Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Governor Scott Walker caught on video telling a billionaire benefactor how he plans to crush the unions and turn Wisconsin into a right-to-work state. Not that billionaire. Or that one. Another one   (2012.talkingpointsmemo.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Wisconsin, industrial district, rollbacks, Journal Sentinel, unions, English-speaking countries, red states  
•       •       •

13827 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 May 2012 at 9:39 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



519 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-11 10:58:22 AM  

skullkrusher: Carn: beefoe: Also to magnify this point:

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 49th

Typical union BS. Let's negotiate a contract to reward our older members at the expense of anyone starting out. Nice!

So... which industry is it that you work in where newbies make as much as experienced veterans?


Crazy pills?

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 20th

That is perfectly logical in a situation where experienced veterans make more than entry level workers. Note how it does not equate starting and average salaries. It compares them, apples to apples and oranges to oranges across the country.


que??? Starting teacher salary rank if 49, among starting teachers, not 20th. Did you just make up this numbers because the facts of the world didn't fit with your beliefs?
 
2012-05-11 10:58:29 AM  

skullkrusher: Right to work has nothing to do with liberty. Why is your "right" to work somewhere greater than the right of the employer to negotiate deals with his employees with the requirement that his employees join a union in exchange for certain guarantees and concessions?


Right to work only means that you can work there without joining the union. The employer is still free to negotiate deals with the union.
 
2012-05-11 10:58:41 AM  
Derper friday in full effect.

Gotta go to work now, miserable wretches. Enjoy your cripple fight.
 
2012-05-11 10:59:37 AM  

Leeds: SpectroBoy: /Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

And those who don't realize that OSHA, minimum wage, and a myriad of other labor laws have replaced the need for unions are doomed to pretend (as you do) that unions are somehow needed on some level.


i.usatoday.net

"If any of you have been asked by your group presidents, your supervisors, engineers or anyone else to do anything other than run coal (i.e. - build overcasts, do construction jobs, or whatever) you need to ignore them and run coal. This memo is necessary only because we seem not to understand that coal pays the bills."
 
2012-05-11 10:59:55 AM  

Reverend Monkeypants: That term "RIght to Work" is full on BS laden I'm surprised whenever someone picks it up. It doesn't mean what the fools think it does. It's not "right to work", it's right to hire people for $1 an hour, the right to fire people for discriminatory reasons, the right to deny your employees any benefit or protection.


"right to work" does not abolish minimum wage laws, discrimination laws or benefit requirement laws.
 
2012-05-11 11:00:22 AM  
So we have video proof now of bribery of an official. The billionaire asks what can be done and then after Walker explains what he is going to do and then does it... he magically gets campaign funds from said billionaire. And this is not criminal how?
 
2012-05-11 11:00:27 AM  

Scerpes: I'm building my new factory in a right to work state.


Now you're going in circles.

The right enjoys being dizzy.
 
2012-05-11 11:00:50 AM  

beefoe: skullkrusher: Carn: beefoe: Also to magnify this point:

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 49th

Typical union BS. Let's negotiate a contract to reward our older members at the expense of anyone starting out. Nice!

So... which industry is it that you work in where newbies make as much as experienced veterans?


Crazy pills?

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 20th

That is perfectly logical in a situation where experienced veterans make more than entry level workers. Note how it does not equate starting and average salaries. It compares them, apples to apples and oranges to oranges across the country.

que??? Starting teacher salary rank if 49, among starting teachers, not 20th. Did you just make up this numbers because the facts of the world didn't fit with your beliefs?


hehe is there something the matter with you? I am trying to explain how your post about the salary ranks does not mean what people think it means. Settle the fark down.
 
2012-05-11 11:01:08 AM  

Bear151556: I recently watched a episode of the show Ancient Aliens. During the show, the "experts" said over and over again that the builders of the pyramids and the surrounding temples must have had some great alien technology, now forgotten, that allowed them to move the huge stones used in some of the buildings.

At that point, I called bullshiat, because how could such a great technology be forgotten? Watching this thread has kind of showed me how this can happen. Many people in the United States today have forgotten the great things unions did already, and it has only been 100 years or so.


The difference is simple.

Unions did do great things. And then every one of the principles that they were fighting for were codified into federal law. Every single one.

Now unions are nothing but money making schemes for the mafia. The preferential treatment that they get in Forced Unionism states needs to be rolled back.

A better analogy would be a hand plow. For centuries they were cutting edge technology and they allowed for a rapid advancement in human civilization. But now we have tractors...
 
2012-05-11 11:01:25 AM  

Scerpes: skullkrusher: Right to work has nothing to do with liberty. Why is your "right" to work somewhere greater than the right of the employer to negotiate deals with his employees with the requirement that his employees join a union in exchange for certain guarantees and concessions?

