The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Not quite. Workers paying more for their own benefits and pensions doesn't equate to "stealing money from taxpayers". Expecting the ever-rising health care and pension tab to be picked entirely by the taxpaying public? That is more like stealing from the taxpayers.

Too funny. You've proven my point.

 

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

More to the point, what does that have to do with the stripping of the collective bargaining power? The unions had already agreed to pay more for their benefits, so what financial gain was made by stripping the bargaining power?

Aside from the fact that most districts were forced to go through the monopolistic WEA Trust for health insurance, the unions never conceded anything until their collective bargaining privileges were on the chopping block. If you think they were going to just agree to pay part of their health care and pension contributions after not doing so for the last 60 years, you're clearly on mind-altering substances.

 

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Too funny. You've proven my point.

Right. The only point proven here is that you are a strong proponent of wealth redistribution.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Aside from the fact that most districts were forced to go through the monopolistic WEA Trust for health insurance, the unions never conceded anything until their collective bargaining privileges were on the chopping block. If you think they were going to just agree to pay part of their health care and pension contributions after not doing so for the last 60 years, you're clearly on mind-altering substances.

Just like you would have to be if you dont think that the unions would be bent over a table down the line if they have no right to collectively bargain. If they can't negotiate, then why would those in charge give them anything? The Government could cut their wages, cut their pensions and end their benefits and there would be no way to stop them.

I have said it a million times, I hate unions and think they are corrupt but as long as there are employers that will screw over the employees (and they will, everyone is greedy even the Job Creators) then unions are needed. Employees have a right to be able to collectively bargain and protect themselves.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

For presidential elections, voting only matters in a handful of states. The rest aren't competitive enough for an individual to come remotely close to mattering. Even at the Congressional district level, most of us don't matter thanks to gerrymandering.

That's why we need an amendment (to the constitution). most of the amendments after the Bill of rights (10) were change related to elections. (26th(age 18), 24th(poll tax), 23rd, 19th(sex),17th(senate), 15th (race), 14th(property), 13th(slavery),12th(president/vice).

http://www.usconstitution.net/constamprop.html

109th Congress (2005-2006)
The "Every Vote Counts" Amendment - providing for direct election of the President and Vice President, abolishing the Electoral College

I think Keplar pointed out the slow change of USA from social change and organization (Pen is mightier than the sword).
And we saw that power (of words) in the Arab Spring.
And the riots/looting in UK. (using Facebook they organized and acted).
And why so many religious/despot gov want to control education and the press.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Just like you would have to be if you dont think that the unions would be bent over a table down the line if they have no right to collectively bargain. If they can't negotiate, then why would those in charge give them anything? The Government could cut their wages, cut their pensions and end their benefits and there would be no way to stop them.

I have said it a million times, I hate unions and think they are corrupt but as long as there are employers that will screw over the employees (and they will, everyone is greedy even the Job Creators) then unions are needed. Employees have a right to be able to collectively bargain and protect themselves.

That's basically what they did. Remember, it's ok to ask the middle class to pay more but it's not ok to ask job creators to pay more. The first is wealth redistribution. The latter helps the overall economy.

It's just like me asking to pay 15% like my rich friends. I ask too much. I need to pay a higher percentage to make sure they can create jobs.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

That's basically what they did. Remember, it's ok to ask the middle class to pay more but it's not ok to ask job creators to pay more. The first is wealth redistribution. The latter helps the overall economy.

It's just like me asking to pay 15% like my rich friends. I ask too much. I need to pay a higher percentage to make sure they can create jobs.

Yes I forgot! The unions are evil...I mean they help those horrible teachers make 50k a year which is WAY too much while hard working job creators are struggling to make ends meet on a meager 250k a year. I mean of all the nerve!!

What is the difference between unions without collective bargaining power and a kangaroo court?

 

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Yes I forgot! The unions are evil...I mean they help those horrible teachers make 50k a year which is WAY too much while hard working job creators are struggling to make ends meet on a meager 250k a year. I mean of all the nerve!!

What is the difference between unions without collective bargaining power and a kangaroo court?

While I do think there are a LOT of bad teachers being protected by labor unions, my primary point of contention is with how the public sector labor union system works: Labor union/government entity approve exclusive CBA giving no-bid contract to said labor union. CBA mandates membership and union dues for all employees working under said agreement. Union dues are used to support campaigns of preferred union-friendly candidates. Aforementioned union-friendly politican is elected to office. Said politician sits across bargaining table from labor union while supposedly representing the taxpaying public. Politician votes in favor of labor-friendly contracts, the stipulations of which in numerous cases are currently bankrupting municipal governments. More money flows to the labor unions in the form of wages, benefits and pensions. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's blatant corruption of the most disgusting kind.

FYI: It is FAR more than $50k when you figure in wages, benefits and pension......not to mention that most teachers less than 3/4 of a year.

 

[joecct]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bernake's speech analyzed by Reuters...

 

[ScoobyDoo]

While I do think there are a LOT of bad teachers being protected by labor unions, my primary point of contention is with how the public sector labor union system works: Labor union/government entity approve exclusive CBA giving no-bid contract to said labor union. CBA mandates membership and union dues for all employees working under said agreement. Union dues are used to support campaigns of preferred union-friendly candidates. Aforementioned union-friendly politican is elected to office. Said politician sits across bargaining table from labor union while supposedly representing the taxpaying public. Politician votes in favor of labor-friendly contracts, the stipulations of which in numerous cases are currently bankrupting municipal governments. More money flows to the labor unions in the form of wages, benefits and pensions. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's blatant corruption of the most disgusting kind.

FYI: It is FAR more than $50k when you figure in wages, benefits and pension......not to mention that most teachers less than 3/4 of a year.

