Support NeoGAF

[ToxicAdam]

You talked about public sector workers without high-school degree making (in some cases) more than their private sector counterparts.

Not in some cases. In most cases. Which has been a trend that has kept widening since the 90's.

How is that janitor (which I took from the article you quoted) an outlier?

Also, by that logic, if the government is running a deficit you can't resist any spending cut or revenue increase without being greedy.

He's an outlier in regards to what the median wage of a state employee makes. A small percentage of the whole.

Wait what?
I thought we were talking about public sector unions.

(also, I would like to see the data of the hundreds of business that died because of organized labor, but we can take it to another thread).

We are, but it is still something that can affect my judgement on this topic.

For your parenthetical remark, it's an unquantifiable thing. Poor decisions begets poor contracts which begets a less competitive company which begets more poor decisions which begets more poor contracts. Until you have the workforce whittled down to the bone and a company with no value. Then the vultures swoop in.

But that's just my anecdotal experience, growing up where I did.

 

[The Technomancer]

What I'm getting hung up on is this:

You are a public sector worker - you produce NOTHING (I'm not arguing against private unions here). So when the economy improves and more money comes into the State coffers through zero work of your own, we should not be allowing those public unions to say "Hey, more money, is coming in, more for us and increases in our pensions!" Then the economy tanks and the very public that is suffering is now stuck holding the bag to pay for your benefits and pension that you were only able to force the State into because of absolutely nothing you actually did, other than threaten to strike and shut down government.

Because when the economy improves private businesses will also be doing better without necessarily expending effort of their own.

EDIT:

As I said, they produce NOTHING. Much of what government provides (and wastes), people would gladly forego.

Okay, now I get your argument. You're saying that there are public jobs that the population doesn't actually want being done. In which case: Such as?

 

[Angry Fork]

Why are people obsessed with productivity and GDP? Why do conservatives think matching China's productivity will make Americans happier?

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Profit = Useful?
Services provided by government = Useless?

Am I getting this right Kosmo? Let's say government dropped all services it provides. Kosmo now has a bill for all of this because he has no taxes:

Garbage pick up
School for his kids
Hospital bills when he gets over 65
Retirement benefits when he gets over 65
Security services
Fire protection services
Building a water well in his backyard to get water

He also has to pay a premium on all of this now because all those services are provided by a private company that has to maximize profit. I don't think you realize how cheaply you are making out right now Kosmo.

I said "essentially" odious debt (i.e. analogous to).

Unfortunately, they aren't accounted for.

Yes they are accounted for. I will know how fast the benefits will grow and how much needs to be pay out each year. Can i get that accurate for medical billing in the year 2030? No.

 

[Chumly]

Well, what do you produce that produces a profit?

Our world is truly a screwed up place when THIS is how conservatives think. Public employees don't produce a profit? So they are worthless? Wow

 

[The Librarian]

The rest of this post shall remain barren as an analogy for the nothingness produced by public employees.

 

[The Technomancer]

Not in some cases. In most cases. Which has been a trend that has kept widening since the 90's.

Perhaps those in the private sector should be making more then? We are the most prosperous nation on earth, I find the curve of wealth distribution in this country absolutely baffling.

 

[eznark]

I propose an ideology thread where you clowns can go stroke each other beards and leave this thread for the horse races!

 

[ToxicAdam]

Perhaps those in the private sector should be making more then?

Who 'makes them'? Who decides how much is enough? Why wouldn't these 'deciders 'just become corrupted by corporate money like our Senate is?

 

[Blergmeister]

As I said, they produce NOTHING. Much of what government provides (and wastes), people would gladly forego.

But those same people voted people into government to provide those things.

Also, if it wasn't obvious enough to begin with, the problem with Odious Debt is that by definition, all debt is odious. There is no hard line. I call the tax refunds to oil companies odious, you call Social Security to those under the age of 67 odious. We hit the debt ceiling? Who cares, it was all Odious Debt!

 

[Kevitivity]

I like how when an executive has bonuses written into his contract it's a sacred pact but when talking about a union contract it's all, "times change, fuckers!"

Private unions use collective bargaining in order to get a larger chunk of the profits that the company is making.

