dems turn coward, refuse to vote

[Obama 2012 1,714]

And in many of those same strongholds, where the fruits of such pillaged goods (taxes) are splurged on by those wealthy teachers like Jabba would enjoy heaving vixens to the Rancor. Surely those 3 or 2 months not working would be spent jet-setting around the Galaxy.

I personally think the problem with unions is that *some* are no different than greedy profiteering companies, not that they are looking out for their members. Another problem I have with *some* unions/school districts is that union membership is mandatory as a condition of employment.

These *issues* can be negotiated, especially if they are exposed publically, to the tax-paying public, in a responsible, non-partisan, and transparent way. Claiming unions are one thing, anti-that, wrong, etc... without considering the whole equation, is reckless and irresponsible.

If you want a fair wage, earn it. It's really that simple. If you don't like what the "taxpayer funded" job is, then don't do it. There shouldn't be this expectation that taxpayers should support you from graduation til your death bed though. It's Welfare. Nothing but glorified welfare that you can do a half-arsed job to earn. You don't even have to be good at it.

Taxpayers shouldn't pay for that. I feel the same way about idiot public employees who cause a city government to get sued. If they win, those thousands to millions of dollars come from taxpayers...

It's real easy to fight for more money when it's coming from someone else who doesn't have a say in what happens. And if they don't pay... they get their homes taken away while you reap the benefits still. How in the hell is that right?

[Zero Sum 305]

Districts get their funds from tax payers. All the more reason that teachers shouldn't hold the education of kids hostage while expecting tax payers to give into their demands. School boards are responsible for the budget of the district. Let them do their job without the union making demands without considering the other responsibilities of the board. Selfish teachers are a disgrace to the profession.

The demands in this case are what?

That's right... its the government telling its citizens what they can and can't do. "Libertarians" should be all over this one. Public funds or not.

If the teachers were selfish then the same can be said for those that profiteer at the expense of the public at large and are not taxed proportionately to their level of profit. What is really at the center of the argument driving a false budget hole to strip employees of their right to fair wages and benefits for their labor?

If its a real budget concern, school district or state level, layoffs would be imminent anyway, so why the hoopla over teachers exercising their rights in such a visible method?

Again, I do not condone strikes by teachers in the most part under most of the cases I've seen them. That's what perhaps *ironically*, unions are for.

[Zero Sum 305]

If you want a fair wage, earn it. It's really that simple. If you don't like what the "taxpayer funded" job is, then don't do it. There shouldn't be this expectation that taxpayers should support you from graduation til your death bed though. It's Welfare. Nothing but glorified welfare that you can do a half-arsed job to earn. You don't even have to be good at it.

Taxpayers shouldn't pay for that. I feel the same way about idiot public employees who cause a city government to get sued. If they win, those thousands to millions of dollars come from taxpayers...

It's real easy to fight for more money when it's coming from someone else who doesn't have a say in what happens. And if they don't pay... they get their homes taken away while you reap the benefits still. How in the hell is that right?

I understand your point of view.

Nevertheless, notice your own juxtaposition of singular instances to overshadow an entire community of workers.

As for tax payers that don't like supporting their communities, they can always move to lower tax havens and see how public services (barring moneys generated by alternate mechanisms like tourism) fare for them there.

You seriously get what you pay for. Is there waste? Yes. Focus on making things efficient without using the term efficiency to fooling yourself into believing that a modern, well-educated society is a cheap endeavor.

I'm still curious as to how teachers enjoy such a posh lifestyle.

[B_J 2,752]

The demands in this case are what?

That's right... its the government telling its citizens what they can and can't do. "Libertarians" should be all over this one. Public funds or not.

If the teachers were selfish then the same can be said for those that profiteer at the expense of the public at large and are not taxed proportionately to their level of profit. What is really at the center of the argument driving a false budget hole to strip employees of their right to fair wages and benefits for their labor?

If its a real budget concern, school district or state level, layoffs would be imminent anyway, so why the hoopla over teachers exercising their rights in such a visible method?

Again, I do not condone strikes by teachers in the most part under most of the cases I've seen them. That's what perhaps *ironically*, unions are for.

I think I'm agreeing with a lot of what you're saying. I just have a real issue with teachers going on strike.

I'm not sure how difficult it is to lay off a union teacher. Here in Texas, I just watched 4 teachers get called in and informed that they won't have jobs next year. Right now, anybody with less that three years experience is really concerned. It's pretty easy here to let teachers go.

[Zero Sum 305]

I think I'm agreeing with a lot of what you're saying. I just have a real issue with teachers going on strike.

