OK folks. There is A LOT going on here. So I'm going to post a few different articles (news stories and opinion pieces) and expect you to react and ask questions. Words & phrases you need to understand (read: ask your parents, teachers, look-up, etc.): collective bargaining, state debt, furlough day, quorum, "Tea Party", cut spending, raise taxes, pension, feel free to add others and define them in your posts....
gen news:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/20/us-wisconsin-protests-idUSTRE71H3UZ20110220?pageNumber=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/us/17wisconsin.html
http://www.thenation.com/blog/158661/wisconsin-crowds-swell-30000-key-gop-legislators-waver
opinion:
http://biggovernment.com/oftheeising/2011/03/01/madison-wisconsin-just-what-are-the-demonstrators-demonstrating/
http://www.slate.com/id/2286169/
the bigger picture:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0218/Wisconsin-protests-why-week-of-rage-matters-to-rest-of-America
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/magazine/27christie-t.html?emc=eta1
The recent protests in Madison seem to underline the growing feeling that public employees have it all too good. Private sector employees have been watching their benefits and pensions become more expensive or disappear all together leaving them envious and even bitter toward the public sector. For example, my father, as a corporate lawyer, has seen the full pension he was promised when he took the job disappear and his health insurance premiums go through the roof. As a member of the private sector it must be easy to wonder, why should my tax dollars provide benefits to public employees I don't have myself?
ReplyDeleteThe answer is simple. They do some of out hardest and most demanding jobs at lower salaries. The public sector includes paramedics, firefighters, police officers whose jobs are to help YOU and keep YOU safe. Also the teachers that not only spend eight hours a day teaching YOUR children in school, but also countless hours grading papers and creating lesson plans for YOUR children at home. There are many more public jobs but the theme seems pretty clear, all of these people are working for YOUR BENEFIT.
Even though I am from Westport and come from a family in the private sector, I am going to assert that we all must HONNOR THY PUBLIC SERVANTS!
While I see Amanda’s point, the public sector jobs are demanding, is it wrong for someone, like a lawyer, in the private sector to ask that question. Doctors and lawyers in private practices work equally demanding jobs and have also gone through several years of extra schooling. I don’t think it is wrong for them to ask this question because it seems unfair from my perspective. I think it would be very beneficial to pass the bill Governor Walker proposed. As Gershowitz and Porter pointed out in the article on Big Government, “the protesters in Athens consist, primarily, of government workers who are unalterably opposed to government interference with the pension and benefit entitlements their unions have squeezed out of the taxpayers; never mind that such unfunded benefits have turned Greece, half of Europe and more than half of the states in America into financial basket cases.” I thought this quote was very significant and telling. These benefits are coming straight out of taxpayers pockets. With so many struggling Americans, lowering taxes doesn’t sound like such a bad idea. Then there is the question of what these unions, tenures, and pensions really do. Amanda mentioned how teachers, “spend eight hours a day teaching YOUR children in school.” While I think this is true with many great teachers, the number of great teachers is dwindling. Take the teacher that was once great but then received tenure and stopped trying or caring but can still benefit from the system. As a student at one of the best schools around it’s hard for me to say this because I am exposed to so many great teachers and I am exposed to the best education but in a lot of America teachers aren’t as good, and schools aren’t as good, yet, they still get plenty of funding from taxes where I don’t think it is due. From all of this I would just like to say that I recognize how biased I am and how I tend to lean towards lower taxes and less government but I think as a country, whether or not this bill passes, we seriously need to take a look at where exactly our tax money is going. With in people that work for the government and even beyond just teachers or paramedics but the military and foreign aid- is this really where the money should be going?
ReplyDeleteOK before starting just a warning I have like 6 points to make so I'll try to keep each one short...
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Amanda's post, the question that comes to my mind is whether jobs that necessitate physical and widespread labor, like that mentioned by Amanda (and I'm going to throw in those fighting in the Armed Forces), deserve more or less benefits (and $$$) than the lawyers, business managers, CEOs, those in our society that get paid the most money to do mostly mental work. I'm not suggesting communism here, but what it all comes down to is whether or not the riots in Wisconsin are justified. I don't really want to answer this question and would rather leave it to you guys to decide (I know Amanda already kind of answered it), but I do think that the dedication, time/work it takes to obtain these jobs (college, grad school, training, etc.), safety risks, and availability plays a role in determining what is deserved by each employee.
