Friday, March 4, 2011

A Lesson In Facts?

I've become a political blogger (of sorts, and of late). Temporarily I hope. The situation in Wisconsin with a governor trying to bust unions under the ruse of budget cuts has me incensed. I'm not personally a big fan of unions but believe it's fundamentally wrong to bust them. (Especially when the unions have agreed to all cuts but the governor still wants to take away collective bargaining rights.)

Twitter has been a source for news and observations on the mess the last few weeks in Madison. I engaged one person who seems to feel unions and teachers are overpaid and a burden on taxpayers.

His original tweet:

 Kevin Cassell 

@ @ What lies? FACT-Taxpayers DO NOT have a seat at CB table but foot the bill. FACT-Unions donate big$ to Dems 

My replies, as the 140 character limit sucks at times:

 No one you know 

@ FACT -- Taxpayers do have a seat at the table, it's called collective bargaining for a reason. 

 No one you know 

@ And since you're so into "FACTS" -- Corporations donate big $ to republicans. 

He didn't respond back right away so I went to bed and when I woke up this morning I did see he did favor me with two responses. Since the 140 character limit doesn't allow for a proper response my responses will be in italics to his here in the blog. Maybe I'll even invite him over to the blog for a lesson in "FACTS."

 Kevin Cassell 

@ Wrong. Politicians & Unions have a seat & disputes are settled by arbitration. The taxpayers don't have a say.

Wrong? Politicians are voted in by the taxpayers to represent them at the collective bargaining table. Is that so hard to understand? Your anger at unions is misplaced and misguided. Your problem is with your elected officials if they're truly over paying teachers with extravagant wages and benefits. (I don't personally know anyone who got rich, or is overpaid as a teacher myself.)

What the taxpayers don't seem to have a say in, in this situation, is the union busting tactics of Gov. Walker. He's forging ahead with vows of no compromise when the majority of taxpayers in WI clearly have stated they support the rights of public workers to collective bargaining. The taxpayers got their wage and benefits cuts demanded of (and agreed to) by the union to help with the state budget woes. Walker has overstepped and doesn't have the majority of the support of the taxpayers to take away collective bargaining rights. He never once campaigned on the issue of union busting. 

 Kevin Cassell 

@ OK - What do corp donations have to do with public unions, taxpayer$, budgets, and spending?  

My first thought is are you serious? Had you stopped your tweet at public unions I'd have had to say nothing, other than most corporations want to end collective bargaining as well.  So nothing isn't entirely true here, in actuality. 

You decided to point out that unions donate money to democrats. While corporations and big business interests donate money to both parties, they overwhelmingly support republicans. That's a "FACT." (The capitalization is for you Kevin, as that seems to be your favorite way to represent the word "FACT.")

Your other points bring up taxpayer $, budgets, and spending. You don't think corporate donations affect those things? A book could be written here on how corporate donations affect all of those things. 

How about corporations and unions both quit donating money to curry favor with politicians at the detriment of the taxpayer. Let's level the playing field. Of course if that were to happen I suspect the unions would probably come out ahead and big business would be one crying and whining bunch. Do some homework Kevin and you'll see the disparity of corporate profits and tax reductions over the last 30 years versus the income gains of the common taxpayer and their tax reductions. It may surprise you to see the disparity. As a note I have nothing against businesses making a profit, even huge profits at that. After all, making a profit is what they're in business to do.


darev2005 said...

Hah! Let's propose a bill making it illegal for any political group or legislator or elected official to take donations from anybody and see how loud they all scream. Make them get by on their own money and salary for a change. I'll bet that would change our political architecture!

Francis Hunt said...

I have the feeling more and more that it's senseless to try to discuss with people like this; they seem to lack the mental capacity to understand what you're saying.

No matter how much you try, you'll never be able to put more than 500 mililiters in a half liter jug!

Smart Ass Sara said...

I'm just confused how Republicans can say this is more about the budget and not raising taxes. Because if you take away rights, you make people pay more, out of their paychecks, and/or lay them off.. it's just like raising taxes. You're just putting a different face on it. It's just insane. I also hope that people remember this when it comes to elect these officials again.

The Reckmonster said...

I am with dareve2005...if we took away the whole concept of "political fundraising" and made politicians run for office with the SAME set of guidelines (a level playing field for ALL candidates), it would be interesting to see how elections would turn out. And then once in office - negate the whole idea of "political contributions" and lets see how the powerful lobbies fare. I'm all ABOUT leveling the playing field for BOTH parties. I say we could take all of the money these "benefactors" and "corporations" have "laying around" to donate to politicians and apply it to the national deficit. I wonder how quickly the deficit would disappear if we had the richest bitches in the country "donating" to erase it?