Government doesn't make any profit, so when public unions use collective bargaining (to increase their pensions, say), they are strong-arming for more money irrespective of the fiscal health of the government or general economic situation. This is very bad - California is in a simular situation where we have billions in completely unfunded public employee pensions.

Whats more, when public employees go on strike, they are striking against tax payers. No one should be surprised that tax payers revolted.

 

[The Technomancer]

Who 'makes them'? Who decides how much is enough? Why wouldn't these 'deciders 'just become corrupted by corporate money like our Senate is?

I just want to make sure I'm interpreting this correctly: because there's no good way to ensure that private employers pay their employees more, we should cut the wages and benefits of public employees so that the two groups are more equal? What does that solve?

 

[Chichikov]

We are, but it is still something that can affect my judgement on this topic.

I'm not trying to be a pedantic dick here, it's just that Walker's move was driven, at least publicly, but the notion that public sector unions are an all together different beasts than private sector ones (a notion that I don't fully reject by the way).
I always thought it was a bait and switch on his regard, but at least you (if I recall correctly) attacked public unions on the ground that they are public.

For your parenthetical remark, it's an unquantifiable thing. Poor decisions begets poor contracts which begets a less competitive company which begets more poor decisions which begets more poor contracts. Until you have the workforce whittled down to the bone and a company with no value. Then the vultures swoop in.

But that's just my anecdotal experience, growing up where I did.

I'm being a bit facetious here.
I'm certain that if there was any way to link the two, even in a weak way, you'll be hearing it shouted from the rooftops by every conservative think tank and GOP candidate.
There's a reason why conservatives always attack unions using envy (they're making more than you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!).

 

[eznark]

man f you guys

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Private unions use collective bargaining in order to get a larger chunk of the profits that the company is making.

Government doesn't make any profit, so when public unions use collective bargaining (to increase their pensions, say), they are strong-arming for more money irrespective of the fiscal health of the government or general economic situation. This is very bad - California is in a simular situation where we have billions in completely unfunded public employee pensions.

Whats more, when public employees go on strike, they are striking against tax payers. No one should be surprised that tax payers revolted.

And those employees are not slaves tied to a desk. Last I checked you have the right to strike. And those tax payers will get what they pay for. Underfunded services and not enough talented people in the government to provide better service. This means you have longer lines at the DMV. Water mains take longer to replace. Teachers who barely understand what they are doing. And yet Republicans complain about all of these and don't want to pay to fix them.

 

[Chichikov]

man f you guys

All of a sudden, fucking city fans everywhere.

 

[Blergmeister]

Who 'makes them'? Who decides how much is enough? Why wouldn't these 'deciders 'just become corrupted by corporate money like our Senate is?

The problem is that having money is too overpowered right now. It is supposed to be pretty strong but right now it's a WIN button. We need to nerf having money slightly and buff number of people more. Then number of people will have a more even match against having money. That way the match can continue as it is.

 

[Kosmo]

And those employees are not slaves tied to a desk. Last I checked you have the right to strike. And those tax payers will get what they pay for. Underfunded services and not enough talented people in the government to provide better service. This means you have longer lines at the DMV. Water mains take longer to replace. Teachers who barely understand what they are doing. And yet Republicans complain about all of these and don't want to pay to fix them.

Get rid of the DMV. Problem solved.

And we already have many teacher's who barely understand what they are doing.

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Get rid of the DMV. Problem solved.

But then how will I be able to vote without my ID?

In all seriousness, let's have uncertified drivers on the road. Who's going to stop that teenager without a driver's license or insurance from driving when we eliminate that awful public police union?

And we already have many teacher's who barely understand what they are doing.

And that's because you don't pay them enough to attract talented individuals into the profession. Instead all those people go out to be doctors, lawyers, bankers, or engineers. You also place a lot of blame upon the profession as a whole. Who wants to work for shit pay and being constantly told that you are the problem?

 

[The Technomancer]

Get rid of the DMV. Problem solved.

And we already have many teacher's who barely understand what they are doing.

Alright, so your argument is that the services the government is providing aren't needed or wanted and that's why its wrong for taxpayers to support those employees. At least I understand clearly now what you're saying

 

[eznark]

The problem is that having money is too overpowered right now. It is supposed to be pretty strong but right now it's a WIN button. We need to nerf having money slightly and buff number of people more. Then number of people will have a more even match against having money. That way the match can continue as it is.

