Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Off-Topic > The Lounge
Register Now
 Register Now

View Poll Results: Should Scott walker and the legislature give up their pensions and health benefits?
Yes I think he and the legislature should volutarily give up all pay this year 7 26.92%
Yes I think the legislature should at least match the cuts and limits proposed to teachers 12 46.15%
Yes the 15% cuts and pension cuts should be across the board 8 30.77%
No he is too important 4 15.38%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread  Post New Thread
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-25-2011, 06:53 PM   #81 (permalink)
cfg83's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,864

1999 Saturn SW2 - '99 Saturn SW2 Wagon
Team Saturn
90 day: 40.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 439
Thanked 529 Times in 356 Posts
Arragonis -

Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
You are assuming parents take responsibilities. One of the problems with this kind of rule is that the people who can dodge it will do so. This rule in China lead to many children being abandoned as orphans, and somethimes in orphanages being left to die because nobody wanted them. Why should the children suffer and the parents get away with it ?

I always heard that it was worse than that for female children :

One-child policy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The policy was introduced in 1978 and initially applied to first-born children in the year of 1979. It was created by the Chinese government to alleviate social, economic, and environmental problems in China, and authorities claim that the policy has prevented between 250 and 300 million births from its implementation until 2000, and 400 million births from 1979 to 2010. The policy is controversial both within and outside China because of the manner in which the policy has been implemented, and because of concerns about negative social consequences. The policy has been implicated in an increase in forced abortions, female infanticide, and underreporting of female births, and has been suggested as a possible cause behind China's gender imbalance. Nonetheless, a 2008 survey undertaken by the Pew Research Center reported that 76% of the Chinese population supports the policy.


What's your EPA MPG? Go Here and find out!
American Solar Energy Society
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

Old 02-25-2011, 10:03 PM   #82 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 808 Times in 592 Posts
Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
Improving a society's wealth increases the health outcomes. Increasing the outcomes means that people decide when to have children - usually later - and how many - usually 1.
That's the theory. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work all that well in practice. At the very least, a society has to be much wealthier than the US, UK, or western European nations are today for it to have any effect, because those nations are still experiencing population growth despite prosperity and over-crowding.

As for the children suffering... Not having them suffer is really not an option, because if population growth is not checked somehow, all but a fortunate handful will be condemned to a life in the human equivalent of battery chicken farms.
Old 02-25-2011, 11:25 PM   #83 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 865
Thanks: 29
Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts
Originally Posted by wdb View Post
Uhmmm, actually, he targeted specific unions. State employees, teachers, yes. Police, firemen, no. Apparently only some unions' costs to the state are busting the budget, and only some unions' collective bargaining rights need to be curtailed to protect said budget in the future.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Wasn't there a Supreme Court ruling about this? Something about what's good for the public school goose being good for the private/church/parochial school gander; i.e., if property taxes pay for a child in that district to be bussed, they have to pay for any child in that district to be bussed to whatever school they attend. I googled a bit and didn't find anything, but something like that sticks in my memory.
You are correct. It is in play in my school district - not because they want to do it, but because it is a federal mandate.

Now EVERYBODY's kids get to ride on the stinking school buses!
Old 02-26-2011, 12:54 AM   #84 (permalink)
Frank Lee's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,761

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,546 Times in 2,215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jim-Bob View Post
Should we limit childbirth or enact a national eugenics program to eliminate the inferior people? No, that would make us monsters and put us in the same company as people like Margaret Sanger who founded Planned Parenthood for just such purposes. Sadly though we HAVE gone through just such policies in our past. Eugenics boards were set up and any child thought to not be intelligent enough by their teacher was then recommended to the board for forced sterilization. This could have been something as simple as one bad report card. Hundreds of thousands of children, many of which later became well educated adults, were forcibly sterilized by the government in the US in these programs. The last forced sterilization was either in 1973 or 1981 depending on which source you refer to. So, before you start down that road, remember: We have been there before and it did us no good. And for those who think the US government has never violated the human rights of it's citizens, go study history a little more in depth than what you got in the 10th grade. You would be shocked at what you find.
Holy Hanna, it NEVER fails, someone has to get all extreme right away.

What about simply abolishing dependent deductions and making parents fund schools for starters? If you still wanna play JimBob Duggar and can afford it, well there ya are. Those two actions would be a pretty sweet disincentive right there- especially in trying times- I'd wager...


Old 02-26-2011, 04:43 AM   #85 (permalink)
Junkyard Engineer
Jim-Bob's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Port Richey, Florida
Posts: 167

Super-Metro! - '92 Geo Metro Base

$250 Pizza Delivery Car - '91 Geo Metro Base
Team Metro
90 day: 43.75 mpg (US)

Fronty the wonder truck - '98 Nissan Frontier XE
Thanks: 7
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Holy Hanna, it NEVER fails, someone has to get all extreme right away.

