on businesses or people. Your concern that government should keep "business excesses reined in" is a worrisome viewpoint and not at all what I believe. Whos to say what "excesses" are? I certainly don't want Big Brother to say I can only make "$X" dollars in my business and no more. That certainly is not freedom and that's not why I started a company. Businesses large or small should have the freedom to make as much money as they want as long as what they do is legal. Although I do run my business with moral character, I don't think it's right to force my morality on others if they choose to be unethical. And we all know you can be unethical but still legal. For me, this all boils down to freedom - plain and simple.

So we will continue to disagree.

Kathryn, I am really enjoying your posts. First off, I view privately held companies much differently than publicly held firms. Private companies, for the most part, do not hide behind the anonymity of a board of directors and shareholders when they make unpopular social decisions. As a student of Adam Smith, he even warned against an uncontrolled business environment. Free market forces often cannot react quickly enough to protect against illegal or abusive business practices. Do you believe that there shouldn't be any business regulation at all? Are you willing to trust that all businesses will do what's right based on good will alone? I agree I don't want the government telling me how much revenue I can legally produce, but any business should be willing to pay their fair share in order to have an ordered, safe and a market pregnant with opportunity. Businesses use fire protection, police protection, use the roads for interstate commerce and other public services. Now if you don't want businesses to pay taxes or to be regulated, then it is a necessary and sufficient condition that the individual will have to cover costs through personal taxes. Do you really want me to believe that you are not concerned about other businesses conducting business in either an unethical or illegal manner in the spirit of capitalism so that they can make as much money as possible? What about monopolies and trusts, under your reasoning shouldn't they be allowed to exist?

Lyle, you've made so many contradictory statements on these forums that I have to question the veracity of your arguments. You keep mentioning, in multiple postings, about being a CEO and owning multiple businesses (Which,I'm sure you're doing to try to build credibilty) but I noticed in one post you commiserated with a senior stating that you, too, live on a fixed income. I don't know many successful business people that, once in retirement consider themselves to be on a fixed income, and I do know a lot of successful business folks . You pretend to be above name calling nd then break out the term Teabagger to describe a faction of the Republican party (BTW, there's a lot more than just Repubs in the Tea Party). This got me to thinking, so I did a bit of research on you. Seems you've been sued by 4 different entities from 2006-2008 for what would seem to be inabilityor unwillingnes to pay your bills. The home you live in in Shorewood (Gotta love Googlemaps Streetview) looks pretty average, not what I'd think a business magnate would be living in. Drop the BS about your business pedigree, there's lots of folks out there who are poor business people, that doesn't make them any more relevant than the rest of us.

FC, I didn't claim to be a business magnate. I have been retired for six years and live a very modest life, always have and don't intend not to. I have made fortunes for myself and others and I have lost businesses and suffered the subsequent financial losses, including a period where I was sued and had judgments placed against me. I've had periods of entrepreneurial businesses, working for multi-national corporations and back to entrepreneurship again. I was like many in my generation of going back and forth. Because I have had to struggle and pull myself back up by my bootstraps doesn't change my life experience, my education or my ability to think and express myself. I finally decided to go ahead and take an early retirement because I finally reached an age where it wasn't practical to start over again. Over the last six years I have had small interests in some start ups that didn't go anywhere and I occasionally consult. Most of my time is spent writing on issues of social justice and I am currently in the middle of a book. I have written four unpublished novels and I will attempt to get published, maybe self publish. I currently do a little teaching of history, ethics, and comparative religion at a private religious school. I got pulled into this political hot potato, by choice, when I realized the pushing of the Libertarian agenda by Walker and the Republican legislature.

continued: I am only one voice amongst many on both sides of the issues. I have nothing to hide, thus I use my real name. Now if for some reason I have lost credibility in your eyes and others, so be it. But you have to remember, I am married to a state employed social worker who works very hard to protect abused and neglected children and I don't think she needs to be vilified just because she has dedicated her life to this mission that few others would want to take on. She's not in it for the money; she makes much less than teachers with comparable education and experience. So I do have a dog in this fight. I don't blame anyone for any setbacks that I have had in life nor do I feel sorry for myself; it is what it is. As far as contradictory statements in my posts; I don't think they are glaring contradictions, but I could have made them in the heat of the moment or simple misstatements. If so I apologize and depend on my critics to point them out.

