|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
arch...so if Ohio's public union members have less to spend...this helps your small Ohio business how?
Ohio's Tea Party Governor Kasich is attempting to fix all of Ohio's budget problems on the back of middle class workers who happen to be union members.
Why no SHARED SACRIFICE..?
Why not reduce every state workers pay and benefits the same percentage across the board, highest paid Ohio employee, like Kasich and his $144,269 salary. Fact is, Ohio's highest paid employees are non-union..they receive benefits and pensions, YET OUR TEA PARTY GOV. KASICH EXCLUDES OHIO'S NON-UNION EMPLOYEES...they sacrifice nothing...SB 5 is directed at "only"...OHIO'S PUBLIC WORKERS WHO ARE UNION.
Roughly half of Ohio's Public workforce is NON-UNION...they sacrifice nothing.
The half of Ohio's Public workforce that is UNION, sacrifices EVERYTHING...according to the way KASICK AND HIS TEA PARTY LEGISLATURE constructed SB 5.
arch...you can attempt to frame Kasich's UNION BUSTING BILL anyway you like, but the fact is, it stinks and reeks of TEA PARTY POLITICS.
I look for Kasich to say and do anything to try to gain support for his TEA PARTY SB 5..even pretending that the real problem is union pension plans not being fully funded. I wonder how much the GREAT BUSH RECESSION affected pension fund investments all across the United States?
ARCH...HOW BAD IS KASICH'S TEA PARTY SB 5?...Kasich could not even get total support from his own Republican Party, that is how EXTREME, KASICH'S UNION BUSTING BILL IS. Kasich and his Tea Party ilk had to pull a fast one just to get this POS of a bill out of conference, even though his GOP held a 7-5 advantage over the Dems....THAT IS HOW BAD THIS BILL IS..!!!
Kasich is attempting to turn Ohio into a SOUTHERN STATE where workers make less and have little or no rights to bargain for wages.
ARCH...Tell me again how it helps your small business if Ohio's middle class workers make less pay?
KASICH AND HIS TEA PARTY ILK WILL WIN THIS ISSUE, FOR NOW.
It will be on the ballot where all of Ohio's working class have the opportunity to vote THIS TEA PARTY LEGISLATION DOWN.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
what is your solution, mac?
raise taxes?
that is the only solution that your side is offering. all that will do is force out people with money and leave people that are stuck in the state with less money. it has been forcing people out in California and there's more things in California to lure people to stay there as opposed to Ohio.
keep in mind the real budget bombs have yet to hit. a lot of states have pension holes that taxpayers will be on the hook for. many of those are in the billions. California has a looming $500 BILLION pension blackhole in the wings.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Unions are great for millionaires...but they are not good if you are a middle class working American..."you make too much"...according to the rich folks, like these listed below...
Bill O'Reilly Praises His Union, AFTRA, But the Union Member FOX Team Bashes Collective Bargaining: Hypocrisy Central
March 6, 2011
Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are all members of a union that has a collective bargaining agreement. As Cenk Ugyur of the Young Turks points out by playing a clip of O'Reilly, Bill actually brags that his union, AFTRA, took one his former television producers to court to enforce pension benefits agreed upon in a collective bargaining agreement.
You can watch it here. O'Reilly doesn't in any way do anything but praise his union because it prevented him from being "stiffed."
As a Florida newspaper commentator recently noted:
The "Health Fund" that is set up by AFTRA, also provides for mental health counseling. I am sure some of those Fox "reporters" could take advantage of that... especially with all of their conspiracy theories swirling around.
Meanwhile, O'Reilly and the FOX propaganda team for Murdoch and the Koch Brothers regularly bash pro-union protesters in Wisconsin and support Scott Walker's thuggish efforts to smash unions.
O'Reilly does imply that concessions will have to be made by unions to compete in a global economy, but the public unions in Wisconsin have already said that they would be willing to negotiate concessions. Scott Walker, however, has remained adamant that he will not negotiate about the collective bargaining process itself, which is the only way to guarantee that the union can negotiate and simply not have its members be subject to arbitrary pay, safety and benefits decisions by a Koch'd-up governor.
Yesterday, BuzzFlash at Truthout documented how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel detailed that Scott Walker lied about receiving a mandate for eliminating (with some very minor exceptions) collective bargaining because he never mentioned or campaigned on such a draconian measure.
What's clear from Bill O'Reiley's admission is that he is grateful for the collective bargaining power and assertiveness of the AFTRA union protecting his benefits.
O'Reilly, Beck and Limbaugh make millions and millions of dollars for blabbering the most inane and bizarre bile on television (although O'Reilly has come to seem like the "senior statesman" of the disingenuous right wing echo chamber).
Teachers and custodians in Wisconsin make a tiny fraction of their salaries. Shouldn't the middle class working people for the State of Wisconsin have the same union protection of collective bargaining that the paid shills of the plutocracy have?
You would think so, wouldn't you?
Because otherwise it might be blatant hypocrisy.
web page
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Curious ... Im not saying this to bash I am actually curious.
Has mac ever proposed actual solutions? Or is he just Anti - Right Wing?
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Unions are great for millionaires...but they are not good if you are a middle class working American..."you make too much"...according to the rich folks, like these listed below...
