I'd say the biggest threat to the Republic is public sector unions. FDR was against them (asking the pertinent question, "how can government organize against itself?") but Ted Kennedy saw them as a slush fund for Dems since private sector unions were in decline (due to growing international trade / competition).
Thankfully smart midwestern states are seeing what happens when public sector unions run amok (Detroit) and are taking action. Public Sector Unions are a threat to limited government and thus taxpayers. Gotta love the slanted description of "Fair Share":
I'm just amazed that a worthless article pushing even more worthless statistics ended up in a 3 page and counting thread.
At least it is informative to see where some folks *cough* Passion *cough* get their "information"...
Sure. The story is completely wrong. The people in Washington State that complain the MOST about government spending are NOT the same people that disproportionately suck off the government tit. The statistics are all a lie.
It's all about Passion hating farmers. Yah, right.
The people who most suck off the government teat are the Public Sector Unions whose interests are only aligned with the politicians they back rather than regular voters. Regular voters in KC see their taxes go up and up while Union Bus Drivers are making over $100,000 in gross salaries.
Or how about the employees in the office of diversity for Seattle Government? They are pulling in $75k+ just in salary alone for doing jack shit.
That kind of crap has infected Seattle City Government, King County Government, and even parts of the State Government.
I'm just amazed that a worthless article pushing even more worthless statistics ended up in a 3 page and counting thread.
At least it is informative to see where some folks *cough* Passion *cough* get their "information"...
Sure. The story is completely wrong. The people in Washington State that complain the MOST about government spending are NOT the same people that disproportionately suck off the government tit. The statistics are all a lie.
It's all about Passion hating farmers. Yah, right.
I'm just amazed that a worthless article pushing even more worthless statistics ended up in a 3 page and counting thread.
At least it is informative to see where some folks *cough* Passion *cough* get their "information"...
Sure. The story is completely wrong. The people in Washington State that complain the MOST about government spending are NOT the same people that disproportionately suck off the government tit. The statistics are all a lie.
It's all about Passion hating farmers. Yah, right.
Passion, you got a great bumpersticker there, maybe even enough for a snappy yard sign, but that's about as deep as it goes.
Detroit kept spending like a drunken-sailor like it was the 1950's and 1960's because public sector unions are corrupt and terribly difficult to roll back if a city stagnates and / or then loses population.
Unions are soooo eeeeevvvviilllll. Trying to get retirees $28,000/year instead of $25,000/year.
Turrible.
$1BN over twenty years during a period where cost-of-living increases and such weren't happening doesn't seem that bad.
Your other graph tells more of the story:
The population of Detroit in 1960 was 1,670,144. Detroit also had the highest per-capita income of any American city in 1960. The population of Detroit today is 688,701. So, a million more people lived in Detroit 54 years ago, and a much-larger city government existed to serve them. Those folks have retired. And now, the city that pays those pensions is 41% the size of the city they worked for. Oh, Detroit is now among the poorest cities in America in terms of per-capita income.
But yes, it was all the unions that made a million people leave Detroit during the last fifty years.
Passion you do lie. The stats lie...you can get stats to lie for whatever you'd like. We see it daily with this "great" economy.
Why did they leave off half of the budget, included that of public transportation, capital spending, and all sorts of other things? The largest state employee group is "Higher Education" with ~43% of the overall # of state employees? That's a boatload of $$$...wonder what counties those employees are and are not in.
On top of that...by simple economics the numbers will be skewed. Commuters by definition will generate income in the higher density areas where they work (via the Business and Occupation Tax) while any "benefits" they get will be from their location of residence. Same with most all large businesses (you think rural people only buy things like rural cars, or do they go to where they have a much better choice). And the opposite is true on things like Prisons (you know...another state function)...for some crazy reason they don't like putting those in heavily populated areas. So the state pays to have a prison out in a place like Connell, Walla Walla, and Monroe and ships all the people from the heavily populated places (we will assume with their passports) that get arrested there...magic, by your "measurement" its yet another rural handout since its the state spending money in that county.
Hey Passion...keep swallowing that Stranger Spooge...why think when you can regurgitate somebody else's lies?
The hostility of middle-class Americans toward organizations that exist primarily to improve their bargaining position and benefits package never ceases to amaze me
The hostility of middle-class Americans toward organizations that exist primarily to improve their bargaining position and benefits package never ceases to amaze me
Public Unions should never serve that purpose. Private unions should and did once, but now the fact they are more Hoffa Jr. and stories like this and this and this and much less about their actual workers who they take money from is the reason they lost their way. Unfortunately that also meant they drove their industries toward irrelevance as well...
The hostility of middle-class Americans toward organizations that exist primarily to improve their bargaining position and benefits package never ceases to amaze me
Public Unions should never serve that purpose. Private unions should and did once, but now the fact they are more Hoffa Jr. and stories like this and this and this and much less about their actual workers who they take money from is the reason they lost their way. Unfortunately that also meant they drove their industries toward irrelevance as well...
