Does Choking Public Sector Unions Save States?

[Charles_Main]

This person evidentially does not think so. Anyone care to dispute his facts?

Anyone?

No need to dispute his facts. All that is necessary is that each state amend their own constitution so that the states are constitutionally prohibited from entering into contractual obligations with employees or employee unions beyond the current budget cycle.

It is a mistake for states to bind themselves to obligations based on future revenue. Bonds included. Because states must balance their books every year. So borrowing on future revenue is an actual theft against persons often not yet born, or not of legal age.

States should never be beholden to unions in order to employ civil servants. That's just like forcing states to do all of their hiring via a temp agency. Imagine if Halliburton contracted to provide all personnel to Wisc state positions. That is pretty much what happens when a union takes over a state employee pool.

The highlighted segment goes to the core of the issue, and is why Walker wants the Public Employees deals to be redone every year based on that years Budget.

What do you expect from Democrats though. Their God Obama sends his Kids to the most exclusive and expensive private school in DC, while opposing Voucher programs that would allow the Poorer among us the same opportunity.

Raging Self center Hippocrates. Every last one of them.

 

[syrenn]

The Rude Pundit is wrong.

There is a lot more in the noxious fiscal stew besides excessive pay and benefits for current public employee. I'll bet that the problems in Indiana consist of a combination of the following:

- Pensions and health care for public employees that predated the elimination of unions.
- Drop in tax receipts due to the moribund effects of Obamanomics.
- The burden of unfunded and underfunded federal mandates such as Medicaid.
- The regulatory and tax uncertainties that are causing businesses to put investment on hold.
- Unemployment claims for those who cannot find jobs in the horrible Obama Recovery.

Fair enough, boedicca. How will killing Indiana public employee unions solve any of those problems?

How will keeping them solve any problems?

 

[uscitizen]

removing collecting bargaining rights of public workers will not save states.

This is an anti union vendetta, A diversionary tactic nothing more.

 

[syrenn]

Fair enough, boedicca. How will killing Indiana public employee unions solve any of those problems?

I've stated this before, private sector unions, whatever. I wouldn't join one and I can't imagine why anyone would. But hey, it's a free country. My experience with unions is that their members' loyalties are with the union first. I have a BIG problem with public servants, yes servants, beholden to a union and not their bosses... the taxpayer. The practice should be outlawed.. PERIOD.

Yes, I know you feel this way, Soggy. I just need a lucid explanation as to how a state without public sector unions is suddenly free of its deficit or any other economic problem.

I'm all ears here.

It will not be free of the deficit. The point is the unions will not be contributing to MORE deficit. Its called trying to balance the budget.

 

[uscitizen]

I've stated this before, private sector unions, whatever. I wouldn't join one and I can't imagine why anyone would. But hey, it's a free country. My experience with unions is that their members' loyalties are with the union first. I have a BIG problem with public servants, yes servants, beholden to a union and not their bosses... the taxpayer. The practice should be outlawed.. PERIOD.

Yes, I know you feel this way, Soggy. I just need a lucid explanation as to how a state without public sector unions is suddenly free of its deficit or any other economic problem.

I'm all ears here.

It will not be free of the deficit. The point is the unions will not be contributing to MORE deficit. Its called trying to balance the budget.

Yep balance the budget on the workers backs instead of the corporations.
Keep the corporate welfare flowing.

 

[syrenn]

Yes, I know you feel this way, Soggy. I just need a lucid explanation as to how a state without public sector unions is suddenly free of its deficit or any other economic problem.

I'm all ears here.

It will not be free of the deficit. The point is the unions will not be contributing to MORE deficit. Its called trying to balance the budget.

Yep balance the budget on the workers backs instead of the corporations.
Keep the corporate welfare flowing.

Did i say that? The budget needs to be balanced on the backs of EVERYONE.

 

[rhodescholar]

Yes, I know you feel this way, Soggy. I just need a lucid explanation as to how a state without public sector unions is suddenly free of its deficit or any other economic problem.