Bill O'Reilly Praises His Union, AFTRA, But the Union Member FOX Team Bashes Collective Bargaining: Hypocrisy Central
March 6, 2011
Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are all members of a union that has a collective bargaining agreement. As Cenk Ugyur of the Young Turks points out by playing a clip of O'Reilly, Bill actually brags that his union, AFTRA, took one his former television producers to court to enforce pension benefits agreed upon in a collective bargaining agreement.
You can watch it here. O'Reilly doesn't in any way do anything but praise his union because it prevented him from being "stiffed."
As a Florida newspaper commentator recently noted:
The "Health Fund" that is set up by AFTRA, also provides for mental health counseling. I am sure some of those Fox "reporters" could take advantage of that... especially with all of their conspiracy theories swirling around.
Meanwhile, O'Reilly and the FOX propaganda team for Murdoch and the Koch Brothers regularly bash pro-union protesters in Wisconsin and support Scott Walker's thuggish efforts to smash unions.
O'Reilly does imply that concessions will have to be made by unions to compete in a global economy, but the public unions in Wisconsin have already said that they would be willing to negotiate concessions. Scott Walker, however, has remained adamant that he will not negotiate about the collective bargaining process itself, which is the only way to guarantee that the union can negotiate and simply not have its members be subject to arbitrary pay, safety and benefits decisions by a Koch'd-up governor.
Yesterday, BuzzFlash at Truthout documented how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel detailed that Scott Walker lied about receiving a mandate for eliminating (with some very minor exceptions) collective bargaining because he never mentioned or campaigned on such a draconian measure.
What's clear from Bill O'Reiley's admission is that he is grateful for the collective bargaining power and assertiveness of the AFTRA union protecting his benefits.
O'Reilly, Beck and Limbaugh make millions and millions of dollars for blabbering the most inane and bizarre bile on television (although O'Reilly has come to seem like the "senior statesman" of the disingenuous right wing echo chamber).
Teachers and custodians in Wisconsin make a tiny fraction of their salaries. Shouldn't the middle class working people for the State of Wisconsin have the same union protection of collective bargaining that the paid shills of the plutocracy have?
You would think so, wouldn't you?
Because otherwise it might be blatant hypocrisy.
web page
yet another article confusing private unions and public unions.
O'reilly's union is a private union. The Wisconsin/Ohio situation deals with public unions.
private unions do not vote for or influence elections to put the people, who they negioate with, in power.
public unions do. You don't view that as a big conflict of interest where the only losing group is taxpayers?
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Curious ... Im not saying this to bash I am actually curious.
Has mac ever proposed actual solutions? Or is he just Anti - Right Wing?
His solution to the problems in Wisconsin and Ohio is for the governors to take a pay cut.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
Quote:
Why not reduce every state workers pay and benefits the same percentage across the board, highest paid Ohio employee, like Kasich and his $144,269 salary. Fact is, Ohio's highest paid employees are non-union..they receive benefits and pensions, YET OUR TEA PARTY GOV. KASICH EXCLUDES OHIO'S NON-UNION EMPLOYEES...they sacrifice nothing...SB 5 is directed at "only"...OHIO'S PUBLIC WORKERS WHO ARE UNION.
You got a link that is a legit source?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Ohio's Tea Party Governor Kasich is attempting to fix all of Ohio's budget problems on the back of middle class workers who happen to be union members.
No. He's attempting to fix a small portion of the deficit with this. He did run on fixing the budget, didn't he? By the way mac, I voted for Strickland.
Quote:
Why no SHARED SACRIFICE..?
The rest of your post is basically the same drivel you spew all the time.
But, I'll try again. The money is not there to continue the benefits. There is a choice to be made: do nothing, and watch as the teacher with 10 years or so ends up paying into a system that is bankrupt and gets nothing when they retire, OR, make some adjustments now so that it can be a viable situation in the future.
Make your call.
The state is not going to balance the budget on the backs of teachers - cuts need to be made all over.
Until you get over your hatred of anything "republican", you'll make no sense in anything. You have goggles on, and they are "democrats are good, republicans are bad" goggles. You fail to see the issue because of your goggles.
And I voted for Strickland. He was a democrat. That in and of itself throws your theory into one of the rings of hell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
That's because we replaced them with illegals. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
it has been forcing people out in California and there's more things in California to lure people to stay there as opposed to Ohio.
California hasn't been losing people in droves though. Their population has increased 9% over the last decade. Also, California had the 16th biggest increase in population from 2008-2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_growth_rate
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
More people are leaving California than moving to California.
More people are moving into and out of California than any other state, and the growth in departures is greater than new arrivals, according to movers.com, a website representing 700 moving companies around the country.
another more credible link
"For him, years of rising taxes, dead-end schools, unchecked illegal immigration and clogged traffic have sapped the allure of the place writer Wallace Stegner once described as "America only more so.""
"The number of people leaving California for another state outstripped the number moving in from another state during the year ending on July 1, 2008. California lost a net total of 144,000 people during that period -- more than any other state, according to census estimates. That is about equal to the population of Syracuse, N.Y.
The state with the next-highest net loss through migration between states was New York, which lost just over 126,000 residents."
