Can the crybaby sissypants in both parties please stop trying to win an election years after you have lost it?
Recall efforts are becoming practically as commonplace as general elections.

Any chance that you partisan asshats can just man up and accept not winning every election?
Thanks.

Sincerely,
your betters

 

-----signature-----

Only 16 times in the last 150 years has someone been recalled but won re-election. It happened 7 times in Wisconsin alone last year. Two recalls were successful. The crime that caused all these recall elections? Taking away the ability of public workers to negotiate fringe benefits.

 

-----signature-----

Why not work to get the recall statute changed or eliminated instead of being a crybaby sissypants when people use it?

 

-----signature-----

The ability to negotiate with those you are contracting with seems important. Freedom to negotiate contracts is one of the most important fundamentals for economic advancement. Losing this ability is something that will upset people.

Except, in the case of government workers, the people they are negotiating with a) are also government workers, b) don't have to pay for the increased costs, c) benefit politically from giving the workers what they want.

the other crime committed by these elected officials was overturning the "mandatory enrollment/fair share payment" law that allowed labor unions to collect dues from people who didn't want to be in the public union.


I'm sure in this regard, freedom isn't quite as important to you theredgay1. Freedom is only important when allowing public unions to effectively double their tax-payer funded compensation through fringe benefits. It was all fine and good until they put the state on the brink of bankruptcy.

 

-----signature-----

So are you saying that nobody should be able to negotiate with the government? Or just workers should not be able to negotiate?


a) doesnt make sense as just about every employee negotiates pay with someone who works for the same company. So we can throw that one out.


b) almost every publicly traded company is in this same situation. The cost of contractual agreements do not come out of the pockets of managers at any company. Shareholders, like taxpayers, have to ultimately be responsible for the people they elect to do the job of setting and executing budgets. Do we take away the negotiating rights of every corporation? Or can we admit you didnt think about this one either and throw it out?


c) Benefit how? By being voted back into office? Are politicians supposed to do things that the voting public dislikes? If voters dont like the higher costs, there is no political benefit is there?


I dont think you thought any of this through. Next time you should question your talking points before you repeat them.

If they didnt want to be enrolled in a union, why did they take that job? Were they forced to take that job and forced to pay for union representation they didnt want?


If people dont like the union representation, they should avoid going to work for a union. The union will shrink, lose market power and fade away.


The freedom you are talking about is the 'freedom' for people to get the benefit of representation without paying the cost of that representation. Thats not actually a freedom. Just like it isnt a freedom to be able to walk into a store and take the things you want while refusing to pay the cost.


What this law does is require those who pay for union representation to also pay for representation of other employees who do not wish to pay for that representation. To go back to our store example, customers who wish to pay the cost of the product are now required to pay the cost those people who are now taking things off the shelf and refusing to pay.


This is not something that people would usually describe as freedom. The government is restricting the ability of these workers to create a contract amongst themselves. You champion this in the name of 'freedom' because you dont understand what freedom means.

Pwnd.

The problem is the political power of the Unions gained through forced dues. They can put a lot of money into a small district. They don't have to do it in many because just the threat is enough.

Even FDR understood the danger of public sector unions. The politician doesn’t have to worry about making money. A business will go bust if they pay too much for labor. With "benefits" a politician can tell the public that they held the line on pay, while giving the workers a big expensive benefit, that will not come due until after the politician retires.

The choice is to give and go broke or hold the line and face recall. The problem is that the good politicians are the ones being hammered with lies and slander. Few have the momey to fight the Unions head up. If the public gets fooled with this then you will never see another politican willing to take the risk. The states will go broke, one by one.

 

-----signature-----