[N]ot only did Scott Walker’s reforms strike an important blow for employee freedom, they also had the happy side-effect of depriving the unions of a large chunk of their funding, and therefore their ability to sway elections. So it is a win-win for everyone, except union bosses and the politicians they support.
April 8, 2013
"Since Wisconsin stopped forcing public employees to pay union dues against their will..."
"... union membership in that state has plummeted," writes John Hinderaker.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
174 comments:
Couldn't happen to a nicer gang of thugs.
This is why the unions and leftists went all in tilting at the recall windmall.
Without the compulsion of the state acting as their collections agent, apparently vast numbers of people do not want to be members of unions.
Suck it Garage.
Right On Humperdink!
Not allowing unions to force the unwilling into membership is known as "union busting."
This further confirms my belief that Unions are largely an anachronism. Without big government maintaining the various frameworks for them (like compulsory membership) they'll just collapse due to irrelevance.
Behold the power of big government!
Had a great effect on the state economy too. We're #4 in the nation on job growth.
Wait, we're #44. NEVER MIND.
Oh how I wish it was the goal of big government to free me from compulsory behaviors that they previously compelled me to do! That is some big government that freedom loving people would support!
Trey
Bravo. What does that say about unions in general? Sucks to be you marxist thugs.
It costs a lot of money to inflate one of those giant rats.
garage mahal said...
Behold the power of big government!
Had a great effect on the state economy too. We're #4 in the nation on job growth.
Wait, we're #44. NEVER MIND.
You still have a job, right?
There is a growing schism between state Democrats and private-sector unions.
State Dems went all-in for the public sector unions, but yet voted against legislation that would have benefitted private-sector unions.
The private-sector unions are never going to automatically support the GOP, but they do know that the Dems will toss them under a bus in second...because they already have.
Their reward/carrot from Scott Walker will be that he will never sign right-to-work legislation, much to the chagrin of many in the state GOP.
In other words, freedom has prevailed.
If the Union were a normal group of people, the leaders who have lead them down this path would be ousted in favor of someone who doesn't have a 1950s mentality. I suspect, however, that the present leaders will try to double down on their losses. When your business model is broken, you either fix it (not happening) or adopt a new one (not happening either). That's the problem for the Unions.
tim in vermont said...
Not allowing unions to force the unwilling into membership is known as "union busting."
Only by unions unable to solicit membership on their own merits. Federal government employees are not required to join the AFGE or pay dues to it, unless they volunteer to do so.
The AFGE union runs periodic recruiting campaigns and makes an effort to act on behalf of the membership and potential members to encourage signing up.
What a concept, eh? Unions that must perform for members rather than union bosses and politicians.
Cass Sunstein does not approve. If the proletariat were fully informed, they would realize that unions are good for teachers, and especially good for students. But due to their false consciousness, they will not willingly pay their dues. So forced collection is required.
Echoing the thoughts of others above: who would have thought the elimination of compulsory dues would have thought the unions would be so affected
Whether to remain a public sector union member or not should be a simple decision. Do the benefits of union membership outweigh the costs? It appears that thousands of Wisconsin public employees have decided the benefits aren't worth the cost.
What will the unions do in response to their declining membership?
1. The unions can try to get the courts to overturn the law and force the public employees to once again pay their dues, even against their will.
2. Or they can hope to win enough people to elective office to overturn the law and force public employees to pay union dues against their will.
3. Or the unions could implement changes to make union membership actually beneficial to the members so people would pay their dues willingly.
Who am I kidding? That'll never happen. Making the changes would be admitting that the unions weren't representing the best interests of their members all along. That will not do.
Golly- I thought people needed unions or they would wither and die. If you don't force unions on people, shouldn't they choose unions anyway!?
When your business model is broken, you either fix it (not happening) or adopt a new one (not happening either). That's the problem for the Unions
Hmm, wonder how it got broke! By big government conservatives crushing it?
Forced unions dues fund democrats. Perhaps some people are tired of that.
garage: "Hmm, wonder how it got broke! By big government conservatives crushing it?"
YES! Because allowing the individuals involved to CHOOSE whether or not to voluntarily give to the Union is the exact same thing as establishing "big government"!
LOL
Freedom = slavery!
Up = down!
The world according to garage.
Mr. Cognitive dissonance strikes again. Hey Garage- Any idea why democrats are so gung ho on BIG GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE UNIONS?
Perhaps some people are tired of that.
Scott Walker & Republicans. They're also tired of too many people voting. And people singing.
None dare call them fascists though.
garage defines fascism as removing government restrictions. but forcing people to pay union dues = freedom.
Garage: The former union members have voted with their feet. They elect not to pay dues. They elect not to be members. This option, available to free people, always confounds the lefties and the government worker types. Why do all those frightful suburbs exist that are draining the cities of their rightful taxes? Could it be the schools are better, the roads smoother, the officials less corrupt or not corrupt at all? Nope. The lefties and government worker types think the solution to those suburbs is higher taxes. The union model is bust. Broken. Gone. Wisconsin is 44th instead of 50th in job growth because it has not yet dawned on the world to build in Wisconsin and employ embittered ex-unionistas with snark in lieu of brains.
garage, like all fascists, does not like it when individuals can vote with their feet and then...do.
