February 22, 2011

"Who'll get in more trouble -- the guy who wasn't spreading salt, for his egregious waste of the city's time and gas, or the guy who was spreading salt, for double-salting and dangerous multitasking?"

Roy Edroso asks some good questions. I have one for him: What would he say if he were looking at 8 minutes of raw footage showing 2 large municipal vehicles cruising around the square blaring horns in apparent support of a big Tea Party rally?

70 comments:

Drew said...

SALT! SALT! That's not "green," is it? I'm sure that guy's toast.

I'm a Shaaaaark said...

I have one for him: What would he say if he were looking at 8 minutes of raw footage showing 2 large municipal vehicles cruising around the square blaring horns in apparent support of a big Tea Party rally?

That's an easy one. That guy would be fired so fast his head would spin, and his 'union' would say, "Well, we tried, but there wasn't anything we could do...'

That said, at least you all still have the sense to use salt and sand and such. Out here, we can't use salt when the roads freeze because the salt might eventually wash it's way into the salt water and do something bad.

Sand is right out, too, because it also pollutes streams and kills Salmon.

Dose of Sanity said...

Food for thought: What costs the city more money?

Option 1: The two plow drivers (at least 1 of which was not doing his job) for an undetermined amount of time?

Option 2: The ensuing investigation and potential sanctions?

Does justice trump actual taxpayer money? Do we think not investigating will cause a slippery slope precedent where plow drivers will stop doing their jobs?

I'm a Shaaaaark said...

Food for thought: What costs the city more money?

I'll take 'Negligence lawsuits against the city when ambulances are nto able to get through because snowplow operators were not doing their jobs, and people die." for $500, Alex.

GMay said...

And here I made the mistake of clicking on the comments section. A quivering mass of ignorant, illogical imbeciles who appear to think they're smarter than they actually are.

NotYourTypicalNewYorker said...

OT:"Dems halt action in Indiana House"

http://bit.ly/gplny7

The rasping, coughing, death rattle of the liberal dem party.

pbAndj said...

"What would he say if he were looking at 8 minutes of raw footage showing 2 large municipal vehicles cruising around the square blaring horns in apparent support of a big Tea Party rally?"

And, what would the fiscally riled (by trucks driving w/ horns) Althouse say if she saw government trucks (e.g. firetrucks) driving around in parades, or rasing money for charities, or (as they do in my hood) blasting Christmas music all around the town w/ a Santa on top? Presumably some civil liberties, anti-religion folks (in addition to tightwad Althouse) would frown on the Christmas thing.

Triangle Man said...

I hear faculty are marching to the Capitol now.

MadisonMan said...

I'll take 'Negligence lawsuits against the city when ambulances are nto able to get through because snowplow operators were not doing their jobs, and people die." for $500, Alex.

I'm pretty sure such a lawsuit would be thrown out of court in Wisconsin. (IANAL). I do know you can't sue people when you slip and fall on their icy sidewalks.

Dose of Sanity said...

Lol Shaaark, good luck with that lawsuit.

Causation, Damages, Immunity, Outside scope of employment. Ya, I can't see any potential problems with that lawsuit.

How about a true pragmatic answer? Since we're so concerned about the "taxpayer money". (If it's a 'on-principle' argument, that is something else)

Chip S. said...

This is a trick question, isn't it? The correct answer is, "the guy who posted the comment about AA getting shot in the head."

But that's just another nonevent in Leftland, I suppose. They're too buy focusing on the big issues, like the tax implications of sleeping on a cot in the office.

MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...

I think Althouse's observations about the salt trucks is motivated more by political concerns than fiscal ones.

Comparing using firetrucks in a parade that has no political overtones and benefits the entire community to using them to show solidarity with a political cause identified mostly with the Democrat Party is comparing apples and oranges.

William said...

Which was a greater violation of professional ethics: The physicians who wrote sick notes or the driver who blared his horn? Who do you think will have to sweat his violation more--the driver or the doctors?.....The teachers and the physicians committed much more egregrious offenses, and they will suffer no consequences. If they screw some poor truck driver for this minimal offense, it will not reflect well on Wisconsin.

