Electoral College

[Jim2Dokes 3]

 

Pension and healthcare are benefits of many jobs. My father had both for 40 years at a private factory until he retired, now he collects his pension. I pay into my pension system as does my employer, just like every pension system. I dont qualify for social security or won't when i retire. I live in the city I work in, therefore my taxes pay for my pay and benefits, as well as all the teachers and public employees here.

 

My pension may not even be there when I retire. You understand that it just like social security goes towards paying beneficiaries who have already retired right? None of it is earmarked in an account specifically with my name on it like a 401k. With a pen stroke it can all go away for me and others. Our pension system for police and fire is very well managed, which is partly the reason its constantly in the crosshairs.

 

So social security is paid for by the poor and is to only benefit the poor? What defines those parameters? Does someone who paid in tbe bare minimum of credits to social security, allowed to draw benefits exceeding their contribution indefinitely?

 

Wrong. Not anymore. That was my argument. I agree pensions and healthcare should be benefits I was playing devils advocate because republicans have been railing against is for years. See Scott Walkers union laws as a perfect example. Your father only had those benefits because of unions and even if he was not apart of one his employer was forced to compete with union jobs to offer them. You are apart of a union. You have said that you would not want to privatize police and fire, maybe that does not work in your situation. We are already privatizing every prison, why not the police. Write those tickets for investors, bring in Blackwater, fire the non performers. The. They can merge with the prisons! Oh so much fun thinking about the “free” libertarian world.

[jessemoore97 1,280]

 

Wrong. Not anymore. That was my argument. I agree pensions and healthcare should be benefits I was playing devils advocate because republicans have been railing against is for years. See Scott Walkers union laws as a perfect example. Your father only had those benefits because of unions and even if he was not apart of one his employer was forced to compete with union jobs to offer them. You are apart of a union. You have said that you would not want to privatize police and fire, maybe that does not work in your situation. We are already privatizing every prison, why not the police. Write those tickets for investors, bring in Blackwater, fire the non performers. The. They can merge with the prisons! Oh so much fun thinking about the “free” libertarian world.

 

My father belonged to the union. Then he got promoted to a foreman for thw last 20 or so years he worked there. He wasn't union backed as a foreman.

 

I don't have a lot to say about privatization of prisons, I believe all the ones here are still state controlled as i understand it. I have no problem discussing reforms to the justice system, that would fall under that I suppose. There is a big difference between privatization of prisons and the police though. Emergency services like fire and police specifically should not be viewed as revenue generators. Thats barely the tip of the iceberg for reasons against privatization. Gangs of New York illustrated a very real example of private fire protection and what could happen.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

 

My father belonged to the union. Then he got promoted to a foreman for thw last 20 or so years he worked there. He wasn't union backed as a foreman.

 

I don't have a lot to say about privatization of prisons, I believe all the ones here are still state controlled as i understand it. I have no problem discussing reforms to the justice system, that would fall under that I suppose. There is a big difference between privatization of prisons and the police though. Emergency services like fire and police specifically should not be viewed as revenue generators. Thats barely the tip of the iceberg for reasons against privatization. Gangs of New York illustrated a very real example of private fire protection and what could happen.

 

Ambulance services are privatized

[jessemoore97 1,280]

 

Ambulance services are privatized

 

Ours are and most probably are too. However they aren't strictly used as emergency responders. Ours routinely transport patients from one medical facility to another for procedures one hospital may not offer among other things. You can also refuse transport by an ambulance or treatment by them. It happens pretty often. Ours get paid on the basis or transports.

[SpeedsterX 652]

Our pension fund here in Indiana has had great governance and that is why we have a surplus. So much so that the Gov't has been trying to get their hands on it for years. This year they finally got our pension leadership to agree that they can dip into it IF there's a State emergency. I AM SO PISSED! You just know this is just the beginning of them getting their greedy hands on my pension. I have NO clue WHAT the damn State pension leadership is thinking! Also, our city and county paramedics are city funded. Very few private ambulance services here.