Garage ... You've mentioned Act 10 and Wisconsin jobs ranking several times now. Seriously, I am willing to listen if you are willing to explain how Act 10 impacted Wisconsin jobs over all? Not just projections, but realities, specific examples, please.
Garage- If unions are so amazing and uplifting - why aren't people choosing to pay union dues anyway?
You think it's OK for government to force people to pay for something against their will?
(the definition of big government!)
(you know, that little thing called freedom of choice...
CHOICE! The thing you liberals claim to love and adore? right?)
Yes fatboy, Walker is such a facist for not forcing people to have money confiscated from them against their will.
So sad that the SECRET ROUTER! indictment you predicted for over a year on this site came to a big fat nothing.
Whine all you like Bitchtits, but these numbers are only the beginning. The forced union/democrat extortion racket is over.
AprilApple: "If you don't force unions on people, shouldn't they choose unions anyway!?"
Not if they are members of the group that can do the "maths".
Which necessarily excludes garage.
AprilApples: "(you know, that little thing called freedom of choice...
CHOICE! The thing you liberals claim to love and adore? right?)"
Fen's Law, again.
"except union bosses and the politicians they support"
Should read: "except union bosses and the politicians they buy"
Means paternalism is like a GPS. You can ignore what the GPS says and try your own route, but if you do so, there is a serious risk that you will get lost. To return to the compulsory public union membership example: means paternalists would steer state workers in the direction of considering all relevant benefits from union membership, certainly by providing relevant information, and if compulsory union membership mandate would help state workers on balance, the means paternalists would be willing to consider it.
As usual, Hinderaker is an asshole.
as usual RC is an idiot.
Larry J,
Whether to remain a public sector union member or not should be a simple decision. Do the benefits of union membership outweigh the costs? It appears that thousands of Wisconsin public employees have decided the benefits aren't worth the cost.
Exactly so. Every worker would gladly pay dues if they were worth more than the price. Unfortunately, in most lines of work in 21st-c. America, much the largest benefit of paying union dues is generally "permission to work in a union shop." Take away the requirement to join the union to get the job, and people are mysteriously less interested in joining the union. Make the members actually write a check for their dues themselves, rather than have their employer remove the money from their pay before they ever see it, makes them, strangely, less enthusiastic still.
As usual, Robert Cook goes Alinsky.
Seriously, I am willing to listen if you are willing to explain how Act 10 impacted Wisconsin jobs over all?
Act 10 sucked about a billion dollars out of the economy that was shoveled upwards to Walker's donor base. Kicking the poor and the disabled didn't turn out to be a big job creation technique either.
garage: "Act 10 sucked about a billion dollars out of the economy that was shoveled upwards to Walker's donor base. Kicking the poor and the disabled didn't turn out to be a big job creation technique either."
LOL
Every garage post is some inverse "gnome-underpants-profits" tale of woe!!
BTW, here's what a real fascist sounds like: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/08/new-msnbc-promo-we-have-to-break-through-our-kind-of-private-idea-that-kids-belong-to-their-parents/
Remember, to garage and his pals, your kids aren't really yours.
At all.
They belong to the state.
I'll bet just reading that makes garage get all "warm" all over...
Robert Cook said...
As usual, Hinderaker is an asshole.
Regardless.
Is he right?
People were given a choice and overwhelmingly decided in their own best interests.
How is this wrong?
Act 10 sucked about a billion dollars out of the economy that was shoveled upwards to Walker's donor base.
Elaborate, or provide links. Show your work.
Cooktard is quite butt hurt today.
I know how much it pains Stalin apologists when people actually get to express their wishes instead of having money confiscated from them.
There there, cooktard, there there.
EMD: "Show your work."
There is no actual "work" involved in parroting what you've been directed to write/say by your political "betters".
Cookie is just all fired up along with his pals over the passing of Maggie.
They can never forgive anyone for standing up to their dream "workers paradise".
Why would anyone pay into something and know they'll get nothing return? While some truly don't want to belong (though seem happy to reap any benefit they may get), so not paying in is fine with them - there are many, many more who understand that the public unions, as they currently exist, can do nothing for them. What exactly would the be paying for?
Compulsory membership and dues robbed the unions of member feedback. The policy doomed them to failure because there was no accountability to their members. So the leadership was free to make any choices without consideration of how it would impact membership.
Trey
" they [the dues reforms] also had the happy side-effect of depriving the unions of a large chunk of their funding,"
I don't think that was a side effect.
But the ultimate cause of this effect is the failure (refusal?) of the members to pay voluntarily. The unions made no real effort to get voluntary payment. They knew how the members really felt.
garage mahal said..
"None dare call them fascists though."
Quite a few dare of course--even you with your clever little misdirection. By and large the accusation is a substitute for thought and argument. But none dare call them stupid, stupid.
Drago said...
Cookie is just all fired up along with his pals over the passing of Maggie.
They can never forgive anyone for standing up to their dream "workers paradise".