Right to work only means that you can work there without joining the union. The employer is still free to negotiate deals with the union.


no, the employer is not if that deal includes "I will only hire union workers".
 
2012-05-11 11:01:26 AM  

Leeds: PA is a Forced Unionism state. I know personally. I was forced into a union back in '98 as a condition of employment. Eventually I worked my way up into management where I was exempt from being in a union.


Interesting you'd bring this up, since if you knew much about business management you'd understand that with a large enough labor force the economics of scale kick in for the corporation, and it becomes counterproductive to negotiate with and handle claims by employees on an individual level. The level of overhead becomes unsustainable in record storage, access, and man-hours. In that case the union itself becomes the intermediary, as a specialized organization to review and manage negotiations and claims on behalf of employees.

Which is why major employers, including one that is among the largest employers in the world with which I have personal experience, actually force union membership as a prerequisite for employment, right-to-work status be damned. It also looks and sounds incredibly good to be "pro union" when all you're doing is acting in your own best fiscal interest. Whargarbl about "forced unionism" and freedumbs all you want, unless you join the union you aren't being handled by these people because management doesn't feel like, want, or really have the capability of treating you or the other few hundred thousand to millions just like you as a special snowflake.
 
2012-05-11 11:01:49 AM  

LineNoise: Philip Francis Queeg: How does anyone who isn't a billionaire support that piece of shiat?

Because I'm someone who can take care of myself, and don't need a union to do so for me.


Please tell us how do you fight for your job from going overseas or your pay getting cut at threat of that happening. We would all like to know.
 
2012-05-11 11:01:53 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: German autoworkers, nearly all of which are unionized, get paid twice as much as their American counterparts and yet as if by magic BMW, Daimler, and Volkswagen are quite profitable over-priced and produce less ROI for the customer than American and Japanese cars, while incurring more vertical mileage as well.

 
2012-05-11 11:02:17 AM  

Weaver95: our internet trolls aren't doing a very good job these days....


www.zuguide.com
 
2012-05-11 11:03:50 AM  

Bf+: Walker: "Divide and conquer."
Barrett: "Neighbor-to-neighbor means not being afraid to talk to anyone about the future of Wisconsin -- even Walker supporters protesting our event in Schofield today."
[sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net image 237x320]

This is the choice Wisconsin has.


UWEC had an event like this today?
 
2012-05-11 11:04:35 AM  

lennavan: domenad: "Right to Work" legislation negates child labor laws gives unions the opportunity to be a choice, rather than a compulsion. Why would anyone be against that? Or are unions admitting that, given a choice, most workers would not elect to join one?

Good question. Why would anyone be against repealing child labor laws? Anyone?


"Negates child labor laws???"

Lol whut?

Please tell me exactly how a state is going to override the Federal Government's child labor laws?
 
MFL
2012-05-11 11:05:31 AM  
Scott Walker is going to win.

Sometimes evolution hurts.
 
2012-05-11 11:06:29 AM  

Wendy's Chili: Havokmon: Wendy's Chili: Havokmon: Tell us about the time your company had to make cut backs and actually gave you an option to be fired or make less. THAT is definitely an advantage of being a part of a Union, but you can't choose to be fired and then biatch about it.

Really?

Your boss makes you choose between a pay cut or your job and you're supposed to happy about it?

Why don't you bootstrap yourself up enough cash to hire a dominatrix instead of voting your masochism onto the rest of the state?

Bootlicker.

You seem to be confused between not being happy about a crappy option, and lynching the boss because the option was presented and you refused to even acknowledge it. Ignoring the core problem in favor of themselves is what the Unions do, hence my original statement.

I also think the same of 99% of all politicians, but that's another thread.

I guess you and I disagree about what the core problem is. You think teaching being a decent job is the problem. I think slashing corporate taxes and gutting education to make up for it is the problem.


The only reason education needs to be cut is because spending is out of control due to those being in charge thinking companies profits should pay for their social programs, a $60million trolly that goes 10 blocks, and those lovable unicorns.
 
2012-05-11 11:07:05 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Dusk-You-n-Me: German autoworkers, nearly all of which are unionized, get paid twice as much as their American counterparts and yet as if by magic BMW, Daimler, and Volkswagen are quite profitable over-priced and produce less ROI for the customer than American and Japanese cars, while incurring more vertical mileage as well.


OK? And the companies are still profitable despite paying their workers twice as much as their American counterparts. These are the facts.
 
2012-05-11 11:07:12 AM  

Leeds: "Negates child labor laws???"

Lol whut?