[jessemoore97 1,280]

Our pension fund here in Indiana has had great governance and that is why we have a surplus. So much so that the Gov't has been trying to get their hands on it for years. This year they finally got our pension leadership to agree that they can dip into it IF there's a State emergency. I AM SO PISSED! You just know this is just the beginning of them getting their greedy hands on my pension. I have NO clue WHAT the damn State pension leadership is thinking! Also, our city and county paramedics are city funded. Very few private ambulance services here.

 

Yea that sucks Speedy. I can't believe your board caved like that allowing the state a toe hold into the fund. After all whats going to define an "emergency", fairly subjective definition. Knowing how government works I'd expect an "emergency" to pop up pretty soon, and from then on you can probably set your calendar to them.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Yea that sucks Speedy. I can't believe your board caved like that allowing the state a toe hold into the fund. After all whats going to define an "emergency", fairly subjective definition. Knowing how government works I'd expect an "emergency" to pop up pretty soon, and from then on you can probably set your calendar to them.

 

Board? That socialist board! You speak in two tounges my friend. You don’t also hold that GOP govt in Indiana a bit responsible?

 

From the internet:

 

Police officers started to form unions in the early 1900s in conjunction with the labor movement that was sparked by the industrial revolution.

 

The earliest example of why police officers started to form unions is commonly associated with the Boston Police Department.

 

Boston police officers did not receive pay increases from 1898 through 1913. In addition, they were often required to work 72 hours per week and pay for their own uniforms.

 

In 1919, Boston cops unionized affiliated with the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

 

After unionizing, 17 of the union leaders were suspended, which led to the majority of Boston’s police officers walking off the job. Violence in the city ensued after the walkout and, needless to say, after this occurred police officers were prevented from striking.

 

Despite this incident police officers would continue to unionize and, as a result, most police officers belong to some sort of collective bargaining unit today.

 

Our younger officers simply may not know that if it were not for unionization, they would not enjoy many of the benefits (wages, rights and working conditions) they enjoy today.

Edited May 25, 2019 by Jim2Dokes

[jbrown_9999 1,020]

Board? That socialist board! You speak in two tounges my friend. You don’t also hold that GOP govt in Indiana a bit responsible?

 

From the internet:

 

Police officers started to form unions in the early 1900s in conjunction with the labor movement that was sparked by the industrial revolution.

 

The earliest example of why police officers started to form unions is commonly associated with the Boston Police Department.

 

Boston police officers did not receive pay increases from 1898 through 1913. In addition, they were often required to work 72 hours per week and pay for their own uniforms.

 

In 1919, Boston cops unionized affiliated with the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

 

After unionizing, 17 of the union leaders were suspended, which led to the majority of Boston’s police officers walking off the job. Violence in the city ensued after the walkout and, needless to say, after this occurred police officers were prevented from striking.

 

Despite this incident police officers would continue to unionize and, as a result, most police officers belong to some sort of collective bargaining unit today.

 

Our younger officers simply may not know that if it were not for unionization, they would not enjoy many of the benefits (wages, rights and working conditions) they enjoy today.

 

I never understood why government workers belong to unions. Unions were formed to protect workers from selfish "evil" capitalistic owners who took advantage of their employees. Since government workers work for a benevolent employer that has their best interests at heart, is the only reason that they belong to a union a money grab to force taxpayers to overpay for their services? How come it seems that democratically controlled states have the highest percent of unionized government workers? Do democratically controlled states treat their workers worse than republican controlled states?

[Jim2Dokes 3]

I never understood why government workers belong to unions. Unions were formed to protect workers from selfish "evil" capitalistic owners who took advantage of their employees. Since government workers work for a benevolent employer that has their best interests at heart, is the only reason that they belong to a union a money grab to force taxpayers to overpay for their services? How come it seems that democratically controlled states have the highest percent of unionized government workers? Do democratically controlled states treat their workers worse than republican controlled states?

 

Maybe states that vote democrat have more people. Idk, but your wrong

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.governing.com/topics/mgmt/gov-states-where-public-employees-most-prevalent.html%3fAMP

 

8 out of 10 gop states hold the crown for most govt employees Per Capita. Want to go further? They also spend the most federal dollars, have the worst schools, and the most poverty. Talk about bad management .