McArdle has a reasonable legth commentary summarizing the circumstances. The economy was at a virtual standstill due to union strikes, inflation was 25%. Remember the UK was maybe halfway to Cook's utopia. The final stage would be much worse.
We don't need unions, we are one community now, and our chidren belong to the community, the private idea they belong to us is passé.
British actors were leaving because of the tax rates.
Those silly former union members, soon it will dawn on them they voted against their own self-interest.
This is an absurd thread. You people posting here are making this a personal fight. Sure I wish that those on the left would have a little more self aware than to call someone a fascist for giving people a choice on collective membership. And yes the constant use of the "look a squirrel" discussion tactic is annoying. But I request that this board not turn into a Facebook poo flinger confab. Just a request.
This may be a one sided argument and soon there will be few people who admit they supported forced wage confiscation to support government cronies like the union bosses. But also realize the same will be said about supporters of DOMA and government enforcement of religious doctrine in what should be consensual contract law.
Garage: The former union members have voted with their feet.
Indeed. A chunk of that decline were people retiring. Or quitting. As of a few months ago, Wisconsin ranked #10 in people leaving the state. We have that going for us.
TMink: "So the leadership was free to make any choices without consideration of how it would impact membership."
Hey man, those Casino's weren't going to build themselves!
Mob guys need no-show jobs too ya know! No-show jobs aren't just for future first ladies after all.
Wait, we're #44. NEVER MIND.
Stay on target, Rogue Leader. No, wait. GM would be Porkins.
Ahhh, to see what all those wretched flee-baggers and their smelly mob fought so hard to extinguish, the popular will, begin to assert itself in WI is a rare ray of sunshine on today's political scene.
garage: "Indeed. A chunk of that decline were people retiring. Or quitting. As of a few months ago, Wisconsin ranked #10 in people leaving the state. We have that going for us."
Of course, this is even more true for many of our best doctors now that the reality of obamacare is just beginning to really kick in.
But remember, that was a designed feature of obamacare, not a glitch.
Under obamacare you are destined for patient "group" appointments, more and more "doctors" trained in far off and exotic "medical schools" etc.
All because the best and the brightest will decide that top down, government-crushed healthcare is not the best place to apply your skills.
Again, a design feature of obamacare, not a bug.
lincolntf: "..is a rare ray of sunshine on today's political scene."
So very true.
As of a few months ago, Wisconsin ranked #10 in people leaving the state.
When the entire Democrat state senate cohort up and flees to Chicago, it provides a wonderful example to the rest of the like-minded cheeseheads.
Achilles: "But also realize the same will be said about supporters of DOMA and government enforcement of religious doctrine in what should be consensual contract law."
Firstly, everything has already been thrown at defenders of traditional marriage whether or not those individuals supported a federal mandate regarding traditional marriage.
Secondly, what makes you think the left wants agreement on "consensual" contract law?
What they want is to force all churches to recognize and perform SSM. That is the end goal.
So, even if you and I agree on the proper role of government in marriage (should be "none"), you should be savvy enough to know that's not what the left is after.
Behold the power of big government!
Indeed. When the government doesn't FORCE one to be involved with a union, almost nobody chooses to be involved with one.
Government authority alone is why ANY union is able to survive.
lincolntf: "..is a rare ray of sunshine on today's political scene."
Too bad about those, uh, jobs, Wisconsin. Does provide a clear blueprint on what not to do to a state, however.
Nobody could have predicted that Tea Party right wing talk radio governance would turn out like this.
garage - prove me that leftist policies create private sector jobs.
"garage mahal said...
Garage: The former union members have voted with their feet.
Indeed. A chunk of that decline were people retiring. Or quitting. As of a few months ago, Wisconsin ranked #10 in people leaving the state. We have that going for us."
Stop digging man. There is no logical basis for your support of the old policy. Your "look a squirrel" posts aside both sides need to realize when they have lost. Your side has lost this one.
Nobody is going to let the government confiscate money and give it to union bosses again. Holding on to this is dividing this country just like the people who are holding on to DOMA and the governments power to interfere with personal relationship agreements.
As Leftist policies continue to starve out cities like Chicago and Detroit, the rest of the country will hopefully take note. Turning it around will be tough, but with a few Scott Walkers, even basket-case Liberal husks like California might be re-animated.
..stopped forcing public employees to pay union dues against their will...
They are making it sound like rape rape ;)
Achilles said...
Holding on to this is dividing this country..
Not a good argument in this case: to garage this is encouraging.
Drago said...
"So, even if you and I agree on the proper role of government in marriage (should be "none"), you should be savvy enough to know that's not what the left is after."
Couldn't have said it better myself. You argue the government should enforce laws to support a specific type of union. But if you Accept this premise then you also accept that if a majority of people disagree with you then they have a right to force you to accept their idea of marriage. Tyranny of the majority is a bitch when you are the minority.
And just as in this case where nobody will admit that confiscation of wages to support union cronies was ever a good idea, so to will supporters of traditional marriage eventually realize that the best way to support traditional marriage is to extricate the government from the issue lest they get the sharp end of the fascist stick.
