The Madison Disgrace

The Madison Disgrace
February 17, 2011 5:07 P.M.
By Larry Kudlow

The Democratic/government-union days of rage in Madison, Wis., are a disgrace. Paul Ryan calls it Cairo coming to Madison. But the protesters in Egypt were pro-Democracy. The government-union protesters in Madison are anti-democracy. In fact, Democratic legislators are fleeing the state so as not to vote on Gov. Scott Walker’s budget cuts.

The teachers union is going on strike in Milwaukee and elsewhere. They ought to be fired. Think Reagan PATCO in 1981. Think Calvin Coolidge police strike in 1919.

Governor Walker is facing a $3.6 billion budget deficit, and he wants state workers to pay one-half of their pension costs and 12.6 percent of their health benefits. Currently, most state employees pay nothing for their pensions and virtually nothing for their health insurance. That’s an outrage.

Nationwide, state and local government unions have a 45 percent total-compensation advantage over their private-sector counterpart. With high-pay compensation and virtually no benefits co-pay, the politically arrogant unions are bankrupting America — which by some estimates is suffering from $3 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

Exempting police, fire, and state troopers, Governor Walker would end collective bargaining for the rest. Unions could still represent workers, but could not get pay increases above the CPI. Nor could they force employees to pay dues. And in exchange for this, Walker promises no furloughs for layoffs.

So, having lost badly in the last election, the government-union Democrats have taken to the streets. This is a European-style revolt, like those seen in Greece, France, and elsewhere. So it becomes greater than just a fiscal issue. It is becoming a law-and-order issue.

President Obama, who keeps telling us he’s a budget cutter, has taken the side of the public unions. John Boehner correctly rapped Obama’s knuckles for this. If the state of Wisconsin voters elected a Chris Christie-type governor with a Republican legislature, then it is a local states’ rights issue.

Obama should stay out. And Governor Walker should stand tall and stick to his principles. Otherwise, a nationwide revolt of state-government unions will destroy the country as well as its finances.

This is the difference between liberal Democats and union members and ordinary, rank-and-file Americans who took to the streets under the Tea Party banner.

The Tea Party protestors were calling for a reduction in the size of the federal government, a cut back on federal usurpations of our constitutionally protected liberties and a massive reduction in federal spending. The Tea Party protestors only wanted to get the federal government out of their lives and to see a return to constitutional republicanism.

In Madison, we see crowds assembled in the name of protecting their wages and benefits won at the expense of Wisconsin taxpayers. It’s not enough that they already make wages WAY above their private-sector counterparts – they also want to keep their free pensions and their next-to-free health care, while their private-sector counterparts have no such deals, and ARE THE ONES PAYING FOR THOSE PENSIONS!!!

It is disgraceful and they should be ashamed of their naked avarice at the expense of the taxpayers of their state. And if this weren’t enough, most of the teachers showing up at this protest were there as a result of an illegal “sick out” that literally shut down the schools they are supposed to be doing their jobs! And the REALLY digusting part is that some of those teachers illegally dragged their students to the protest – talk about indoctrination and illegal child labor “here kid... hold this sign and scream ‘down with Walker.”

Every single one of these teachers should be fired!

How anyone can make excuses for this is beyond me. ABC News led tonights broadcast with this and the reporting was mostly sympathetic. The part the broadcast didn't tell the viewership is that the Wisconsin governor isn't removing unions power to bargain for wages. He's demanding that state workers put 6% of their wages toward retirement and that they cover 12% of their health care premiums! That still would still have them paying more than $100 less a month than the average citizen.

They insist this is the end of unionization in gov't. Bleh. In gov't, workers are already protected by civil service laws.

Exactly! There is NO NEED for government employee unions... NONE! They are a travesty and a breeding ground of government corruption. Their dues, almost to the dollar, go to Democrats who are only too happy to promise ever more lavish and completely irresponsible pay and benefits to these public leeches.