 

Maybe you should just read my post which states why police officers joined the union to begin with, working 72 hr shifts etc. Jessie may be able to explain why it is important, or may be we just privtive the whole deal. You pay for your roads, your garbage (mafia style), your city beautification, your schools.... I could go on and on, I assume you get the picture of what I have been saying. You think city workers are going to work 72 hrs, no benefits etc fixing the **** you use everyday? You would have high schoolers throwing your trash in your lawn because they were pissed your garbage bin was to heavy. Try going to Loews in a good ecomony, it’s terrible. Imagine your road service.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Jim2Dokes

[Kelly Gruene 26]

Maybe states that vote democrat have more people. Idk, but your wrong

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.governing.com/topics/mgmt/gov-states-where-public-employees-most-prevalent.html%3fAMP

 

8 out of 10 gop states hold the crown for most govt employees Per Capita. Want to go further? They also spend the most federal dollars, have the worst schools, and the most poverty. Talk about bad management .

 

That's an interesting link.

The article you linked didn't specifically indicate government employees per capita, but in the same journal this link does list it: https://www.governing.com/gov-data/public-workforce-salaries/states-most-government-workers-public-employees-by-job-type.html

This link, in the journal you provided, disagrees with what I think your comment regarding 8 of 10 meant. I think you meant that of the 10 states with the highest per capita govt employees, 8 are republican.

However, this article in the journal you referenced indicates an even split: 5 R, 5 D:

Alaska 245, Delaware 190, Wyoming 160, Hawaii 148, Vermont 146, North Dakota 134, New Mexico 128, Montana 125, Mississippi 120, Rhode Island 117.

While per capita government employee numbers are interesting, I don't think I'm smart enough to draw meaningful conclusions based on that. Some may require more policing than others, some may provide more government-funded health care than others, etc.

I like the link, the journal. Good stuff.

[jbrown_9999 1,020]

Jim2Dokes, I was indeed correct. My statement was: How come it seems that democratically controlled states have the highest percent of unionized government workers? You seemed to completely have missed the main point of my question.

 

The attached article a-profile-of-union-workers-in-state-and-local-government/

 

points out that the 10 states with the highest percent of state and local unionized workers are:

 

California (blue state)

Connecticut (blue state)

Hawaii (blue state)

Maine (leans blue)

Massachusetts (blue state)

New Hampshire (split)

New Jersey (blue state)

New York (blue state)

Rhode Island (blue state)

Washington (blue state)

 

* Blue states per Gallup http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/blue-states/

 

It is no longer the 1870's and I am not sure if the 72 hour shift argument applies to state office workers. If Republicans do not care about the common person and "we" should trust a government controlled by Democrats to better provide for us, why do government workers in blue states feel that they need to unionize at a higher rate than government workers in red states?

Edited May 27, 2019 by jbrown_9999

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Jim2Dokes, I was indeed correct. My statement was: How come it seems that democratically controlled states have the highest percent of unionized government workers? You seemed to completely have missed the main point of my question.

 

The attached article a-profile-of-union-workers-in-state-and-local-government/

 

points out that the 10 states with the highest percent of state and local unionized workers are:

 

California (blue state)

Connecticut (blue state)

Hawaii (blue state)

Maine (leans blue)

Massachusetts (blue state)

New Hampshire (split)

New Jersey (blue state)

New York (blue state)

Rhode Island (blue state)

Washington (blue state)

 

* Blue states per Gallup http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/blue-states/

 

It is no longer the 1870's and I am not sure if the 72 hour shift argument applies to state office workers. If Republicans do not care about the common person and "we" should trust a government controlled by Democrats to better provide for us, why do government workers in blue states feel that they need to unionize at a higher rate than government workers in red states?

 

Touché I missed that point in bold. I don’t know if workers feel the need in one state or the other, state laws most likely pay a huge toll. Right to work states there is really no incentive join a union as they offer no protection anyways. I would guess more blue states are not right to work states. Also, as I mentioned blue states have better schools with more teachers. As your article points out teachers make up the majority of Union workers in each state.