Lyle,perhaps you willnow cease laying out your credentials to attempt to gain credility, stop asking folks about their education level, which seems to be an obvious attempt to reduce the credibility of others.

You really don't need to do these things as you're one of the few liberals that will actually try to use some facts and thoughtful arguments, but these other tactics are annoying and condescending.

Telling Kathyran and myself to "Take some classes in basic economics" almost, I repeat almost, convinced me to give you some credibility as an expert in Econ.... Until I went back and reread all your conflicting comments and considered all your posting about your numerous degrees and vast work experience. I am sorry , But like others, I'm just not buying what you are selling.

Bewildered,
I too am concerned about people misrepresenting themselves and I don't think I claimed to have been an economist. My degrees and business experience have given me some unique perspectives that is not normally heard in these types of discussions. I am not trying to sell anything but want people to look at the other side of things and move beyond their prejudices and biases. I'll let you know that my avocation is that of social philosopher and I look at public policy and politics as it impacts society. Personally I would much prefer a social democracy like those found in Northern Europe rather than what we are struggling with in the US. As a social democrat I am not troubled by some types of socialism in regards to public welfare. However, I also believe in the benefits of capitalism and constantly look at achieving a balance between the needs of people and retaining business productivity. I have the luxury that most don't have in as much as I can research and study full time. So when I say something keep in mind my socialist leanings, my ivory tower attitude to intellectual challenges and my basic enjoyment of a good discussion.

FC,
I depend on you and Bewildered and others to fully discuss the issues and I am not afraid to cede points when you have them. I strongly believe that we can come to consensuses when we fully air all different sides of a given issue. So much of the time we only see the world through our interpretation of reality and we are capable of being blinded by our prejudices and biases. I can't possibly have had your life's experiences and you can't have mine. You and others help me to look beyond my own interpretations and attempt to see your world. I hope I can do the same for you. This is a journey we all make together and we all have a vested interest. Just because someone doesn't see the world as I do, I will not condemn them, I value our shared humanity. I will fight to the death your right to be heard and to live your life free of tyranny, whether it comes from the left or the right.

I can't see the Socialist Democracy playbook of the scandanavian countries working at all for the U.S.. The population in those countries is extremely small compared to ours, is also extremely homogeneous in race, culture, social mores, religion, work ethic etc. Most of the scandinavian countries have been shown in polls to also have someof the highest feelings of responsibility among their population, which means folks won't be as inclined to take advantage of the system. Just look at the day care scams uncovered in Milw and think about what our average level of resposibility must be in comparison. Also, It's a lot easier to run a welfare state where everyone is pretty much alike. They also don't have the illegal alien problems we do, and I doubt they have the number of unskilled legal immigrants emigrating to their countries either. I think you'll see some changes in these countries though, with the ever growing influx of Muslims you're already seeing some squabbling and class warfare starting, and it's only going to get worse. Their unemployment rates have been climbing as well as the number of folks on "sick leave", where they get paid to stay home indefinitely with an illness. Also,countries like Sweden,long held out as the utopia for this type of gov, was forced to make some pullbacks on the socialist programs and cut taxes as well. Socialism, especially on a large scale, just won't work for the long term.

FC,
You're right about a number of issues about the Scandinavian form of democratic socialism. They are homogeneous populations with similar lifestyles, mostly secular Lutherans, and a commitment to social justice. There populations are relatively small and I think all of the Scandinavian countries lumped together only have somewhere under 20 million. They are now experiencing problems with all the guest workers they invited in during the 60s and 70s. The Muslims have not assimilated well and are now a drain on the welfare state. One of the things I have looked at is service delivery between socialism and our system. Obviously they support their system through taxes and we use a combination of taxes and private payment. Several years ago I did some cost analysis and found that on average the Scandinavians, other than Norway with their oil money, pay around 63% to 65% in taxes. When I did a direct comparison between what we pay in taxes and direct payment it amazingly came out to about the same and the Scandinavians have far better programs. There is no comparison of a nation with a heterogeneous population the size of ours, but this is why I support single payer systems for healthcare and retirement for all. The history of the US is steeped in Calvinism and it may be impossible because of our lack of basic tolerance. I think we'll have to continue this conversation at another time.

SUre he is, if someone who keeps tossing out union talking points is a breath of fresh air.

We'll see about that at the recall election, won't we.

Ron,
It's a stretch to connect union workers with Islamic Radicals. You're talking about your neighbors and fellow citizens. Should those who oppose unions be labeled as Nazi fascists? C'mon, tone it down and get a handle on your emotions.