---
and the reasoning behind why California still has population growth,,,
---
"And, in fact, the state's population continues to increase overall because of births and immigration, legal and illegal. But it is the fourth consecutive year that more residents decamped from California for other states than arrived here from within the U.S., according to state demographers."
one last link
"California's population grew less than 1 percent this past fiscal year, continuing a modest growth trend, according to new state estimates released yesterday."
"Most of the growth, 81 percent, was due to births; net migration contributed 19 percent."
--
Just because population is growing, does not mean people are not leaving the state. The issue is that people with money are leaving and the poorer people are gaining in population as a percentage and whole. Population growth never tells the whole story.
Last edited by ~TuX~; 03/07/11 03:30 AM.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
Curious ... Im not saying this to bash I am actually curious.
Has mac ever proposed actual solutions? Or is he just Anti - Right Wing?
His solution to the problems in Wisconsin and Ohio is for the governors to take a pay cut.
Only an idiot would interpret my idea of "shared sacrifice" this way.
I have only posted "shared sacrifice" about 10 times in this thread, when it takes most people only once or maybe twice to read something so easy to understand...and understand it.
...let's see, how can I make it any "simpler" for those who are mentally challenged...ahhh...if your paycheck is courtesy of the tax payers of a Ohio (WI./any state)...
...you and everyone give up the same percentage of your pay/benefits that is returned to the state to help reduce the budget crisis...
...union, non union, highest paid like judges for example, making $150,850 + benefits + pension...down to the lowest paid worker, union/non union.
Everyone earning a paycheck from the state of Ohio, gives up the same percentage.
Again, only about 1/2 of Ohio's workers are union and sharing the burden of Ohio's debt crisis across "all" workers, union and non-union, will solved Ohio's budget crisis in half the time as saddling just the teachers, patrolmen and law enforcement with the burden of repaying Ohio's $8 billion in debt.
...SHARED SACRIFICE...by all state employees...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Why employee pensions aren't bankrupting states
March 6, 2011
By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — From state legislatures to Congress to tea party rallies, a vocal backlash is rising against what are perceived as too-generous retirement benefits for state and local government workers. However, that widespread perception doesn't match reality.
A close look at state and local pension plans across the nation, and a comparison of them to those in the private sector, reveals a more complicated story. However, the short answer is that there's simply no evidence that state pensions are the current burden to public finances that their critics claim.
Pension contributions from state and local employers aren't blowing up budgets. They amount to just 2.9 percent of state spending, on average, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators. The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College puts the figure a bit higher at 3.8 percent.
Though there's no direct comparison, state and local pension contributions approximate the burden shouldered by private companies. The nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that retirement funding for private employers amounts to about 3.5 percent of employee compensation.
Nor are state and local government pension funds broke. They're underfunded, in large measure because — like the investments held in 401(k) plans by American private-sector employees — they sunk along with the entire stock market during the Great Recession of 2007-2009. And like 401(k) plans, the investments made by public-sector pension plans are increasingly on firmer footing as the rising tide on Wall Street lifts all boats.
Boston College researchers project that if the assets in state and local pension plans were frozen tomorrow and there was no more growth in investment returns, there'd still be enough money in most state plans to pay benefits for years to come.
"On average, with the assets on hand today, plans are able to pay annual benefits at their current level for another 13 years. This assumes, pessimistically, that plans make no future pension contributions and there is no growth in assets," said Jean-Pierre Aubry, a researcher specializing in state and local pensions for the nonpartisan Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.
In 2006, when the economy was humming before the financial crisis began, the value of assets in state and local pension funds covered promised benefits for a period of just over 19 years.
At the bottom of Aubry's list is Kentucky, which would have enough assets to cover 4.7 years. Other states do much better: North Carolina local government pensions are funded to cover 19 years of promised benefits; Florida's state plan could cover 17 years; and California's plans about 15 years.
"On the whole, the pension system isn't bankrupting every state in the country," Aubry said.
States having the biggest problems with pension obligations tend to be struggling with overall fiscal woes — New Jersey and Illinois in particular. Many states are now wrestling with underfunding because they didn't contribute enough during boom years.
Most state and local employees government across the nation have defined-benefit plans that promise employees either a percentage of their final salary during retirement or some fixed amount. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 91 percent of full-time state and local government workers have access to defined-benefit plans.
Several states_ including Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Colorado and Washington_ have adopted competing defined-contribution plans, or a hybrid plan that provides government employees both a partial defined benefit in retirement and a supplementary defined-contribution plan.
Defined-contribution 401(k) plans divert on a tax-deferred basis a portion of pay, generally partially matched by the employer, into an account that invests in stocks and bonds. In 1980, 84 percent of workers at medium and large companies in the U.S. had a defined-benefit plan like those still predominate in the public sector. By last year, just 30 percent of workers in these larger companies were covered under such plans.
Defenders of the public pension system say anti-government, anti-union elected officials and interest groups have exaggerated the problem to score political points, and that as the economy heals, public pension plans will gain value and prove critics wrong.
"There's a window that's closing as market conditions improve and interest rates rise, the funding of these plans is going to look better than depicted by some," insisted Keith Brainard, the director of research for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators in Georgetown, Texas.
Critics of public sector pensions paint the problem with a broad brush.
