Give me a straw man!

Don Taylor another name to remember. Is just as ignorant as Scott on the laborers disproportionate distributions of laborers productivity. Presently 84% of wealth { Labor’s Productivity} to go to 20% of our populace as the 80% fight over the remaining 16%. Foxy Koch Urchins are they, emulating their desires for Corporatism .
Here we go again. Take the money from the education and dumb down the populace and let the savings go to the wealthy. Expenditures’ remain the same as laborers fork over more of their pay to pay for it. Sad state affaire for the people with cutting jobs in the near future. Oh what leadership… Ain’t ignorance a blissful benefit for the weak minded?

Corporate Citizen Welfare - Kock Brothers, Big Oil and Healthcare Mafia. = Trillions in Bush Tax Gifts (used to attack working class middle Americans whom pay the higher percentile burden) vs.

American Middle and Lowerclass tax paying citizens = Less job security, dangerous working conditions, dirty water, air, land - deny health care due to crimes by the Corporate Citizen against the American Citizens.

You have to be a kochhead or kochwhore to see it otherwise. What the Police and Fire Unions are ignoring is that - as soon as they weaken the existing Collective Bargining workers - THEY ARE NEXT. Believe it.

Jazzy:

Turn over your page of talking points--you forgot ALEC again...

Wouldn't count on it, Lyle, regardless of which way it goes. The cost of this process, in dollars and other things, is enormous. If you think that folks are going to just shrug their shoulders and say "what's done is done", you are sadly mistaken. You wanted war, you got it. It's too late to turn back now.

@Bob McBride...Let's hope it just stays a war of words. Can I count on you to join for a beer when it's over? BTW, Woodstock was a miserable place.

Hoffa would sit down with the two of you - but not for a beer, as Hoffa doesn't drink (personal choice).

I really don't think you understand, Lyle. Your side effectively kicked a hornets nest tonight. The quiet resentment that's been smoldering through the protests in Madison, the Occupy (insert city/institution name here) and now this foolish decision to invade a residential neighborhood are now full blown flames.

Words are words and we expend a lot of them here and nobody gets hurt. This goes way beyond that, Lyle. And, unfortunately, all your side knows how to to do is fan the flames. Well these are the kinds of flames, Lyle, that you don't see until it's too late and you're already burned.

@Bob McBride...OK, you made your point and good luck. I guess I don't hold the same kind of resentment that you do.

Lyle, why would you? It's not your vote that someone is attempting to invalidate for the second time this year, simply because their side lost the election.

I wasn't referring to me, Lyle. I was referring to the folks who've basically sat by through all that and were put off by it, but not to the point of doing anything about it. They're the hornets, Lyle. I don't think you can count on their complacency any longer, and I don't think you can count on them just saying "no harm, no foul" if Walker survives, because there's that issue of the costs I mentioned before.

If the Walker recall is run as a special election, using the costs from the 9 Senate recalls as a basis, we are looking at costs an the $8 million dollar range.

Lets fire up the old NCR, and run a tape. Oh, and, Mr. Ruble, how do you plan on paying for this today, MasterCard,Visa,American Express or you could empty that fat wallet of yours, as we do take cash.

$400,000.00 #Capitol repairs(protester damage)
ChaCHING
$8,000,000.00 #Capitol safety/protection (police)
ChaChING
$2,100,000.00 #State Senate Recalls
CHAchinnG

Nice try Lyle. What you don't get is that this was settled a year ago in a regular election. It's a war alright and not just of words. I was in the middle of that mess in Madison as 70,000 liberals chanted and beat drums and screamed at people. And you want to have a beer with people after it's all over? Only if I can pour it on your head.

It is. The Corporate Citizen is organized. From Clarence Thomas and Scalia, to the Election Boards in Florida and Ohio - they are organized. They are electing hand puppets to do their bidding (i.e., anyone that works for Fox). Attacking and dividing middle America is their goal - using our resources (tax dollars and military) to line their pockets. The Republican sheep that think they're "moral" are immorally lost on the reality - suckered into voting "social" issues while they're fleeced on the real concrete issues - our country's well-being - fiscally and other.

@JRH...You're being a bit creative. Did you forget he convinced several Democratic legislators to not approve some public employee contracts before he was even sworn in. They would have only been in force until July. I think your exercising some wishful thinking.

the best reason I've heard for voting for Walker during the November election was a woman in Milwaukee County who voted for him so he would no longer be the county executive. LOL Now she is feeling buyer's remorse.

http://gazettextra.com/news/2011/feb/21/janesville-school-board-could-ok-union-contract/

The contract was approved on February 22 by a vote of 5-4.

One example of many. They told Walker that they agreed to take pay cuts, so what's the deal here? Looks like a LIE to me.

@JRH...I wasn't referring to teacher contracts but state employees.

@Lyle -

Did you read the article? These were non-teacher school employees (maintenance, cafeteria workers, janitorial services, etc.)

Yeah. Teachers are the problem. Those "la-di-da" over-paid tearchers. Psst. Sarcasm. Look it up.

Corporate Citizen Welfare - Kock Brothers, Big Oil and Healthcare Mafia. = Trillions in Bush Tax Gifts (used to attack working class middle Americans whom pay the higher percentile burden) vs.

American Middle and Lowerclass tax paying citizens = Less job security, dangerous working conditions, dirty water, air, land - deny health care due to crimes by the Corporate Citizen against the American Citizens.

You have to be a kochhead or kochwhore to see it otherwise. What the Police and Fire Unions are ignoring is that - as soon as they weaken the existing Collective Bargining workers - THEY ARE NEXT. Believe it.

You just completely made that up.

"No compromise! No discussion!"

Have you completely just attempted to errase the whole "no compromise" thing from history?

You are a liar.

Typical republican revisionist history.

The workers offered up the money if Walker would leave them their rights.

Walker said "no compromise" so they had to get whatever they could.

Please stop lying.

@Tbone -

The unions were promising Walker one thing, while the locals were going wildcat behind his back! Did you not see the Janesville example - and that's just one of many. When Walker saw all these wildcats that the central union offices wouldn't take responsibility for, that's when he finally said enough is enough - no compromise. The wildcat actions, and the reluctance to take responsibility for them by the central offices, was indicative to Walker of the fact that the public sector unions couldn't be trusted to abide by their word.

It's not revisionist - it's what happened. Educate yourself instead of being fooled by the propaganda and empty rhetoric. I can provide many more links of other wildcats if you so desire, because that's how it really went down.

The real JRH always took responsibility for local wildcats and would break their bogus actions immediately! Here, the pubic sector unions didn't and wouldn’t do that. That's how Milwaukee ended up with a 4-year contract that resulted in the layoff of some 300 teachers.

Are you really that ignorant or just playing some severe catch-up? Get with the program my friend, and look at all sources when researching for the truth – not just the left-wing stuff.

@JazzyJim -

That's very good - you've demonstrated that you can effectively cut and paste all of the left-wing talking points.

But for your next trick, why don't you actually try thinking for yourself for a change? That would really impress us!

You should have just quit at "I don't live in WI", Merrily. You haven't a clue.

The people you saw in Madison were society's malcontents and, in reality, they're in the minority and most of them work in the public sector - if they work at all. Those that do were willing to lie to their employers (both direct and indirect) to take time off from their well compensated for jobs to go up to Madison and make a mess while the rest of us put in an honest day's work and were willing to let the government do so as well. They're spoiled children, Merrily, and they don't like it when they don't get their way so they whine and scream and exaggerate, just like children do.

That's what you saw, Merrily. That's what this is all about. That's the non-MSNBC version, and that's the truth.

Bob - "The people you saw in Madison were society's malcontents......." etc. No they weren't, were you there?? They were nurses, and firefighters, farmers and teachers, businessmen, and politicians, musicians, and public speakers, plumbers and electricians, roofers and carpenters, policemen and social workers, psychologists and counselors, entreprenuers and inventors, scientists and painters. And as far as spoiled children go, seems to me Mr. Walker fits that bill quite well, but not as well as Mr. Fitzgerald, whining and exaggerating (I'd rather call it lying) just like children do when they don't get their way or don't want to be blamed for something they have done.. I personally don't have much problem with Republicans.....its Walker (and people like him) I can't abide! That's the non-CNN or Fox version, and that's the truth!

marybeth, by the very definition of the word, they were and are malcontents. Those who aren't don't participate in such nonsensical, childlike behavior. And that goes for those on both the left and the right. It just seems your side has an overabundance of them.