Hate to tell you this, but you still don't have control of your state unless you're one of those Libertarians that believe in a regulation free environment. Libertarians want a free business zone where business can do whatever they want and all the state and public get out of it is jobs that contribute to the state coffers from taxes paid by the workers. NO STATE TAXES ON BUSINESS; where do I sign up. How much corporate money stays into the state?

How about including the salaries of the biggest CEOs and business types where the Republicans received there funding. Unions or Business shouldn't be in the political contribution business. Hey, what about only government funding be allowed, then the problem goes away.

bep,
Stop the hyperbola and lets get real. If you forgotten the public employees and teachers also pay taxes. No matter what Governor Walker says, the state's not broke. We have plenty of revenue sources if we want to activate them. Exposure to other options have been purposely limited to meet a Libertarian ideology. I am sure that the Democratic Party has socialists as well as communists amongst their ranks. It is a party made up of many interests. There isn't anything wrong with being either a socialist or communist as long as you don't demand everyone else is. To clarify we do not live in a pure democracy or even a strictly republican democracy; we are technically living in a socialist republican democracy. I will not characterize the Republican Party by some of its extreme factions even though it contains racists, religious fundamentalists, oligarchs, plutocrats and Tea Baggers. The only people I have herd whine is privately employed people who resent having to pay their taxes like every other citizen. Please stop scapegoating public workers the're citizens too. It's time for you to reload with information that is accurate and more constructive.

Lyle, does the Democratic party also contain racists, religious fundamentalists, oligarchs, plutocrats?? You keep saying you want civil debate, no name calling and then you unleash "TeaBagger"? Your credibility is waning sir. The idea from you seems to be we can turn on other revenue sources. That generally means raising taxes. WE, the people,spoke in the last elections that we do not want our taxes raised. I know many of your side keeps saying "Tax the rich, leave the middle class alone". Great, ask Maryland how that worked out. After they enacted a millionaire tax which they said would raise revenues from that sector $106 million,they found that sectors revenue dropped by $257 million. Thenumber of returns in that group dropped by 30%. I'm sure the recession had something to do with some of these folks dropping out, but indeed many of them moved to, or started filing in other states with lower tax burdens. Many probably started reducing their income, deferring, etc. It just doesn't work. Stop villifying the rich or the smallbusiness owners that work hard to get what they've got.

FC,
Of course the Democratic party also contain racists, religious fundamentalists, oligarchs, and plutocrats. However, the Democratic Party is not characterized in the media as such. My point to bep was it is wrong to characterize a whole group by the actions of the most extremist few. Stereotypes are just that, stereotypes; they are a means to dehumanize the opposition. Terms like TeaBagger, socialist and communist are terms thrown about discounting the positions and philosophies held by others .
When I spoke to turning on other revenue sources I was not speaking to increases in income taxes, property taxes, etc. In past posts I have focused on closing the loopholes in the sales tax, increasing alcohol taxes, imposing a VAT on luxury goods and possible sales tax increases. I maintain that cost cutting alone will not do the job to permanently close the budget deficit but requires both cutting and increasing revenues. As a business man I had to address budget shortfalls in two ways. Also, Maryland's "Millionaires Tax" was ill conceived, poorly implemented and as you say poorly timed with regards to the economy.
I am fully in support of small businesses, because they create the jobs at very little exposure to the state; whereas large corporations quickly become liabilities. I would feel much better about subsidizing business if it were strictly instate small business firms. I have been a corporate executive and small businesses owner and I will vilify the amoral, unethical.

<< Terms like TeaBagger, socialist and communist are terms thrown about discounting the positions and philosophies held by others .>>

Socialists and Communists are just that, and you know that the many Socialist parties have heavy representation in labor unions (As a former union member with many freinds that werein the Socialist Workers Party, Iknow this is true) however Tea Party folks are NOT teabaggers, you know as well as I that this is a derisive term used by leftys to marginalize the movement. So I guess you're saying YOU used this term for that reason as well, which is odd as you've said in other posts weshouldn't resort to name calling, should be civil, etc.

Mike, Mike, Mike, stop mucking up the issue with facts. Facts aren't pertinent, just emotions and slogans.

Anyone who doesn't belong to a union.