"Unionized government workers have tremendous leverage to negotiate their own wages and benefits. They funnel tens of millions of dollars to elect candidates who will sit across from them at the negotiating table," said Thomas Donohue, the chief executive of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in a Feb. 24 blog post. "This self-dealing has resulted in ever-increasing wage and benefit packages for unionized government workers that often far outstrip those for comparable private-sector workers."
In a Feb. 23 radio interview, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., called federal stimulus efforts to rescue the economy "essentially a federal bailout of public employee unions." Nunes described money owed to state pensioners as a crisis "about ready to happen."
Except that two out of every three public-sector workers aren't union members.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in January that 31.1 percent of state public-sector workers were unionized in 2010, compared with 26.8 percent of federal government employees. The highest percentage of unionization, 43.3 percent, was found in local government, where police officers and firefighters work. Teachers can fall into either state systems or local government.
Ironically, in Wisconsin, where Republican Gov. Scott Walker is trying to weaken public-sector unions and reduce pension benefits, he's exempted police and firefighters, who are among the most unionized public employees. And Wisconsin's public-sector pension plan still has enough assets today to cover more than 18 years of benefits.
The most recent Public Fund Survey by the National Association of State Retirement Administrators showed that, on average, state and local pensions were 78.9 percent funded, with about $688 billion in unfunded promises to pensioners. Critics suggest that the real number is at least $1 trillion or higher, using less-optimistic market assumptions.
The unfunded liabilities would be a problem if all state and local retirees went into retirement at once, but they won't. Nor will state governments go out of business and hand underfunded pension plans over to a federal regulator, as happens in the private sector. State and local governments are ongoing enterprises.
The flow of employees into retirement matches up with population trends in states, with Northeastern states with declining populations, particularly Rhode Island, seeing more stress on their pension systems than Southern and Western states, where there's been vibrant population growth.
Another misperception tied to the pension debate is that while the private sector has shed jobs during the economic crisis, state and local government employment has grown — and pensions along with it.
Since September 2008_ when state and local government employees numbered 19,385,000 and the economic crisis turned severe — the governments' payrolls shrunk by 407,000, to 18,978,000 this January, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
When calculating from December 2007_ the month that the National Bureau of Economic Research determined was the start of the Great Recession_ state and local government employment has fallen by 703,000 jobs amid a downturn that cost the nation more than 8 million jobs overall.
"The down economy has had an effect, and the loss of employment outside the public sector has created a contrast" said Brainard, of the National Association of State Retirement Administrators.
Also fueling backlash is the perception that state and local workers don't contribute to their own retirement funds the way private sector workers do.
Four states have non-contribution public pension plans_ Florida, Utah, Oregon and Connecticut. Missouri until recently had a non-contribution policy for state workers, as did Michigan until 1997. Michigan workers hired before 1997 still don't pay toward their pensions, and some teachers in Arkansas don't have to contribute toward theirs. Tennessee doesn't require contributions from most workers and employees in the state higher education system.
Those notable exceptions aside, most states require employee contributions. The midpoint for these contributions for all states and the District of Columbia is 5 percent of pay, according to academic and state-level research. That contribution rate climbs to 8 percent for the handful of states whose workers or teachers are prohibited from paying into the federal Social Security program.
By comparison, private-sector workers shoulder a bit more of the burden.
In its data for 2010, Fidelity Investments, the largest administrator of private-sector 401(k) retirement plans, showed employee contribution rates in its plans averaged 8.2 percent of pre-tax pay.
Separately, the Employee Benefits Research Institution estimates that most private-sector employers match up to 50 percent of employee contributions up to the first 6 percent of salary.
The utility or burden of either type of retirement plan depends on whether the plan is measured by what it delivers to an individual, or by how much it delivers to all workers receiving retirement benefits from their employer.
"It really comes down to what you are attempting to do," said Dallas Salisbury, the president of the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute.
Viewed through the lens of an employee, defined-benefit plans are more cost-effective at providing a pre-determined level of benefits to an employee. But the shortcoming of these plans is that they reward seniority. For workers with a shorter tenure, they're far less generous in retirement.
This fairness issue is one reason why 401(k) plans have grown steadily in prominence since the mid-1980s. From the payroll perspective of an employer, these defined-contribution plans produce at least some retirement income for the greatest number of employees, and the plans can move with employees who change jobs.
web page
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
JC...
Not living in Ohio I don't know, but does anyone know if the non-union workers have been on raise freezes, work furloughs, benefits changes etc. over the last few years.?
I recall reading stories of certain towns/counties in Ohio asking non-union workers to pay more for benefits, forgo raises, etc over the last couple years, curious how that all turned out.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,068
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,068 |
Maybe about four cents' worth. Wife and I taught for years and retired fully vested. Part of STRS. A number of authorities are throwing some questionable things around, while some other items are not being shared. These latter are conveniently ignored, or like so many facts, get twisted in the way they are presented. Wife and I had some common achievements. We each were lead negotiators, each of us was president of our local, and each of us had consistent involvement. In addition, I was in charge of a labor liaison setup that resulted in no grievances for almost 20 years. I am in favor with the collective bargaining process; this resolution where the state or non-employee is guaranteed a win without limitation is wrong. Adults can discuss and should solve problems together. It points to part of Kasich's flaw; he cannot have anything questioned or scrutinized. The fun and the candy is in forcing your will unilaterally on someone, in this case the unions because of his politics. The targeted group did not cause the disaster and crisis, and the "political cure" Kasich wants cannot eliminate it.