I am sick to death of the incessant whining of "poor, poor, pitiful me... the government is out to steal food from our mouths" when they have FAR better pay and benefits than the people who pay their salaries and benefits. Screw these fucking parasites! Fire the lot of them I say, and disband their stinking unions!

Finally the GOP starts dealing with a real issue... Of course, they pick the wrong side as usual. But at least it's a legitimate issue.

You know what you'll get if you get rid of unions? You'll get legalized slavery, that's what. Sorry guys, you're on the wrong side. Business isn't out to help anyone but themselves. Not you, not the workers, not the economy. They are only in it for themselves. Unions exist (and have existed) so that the workers (i.e. those who make money for business) won't get screwed by those they're working for.

i_luv_miley wrote:Finally the GOP starts dealing with a real issue... Of course, they pick the wrong side as usual. But at least it's a legitimate issue.

You know what you'll get if you get rid of unions? You'll get legalized slavery, that's what. Sorry guys, you're on the wrong side. Business isn't out to help anyone but themselves. Not you, not the workers, not the economy. They are only in it for themselves. Unions exist (and have existed) so that the workers (i.e. those who make money for business) won't get screwed by those they're working for.

We're talking about public-sector unions, not private-sector unions - though the need for those has long passed us by too.

What I'm tired of is government employees, people whose salaries OUR tax dollars pay, bleating for ever more of OUR money to finance their lavish salaries and benefits! There is no possible justification for a public-sector union. There are no "government slaves." These people suckle at the public taxpayer teat while giving their benefactors the big middle finger where ever they interface with them. At the DMV and at any government office you've ever been to, state and federal. Since it's nearly impossible to fire them, thanks to their unions, so they have absolutely NO incentive to do a good job or politely service their true employers - the taxpayers.

And we don't have "workers" in America, that is a hackneyed term from Soviet-era style communism. We have employees, associates, entrepreneurs, not "workers." There is no American "proletariat." It's the 21st century, not the 19th.

i_luv_miley wrote:Finally the GOP starts dealing with a real issue... Of course, they pick the wrong side as usual. But at least it's a legitimate issue.

You know what you'll get if you get rid of unions? You'll get legalized slavery, that's what. Sorry guys, you're on the wrong side. Business isn't out to help anyone but themselves. Not you, not the workers, not the economy. They are only in it for themselves. Unions exist (and have existed) so that the workers (i.e. those who make money for business) won't get screwed by those they're working for.

We're talking GOVT employee unions here, not the private sector.

Btw there, ILM.... what are you against on the issue in Wisconsin?

dblboggie wrote:We're talking about public-sector unions, not private-sector unions - though the need for those has long passed us by too.

So in essence, and like I suspected, you are talking about all unions.

dblboggie wrote:What I'm tired of is government employees, people whose salaries OUR tax dollars pay, bleating for ever more of OUR money to finance their lavish salaries and benefits! There is no possible justification for a public-sector union. There are no "government slaves." These people suckle at the public taxpayer teat while giving their benefactors the big middle finger where ever they interface with them. At the DMV and at any government office you've ever been to, state and federal. Since it's nearly impossible to fire them, thanks to their unions, so they have absolutely NO incentive to do a good job or politely service their true employers - the taxpayers.

So you're okay with CEO billionaires not only getting tax-breaks (that is when they actually do pay taxes), but you're okay when they use YOUR money to "lavish salaries and benefits" on themselves? Can you say, hypocrisy? And of course, some people will always do a half-assed job. But that's human nature, right?

dblboggie wrote:And we don't have "workers" in America, that is a hackneyed term from Soviet-era style communism. We have employees, associates, entrepreneurs, not "workers." There is no American "proletariat." It's the 21st century, not the 19th.

No thanks to the Republicans, we don't have "workers" in America. Since the days of Reagan, the GOP outsourced all of our jobs to India and China so that the billionaire CEO's (who don't even pay taxes) don't have to pay decent (American) wages to their "workers" since their "workers" aren't American.