William said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
bagoh20 said...

Today is the anniversary of the martyring a few very brave people in a dangerous time and place. Real defenders of civil liberties, not anything like our modern poseurs.

The White Rose

Dose of Sanity said...

@ William

That was mostly the point I was making. Though I'm less certain I would punish the teachers. The doctors, certainly, violated their medical ethics.

bagoh20 said...

William @ 11:51

An excellent point.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

GMay said...

And here I made the mistake of clicking on the comments section. A quivering mass of ignorant, illogical imbeciles who appear to think they're smarter than they actually are.

Hey! I hadn't even commented yet.

Oh, you meant the linked comment section?

Never mind

edutcher said...

How about the guy who threatened Ann for showing up those clowns?

pbAndj said...

"What would he say if he were looking at 8 minutes of raw footage showing 2 large municipal vehicles cruising around the square blaring horns in apparent support of a big Tea Party rally?"

And, what would the fiscally riled (by trucks driving w/ horns) Althouse say if she saw government trucks (e.g. firetrucks) driving around in parades, or rasing money for charities, or (as they do in my hood) blasting Christmas music all around the town w/ a Santa on top? Presumably some civil liberties, anti-religion folks (in addition to tightwad Althouse) would frown on the Christmas thing.


Nothing, because that time and money was budgeted (and I doubt Ann is a spoilsport).

PS The PC crowd wants everybody to do it their way because they're always offended and it's past time they were told they offend everybody else.

I'm a Shaaaaark said...

I'm pretty sure such a lawsuit would be thrown out of court in Wisconsin. (IANAL). I do know you can't sue people when you slip and fall on their icy sidewalks.

I was alluding to the issues in NYC when the snowplow drivers (i.e. sanitation worker's union) had work 'slowdowns' etc. because of city budget cuts during the bad winter storm not so long ago.

pbAndj said...

"because that time and money was budgeted"

Hardly.

BTW, speaking of budgeting, I know a firefighter in my hood. When they built their new fire station about six years ago, they were very careful to formulate the construction budget so that it wasn't obvious that they were building an extremely posh "cinema room."

They'd rather have folks think of how nice it is when they drive up and down the streets (for two nights in a row, i.e. they cover the same streets (in the best part of town) twice a year, just in case folks missed them the first time) blasting Christmas (including religious) music.

Triangle Man said...

building an extremely posh "cinema room

You mean distance education enabled training facility.

tim maguire said...

He seems like a reasonably intelligent guy who uses his brains to make slightly more intelligent sounding partisan statements that any idiot could make.

Personally, I've about had all I can take of snark and the idiots who confuse it with wit.

Bob Ellison said...

This isn't the right thread for the following comment, but here it is anyway:

Unions are or seek to become monopolies. Monopoly over the supply of labor is their source of power.

This Wisconsin thing seems to be metastasizing rapidly, and I continue to be amazed that most people seem unaware of the above fact. Why is support for unions be so strong (48% or so, according to Gallup) in a populace that has such rare union membership (12% or so)? Especially when we have such horrible examples as the teachers', teamsters', and auto workers' unions?

The answer is that most people have no idea why unions exist. They buy the myth that the teacher unions are there for education, and that other unions are there for various reasons, chief among which is worker safety and the like. Of course, unions exist today only to gain power and to extract wealth, like any other business in a capitalist environment. Unlike other businesses (excepting major league baseball), however, unions are entitled to monopoly power.

We don't usually like monopolies. They tend to inhibit trade, raise prices, and inhibit progress and development. These results are obvious in all union-dominated areas in America: education, shipping, auto manufacture, etc. Yet somehow the news goes on nightly reporting about unions as though they are just a bunch of nice workers fighting the big, bad company for the right not to get their fingers sheared off by the sausage-packing machine.