On another note, according to the article, "Wisconsin protests: why 'week of rage' matters to rest of America," "One political scientist has gone so far as to compare the Wisconsin protests with what transpired in Cairo earlier this month." I have to disagree with this statement in the sense that I don't think comparing these riots to Cairo is "going so far." In fact, I think the first question that comes to all of our minds is whether or not these protestors were directly or even somewhat motivated by the protests in the Middle East. To me, if they were, it would seem two things. In the first sense, it's kind of odd if they were, looking at how much in disarray these countries are at the moment; the government is afraid of the people, the people are riled up and out to get the government (this reminds me of what Schager said about rallies...), and (varying between countries) everyone in the rest of the world is pretty much trying to step back and avoid getting involved. This may seem crazy, but I see it all as kind of a tornado: all these people are trapped in the tornado, and though they want us to stick our hands in and pull them out, we know that in a split second we could get sucked up right into the raging winds.
In the other sense, however, it's not a surprise if they were influenced by these protests. Considering the fact that they're not epic failures and also considering the fact that Cairo definitely had an effect on other countries in the Middle East, I doubt it's just a coincidence that these people would fight back so hard to an unfavorable Wisconsin governmental decision. And, in relation to the events in the Middle East, are we as the people of the United States, living in another state, obligated to help the people of Wisconsin get what they deserve and fight the government? Are Connecticut state legislators obligated to support Walker? It's just like how everyone wants to know whether the U.S. is obligated to help a people fighting for democracy in a country thousands of miles away. It's very, very complicated, and no one really wants to answer.
Sorry I didn't talk about Martha's post, I started writing my rant before she had posted....
ReplyDeleteSorry, I made a spelling mistake which Caitlyn so graciously pointed out...so here's the NEW and IMPROVED version:
ReplyDeleteI was very surprised to find that, while I read the articles regarding Wisconsin's situation, I saw so many similarities between what's been going on in the Middle East and what's happening in Wisconsin. Though, there are still a ton of differences between the uprisings in the Middle East and the protests in Wisconsin. Firstly, the violence in Wisconsin is essentially non-existent, while Cairo certainly had an excessive amount of bloodshed (as is Libya right now). And, while those in the Middle East nations in question have been unhappy under the same dictatorship for years and citizens of Wisconsin are angry about a fairly new bill, the general equation for both uprisings is almost exactly the same:
unhappiness + bad leadership = revolt
I wouldn't say that Wisconsin is a revolution in any way, as it's essentially based on protesting an unfair bill rather than government reform, but I think it's almost impossible to deny that this equation can't be applied to most rebellion-esque situations. Of course, there is always more to a revolution that unhappiness and bad leadership, but those two factors usually are the primary reasons why citizens step up and say "enough is enough". So, while Cairo and Wisconsin may be different situations, they have the same underlying causes which make me think they mirror each other more than they oppose each other in likeness.
I'd also like to discuss Caitlyn's idea of obligation for a moment. Honestly, as U.S. citizens, I've noticed that a lot of the time people will say (and this is including me, too), "Oh, what a horrible situation! I want to fix it!", and then maybe they'll sign an online petition and forget about it. I think that we tend to wait until someone else, perhaps a "higher power" (I mean a person in government or of the sort) will step up and try to buffer of help the situation while we watch in support. We were lucky enough in Egypt that Mubarak stepped down before we really had to make a move...I could nearly hear the sigh of relief from the Obama Administration. This idea of obligation - that we have to do something because of the type of country we live in - is quite frequent, yet it is infrequently that ordinary citizens truly act upon that feeling.
I think it really comes down to perception and empathy. It's difficult for perhaps the average Westport family to empathize with the types of people struggling to reform their country in Egypt of Libya when we know what democracy tastes like already. It's hard to feel the same way that a family working in the public sector feels about their health insurance and pension rates increasing when it's not the most significant concern in our town. This sounds horribly negative, but I'm just trying to say that when a person has such a different lifestyle than another person, it may be hard to actually act on the natural feelings of obligation that spring when the other person needs help.
To ask some questions myself, I'd really like to know where you think the situation in Wisconsin lies on the scale we made in class today that ranged from obedience to rebellion? Of course, the Wisconsin citizens are not slaves, but I guess there is a certain amount of obedience a citizen should have towards their government and laws. Additionally, I'd like to ask what you all think this means for the rest of America, kind of like a response to the article "Wisconsin protests: why 'week of rage' matters to rest of America", which I thought was really interesting but I'd love to know what you all think!
