Birth of the People's Party

[georgephillip]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

I think those times of universal deceit are here.

Even Orwell would be impressed by US corporations sitting on $2 trillion in cash and calling for an end of collective bargaining for public employees in the name of "austerity".

Austerity would start with taxing rich individual and corporations instead of borrowing from them. It would also help if Obama's Justice Department started filing charges for control fraud against some of Wall Street's biggest players.

But I'm not holding my breath.

 

[georgephillip]

............You should mention that to the Wisconsin UNIONIZED firefighters .......................

The Gov made a mistake to not eliminate the cop & fire unions. One he will hopefully correct.

As to a recall go ahead & try.

BTW, ya won't be able to import Voters as easily as you have the State Capitol 'rent a mob'.

Piece of cake

"Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won his job last November with 52% of the vote, but his popularity has slipped since then.

"A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Wisconsin Voters finds that just 34% Strongly Approve of the job he is doing, while 48% Strongly Disapprove.

"Overall, including those who somewhat approve or disapprove, the new Republican governor earns positive reviews from 43% and negative reviews from 57% of voters statewide"

Walker's too fucking stupid to be Palin's running mate.
If such a thing is even possible.

 

[georgephillip]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

Do you think there's any fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to Wall Street or how they treat the richest one percent of US voters?

 

[The Gadfly]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

Do you think there's any fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to Wall Street or how they treat the richest one percent of US voters?

Don't know, don't care. What I care about, is how they treat the upper middle class (who do you think democrat taxation hits the hardest; the guy making 300 thousand a year, or the guy making 30 million a year?). Not in absolute terms but in disposable income that matters. Hell, Warren Buffet doesn't have to care what he pays in taxes; he'll never know any difference in his lifestyle. I, and others like me, definitely do notice a difference in our lifestyle, so democrats can buy votes (compassion, my ass!). Damn the democrat tax and spend party to hell! I hate two things about them; everything they are, and everything they do. I wouldn't vote for Jesus, if he ran as a democrat. I refuse to support anything about that party; I wish it did not exist, and whatever I can lawfully do to harm its causes, or render it less effective, or marginalize it, or help destroy it, I will do. If busting unions helps dry up its finances, excellent! I'm acting strictly in my own self-interest on that; they aren't for me, and I'm not for them!

 

[georgephillip]

Democrats AND Republicans place those earning $300,000/year into the same tax brackets as those earning $30,000,000 or 300,000,000 per year.

Tax bias in favor of debt over equity investment and in favor of FIRE sector income over wage slave earnings explains why the richest 5% of Americans have nearly doubled their share of returns to wealth over the last generation.

Choosing between a Republican OR a Democrat will never change that.

FLUSHING ALL Republicans AND Democrats from DC will.

 

[nraforlife]

............You should mention that to the Wisconsin UNIONIZED firefighters .......................

The Gov made a mistake to not eliminate the cop & fire unions. One he will hopefully correct.

As to a recall go ahead & try.

BTW, ya won't be able to import Voters as easily as you have the State Capitol 'rent a mob'.

Piece of cake

"Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won his job last November with 52% of the vote, but his popularity has slipped since then.

"A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Wisconsin Voters finds that just 34% Strongly Approve of the job he is doing, while 48% Strongly Disapprove.

"Overall, including those who somewhat approve or disapprove, the new Republican governor earns positive reviews from 43% and negative reviews from 57% of voters statewide"

Walker's too fucking stupid to be Palin's running mate.
If such a thing is even possible.

Well then don't just talk, go for it, uncle. Mount that recall!!!!!!!

Remember though all of those polls really count for NOTHING. All that matters is the 'poll' taken on election day.

 

[nraforlife]

........... What I care about, is how they treat the upper middle class (who do you think democrat taxation hits the hardest; the guy making 300 thousand a year, or the guy making 30 million a year?). Not in absolute terms but in disposable income that matters. Hell, Warren Buffet doesn't have to care what he pays in taxes; he'll never know any difference in his lifestyle. I, and others like me, definitely do notice a difference in our lifestyle, .................

Hmmmmm, where I live $300K/yr would be very high end much more so than in say LA or NYC. Still in any case that person is also likely a high end producer (unless they are a Lawyer then they are a mere parasite). The current tax load on such an income is all ready more than enough.

Whwn we get to the $1M a year and up folks though- a surtax of 10% or even 25% of gross would not be unreasonable purely because these are the folks who are reaping a massive windfall merely from living in a civil society. Bill Gates is a billionaire ONLY because he has lived his life in America. Plunk him down 50 years back in Central Africa with exactly the same skill set and today he would be nothing maybe not even alive. it is the background of a civil society which has prospered him so greatly, He aand those like him need to pay some fees for that service.

 

[georgephillip]

My understanding is the richest 1% of taxpayers earn a minimum of about $340,000 per year; however, someone earning $340,000,000 per year (about 400 Americans) pay taxes at the same rate(s).

Republicans AND Democrats do this deliberately.

Many of the hardest working people I've met are small business owners who work 80 to 100 hours every week to gross $340,000 a year.

By grouping small business owners with Warren Buffett politicians deflect the criticism that the rich don't pay their fair share.

IMHO, you nailed it with your Bill Gates observation.

Without the State it becomes much more expensive to protect vast private fortunes.

 

[taichiliberal]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

So because you have an axe to grind against the Democratic Party (for reasons undisclosed), you'll support these heinous, legal skirting acts by a political Party that YOU admit you're not too thrilled with....the PEOPLE be damned. That's pretty pathetic on your part, Gadfly.