What about simply abolishing dependent deductions and making parents fund schools for starters? If you still wanna play JimBob Duggar and can afford it, well there ya are. Those two actions would be a pretty sweet disincentive right there- especially in trying times- I'd wager...

How about eliminating AFDC, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid instead? Your theory also has a flaw in that it seems to treat children as chattle instead of as human beings. I do support public education to a REASONABLE extent, but I also support school choice initiatives that would allow parents to opt out of the public schools and credit them the money that they would have paid in taxes towards those schools towards private schools instead. Private schools tend to provide better educations at a lower per child cost than public ones do because of the lack of waste. If they could be used to induce competition then maybe we could cut public school costs as well. As for me, I have no children. I wish I did but it takes two to tango and I have yet to find a dance partner at 37 so it is unlikely I ever will.

I also would ask what you would do to someone who had a child and could not afford to pay for their education? Put the child to death? Throw the parents into forced labor camps? Force the mother to have an abortion against her will before the child was born? Deny the child an education and condemn them to a life of poverty and citizenship in a crime-ridden underclass as an adult? Your solution is overly simplistic and lacks enough details to deal with the realities of how life plays out. Therefore my analysis was legitimate because you make broad, open ended statements instead of writing well-reasoned, detailed arguments.
No green technology will ever make a substantive environmental impact until it is economically viable for most people to use it. This must be from a reduction in net cost of the new technology, not an increase in the cost of the old technology through taxation

(Note: the car sees 100% city driving and is EPA rated at 37 mpg city)
Old 02-26-2011, 04:47 AM   #86 (permalink)
The PRC.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 535 Times in 384 Posts
Unfortunately they will outnumber us all....
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
Old 02-26-2011, 09:58 AM   #87 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
mcrews's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,523

The Q Sold - '02 Infiniti Q45 Sport
90 day: 23.08 mpg (US)

blackie - '14 nissan altima sv
Thanks: 2,203
Thanked 659 Times in 474 Posts
a moron wrote the poll guestion.......

well, what is the surprise there.
I am soooo sick and tired of the brainless, thoughtless,"repeat after me' left.
So what YOU think is that Gov Walker has the exact same benefits and he gets to keep his while the pooooooorrrrrrrrr little hapless teacher "GIVE UP" AND LOSE IT ALL. (Stupid moronic poll question)

Here are some facts for you to chew on......yes, facts. Don't meally mouth rabble about 'destroying unions'.

The showdown in Wisconsin over fringe benefits for public employees boils down to one number: 74.2. That's how many cents the public pays Milwaukee public-school teachers and other employees for retirement and health benefits for every dollar they receive in salary. The corresponding rate for employees of private firms is 24.3 cents.
Gov. Scott Walker's proposal would bring public-employee benefits closer in line with those of workers in the private sector.

And to prevent benefits from reaching sky-high levels in the future, he wants (PAY ATTENTION>>>>>>HERE IT COMES)to restrict collective-bargaining rights.

******I'd swear that the left said 'destroy" unions. Bust Unions. Give up all benefits...... *******************

Huuummmmmmmm, oh well, back to the story.........

The average Milwaukee public-school teacher salary is $56,500, but with benefits the total package is $100,005, according to the manager of financial planning for Milwaukee public schools. When I showed these figures to a friend, she asked me a simple question: "How can fringe benefits be nearly as much as salary?" The answers can be found by unpacking the numbers in the district's budget for this fiscal year:

•Social Security and Medicare. The employer cost is 7.65% of wages, the same as in the private sector.

•State Pension. Teachers belong to the Wisconsin state pension plan. That plan requires a 6.8% employer contribution and 6.2% from the employee. However, according to the collective-bargaining agreement in place since 1996, the district pays the employees' share as well, for a total of 13%.

•Teachers' Supplemental Pension. In addition to the state pension, Milwaukee public-school teachers receive an additional pension under a 1982 collective-bargaining agreement. The district contributes an additional 4.2% of teacher salaries to cover this second pension. Teachers contribute nothing.

•Classified Pension. Most other school employees belong to the city's pension system instead of the state plan. The city plan is less expensive but here, too, according to the collective-bargaining agreement, the district pays the employees' 5.5% share.

Overall, for teachers and other employees, the district's contributions for pensions and Social Security total 22.6 cents for each dollar of salary. The corresponding figure for private industry is 13.4 cents. The divergence is greater yet for health insurance:

•Health care for current employees. Under the current collective- bargaining agreements, the school district pays the entire premium for medical and vision benefits, and over half the cost of dental coverage. These plans are extremely expensive.

This is partly because of Wisconsin's unique arrangement under which the teachers union is the sponsor of the group health-insurance plans. Not surprisingly, benefits are generous. The district's contributions for health insurance of active employees total 38.8% of wages. For private-sector workers nationwide, the average is 10.7%.