NOT recalling him will cost us much more than money! Is there nothing to be said for integrity? Just because a person stops short of breaking the law doesn't make them trustworthy. As far as school districts saving money - please see my post under the Bubblegum article. Get the facts, and see how "all the money they save" is REALLY affecting them. Yes, the recall will cost us ALL money, and if it is successful it will be money well-spent!! If not you can thank Mr. Walker for forcing it to happen. (Although I'm sure in your opinion, he will remain blameless!)

It might be interesting to take a look at the financial situation of all those school districts before and after Act 10 was passed...

Giving Trillions in Bush Tax Gifts has already cost you money. Believing it is a "trickle down" ruse is folly and for the ignorant. Blaming the middle class for the crimes of the Corporate Citizen and defending that ideology - is deadly. Kochwhores and Kochheads work for the Corporate Citizen - they want to pollute your air, water and land, raping all resources on the citizens dime - and blame them for wanting a better life, secure and safer living conditions. Being a stooge for the Koch Bros. ideology pays - look at Fox and the Teabaggers. They too work for the Corporate Citizen. It's time that the American Citizens wake up and fight back.

So my school district saving $5M dollars and having my property taxes lowered because of it -- is illegal and immoral? Hmmmm....

Hey Susan, I don't want to save money at the expense of children's education. Scott Walker committed lies of omission in not revealing his true agenda during the campaign. He lied when he said that stripping public unions of bargaining rights would help the bottom line when it didn't. He claimed Wisconsin had a massive deficit but committed the lie of omission when he tried to hide the fact that much of that deficit in FY12/13 would be caused by his corporate tax cuts. I saw his newest lies of omission the other night on Hannity--his aw shucks moment when he aired his new meme, I just did what I said I was going to do, and now they want to recall me. Really? Well in these days of the internet and video, those lies are documented and a lot of people in this state reject Walker, his lies, and his ties to the Koch brothers and their kooky far-right agenda.

@Bren -

Both Politifact and FactCheck.org debunked the whole 'Walker’s corporate tax breaks caused the state's structural deficit' liberal LIE, as perpetuated by Rachel Maddow and apparently YOU.

If you are in fact 'confirming' all of your sources as you claim, then I'm really surprised and disappointed at this oversight or downright disregard for the TRUTH – especially coming from such an esteemed and highly-regarded independent thinker as yourself.

Or are you really just a liberal firing off the typical liberal talking points and Koch Bros conspiracy theories, only pretending to be an independent? Because then it all makes perfect sense!

Gotcha again Bren ;-)

'conspiring to hire thugs' -- not true. No 'thugs' were hired, no conspiracy.

Yes, he made 1 bad appointment (who is no longer in that job), but it is untrue that it was a 'six-figure job. The job paid a little over $81k/year.

'lying about 'overturning' collective bargaining' -- not true. He was very clear about making changes that would require public union members to pay toward their pension and health insurance benefits. How could he have made this happen aside from changing how collective bargaining is done?

He was quick to get on the phone with his masters though - Koch Industries.

Hey Cow, a conspiracy doesn't have to come to fruition to be identified for what he is. He told the fake Dave Koch that they "thought about it." That's terrible. Don't forget that he also expressed willingness to be entered in Cali by "Dave Koch" and that's scary too.

He's made more than one bad appointment. You forget the now former state-senator's mistress who may even now be on the payroll. With more cronies being appointed to former state employee jobs, who knows what the final total will be.

True, no 'conspiring to hire thugs'; he legitimately considered hiring them. No conspiracy at all, just a reality. When the impostor David Koch suggested sending in some troublemakers to mess with the protestors, Walker responded, "The only problem...cuz we thought of that...my only gut reaction to that is....right now.... my only fear is that if there was a ruckus caused, that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has got to settle to avoid all these problems"
Listen for yourself. About 14.5 mins into the 20 minute call: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/scott-walker-buffalo-beast-phone-prank_n_827058.html

Sorry wordlady but those people in Madison ARE malcontents. Nothing more than government union thugs, each and every one of them. You cannot compare someone working in the private sector with a government union thug. And I love the "fellow taxpayer" line. I hear that time and time again. The old "we pay taxes too!" line. The difference is that any taxes that you pay are an investment and any taxes that I pay are purely an expense.

@wordlady... from our good friends Merriam-Webster:
Malcontent: a discontented person:
a : one who bears a grudge from a sense of grievance or thwarted ambition
b : one who is in active opposition to an established order or government : rebel

And, you use the nom de plume of wordlady?

Rational people don't behave in that fashion. You forget that many of us have contact with these people on a daily basis. Many of them take that same attitude with them to the job and in their interactions with the folks who pay their salaries and for whom they are supposed to be performing their public service. The ones that went to Madison are so delusional that they think the private sector is there merely to provide them with jobs. They have absolutely no understanding of the economy, they've been AWOL from what the rest of the nation has been going through for years and even when confronted with that, they want to blame it on an imaginary monolithic boogieman and insist that they, alone, be allowed to maintain the lifestyle they've grown accustom to over the years.

Frankly, a good half or more of the occupations you list above could be outsourced and replaced with more efficient, more conscientious and more courteous private sector workers at a great savings to all taxpayers. Actions they've taken like those we've seen since early this year, whether they know it or not, push them ever closer to that brink.

That's what Republicans call everyone whom doesn't walk in goose step with their blind ideology. To them, the world is STILL flat. It's embarrassing.

Yes, that's the man speaking to someone whose approval matters to him (or so he thought). He's 'not negotiating' and therein lies the problem for the rest of us. We have to take back our state.

Walker works for the Republican Corporate Citizen. How can you tell? He repeats the same mantra as spewed on Fox, via the Roger Ailes Ministry of Lies. It is a "tactic" that works for the Corportate CItizen whom lacks accountability to our country, it's resources, it's people and it's military. Whom benefits from Iraq? BP, Chevron (Koch Bros.), Haliburton and the Saudi Royal Family (aka Murdock, News Corp., et. al.); Who benefits from taking down the EPA? Manufactures whom will pollute the land, air and water - i.e., Koch Brothers/Industries, etc., Who benefits from a weakened work force? Big Industry, i.e, cheaper labor, more dangerous working conditions, and no repercussions (i.e., the GOP support of "tort" reform). The GOP is giving away America. The Republican base is brainwashed like the half of Germany that thought AH was a great leader. Same people - different era.

What exactly is it that you do in the public sector? Maybe we can find a cheaper way of getting it done at a savings to all taxpayers.

Please tell us how you've "served" me over the last 40 years. I'm anxious to hear how important your job is and whether or not it should have been farmed out or eliminated many years ago. And please stop with the "public servant" crap.....

I think it's unfair to characterize everyone in the public sector as union thugs. I think, however, it's much better to characterize them as blissfully ignorant of the true costs of their benefits package. I think they've talked themselves into believing that money that pays for their pensions is free and that it should be their right to retire at 57 on full pension. Their benefits package is so outsized compared to the private sector it is obscene. We, the taxpayers, are reining in these outsized benefits packages. It had to happen. And in order to have it happen the unions had to be shut out of the process. They've taken on too much power and they need to be removed in order to make the process work. And the front line public sector worker doesn't understand this because they are receiving their talking points from the union or their coworkers. They're spoiled and they don't realize it. That's coming to an end and it's going to be a painful process. If we don't get this under control we are saddling ourselves and our grandchildren with a future of crushing debt.

Medicare, Medicaide, Social Security - the GOP are calling these entitlements. Since when did paying into these programs become "entitelments" to get them back? The right-wing nuzis are off the reservation.

Now they want you to work for less, work later in life and just hope you die before you need any assistance and are able to retire. That's the GOP plan. Move the goal post - screw the people.

Have they? I've yet to see my first post-BRB tax bill. Theoretically, it should be sharply reduced because of the lower fair market value of all our homes. But we shall see.