This is a terribly important point. If Madison electric utility owners were taking over the capitol building in Madison because Governor Walker wanted to restrict the utility's ability to collectively bargain a five-cent-per-kWh charge on electricity delivery, we'd laugh at such monopolistic effrontery.

I feel like Bob Dole: where is the outrage?

Chip Ahoy said...

GMay, I made the same mistake. Then I keep right on reading in search for that single spark that could redeem the the whole thing but it never comes. Then I get to the end and I go, "Why did I do that? Why do I keep challenging my faith in humanity this way? "

I have a question too, for all the commenters over there at that hopeless sordid sinkhole: How are your vacuum pump enlargement regimens coming along, Pixies?

Robert Cook said...

"And here I made the mistake of clicking on the comments section. A quivering mass of ignorant, illogical imbeciles who appear to think they're smarter than they actually are."

Sounds like you're describing a cohort of which you're a part.

Robert Cook said...

"...most people have no idea why unions exist. They buy the myth that the teacher unions are there for education...."

Who ever said teacher's unions were for education?

Teacher's unionize for the same reason any workers unionize: to gain a more equal footing with the employers, so to gain sufficient leverage to bargain more fairly for decent working conditions and pay.

Bob Ellison said...

@Robert Cook, the teacher unions themselves, and the protesters in Madison, routinely claim the these unions exist for education. Yes, you're right in what you say, but the mythology is strong, and most people seem to buy it. That's my point.

Jeremy said...

Why won't The Queen just admit that she's nothing more than another teabagging fool, trying to pass herself off as some kind of "independent?"

Gutless.

Jeremy said...

Unions gave us weekends, child labor laws, minimum wage, sick days, vacation, collective bargaining and workers having the ability to earn a living wage.

Not that any of that matters to the teabagging crowd who visit this site every day of the week, worshipping The Queen.

Blaming unions for the economic mess in Wisconsin and throughout the entire country is ridiculous.

pbAndj said...

BTW, does Althouse really want her readers to start thinking about how certain actions, that may seem to have no cost to them, do, in fact, have a real cost?

For example, if these truck drivers are costing Atlhouse money, surely it is true that readers using the Althouse portal are subjecting themselves to a real cost. Amazon's costs per sale would be lower if folks went directly to Amazon. Therefore, direct purchases would allow Amazon (when they formulate prices) to pass on extra savings to the shoppers, rather than the portalizer.

Not to mention the benefits that will flow to the stockholders if Amazon can increase it's earnings. We should be especially focused on the folks who have large holdings, i.e. the rich folks, i.e. "the job creators," i.e. the folks who trickle on the middle class.

Just sayn'

Alex said...

If they screw some poor truck driver for this minimal offense, it will not reflect well on Wisconsin.

Uh this "poor truck driver" should have thought before he made an ass of himself. Or do actions have no consequences in your silly little world?

Alex said...

pbj - you simply do not think immoral behavior in the service of left-wing actions is a problem. Alinsky smiles.

traditionalguy said...

This is not a Labor Union busting case, but it instead is a Public Service Employee's Political Action Committee busting case. Therefore, the idea that their misuse of time and facilities can be called "Egregious" strikes me as a joke. The more educators misuse time and facilities, the more they can demand extra compensation. What an irresponsible way to operate...but wait, it's not a business operation. A business operation is paid for production, but a government operation is paid for wasting time to spread out the government jobs.

Hagar said...

I can remember when the NEA was strictly a professional association, and it was all for the children, no way was it anything as crude union, oh, Heavens to Betsy, no!.

This suddenly changed when Al Shanker formed the AFT, and teachers quit the NEA and joined the AFT, thus cutting into the membership dues take.

BJM said...

Gee Dose, I don't know which is more cost effective, but shall extend your hypothetical a bit further?

1)the investigation of a snow plow operator who participated in an illegal work stoppage and did not plow your street. Your child/spouse/parent died because an ambulance could not traverse the unplowed street.

2)or doing nothing?