[jessemoore97 1,280]

Board? That socialist board! You speak in two tounges my friend. You don’t also hold that GOP govt in Indiana a bit responsible?

 

From the internet:

 

Police officers started to form unions in the early 1900s in conjunction with the labor movement that was sparked by the industrial revolution.

 

The earliest example of why police officers started to form unions is commonly associated with the Boston Police Department.

 

Boston police officers did not receive pay increases from 1898 through 1913. In addition, they were often required to work 72 hours per week and pay for their own uniforms.

 

In 1919, Boston cops unionized affiliated with the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

 

After unionizing, 17 of the union leaders were suspended, which led to the majority of Boston’s police officers walking off the job. Violence in the city ensued after the walkout and, needless to say, after this occurred police officers were prevented from striking.

 

Despite this incident police officers would continue to unionize and, as a result, most police officers belong to some sort of collective bargaining unit today.

 

Our younger officers simply may not know that if it were not for unionization, they would not enjoy many of the benefits (wages, rights and working conditions) they enjoy today.

 

I hold both sides of the aisle responsible for mismanaging spending in the government at all levels. There has been a long history of our pension system, which used to be through the cities themselves at a local level. In the 80's it was decided that the state "needed" to step in and create a state funded system for police and fire. Since that time both sides have looked to fix their poor fiscal decisions by dipping into the funds that are well managed, like our pension, which wasn't designed as a piggy bank for the government to use whenever they want.

 

Regarding unions I have a lot of opinions about them. We formed our own bargaining unit for the PD some years ago, after we finally and thankfully got away from Teamsters. It's not perfect but we are more engaged than we were, and I don't have to worry about my dues going to political candidates at all. Like jbrown_9999 cheekily mentioned about our "benevolent" employer, the government, and your historical factoid about police unions is one of the reasons I am unionized.

 

No I don't believe you can privatize LE. There have been experiments in that area in the past like the Pinkerton Detective Agency, among others, that didn't work out. There are hundreds of reasons why law enforcement specifically shouldn't privatize.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

I hold both sides of the aisle responsible for mismanaging spending in the government at all levels. There has been a long history of our pension system, which used to be through the cities themselves at a local level. In the 80's it was decided that the state "needed" to step in and create a state funded system for police and fire. Since that time both sides have looked to fix their poor fiscal decisions by dipping into the funds that are well managed, like our pension, which wasn't designed as a piggy bank for the government to use whenever they want.

 

Regarding unions I have a lot of opinions about them. We formed our own bargaining unit for the PD some years ago, after we finally and thankfully got away from Teamsters. It's not perfect but we are more engaged than we were, and I don't have to worry about my dues going to political candidates at all. Like jbrown_9999 cheekily mentioned about our "benevolent" employer, the government, and your historical factoid about police unions is one of the reasons I am unionized.

 

No I don't believe you can privatize LE. There have been experiments in that area in the past like the Pinkerton Detective Agency, among others, that didn't work out. There are hundreds of reasons why law enforcement specifically shouldn't privatize.

 

That is great your own private union has done well. However, Marion county is having trouble with theirs. The Pinkerton agency still exists, and is hired by us officials. Blackwater and other private firms are hired by the govt against the anti Pinkerton act, mostly by GOP led efforts. The president that enacted those laws was also for the forest reserve act, anti monopoly and would be considered so left nowadays you may call him a socialist. It is privileged to say your profession requires the govt protection but others do not. The Pinkerton before the law was in place did no worse than a public police force today with all the incompetence that is seen everyday. Make no mistake about it, I agree with you. I am just exposing hypocrisy. I think you know, you are battling yourself at this point. I am just pointing out a libertarian position. Conservative hero David Clarke cost the city of Milwaukee 6.5 million dehydrating and killing inmates. He spoke at your convention, law and order etc etc. looney tunes from the gop.

Edited June 8, 2019 by Jim2Dokes