Well this is intimiating, I don’t have as much to say because looking above everyone has written a novel but ok….
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness I think that this one quote really sums up this craziness:
I’m sure we’re going to hear more from other states where Republican governors are trying to heap the entire burden of the financial crisis on public employees and public employees’ unions.
It’s absurd that the public officials are blaming the public employers when in fact the financial crisis should be attributed to the greedy people on wall street. Having a financial advisor for a father gives me the opportunity to understand the corruption and complication regarding the financial system. However it is totally unfair and just not right to have these employers pay for these people’s mistakes. I don’t see how this is really going to help the state out either because right now everyone is outraged by it and because so many people went ot support it they had to miss school which therefore is going against everything they want. I completely agree with what Amanda said, these people are working for YOU. These jobs are completely necessary and many of them are jobs the seem to never end. For instance, teachers are always working and to have them constantly working AND make them pay for the financial crisis is truly absurd and ridiculous.
Another idea is the fact that in many cases these public employees do not have the greatest salaries to begin with. So by lessening them and raising health issues and pensions it just doesn’t make sense. Many of these people are already having trouble getting by and these increases will make is very difficult for them to live. Now here is something to think about, all of the CEO’s of the fraudulent companies still get an incredible paycheck. One of my favorite headlines during the financial crisis was “Stocks may fall but executive’s pay doesn’t”.
So while these CEO bast in the sun next to their pool with their butler on hand there are these poor public employees that are protesting to keep their pensions and health care the same. Does this seem right? Its clear that states are having troubles but what is the best way to solve this?
I typed out what I was thinking as I read some of the documents. My thought process and response to posts so far:
ReplyDeleteSo I started with a quote: "Mr. Walker said he did not believe that most Wisconsin residents had a problem with his proposals." I wondered if this was an example of ignorance or a valid observation. If we look at the Civil War, (not to compare public sector workers to slaves AT ALL), white masters believed the slaves were happy and accepting of their situation. My theory is that what's happening in Wisconsin is another example of how people in power see what they want to see and tend to ignore anything that doesn't go their way. It seems the unconquerable case of tunnel vision and selective listening is just reoccurring.
Then there's the factor of desperation. Under our nation's economic circumstances, the struggle to balance budgets is a heavy burden and clouds consideration for moral integrity.
My next thought was that a lot of people are supporting Walker's bill because it's not a direct disadvantage to them. Public school teachers like Kim Hoffman, quoted in the New York Times article, have explained that they'll need to find new jobs to sustain a sufficient income. If the bill is passed, the number of public sector workers will thin. Police and fire departments who protect our communities will be weaker. Teachers will retire. Then you've got a bigger student to teacher ratio in the classrooms and therefore a less successful education system.
But do all public sector workers deserve the benefits? Like Martha said, some of them have become heavily dependent on these benefits. Some teachers take advantage of tenure and see that there's room to slack off. Students end up with lazy teachers who don't deserve the rewards they're receiving. I don't oppose teachers' protection because I think we can all agree that there are some pretty scary parents out there who find a lot of opportunities to criticize teachers. A thorough investigation is obviously necessary to make a decision on who *is* slacking off.
(This post is getting too long so I have to split it in half.
So which is worse? Keeping high taxes? Or a corrupted public sector? What do we risk? How can we prioritize? Like Caitlyn said, no one wants to answer. We're too lazy to try to untangle the mess.
ReplyDeleteI, for one, think it's sad how afraid we've become of the threats of Darwinism. Yeah, there are those moments when people try to help each other, but in the end, it's almost always still for self-benefit. Our system has created an unfortunate need for aggressive selfishness. Without it, you get swallowed alive in this society. I could keep going on this tangent, but I'm getting a bit general so I wanna stick to the issue.
The way we've set up our economic system created this whole mess. To relate back to what we discussed about bipartisanship, it's the price we pay for choosing democracy, and so to fix this without uprooting the entire government system, we've got to take small steps. If such a large population of public sector workers are dependent on the benefits they receive from the government, and we *see* that, we can't just rip the ground out from underneath them, leave them struggling. The government created the mess in the first place. To take everything back and just say "oh, sucks for you" isn't the right way to handle it. I think there needs to be some form of compensation, because after all, the policies the government established in the first place allowed these public sector workers to become so dependent on their benefits. It's obviously not all of the public sector workers, but this is certainly an issue.