Not sure how to break it to you guys, but a judge has struck down parts of Act 10, namely, the prohibition on voluntary union dues deductions.
Also, an appeals judge already overturned that decision.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57564802/appeals-judge-upholds-wis-law-stripping-collective-bargaining-rights/
... the prohibition on voluntary union dues deductions.
Voluntary union dues are voluntary like the IRS exists to handle charitable donations.
Achilles, perhaps I worded something inartfully and/or you missed my point.
Either way, bottom line is that I believe we are in agreement.
Government out of both issues.
I think my overriding point was that even if we succeed in getting government out of the marriage debate, the left fully intends to use the government to force churches to perform SSM whether or not that is in alignment with the church's teaching.
And it won't make one bit of difference what the government was involved with or not involved with before.
I contribute to a UW faculty advocacy organization, PROFS. It's voluntary, but it's a good value so I do it.
Unions price themselves out of the market, thus the need for coercion.
Funny how, given the chance, people vote with their feet (or pocketbooks) against the Lefties.
Wow Bitchtits, It didn't take very long for Damisek to make you look like the ignorant never went to college retard you are.
And I love how you call automatic removal of dues from paycheckts "voluntary."
Wisconsin open for lawyers.
Freedom is a wonderful thing.
Especially when it costs those who wish to restrict freedom.
Ronald Reagan: “Where Collective Bargaining Is Forbidden, Freedom Is Lost”
"Ronald Reagan: “Where Collective Bargaining Is Forbidden, Freedom Is Lost”
Nothing says freedom like, "Your money or your job."
Garage-
I actually agree that the unions should be allowed collective bargaining for all terms of employment for its members. But only for its members.
I assume since you are concerned about freedom you support right-to-work too, right?
I assume since you are concerned about freedom you support right-to-work too, right?
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no.
Drago said...
What they want is to force all churches to recognize and perform SSM. That is the end goal."
This is exactly right. That is the goal and has been the goal from the begining.
Garage Mahal said...
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business."
Cool. So you would support any photographer or catering hall or florist that would refuse to work a SSM ceremony. Good to know.
garage mahal:
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Tell us another garage!
Also you would support a bar or restaurant that decided they wanted to open a smoking section. Because they could make a shit pot full of money if they did. Because you don't want to dictate how private business is run. Cool.
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no.
So you support repeal of the Wagner Act, since that dictates how lawful businesses may do business regarding unions?
"I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no."
Your contortions are entertaining.
"I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no."
19th century southern plantations owners couldn't agree with you more.
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business unless it is uber-liberal nonsense like unions, Obamacare, abortions and affirmative action. Then it is just fine and dandy."
FIFY!
"Too bad about those, uh, jobs, Wisconsin. Does provide a clear blueprint on what not to do to a state, however."
So how's that Wisconsin mining thing going? Is it now a little pocket of blue collar prosperity and heavy equipment manufacturing? Or did the Dems get it stopped?
Wasn't that long ago Republicans were proud of their union membership ranks. Before, you know, they went fucking nutzoid.
So how's that Wisconsin mining thing going?
Nowhere.
Garage-
I guess you missed my question, so I'll repeat it:
Do you support repeal of the Wagner Act, since that dictates how lawful businesses may do business regarding unions?
Wisconsin open for lawyers.
So, why pass ANY laws? How much money has been spent due to the inane Obamacare law?
Somebody filing suit against a law isn't proof positive it is a bad law.
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business.
And forced unionization does not do that? Is this your claim?
Also, do you support the minimum wage? Because that certainly does that. How about OSHA? Discrimination laws?
Just asking, since you claim you oppose the government telling business how do to business?
Wasn't that long ago Republicans were proud of their union membership ranks. Before, you know, they went fucking nutzoid.
Wasn't that long ago Democrats were proud of having working white people in their party.
You know, before they went nutzoid.
As of a few months ago, Wisconsin ranked #10 in people leaving the state. We have that going for us.
Keep up with the unionista, blue state model and soon.....you too can be California which is hemorrhaging people. You can be number ONE in people fleeing the sinking ship!!!
Ever think it might also be the weather in Wisconsin ;-P
Original Mike: to garage-"Your contortions are entertaining."
garage is the textbook case study in how Fen's Law is manifested.
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no.
So you support repealing Davis Bacon? No more forced prevailing wage contracts?
YAY. Free enterprise.
Garage... Could you cite the study that put WI's economy at 44th? I'm not seeing it. What are the criteria?
"So you support repealing Davis Bacon? No more forced prevailing wage contracts?
YAY. Free enterprise.
Lol.
You know he doesn't, nor does he support repealing PLAs, even as they have "government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business."
Keep up with the unionista, blue state model and soon.....you too can be California which is hemorrhaging people
Not according to United Van Lines who track this. California is considered "balanced" , meaning approx amount of inbound/outbound.
@sonicfrog
Wisconsin is ranked 44th nationally in job creation.
The most up-to-date survey I found was this one, which has WI at 17th at the end of 2012.
Not according to United Van Lines who track this. California is considered "balanced" , meaning approx amount of inbound/outbound.
Ha ha ha ha. Oh...you were serious.