•Health insurance for retirees. This benefit is rarely offered any more in private companies, and it can be quite costly. This is especially the case for teachers in many states, because the eligibility rules of their pension plans often induce them to retire in their 50s, and Medicare does not kick in until age 65. Milwaukee's plan covers the entire premium in effect at retirement, and retirees cover only the growth in premiums after they retire.

As is commonly the case, the school district's retiree health plan has not been prefunded. It has been pay-as-you-go. This has been a disaster waiting to happen, as retirees grow in number and live longer, and active employment shrinks in districts such as Milwaukee.

For fiscal year 2011, retiree enrollment in the district health plan is 36.4% of the total. In addition to the costs of these retirees' benefits, Milwaukee is, to its credit, belatedly starting to prefund the benefits of future school retirees. In all, retiree health-insurance contributions are estimated at 12.1% of salaries (of which 1.5% is prefunded).

Overall, the school district's contributions to health insurance for employees and retirees total about 50.9 cents on top of every dollar paid in wages. Together with pension and Social Security contributions, plus a few small items, one can see how the total cost of fringe benefits reaches 74.2%.

What these numbers ultimately prove is the excessive power of collective bargaining. The teachers' main pension plan is set by the state legislature, but under the pressure of local bargaining, the employees' contribution is often pushed onto the taxpayers. In addition, collective bargaining led the Milwaukee public school district to add a supplemental pension plan—again with no employee contribution. Finally, the employees' contribution (or lack thereof) to the cost of health insurance is also collectively bargained.

**********let me see if I understand
1. it's all about the kids......yeah right.
2. so the unions have ripped of the taxpayers.
3. I thought only employers and republicans were fat and greedy.
4. Wow......amanzing how refreshing the truth can be.

So the poll question should be:

Should the greedy, fat unions give back what the stole from the taxpayers


As the costs of pensions and insurance escalate, the governor's proposal to restrict collective bargaining to salaries—not benefits—seems entirely reasonable.

Mr. Costrell is professor of education reform and economics at the University of Arkansas.

Yeah, damn union buster..........

Freakin moronic union whiners
MetroMPG: "Get the MPG gauge - it turns driving into a fuel & money saving game."

First: ScangaugeII

Second: Grille Block

Third: Full underbelly pan

Fourth: rear skirts and 30.4mpg on trip!

Last edited by mcrews; 02-26-2011 at 10:09 AM..
The Following User Says Thank You to mcrews For This Useful Post:
duane1 (02-26-2011)
Old 02-26-2011, 11:10 AM   #88 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 744

redyaris - '07 Toyota Yaris
Team Toyota
90 day: 45.54 mpg (US)

Gray - '07 Suzuki GS500 F
90 day: 70.4 mpg (US)

streamliner1 - '83 Honda VT500 streamliner
90 day: 75.63 mpg (US)

White Whale - '12 Sprinter 2500 Cargo Van
90 day: 22.01 mpg (US)
Thanks: 81
Thanked 75 Times in 67 Posts
A colective agreement is an agreement that both the union and the employer sign and AGREE to. If you want to cast blame then it is on both parties. As to how benifits should be funded I will agree with you that they must be PRE funded not pay as you go; ie the person recieving the defered benifit should "Fund" the cost. Most if not all benifits have costs so they have to be funded up front. I for one have no objectin to unionized public servents, in this case teacher, being well compensated. What I do object to is the notion that we don't need to fund it till some time in the distant future,and with other peoples money! The major problem with pensions is that they have been mismanaged and underfunded for decads now and the chickens have come home to roost.

Last edited by redyaris; 02-26-2011 at 11:05 PM..
Old 02-26-2011, 09:46 PM   #89 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 21
Thanks: 16
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
I think the poll is slanted drastically to the left just due to the bias in the possible responses. You are trying to win this poll, not get a reasoned response.

If you want to get true numbers about his credibility we need a wide range of repsonses and alternatives rather than the libral insult of "he's too important".

Open and honest debate is the only way to work through any issues.
The Following User Says Thank You to duane1 For This Useful Post:
Thymeclock (02-26-2011)
Old 02-26-2011, 10:13 PM   #90 (permalink)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 865
Thanks: 29
Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts
Originally Posted by duane1 View Post
I think the poll is slanted drastically to the left just due to the bias in the possible responses. You are trying to win this poll, not get a reasoned response.

If you want to get true numbers about his credibility we need a wide range of repsonses and alternatives rather than the libral insult of "he's too important".

Open and honest debate is the only way to work through any issues.
Wow. I can hardly believe I'm not the only one here who has noticed this.

It's why I didn't answer the poll.

This is related to: "Is it true you are still beating your wife?"

The answer you get to any question depends on how the question is framed. The one who defines the terms controls the debate.

If I may make a suggestion: would you revise the questions and try submitting it as a new (or revised) poll? Whether the list administration allows or supports it may be an indicator of possible bias.

Closed Thread  Post New Thread

Thread Tools

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com