Each of us contributed every pay to our retirement. It is capped by a percentage of how much is required to be put in, and a set amount from the employer. We knew going in that it was not a 100% retirement pension. It was to supply about 70 to 80 per cent of income after teaching. The state will not allow extra money beyond payroll deduction. They also have gotten much about being unsustainable out to 30 + years (social security can't either) at a time when the actuarials insist we are in the worst place in a lifetime. The picture could not be made to look worse than now. Many teachers did also contribute to an additional retirement annuity to be converted when they leave. The percentages have not changed. I have payed for insurance and negotiated it in myself. Neither of our districts and none in the county get it free.
I would like to see some of the energy we have wasted politically bullying taxpayers like us to go into getting a handle on premiums. It is frightening to everyone, and we continue to pay more every year in retirement. This is out of control. Bargaining health COST is, not the process, which assures engagement.
I would have gladly run my annuity through the STRS account, but that is not allowed. We might have been able to have more taken out for medical but that isn't allowed.
I am about deaf from the hypocrisy this issue is creating. I see no cuts or "shared pain" in the governor's position. In fact, I am not sure we are able to afford them. Can't be job performance; if they wer paid piecework they would starve. A lot of our money was lost in the Lehman type deals on Wall Street. Banks are required to recover; taxpayers' pensions are attacked and given unfavorable treatment.
I think we cut pensions to about 5% per year per politician. Get rid of the taxpayer paid staff and let them buy office space. I will be more comfortable with representatives who are the architects also gutting themselves and their perks; I am not a second class citizen to be attacked. Individual issues and bad standout examples can be addressed as such. But the Lehmanizing of Ohio for the Republicans is wrong, and punitive leadership is none at all IMO.
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
...does the state of Ohio employ union leaders?
...I just checked and found that not one cent of Ohio or Wisconsin tax dollars are used to pay the salary of "union workers".
But mac isn't it all about shared sacrifice? If the union leaders would take a pay cut and possibly scale back the millions of dollars they dump into political campaigns then the amount of union dues the teachers have to pay would go down, therefore the teachers would have more money in their pockets...
Again mac, the union leaders DO NOT care about the teachers, they care about their own salary and their bargaining power...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Curious ... Im not saying this to bash I am actually curious.
Has mac ever proposed actual solutions? Or is he just Anti - Right Wing?
His solution to the problems in Wisconsin and Ohio is for the governors to take a pay cut.
Only an idiot would interpret my idea of "shared sacrifice" this way.
I have only posted "shared sacrifice" about 10 times in this thread, when it takes most people only once or maybe twice to read something so easy to understand...and understand it.
...let's see, how can I make it any "simpler" for those who are mentally challenged...ahhh...if your paycheck is courtesy of the tax payers of a Ohio (WI./any state)...
...you and everyone give up the same percentage of your pay/benefits that is returned to the state to help reduce the budget crisis...
...union, non union, highest paid like judges for example, making $150,850 + benefits + pension...down to the lowest paid worker, union/non union.
Everyone earning a paycheck from the state of Ohio, gives up the same percentage.
Again, only about 1/2 of Ohio's workers are union and sharing the burden of Ohio's debt crisis across "all" workers, union and non-union, will solved Ohio's budget crisis in half the time as saddling just the teachers, patrolmen and law enforcement with the burden of repaying Ohio's $8 billion in debt.
...SHARED SACRIFICE...by all state employees...
Quote:
Only an idiot would interpret my idea of "shared sacrifice" this way.
You are right. Your idea of shared sacrifice is just thrown out as a catch phrase, especially since you are wrong. There is shared sacrifice in both bills. There just aren't any wage cuts for either.
Quote:
I have only posted "shared sacrifice" about 10 times in this thread, when it takes most people only once or maybe twice to read something so easy to understand...and understand it.
We all understand it. We just don't think you know what it is
Quote:
..let's see, how can I make it any "simpler" for those who are mentally challenged...ahhh...if your paycheck is courtesy of the tax payers of a Ohio (WI./any state)...
Since no one is losing money they are all sacrificing the same. In benefits. If you want all non union employees to take wage cuts you must also be saying you want to take money out of union workers pockets.
Quote:
Again, only about 1/2 of Ohio's workers are union and sharing the burden of Ohio's debt crisis across "all" workers, union and non-union, will solved Ohio's budget crisis in half the time as saddling just the teachers, patrolmen and law enforcement with the burden of repaying Ohio's $8 billion in debt.
Prove it. This is the 2nd time I have asked you for a link. When you finally give us a link you need to make sure it is credible. Bloggers don't count.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Quote:
...you and everyone give up the same percentage of your pay/benefits that is returned to the state to help reduce the budget crisis...
...union, non union, highest paid like judges for example, making $150,850 + benefits + pension...down to the lowest paid worker, union/non union.
Everyone earning a paycheck from the state of Ohio, gives up the same percentage.
...SHARED SACRIFICE...by all state employees...