Sure. We have thousands of working middle class and upper middle class people leaving the State, being replaced by thousand of illegal aliens and people flocking to get onto the California Gold Card program, welfare, Medi-Cal, food stamps, rent subsidies.
If this is what you want for YOUR State and what you call balance.....have at it. As more tax paying people leave, the gap is being filled by non productive takers.
Some balance.
Moron.
garage mahal said...
Not according to United Van Lines who track this. California is considered "balanced" , meaning approx amount of inbound/outbound.
Who are the people coming in and who are the people leaving? Is it good for the state if highly skilled (technology/engineering types) workers are leaving to be replaced with lower skilled or unskilled illegal immigrants?
garage mahal said...
I assume since you are concerned about freedom you support right-to-work too, right?
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no.
Interesting. Government makes it illegal not to deal with unions if they meet certain criteria. Garage believes that should be rescinded and all companies have the right to simply stop negotiating with the unions?
More seriously his childish efforts to recast leftist beliefs with a veneer of rightist justifications is tiresome. We need better propagandists.
Now Wisconsin government workers are made up of a bunch of free-riding, ex-Marxist thugs!
"Compulsory membership and dues robbed the unions of member feedback. The policy doomed them to failure because there was no accountability to their members. So the leadership was free to make any choices without consideration of how it would impact membership."
An excellent point you make there, Tmink.
Is it good for the state if highly skilled (technology/engineering types) workers are leaving to be replaced with lower skilled or unskilled illegal immigrants?
I'd be curious to any link material to back this claim.
Anecdotal, but 200 hi-skilled, hi-pay jobs are leaving Madison for San Diego...
garage mahal:
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business.
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
I BET, you fat idiot!
I mean, you're totally against ObamaCare and Sarbanes-Oxley, for example.
Moron.
It's the revered working class leaving California. Thanks to liberal, leftwing Democratic policies, the working class can't afford to live there any more. But, "In fact, since 2005 California has experienced a net in-migration of households earning more than $200,000, according to the U.S. Census's American Community Survey."
Party of the common man my ass.
garage mahal:
I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business.
No you silly fuck-tard, you just support the government mandating the forced collection of union dues for public sector employees.
Other than that, you're like totally against government interference and stuff!
LOL
DBQ:
"We have thousands of working middle class and upper middle class people leaving the State, being replaced by thousand of illegal aliens and people flocking to get onto the California Gold Card program, welfare, Medi-Cal, food stamps, rent subsidies."
WSJ:
"As it happens, most of California's outward-bound migrants are low- to middle-income, with relatively little education: those typically employed in agriculture, construction, manufacturing, hospitality and to some extent natural-resource extraction."
""As it happens, most of California's outward-bound migrants are low- to middle-income, with relatively little education: those typically employed in agriculture, construction, manufacturing, hospitality and to some extent natural-resource extraction."
So other than farmers, the folks leaving then are those potentially in private-sector labor unions.
Sort of makes my point of the growing schism between private and public labor unions.
Affluent, government-first liberals are not friends of the regular private-sector working person.
You are really flailing away today fatboy.
Your statement about how, "I don't support the government dictating to lawful businesses and legal entities how they choose to do business. So, no." is about as believable as that you have a high income.
I guess you just must have one of those oh so common jobs that does not require any education beyond high school, but somehow allows you the time to post lefty propoganda online all day.
At least we overeducated tax slaves have the excuse at being at computers all day.
Did they install WiFi at your food service industry job, fatty? That type of employment would explain your overweight status, but the manager is doing a poor job of supervising you if you are able to post so frequently.
Garage: Did it ever occur to you that the reason Wisconsin has such low job creation is that it has few risk takers or entrepreneurs who would want to create a business anywhere much less in frozen, union crazed, Wisconsin? Did it ever occur to you that losing high skilled jobs to San Diego might say something about the quality of life afforded in frozen, union crazed, fat Wisconsin versus sunny San Diego which is filled with smart tech savvy job seekers? 44th is probably pretty good for a high tax, union obsessed, frozen state with shitty transportation and high taxes.
Since 2005, California has had a net loss in legal migration.
Illegal immigration is harder to track, for obvious reasons.
At least we overeducated tax slaves have the excuse at being at computers all day
I wasn't aware pretending to be a lawyer on the internet paid anything. Do you scam people to make money?
Why does everyone sound like a clone of Jay today?
San Diego is routinely designated one of the very best cities in America, for obvious reasons.
Some of those reasons are enough to mitigate perniciously anti-business laws and confiscatory taxes enacted in Sacramento, especially if those businesses build upon STEM-focused skill sets, and any related manufacturing processes, such as with Apple, are off-shored.
But, for many other businesses, it's just much harder here than it is elsewhere.
The East German government needed the Berlin Wall for the same reasons the government unions needed mandatory dues.
@Michael
Wisconsin was 10th in the nation in job creation when Walker took over.
Now we're 44th.
As they say, do the math.
Your "fat union member" theory doesn't hold water as Minnesota is kicking our ass on jobs and econ growth. I wonder what they did differently than Wisconsin did? Wait, I know!