Corporations almost never steal. Except when they do.
First off, you're moving the goalposts. Originally you said it was the 1970's ruling regarding public school integration that led Detroit to bankruptcy yet you go all the way back to 1960 to pull population numbers.
#2, since public sector unions exist to fleece everyone else not in said unions, they are hard to get rid of and downsize which means more of them stuck around to qualify for pensions.
#3, Detroit didn't start materially decreasing city teat suckers until 2004 so it took the city 30 years (40 if you want to cherry pick 1960 numbers and ignore your original assertion about the SC ruling) to go from roughly 25,000 to 19,000 workers. But if they were facing such a declining population that didn't need nearly as many services (and workers), why did it take them that long? Well, see #2.
#4, When the public sector unions and pensioners saw the writing on the wall in 2004, they finally relented to cutting head-count purely out of self-interest because at the end of the day, all they cared about was their pensions. That's why it only took them 9 years to reduce headcount from about 19,000 employees to under 10,000.
#5, It doesn't appear as though the $2,300+ bonus checks were inflation adjusted in the graph. Therefore the money they paid out each year (bonus for what, they suck off the teat of the government, are very difficult to fire, and have great pensions / healthcare benefits / early retirements) is much higher in 2015 dollars.
Unions are soooo eeeeevvvviilllll. Trying to get retirees $28,000/year instead of $25,000/year.
Turrible.
$1BN over twenty years during a period where cost-of-living increases and such weren't happening doesn't seem that bad.
Your other graph tells more of the story:
The population of Detroit in 1960 was 1,670,144. Detroit also had the highest per-capita income of any American city in 1960. The population of Detroit today is 688,701. So, a million more people lived in Detroit 54 years ago, and a much-larger city government existed to serve them. Those folks have retired. And now, the city that pays those pensions is 41% the size of the city they worked for. Oh, Detroit is now among the poorest cities in America in terms of per-capita income.
But yes, it was all the unions that made a million people leave Detroit during the last fifty years.
Are you talking about unions such as Boeing has that compete in the private sector or Public Sector Unions that exist to fleece everyone else not in government? That are not one and the same.
This should keep you busy for at least a little while, why don't you start a pole on this Husky Site and ask if people:
1) Support Public Sector Unions more than Private Sector Unions
2) Support Private Sector Unions more than Public Sector Unions
3) Think Public Sector Unions should've never been legal and that Private Sector Unions are fine.
The hostility of middle-class Americans toward organizations that exist primarily to improve their bargaining position and benefits package never ceases to amaze me
First off, you're moving the goalposts. Originally you said it was the 1970's ruling regarding public school integration that led Detroit to bankruptcy yet you go all the way back to 1960 to pull population numbers.
#2, since public sector unions exist to fleece everyone else not in said unions, they are hard to get rid of and downsize which means more of them stuck around to qualify for pensions.
#3, Detroit didn't start materially decreasing city teat suckers until 2004 so it took the city 30 years (40 if you want to cherry pick 1960 numbers and ignore your original assertion about the SC ruling) to go from roughly 25,000 to 19,000 workers. But if they were facing such a declining population that didn't need nearly as many services (and workers), why did it take them that long? Well, see #2.
#4, When the public sector unions and pensioners saw the writing on the wall in 2004, they finally relented to cutting head-count purely out of self-interest because at the end of the day, all they cared about was their pensions. That's why it only took them 9 years to reduce headcount from about 19,000 employees to under 10,000.
#5, It doesn't appear as though the $2,300+ bonus checks were inflation adjusted in the graph. Therefore the money they paid out each year (bonus for what, they suck off the teat of the government, are very difficult to fire, and have great pensions / healthcare benefits / early retirements) is much higher in 2015 dollars.
Unions are soooo eeeeevvvviilllll. Trying to get retirees $28,000/year instead of $25,000/year.
Turrible.
$1BN over twenty years during a period where cost-of-living increases and such weren't happening doesn't seem that bad.
Your other graph tells more of the story:
The population of Detroit in 1960 was 1,670,144. Detroit also had the highest per-capita income of any American city in 1960. The population of Detroit today is 688,701. So, a million more people lived in Detroit 54 years ago, and a much-larger city government existed to serve them. Those folks have retired. And now, the city that pays those pensions is 41% the size of the city they worked for. Oh, Detroit is now among the poorest cities in America in terms of per-capita income.
But yes, it was all the unions that made a million people leave Detroit during the last fifty years.
#1 Hi. I was using your graphs about Detroit, one of which started in 1960.