The report just came out today

►MADISON, WI - After going up steadily for the last 10 years, Wisconsin’s average school property tax went down by one-percent this fall. The state Department of Public Instruction released the new figures today. It said the total amount of school assessments on the December tax bills will be 47-million-dollars less statewide than the previous year. Before that, Wisconsin school taxes jumped by an average of 176-million dollars each fall.◄

Feels good to be free of tax and spend "leaders" again

Steve: Except, of course, that they didn't. The mill rate went UP. It's property values that went DOWN. (http://bit.ly/shdZJn)

"School mill rates 2011 vs. 2012
2010-2011- 9.76 overall, 9.80 K-12
2011-2012- 9.84 overall, 9.88 K-12

That's right, school property tax rates went up this year. So if your property's value stayed the same in Wisconsin, it's likely your school property taxes will go up, regardless of how the Sykes/Belling/Walker team try to spin it. And if they don't go up, it's probably because your home's value went DOWN, and not by a little. But hey, who cares if you're underwater on your house when you can save $1.50 a month in (deductible) property taxes, right? "

Math's a bitch, ain't it?

@Bob McBride....There is no doubt that most problems can be traced back to the front office, whether private or public. I made a good living off of that. I have seen a variety of contractors who shouldn't even be in business, but contract cronyism has been in play. As far as best business practices, they didn't have a clue. AS you fully know, getting a culture change away from SOP is a herculean task. In fact, I have known union shops that have attempted to get in place best business practices only to be resisted at every step by management. I still maintain that if the public will to privatize is there, then it better be done right. If business structural models are used, then they must have relevancy. I have such distrust of our current state administration, it worries me to no end of what they would do in the privatization process. I know you think he is the messiah come to earth, but he also has a great deal of baggage. His extreme committment to libertarianism does not make him the best one to implement a process of privatization. I don't want anymore County Mental Health failures.

Lyle,

Let me put it to you this way: As someone who's sold identical product lines and services to both the public and private sector, I can substantially verify that the public sector is rarely getting the best deal it could on those products and services. Frankly, if there wasn't enough of an enticement in the form of superior margins to sell to the government in most cases, the paperwork alone would kill you. It's been very seldom that I've been involved in any business with the government where we were willing to walk away from it because of the overbearing nature of the paperwork. That along should tell you something, because as you know the COST of doing business with a particular type of customer is factored into the overall willingness to do so. The businesses I have sold to, on a whole, adhere to the kinds of business practices one would hope for. Expectation of a satisfactory product at a verifiably competitive price. And they get better pricing because they operate more efficiently than to government entities for the most part and allow and, in fact, encourage their vendors to do so as well.

I've sold them everything from data processing equipment to consumables, and in all cases, the pattern has been the same. There is a lot left on the table and most of it has to do with bad business practices, sometimes combined with ridiculous regulatory compliance. It can be done better, and it has to be.

Lyle, you recently wrote a piece here calling, essentially, for complete change in our form of government, yet you're unwilling to implement on a fairly limited basis, sound business practices because you don't like the elected official currently in power for a limited term? Unless you're being less than candid about the first instance and are planning on including in that form of government a codicil that installs you as supreme ruler for life, you're always going to have to contend with leaders you may not like and you're always going to have to rely on their discretionary authority to a degree - including in your ideal social democracy.

@Bob McBride...Ah Gee Bob, I could have written the same piece. In my career I walked away from a great deal of government business because it cost more than it was worth. Unlike you I sold industrial equipment and engineered solutions. What a nightmare. Most of my work was with the feds. Of course, I have to admit that when dealing with large corporations they could be worse than the government. Back in the Day when the major car companies transitioned to JIT systems, they drove a lot of companies out of business with their demands. GM put me in a vice and to retain their business I had to open direct distribution next to their plants and expose myself to huge financial risk. I changed business focus in 1984 because of that and did less volume but at higher profit and less administrative and financial hassle. In this case you are preaching to the converted. I would love to see government square away their logistics practices. I can only imagine how much could be saved to be put into direct services.

Phil, I see you would rather have your taxes go up. Please donate extra this tax season to the WDR.

Republicans have a knack for promising tax reductions while they maintain expenditures. After Peter pays Paul they turn back to you and demand for your new ante up cost. All the while they cut your education to dummy you up.

My taxes in the northwoods went up!

Because people have lost jobs and can't afford property OR taxes - thanks to middle class support of Bush Tax Gifts in the Trillions for the likes of the Koch Bros.

Maybe you want to thank the President?

Benard and Phil - spot on. Obviously, education paid off for you. Unlike Steve here whom get's his talking points from the GOP Corporate Citizen Ministry of Lies (still). Unfortunately, there will be those like them that won't do the math, read and be capable of "understanding" what is said to them. This is the new GOP constituent. They are told what to do, what to say, how to say it ("We want our country back! - alas, not one of their finest moments). The Republicorp Goebbels Division of Propaganda is deep (TV Evangelicals, Jesus Camp) and Fox. Same moronic Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck/Palinista tripe - aimed at the willingly ignorant.

It's time to reevaluate each and every one of those services and functions. Each and everyone needs to be quoted out to the private sector, where applicable. Screw "social contracts". We can't afford to play nice anymore. Your side pushed this to the brink, and the time has come to push back. We tried to be reasonable. You balked. I think the only reasonable, proper response taken on behalf of ALL taxpayers in this state is for folks to pressure their local, municipal, county AND state government bodies to actively seek competitive quotes from the private sector. It's all we have left to bring some sanity back to this state.

And, just as an adder, if we're getting such a great bargain for our money now with these public services and functions, there should be no fear or hesitation on the part of those who support the unionized, public workers. They should welcome this opportunity to prove their worth in a competitive environment as an opportunity to put to bed the concerns of those who question that worth.

Please include the fact that the public sector is ever expanding, inturn forcing tax payers to have a pocket book mentality. The standing social contract is not a blank check to be filled out by the unions. We want some local control, not the control that corporations have been using for three decades, which is more like collective bargaining.

@Bob McBride...If you remember from past exchanges that the goal of Walker all along has to been to privatize government services as much as possible. It is keeping with his libertarian ideology. So far privatization has not worked out terribly well for the social services, including Milwaukee County Mental Health. Also, private prisons have proved to be an utter failure. So what are you proposing to privatize; janitorial services?

@Lyle Ruble... The social contract between taxpayers and government employees is both uni-directionally endless in its term and uni-directional in its negotiability, both in favor of the employee?

Lyle,

As I said, I think each and every taxpayer funded, public service function needs to be evaluated from a cost effectiveness standpoint by requiring all levels of government to get quotes from outside, private sector sources where applicable. In other words, if there is a private sector entity that performs a service equivalent to that provided by a particular public service function, it needs to be quoted out. Actually, this probably should have been initiated at the same time Walker pushed through the other stuff.

After quotes from qualified vendors are accumulated and analyzed, the existing vendor (in this case, public service employees) should be given an opportunity to meet the offer selected as being the most competitive. Obviously, if it turns out the outside vendors are unable to provide a more competitive package, that step is eliminated.

If the public employee(s) elect not to meet the best outside offer, they lose their jobs.

Perfectly fair Lyle, needs to be done and, frankly, it should have been done a long time ago.

@Lyle It nevers ceases to amaze me the economic stupidity of the government union thugs and their belief in this so-called "contract" that can never be broken. What don't you get about being broke Lyle? A politician can promise anything they want, but if the money is not there then IT'S NOT THERE!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh, go take a class in Economics will you? P.S. Just look at all the promises made in Greece.....

The fact is that Walker's reforms saved the jobs of teachers and other public employees. He could have frozen the levy and let the unions feed upon it's members. But noooooooooo, these people still have their jobs.

@bob McBride...Who is to make the decisions on what to privatize and how would it be decided; on cost only? That's a very narrow view and in the private sector has led to disaster. Look at the abuse in the defense industry and billions that have been lost through graft and corruption. By privatizing we would be trading one set of problems for another set of problems that we would have even less control over. I can attest for a fact that the child deaths and that have occurred that have continued while in foster care in the county are directly attributed to private contractors. In the case of child welfare the very best social workers are already employed by the state and counties, but entirely stretched too thin. In this case, service suffers from privatization. Be careful what you wish for, my friend. I am not saying that some privatization doesn't make sense, but service level and delivery can be very complicated and should not be solely based on initial cost.

Lyle,

As I said the vendors are qualified. It's the responsibility of those at the management levels to verify qualification, evaluate proposals and select vendors based on a cost/benefit analysis basis.

This is done all the time in the private sector on a regular basis and rarely does it result in disaster. As I said, the existing vendor (in this case, the public service employee, essentially) is given a chance to meet the best offer from a qualified vendor. Completely fair. You know all this because you come from a business background, you've been involved in it and you know it will work at certain levels. There is nothing new or revolutionary about it.