Here is your answer:

The Beholden State by Steven Malanga, City Journal Spring 2010

STEVEN MALANGA

The Beholden State
How public-sector unions broke California

The camera focuses on an official of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), California’s largest public-employee union, sitting in a legislative chamber and speaking into a microphone. “We helped to get you into office, and we got a good memory,” she says matter-of-factly to the elected officials outside the shot. “Come November, if you don’t back our program, we’ll get you out of office.’

 

[uscitizen]

It will not be free of the deficit. The point is the unions will not be contributing to MORE deficit. Its called trying to balance the budget.

Yep balance the budget on the workers backs instead of the corporations.
Keep the corporate welfare flowing.

Did i say that? The budget needs to be balanced on the backs of EVERYONE.

yeah but that does not seem to be what the MN Guv is doing.

 

[rhodescholar]

removing collecting bargaining rights of public workers will not save states.

This is an anti union vendetta, A diversionary tactic nothing more.

You're welcome to believe whatever such nonsense you can imagine.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes, I know you feel this way, Soggy. I just need a lucid explanation as to how a state without public sector unions is suddenly free of its deficit or any other economic problem.

Here is your answer:

The Beholden State by Steven Malanga, City Journal Spring 2010

STEVEN MALANGA

The Beholden State
How public-sector unions broke California

The camera focuses on an official of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), California’s largest public-employee union, sitting in a legislative chamber and speaking into a microphone. “We helped to get you into office, and we got a good memory,” she says matter-of-factly to the elected officials outside the shot. “Come November, if you don’t back our program, we’ll get you out of office.’

And that is different from any other group in what ways?

Lobbyists just do it behind closed doors.
The Tea Party?
Hispanics and other minorities?
Churches?

Actually doing it with votes only is the most honest way in my opinion.

 

[rhodescholar]

Yep balance the budget on the workers backs instead of the corporations.Keep the corporate welfare flowing.

Raise corporate tax rates and regulations too high, and companies LEAVE your state, if not country.

In 2011 we live in what is called a GLOBAL ECONOMY, that means companies have nearly infinite flexibility to move to a locale with lower tax rates/regulations, taking their jobs with them.

That means that high tax, high regulatory states are at a fundamental disadvantage.

States like WI, NY, CA, etc., that have lots of public union employees demanding - and getting over the past several decades - high salaries, lots of benefits/perks, etc., - are in a downward death spiral:

1) public union employees demand higher wages/benefits
2) taxes rise to pay for them
3) people/companies flee to avoid higher tax rates
4) the private sector tax base that supports and sustains these increased taxes shrinks
5) budget gap grows
6) city/state goes bankrupt when it can no longer raise tax rates or issue municipal/state bonds to cover shortfall

Not too hard to grasp now, is it?

 

[rhodescholar]

And that is different from any other group in what ways?

Lobbyists just do it behind closed doors.
The Tea Party?
Hispanics and other minorities?
Churches?

Actually doing it with votes only is the most honest way in my opinion.

Huh? What city/state budget in the US provides any where near the amount of revenue towards churches that it does to public union employee salaries and benefits?

Do you have a rational point to make, or am I just wasting my time here?

 

[skeptic]

This person evidentially does not think so. Anyone care to dispute his facts?

Anyone?

No need to dispute his facts. All that is necessary is that each state amend their own constitution so that the states are constitutionally prohibited from entering into contractual obligations with employees or employee unions beyond the current budget cycle.

It is a mistake for states to bind themselves to obligations based on future revenue. Bonds included. Because states must balance their books every year. So borrowing on future revenue is an actual theft against persons often not yet born, or not of legal age.

States should never be beholden to unions in order to employ civil servants. That's just like forcing states to do all of their hiring via a temp agency. Imagine if Halliburton contracted to provide all personnel to Wisc state positions. That is pretty much what happens when a union takes over a state employee pool.

The highlighted segment goes to the core of the issue, and is why Walker wants the Public Employees deals to be redone every year based on that years Budget.

What do you expect from Democrats though. Their God Obama sends his Kids to the most exclusive and expensive private school in DC, while opposing Voucher programs that would allow the Poorer among us the same opportunity.

Raging Self center Hippocrates. Every last one of them.

I agree. But I think that the cornerstone point is that states should be barred constitutionally from such obligations. States exist fiscally on a year by year basis. Their obligations should be structured the same way.

I don't want to kill unions. I want to preserve states.