I'm not very optimistic about the state, although some appear to be waking up.
garage - whatever.
Garage: So a new governor single handedly caused the state to lose competitiveness? You are out of your fucking gourd, dude. Think real hard about some other potential cause of the decline. Think.
Garage: a hint . Minn. has excellent transportation. Quick, what is the symbol for an airport, any airport, in Wisconsin. Quick, check the flight schedules from that airport, the direct flights to places where people do business. Compare with Minneapolis.
Next, check out the job growth against the wage growth in brawny Minn. More jobs less pay.
Also look up the meaning of the latin phrase post hoc ergo propter hoc. Think.
Garage: So a new governor single handedly caused the state to lose competitiveness?
I think generally speaking, "dropping bombs" on a state doesn't foster growth. People looking to relocate look at schools, which are under assault here.
So a new governor single handedly caused the state to lose competitiveness?
Check the chart.
" garage mahal said...
So a new governor single handedly caused the state to lose competitiveness?
Check the chart."
I just did a quick scan of the Internet for Wisconsin job growth statistics vs. national. Though surveys vary in 2012 it was between 40-45 depending on the survey and early 2013 it is somewhere around 35th according to a couple others. Two trends popped up. First was that red states were overwhelmingly towards the top of the list. The second with a slightly lower correlation was warmer weather states doing well.
The most relevant statistics were that the state of Wisconsin lost a lot of public sector jobs, 7000, due to actually balancing their budget and that private sector job creation, particularly in manufacturing were strong putting them somewhere in the middle on the private sector side.
But as I chased squirrels all over google I couldn't find one thing: Any reason whatsoever to have the government confiscate money from workers and give it to rich union bosses.
So if people aren't forced to join unions in order to work, many of them choose NOT to join unions?
How utterly surprising.
Maybe the unions should just build a wall to keep all the members in.
There's a precedent for that on the left.
garage would probably call it a "Freedom Facilitator...Helping to Keep all that gooey good Freedom In!!"
"But as I chased squirrels all over google I couldn't find one thing: Any reason whatsoever to have the government confiscate money from workers and give it to rich union bosses."
Check, to the degree they are public and online, the various reported political donations of the public employee unions, and you will find not only a reason but the only reason for "the government confiscate money from workers and give it to rich union bosses."
Drago said...
"Maybe the unions should just build a wall to keep all the members in."
Bark collars, chains and leashes are cheaper.
Garage. Again, look up post hoc propter hoc. It will save you considerable embarassment.
Garage. Again, look up post hoc propter hoc. It will save you considerable embarassment.
Numbers don't lie. Worse for Walker, job creation was Walker's main campaign theme, a promise of 250,000 jobs to the state. And he said he would be judged on that. I don't see it getting any better either. Help from Washington isn't coming from the teabaggers.
Anecdotal, but 200 hi-skilled, hi-pay jobs are leaving Madison for San Diego
What company?
Numbers don't lie.
Interesting. So what to make of the fact that labor force participation ended last year at 63.6%, while under Bush it never fell below 65.8%? In fact, labor force participation -- the true employment rate -- has gotten worse every year Obama's been in office. Over three million jobs gone. How's that compare to Obama's promises? Heck, how does it compare to his claims about the current health of the economy?
Now, sure, you can blame Bush... and Walker can blame Doyle, who was in charge more recently than Bush was. You can say Walker hasn't achieved what he promised, but Obama's fallen far shorter of his promises than Walker has. The comparisons uniformly paint a worse picture of Obama than of Walker - but I'm guessing you'll stick with your "Walker's horrible, Obama isn't" schtick.
Because while numbers may not lie, you certainly do. :)
I'm trying to understand why the union members are leaving.
Here in San Jose, and Alameda County, firefighters make on average of $150,000 a year, and get a gold plated pension package. They pay less than people do for Social Security, and for that they get to retire at 55 with 90% pension, 3% adjustment, plus inflation adjustments, plus if the stock market does well they get a bonus. If the stock market does poorly, the taxpayers get a haircut.
When the city said the contracts were not sustainable, and either increases to the pension were required in the next contract or people would be laid off, they chose laying off the young firefighters.
Meanwhile, the Union builds up firefighter's egos. And police officers too. You die young. You get divorced. You can get shot. Blah, Blah, Blah.
Garbage men die much more frequently on the job than either firefighters or police officers, but they don't have the cache of the firefighter. After all, it's just garbage. So they love the unions.
There are a lot of jobs that can be done anywhere. These are the clean happy every-one-should-have-a-college-education jobs. The tech jobs. The information jobs.
There is no reason at all to do those jobs in Wisconsin or anywhere else in the frozen North. Not without HUGE incentives.
There are other jobs that have to be done on-location. These are usually the blue collar jobs, the working-man jobs, the vocational-school jobs. Like resource extraction and construction and agriculture.
Jobs that SMELL.
Icky jobs.
Who even wants them?
Why is it that progressives hate blue collar jobs so much but claim to love blue collar workers? Hate the sin, love the sinner?