It also doesn't preclude public sector divisions from competing in bids against private sector vendors for those items currently being sourced outside. The are availed access to the same process. The goal is cost savings, not privatizing for the sake of privatizing.

Your side was given a very reasonable, soft option to comply with and you elected not to do so, by launching a series of costly recalls. By doing so, you opened yourselves up to this. It's not unfair, it's the right thing to do, based on sound, time tested principles and, in lieu of any sign of cooperation whatsoever on your side's part, it's absolutely necessary.

Lyle:

I don't think that privatization would necessarily mean that there would not be accountability. If the private vendor messes up and fails to deliver as promised, their contract should not be renewed and/or they should be paying damages. I would argue that privatization might even result in more accountability from those providing the services.

I see your point about using cost alone as a determining factor, but I do see value in looking at the services provided by government and determining if the same (or better) level of service can be provided at a lower cost by a private entity...

@Hudson Resident...Basic economics is fairly clear. In private enterprise to increase profits, there are only a two simple things that must be done, increase sales or decrease costs. In government services the choice is increase revenues or decrease costs. Now the question is whether the services the government is providing is worth the cost? Fiscal conservatives claim that we are paying too much for what we are getting. Fiscal progressives claim that we are getting full value and are getting greater value for the amount expended. What has yet been determined is what is the right value for the service. If you don't ever use the service, then you will claim we are paying too much. However, if you use the service and are satisfied, then you will claim you're receiving full value. For your information I have had a number of courses in economics and understand it very well.

Concerning social contracts, I suggest you are woefully ill informed. If I may suggest, your should start by reading Thomas Hobbes and work your way forward to get a better understanding of what social contracts entail. Our founding documents, including the US Constitution is a social contract. Sorry, but passionate opinions do not make up for facts and knowledge.

@bob McBride...So if I understand you correctly you are advocating privatization as a form of fair retribution for legal social action. Where will this lead and at what ultimate cost?

@CowDung...The only problem with solving poor performance by contractors is to not renew contracts or fire them is that often times it is too late. Damage has been done and have cost human lives and untold misery. That's why I maintain that some services shouldn't be privatized. It's for this reason we don't privatize law enforcement and fire protection. We ill afford less than optimum performance and should be prepared to pay for it.

Some communities do have privatized police and fire protection. Obviously some privatization of services choices are easier to make than others...

There's no guarantee that having the government providing the service isn't going to cost and/or ruin lives either.

No, you don't understand at all Lyle, and purposely so. I know you're not that stupid. You just don't want to admit that the program I've laid it is very fair, consists of time-honored principles and will work. It may even work the advantage of someone like your wife, if you do as I've suggested and play the tape through to the end. If we find significant savings in some of the more commodity-like functions, some of that savings may be applied in the form of additional funding for areas that are more specialized and, perhaps, currently understaffed due to overall budget constraints.

You don't want to address this seriously because you know I'm right, you know it will work and you also know your side was darn lucky it wasn't a part of Walker's initial proposals, because it could have been the hammer that would have kept this entire, silly recall process in check - saving this state even more money in the process.

Your side has brought this on itself by use of in-your-face tactics like the one last night, pulled in conjunction with the recall effort. As I said before, you have most likely wakened a sleeping giant. If what I suggest comes to fruition (and I truly hope it does because it will be good for this state), it will be thanks to actions like that one and all the other, ridiculous public displays and political maneuvering your side has engaged in since the beginning of the year.

You folks looked a gift horse in the mouth and decided it wasn't for you.

@Lyle: What's the current way to deal with poor performance of public sector workers? Oh, that's right, nothing. We don't fire public service workers for poor performance because they are a protected class(protected by their unions, their demographics). Just how motivated to perform do you think a worker is when there is virtually no chance of losing their job due to poor performance(note that I am not saying the ONLY way to motivate a worker is via threat of termination). Fact is we already have a lazy, unmotivated public sector. Been to the DMV often? Anyone really think the private sector will do worse?

@Bob McBride...Whether I'm stupid or not, the jury is still out; just don't ask my wife and kids. I just don't want to use privatization as a form of punishment, in many cases it could result in throwing the baby out with the bath water.

What I really fear is who will be making the decisions. I am fearful of extreme ideologues, whether right or left. Administrating and supervising such a change can be fraught with extreme danger. A critical service that should only be performed by a government agency could be taken away to satisfy someone's ideological perspective. It would also be subject to politicization and we know how that works.

My father worked for the DOD as a contracting officer and I know the potential horrors that can occur if not done correctly. Some of the best examples to date is KBR and Black Water. The blame is shared between the contractor and those government agencies charged with oversight. Look what happens in this state every time road construction projects are let. Shorewood's recent roadwork is a good example of trying to herd a bevy of cats. The type of change you are proposing is not a simple thing to do and it's damn expensive. We also have to worry about the feds, they have a stake in it too.

Lyle,

First, to a degree this is already being done in some arenas. I've seen some of it myself. When it's done poorly, it's usually not a matter of some outside interest mucking up the works, rather it's a matter of a lack of good business practices being applied.

And lest we get too upset about the implication of business practices, keep in mind that in most government bodies there's already a "business office" that performs functions that, in many ways, mirror those in the private sector. It's been my observation that, lacking sound direction, decisions made in those offices often reflect favoritism and cronyism to a much greater degree than in the private sector, primarily because they lack the kind of incentives to achieve cost savings ALONG WITH maintaining performance levels that are present in private sector business offices.

The public sector has balked at the most minimal of intrusions into their SOP in the fashion we've seen. It's apparent cooperation isn't in their vocabulary. It's time to get serious and if this means busting through union resistance to force the implementation of the very types of business practices that, in the long run, preserve jobs for those that are deserving of them, then that's what needs to be done. We can't go on pretending we're still back in the '90s. Those days are long, long gone.

@Lyle -

It has absolutely nothing to do with your so-called "pocket book morality." It's simple economics, as I've explained to you before.

Economy suffers, unemployment/underemployment is high and property values decrease. Because of this, tax revenues go down, no longer enough money to sustain present level governmental pay/services. Choices available - raise taxes, print more money, borrow money, decrease pay and reduce services offered. Walker ran on the platform of reducing pay and decreasing services. The people voted and chose Walker's ideas over all other competitors.

Sorry, but that's the way our economy and government works. What more can honestly be said about it?

Greg - re: "Walkers reforms saved teaching jobs" The 3,368 people who lost their jobs would disagree!

marybeth mack,
Where were these jobs lost? Did they follow the reforms?
You can lead a horse to water...
My community hired additional teachers, cut taxes and credited Gov. Walker for both.

@JRH...You and I couldn't disagree more. It is "pocket book morality". I would say the majority of citizens don't understand the fundamentals of government. Their ultimate concern is myopic at best and unable to fully grasp all the complexities of any government action. This is not an indictment of the majority since they are concerned about other things and are not addicted political junkies like myself.

Any time money is cut to a given service there is consequences and you're always betting the come that it won't result in dramatic damage to services and human capital. Wlaker and the legislature picked the low hanging fruit with the state employees. There was nothing creative about going after the problems with a meat axe. I was not convinced that now was the time to press a recall because we don't know what the full consequences are yet. To carefully go through government agency by agency and make adjustments would have been the smart creative thing to do. "Pocket Book Morality" is cutting state funds in some areas so that the available revenues can be shifted to "Wisconisn's Open for Business" programs. In my view the governor isn't the right person to make the changes necessary to get the best bang for the buck. He's lacking education, lacking any real business experience and is driven by libertarian ideology.

@Lyle -

OK, so of those running for governor in the 2010 election, who exactly was the candidate that was running on the platform of "carefully go[ing] through government agency by agency and mak[ing] adjustments," and would have been in your estimation "the right person to make the changes necessary to get the best bang for the buck[,]" as it most certainly wasn't Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett – he didn’t even do that for the City of Milwaukee, let alone could have done so for the entire state!

So what third party or independent candidate did Lyle back and vote for in the 2010 election? Curious minds want to know!

@JRH...After what Scott Walker did and didn't do in Milwaukee County, all I will say is it was anyone except Walker.

@Lyle -

Nice cop out! So in other words, you supported and voted for Barrett, just as you'll probably end up supporting and voting for Obama - even though Gloria La Riva probably best matches up with your political ideology.

Way to put your money where your mouth is Lyle!

Unlike you, I actually vote for the guy I most believe in - regardless of the chances of success.

Instead of merely talking about your principles, perhaps you should actually try standing up for them for a change!