I think the balance is actually pretty tight. Sure there could be some tweaking but that's what June beta's are for. The factions are asynchronous which leads to some really interesting and fun strategies. Money might seem overpowered one day, but then the other side has insanely high organization skills and infrastructure, not to mention full time settlers that get paid to harvest. GOP turtling is only effective if the Dem rush isn't properly executed. Not like the 3 Gov 4 PAC strategy can't be over come, it just needs a Class Warfare rush. It's lame that The Founders have kept in the Champion units like Racism and the Race Card. I'm still hoping they'll be patched out.

 

[Kosmo]

But then how will I be able to vote without my ID?

In all seriousness, let's have uncertified drivers on the road. Who's going to stop that teenager without a driver's license or insurance from driving when we eliminate that awful public police union?

All of the above already happen, so I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[empty vessel]

You're taking macro information and trying to pass it off as pertinent data. Atlanta and Detroit have taken decidely different turns in economic realities over the past two decades. Dayton and Charlotte. Erie and Scottsdale.

But you're just making word salad and passing it off as argument. Revenue streams?

Ahhh .. there IT is! Wash, rinse, repeat. Good work, jaydubya.

That's not an argument. And you look kind of stupid dismissing very basic Keynesian economics (i.e., non-heterodox economic thought). Explain why the federal government cannot or should not adopt countercyclical fiscal policies. I am amused that you are knee-jerk reacting so violently to mainstream economic opinion.

You say cuts, I say normalizing. Whatever.

What it really is is class warfare. Lowering government pay gives private employers more bargaining power.

I have no problem with the janitor in Wisconsin making 27k. It is his benefit package that is grossly out of wack with reality.

Based on, apparently, no information at all! Seriously, by what measure are you judging the benefits package? You think it's too generous. Why? Do you know what this janitor's pension would be? I can assure you it would not be more than the 27k per year he makes. Is that excessive? Why? Because private sector employers have sufficient bargaining power to deny the same benefits to private sector workers? I mean, it's weird to sit here, point your finger at another American who has worked his entire life, and say, you deserve less benefits, even while you have articulated no valid reason why that person must have less. You are, without any justification, directly attacking the standard of living of hard-working Americans in the country with the most absolute wealth in the world. It's obscene, anti-social, and totally intolerable.

In fact, the Democrat candidate Tom Barrett agrees with me and had a plan to 'rightsize' the workers if elected in 2010.

You say that as though I would defend Barrett (or any other Democrat). Pointing at Barrett and saying, look, he also wanted to hurt Americans for no good reason isn't a compelling argument.

No, just that economic realities change and people need to set aside their greed and stubborness and accept some small cuts in their life. Entitled people are the worst kind of people.

Word salad. No substance. If you can't articulate this argument and expand upon it--what economic realities?--you've clearly been conditioned and are just parroting things you've read or heard.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Get rid of the DMV. Problem solved.

...and then what? What happens to all the things the DMV does when its gone? Who pays for all these things?

 

[Diablos]

New Pennsylvania poll: Obama 48% Romney 36%

Whoever says PA is battleground should be locked up in rural PA for the rest of their lives

Well, ever since Corbett and his goons failed to gerrymander the EV's here, yes, I've been 99% confident that PA will once again go blue.

Obama can win here by 30 for all I care -- Democrats have won it in every Presidential Election since 1992. So that it's safe DEM should not be a surprise nor should it be comforting. We did lose 1 EV thanks to Census data.

The real fight is in the legitimate swing states, not to mention WI thanks to this joke of a recall election.

I think WI is seriously in play regardless of if Walker is seriously going to be a running mate because of this whole debacle. It's another classic example of Democrats shooting themselves in the foot and helping the GOP candidate become even more popular.

All of the dismissive commentary about WI reminds me exactly of 2010; it reeks of denial and not really seeing what's happening here. Obama's enjoying a soft lead in swing states, and a commanding one in safe Dem states, but that's not much of a buffer for when the shit really hits the fan in another 3 months. Think otherwise and you are in denial. He can still win but 2012 is probably going to be decided by only one or two states either way.

 

[spandexmonkey]

And we already have many teacher's who barely understand what they are doing.