Please tell me exactly how a state is going to override the Federal Government's child labor laws?


www.examiner.com
 
2012-05-11 11:08:22 AM  
I live in a state that is both right-to-work and at-will, with virtually no worker protections beyond the federally mandated protections against discrimination. This has led to us having the lowest paid teachers in the nation and the second-lowest average wage overall. (We just barely lost to Mississippi for the coveted last place showing there). We also have a very low (relatively) tax burden, including no personal or corporate state income tax. It's a Republican/Plutocrat wet dream, except that it hasn't really worked as planned. There is one major drawback to the whole "screw your workers while you fellate your corporate masters" plan: In a time of near-record nationwide unemployment, with people all over the country desperate to land a job, we're suffering a severe labor shortage. Not only are new companies not being drawn in by our employer-friendly policies, existing long-term, locally owned businesses are beginning to leave because they can't find workers. We have schools that have had teacher openings for 2 or more years in a row with 0 applicants (and that's after we had such a bad teacher shortage, which the government denies exists, that we had to lower the bar on what it takes to become a teacher. Basically, if you can't pass the test to get your teaching certificate in surrounding states, we'll still hire you if you managed to spell at least part of your name correctly on the exam. Using crayon is acceptable. We still can't get any takers. Who would have guessed that offering someone with a 4-year degree and student loans to pay off $28,000/yr. with a health plan that costs you $1,600/month out-of-pocket wouldn't be a big draw??)

Personally, I'm torn on the whole "right-to-work" debate. I've never been in a union, so it's hard for me to really judge the positives and negatives. I can see the benefits to having unions, but there is part of me that instinctually draws away from being forced into one. What I do know is that we need balance, which is something that has been completely tossed to the side in these times of hyper-partisan, has to be all the way left or right times. You can go too far to the left and be like California, which is driving away businesses and individuals with sky-high taxes and overly onerous regulations that make doing business there very hard, and with a state government crippled by debt due, at least in part, to overly generous entitlement programs and pensions. You can also go too far to the right and end up where we're at right now, with a climate so anti-worker that you become an island of labor shortages in a sea of unemployment. I know it's shocking, but even desperate people aren't going to uproot their family and move across the country to go make $8.00/hour with no benefits in a state where an employer can fire you on the spot because he doesn't like your shirt and then not even pay you unemployment (and good luck getting food stamps or any other government assistance).

Oh, and for all of you "the free market will work it out" folks, that's not working here either (in part because there is no such thing as a truly free market in this country). The last article I read in the local news about employers and government officials whining and scratching their heads over the lack of skilled labor noted that, even though we pay slave wages and businesses are losing millions every year to lost business due to a lack of workers, wages are not going up. The market forces of supply and demand simply aren't working to drive up the price of labor. There are a few reasons for this: 1.) Companies decided it was easier to outsource some things than pay a skilled welder more than $8.50/hr. 2.) Local and state governments actually pressure businesses to keep wages low. There have been many stories of companies wanting to come in and pay their workers a good wage, and the government will flat-out block them from opening shop unless they lower their wages to be in line with what other employers are paying. The local entrenched interests don't want to raise their wages, and they don't want to compete for workers. With such a small available workforce and without the ability to offer a wage that would draw in workers, most companies simply go somewhere else. 3.) Lack of unions. People around here, inexplicably, would rather work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet than try to demand that their employer pay them a liveable wage. It's a whole mindset that is hard to explain if you weren't born and raised here.
 
2012-05-11 11:08:55 AM  

Leeds: PA IS A FORCED UNIONISM STATE


Everything's scarier when you add -ism to it, isn't it? I'm starting to think the RNC outsourced it's shilling department to North Korea.
 
2012-05-11 11:09:06 AM  

MFL: Scott Walker is going to win.

Sometimes evolution hurts.


Maybe not if people keep finding legit dirt on him like this. There are a lot of undecided voters that feel conflicted in this election if they keep seeing shiat like this about Walker there will vote for Barrett. However I sadly agree there is a good chance Walker will win this. I hope not, he is stating a surplus in Wisconsin right now, but then why like a month or two ago he had to use the settlement money from the Mortgage suit to cover the costs of a "deficit"?
 
2012-05-11 11:10:18 AM  

olddinosaur: This is why you never see layoffs in the public sector,


How about frequently instead of never. In fact, cuts in the public sector have outpaced private sector cuts by far in the past few years. If your argument is based on lies it is most assuredly false.
 
2012-05-11 11:10:46 AM  

olddinosaur: The problem is a simple matter of mathematics.

If you are in a private company, they can't pay more than they can afford to, and still make a profit; you can't do less work than you must in order to earn your keep, so it all balances out in the long run.

However in the public sector, you are sucking on a bottomless tit: You can stay on the job, while doing no work whateoever, demand assistants to not get it done, demand raises, perks and a generous retirement----and get it, because it all comes out of the public's pocket.