Bob McBride thinks Big Brother and the Corporate Citizen will "do the right thing". What in history are you basing this fantasy? The 30 years of Republican Rule since Reagan is when the wheels started coming off. Corporate Citizens have gained more power, while paying less - while breaking up the working middle class and poor tax payers - whom used to be able to keep them in check with votes. The Corporate Citizens OWN the GOP. Democarcy's last chance is the educated American - and unfortunately, with knowledge comes a greater sense of history, well-being, understanding and good - that a moron would lack in it's simplicity.
Funny, the Republicans "blame government" - and do everything they can to steal it - while destroying it from within - then point the finger at the guys trying to fix it for their disasterous reign of terror.

@235301....You can take just about any bureaucratic structure, public or private, and find inefficiencies. I don't think that it is general knowledge that many government agencies have gone through the same cost rationalizations as private businesses. More service is now being done by fewer employees. Now this is not universal, but there have been programs and policies in place to reduce personnel. The consulting firm I owned and ran would come into a private firm and help find ways of increasing efficiencies whether it was retraining personnel or utilizing new technologies. Most often the resistance didn't come form the workers but from the management and administration. Effective and necessary change was actively sabotaged for position protection. I know it goes on in government as well. Old adage, don't look at the worker, but look at the managers and supervisors.

Same issues are at work whether there is a need for a union or not. Good management makes unions unnecessary, bad management makes unions absolutely necessary.

8 Years of George W. Bush. Do you think the problems of today are due to the 2008 election of President Obama? Giving away - GIVING AWAY your right to collective bargin - I thought you were for "freedom" and "democracy"? Only when it suits your cause apparently. So typical GOP Corporate Citizen.

OMG, I'll respond to one more Lyle"ism" and then I need to get back to work in the private sector. Private companies can and do fire people "at will" on a regualar basis. You no more have a "right" to a job than you have a "right" to take from your neighbor. Unfortunately the government union thugs believe that both of those are "rights".....

@Hudson Resident...You must never have worked for the size of corporations that I have. Small and medium size businesses have much greater freedom when they decide to let someone go. However, when you work for a company that has over 100,000 employees, it's a different ballgame altogether.

Nick, your obsession with Charlie Sykes is, frankly, a little creepy. You also demonstrate no greater ability to get past your own brand of "foo foo dust" that comes courtesy of other outlets I don't waste much time with, like MSNBC. You shouldn't either - you end up being the pot calling the kettle black.

I'd suggest thinking on your own once in awhile, but frankly you don't ever seem to get past style into substance. So maybe it's just not possible for you.

Since when has Charlie Sykes claimed to be an objective journalist? He's a radio talk show host and editorialist...

@Nick Poulos...You have to understand what Charlie Sykes does, HE'S AN ENTERTAINER"!. If a liberal perspective would sell more advertising spots, then he would be a liberal. This has nothing to do with politics, but it's everything about business. You compliment me, but he would never let someone like me on the air.

Bob's right about popular news media, they're not interested in anything except making money; whether MSNBC or Faux News. I have to admit that I listen to Sykes, Wagner and Belling just to know who's shaping the popular thought from the right. Information that I count comes from a variety of printed and online sources; left and right. As a social philosopher, I find politics particularly fascinating as a laboratory. Morals, values and ethics are constantly in play. My problem is that it is too easy for me to objectify it and lose the human understanding.

Here are true entertainers:
http://www.amarketplaceofideas.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/msnbc-rachel-maddow.jpg
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-oreilly-issues-viewer-warning-that-msnbc-hosts-may-commit-suicide-tomorrow/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30014016/ns/msnbc_tv-the_ed_show/t/ed-schultz/#.TsQFC8Mk4qQ

If you allow entertainers like Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Charlie Sykes, Bill OReilly or Rush Limbaugh to form your opinions for you then you, sir, are an idiot. Sure they can provide information but you better put on your thinking cap, evaluate the info, research the source and then form your opinion.

Nick, you seem to be the one of the few here who consistently can't seem to engage in an extended conversation with anyone. Lyle's able to, as are a number of others on both the left and right - but not you. Why is that, Nick? There's a question for you. I know better than to expect an answer because your ego would rather you go to your death than contemplate the honest one.

I used to work for a man who had Sykes, Belling and Limbaugh blaring on his car radio while he drove around on business. He took them as gospel and it affected his employment practices. I didn't used to be so far to the left before I worked for him.

Nick:

What 'insults' are you accusing me of making? Calling Charlie Sykes a 'talk show host and editorialist' is an insult?

Well that would only figure, Randy, as they all have big ratings. Similarly, though, MSNBC has apparently found a profitable niche for itself being the lefty version of the same thing. And while you can't (or shouldn't) be driving around in your car watching it (although you can placate yourself somewhat with WPR), somebody's gotta be watching that and taking it to heart as well.

I just find it interesting that the most mentions of Sykes (and I'm not sure when he usurped Belling's title as the guy the left loves to hate, but I don't keep up with that stuff really) are from those on the left. It almost makes me think a significant portion of his listenership must be lefties who like to grit their teeth or spit tacks as they dodge pedestrians on Downer Ave. Maybe the drivers I should be watching out for during the morning hours are those driving late '90s Corollas and Prius' with the COEXIST stickers on the back, rather than the guys who look like they're itching for a spot to pull a high speed drift maneuver.

@Bob McBride...I think that Charlie is only the "man of the hour" because he frequently has the governor, the speaker of the assembly and senate majority leader on. He also gave Justice Prosser a lot of free air time. In my book, Belling still gets the prize for the most over the top right wing radio entertainer. His devotees seem to be angrier than Charlie's listeners.

@Bob McBride -- this was in 1993. Take a guess what station my car was turned to back then. Take a guess what it's turned to now. Try to avoid stereotyping, please.

I think my former boss's mood (and his ability to drive safely) might have been better served by something soothing like The Prairie Home Companion of the folk stylings of Doc Watson.

Okay, what am I stereotyping, Randy? All i said was that there's a flip side to those guys and it's on TV versus the radio for the most part. That's pretty much been a given since what we call talk radio came into prominence. Both sides seem to have their adherents, casual listeners/watchers and folks who are 100% opposed to what they say, but listen/watch anyways. And then there's folks who don't listen to or watch any of it at all if they can avoid it. Not sure where the stereotype is in that, or how it relates to what you, personally, are listening to now or were back then.

Then why don't you do some of that instead of insisting "we" all need to? You seem to be waiting for others to recognize your "brilliance" and jump at the opportunity to engage with you in the manner you desire. How about you start the ball rolling by NOT jumping in with some partisan, sykes-hating crap for once and get in the game? You do understand this is an interactive medium, not a lecture hall, correct?

It's called volunteering one's time and effort. It's what people do when they get motivated.

I scrolled up too far and replied to the wrong thread.

24% of Wisconsin Republicans don't seem to enjoy the servitude as much as you do http://tinyurl.com/75259r9

First of, the public employees made a bargain with us -- lower pay for higher benefits. And now Walker and his tools want to renege on that.

Second of all, a real man would fight for those benefits for everyone. Take those away from the public employees and you see more chipping at the middle class.

As posted on scottwalkerwatch.com, from a WPR/St Norbert's poll. I believe they had the Vikings winning by a landslide last Monday as well.

In general, if you have to result to polls to make a point, you're either lazy or you really don't have one. The only poll that mean anything is the one taken on election day, although you guys are doing your darnedest to change that as well.

Sore losers, cranks, wailing babies, insolent children - This is what democracy looks like, these days.

Well said, Keith, well said.

Keith and Phil - The union representing the public employees couldn't help their greed and willingness to screw the tax payer. The employees may have made a deal for benefits but let their unions run wild. They grossly overcharged for services and we finally got someone to stand with us and look out for the taxpayer.

Their benefits were not taken away, that is simply a lie. If they would have kept their union in check things would have been different. But they let it run wild with greed. Game over. If you would like to keep contributing your hard earned dollars to a public employee no one is stopping you. But I suspect you will secretly enjoy the freedom while still bashing those that provided it to you.

Steve: First, thank you for not invoking a straw man argument. I appreciate it. Seriously...

I think you and I have a different view of the term "greed." I think a union fighting for a living wage and adequate benefits for its members does NOT constitute "greed." It means that organization is doing what it's paid to do.