Nothing draws in the best and brightest like starting teacher salaries.

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Based on, apparently, no information at all! Seriously, by what measure are you judging the benefits package? You think it's too generous. Why? Do you know what this janitor's pension would be? I can assure you it would not be more than the 27k per year he makes. Is that excessive? Why? Because private sector employers have sufficient bargaining power to deny the same benefits to private sector workers? I mean, it's weird to sit here, point your finger at another American who has worked his entire life, and say, you deserve less benefits, even while you have articulated no valid reason why that person must have less. You are, without any justification, directly attacking the standard of living of hard-working Americans in the country with the most absolute wealth in the world. It's obscene, anti-social, and totally intolerable.

You could say he was being greedy. But really spreading the misery around is asinine. Instead of making others hurt as much as you, why don't you go out and get more from your employer? This isn't directed at you by the way EV.

 

[The Technomancer]

Well obviously since there's a lot of demand for having people licensed before they can drive, the invisible hand will start giving out licenses privately. Also, there will be less waste and the lines will be short!

It'll also be cheaper to get a license, since they'll have to make a profit.

I think his point was that people wouldn't need licenses at all.

I think.

 

[Diablos]

Question for MA/New England gaffers -- is there any potential for Romney to carry the state if he runs a good campaign there, or do people hate him so much they'd never vote for him again? 10 WI EV's + 11 MA EV's would negate a state like PA, and, say, Virginia.

I realize Obama's leading by ~16 currently, so it's kind of silly to ask in the first place, but Scott Brown shocked everyone after all. If Obama finds himself in more trouble than we're thinking, who knows what Romney could do there, especially with all the money he's going to have.

How's Warren faring against Brown btw? If Brown is doing well it could give Mittens a lot of momentum there.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I just want to make sure I'm interpreting this correctly: because there's no good way to ensure that private employers pay their employees more, we should cut the wages and benefits of public employees so that the two groups are more equal? What does that solve?

I'm not proposing cutting wages. In fact, I agree with you that actual wages should be slightly higher than the norm for the region. Although, I doubt the effectiveness on how a handful of those jobs could act as some kind of regulator private industry wages.

But the fact that most state union workers have benefit plans that the Obama HCR bill classified as 'Cadillac plans' should tell you something. The fact that we have an incoming pension crisis and no real answers on how to assuage it should concern you. This is where cuts and scalebacks have to happen. Especially in some regions of this country.

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

The standard anti-govt argument goes that the market will provide the things we need. Including regulation and standards and so on.

So surely, if we stop requiring driver's licenses...

I'm sure a society will develop like the CPA for accountants. You can be a register one and trusted to drive. Maybe you'll get a discount on your insurance for it. Mom and Pops that do their own driving will have to pay more.

 

[empty vessel]

But the fact that most state union workers have benefit plans that the Obama HCR bill classified as 'Cadillac plans' should tell you something.

It does tell me something. That even Democrats engage in class warfare.

The fact that we have an incoming pension crisis and no real answers on how to assuage it should concern you. This is where cuts and scalebacks have to happen. Especially in some regions of this country.

What crisis? Seriously. Explain the crisis.

 

[RustyNails]

As I said, they produce NOTHING. Much of what government provides (and wastes), people would gladly forego.

Kosmo government provides services to you at zero profit. Yes the US government doesnt manufacture TVs, but it provides means for that product sitting in warehouse ending up in your living room. At zero profitability.

 

[Measley]

You could say he was being greedy. But really spreading the misery around is asinine. Instead of making others hurt as much as you, why don't you go out and get more from your employer? This isn't directed at you by the way EV.

As I was listening to a conservative radio station, a caller phoned in complaining about how teachers get more benefits than he does.

He was a cable man.

Conservatives getting middle class Americans to turn on each other was pretty damn brilliant.

 

[reilo]

As I said, they produce NOTHING. Much of what government provides (and wastes), people would gladly forego.

You are using the internet, are you not?

 

[Blergmeister]

I'm not proposing cutting wages. In fact, I agree with you that actual wages should be slightly higher than the norm for the region. Although, I doubt the effectiveness on how a handful of those jobs could act as some kind of regulator private industry wages.