I'm aware that I didn't really answer Caitlyn's question concretely, but I think there's more to the solution than a yes or no. We have to weigh the sides before we make any conclusions. Anything to add to my pros and cons?
P.S. I typed this up last night. For some reason they didn't post. Sorry Sarah and Alexis...I didn't see your posts until just now.
I meant to post this last night, so after Kelly’s awesome comment, this may seem like I’m ignoring everything she said.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Amanda's comment, sort of I like Martha's opinion, I have to say that public workers are not the only hard workers. Anyone who works is providing a service of some sort to someone else (save the corrupt Wall Street bankers if you please), and as a result receives payment for it. Sure, public employees like teachers are doing things for children, as with policeman for the public, but they are still getting paid for their labor just like anyone else gets paid for what they do, such as providing cupcakes in a cupcake business for the community. And I don't think public servants necessarily work harder than those in the private sector, and in actuality the average government employee is paid more than the average private sector employee. Take pensions for example. In some sections of the government, state or federal, people can start their public service career at 20 and retire at age 50 or 55, and then receive pensions that are almost equal to the salary they received while working. This means these employees are receiving 20+ years of pay when they haven’t worked at all. Doesn’t it seem unfair that most private sector employees have to work until their late 60s or even later until they retire? Like Martha said, wouldn’t some teachers who don’t love teaching at heart have little motivation to try hard once they are guaranteed their job indefinitely under tenure? (Of course this only applies to a small minority of public workers, I am not suggested that they ALL try to corruptly live off the system) These cuts really stink. But our federal and state governments have massive amount of debts, and just like the any American family has to pay off its debt, so should the government (well the states actually do, not the federal gov’t). If we don’t start biting the bullet and realize that we simply cannot maintain what we have in place, which, yes, in this case, will result in some job loss and less pay for public employees, we will just be kicking the can down the road until Wisconsin is in much deeper trouble. This bill does not obliterate pensions, it just reduces them.
Sorry I have been having some mega issues internet wise...
ReplyDelete(Second Part of Comment)
But haven’t most Americans seen their paychecks reduced during the recession, let alone those who have already lost their jobs? Raising taxes will simply hurt businesses and job creation, and in response to Alexis’s comment about the CEO bonuses, it doesn’t seem like that would be a viable way to close a 140 million dollar deficit a projected deficit of 4 billion. Basically, no matter what happens, when we have to make cuts in government, somebody is going to be hurt and unhappy, but what are you going to do?!? I agree with Kelly that we are being “lazy” and not tackling the problem from the bottom up, rather from the top down simply by cutting pensions, but I am finding it hard to see how else Wisconsin can close its budget at the moment. In order to prevent this from happening in the future, we need to actually reform the system, and not just cut a piece of it off as Walker is proposing to do. But can we actually reform what we have in place? Is it possible to create a much more competitive public system and get rid of the corruption, greed, and dependency on pensions when this has been in place for decades?
I agree with the main point that Doug is saying. There have to be sacrifices to avoid the massive debt and it will cause problems. I however think that there were other ways Wisconsin could handle this. First off is the straightforward approach that so many states have taken .They simply lay off employees. While this seems harsh, the increase in taxes is indirectly having the same effect. Kim Hoffman, who is a middle school music teacher said, “I love teaching, but I’d have to start looking for another job, period,” (NYtimes). Not only will those people be forced to quit, but it will cause them to pick a job solely for money. Instead of pursuing a career for fun, it will be all profit driven. That takes away their natural right of the pursuit of happiness. The next most logical decision would be to borrow money from the wealthy. This goes strongly against republican belief, but it is an efficient and less damaging way to reduce debt. While many of the citizens found the increased taxes too much, wealthy people could pay vastly more without having as big a impact. The increased taxes cost an extra $1200 per year, which I know as a fact is less than some people in Westport make daily.If they were to give up 2 weeks pay, they could almost cover a year of the extra taxes for a struggling family.