This is why you never see layoffs in the public sector, no matter how bad the economy gets. "-----what, lay off my secretary? I'd have to type my own letters, and who'd answer the phone?-----"


You've obviously never worked in the public sector. When the economy gets crappy, tax revenues drop and they do lay workers off. I've seen it myself.

/"Luckily' I was a contractor at the time.
//The quotes are 'cause I did the same work as full-time employees for less pay & no bennies. Kept my job though.
 
2012-05-11 11:11:40 AM  
Good for him. Crush the union thugs, every state should be a right to work state without the mob collecting fees just so i can have a job, we have the government to do that.
 
2012-05-11 11:12:43 AM  

beefoe: Carn: beefoe: Also to magnify this point:

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 49th

Typical union BS. Let's negotiate a contract to reward our older members at the expense of anyone starting out. Nice!

So... which industry is it that you work in where newbies make as much as experienced veterans?

Try looking up the words "relative" and "absolute"


Yeah, I get it. Why should they be equivalent? Maybe Wisconsin is doing it right. Perhaps it's better to pay new teachers lower than the average, see which ones are most effect, and pay them higher if they perform well? Ideally, they would fire those that suck but that is probably wishful thinking. I don't live there so I can't vouch, but it was mention anecdotally that Wisconsin has one of the best education systems in the country.
 
2012-05-11 11:16:02 AM  

vinniethepoo: olddinosaur: The problem is a simple matter of mathematics.

If you are in a private company, they can't pay more than they can afford to, and still make a profit; you can't do less work than you must in order to earn your keep, so it all balances out in the long run.

However in the public sector, you are sucking on a bottomless tit: You can stay on the job, while doing no work whateoever, demand assistants to not get it done, demand raises, perks and a generous retirement----and get it, because it all comes out of the public's pocket.

This is why you never see layoffs in the public sector, no matter how bad the economy gets. "-----what, lay off my secretary? I'd have to type my own letters, and who'd answer the phone?-----"

You've obviously never worked in the public sector. When the economy gets crappy, tax revenues drop and they do lay workers off. I've seen it myself.

/"Luckily' I was a contractor at the time.
//The quotes are 'cause I did the same work as full-time employees for less pay & no bennies. Kept my job though.


This year's property tax bill I just got shot up 700 farking dollars just for the pensions in this county while our property values are down.
I have no problem with private unions, but public unions are "the bottomless tit".
 
2012-05-11 11:16:03 AM  

Carn: beefoe: Carn: beefoe: Also to magnify this point:

Average Teacher Salary Rank: 20th
Starting Teacher Salary Rank: 49th

Typical union BS. Let's negotiate a contract to reward our older members at the expense of anyone starting out. Nice!

So... which industry is it that you work in where newbies make as much as experienced veterans?

Try looking up the words "relative" and "absolute"

Yeah, I get it. Why should they be equivalent? Maybe Wisconsin is doing it right. Perhaps it's better to pay new teachers lower than the average, see which ones are most effect, and pay them higher if they perform well? Ideally, they would fire those that suck but that is probably wishful thinking. I don't live there so I can't vouch, but it was mention anecdotally that Wisconsin has one of the best education systems in the country.


We are, but we have like over 500 million dollars in budget cuts the past year, and has affected education a lot. I am not sure about k-12, but for the university it is. I am still in college, and I've seen teachers lose their jobs, and a lot of classes get canceled because of the budget cuts. Plus there has been grouping of different types of classes together, and taught by one teacher. It is in a studio setting so having class of almost 25 students trying to teach two different mediums of art, and give feedback to improve is hard.
 
2012-05-11 11:16:26 AM  

Leeds: Bear151556: I recently watched a episode of the show Ancient Aliens. During the show, the "experts" said over and over again that the builders of the pyramids and the surrounding temples must have had some great alien technology, now forgotten, that allowed them to move the huge stones used in some of the buildings.

At that point, I called bullshiat, because how could such a great technology be forgotten? Watching this thread has kind of showed me how this can happen. Many people in the United States today have forgotten the great things unions did already, and it has only been 100 years or so.

The difference is simple.

Unions did do great things. And then every one of the principles that they were fighting for were codified into federal law. Every single one.

Now unions are nothing but money making schemes for the mafia. The preferential treatment that they get in Forced Unionism states needs to be rolled back.

A better analogy would be a hand plow. For centuries they were cutting edge technology and they allowed for a rapid advancement in human civilization. But now we have tractors...


Leeds: Bear151556: I recently watched a episode of the show Ancient Aliens. During the show, the "experts" said over and over again that the builders of the pyramids and the surrounding temples must have had some great alien technology, now forgotten, that allowed them to move the huge stones used in some of the buildings.

At that point, I called bullshiat, because how could such a great technology be forgotten? Watching this thread has kind of showed me how this can happen. Many people in the United States today have forgotten the great things unions did already, and it has only been 100 years or so.

The difference is simple.