Yeah, those damm unions are destroying America (hint: look at the top campaign contributors, labor is barely keeping up with corporate America). And teachers, OMG the are living high on the hog.

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

While I do think there are a LOT of bad teachers being protected by labor unions, my primary point of contention is with how the public sector labor union system works: Labor union/government entity approve exclusive CBA giving no-bid contract to said labor union. CBA mandates membership and union dues for all employees working under said agreement. Union dues are used to support campaigns of preferred union-friendly candidates. Aforementioned union-friendly politican is elected to office. Said politician sits across bargaining table from labor union while supposedly representing the taxpaying public. Politician votes in favor of labor-friendly contracts, the stipulations of which in numerous cases are currently bankrupting municipal governments. More money flows to the labor unions in the form of wages, benefits and pensions. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's blatant corruption of the most disgusting kind.

FYI: It is FAR more than $50k when you figure in wages, benefits and pension......not to mention that most teachers less than 3/4 of a year.

Are most school districts union shop? Real question, honest. I am a teacher but I have yet to work in a district wherein I was required to join any union.

 

[Bill]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I interpreted that question as who are real economists that are not Keynsians, since you had asked, in the interim, if a real economist must be a Keynsian and I responded no, that Chicago Schoolers count, but Austrian Schoolers do not.

That said, let's go ahead use Friedman's 23% income tax as a baseline for what is realistic.

The most recent flat tax proposition that gained any widespread national appeal was Steve Forbes' in the '96 and 2000 election cycles, and he suggested a rate of 17%. A few senators floated a plan about a half dozen years ago or so, and I think that was around 15% for its base rate. Both would have exempted everything but wages from the tax, meaning capital gains, dividends, and interest would be taken tax free. Both would have exempted a certain amount of money from any taxation.

A 2010 piece from US News and World Report shows that the Cato Institute likewise still uses the 17% figure. I have not seen a modern flat tax proposal of any significance that uses Friedman's 23%.

Therefore, I think it's fair to say that even Friedman would find those plans unrealistic.

The so-called Fair Tax is understated in so much as proponents call it a 23% tax instead of the 30% that it actually is. To that extent, I suppose they have a realistic number (30%) that they're trying to sell as being smaller than it really is to try to make it more palatable.

However, since not all income is spent, to be revenue neutral the sales tax would have to be a higher rate than the associated income rate. Since Friedman supported a 23% income tax rate, the comparable sales tax rate would have to be at least somewhat higher than that. Indeed, at least one political watchdog, FactCheck.org, says that the 23% inclusive figure is still not high enough. It's not grossly understated (FactCheck, citing the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform, figures it'd take a rate of 25% inclusive or 34% when treated as a traditional sales tax), but understated nonetheless.

I've seen flat proposals in the 17-20% range. I'm not so sure I'd consider those amounts to be "grossly" understated compared to Friedman's 23%. Probably the only way to find out which is more accurate is to implement one and see.

 

[Bill]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Bernake's speech analyzed by Reuters...

Here's another take on it:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/08/breaking-down-bernanke-speech.html

 

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I've seen flat proposals in the 17-20% range. I'm not so sure I'd consider those amounts to be "grossly" understated compared to Friedman's 23%. Probably the only way to find out which is more accurate is to implement one and see.

What is a horrible idea, Alex.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Was that a question?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I have to agree with Foxton here. Guess and check may work for Sudoku but not when it comes to national tax policy. That's just lunacy.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Are most school districts union shop? Real question, honest. I am a teacher but I have yet to work in a district wherein I was required to join any union.

I think most city jobs are union (or association). (police/fire/teacher etc..)
looks like teachers received 2-3% automatic raise in this 3 year contract. compared to 4-7% raises in 2005-2010 period. That makes sense we had our housing (property tax increase) boom late compared to lower 48. And it really hasn't dropped at all (-5% at most).

raises.http://www.asdk12.org/depts/hr/contracts/AEA/examples.asp

There was a flak several years ago from Fire chief making the highest state salary (including overtime 350k/yr?). Compared to Fire/Police teachers might be underpaid, although if you look at hours worked etc.. it might not be true.

Looks like starting wage was around $36k in 2005 ending at $46k in 2010 with masters/ (step21) $68k start and ending at $79k with automatic raises by 2010.

Our 3,500 members are also part of our state affiliate, NEA-Alaska (the largest employee organization in Alaska) and the National Education Association (the largest employee organization in the country.)

http://articles.ktuu.com/2010-04-26/teachers-union_24127541

It gives full time teachers an $1,800 raise in year one, a 2 percent raise in year two and a 3 percent raise in year three.

The school district will contribute $1,180 to health insurance in year one, $1,300 in year two and $1,385 in year three.

The settlement is a good one, although it's not all that the teachers wanted, and although it's not all that I think the teachers deserve," said Anchorage Education Association President Jim Lepley.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I have to agree with Foxton here. Guess and check may work for Sudoku but not when it comes to national tax policy. That's just lunacy.

You two are hilariously naive. We've been engaged in "guess and check" for decades with all the tweaks done to the tax code.

 

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I've seen flat proposals in the 17-20% range. I'm not so sure I'd consider those amounts to be "grossly" understated compared to Friedman's 23%. Probably the only way to find out which is more accurate is to implement one and see.

You don't think a 26% change in taxes is a big difference (17/23)?

Also, where have you seen a 20% proposal? And no, a single post from freerepublic.com does not count.

 

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

You two are hilariously naive. We've been engaged in "guess and check" for decades with all the tweaks done to the tax code.

Tweaks, not removal of current system for one that apparently can't really be justified without saying "try it I bet it works".