Does justice trump actual taxpayer money?

Do we think not investigating will cause a slippery slope precedent where plow drivers will stop doing their jobs?

Real life provides the answer.

A union card does not make one immune from the law and consequences of one's actions.

We either live by rule of law or the mob.

shiloh said...

And here I made the mistake of clicking on the comments section. A quivering mass of ignorant, illogical imbeciles who appear to think they're smarter than they actually are.
~~~~~


Indeed and aren't generalities, personal ad hominems great lol as this is what put AA's blog on the map! as she competes w/drudge daily ...

Many bloggers are addicted and just can't help themselves, eh.

Is there a political bloggers anonymous?

>

One of my fav ;) blogs (((was))) HP er Huffington Compost where equal parts cons/libs yell at each other all day long to no effect ~ much like here. :)

MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...

"Unions gave us weekends, child labor laws, minimum wage, sick days, vacation, collective bargaining and workers having the ability to earn a living wage."

True. And governments gave us: social security, medicare, medicaid, food stamps, unemployment insurance, worker's compensation, public, and $14 trillion in debt.

You've got your socialist Utopian entitlement society. Why are you still banging your spoon on the high chair like a snot nosed brat whining for more?

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Indiana dems now cutting and running:

http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2011/02/cut-and-run-dems-now-cutting-and.html

Shanna said...

I suspect the worst the truck driver would get is a "dont' do that again". Maybe a letter in a file. If that.

Alex said...

Shanna - more like an "atta boy! you really showed those baggers".

Jay said...

"Unions gave us weekends, child labor laws, minimum wage, sick days, vacation, collective bargaining and workers having the ability to earn a living wage

Unions did not "give us" vacation days.

Your ignorance is staggering.

roesch-voltaire said...

Too often Althouse finds a small infraction, wasting eight minutes of my tax dollars, to focus on as though that will somehow change the growing tide of folks around the state, including off duty police and fire department members,who are joining in with this protest over a hasty and poorly vetted proposal.

Pangolin said...

So let me get this straight. A lawyer, part of that legal monopoly known for billing clients $75 for a five minute phone call, is bitching because some $30/hr. union guys are padding the tab?

Jesus wept.

Jay said...

So let me get this straight. A lawyer, part of that legal monopoly known for billing clients $75 for a five minute phone call, is bitching because some $30/hr. union guys are padding the tab?


Um, your "analogy" falls a little flat given that the salt truck driver's salary, health care, and pension are paid for by state tax payers.

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

And here I made the mistake of clicking on the comments section. A quivering mass of ignorant, illogical imbeciles who appear to think they're smarter than they actually are.
~~~~~

Indeed and aren't generalities, personal ad hominems great lol as this is what put AA's blog on the map! as she competes w/drudge daily ...

Many bloggers are addicted and just can't help themselves, eh.

Is there a political bloggers anonymous?


Don't let the door hit you...

BJM said...

pbAndj

Are you kidding me?

Keep in mind that those firefighters will roll out of their "cushy cinema room" and RUN INTO YOUR BURNING HOUSE to carry your sorry ass to safety.

Firefighters have lived in firehouses with minimal creature comforts for decades. Most local jails have better facilities than the average firehouse.

The real crime is that the firefighters felt they needed to disguise a recreational resource that most of us enjoy at home.

The community should provide creature comforts for men and women who place our lives, safety and property above their own.

rick said...

"Unions gave us weekends, child labor laws, minimum wage, sick days, vacation, collective bargaining and workers having the ability to earn a living wage"

Jane, you ignorant slut. Unions also gave us thuggery, intimidation, wildcat strikes, work slow downs, forced union dues, no voice in where political contributions are sent, higher construction costs (via the phony prevailing wage regs.).

Pogo said...

"Keep in mind that those firefighters will roll out of their "cushy cinema room" and RUN INTO YOUR BURNING HOUSE to carry your sorry ass to safety."

Why not pay them each $20 million per year then?

Why not $50M annually?