They do the same dumb thing in Colorado and pat themselves on the back for protecting the poor unwashed masses from being forced into bad jobs. Sure, they've got NO jobs, but if they had a choice of no job or taking that mining job, that would be failing to make sure they're free from corporate oppression.
Because while numbers may not lie, you certainly do. :)
By posting factual information you can't refute? Other than blaming Obama. You're not alone, Walker has blamed everyone but himself, not surprisingly.
Walker went from 10th to 44th. If he were a coach he would be fired. None of what Walker promised has come to fruition.
Even FDR and George Meany couldn't get behind the morass of conflicting interests that are public sector unions.
Garage. You have presented a chart with no elaboration on how there could have been an INSTANTANEOUS decline in new job creation with the election of Walker. No lag. Do you have a theory on how this came to be? The chart otherwise proves coincidence.
garage mahal,
As it happens, most of California's outward-bound migrants are low- to middle-income, with relatively little education: those typically employed in agriculture, construction, manufacturing, hospitality and to some extent natural-resource extraction.
Translation: CA now builds less stuff, grows less stuff, has fewer tourists, and is no longer especially interested in fossil fuels. This doesn't look like good news from here.
Get rid of the teacher unions and then watch the quality of eduction improve.
Michael
I did post my theory. The passage of Act 10 and implementation of Walker's first budget. Austerity economics. The chart backs the theory.
Synova,
Why is it that progressives hate blue collar jobs so much but claim to love blue collar workers? Hate the sin, love the sinner?
It's very nearly that, actually. Look at the dynamic around "E-Verify." The companies who hire ... um, what will the AP Stylebook allow me to say here... "people who cannot document their right to work legally in the United States." OK? Anyway, the companies who hire said people are villains, exploiters. Except when someone proposes means to stop the exploitation, at which point it's cruel to take people out of work.
Damnit, people, people are either being exploited or they aren't; they are doing useful work for employers or they aren't.
"Because while numbers may not lie, you certainly do. :)"
By posting factual information you can't refute?
Most commonly you lie by omission or by attempting to change the subject.
For example, above we see you suddenly demanding that I "refute" your numbers, even though I'm not arguing that Walker's done a good job. You also misrepresent me as "blaming Obama" for Wisconsin. :)
Also, garage, are you planning to say what company those 200 "hi-tech, high-paying jobs" are for? Neither Google nor the local papers seem to know anything about it.
The chart backs the theory."
So, I have a few minutes to kill before a buddy comes over, and I took a look at Moobs Mahal's .jpg posing as a "chart;" as analysis goes, I'm sure it surpasses the requirements of any sixth-grade simpleton impressed by graphic depictions of inflection points.
Ergo, Moobs believes it supports his "theory" re: "austerity" (i.e., spend within your means) economics.
Well, we can't fix stupid.
We can, however, note that even a slightly more robust analysis, one that includes the unemployment rate (just the U3 rate rather than U6; want to keep it simple for simple minds, mindful that even that simple effort will fail to penetrate) shows that while California is 10th in job creation, it is still 49th in U3. So, the analysis suggests there is slight correlation between state job growth rankings and the unemployment rate.
However, there is a greater (albeit imperfect) correlation between so-called "austerity economics" and unemployment rate. High-cost states (ones with high tax rates to fund big, expensive, intrusive state governments) have higher unemployment rates, on balance, than so-called "austerity" states.
Now, to be fair, this is self-evident to most here, and it only confirms what most of us already know, but it is still worth stating.
Anyway, got to run.
Have fun with the troll.
Also, garage, are you planning to say what company those 200 "hi-tech, high-paying jobs" are for? Neither Google nor the local papers seem to know anything about it.
Third Wave Technologies.
garage - I laugh SO hard when I hear jobs leaving Wisconshit.
According to this site, as of a year ago Wisconsin had a 68.3% labor force participation rate compared to 63.3% for California. To put it another way, California needs to add around a million jobs, from the 2012 baseline, just to catch up to Wisconsin. That's assuming our population doesn't increase, of course.
Third Wave Technologies.
Thanks!
However, the article doesn't support your claim. The company employs 179 people (which you could round up to 200, I guess), and it bought a San Diego operation, but there is nothing about moving jobs here. Quite the opposite:
"Hologic executives have told investors and research analysts the company expects to save $75 million within three years by shedding duplicate operations, primarily from closing the Madison operation"
It would be surprising indeed to hear that a business was moving here as a cost-cutting measure. :)
Yes, correct, not moving. My error. I actually pointed that out [that it was a consolidation move] on a thread here last weekend.
Garage. The chart does no such thing. The decline began before the election and the budget was not passed until later in the year after which there was an increase in job creation followed by a year long circle jerk staged by crybabies. Proving my point that people stopped jiring in the face of uncertain outcomes recall- wise etc. the chart is dumb by the way because it is honey to dumb people. Post hoc ergo propter oc is a fallacy not a guide to chart reading.
LOL!!
From the Link: "Third Wave Technologies is expected to close — or be reduced to a small presence — within two years after parent company Hologic completes its planned $3.7 billion purchase of San Diego-based Gen-Probe later this year, company officials and analysts say."
So, this acquisition deal is one of the items garage is using to assert that Walkers policies are failing?!!