Well it sounds to me Mac, like you are essentially proposing a flat tax. Everyone should equally share in the burden. Tax the richest S.O.B's a flat 22%. And tax the guy who only made 22 thousand 22% ... and the high school senior working at mcdonalds for 1,200 this year ... 22%.
Isn't the flat tax a great way to let everyone equally share in the burden? We all give the same proportion of what we have to fix the problem...
Funny I thought that was a "tea party" idea? Mac
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Curious ... Im not saying this to bash I am actually curious.
Has mac ever proposed actual solutions? Or is he just Anti - Right Wing?
His solution to the problems in Wisconsin and Ohio is for the governors to take a pay cut.
Only an idiot would interpret my idea of "shared sacrifice" this way.
I have only posted "shared sacrifice" about 10 times in this thread, when it takes most people only once or maybe twice to read something so easy to understand...and understand it.
...let's see, how can I make it any "simpler" for those who are mentally challenged...ahhh...if your paycheck is courtesy of the tax payers of a Ohio (WI./any state)...
...you and everyone give up the same percentage of your pay/benefits that is returned to the state to help reduce the budget crisis...
...union, non union, highest paid like judges for example, making $150,850 + benefits + pension...down to the lowest paid worker, union/non union.
Everyone earning a paycheck from the state of Ohio, gives up the same percentage.
Again, only about 1/2 of Ohio's workers are union and sharing the burden of Ohio's debt crisis across "all" workers, union and non-union, will solved Ohio's budget crisis in half the time as saddling just the teachers, patrolmen and law enforcement with the burden of repaying Ohio's $8 billion in debt.
...SHARED SACRIFICE...by all state employees...
I'm not stupid mac. You are trying to sell us oranges by painting lemons orange. You are only using the term "shared sacrifice" to hide your blatant demonization of Walker and Kasich. You continue to call them the part of the highest paid governors and are only doing so to demonize them to make them look bad. They are not even part of the highest paid. Call me back on that when they make $170k a year like the Top 7 do. This has nothing to do with Shared Sacrifice. It has everything about you trying to demonize these two governors.
Another thing, why isn't anyone talking about how underpaid governors are? I mean look at the CEO's in the private sector. They make millions a year..
Last edited by ~TuX~; 03/07/11 02:48 PM.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
You are only using the term "shared sacrifice" to hide your blatant demonization of Walker and Kasich. You continue to call them the part of the highest paid governors and are only doing so to demonize them to make them look bad. They are not even part of the highest paid. Call me back on that when they make $170k a year like the Top 7 do.
Tux as I already pointed out, I don't care if the governor DOES make $170K a year.. He is essentially the CEO of a company with a $50 billion budget (which puts him on par with microsoft) and he has.. 30,000 employees? 40,000? under him? I couldn't find the exact number...
Find me a CEO of 40,000 person firm with a $50 billion budget that makes less than $200K a year...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831 |
Quote:
Another thing, why isn't anyone talking about how underpaid governors are? I mean look at the CEO's in the private sector. They make millions a year..
Same reason the President (arguably the most powerful person in the world) makes $400,000 a year. You take a pay cut when you're the lead executive for the privileges that come with the position (power and influence).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
DC..Tux...who forced Kasuch and Walker to run for a state government position, to serve the public?
When an individual runs for public office, pay is not an issue and never has been an issue because it is "public service" and those seeking office understood that fact when they made the decision to run for office.
Neither Kasich or Walker are worth what they are being paid as the governor of Ohio and Wisconsin, imo...with salary, benefits and perks well over $200,000 annually.
I guess those who have never sacrificed for anything would not understand the concept of "shared sacrifice". I just assumed everyone would understand and recognize the common sense of the idea and the fact that in Ohio's case..."shared sacrifice", including "all who work for the state", rather than just the half who are union members, would help to fix Ohio budget issue in half the time.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
What planet are you on and who is feeding you this foolish crap?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
Quote:
DC..Tux...who forced Kasuch and Walker to run for a state government position, to serve the public?
When an individual runs for public office, pay is not an issue and never has been an issue because it is "public service" and those seeking office understood that fact when they made the decision to run for office.
Neither Kasich or Walker are worth what they are being paid as the governor of Ohio and Wisconsin, imo...with salary, benefits and perks well over $200,000 annually.
I guess those who have never sacrificed for anything would not understand the concept of "shared sacrifice". I just assumed everyone would understand and recognize the common sense of the idea and the fact that in Ohio's case..."shared sacrifice", including "all who work for the state", rather than just the half who are union members, would help to fix Ohio budget issue in half the time.
You continue to spout lies and when called on it your idea is to ignore it. My wife is not covered by a union and she pays into her pension and that amount was going to go up. It's not since we found out today that she is most likely losing her job.
We are sacrificing while all you do is repeat a catch phrase that is bullcrap.
Now before you respond again, how about you give us a link where it states that only union members are going to be paying the price? I know you can't because it is bullcrap. I already posted a link yesterday from a news channel that did a fact check on the bill.
If you tell lie after lie, what are you?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
DC..Tux...who forced Kasuch and Walker to run for a state government position, to serve the public?
And who forced state employees to be state employees? If they don't like their pay or benefits, then they should get a job elsewhere.. That same principle applies to them as well.