But the fact that most state union workers have benefit plans that the Obama HCR bill classified as 'Cadillac plans' should tell you something. The fact that we have an incoming pension crisis and no real answers on how to assuage it should concern you. This is where cuts and scalebacks have to happen. Especially in some regions of this country.

Here is my take on this. Those benefits in my mind were committed a long time ago in a way that they are already "paid out". It would be like having a gift card to a store and then the store decided that they are no longer honoring them because it would be cheaper for them that way. This is different than Social Security is that you are just guaranteed to be part of the Social Security program, whatever that happens to be when you are eligible. Not that I'm prescribing huge changes to that here, just why I see it as more flexible than these promised pensions.

 

[ToxicAdam]

But you're just making word salad and passing it off as argument. Revenue streams?

Not an argument.

That's not an argument. And you look kind of stupid dismissing very basic Keynesian economics (i.e., non-heterodox economic thought). Explain why the federal government cannot or should not adopt countercyclical fiscal policies. I am amused that you are knee-jerk reacting so violently to mainstream economic opinion.

Word Salad. No meaning.

What it really is is class warfare. Lowering government pay gives private employers more bargaining power.

'Class warfare'? Just another buzzword that you are parroting. More conspiracy babble.

Think for yourself sometime.

Based on, apparently, no information at all! Seriously, by what measure are you judging the benefits package? You think it's too generous. Why? Do you know what this janitor's pension would be? I can assure you it would not be more than the 27k per year he makes. Is that excessive? Why? Because private sector employers have sufficient bargaining power to deny the same benefits to private sector workers? I mean, it's weird to sit here, point your finger at another American who has worked his entire life, and say, you deserve less benefits, even while you have articulated no valid reason why that person must have less. You are, without any justification, directly attacking the standard of living of hard-working Americans in the country with the most absolute wealth in the world. It's obscene, anti-social, and totally intolerable.

More word salad. Not an argument.

You say that as though I would defend Barrett (or any other Democrat). Pointing at Barrett and saying, look, he also wanted to hurt Americans for no good reason isn't a compelling argument.

We are talking about actual politicians. That are actually going to have an impact on policy. That's why he was brought up. To show you what "THE OTHER SIDE" feels and how they want to respond. It was even in the same state (gasp!).

Not your mondo-bullshit fantasyland.

Word salad. No substance. If you can't articulate this argument and expand upon it--what economic realities?--you've clearly been conditioned and are just parroting things you've read or heard.

More sophism.. obviously you are not able to engage in realities that make your uncomfortable.

-- /// ---

If this is how you are going to behave, then so will I.

 

[RustyNails]

You are using the internet, are you not?

Hmm gee i wonder what Al Gore's profit was when he created the internet!

 

[Invisible_Insane]

It does tell me something. That even Democrats engage in class warfare.

What crisis? Seriously. Explain the crisis.

He posted an article on the previous page mentioning pension liabilties that do pose a significant threat to the health of many state budgets. Even if you think the federal government can/should help them, given the political realities of the last couple of years, there's very little reason to expect that that sort of help is going to be given, particularly if the federal legislature and executive branch are occupied by different parties.

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Here is my take on this. Those benefits in my mind were committed a long time ago in a way that they are already "paid out". It would be like having a gift card to a store and then the store decided that they are no longer honoring them because it would be cheaper for them that way. This is different than Social Security is that you are just guaranteed to be part of the Social Security program, whatever that happens to be when you are eligible. Not that I'm prescribing huge changes to that here, just why I see it as more flexible than these promised pensions.

Funny you should mention Social Security. Public workers don't put any money into it. Instead their money goes into their pension plans, and they forgo SS when they retire.

 

[Byakuya769]

I'm sure a society will develop like the CPA for accountants. You can be a register one and trusted to drive. Maybe you'll get a discount on your insurance for it. Mom and Pops that do their own driving will have to pay more.

Everyone would have to pay more; the increased risk of inept drivers would be spread out among all policy holders.

 

[ToxicAdam]

It does tell me something. That even Democrats engage in class warfare.

No, they are lawmakers. People that take information that is provided to them and make rules and guidelines based on that data.

We are again heading down this familar road, where I argue how the world works and you argue how the world SHOULD work.