Sorry Republicans... Labor is one thing you guys will never win. Ever!

i_luv_miley wrote:

dblboggie wrote:We're talking about public-sector unions, not private-sector unions - though the need for those has long passed us by too.

So in essence, and like I suspected, you are talking about all unions.

Not in this thread. But yes, I do believe that unions are an anachronism in the 21st century. However, I would not outlaw private-sector unions.

Public-sector unions are an entirely different matter however.

i_luv_miley wrote:

dblboggie wrote:What I'm tired of is government employees, people whose salaries OUR tax dollars pay, bleating for ever more of OUR money to finance their lavish salaries and benefits! There is no possible justification for a public-sector union. There are no "government slaves." These people suckle at the public taxpayer teat while giving their benefactors the big middle finger where ever they interface with them. At the DMV and at any government office you've ever been to, state and federal. Since it's nearly impossible to fire them, thanks to their unions, so they have absolutely NO incentive to do a good job or politely service their true employers - the taxpayers.

So you're okay with CEO billionaires not only getting tax-breaks (that is when they actually do pay taxes), but you're okay when they use YOUR money to "lavish salaries and benefits" on themselves? Can you say, hypocrisy? And of course, some people will always do a half-assed job. But that's human nature, right?

Again, I am not a proponent of crony capitalism – which is what you are talking about here. Crony capitalism is NOT free-market capitalism – not even remotely close to it.

i_luv_miley wrote:

dblboggie wrote:And we don't have "workers" in America, that is a hackneyed term from Soviet-era style communism. We have employees, associates, entrepreneurs, not "workers." There is no American "proletariat." It's the 21st century, not the 19th.

No thanks to the Republicans, we don't have "workers" in America. Since the days of Reagan, the GOP outsourced all of our jobs to India and China so that the billionaire CEO's (who don't even pay taxes) don't have to pay decent (American) wages to their "workers" since their "workers" aren't American.

Sorry Republicans... Labor is one thing you guys will never win. Ever!

Again, you can not blame outsourcing on Reagan, or just the Republicans. True we’ve had more than our fair share of turncoat RINO’s to deal with over the years (including both Bush’s), but more than any other party, the Democrats and their relentless assault on the private sector, while promoting crony capitalism, hold the lion’s share of the blame for the sorry state of affairs in America today.

You see, one does not go into business to provide jobs to Americans – something they neglect to teach school children these days in K-12 schools – and hell, even something they fail to teach to college students.

One goes into business to MAKE MONEY! Novel concept I know, but that is the cold hard truth. If a government, through oppressive and unnecessary regulations and taxes makes it impossible for a business to make a profit, then that business is going to find a way to do so or fold. Even Obama has recently had to acknowledge how oppressive our regulations and corporate taxes are and their role in sending business to friendlier climes.

This is economics 101 stuff. If we want jobs to return to America, the best thing in the world that we could do is get the government OUT of the way (end crony capitalism) and enact the Fair Tax. If that passed, this country would be overrun with jobs as every company in the world would flock here to open offices and manufacturing facilities. Very similar to what happened in Ireland when they slashed the corporate tax rate back in the late 80’s and throughout the 90’s, but with even more gusto as the corporate tax rate would be 0%. Then all we’d need to do is deal with the millions of pages of needless and job-killing regulations we’re saddled with, and this country would be a jobs mecca! We’d have to import people to fill all the jobs that would fly here.

TexasBlue wrote:Btw there, ILM.... what are you against on the issue in Wisconsin?