Bewildered, you state "Walker's budget proposal is just that, a proposal. He fully expects discussions and modifications Thats's how process. works."
Walker stated that he would not negotiate. His exact words: "hell, I’ll talk to them. If they want to yell at me ...I’m used to that, I can deal with that. But I’m not negotiating."
The Fitzgerald triumvirate is with him and want to push the bill through. I'm still shocked the way S. Fitzgerald gave the Democratic assembly members on Feb. 18th a 5pm start time for the vote but gave the Republicans an earlier time to vote, since they didn't need a quorum. That's not a way to negotiate. That's not participating in Process". Its just wrong. Watch the video of that assembly meeting if you can. Its not the way a democracy does things. http://71.87.25.133/IVOD/ASM/ASM_110218_4.wmv

Linda, I am refering to the Buget proposal for the next two years, not the budget repair bill

Bewildered, what on earth makes you think Walker would behave any differently on the Budget Bill than he did on the so-called budget repair bill? Walker is a self-stated non-negotiator!

I believe Walker stated he was non-negotiable on Collective Bargining only so far. 2012-13 budget is not about collective bargining . I respect that your mind/opinion will and can not be changed. There is much in the new proposed budget I don't like too, but as history shows, BOTH parties will submit numerous buget admendments that will be discussed and acted on. The 2012-13 budget is a starting point, not an ending point. The end result will be far different than what's on the table now. This is how budgets (again not he budget repair bill) are finalized, both in Madison and in DC.

Would you like to place a small wager on that?

Maybe, but you'd have to give me odds as I feel your are the favorite. Anyway, I'm still hoping for a FINAL budget that reflects both sides. Maybe naive , but is that wrong to dream?

The only "beast" Governor Walker is starving is the public union sector. I say...starve that beast Governor.

Linda Binder, I don't know who you really are, but I HEART you!

Thank you, Anne, and I want to thank everyone else who makes well reasoned comments on sites like this. There is a lot of "noise" - name calling, bringing up past indiscretions by either party, distracting tangents, but through all that there are some truly insightful (as opposed to incite-ful) posts.

Your last comment is well said and I agrees. Does it apply well thought comments from both sides, without the "noise" ( you are being too kind)? Just wondering as it is obvious we agree to disagree on these issues. Thank goodness for a two party system so differ. views can be heard and hopefuly respected.

in the public sector unions they do have a choice. It is not a closed shop. They get the same healthcare but have to pay more for it and the same retirement but cannot grieve and be represented by the union and have little or no protection against certain workplace conditions, demands or unreasonable management. In the past they received much of the same protections as the union workers without having to pay dues.

Lyle, I am confused with your comments. At my wife's school, union dues are automaticly taking out (about $1,000 annualy) weither she joins or not. And it is part of the collective bargined contract she had to agree to to be hired? There is no choice. Are schools different than the rest of the Public sector unions?

Each union can have different rules, even under the same bargaining unit. In my wife's union they are given the choice, it may be because they are considered in a professional status by the state. But I do know they had a choice.

Oh now I understand, Lyle. Unlike your wife's "sociL workers" union, the teachers' union is not considered "professional status". I sure teachers everywhere agree with your opinion. Perhaps a little more knowledge before you pass yourself off as an expert making such truthful statements (1, All public employees working under union contracts do not have to pay union dues; and 2, teachers are not considered by the state of "proff. status".
Maybe you didn't mean to imply this, but we can only go by your words. Chose them carefully next time.
   

Bewildered,
I am not saying teachers are not professional. I am talking about state workers having as many as seven different unions and a number of different bargaining units. The local she belongs to also covers probation and parole and P&P have different rights than the social workers. P&P have protected status like police officers and firefighters while the local's social workers do not. Sorry for the confusion and I will word it more carefully next time.

And what does this have to do with your orig comment that public sector union members have a choice and don't have to pay dues. Such rash generalizations don't help your credibity

Bewildered,
I over generalized and the original statement was meant as not all public sector employees have to join unions as I clarified in subsequent posts. Thanks for pointing this out and I will be less general in the future. A number of my friends and relatives who are or have been teachers have indicated their displeasure at being forced to join the teacher's union and have the dues automatically pulled out. I do think it is an injustice and a loss of freedom.

Ok , Lyle. Truce. I respect your last two comments (here and above). Let's agree to disagree, be careful with our words and enjoy factual discussions. Perhaps some day sitting down together and enjoying a fine adult beverage brewed right here in the town we love. Mazal Tov!