 

[eznark]

Everyone would have to pay more; the increased risk of inept drivers would be spread out among all policy holders.

You really put a ton of stock in the value of drivers ed.

 

[Frank the Great]

roads, DMVs, teachers, etc. etc. everyone always mentions these. why do people always ignore the other government functions that really matter?

with no government, who is going to:

-inspect your food so that you know it is safe?
-make sure your medicine is safe? who is going to make sure your doctor is qualified through licensing? your dentist?
-protect your dumb ass from individual criminals or hostile nations
-prosecute these criminals?
-prevent monopolies?
-make sure you are not breathing in poison? or that your water is safe?
-ensure that car manufacturers meet safety standards so that when you get in an accident, your airbag or your seatbelt saves you?
-regulate air traffic so plains do not fly into each other?
-run the airports, the train stations?
-who will inspect restaurants and eateries for cleanliness to make sure you aren't being poisoned every time you go out to eat?
-what about the judges, clerks, and administrators of the entire judicial branch, who are there to give you your convenient due process rights and what not . . . should we get rid of them too?
-pioneer technologies such as the internet and nuclear energy?
-maintain diplomatic relations with, and deal with economically as well as noneconomically, with 200 countries around the world?
-regulate and index the tariff system?
-investigate allegations of child abuse and take steps to remove the child to safety?
-control and administer elections?
-implement zoning and design standards/precautions to make sure your house does not fall apart or sink into the ground?

every single one of us is brutally dependant on the government. there is not one second of one day where any of us are doing something that is not the result of government involvement. you cannot eat or breathe without being benefited by the government. and moreover, each of the numerous things i listed above require teams of professionals and administrative workers to support them, as well as policymakers to help develop the programs. don't fucking say government produces nothing or that it does not help you or that you do not need it. you are lying to everyone and worst of all, you are lying to yourself.

 

[eznark]

Um... yeah? Do you remember the first time you got behind the wheel of a car?

Don't tell me you buy into this Kosmo nonsense.

The first time I got behind the wheel of a car my was with my dad teaching me how to drive on a dirt road behind the farm at like 8 years old. Someone had to drive the hay wagon, man.

My drivers ed instructors were clowns.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

I propose an ideology thread where you clowns can go stroke each other beards and leave this thread for the horse races!

There's still months to kill before the next race even gets started.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

You really put a ton of stock in the value of drivers ed.

Well obviously once driver's ed is part of an integrated private sector system of licensing, registration, and insurance, companies will have incentive to ensure that people conducts themselves on the road with only the best of driving practices.

 

[empty vessel]

If this is how you are going to behave, then so will I.

The difference is that my posts have contained substance. Yours haven't. You refuse to explain any of the reasons for your prescriptions beyond vague references to "crises," "economic realities," and "revenue streams." I have explained why there aren't any. You have earned those responses. And your behavior now only confirms that you have no arguments to articulate about why you think American workers should experience a decline in their standard of living in the richest country in the world.

No, they are lawmakers. People that take information that is provided to them and make rules and guidelines based on that data.

We are again heading down this familar road, where I argue how the world works and you argue how the world SHOULD work.

I think that if you think discussion about how the world SHOULD work is off the table, then you misunderstand at its most fundamental level what politics is.

 

[Kosmo]

Um... yeah? Do you remember the first time you got behind the wheel of a car?

Don't tell me you buy into this Kosmo nonsense.

My driver's ed was 5 mornings of "instruction" in a classroom and about 1 hour on the road. My ability to drive on the freeway was tested by getting on and getting off about 3 miles later - so glad I had to in order to go answer the 20 question test or whatever I needed to get a license.

The difference is that my posts have contained substance. Yours haven't. You refuse to explain any of the reasons for your prescriptions beyond vague references to "crises," "economic realities," and "revenue streams." I have explained why there aren't any. You have earned those responses. And your behavior now only confirms that you have no arguments to articulate about why you think American workers should experience a decline in their standard of living in the richest country in the world.

What country has ever operated under your beliefs and "printed" their way to fiscal health?

 

[Byakuya769]

You really put a ton of stock in the value of drivers ed.

Not at all, I just know insurance agencies are risk adverse and seek to not lose money. They would pre-emptively raise prices if there were no state enforcement and registration regime concerning driving.