Unions did do great things. And then every one of the principles that they were fighting for were codified into federal law. Every single one.

Now unions are nothing but money making schemes for the mafia. The preferential treatment that they get in Forced Unionism states needs to be rolled back.

A better analogy would be a hand plow. For centuries they were cutting edge technology and they allowed for a rapid advancement in human civilization. But now we have tractors...


Not really disagreeing with you on the hand plow analogy, but here in Wisconsin, at the same time Gov. Walker is trying to squash the unions,( by his own admission, apparently) he is also rolling back environmental protections and also attacking workers' right of legal redress, particularly women. So if we remove the protections unions provide, how exactly do we keep those protections? Tractors are expensive next to the cost of a hand plow and slave labor. And in the free market, expense cuts profits.
 
2012-05-11 11:17:02 AM  
Walker seems to only tell the truth to you if you are a millionaire.
 
2012-05-11 11:17:33 AM  

mod3072: Personally, I'm torn on the whole "right-to-work" debate. I've never been in a union, so it's hard for me to really judge the positives and negatives. I can see the benefits to having unions, but there is part of me that instinctually draws away from being forced into one.


The point is - be for or against unions not for or against right-to-work. Either a job is unionized or it is not. In right-to-work situations where you can choose, that means the job is not unionized because right-to-work effectively destroys the union. That's why membership has to be mandatory.

In general, people seem to like to view economics as if there is an excess of jobs. There are not. There are more people than jobs and for the vast majority of americans a job is required for survival. Those two things together put all the power in the hands of the employer. The only way workers have found to counter that is to unionize. If one worker quits, the employer could give a fark. If all of the workers threaten to quit, the employer has to pay attention. That puts them on nearly equal footing. The survival of the company versus the survival of the workers.
 
2012-05-11 11:18:18 AM  
i137.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-11 11:18:32 AM  

LineNoise: Good. Why anyone would want to be forced into a union is beyond me. You do realize it doesn't ban unions, right?


Well, dipshiat, I hate to say this, but Taft-Hartly did pretty much the same thing in 1947. But in your fantasy world is set apart from reality. Keep farking that chicken.

/Can the trolls seriously get any worse?
 
2012-05-11 11:19:23 AM  

Bear151556: Not really disagreeing with you on the hand plow analogy, but here in Wisconsin, at the same time Gov. Walker is trying to squash the unions,( by his own admission, apparently) he is also rolling back environmental protections and also attacking workers' right of legal redress, particularly women. So if we remove the protections unions provide, how exactly do we keep those protections? Tractors are expensive next to the cost of a hand plow and slave labor. And in the free market, expense cuts profits.


If he is indeed rolling back environmental protections then that is something that I'd counsel him against doing. But it is not related to his desire to fix the union issue.

And as for tort reform, we're all in favor of that, right? Society is way too litigious at present.
 
2012-05-11 11:19:23 AM  

Oh, how I wish I lived in Wisconsin. I could take all the liberal tears and use them to shine my boots...

The only thing that is driving the recalls now is hate. Pure hate for Scott Walker. The polls don't even show the anti-Walker voters giving two shiats about unions, and the union suckup Falk lost. It's all about Scott Walker.

Reminds me of something in a way:

It was nearly eleven hundred, and in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT, they were dragging the chairs out of the cubicles and grouping them in the centre of the hall opposite the big telescreen, in preparation for the Two Minutes Hate....

The next moment a hideous, grinding speech, as of some monstrous machine running without oil, burst from the big telescreen at the end of the room. It was a noise that set one's teeth on edge and bristled the hair at the back of one's neck. The Hate had started.

As usual, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein Scott Walker, the Enemy of the People, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. . . .

The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Goldstein Walker was not the principal figure. He was the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party's purity. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of his teaching. . . .

Winston's diaphragm was constricted. He could never see the face of Goldstein Walker without a painful mixture of emotions. . . . It resembled the face of a sheep, and the voice, too, had a sheep-like quality. Goldstein Walker was delivering his usual venemous attack upon the doctrines of the Party - an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. He was abusing BIG BROTHER BARACK OBAMA, he was denouncing the dictatorship of the Party, he was demanding the immediate conclusion of peace with Eurasia The Tea Party, he was advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought, he was crying hysterically that the Revolution has been betrayed - and all this in rapid polysyllabic speech which was a sort of parody of the habitual style of the orators of the Party, and even contained Newspeak words: more Newspeak words, indeed, than any Party member would normally use in real life. And all the while, lest one should be in any doubt as to the reality which Goldstein's Walker's specious clap trap covered, behind his head on the telescreen there marched the endless columns of the Eurasian army Tea Party - row after row of solid-looking men with expressionless Asiatic Caucasian faces, who swam up to the surface of the screen and vanished, to be replaced by others exactly similar. The dull rhythmic tramp of the soldiers' boots formed the background to Goldstein's Walker's bleating voice.

Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room. The self-satisfied sheep-like face on the screen, and the terrifying power of the Eurasian army Tea Party behind it, were too much to be borne: besides the sight or even the thought of Goldstein Walker produced fear and anger automatically. . . . But what was strange was that although Goldstein Walker was hated and despised by everybody, although every day and a thousand times a day, on platforms, on the telescreen, in newspapers, in books, his theories were refuted, smashed, ridiculed, held up to the general gaze for the pitiful rubbish that they were - in spite of all this, his influence never seemed to grow less. Always there were fresh dupes waiting to be seduced by him. A day never passed when spies and saboteurs acting under his directions were not unmasked by the Thought Police Media Matters. He was the commander of a vast shadowy army, an underground network of conspirators dedicated to the overthrow of the State....

In its second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices in an effort to drown the maddening bleating voice that came from the screen. The little sandy-haired woman had turned bright pink, and her mouth was opening and shutting like that of a landed fish. Even O'Brien's heavy face was flushed. He was sitting very straight in his chair, his powerful chest swelling and quivering as though he were standing up to the assault of a wave. The dark-haired girl behind Winston had begun crying out 'Swine! Swine! Swine!' and suddenly she picked up a heavy Newspeak dictionary and flung it at the screen. It struck Goldstein's Walker's nose and bounced off; the voice continued inexorably.

In a lucid moment Winston found that he was shouting with the others and kicking his heel violently against the rung of his chair. The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic...

The Hate rose to its climax. The voice of Goldstein had become an actual sheep's bleat, and for an instant the face changed into that of a sheep. Then the sheep-face melted into the figure of a Eurasian soldier Tea Partier who seemed to be advancing, huge and terrible, his sub-machine gun roaring, and seeming to spring out of the surface of the screen. But in the same moment, drawing a deep sigh of relief from everybody, the hostile figure melted into the face of BIG BROTHER BARACK OBAMA...

Winston had heard the whispered story of a terrible book, a compendium of all the heresies, of which Goldstein Walker was the author and which circulated clandestinely here and there. It was a book without title. People referred to it, if at all, simply as the book. But one knew of such things only through vague rumours. Neither the Brotherhood nor the book was a subject that any ordinary Party member would mention if there was a way of avoiding it.


Looking at any thread about Walker, it looks like Orwell was right, just a few years off...
 
2012-05-11 11:20:07 AM  

bim1154: vinniethepoo: olddinosaur: The problem is a simple matter of mathematics.

If you are in a private company, they can't pay more than they can afford to, and still make a profit; you can't do less work than you must in order to earn your keep, so it all balances out in the long run.

However in the public sector, you are sucking on a bottomless tit: You can stay on the job, while doing no work whateoever, demand assistants to not get it done, demand raises, perks and a generous retirement----and get it, because it all comes out of the public's pocket.

This is why you never see layoffs in the public sector, no matter how bad the economy gets. "-----what, lay off my secretary? I'd have to type my own letters, and who'd answer the phone?-----"

You've obviously never worked in the public sector. When the economy gets crappy, tax revenues drop and they do lay workers off. I've seen it myself.

/"Luckily' I was a contractor at the time.
//The quotes are 'cause I did the same work as full-time employees for less pay & no bennies. Kept my job though.

This year's property tax bill I just got shot up 700 farking dollars just for the pensions in this county while our property values are down.
I have no problem with private unions, but public unions are "the bottomless tit".


fark you, got mine, right?
 
2012-05-11 11:21:47 AM  

mwfark: Alabama is a right to work state. I'm not feeling the "villainy" down here that you people are talking about.


Are you feeling the effects of one of the worst public school systems in the nation?

blog.al.com

Are you wondering why your school system sucks?

www.teachersalaryinfo.com

Lack of an educated populace stops companies that demand highly skilled people from forming in or moving to AL. There is not a sufficient supply of educated people around to fill positions. This yields results like this.

www.youdontknowjersey.com
 
2012-05-11 11:21:56 AM  

LineNoise: Philip Francis Queeg: How does anyone who isn't a billionaire support that piece of shiat?

Because I'm someone who can take care of myself, and don't need a union to do so for me.


You are a citizen of a modern society. You've never "taken care of yourself" for a minute in your entire life. What a self-deluded joke.
 
2012-05-11 11:22:03 AM  
lennavan
domenad: "Right to Work" legislation negates child labor laws gives unions the opportunity to be a choice, rather than a compulsion. Why would anyone be against that? Or are unions admitting that, given a choice, most workers would not elect to join one?

Good question. Why would anyone be against repealing child labor laws? Anyone?


Thats not my understanding of Right to Work. Can you please elaborate?
 