Quote:
When an individual runs for public office, pay is not an issue and never has been an issue because it is "public service" and those seeking office understood that fact when they made the decision to run for office.
Once again, same applies to state employees, ie teachers, clerks and such. If they didn't like the money, they shouldn't have went into those fields.
Quote:
Neither Kasich or Walker are worth what they are being paid as the governor of Ohio and Wisconsin, imo...with salary, benefits and perks well over $200,000 annually.
I guess those who have never sacrificed for anything would not understand the concept of "shared sacrifice". I just assumed everyone would understand and recognize the common sense of the idea and the fact that in Ohio's case..."shared sacrifice", including "all who work for the state", rather than just the half who are union members, would help to fix Ohio budget issue in half the time.
Oh... Kasich and Walker are not worth being paid that much? Do you have a source for that? oh wait.. that is just YOUR opinion.
Once again, your use of the term "shared sacrifice" has absolutely NOTHING to do with the budget problems, but rather YOUR demonization of the two Republican governors. You are only trying to hide it by using the term.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,137
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,137 |
Now here is a serious concession.  And folks wonder why we question the public unions. Good use of the union legal fund here. madison.com The Milwaukee teachers union has dropped a lawsuit seeking to get its taxpayer-funded Viagra back. The union sued in July 2010 to force the school board to again include the erectile dysfunction drug and similar pills in its health insurance plans. The union has argued the board's policy of excluding such drugs from the plans discriminates against male employees; the board has countered the 2005 move was meant to save money. Court records indicate the union, the school board and the state labor commission agreed to dismiss the lawsuit on March 1. A spokesman for the state Justice Department, which is representing the commission, declined comment. Attorneys for the union and school board didn't immediately return messages.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 326
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 326 |
I just got back on here and checkout what people have been saying and writing after I posted about 2 days ago.
I read a post which talked about how the job is hard at first, but once the plans are created you just keep on using the same plans, tests, and textboooks rarely change outside of the last chapter....
This a flawed view of teaching... if you are actually trying to be the best teacher you can be. Like I mentioned before, I am certified to be a 7-12 History teacher. It seems like over 70% of the S.S teachers out there have this mentality. Teacher the textbook year in and year out using the same materials. That doesn't mean they can't be good teachers.
However, great teachers use resources outside of the textbook. These textbooks are junk. They basically teach students to never question what happened in history because it's in the book meaning it must be factual and that must be all there is to know about that particular topic. If Social Studies teachers grow as a historian, it not only makes them more knowledgeable, but gives them the best opportunity to connect to the students and bring a new life to the classroom.
Also.... if you use the same lesson plans year in and year out, how do you ever grow as a teacher. Lesson plans will not always work for every classroom. Lesson plans should be created so that each student or classroom has the best opportunity to learn. Not used just because they worked last year.
Just wanted to give my opinion on that. I just feel like people have this misconception about what a teacher does or I guess in some cases should do. Not that this has much to do with SB5, but still wanted to address it.
Lastly, I was substitute teaching today and overhead a teacher saying that if SB5 is passed in the House and this becomes a law coupled with the pay cut the teachers are taking at this school, that he would be eligible for food stamps. I don't know much about the eligibility, but this guy has a Master's in Education. 6 Years of education and this is what this guy may face. That is concerning. I don't know the details or if this was over-exaggerated, but it's still shocking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,137
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,137 |
28k total household income is the cutoff for a family of 4 to receive food stamps, and that's if you don't have any money in the bank. He's yanking your chain.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
Quote:
Lastly, I was substitute teaching today and overhead a teacher saying that if SB5 is passed in the House and this becomes a law coupled with the pay cut the teachers are taking at this school, that he would be eligible for food stamps. I don't know much about the eligibility, but this guy has a Master's in Education. 6 Years of education and this is what this guy may face. That is concerning. I don't know the details or if this was over-exaggerated, but it's still shocking.
That is because in the original bill they had minimums on what the can pay teachers. Those numbers were well under the $28,000 figure. Last time I checked the minimums were taken out of the bill but I guess they added some 50 pages in the last day before the bill passed the Senate.
I think there are two things in play. You have union leaders giving the worst possible outcomes and teachers that are very afraid of the uncertainty. The bill give a lot of power to the individual school boards which isn't always a good thing.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
DC..Tux...who forced Kasuch and Walker to run for a state government position, to serve the public?
When an individual runs for public office, pay is not an issue and never has been an issue because it is "public service" and those seeking office understood that fact when they made the decision to run for office.
Neither Kasich or Walker are worth what they are being paid as the governor of Ohio and Wisconsin, imo...with salary, benefits and perks well over $200,000 annually.
I guess those who have never sacrificed for anything would not understand the concept of "shared sacrifice". I just assumed everyone would understand and recognize the common sense of the idea and the fact that in Ohio's case..."shared sacrifice", including "all who work for the state", rather than just the half who are union members, would help to fix Ohio budget issue in half the time.
You continue to spout lies and when called on it your idea is to ignore it. My wife is not covered by a union and she pays into her pension and that amount was going to go up. It's not since we found out today that she is most likely losing her job.
We are sacrificing while all you do is repeat a catch phrase that is bullcrap.