Sorry, I didn't see this earlier. I'm against what I perceive to be the smoke-screen for the real issue. It's like I mentioned above with dblboggie's comment, I figured he wanted to do away with all unions. And while this particular story says it only deals with one type of unions, I find that to be BS. Generally speaking, Republicans are anti-union all the way and so when I see a Republican governor in a heavy Democrat state (as Wisconsin is), talking about unions, I think his real motive is to do away with all of them. Luckily the people (and Democrat legislators) of Wisconsin seemed to have seen right through it.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Btw there, ILM.... what are you against on the issue in Wisconsin?

Sorry, I didn't see this earlier.

Well, that what this lead post is about; Wisconsin and the unrest there.

i_luv_miley wrote:I'm against what I perceive to be the smoke-screen for the real issue.

The real issue IS public employee unions. I don't know if you've been paying attention in the last 2 years but there's plenty being written of them. The states are going broke because of them. Let's address that issue.

i_luv_miley wrote:It's like I mentioned above with dblboggie's comment, I figured he wanted to do away with all unions.

He's already said he doesn't want to do away with them.

i_luv_miley wrote:And while this particular story says it only deals with one type of unions, I find that to be BS.

How so? Again, much has been written by many news sources on how states are going broke from public employee unions.

i_luv_miley wrote:Generally speaking, Republicans are anti-union all the way

Why would they support it? Everything they stand for (at least in America) is against free-market principles.

Btw, Dems are completely owned by labor unions. Another reason to not support them. I used to be in a union. Have you?

i_luv_miley wrote:and so when I see a Republican governor in a heavy Democrat state (as Wisconsin is), talking about unions,

Funny. How do you explain longtime Dem Senator Fiengold getting booted last Nov? How do you explain a Repub gov getting elected? How do you explain the whole legislature going Repub last Nov?

i_luv_miley wrote:I think his real motive is to do away with all of them. Luckily the people (and Democrat legislators) of Wisconsin seemed to have seen right through it.

Seen thru what? It ain't over. Your union side is losing this as we speak via Wisconsin public opinion.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:I'm against what I perceive to be the smoke-screen for the real issue.

The real issue IS public employee unions. I don't know if you've been paying attention in the last 2 years but there's plenty being written of them. The states are going broke because of them. Let's address that issue.

The states are going broke because of many factors. This is just one reason - and in this particular case, a politically motivated one master-minded to acheive an ulterior motive.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:It's like I mentioned above with dblboggie's comment, I figured he wanted to do away with all unions.

He's already said he doesn't want to do away with them.

Again, a smoke-screen. Republicans don't want unions period. That's what this story is really about.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:And while this particular story says it only deals with one type of unions, I find that to be BS.

How so? Again, much has been written by many news sources on how states are going broke from public employee unions.

Again it's only one factor, and a politically motivated one.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:Generally speaking, Republicans are anti-union all the way

Why would they support it? Everything they stand for (at least in America) is against free-market principles.

No, Republicans who are pro-business want all of the pie for themselves. But they want someone else to do the work. It's called greed.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:and so when I see a Republican governor in a heavy Democrat state (as Wisconsin is), talking about unions,

Funny. How do you explain longtime Dem Senator Fiengold getting booted last Nov? How do you explain a Repub gov getting elected? How do you explain the whole legislature going Repub last Nov?

So America voted Republican in 2010 because of Wisconsin? Two different issues.

TexasBlue wrote:

i_luv_miley wrote:I think his real motive is to do away with all of them. Luckily the people (and Democrat legislators) of Wisconsin seemed to have seen right through it.

Seen thru what? It ain't over. Your union side is losing this as we speak via Wisconsin public opinion.

Actually, we've already won. There will be no vote until the Democrats return to the state - and if they have any balls (and that is now the question IMO), they won't until the governor is willing to negotiate. If the Wisconsin GOP vote anyway, they expose their own hypocrisy. Either way, the GOP, at least in Wisconsin, has shown their true (anti-worker, anti-labor) colors. In the end, we win. Again.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:The real issue IS public employee unions. I don't know if you've been paying attention in the last 2 years but there's plenty being written of them. The states are going broke because of them. Let's address that issue.