 

[taichiliberal]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

And DEFERRED on the backs of the TAXPAYER...

Again.....The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations. This means the taxpayer only gets involved if the STATE screws up.....or additionally, if the investments don't come through (does the recent Wall St./mortagage banking debacles ring a bell?).

 

[The Gadfly]

Once again for the cheap seats:

Union pensions are DEFERRED PAYMENTS. The State only gets involved when they screw up the investments or siphon off funds for other fiscal situations.

Collective bargaining by unions has always supported the State through tough fiscal times. Case in point, the Wisconsin unions AGREED to the increased payments to their benefits and pensions. Historically, the unions bailed out New York during the Ford Administration.

Unions and collective bargaining DID NOT create the fiscal mess the country is currently in, which lessened federal funding to the States. They were NOT responsible for the S&L scandal, Enron, or the Wall St./mortgage banking debacle.

Since unions are a prime backer/campaigner for the Dem party, weakening if not dismantling them via punitive financial moves by GOP politicos points to upcoming elections.

In Wisconsin, the Koch brothers industries would benefit from non-union input regarding their 17 business there, and would also benefit from Walker selling of public utilities to private industries.

At first, Walker and the Wisconsin GOP stated that banning collective bargaining on pensions and benefits was crucial to the budget. Then, they remove this aspect from the fiscal bill in order to repeal a 50 year old Wisconsin law to this effect. So by their own convoluted logic, the Wisconsin GOP inadvertently admitted that eliminating collective bargaining had NOTHING to do with balancing the budget.

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

So because you have an axe to grind against the Democratic Party (for reasons undisclosed), you'll support these heinous, legal skirting acts by a political Party that YOU admit you're not too thrilled with....the PEOPLE be damned. That's pretty pathetic on your part, Gadfly.

Reasons undisclosed; I think not; I put the reason out there very clearly a few posts back. That party uses government to extort all it can from people like me, for the purpose of buying the votes of its chosen constituents. It is therefore my enemy, as it is the enemy of every American who has actually achieved some success from a lifetime of hard work. I have nothing to gain by supporting it, or those who empower it. I have every interest in working against it with all my might, and that is what I do. That's no more selfish than you are; you want things your way; I want them my way. I don't give up, I don't give in, and I'm dug in for the long haul. The day I stop working against the democrat party with every lawful means at my disposal, and/or stop supporting others doing the same, will be the day they plant me under six feet of dirt.

 

[georgephillip]

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

So because you have an axe to grind against the Democratic Party (for reasons undisclosed), you'll support these heinous, legal skirting acts by a political Party that YOU admit you're not too thrilled with....the PEOPLE be damned. That's pretty pathetic on your part, Gadfly.

Reasons undisclosed; I think not; I put the reason out there very clearly a few posts back. That party uses government to extort all it can from people like me, for the purpose of buying the votes of its chosen constituents. It is therefore my enemy, as it is the enemy of every American who has actually achieved some success from a lifetime of hard work. I have nothing to gain by supporting it, or those who empower it. I have every interest in working against it with all my might, and that is what I do. That's no more selfish than you are; you want things your way; I want them my way. I don't give up, I don't give in, and I'm dug in for the long haul. The day I stop working against the democrat party with every lawful means at my disposal, and/or stop supporting others doing the same, will be the day they plant me under six feet of dirt.

Do you vote Republican?

 

[taichiliberal]

It's called playing the game the same way your party of choice has played it for years-as an extension of war by other means. I'm not enamored of republicans, especially-it's just that I loathe the democrat party, so naturally I'll support ANYTHING that damages its interests, on the sensible grounds that whatever helps it, hurts me. I would vote for a one-eyed, one-eared, mangy, flea ridden yellow cur, before I'd vote for a democrat, any democrat. As far as the rest, welcome to hardball politics-we learned it from the democrats.

So because you have an axe to grind against the Democratic Party (for reasons undisclosed), you'll support these heinous, legal skirting acts by a political Party that YOU admit you're not too thrilled with....the PEOPLE be damned. That's pretty pathetic on your part, Gadfly.

Reasons undisclosed; I think not; I put the reason out there very clearly a few posts back. That party uses government to extort all it can from people like me, for the purpose of buying the votes of its chosen constituents. It is therefore my enemy, as it is the enemy of every American who has actually achieved some success from a lifetime of hard work. I have nothing to gain by supporting it, or those who empower it. I have every interest in working against it with all my might, and that is what I do. That's no more selfish than you are; you want things your way; I want them my way. I don't give up, I don't give in, and I'm dug in for the long haul. The day I stop working against the democrat party with every lawful means at my disposal, and/or stop supporting others doing the same, will be the day they plant me under six feet of dirt.

Sorry Gadfly, but you and I differ in many ways.....I don't lie about a political party because I don't like it....I give REASONS. Accusing someone "extortion" without any viable proof or example is just somebody blowing a bullhorn. I spot a lot of the buzzword mantras of rabid anti-gov't types and Rovian/teabagger rhetoric in this little ditty of yours...which makes your claim of similar dislike of the Republican party dubious at best...because YOU want to EXCUSE the heinous actions of the neocon driven GOP in Wisconsin...actions that are AGAINST the ideals you claim to have....actions that are starting to repeat in other states with other GOP governors.

Sorry Gadfly, but your double talk here just won't cut it under logical examination.