Now before you respond again, how about you give us a link where it states that only union members are going to be paying the price? I know you can't because it is bullcrap. I already posted a link yesterday from a news channel that did a fact check on the bill.
If you tell lie after lie, what are you?
pdie...what have said that is not true?...be specific please !
Sorry to hear your wife may be losing her job. You say she is non union, as are most workers in Ohio...is she employed by a private business that is cutting back? The good news for her may be that finding another job should become easier as the country continues to recover from the recession.
I believe "shared sacrifice" by all of Ohio's public workers is the answer "IF" our Tea Party Governor is trying to fix the budget short fall Ohio is facing.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
jc..
Maybe they are taking on the union as the first step into this "shared sacrifice". I know I wouldn't want to hit the non-union workers with the changes immediately, while I fight the union for their share of changes, only to tick off those non-union folks.
Like in most things in life, you pick your battles, and often if you can win 1 crucial battle, the rest are much easier.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
She works for the government. What have you lied about? 
Last edited by Pdawg; 03/08/11 09:17 AM.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I believe "shared sacrifice" by all of Ohio's public workers is the answer "IF" our Tea Party Governor is trying to fix the budget short fall Ohio is facing.
Let's start with Tressel and Matta.. they are probably the two highest paid state employees.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
There are 2 schools of thought on how to tackle major, heavy duty problems.
1 is to handle the small things that can definitely get completely done. The thinking is that it makes getting the bigger things done when you have a few successes under your belt.
Unfortunately, it is easy to get into a self-congratulatory mode when you ring up minor success after very minor success. It's easy to fall into "Well, I got a TON of things done, so I can take it easy now." Congress is in danger of falling into this with minor and inconsequential cuts while the deficit continues to balloon out of control. "But we cut $100 million out the the $1.5 trillion deficit. Yea us."
The 2nd school of thought is that you take on the biggest and baddest problem right off the bat. If you can solve the very worst problem facing your business, (or state, for that matter) then solving the smaller problems becomes that much easier. If there is an $8 billion state deficit, and you can clear $7 billion in one fell swoop, then looking for the rest becomes pretty easy. Plus, no one can complain when they face cuts after the bigger cuts have already takenplace. This is usually the better path to success .... if you have the guts (and other body parts) to hang in and get it done ..... even through fierce criticism, and being called brutal, uncaring, and dictatorial by those who stand to lose something. You have to face the whining of others, and stand strong ... and just get the job you were brought in to do, done.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Plus, no one can complain ...
Really? Did you just type that in a political budget cutting context? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Quote:
Quote:
Plus, no one can complain ...
Really? Did you just type that in a political budget cutting context?
If you cut $50/year out of the "Nosepicking Prevention Fund" ...... there aren't going to be many riots, or marches on the state house ........
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
His 1st State of the State speech is today at noon. I am wondering how he is going to cut to finish balancing the budget?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,822 |
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC..Tux...who forced Kasuch and Walker to run for a state government position, to serve the public?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And who forced state employees to be state employees? If they don't like their pay or benefits, then they should get a job elsewhere.. That same principle applies to them as well.
tux...YEP...those who chose to serve the public are in the same boat, from our overpaid Governor Kasuch down to the the lowest paid public worker.
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When an individual runs for public office, pay is not an issue and never has been an issue because it is "public service" and those seeking office understood that fact when they made the decision to run for office.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, same applies to state employees, ie teachers, clerks and such. If they didn't like the money, they shouldn't have went into those fields.
YEP AGAIN, TUX
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither Kasich or Walker are worth what they are being paid as the governor of Ohio and Wisconsin, imo...with salary, benefits and perks well over $200,000 annually.
I guess those who have never sacrificed for anything would not understand the concept of "shared sacrifice". I just assumed everyone would understand and recognize the common sense of the idea and the fact that in Ohio's case..."shared sacrifice", including "all who work for the state", rather than just the half who are union members, would help to fix Ohio budget issue in half the time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh... Kasich and Walker are not worth being paid that much? Do you have a source for that? oh wait.. that is just YOUR opinion.
Once again, your use of the term "shared sacrifice" has absolutely NOTHING to do with the budget problems, but rather YOUR demonization of the two Republican governors. You are only trying to hide it by using the term.
TUX...Kasich and Walker are two of the higher paid Governors in the entire USA, with both making over $144K annually +benefits+perks
My idea of shared sacrifice has "everything" to do with the budget shortfall facing Ohio and nothing to do with taking anyone's bargaining rights away or trying to bust unions or attempt to fix Ohio's $8 billion deficit on the backs of Ohio public union employees.
Again, my idea of shared sacrifice is everyone who is paid a salary and receives benefits from Ohio taxpayers, will have their pay and benefit packages reduced the same percentage, regardless if that Ohio public employee is union or non union, the highest paid, (such as Ohio Chief Justice with a salary of $150,850+ benefits+ perks)...down to the lowest paid public workers.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I must have missed it. How is the governor of Ohio overpaid?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Quote:
I must have missed it. How is the governor of Ohio overpaid?
He's a Republican.
That's all that matters to mac.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum The situation in Wisconsin [Part
2]
|
|
![[Linked Image from i190.photobucket.com]](http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z33/booger52/phpGGRdhwAM.jpg)