2012-05-11 11:22:43 AM  

WombatControl: Oh, how I wish I lived in Wisconsin. I could take all the liberal tears and use them to shine my boots...

The only thing that is driving the recalls now is hate. Pure hate for Scott Walker. The polls don't even show the anti-Walker voters giving two shiats about unions, and the union suckup Falk lost. It's all about Scott Walker.

Reminds me of something in a way:

It was nearly eleven hundred, and in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT, they were dragging the chairs out of the cubicles and grouping them in the centre of the hall opposite the big telescreen, in preparation for the Two Minutes Hate....

The next moment a hideous, grinding speech, as of some monstrous machine running without oil, burst from the big telescreen at the end of the room. It was a noise that set one's teeth on edge and bristled the hair at the back of one's neck. The Hate had started.

As usual, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein Scott Walker, the Enemy of the People, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. . . .

The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Goldstein Walker was not the principal figure. He was the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party's purity. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of his teaching. . . .

Winston's diaphragm was constricted. He could never see the face of Goldstein Walker without a painful mixture of emotions. . . . It resembled the face of a sheep, and the voice, too, had a sheep-like quality. Goldstein Walker was delivering his usual venemous attack upon the doctrines of the Party - an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. He was abusing BIG BROTHER BARACK OBAMA, he was denouncing the dictatorship of th ...


Link
 
2012-05-11 11:23:03 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: mwfark: Alabama is a right to work state. I'm not feeling the "villainy" down here that you people are talking about.

States ranked by Median Household income:

1 Maryland
2 New Jersey
3 Connecticut

.....


46 Alabama
47 Kentucky
48 Arkansas
49 West Virginia
50 Mississippi

MARYLAND - 125.8
NEW JERSEY - 126.5
CONNECTICUT - 125.3

ALABAMA - 92.6
KENTUCKY - 90.4
ARKANSAS - 90.8
WEST VIRGINIA - 94.0
MISSISSIPPI - 92.5


2010 census CPIs for the states listed on a 100 scale


Maryland Median Household income: 69,272

US Median Household Income: 50,221

Alabama Median household income: 37,823

So if we index the incomes in the same way as the CPI you provided;

Maryland MHI: 137 CPI: 125.8

Alabama MHI: 75.3 CPI: 92.6
 
2012-05-11 11:25:09 AM  

derpdeederp: lennavan
domenad: "Right to Work" legislation negates child labor laws gives unions the opportunity to be a choice, rather than a compulsion. Why would anyone be against that? Or are unions admitting that, given a choice, most workers would not elect to join one?

Good question. Why would anyone be against repealing child labor laws? Anyone?

Thats not my understanding of Right to Work. Can you please elaborate?


Newt Gingrich did during his run for the GOP nomination. The tl;dr point is everyone has a "right to work" including kids, who the hell are we to take that right away from them?
 
2012-05-11 11:28:02 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: mwfark: Alabama is a right to work state. I'm not feeling the "villainy" down here that you people are talking about.

States ranked by Median Household income:

1 Maryland
2 New Jersey
3 Connecticut

.....


46 Alabama
47 Kentucky
48 Arkansas
49 West Virginia
50 Mississippi

MARYLAND - 125.8
NEW JERSEY - 126.5
CONNECTICUT - 125.3

ALABAMA - 92.6
KENTUCKY - 90.4
ARKANSAS - 90.8
WEST VIRGINIA - 94.0
MISSISSIPPI - 92.5


2010 census CPIs for the states listed on a 100 scale

Maryland Median Household income: 69,272

US Median Household Income: 50,221

Alabama Median household income: 37,823

So if we index the incomes in the same way as the CPI you provided;

Maryland MHI: 137 CPI: 125.8

Alabama MHI: 75.3 CPI: 92.6


more clearly stated, MD is basically right on par with the median income nationwide. The CPI of AL should place it at $46,504 all else being equal
 
2012-05-11 11:28:29 AM  
lennavan
derpdeederp: lennavan
domenad: "Right to Work" legislation negates child labor laws gives unions the opportunity to be a choice, rather than a compulsion. Why would anyone be against that? Or are unions admitting that, given a choice, most workers would not elect to join one?

Good question. Why would anyone be against repealing child labor laws? Anyone?

Thats not my understanding of Right to Work. Can you please elaborate?

Newt Gingrich did during his run for the GOP nomination. The tl;dr point is everyone has a "right to work" including kids, who the hell are we to take that right away from them?


Ahh, thanks. Well Newt is a moron and I dont think his views have anything to do with right to work laws on a state to state basis. In Virginia we have right to work and my mother was part of the nursing union. It didnt seem to have any effect on her right to join a union or that union helping out with employment issues.
 