ReplyDeleteThe question then become why Wisconsin acted the way they did. I think that it was a failed attempt to keep the public happy. Around the country, people are being laid off, and it seems like a terrible event. While it is unfortunate it is the best way to approach the problem. In an attempt to avoid upsetting the public with budget cuts, Wisconsin looked for a new way to solve the problem. The error is that their solution was more detrimental, and upset the public even more.
I (politely) disagree that we should all "not make cuts" and look for a new solution (I'm not accusing anyone specific of saying this. I think it was in an article). First off, it's all too easy for everyone to get upset when taxes get higher and salary cuts start affecting teachers and other public workers, but what else can Wisconsin do? Of course, they're in debt; one could say it is their own fault that they are out of money. However, many things contribute to state debt, and the current state government is now responsible for mistakes their predecessors may have made. That said, there are not a lot of places from which they can borrow money. Government is responsible for everything public - it isn't their right to start pulling money out of private businesses.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, most of the anger regarding these budget/salary cuts seems to be revolving around teachers. Which makes me wonder, is there anywhere else that can be given significant budget cuts? Is it possible that the government cuts a small amount from a lot of public businesses, schools, etc as part of a long-term effort to decrease debt?
In my opinion, the schools should be the last place to experience budget cuts, and the teachers should not suddenly have to pay for healthcare and experience such drastic changes in their salaries. Educating the youth, as cheesy as it sounds, can really affect the future of the U.S. If we set a poor example for students regarding money woes and poor leadership in escaping debt, we are only setting ourselves up for more failure in the future. Therefore, I believe that Wisconsin should definitely make some cuts so that their businesses, schools, and other public functions can continue to work; however, cutting too much from one place is not the way to approach the issue.
I agree with Katie, from reading the article posted from the New York Times, it seems there is little to do in Wisconsin besides make cuts, its not as though the state can make none and completely ignore the problem. That being said, its not responsible for a state to suddenly make such cuts that so drastically effect the state employees to suddenly, doing this could cause chaos. Yes, state employee are bound to have their salaries impacted, but the state needs to find other ways such as recovery plans or borrowing money to remain financially intact without upsetting such a large part of their population. By cutting so much so suddenly, the state is only setting itself up for more long term problems in its schools and the other state run departments.
ReplyDeleteI liked how Alex described the situation in Wisconsin as "a failed attempt to keep the public happy" because I completely agree. I also thought it was interesting how so many people reacted to this budget cut because, as Mrs. Schager stated in class, "it takes a lot to get people to protest." One article stated that there had been a "17 hour rally... schools were cancelled... [and] there had been as many as 40,000... union Wisconsin protesters." This got me thinking about why people were so passionate about this event. I think it was wrong of Scott Walker and the legislature to "cut collective bargaining" because I don't think it is within the rights of a man such as Chris Christie to " cut more than $1 billion in local aid" and force teachers to contribute 1.5% of their salaries towards healthcare. The average teacher salary in Wisconsin is around $47,000 compared to the occupation of a doctor who gets paid an average of $96,000. Teachers already have low salaries in Wisconsin and to give them a "pay freeze" and cut health care seems like a terrible idea. I know that if that was me I wouldn't take it lightly but I would like to know how much this is going to benefit Wisconsin and is it worth it?
ReplyDeleteI would like to go back to a comment made by Caitlyn and kelly about the situation resulting from people being lazy. I really don't think that leaders are being lazy and while I don't agree with what they are doing, I think they are doing what they have to do. Granted, the situation is terrible and something needs to be done in the Middle East, and even in our own "united" country. In my opinion, this situation is not one to give us an opportunity to blame leaders, or make excuses about the current events all over the world. I think it is time to reevaluate our governments, reshape our systems and somehow, create a better environment in which the people and government could finally agree.
ReplyDeleteOne of the articles described the situation saying: "It was like a root canal without the benefit of Novocain, watching and listening to the harangue on RT (Russia Today) about how the protests in Madison Wisconsin, Cairo, Libya, Bahrain, and Tunis are all one in the same, that is, the people revolting against dictators who want to bring back feudalism." The connotations that come with getting a root canal are painful and terrible, so the comparison to a root canal without the numbing medicating just shows how bad Wisconsin is. And if it is this bad in our own country, how can we even begin to imagine what is going on in the Middle East. So clearly, in my opinion it is important to take a step away from blaming what has already happened and look ahead to how we can improve what is going on today.