I'm not sure how difficult it is to lay off a union teacher. Here in Texas, I just watched 4 teachers get called in and informed that they won't have jobs next year. Right now, anybody with less that three years experience is really concerned. It's pretty easy here to let teachers go.

From my experience as a teacher some years ago, when you accept employment under 'protection' by a union (sounds like a Mob thing, I know), there are instances where losing a job is obviously not covered and is accepted by the new hire.

You'd be surprised to learn how easy it can be to lay off a union teacher. More so when its a budget issue. These are clear-cut examples that do not dispel the notion that teachers do not need to have rights within an acceptable range.

I wish merit meant more than seniority, but you should know by now that people have some very odd priorities in place, and highlighting them is of course, interfering with people's freedom of thought and choice (seriously... odd way of thinking but its quite evident in this country right now).

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I understand your point of view.

Nevertheless, notice your own juxtaposition of singular instances to overshadow an entire community of workers.

As for tax payers that don't like supporting their communities, they can always move to lower tax havens and see how public services (barring moneys generated by alternate mechanisms like tourism) fare for them there.

You seriously get what you pay for. Is there waste? Yes. Focus on making things efficient without using the term efficiency to fooling yourself into believing that a modern, well-educated society is a cheap endeavor.

I'm still curious as to how teachers enjoy such a posh lifestyle.

This is the United States. We don't have 'workers.' You can move to N Korea, China, etc. if you want 'workers.'

We have employees. We have individuals who have the right to seek out a job and the right to either be good at it and keep it or suck at it and be fired. They don't have the right to suck at it and still get paid the same as the guy who works his ####### off every week.

Collective bargaining is weak. It's puny. It's pathetic. No REAL Man is a union member. Period.

[Zero Sum 305]

I can see Paul and Vanessa doesn't need introductions.

Yes, we have employees. Any other bit of useless information that doesn't make sense more than what your limited opinion entitles you to conclude?

[B_J 2,752]

From my experience as a teacher some years ago, when you accept employment under 'protection' by a union (sounds like a Mob thing, I know), there are instances where losing a job is obviously not covered and is accepted by the new hire.

You'd be surprised to learn how easy it can be to lay off a union teacher. More so when its a budget issue. These are clear-cut examples that do not dispel the notion that teachers do not need to have rights within an acceptable range.

I wish merit meant more than seniority, but you should know by now that people have some very odd priorities in place, and highlighting them is of course, interfering with people's freedom of thought and choice (seriously... odd way of thinking but its quite evident in this country right now).

I can see Paul and Vanessa doesn't need introductions.

Yup... skip intros and go straight to questioning your manhood.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I can see Paul and Vanessa doesn't need introductions.

Yes, we have employees. Any other bit of useless information that doesn't make sense more than what your limited opinion entitles you to conclude?

Watch yourself on posts like that here.

You can not like what I have to say all you want. The fact of the matter is though, is that when it comes to one group of people forcing another group of people to pay them with threat of losing their homes, their livlihoods, etc. then those people are pathetic losers who and no better than criminals who steal from stores, rob banks, etc. The law just so happens to be on their side. Of course it stands to reason they'd get up in arms when the law tries to turn against them.

[Ban Hammer 13,483]

Watch yourself on posts like that here.

you might take your own advice on that subject.

No REAL Man is a union member. Period.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

you might take your own advice on that subject.

Charles, there's a difference in directly attacking a person and making a general broad statement. You know this.

[Zero Sum 305]

Interesting. Internet sites that have discussion fora AFAIK, tend to have TOS and members that suffer from thin, reactive e-skins. I didn't know that my post # 52 in this thread would be taken as an attack. Is this what others would conclude to be the case here?

I mean we can take that post sentence by sentence and analyze it and then perhaps analyze the response it earned.

Ohhhhhh the internets...

[Ban Hammer 13,483]

Charles, there's a difference in directly attacking a person and making a general broad statement. You know this.

as you know that some replying in this thread may well be union members....

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Collective bargaining is weak. It's puny. It's pathetic. No REAL Man is a union member. Period.

I'd like to see you say that in front of a group of Teamsters.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

It's why I live in a 'Right to work' state vs. a union stronghold.

Every last person protesting who is a member of those unions is a LOSER. Period. NO ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Public unions are garbage who hold taxpayers hostage.

LOL @ Right to Work states.

Right to work states = cheap mexican labor from slave outfits like "Labor Ready"

Used to be up here in Alaska you could get by paying a Texan/okie near minimum wage and a case a cheap beer at the end of the week.