To me, what constitutes "greed" is an economic environment where the financial system has been allowed to run unregulated for years and has created the largest income disparity (not wealth disparity mind you, but income) since the 1920s. And the way things are going, we'll be back to the 1890s in a few years. I consider that to be greed. These financial "robber barons" have stacked the tax system in their favor and they have used the taxpayer as a backstop to their bad decisions. It's appalling to me that teachers, social workers and nurses are being called "thugs" and are being driven to a "shared sacrifice" when the people who caused the economic troubles are sheltered by the collective tax dollars of the 99%. They get off without so much as a scratch.

I can only speculate what others think but the term Thug is 100% directed at the union, not the employee. We do respect our public workers.

What I mean by greed is the union started their own healthcare insurance company and overcharging for those premiums to the state vs other private insurance market rates that are comparable. Unions allowing workers to call in sick but then pick up another shift on the same day which results in overtime. Overtime that is charged at double or above the hourly rate when in the private sector is is 1.5x. Unions dictating tenure and not allowing bad employees to be fired. All of this is picked up by the taxpayer.

Steve: Well, you may intend to direct the term "thug" at the organization, but "thug" is an adjective that is usually directed a people and not things. But I'll grant you the intention. Perhaps you might consider the term "thugish" to refer to the union as a whole and not to the members.

Second, not all unions in Wisconsin have the same agreements or the same healthcare plans. I know my wife, who is AFSCME in Dane County has a private PPO administered by Physicians+. Other groups have other agreements.

Finally, it takes two to collectively bargain. Are you holding the unions solely accountable for the agreements reached by the state and the municipalities with their workers? Seems pretty silly since the whole process was a bargain between *two* parties, the unions and the officials. If you don't like the way the bargain was struck by your *elected officials,* get new elected officials. Don't scapegoat the unions because the people you elected behaved in a way you don't like. And certainly don't strip the rights of the union members away because you don't like their agreements. That's what people are angry about.

Phil:

That's kind of the issue with the public unions though--the two parties involved in the negotiations aren't necessarily on opposite sides. When you have unions involved in politics and getting people elected that are beholden to the unions, the public unions essentially end up negotiating with themselves. This is why we don't take issue with private unions like we do with the public unions. In private unions, the 'adversarial' relationship between the two parties is maintained and usually results in an agreement that is fair to all. I don't see that as being the case nearly as often with public unions.

Seeing as all this wealth has been confiscated from the public by the UNION, how come the workers aren't any further ahead than the middle class, and why has the top 1% grown in wealth at a rate that no one could have imagined, not even them. damn those unions.

@Say What -

You're comparing apples to oranges. The reason behind the explosion in wealth of the top 1% is largely due to the artificially low interest rates being promoted by the Federal Reserve. You see, when money is super cheap to borrow, as it currently has been since the late '80's and especially today, rich people, who represent a solid credit risk and can therefor access loans easily, use that cheap borrowed money to investment with and make even more money for themselves. However, liberals also like low interest rates because it allows middle and lower class people to put more of their income towards purchases, thus allowing those people to have more stuff which means that they have a higher quality of life, as opposed to having to spend more of their income on interest. Now here’s the kicker – middle class and poor people almost always only ever use this cheap borrowed money to buy stuff with and put themselves into debt. The rich people don’t do that for obvious reasons.

When interest rates were high, as they were in the mid '70's through to the mid-'80's, rich people couldn't make any money off of the borrowed money, so they didn't borrow money and couldn’t use ‘leverage’ to make themselves even richer as they are currently able to, thus the reason for the much closer wealth distribution during these moments in times on your little MS-NBC / Daily Kos wealth disparity chart. What MS-NBC and Daily Kos never told you though, was why the chart is the way that it is (or at least they never told the real TRUTH anyway). Hoffa just did that for you – you’re welcome.

So, essentially, you're mad at the 1% for being good credit risks and using money wisely.

Please, get a clue!

@Keith Schmitz -

I don't really care how a person takes their compensation from their employment. Compensation is compensation. And the fact of the matter is that our economy has been and continues to suffer. A suffering economy means that the tax base is hurting. A weakened tax base means that tax revenues are down. Less revenues mean we don't have the money to continue to maintain compensation of public employees at present levels, let alone are able to give raises. So what does the government do? The choices available are - raise taxes, borrow money (with interest obligations), print more money and inflate the currency (which would have an adverse effect on everyone and can only really be legally done by the federal gov), cut many other programs in huge ways, or reduce the amount of compensation and level of services being offered. Walker campaigned on reducing compensation and the level of services being offered. The majority of the people voted for this option above all others that were presented during the election.

What more can be said about this? It's simple economics my friend. Tax payers suffer = lower government wages. It's not rocket science! It’s part of the inherent risk involved in making the choice to go into public sector employment. If you don’t like it, you’re free to get out and do something else. I’m sure that there are plenty of people who would love to have that job, even at the reduced compensation levels. And when the economy gets better, you can lobby the politicians to increase your compensation as well. That’s the simple logic of it!

JRH,
You really didn't answer my question, you only dismissed it. so, I ask again. Why, if they are thieving bastards, are the union members not further ahead in life? Right, apples and oranges...Fine, can we tax the rich who earn through investments at the same rate as income?

@Say What?

They're certainly further ahead in life than many non-union members - especially the unskilled workers (trash collectors, janitors, etc.). But that's not the point for being against public sector unions. The whole 'union greed' argument is not one that I personally buy into, so I will not defend it here to you - others can do that if they wish.

The reason to stand against public sector unionization is its inherent conflict of interest, as recognized by the real JRH, FDR, and other historically great and recognized supporters of labor. In fact, even Vladimir Lenin was confused by the concept of public sector unions operating in a democratic republic, such as our government is supposed to be.

"Fine, can we tax the rich who earn through investments at the same rate as income?"

That's certainly an option, and one that I happen to support so long as tax rates are lower across the board. I've actually set-forth a reformed tax code of my own making here on Patch in prior comments that has gotten fairly good reviews from most people - check my profile. The only person who didn't like my proposed reformed tax code was Randy1949 – but he has a problem with wanting to pay for his fair share of taxes.

@JRH -- How is not wanting to pay more than the 33% of my gross income that I already pay having a problem with paying my 'fair share'?

Hoffa's proposed federal tax code:

Federal Sales Tax (applicable to ALL transactions): 1.5%

Federal Income Tax (applicable to all gross income and eliminates income adjustment - deductions, exemptions, itemized write-offs, loop holes, eit credits, etc.):
$0 - $125,000 - 8%
$125k - $250k - 12.5%
$250k - $1M - 17%
$1,000,000+ - 21.5%

Federal Cap Gains Tax (short & long term, bracket neutral): 15%

Federal Corp Profit Tax (offset only by legitimate losses for up to 3 years carried forward): 18%

All other federal taxes, with the exception of the federal excise taxes on petro fuels, alcohol, and tobacco products and trade tariffs/taxes with unfair trading nations, will be eliminated.

@Randy1949 -

I don’t think we’re on the same page here because you’re so ingrained in the current tax system. Are you saying that your over all tax burden (sales, property, income - state and federal, payroll, excise, capital gains, etc.) is 33% of your gross earnings or your gross adjusted earnings (after taking your deductions, exemptions, itemized write-offs, loops holes, eit credits, etc.) or are you just talking about your income tax burden (state and federal)?

I thought that you once said that after taking your deductions, exemptions, etc., that you typically wouldn’t owe any federal income tax – correct? Or am I mis-understanding you here?

So are you saying that all of the other taxes you’re paying adds up a 33% burden on your gross earnings, or gross adjusted earnings?

Remember, my proposed tax plan does away with many taxes (payroll, etc.) and completely does away with adjusting income (deductions, exemptions, etc.) except in cases of special needs children, in favor of lower across the board rates that apply equally to everyone from the very poor to the very rich - thereby expanding the base and making sure that everyone is paying something. My plan was also limited to federal tax collection, whereby I’d ask for 8% of your gross income deriving from labor and 15% of your net profits from any capital gains earned in a fiscal year.

So, explain how we’re not on the same page or why exactly you wouldn’t support my federal tax proposals.

@Randy1949 -

WI income taxes – 4.6% - 7.75% progressive, and subject to adjustment in gross income and qualifying credits

WI sales tax – 5% statewide .5% county (if implemented)

Average WI property tax - $20.68 per $1,000 of assessed value, median home value $141,600

Excise taxes – exempt from this discussion as they are a use tax on non-essentials.