People seem to be justifying the proposed legislation by the fact that Wisconsin needs to close its budget gap through cuts. I agree budget cuts are needed but not from public employees. When Walker first took office two years ago he had a budgetary surplus. And now, in a short period he has led his state into millions of dollars of debt. How did he run up this gigantic deficit? Tax cuts and other legislation in favor of corporations. So I believe Wisconsin should fix the deficit be reversing what created it in the first place: corporate tax breaks. Fix the underlying cause instead of using the deficit as a lame opportunity for some classic Republican union busting. Wisconsin needs cuts but NOT from public servants. And I won't even bring up increased tax for the extremely wealthy........
ReplyDeleteP.S. Enjoy Martha and Doug!
I would like to disagree with Amanda. After looking online, it appeared that Walker was the culprit causing the debt. However much of the information i found, was written by angry citizens of Wisconsin. These are people who amassed by the thousands to protest, and therefore are most certainly biased. I discovered that the real problem started years ago when the federal government required an extra 2.2billion dollars and when Doyle was in charge of wisconsin, raising taxees over $1 billion. COmpared to this, Walker has not done very badly. I think the only reason people are revolting now is that over the years their patience has worn thin and they can't wait any longer.
ReplyDelete(sorry if this is random, I tried to post awhile ago)
ReplyDeleteThe more comments I read, the less I’m convinced that we live in a democratic yet laissez-faire, capitalist society. If the government is supporting retirees from the age of 50 with such large pensions, where do I find the “every man for himself” and “hands off, government” voices that we’re supposed to have based our economy on since the beginning of industrialization? It’s not that I don’t support pensions or government funded benefits, but I do think it seems to present educated young men and women with some option of heading on two paths, the private versus public sector.
I love the idea of obligation and our tendency to want to butt in to every situation, good willed and usually highly unprepared. Back in the beginning of the year when we discussed the terrible conditions of the poorest areas of the nation, we were all dutifully appalled at the inequality of this country, but in all honesty, did nothing. That’s another thing about capitalist societies – there is a battle between the need to support each other as patriotic citizens of the same nation, as well as fellow moral human beings, for that matter, and the right of each individual to worry about himself.
We can’t forget though, that this whole mess has happened because our government is concerned with the government’s debt. It’s hard to see that somehow, by taxing the people (taking their money) the government will only help the people. Is this even possible? Why is everyone so opposed of the government trying to help? Or is there a lack of trust in the government such that the government becomes an evil, thieving entity there to deprive the public of their money? But no, this can’t be true, since we’re a democracy…
(This is kind of a side note, but I have to argue that while I understand that the public workers do have very demanding and necessary jobs in society, we’re totally forgetting an even more overworked, underpaid, neglected, group of people whose jobs are just as, if not even more, physically demanding and unrewarding. I’ve recently read Nickel and Dimed for English class, and it basically gives a glimpse at the life of the truly poor. Just keep in mind that the lowest economic class in America doesn’t even have much chance of ever receiving pensions, being, for the most part, employed by private corporations paying them minimum wage. For them, retirement could mean, quite immediately, meals from a soup kitchen.)
Whoever starfruitguineapig is... brilliant. Anyway -
ReplyDeleteWI Gov follows through, dismissals could take effect as early as April 1.
More: Judge orders protesters to leave state capitol.
And: Dem. Legislator is tackled while trying to enter Capitol building.
Earlier: WI Senate orders arrest of 14 absentee Dem Sens. Thurs.
Read more: http://thepage.time.com/2011/03/03/walker-sets-friday-deadline-for-layoffs/#ixzz1FgNdGv9h
So.... Walker is going to lay off these people, but more importantly, what do leaders, governments, and countries do when their "people" begin to either rebel or collectively rally? Censor, censor, censor, censor, and censor. Well done America. Anyway, if you read the information above, our own government tackled, arrested, and threatened these protestors in front of the Capitol building. What a surprise!
Walker goes on to say,'"may be able to be rescinded and layoffs avoided"' if 14 Senate Democrats return to the state capitol." So Walker is essentially threatening these Unions with layoffs, which I think he has no authority to do, and is "mean."
Finally, I read a different point of view about the protests:
"I'm very excited to hear about the enthusiasm that's going on in Wisconsin and around the country," Solis said. "I am so inspired and proud of all of you, especially those who went down to Wisconsin and also around the country."
