How did they make that money? In a system that inarguably funnels the bulk of the wealth to the top. And what system is that? One they've bought via political donations. Why do you feel that the top shouldn't pay for the system that benefits them? Oh that's right. You're for the government tit when it helps people like you. Sorry for asking.Meade wrote: I am. You seem to be challenging me. When is a tax cut a "giveaway"?
The negotiating tool you support taking away is the one that obtained the meager benefits that were reduced in ACT 10. You support ACT 10, so I assume you support the increase in health care payments which is a net loss in real wages (another example of your intellectual dishonesty). And again, you support giveaways to corporations who pay no taxes in Wisconsin, nor have they created any significant jobs, which means everyone else has to pay more taxes to make up the loss (another example of your intellectual dishonesty).I don't want to take away their benefits. I only wanted to take away their unions' unfair corrupt negotiating tools. Wisconsin public employees didn't have too many benefits. They had benefits Wisconsin taxpayers could no longer afford. Why do you hate Wisconsin taxpayers?
The system of low wages, low benefits, long hours for lower income workers, and low taxes for the top and the resulting widening gap between these classes. The State's contract with State employees.What "system" are you referring to. What "contract" does the State have with the "low to middle class"?
The freedom to compete with people who already own the Government? This is what I'm trying to address with you. There is no "freedom to compete" when the system is already rigged unless you have the ability to buy the politicians who favor your would be competitors who already own them. That's the whole problem: You're NOT for a free market of ideas, hard work, or even the idea of competition. You're for a rigged system designed to funnel as much as possible to the top at the expense of everyone else. Then you blame the people you help hold down for not "competing" with the people who are gaming the system via policies from politicians they own.The wealthy do not have it bad and neither do teachers or other public sector employees who have the freedom to enter the private sector at any time they choose and compete for the incomes of wealthier citizens.
Why do you call it a "bad economy"?
That you blame the public sector for the state's "inability" to make good on their agreements with them, and support making the public sector pay for the mistakes of the top is perhaps a prime example of how deeply dishonest you are.
Why not place the blame where it's due: on the system that allowed the deregulation of the banks, which in turn allowed the corruption that caused the bank failures re: this economy?