2012-05-11 11:28:32 AM  
The great thing about incentivizing being a vile farkbag is that you'll never have a shortage of people willing to become human filth, no matter how degrading or morally reprehensible. When the nascent oligarchs amass a critical mass of wealth, no power structure can stand against them. Money is like water, it always finds a way in. Then it rots whatever it touches.
 
2012-05-11 11:28:40 AM  

derpdeederp: lennavan
domenad: "Right to Work" legislation negates child labor laws gives unions the opportunity to be a choice, rather than a compulsion. Why would anyone be against that? Or are unions admitting that, given a choice, most workers would not elect to join one?

Good question. Why would anyone be against repealing child labor laws? Anyone?

Thats not my understanding of Right to Work. Can you please elaborate?


Briefly - Newt Gingrich spelled it out during his run for the GOP nomination. The tl;dr point is everyone has a "right to work" including kids, who the hell are we to take that right away from them? Under the guise of "right to work" legislation like this has been proposed by Republicans:

SB 222 - This act modifies the child labor laws. It eliminates the prohibition on employment of children under age fourteen. Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed. It also repeals the requirement that a child ages fourteen or fifteen obtain a work certificate or work permit in order to be employed. Children under sixteen will also be allowed to work in any capacity in a motel, resort or hotel where sleeping accommodations are furnished. It also removes the authority of the director of the Division of Labor Standards to inspect employers who employ children and to require them to keep certain records for children they employ. It also repeals the presumption that the presence of a child in a workplace is evidence of employment.

Link
 
2012-05-11 11:29:27 AM  

Don't Troll Me Bro!: mwfark: Alabama is a right to work state. I'm not feeling the "villainy" down here that you people are talking about.

Are you feeling the effects of one of the worst public school systems in the nation?

[blog.al.com image 453x479]

Are you wondering why your school system sucks?

[www.teachersalaryinfo.com image 612x792]

Lack of an educated populace stops companies that demand highly skilled people from forming in or moving to AL. There is not a sufficient supply of educated people around to fill positions. This yields results like this.

[www.youdontknowjersey.com image 640x422]


I just love how people on Fark posts graphs, then fail to understand what the mean.

Look at the graphs you posted - do you see any correlation between teacher salary and educational performance?

Utah pays teachers less than Alabama does, but still has a high per-capita income level (towards the top).

Florida pays their teachers much more than Alabama, yet has a graduation rate worse than Alabama. New York pays their teachers towards the top of the pay range, yet is only a few places above Florida in graduation rates. Nevada is towards the middle of the teacher pay range, but is dead last in high school graduation rates, but is in the middle of the median salary range.

This is why before you start posting graphs, you should think about what they mean and whether they actually support your point or not.

/ tempted to make an obvious point about the quality of education...
 
2012-05-11 11:29:29 AM  

lennavan: Good stuff.


Yep, not to mention the fact that employers are beneficiaries of unions also. One contract so less arbitration and record-keeping and vastly less potential for damaging unfair practices and discrimination suits, the union handles claims and issues on behalf of the employees that would run up overhead for the employer, and union reps serve as a single point of contact between labor and management. Less overhead, lower bottom line than handling employees as individuals across all levels. Hell like I mentioned in my previous post, more than a few large-scale employers require their labor to be in unions as a prerequisite for employment. That's not because of legislation, that's because it's more profitable to use unions as an intermediary in the long run.

In non-union sectors, who handles this increase in overhead in lieu of union reps? Salaried employees or wage-earners?

This isn't a labor-vs-management fight. This is a "greedy superminority"-vs-"everybody else" fight.
 
2012-05-11 11:29:44 AM  

vinniethepoo: olddinosaur: The problem is a simple matter of mathematics.

If you are in a private company, they can't pay more than they can afford to, and still make a profit; you can't do less work than you must in order to earn your keep, so it all balances out in the long run.

However in the public sector, you are sucking on a bottomless tit: You can stay on the job, while doing no work whateoever, demand assistants to not get it done, demand raises, perks and a generous retirement----and get it, because it all comes out of the public's pocket.

This is why you never see layoffs in the public sector, no matter how bad the economy gets. "-----what, lay off my secretary? I'd have to type my own letters, and who'd answer the phone?-----"

You've obviously never worked in the public sector. When the economy gets crappy, tax revenues drop and they do lay workers off. I've seen it myself.

/"Luckily' I was a contractor at the time.
//The quotes are 'cause I did the same work as full-time employees for less pay & no bennies. Kept my job though.


Public sector jobs have fallen precipitously over the past 4 years while private sector employment has risen. Conservatives need to stop basing their arguments on baseless falsehoods stated as fact. A simple google search would suffice. It drives me mad that people can claim these cocksure opinions about the bottomless public sector teat as fact when they are opposite-fact, it is either laziness or lying.
 
Displayed 50 of 519 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report