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/hilda-solis/2011/03/04/obama-labor-secretary-incites-wisconsin-unions#ixzz1FgQPNsFW
I agree, because without a sacrifice (technically the layoffs) Walker will cut the budget.
Now from the other point of view!!
Would the budget cut help keep the state and country more out of debt, as we are in deep right now. So.. which is more important??
I think it's important to recognize the parallel drawn by the Big Government article between the protests in Wisconsin and the protests in Greece. 2010 saw a large-scale debt crisis for Greece, resulting in many of the same measures now being erected in Wisconsin: pension reductions, public sector pay cuts, raised general taxes. On May 5, 2010, protests began in Athens consisting of somewhere between 100,000 and 500,000 protesters (I realize that this is a very wide gap, but the internet has done a pretty poor job of properly documenting the event). Most of the protesters were government job-holders. The protesters were quite violent, some throwing petrol bombs at a bank and killing workers who actually shared their opinions about the devastating tax cuts, but didn't join in the protests for fear of losing their jobs.
ReplyDeleteThis is a shocking event to link the Wisconsin protests to, as no one wants to believe that such violence could ever occur in the United States. However, there's something to be said of the general mob-like tendencies of protesters. People become overly passionate about this type of thing and cling so tightly to their cause that they become impractical and unwilling to compromise. Though it is improbable that the Wisconsin protesters will actually kill anyone, it is very possible that they will become so attached to their idealistic slogans that they will no longer be practical, or willing to compromise for a middle ground.
This is less of a critique of the Wisconsin protesters and more of a critique of the nature of protesting in general. When did it become an acceptable, even an honorable system to seek change in our government by shouting our demands at people we disagree with? I acknowledge that this method often works. It shows a strength in numbers that convinces officials and other persons in power to adjust towards public opinion. And in situations such as women's suffrage, this is perhaps fine, as the solution the protesters are asking for is simple and possible. Giving women the right to vote would not plummet the country into an economic crisis.
However, Wisconsin needs money, and they are looking for the best solution to get it. The protesters are doing very little to assist in this goal by simply telling the government to change their plans. In situations such as this, the passions of protesting get in the way of looking for an acceptable solution for the problem. The Wisconsin protesters want change, but they have little advice on how to accomplish it.
I would just like to take a moment to talk about collective bargaining. For those who don't know, collective bargaining is negotiations made by employers and a group of employees regarding employee working conditions. This bill that Walker proposed is supposed to cut collective bargaining, which I see why it upsets people in Wisconsin, especially union members. This, quite frankly, upsets me too. I think it is good for these negotiations to occur so that working conditions are fair and salaries are adequate and appropiate (depending on the job and working hours). If union members and other employees get upset because they are not being heard, etc., this would lead to more protests and strikes, which would results businesses to approach or become more in debt, if they aren't already. We, of course, study stikes and a lack of collective bargaining during the Industrial Revolution of laissez-faire economics. Employers took advantage of their "power" by getting a lot more money for basically supervising workers who would get injured, thanks to dangerous machines. Unions started to form and strikes happened, since employers would not listen to the employees wants. I just don't think that collective bargaining should be weaken. Just the idea is enough to make people mad and protest, as evident in Wisconsin.
ReplyDeleteSorry this is so late, I wrote it down on paper because I couldn't figure out where to type it on the blog....yeah I'm a little technically challenged. Whateva.
ReplyDeleteI think all the points made by everyone are very valid reasonable arguments. However, I do side with Amanda's lead on this. Public sector employees work hard everyday to make the community and society we live in the way it is. They work to SERVE us people, and they deserve recognition for that. Although they are attempting to achieve this in a rather disruptive and annoying way, they do need to be recognized. My dad works for a private sector company, and for him it is hard to see his hard work and money be given to people who don't necessarily deserve it through taxes. However, he does realize that these public officials work hard to please not just him, but EVERYONE. They deserve the right to these benefits.
Also, when reading the article ""Wisconsin protests: why 'week of rage' matters to rest of America," I found this quote QUITE disturbing, "One political scientist has gone so far as to compare the Wisconsin protests with what transpired in Cairo earlier this month."
How this comes close to the political riots in Egypt does not make sense to me, especially when I've heard about how far the riots in this region have gone. Although its quite similar, an angry group of people demanding what they want from a government, I do believe that the events in the Middle East are quite more severe than what has happened in Wisconsin.