Current FICA – 5.65%

So, if you're paying no federal income tax, and assuming no federal cap gains and that you spend all of your net income within the year on in state purchases, your overall tax burden would look like this:

6.33% state income tax (averaged)
5.5% sales tax (lower when adjusted for gross income as opposed to net)
5.65% Fica (payroll) tax
And a property tax bill of $2,928

So, unless you’re saying that your property tax bill accounts for 15.53% (or more) of your total gross income, which would place your gross yearly income at $18,853, or you just spend a majority of your net income on fuel and vices, there’s no way your overall tax burden is adding up to 33% of your gross as you claim. Or you haven’t been completely honest about your tax situation in past threads.

So, what’s the deal here Randy1949?

Randy you're having a conversation with Hoffa, not me.

You okay?

LOL -- no. That's what happens when you have to scroll up ten posts to reply on this board.

As far as I'm concerned, Hoffa can just think what he likes at this point.

@Bob McBride & Randy1949 -

Did Hoffa miss something here?

//@Bob McBride & Randy1949 -

Did Hoffa miss something here?//

Yes, you did. Suffice it to say that my property taxes do exceed 15% of my gross income by quite a lot, and your tax proposal would double my federal income tax.

@Randy1949 -

Either your gross income is very low, your property assessment very high (above the state median), your total property millage is very high (higher than the state average), you have more than one property, the property you do have isn’t homestead exemptable, or there’s presently a special assessment that was levied in your area/neighborhood – OR a combination of some or all of those factors.

And with the lowest federal income tax brackets at 10% and 15%, you must be using adjusted gross income in arriving at your true out-of-pocket federal income tax burden. But I thought you previously said that your adjusted gross income exempted you from any federal income tax liability what-so-ever a majority of the time. But you were still paying the payroll taxes. So to say that my proposed tax code would more than double your federal income tax burden despite eliminating the payroll taxes - something’s not quiet adding up for me here. Does your sole source of income derive from some sort of tax deferred retirement account by chance?

In any case, if your property taxes alone are accounting for over 15% of your total gross income – then that is where your biggest tax problem lies, and that is courtesy of your local level government. Here are my property taxes for comparison sake:

Assessed value of property (fair market value): $141,500
Taxable value with homestead exemption: $70,750
Total Millage: $12.37 per $1,000 of assessed value

Yearly Property Tax Bill: $875.18

Granted, I live out in the country – no sewage system, no garbage collection, and currently NO special assessments (drainage, etc.). And my school district is always very competitively ranked. So either your getting hosed or something else is going on (like a special assessment) that your not telling me about.

And I don’t believe that anyone’s total individual tax burden should be any higher than 40% max, so if you’re really at 33% as you claim, then you are contributing your fair share and I apologize and retract my previous statement. It’s just that some of your earlier statements about your tax situation were either not consistent or contradictory in nature. Again, I’m sorry for my previous label of your situation.

@JRH --the change in my federal income taxpaying status reflected a switch from living off the sale of savings that had been put into mutual funds (taxable only as capital gains) to IRA distributions (fully taxable). Plus, my son left home and we lost an exemption. So, in 2000, I didn't owe any federal income tax. Since 2009, when the regular savings ran out and we could finally access the IRAs, I've been paying varying amounts of state and federal income tax on a not very princely income. Your proposal would double the federal income tax, while reducing very little or my other tax burdens.

I'm completely satisfied with the way my local government is run. It's the school levy that is the huge part. You may have seen, about ten years ago, a large, upscale development of 3/4 to million dollar homes attempting to secede from the Waukesha Public School district and join Elmbrook, which at the time had half the levy. I don't live there, but I could sympathize, even though developments like that run up the 'fair market value' of everyone else's land. I've lived in this house my entire life, and don't feel like getting forced out of it just because country has turned to suburb and my income hasn't kept up.

I accept your apology, and I wasn't being untruthful. If you factor in the 5% sales tax on non-food necessities like toilet paper, laundry soap, toothpaste, underwear, clothing, and bundles of shingles to repair my roof, I'm easily at 33% or higher.

Just what government union thug has a $2500 deductible Thursty? And I've had a $5000 deductible forever. So are you going to cough up the rest when I get sick?

Well I actually read your entire post and I can say that you're living in a dream world my friend. The government union thugs that find joy in stealing from their neighbors will not go away quietly. They have had their run at the top of the heap for so long that they don't know any different. Instead of coming together as you would like and holding hands singing cumbia, I'm afraid that this conflict will eventually end violently. So I would suggest the purchase of one of more guns and plenty of ammunition....

Do you ever write a post without posting some type of link Thursty? And 3 in the morning writing about politics? I think you need a life my friend.

"These Plutocrats and their maionettes and the other lemmings" that you talk about certainly include the powerful government unions like WEAC don't they? After all WEAC is the biggest and most powerful lobbying group in Madison. And don't leave out the retired fat cat professors who have guarnateed pensions and healthcare paid for by the taxpayers. I do love all of your mushy words like sustainability and social/civil contract. You can wax it all you want there smart boy, but the bottom line is that the government workers are the ones causing the strife and they may not like the result of their temper tantrums. Lock and load buddy.....

Lyle, Nick's not that hard to understand and even if he is on the first read, he's posted the same darn thing so many times here now that anyone who's bothered to read him more than once can't help but wonder if they're experiencing deja vu. There's your "Johnny One Note". It's nice that you stand up for him and all, but if he's really interested "conversation" he's got to understand that one way to assure he's including himself out is by constantly telling folks they shouldn't be talking about nuts & bolts and need, instead, to come together to replace the entire machine with one of his liking.

The response he gets when he does this is reliably the same and to blame it on those who react to him in that fashion is ridiculous. Maybe he just needs to stick to writing articles rather than attempting to engage in the comments section. He'll never be satisfied with the results and if it makes him feel better to assume it's just because he's so far above everyone else that they don't "get" him as a way of rationalizing the less than stellar response he gets, then fine.

If a person goes to a Packer game expecting to hear an opera, it's not the fault of the fans in the stands or the players on the field that his expectations aren't met. It also doesn't make a load of sense to continually come back to the same place, expecting different results.

@bob McBride...Nick's style of communication takes some analysis. However, Hudson Resident is a real piece of work. He wants to blame everything plaguing the state on "union thugry". Hes too quick to criticize before understanding the issues or the authors.

Lyle, Nick may have some attributes in need of analysis, but his style of communication isn't really all that hard to figure out. Everyone has their little pet issues (case in point, Nick, ad infinitum) but overall Hudson's reaction to Nick is not unlike that he's gotten from myself or any number of others here.

Nick may actually have something to offer to a conversation if he didn't always insist that, unless one is discussing the route to the endgame he'd like to see come to fruition, they're wasting time (his, apparently, as no one else seems particularly bothered by it).

I'm suggesting that, if that's the case, then perhaps the comments section isn't the place for him. His articles are fairly well written (certainly more coherent than most of his comments) and you and he seem to enjoy discussing them in the comments section attached to them. Perhaps he just needs to rely on those articles to attract the kinds of folks he feels he'd like to have conversation with, rather than jumping in other conversations here and insisting they're not up to snuff because they're not discussing what he'd like to discuss.

Hudson Resident seems to think that providing links to outside info is not fair play. Instead he keeps hammering on his one stringed instrument and redundant comments.

@Hudson Resident...You are not the only one who started out poor and worked for everything they have. Yet they all don't have the same attitude as you. Your obsession with public unions is mystifying. Other than an opinion, what is your evidence to support your statements?

@Thurston Howell III...Most of those who carry high deductibles also have health savings accounts. This greatly reduces the cost of monthly premiums and tax advantages.

I have a HSA and a $7,500 family deductible. Our firm has had employees with multiple cancer and other serious illnesses and so for the past few years other insurance companies wouldn't even give us a bid. This year we can bid out, so hopefully our plan options will return. I'm just saying that it's tough for smaller organizations in these circumstances.

Oh no, Facts! I'm melting, melting, melting!!

@Keith Best...I don't see that there is anything in the newsletter that would indicate liberals are lying. In fact everything that they said would be done if Walker was elected has happened. This newsletter had limited circulation and the general electorate was never privy to this information. Walker never made this part of his public campaign. Oh well, the fat's in the fire now and I will watch with curiosity how you and the other conservatives spin around this one.