Bewildered,
I'll look forward to when you post again. I would enjoy an adult beverage with you. By the way I'm on facebook and we could chat there. Mazal Tov and Shalom Alechem. :}

I've recorded everything on Fox the last 4 days and listened to EVERYTHING about WI GOV Walker and Senate Majority Leader Bob Fitzgerald NEVER said anything about destroying the Democratic party or eventually ousting President Obama.

Mande, here's the segment you were looking for: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJdijPEBJE

Mande,
We are not NY, NJ, CA, IL or any other state with an underfunded pension plan. According to such sources as Forbes Magazine, the WRS is solid and can cover their benefit obligations well into the future. Luckily we are not in a pay as you go and the principle remains untouched. The fund, I'm not sure of the totals, is somewhere around $72 billion and the annual payout is around $3 billion in benefits. There have been losses in the pension fund from poor returns on institutional investment losses with the Wall Street fiasco. I think you shouldn't have to worry about paying for "golden retirement" excesses. Also, with the program designed as it is, it is actuarially strong.

Not saying WRS is bad (far from it), but even before this most recent budget crisis, many, many munis and school districts fou d themselves with severe financial shortfalls due to falure to anticipate and budget for their portions of WRS contributions. Bottom line is that many governing bodies are already struggling to meet existing and future payouts, due to bad forecasting and long term planning. Luckey for me, my muni sat the WRS bump comming and have been putting $ in a WRS reserve fund.

Bewildered,
How will the teachers contribute to their retirement? Are they going to be contributing a lot more or do you think the districts will pick up the increases if any?

Sorry about typing. iPhone has very limited ability to proof
messages when typing and it's " self-correcting" mode drives me nuts. Reading my messages is like playing "Wheel of Fortune".... Buy a vowel and fill in the blanks.

By way. Lyle, nice to see you back on line!

Nice to hear from you in spite of your hi-tech issues. My wife's union was one of those that weren't signed before Walker took office. As soon as the bill is certified and printed her new contributions kick in. I am curious to see how long they hold at the proposed rates. I am confused about the increases. Can the governor change the contribution rate without legislative approval? If he can't, when did the legislature approve the change? I thought the only thing they voted on was pulling collective bargaining and the rest needed a super quorum since it was fiscal.

Lyle.. the Governer will have to have the legislature approve any future contracts. Remember last year Doyle wanted to sign the contract before Walker took office, but the legislature didn't approve. The legislature approved the change to the contributions as part of the special session that just took place. Since the updated bill didn't appropriate any money (actually spend $$) it wasn't considered fiscal in nature. They had to take the bond portion of the bill out since that did spend $$. I'm sure the courts will review these assumption.

D.D.,
Now we are getting into the meat of the issue. Government and the public has been betting the house on the economy continuing to grow. I don't know many people I have known who have rationalized their irrational financial behavior based on the assumption that the economy could recede, but they could afford the risk because everything would come back bigger and better than before. In reality real middle class spendable income has been steadily declining since 1980. People have gone on a credit binge to make up for the lack of real income growth in order to support their addiction to consumerism. This aversion to staying within our means has created a situation where we want government services and security but we don't want to pay for them (taxes). For over a decade any politician saying they want to raise taxes to pay for services, is quickly shuttled out the door. I think it is time that we become grown ups and face the music and stop thinking strictly about the me and instead think about the we. We can't cut everything so we'll have to step up and start paying for it.

I agree that this is the real question. The unfortunate issue for the state of Wisconsin is that our tax rates are already pretty high. Perhaps there are areas that can be increased and depending on how severe the cuts are that may be necessary. However, Wisconsin already ranks #4 for % of State and Local taxes as percentage of State Income. NJ, NY and Conn rank higher (we are followed by RI and California). The bottom group (lowest individual taxes) are Alaska, Nevada, South Dakota, Tenn, Wyoming, Texas. Wisconsin also has the 40th "best" tax climate in the USA based on a variety of factors. I don't have the data, but I think you will find the lower tax states are the ones that are also seeing the highest population and business growth... and vice versa for the highest taxed states. The Northeast and Midwest seem to be losing people and businesses (or at least growing far less) than the South and Southeast. I don't believe we have to (or want to) compete on tax rates with these areas; however, increasing taxes in Wisconsin has to be considered very carefully to prevent further erosion of income and jobs.

Dave, have no idea what your message means