Dose of Sanity said...

@ Rick.

Saying unions gave us wildcat strikes is ridiculous, considering the definition.

pbAndj said...

BJM,

I never wrote that I had a problem w/ the lavish fire house. I know from my friend (the fire fighter), that it's really hard to get those jobs, hence these folks should be well compensated. Likewise, I think it's nice that they drive around blasting Christmas (including religious) songs.

But, I also don't care if these guys in Madison want to drive around the block a couple times.

P.S.
I do find your argument about these guys going into burning buildings to be weak. If that was the measure, many in our military would be much better compensated. I'm sure fighting on the front lines against terrorists is much more dangerous, w/o a relatively huge salary and benefit bump being secured by the front line fighters.

Right?

Triangle Man said...

Amazon's costs per sale would be lower if folks went directly to Amazon. Therefore, direct purchases would allow Amazon (when they formulate prices) to pass on extra savings to the shoppers, rather than the portalizer.


Affiliate fees are marketing costs. If the Affiliate program failed, those funds wouldn't go back to the consumer, nor would they go to Amazon's profit, they would go into some other form of marketing.

rick said...

@Dose.....the major reason for a contract (from a management perspective) is a guarantee the workforce will show up and perform their duties. Any disagreements are to be resolved through the grievance procedure. Without the union, and by extension the union contract, wildcat strike would not be in our lexicon.

pbAndj said...

Triangle Man,

If Amazon can sell you junk w/o paying the 'Althouse tax', they can use the saved money to increase their business. They can either spend the money marketing to someone else. Since you've gone directly to them, they're able to use your 'Althouse tax' to market to someone else. Or, they can put the 'Althouse tax' back into the business in some non-marketing way. Or, they can drop the saved 'Althouse tax' to the bottom line, as earnings.

Ask any retailer if they would prefer to have buyers voluntarily walk in the door, or do they think it'd be better (or neutral), from the business POV, if they had to pay someone to bring the same buyer in the door, to make the same purchase.

The 'Althouse tax' is real. Folks can pay it if they want to (I do), but they shouldn't pretend it doesn't exist.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

Boy, those doofuses at Amazon know nothing about running a profitable business! Imagine them voluntarily running a program where they lose money. How stupid can they be? They should hire that genius pbAndj to run their marketing department. He's much smarter than they are.

Shanna said...

Boy, those doofuses at Amazon know nothing about running a profitable business! Imagine them voluntarily running a program where they lose money. How stupid can they be?

Seriously.

Bryan C said...

"Does justice trump actual taxpayer money?"

The point of disciplinary action isn't just abstract "justice", as applied to this single case. The point is to show that plow drivers that they shouldn't participate in stupid political stunts while on the taxpayer's dime, or they'll get into trouble. And to show the public that the city is a responsible steward of their tax dollars.

(w/v coati - Have you hugged your snookum bear today?)

pbAndj said...

Martin and Shanna,

I never claimed Amazon was losing money as a result of this so-called portalization.

I'm assuming that you made that up because you couldn't argue against what I did write.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

pbAndj,

Calling affiliate marketing fees a tax is profoundly ignorant, and needs no refutation. Amazon is not paying a tax, they're generating business. But you're so desperate to find a flimsy excuse to criticize Professor Althouse that you're mischaracterizing it, presumably intentionally. That's worthy of mockery.

Robert Cook said...

"Jane, you ignorant slut. Unions also gave us thuggery, intimidation, wildcat strikes, work slow downs, forced union dues, no voice in where political contributions are sent, higher construction costs (via the phony prevailing wage regs.)."

Not to deny the negative aspects that have been associated with unions--not that consider I wildcat strikes or work slowdowns to always be unjustified--but if you want to talk about sheer magnitude of crimes against society and theft of taxpayer dollars, look to the boards and CEOS of the banks and financial institutions and national and international corporations who set the agenda their Congressional lackeys must fulfill. These guys are crooks and killers beyond anything Al Capone or John Gotti ever conceived of being.

pbAndj said...