@Lyle Ruble--Did you read page 3, where all of candidate Walker's plans were laid out BY WEAC? Now they are claiming they never knew. Of course it's a lie. Why are you denying reality once again?

@Keith Best...Of course I read page three, but you didn't read my comment very well. WEAC knew and alerted their members, but it was not common knowledge to the general electorate.

Lyle, you're stretching the boundaries of plausibility here. The fact is that they, like many lefties, figured a Republican was unlikely to win. When has WEAC and its membership (which, btw, is significantly large enough that word of mouth would have sufficed, had they anticipated a loss) ever been shy about putting out information they felt served their purposes? They were apparently comfortable enough with that information when they were under the assumption that it would never come to fruition. Once it did, they were up in arms and Walker had to go. This entire process, from start to finish, is about a miscalculation on the part of Democrats as regards the outcome of the 2010 election - pure and simple.

@Bob McBride....Shame on WEAC and the Democrats. If they had this knowledge and didn't share it such a manner that disseminated to the general electorate, then I have to agree with you. I also stand guilty because I was not following this aspect of Walker's position, I was clearly focused on other aspects of his plan/ideology. I think there was a great deal of miscalculation on the part of the left and we couldn't imagine such fundamental structural changes. Now we are in the midst of trying to correct a problem we had a great deal to do with in creating. Although the left can't turn the clock back, we do have to stop the "run away train" that is taking this state in the wrong direction, away from democracy and into the jaws of tyranny.

I guess no one reads the J/S(see below), so the info on removing healthcare from collective bargaining was not common knowledge. And further, Barrett(Walkers opponent) understood Walker's plans, as the newsletter interviewed/cross quoted him in opposition to Walkers position: “I believe in collective bargaining.”

Walker supports a bill that would take away the right of unions to negotiate health care benefits. Ryan Murray, Campaign Policy Adviser for Walker, said "The way the proposal would work is we would take the choice out of the collective bargaining process."

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 8/29/10

Lyle, if you can accept that particular miscalculation, why is it not possible that you're now miscalculating the intent and overall effect of the changes Walker has put in place? If you selectively believe one thing someone says, discount other things and label yet others lies, how do you know which is which?

The least extraordinary (and, as we're finding out, apparently not even unknown) part of what's happened since January is what Walker and the Republican legislature have done, rather it's the reaction to it on the part of the those who lost out in the election that's unprecedented. Marches, recalls, recounts, etc. And basically, all based on a "miscalculation" of the extent to which the general populace was behind the Democratic party, its candidates and its performance since 2008.

It's happening here for a number of reasons the key ones being as follows: A somewhat controversial Republican governor, a teacher's union that wields significantly more power (and an associated ability to call its members and supporters to action) than do its counterparts in other states, and some loosey-goosey recall laws.

If a challenge was going to be mounted somewhere, this was the perfect place for it. It's been the progenitor to the actions in Ohio, the OWS movement, and if it succeeds you can count on it becoming SOP whenever Democrats lose going forward.

It's unnecessary, but your side is gambling it will work, so that's why it's in play.

@bob McBride... The left may have miscalculated Walker during the election, but there is no doubt now on his intent and direction. I opposed him during the election for a number of issues, including his lack of positive performance as CE. I directly oppose libertarianism and Walker is a committed libertarian. He is a dedicated corporatist and I see unregulated corporatism as leading to the economic mess we are in. I am a strong believer in social justice and true equal opportunity and Walker represents the antithesis. We'll see if the majority of Wisconsinites share his view or mine.

Lyle, that's what elections are about. You exercised your right to vote against him based on what you believe him to be, the majority voted for him and he won. Similarly, in past elections you've voted for the candidate you supported, they've subsequently won or lost and you've accepted that decision. I can say the same.

The fact that your side was essentially asleep at the wheel and didn't realize that the tide was turning against you doesn't make the 2010 elections any different than those of past years. The fact the Walker has not been elected to an indefinite term and will be up for re-election in 4 years also doesn't point to this as being different from any previous elections. The fact that there's absolutely nothing Walker and the Republicans can do that can't be reversed by subsequent administrations and legislatures doesn't make it any different from previous elections. The only thing that makes it different is the extent to which your side is willing to go, in terms of mischaracterizing what Walker is doing, in terms of participating in public displays of displeasure and in terms of utilizing rarely used techniques that in the past have been preserved for use only during extraordinary circumstances to essentially negate the results of the last election.

And all this is being done because Walker had the temerity to take on an overly powerful, public employee union that will not cotton to not getting its way.

@Bob McBride...Point well taken, but our democratic process is at work as constitutionally outlined. You and I will both have to live with the results and deal with the realities of future turmoil. If recalls become so dysfunctional we'll have to fight it out and change it.

Out of personal curiosity; since you are a Walker supporter, at what point do you consider that he'll have gone too far? Do you wish to see all state agencies and regulations thrown on the scrap heap and everything that can be privatized turned over to private enterprise? What should be retained and what should be privatized?

Lyle, since you're an Obama supporter, at what point do you consider he'll have gone too far? When all private enterprises are taken over by the government and the "1%" are loaded onto trucks and shipped out to work at "re-education centers", working the fields picking lettuce while their illegal alien overseers crack whips to keep them moving? Can they at least keep their black cards so they can attempt to keep their strength by gorging on caviar and triple digit bottles of vino in the evenings?

Please, Lyle, let's not get stupid here.

@Bob McBride...I wasn't attempting to go stupid, I was asking a serious question. Do you have a tipping point? Obama is an entirely different matter. If there was another alternative rather than what the Republicans are going to put up, I would take a serious look.

As far as 1% reeducation camps, we can only dream. Where's Mao's little red book? Oh it's sitting in my library next to the Communist Manifesto which next Handbook for Radicals.

Here's the serious answer. It's the same one that I've given you before when we've discussed this. I'll keep it short. Everything in government, from local to state level, needs to be examined to see if similar services are provided in the private sector or by other government divisions. RFBs should be sent out, responses examined and qualified by the existing knowledgable department heads for not only savings, but assurance that the bidder can provide the required service. If it's determined that the existing public employee staffed service is the best, it's kept. If not, the employees or their reps in the union or whatever are offered an opportunity to met the best bid. If they refuse, the work goes to the best bidder. Contracts are for a maximum of 4 years, at which point (or at an earlier point, if so determined by the department head) new bids are sought. In all cases, if the existing service provider is the public employee group originally in place, they are given a chance to meet the best bid. That privilege is not extended to private vendors or other public employee divisions from other areas that might be bidding on the work as well.

Example: WFB decides to bid out garbage collection via a public RFB that's open to private and public providers. After the bids come in, Shorewood's DPW is the winner. WFB's DPW is offered the chance to meet it or decline. If they decline, the contract is awarded to Shorewood's DPW. If not, WFB DPW keeps the business.

That's more than a tipping point, that's a goal. Anything that gets us closer to that goal is acceptable as far as I'm concerned. I approve of the direction Walker is moving in that it's more likely to get us closer to that goal than the alternative of coddling the unions and continuing to attempt to isolate public employees from the very real effects of a dwindling economy.

Do you have your copies of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" and "Trout Fishing in America" sitting there and collecting dust as well, Lyle? If not, I will have to doubt the seriousness of your period-appropriate lefty credentials.

@Bob McBride...It's not a home without those two volumes. I have a few volumes of Alan Watts sitting around as well as Calos Castaneda.

@Bob McBride...I know that was your answer and I can see it in garbage and recycling collection, but what about the schools?

Wherever it makes sense, Lyle. I'm not ruling out any particular departments simply because it might seem intuitive to do so. I'd leave it up to the department heads, however they would be required to provide evidence as to why their decision either way (whether to farm out the work, or not) makes sense both fiscally and from the point of view of continuing to provide adequate service. Which means they're going to go through the investigative and RFB (if applicable) process first.

@Bob McBride...I don't necessarily disagree with you. My only concern is how do we keep politics out of it and direction to agency heads from above. I would rather see a non-partisan commission take it up and make the decision, just like for closing miltary bases.

"Non-partisan" commissions are great if your goal is to make sure things take forever.

You can't keep the politics out of it any more than you're keeping the politics out of it now, but if you require folks to produce results upon which their jobs depend and offer incentives for jobs well done, you can cut through a lot of the politics that way. Frankly, if you've been to any local board meetings and seen how decisions are made at that level sometimes, what I'm suggesting is much less "political" and involves a much more sophisticated decision making process that much of what you'll see there.