The states are going broke because of many factors. This is just one reason - and in this particular case, a politically motivated one master-minded to acheive an ulterior motive.

Wrong! The pension plans in many states are starting to break them. City pension plans are breaking city coffers. All of this is well-documented. California is up to it's neck in this all because of unfunded public employee pensions. It's the middle class that gets the income taken from them to pay the retirement benefits of public sector. Is it really that unfair that public employees pay more for rising health care costs and contribute more to their own retirement?

Even though they recognize and accept the financial disaster facing their state gov't (and other state govt's around the country) the unions see no need for them to be a part of the solution.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:He's already said he doesn't want to do away with them.

Again, a smoke-screen. Republicans don't want unions period. That's what this story is really about.

Wrong-0. The governor has already said he doesn't want to do away with them. He wants to take their collective bargaining rights away on pensions and health care. They can still bargain wages with the current proposal.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:
How so? Again, much has been written by many news sources on how states are going broke from public employee unions.

Again it's only one factor, and a politically motivated one.

See two quotes above. If you like, I can post figures to back up what I said. Just say the word. There's nothing political in the fact that public employee pensions are strangling the states. In Wisconsin, they pay NOTHING toward their pension plan. NOTHING! There's nothing political in the fact that public employee health care costs are strangling the states. In Wisconsin, they pay 5% in health care costs. With the guv's proposal, they pay 12%. Oooooo boy. In the real world, one pays far more than that. But in the make-believe world, these people are paid these bennies via the tax payer.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Why would they support it? Everything they stand for (at least in America) is against free-market principles.

No, Republicans who are pro-business want all of the pie for themselves. But they want someone else to do the work. It's called greed.

Again, you seem to be in favor of the states going broke. You seem to be in favor of taxpayers paying even more money for these people. Taxpayers are strangled enough. Yep, you appear that to me because that's what you imply via your excuses.

i_luv_miley wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Funny. How do you explain longtime Dem Senator Fiengold getting booted last Nov? How do you explain a Repub gov getting elected? How do you explain the whole legislature going Repub last Nov?

So America voted Republican in 2010 because of Wisconsin? Two different issues.

You didn't seem to get it. Wisconsin kicked out longtime Senator Fiengold. Wsconsin elected in a REpub govnor. Wisconsin booted out a Dem controled assembly and voted in a GOP controlled one.

So much a "heavy Democratic" state.

i_luv_miley wrote:Actually, we've already won. There will be no vote until the Democrats return to the state - and if they have any balls (and that is now the question IMO), they won't until the governor is willing to negotiate. If the Wisconsin GOP vote anyway, they expose their own hypocrisy. Either way, the GOP, at least in Wisconsin, has shown their true (anti-worker, anti-labor) colors. In the end, we win. Again.

No. Public opinion is turning on them. When that happens, more of your party's seats will be lost in that state. It's what happened nationwide last fall.

As for the state legislators, running away from the issue is not the best way to show leadership especially when they're voted to represent. Since the Dems are completely owned by labor unions, this isn't a surprise. The legislators obviously don't care enough to show up and voice their concerns or opposition. Running away is downright cowardly. These politicians are voted in and paid by taxpayers to do their jobs.... and a tough part of it is right now. Wisconsin, in an overwhelming majority, voted in the Repubs for a reason.

Hint: The Dems may wanna strike a deal now, because 2012 maybe a whole different ball game there in Wisconsin.

Here's a look (albeit 2 years old) at the states in 2008 that couldn't fund their state workers pensions.
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=349061

You know what happens? The said state goes in the hole. You okay with that??????

People thought I was crazy for downplaying the Super Bowl.
"It's just a game", I said to everybody,"A few days after the game the winning city will not care about it and they will get back to what really matters"

Well who has cheese on their face now?! HA!
Apparently the Packers victory did not stop this from happening. Who coulda saw that comin'...other than me.