Martin,

I don't mean to say that the 'Althouse tax' is collected to support government expenditures, like a real tax, i.e. it's not the same in inspiration or implementation. I'm saying that, mechanically, it's like a VAT because both situations require a retailer to give part of their shoppers' money to some outside entity. If it makes you happier you could call it the 'Althouse commmission.'


FTR, I'm not attacking Althouse. I'm stating that it's better for Amazon's business if folks shop w/ them directly, so that they don't need to pay money to Althouse.

Facts are facts.

rick said...

@ Robert Cook "These guys are crooks and killers beyond anything Al Capone or John Gotti ever conceived of being."

You failed to include W.A. "Tony" Boyle and Jimmy Hoffa Sr. in your assessment.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

Let's see... You think not paying affiliate fees would be better for Amazon's business. In fact, beyond thinking this, you proclaim it a "fact".

Amazon apparently thinks otherwise, or they would cancel the program.

Based on their dominance of the online sales market, I'm gonna say that Amazon knows what they're doing. And either you just can't understand that, or you're deliberately fabricating an excuse to criticize Professor Althouse.

MadisonMan said...

What would he say if he were looking at 8 minutes of raw footage showing 2 large municipal vehicles cruising around the square blaring horns in apparent support of a big Tea Party rally?

How'd they steal those trucks?

pbAndj said...

Martin,

A sale where Amazon pays the 'Althouse commission' is better for them than no sale at all. Here the 'Althouse commission' sale would be added business for Amazon. If Althouse is motivating folks to buy stuff that they wouldn't otherwise be buying, then the 'Althouse commission' sales are great for Amazon.

But, a sale w/o the 'Althouse commission' is better for Amazon than a sale where they need to give part of the purchase price to Althouse. Althouse frequently makes the point that folks should use her portal to buy things that they were planning to buy anyway. She says that this is a no cost way for folks to support Althouse, while doing what they were going to do anyway. In these situations it would be better for Amazon's business if folks went directly to Amazon, because then Amazon can keep more of the purchase price, since no 'Althouse commission' would be paid.

Facts are facts.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

"Facts are facts."

For instance, the fact that Amazon knows what they're doing, and you don't. I judge by results, not by assertions.

Maguro said...

In these situations it would be better for Amazon's business if folks went directly to Amazon, because then Amazon can keep more of the purchase price, since no 'Althouse commission' would be paid.

Well, you could say the same thing about credit card purchases, since retailers pay a commission to MC or Visa whenever you use your card. Nonetheless, stuff still costs the same at Wal-Mart whether you pay cash or with a card. And I don't think you can assume prices would be cheaper at Wal-Mart if they didn't accept cards, since their overall sales volume would decrease.

Issob Morocco said...

Call Mayor Bloomberg

autothreads said...

Unions gave us weekends, child labor laws, minimum wage, sick days, vacation, collective bargaining and workers having the ability to earn a living wage.

Foundational myths of organized labor. Weekends were given by Henry Ford when he realized that with 40 hour 5 day work week, he could run his plants 24 hrs a day. He also set up a company health clinic. As for wages, I doubt you'd be interested in the facts but if you look at wages from 1900 to 1940, wages were going up dramatically long before the Wagner Act facilitated the organization of American industries in the late 1930s.

Child labor laws were enacted by Congress and state legislatures, they did not come about through collective bargaining.

In any case, what's going on in Wisconsin has nothing to do with traditional private sector unions, whose member can create wealth. Wisconsin is about the Marie Antoinettes of our day, the entitled and privileged public employees, whose unions and their bought politicians are the definition of corruption.

Let a business person even talk to a politician and you're quick to decry lobbying but you have no problem with public employee unions paying politicians to hire more public employees.

So you're not about the working man and woman, you're about increasing the political power of your side and about massively growing government.

abeer ahmed said...

For the latest news visit us on cnn.com
http://whois.domaintasks.com/cnn.com