When I start getting paid PRIVATE SECTOR WAGES for my 50 – 60 hour work weeks, I’ll be happy to accept those “private sector benefits” (which, actually, are almost exactly what my union job provides me). 

It’s funny how conservatives keep saddling teachers with greater burdens while giving us fewer resources and then vilifying us when we can’t make the impossible commonplace. 

And let’s not pretend that incompetence in the private sector is rare. As far as I can tell, it’s commonplace and often highly rewarded. Companies whose CEOs mismanage them seldom fire the CEOs — instead, they fire the workers. If you want to know wht workers unionize, look no further than there.

I work damned hard for my students, all so that I can JUST afford a little, old two bedroom apartment, and I get MIGHTY tired of people who haven’t been in a public school in years attacking teachers for our supposed “greed” while the richest 2% of Americans whine about getting even MORE tax breaks.

What’s that tell you about teachers!  He completely ignored where I said:

I don’t have any problem with teachers or other state employees.. My problem is with those that run unions, their interest is protecting their own personal interest & power. I remember about 8-9 years ago their was a grocery strike & it came out that the president of the union who was “Fighting” for the poor workers, made over $300,000 per year! If these people REALLY gave a shit about working people they wouldn’t be doing that.

“Sarah Archibald, an education consultant who worked for seven months in Gov. Jim Doyle’s office, offers a pragmatic reason for unions to consider in their continued fight to improve teacher wages and working conditions:

‘Keeping low-performing teachers in classrooms hurts everyone, most of all kids, and disproportionately, low-income kids and kids of color,’ Archibald said. ‘But it also hurts the teaching profession.

‘It is very difficult to argue for paying teachers more – even though it makes sense based on evidence from countries with higher performing educational systems – when some of that money would go to teachers who are not performing in the classroom but who cannot be dismissed on that basis or even paid less than their higher performing peers.’”

Pubic employee unions have gotten WAY too much power in many states in the country.  California is a prime example.  Democrat politicians are bought by the Unions.

[A] new bankruptcy law would allow states in default or in danger of default to reorganize their finances free from their union contractual obligations. In such a reorganization, a state could propose to terminate some, all or none of its government employee union contracts and establish new compensation rates, work rules, etc. The new law could also allow states an opportunity to reform their bloated, broken and underfunded pension systems for current and future workers. The lucrative pay and benefits packages that government employee unions have received from obliging politicians over the years are perhaps the most significant hurdles for many states trying to restore fiscal health.

I certainly am a big fan of dealing with the bloated union contracts and state employee pensions that have ballooned to create an unsustainable state budget.  Don’t think we haven’t created a monster?  Check out this stat:

The figures for next year’s budgets are staggering. California, which faces a $25.4-billion budget shortfall, will pay $100,000+ pensions to more than 12,000 state and municipal retirees this year. A Stanford study puts the state’s unfunded pension obligations at more than half a trillion dollars.

While some form of Bankruptcy makes sense when looking at these numbers, my concern is 2 fold.  First, that states will look at the new Bankruptcy as a crutch to never really change their spending ways.  Bush & Gingrich adrress that:

An additional benefit of a new voluntary bankruptcy law for states is that its mere existence may deter any state from ever availing itself of its provisions. If government employee union bosses know that they could have all their contracts annulled under federal bankruptcy law, either through a plan of reorganization voluntarily entered into by state leaders or by the voters through proposition, they may be far more accommodating with state governments to restructure government employee union workforces, pensions and work rules.

That makes sense, but it is still a concern I have.

My second concern is how suck a bankruptcy would effect the state’s bond rating & the overall ability to borrow money.  Again, Bush & Gingrich have a response:

Third, the new law should allow for the restructuring of a state’s debt and other contractual obligations. In a voluntary bankruptcy scenario, states, like municipalities, will have every incentive to file a reorganization plan that protects state bondholder claims and their ultimate recovery. States will evaluate their future access to bond markets and their prospective borrowing rates as they formulate the optimal restructuring plan.

When California refused to bail out Orange County, the county entered bankruptcy and emerged within 18 months. Within three years, the county returned to an investment grade rating, and it repaid 100% of the principal of the vast majority of its investors by 2000 without raising taxes.

The lesson is that voluntary bankruptcy offers taxpayers the option to restructure state finances responsibly to achieve long-term fiscal health — which can only improve California’s bond rating since it is the worst in the nation— instead of simply having to accept the Sacramento solution of another tax increase.

Overall I think the Bankruptcy option may work, but it is something that must be carefully addressed.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.

HMMMM how can the left attack THAT!

On behalf of the American people who aren’t insane: FUCK YOU!

Sincerely,
The People o the United States of America

The conventional viewpoint says we need a jobs program and we need to cut welfare. Just the opposite! We need more welfare and fewer jobs. Jobs for every American is doomed to failure because of modern automation and production. We ought to recognize it and create an income-maintenance system so every single American has the dignity and the wherewithal for shelter, basic food, and medical care. I’m talking about welfare for all

So pretty much if Jerry wins, California is royally FUCKED! via » Jerry Brown Flashback: We Need More Welfare and Fewer Jobs – Big Government.

“I don’t know how they stole that last goal from us. I’m not sure what the call was. He (the referee) wouldn’t tell us what the call was.”

The USA played great & really should have one the game, I wonder what the rest of the world has to say about that one.