LOL
A simple consolidation post-acquisition?!!!
LOL
This is from the link: ""All of our diagnostics will come out of San Diego" when the purchase goes through, Hologic chief financial officer Glenn Muir told the William Blair & Co. investors conference in Chicago on June 13, according to GenomeWeb News."
Do you know how many factors are weighed in the restructuring of newly combined operations after 2 entities merge?
LOL
Good old garage. Such a simpleton.
You know, sometimes garage sounds just like some uneducated buffoon who didn't go any further than some trailer-infested public high school.
Here's some numbers to chew on:
Hologic, which is the parent company for Third Wave, is a $5B company with an employee base of around 5000.
They just bought Gen Probe for $3.7 Billion (after paying around $580 Million (with a 24% premium) for Third Wave in 2008 and I'll bet there hasn't been much organic growth on the Third Wave side since then.)
So, even if you allow the premium % to accrue to Third Wave's current "value" to Hologic, the fact that a company 6 times bigger was just acquired consolidation of operations almost guaranteed that Third Wave was headed out the door, especially given some of the overlapping technologies and production capabilities.
I wonder which company had the bigger footprint, skillset alignment with future growth needs and capability for easy expansion?
I'm betting it wasn't Third Wave.
Note: I'm not saying anything is "wrong" with Third Wave (not without some real data and analysis).
I'm simply saying that there are probably some pretty compelling operational reasons to consolidate operations under the Gen Probe guys in San Diego, even with all the very real CA burdens.
But to garage and simple-minded folk like him, it's all Walkers fault!!
LOL
You can see from the M&A/growth strategy utilized by Hologic for the past 5 years or so this kind of "deal" is par for the course for them.
Buy up, consolidate, then streamline.
Of course, when garage reads this all he sees is "cheeseburger".
Note: I'm not saying anything
What the fuck else is new?
LOL
And that, garage, is why you are where you are and others .....are not.
garage on garage: "My error."
What the fuck else is new?
more garage on garage:"I don't see it"
What the fuck else is new?
Liberals worship the rotting carcass of Jimmy Hoffa.
Hard to take seriously anyone who uses the phrase "union bosses". It is akin to those who label Walker a "Nazi"...it shows either a complete ignorance of how things actually are or just a basic desire to call names rather than have an honest discussion.
Or both.
Yeah, probably both.
Robert Cook said...
As usual, Hinderaker is an asshole.
And yet you still rectally clench.
purplepenquin said...
Hard to take seriously anyone who uses the phrase "union bosses". It is akin to those who label Walker a "Nazi"...it shows either a complete ignorance of how things actually are or just a basic desire to call names rather than have an honest discussion.
Or both.
Yeah, probably both."
What else do you call them? Leaches? Mob Thugs? Executives? Most of them make far more than the people they represent, and They are paid with money that is confiscated before the worker gets the check. They invariably support one party who invariably supports their authority to confiscate money out of workers checks.
So since I want to do more than just call people Names what do you call these people if you can't call them union bosses? I can think of many things along the line of "Disgusting Reprobates." Blood sucking parasite works too.
I don't understand the problem with the phrase "union boss". Unions have bosses, right? Nothing wrong with a union having a boss. Calling someone who is not a nazi (national socialist) a nazi is literally infinitely worse than calling somebody who heads a union a union boss (because there is nothing wrong with calling the head of a union a union boss).
Obviously forcing people to join a union is morally wrong so this thread mainly serves to separate the lefties who frequent this blog into two groups: those smart enough to stay silent and those stupid enough to defend the indefensible.
garage mahal said...
Third Wave Technologies.
Another silly, easily debunked lie.
Why do you bother, idiot?
Unions are the chief Socialist-Neo-Commie Vanguard funding mechanism for todays leftist Democrats.
They always shriek like vampires in the sun when they stand to lose any of that free cash transferred from taxpayers, both union money slaves and private citizens, that fund the jobs.
Public Employee Unions are just legalized political money skimming and radical thug recruiting operations that provide no value to ordinary taxpayers. They should be illegal, per FDR.
Public Employees can serve the public best and have good pay and benefits without Unions, just like the Military does.
There is nothing sacred about Public Employee Unions and anybody that tells you different is lying to you.
Unions are anti-American quasi-Marxist political bullying operations. Repeal Davis-Bacon and free workers from wage slavery to the Unions Bosses.
SGT Ted said ...
Public Employees can serve the public best and have good pay and benefits without Unions, just like the Military does.
Actually, at the federal level, including DOD, civil servant union membership is optional and DOES NOT involve collective bargaining for pay and benefits.
The obvious conclusion is that the union is not the primary source for good pay and benefits. In the public sector, legislatures via personnel offices are the sources representing taxpayers DIRECTLY, as it should be.
The myriad state and local "service unions" and "public employee unions" where wages, salaries, and benefits are concerned, are purely mob extortionists...demanding money from taxpayers directly regardless of any service provided or lack thereof.
It's very obvious that whenever "public unions" come up in debate the advocates never mention the federal model. They'd prefer you don't know.
Post a Comment