Dining          Events          A&E          Style          The Daily Mil          Blogs          Photos          Guides          Magazine

Post: Battle for the Hills
Replying to: Periscope
poor uneducated comment. There would be many office jobs, people like receptionists, secretaries, hr, supervisors, not to mention restaurants, county and city workers, potentially additional school staff and on and on. I own property in the area up there which I would prefer to remain as is, but the people up there have nothing and a large chunk of the population is certain towns is on gov assistance and I assure you they do not want to be. The D side of this needs to realize there will be some risks and that companies are not evil and the R side needs to realistically address concerns within reason looking at profit margins for similar product extracted and it is as simple as that... the area needs protection and the people need jobs but our society is so polarized it is hard to address anything at all anymore.
Post: Walker’s Key Adviser?
CEO salary are often tied in to company profits, this often does not work out well for the working man, but usually works out well for the company which is why the company is in business and there is nothing wrong with that. If the poor starving american working man is willing to lose money and or work for free if the company does not make profits I would buy that load of crap, but when the working person agrees to a job for a wage and gets paid that wage even if the company does not make money then crying about what others may and or may not make is folly. As far as public unions, same thing if tax revenues drop drastically then public union workers should then work for free because they have certainly had no problem taking more wages and benefits when tax coffers increase. The fact is public unions are a bad idea period because they can effect the elections of the people they then bargain with which is just plain against common sense on any level.
Post: Does Schiller = Sherrod?
Wow, I was hoping this site was supposed to be in the middle, I can now see after reading for a couple weeks it is just left opinion, this post with a lack of anything calling the Walker caller names especially proves it. Oh well just another site to not look at very often if ever.
Post: How Walker Will Transform Wisconsin
All arguments aside, what sense does it make to let public unions raise money for and to endorse candidates that they will then later get to negotiate with later? I am all for collective bargaining, but have always been against the public unions being allowed to participate in the political arena, by definition these workers are also government and as a collective they should not be allowed to organize politically, of course they should have every right as individuals to do so and join and contribute out of their own pockets to groups that do, however taking tax payer money to give to a group which then works to effect elections is just plain against common sense on any level. The government unions should be there to negotiate on behalf of their members, not to influence elections. I also think it is very unfair to force everyone into the union, this should be a choice, if a person feels the union is worth investing in then they can chose to join, however if they do not want to then they should not be forced to and they forgo any union representation when it comes to disciplinary actions and other areas union workers enjoy union protection. You could say the same thing for Business that derives a certain percentage of its revenue from Government being able to act politically.