My poont is that white flight (which started in the 1960's and turned into a tidal wave after the Milliken case, is what killed Detroit. Not its public employees' union, which was a gnat on the regional economy in 1960 when things were still good and is (I'm certain) even less of a factor today. Most cities have public employees' unions, and most of them are doing fine, because most cities aren't shrinking to their 1914 population like Detroit has been doing (and getting poorer, relative to the rest of the country) for the last forty or so years.
#2 is just screed on your part. Public employees are hard to fire.
#3 is wrong. From your graph, looks like Detroit shed almost 7,000 employees from 1975-1985. Peak municipal employment was a bit more than 26,000 that in the early 1970's. Where I come from, 25% is a substantial reduction in force.
#4 So what? Everyone realized that the city was completely broke and there was nothing left to do but abandon ship.
#5 Huh? And the city is raking in 2015 dollars in taxes to pay its pension liabilities. WGAF?
The unions didn't make Whitey leave Detroit. Show me that they did, somehow. I'll be waiting right here.
Comments
Thankfully smart midwestern states are seeing what happens when public sector unions run amok (Detroit) and are taking action. Public Sector Unions are a threat to limited government and thus taxpayers. Gotta love the slanted description of "Fair Share":
wgntv.com/2015/02/09/gov-rauner-signs-executive-order-allowing-state-employees-to-opt-out-of-union-dues/
And all this time I thought it was Milliken v. Bradley.
It's all about Passion hating farmers. Yah, right.
Or how about the employees in the office of diversity for Seattle Government? They are pulling in $75k+ just in salary alone for doing jack shit.
That kind of crap has infected Seattle City Government, King County Government, and even parts of the State Government.
White flight happened. Detroit lost its tax base and went broke.
Detroit kept spending like a drunken-sailor like it was the 1950's and 1960's because public sector unions are corrupt and terribly difficult to roll back if a city stagnates and / or then loses population.
freep.com/graphics/financial-history/detroit-bankruptcy-pensioners-employees-3.gif
Unions are soooo eeeeevvvviilllll. Trying to get retirees $28,000/year instead of $25,000/year.
Turrible.
$1BN over twenty years during a period where cost-of-living increases and such weren't happening doesn't seem that bad.
Your other graph tells more of the story:
The population of Detroit in 1960 was 1,670,144. Detroit also had the highest per-capita income of any American city in 1960. The population of Detroit today is 688,701. So, a million more people lived in Detroit 54 years ago, and a much-larger city government existed to serve them. Those folks have retired. And now, the city that pays those pensions is 41% the size of the city they worked for. Oh, Detroit is now among the poorest cities in America in terms of per-capita income.
But yes, it was all the unions that made a million people leave Detroit during the last fifty years.
$951 million divided by 20,000 pensioners (roughly) divided by 20 years = $2,377.50 per pensioner per year.
SO LAVISH
Why did they leave off half of the budget, included that of public transportation, capital spending, and all sorts of other things? The largest state employee group is "Higher Education" with ~43% of the overall # of state employees? That's a boatload of $$$...wonder what counties those employees are and are not in.
On top of that...by simple economics the numbers will be skewed. Commuters by definition will generate income in the higher density areas where they work (via the Business and Occupation Tax) while any "benefits" they get will be from their location of residence. Same with most all large businesses (you think rural people only buy things like rural cars, or do they go to where they have a much better choice). And the opposite is true on things like Prisons (you know...another state function)...for some crazy reason they don't like putting those in heavily populated areas. So the state pays to have a prison out in a place like Connell, Walla Walla, and Monroe and ships all the people from the heavily populated places (we will assume with their passports) that get arrested there...magic, by your "measurement" its yet another rural handout since its the state spending money in that county.
Hey Passion...keep swallowing that Stranger Spooge...why think when you can regurgitate somebody else's lies?
-HH
#2, since public sector unions exist to fleece everyone else not in said unions, they are hard to get rid of and downsize which means more of them stuck around to qualify for pensions.
#3, Detroit didn't start materially decreasing city teat suckers until 2004 so it took the city 30 years (40 if you want to cherry pick 1960 numbers and ignore your original assertion about the SC ruling) to go from roughly 25,000 to 19,000 workers. But if they were facing such a declining population that didn't need nearly as many services (and workers), why did it take them that long? Well, see #2.
#4, When the public sector unions and pensioners saw the writing on the wall in 2004, they finally relented to cutting head-count purely out of self-interest because at the end of the day, all they cared about was their pensions. That's why it only took them 9 years to reduce headcount from about 19,000 employees to under 10,000.
#5, It doesn't appear as though the $2,300+ bonus checks were inflation adjusted in the graph. Therefore the money they paid out each year (bonus for what, they suck off the teat of the government, are very difficult to fire, and have great pensions / healthcare benefits / early retirements) is much higher in 2015 dollars.
But go ahead, keep digging yourself deeper Quook.
#justincaseyoumissedit
This should keep you busy for at least a little while, why don't you start a pole on this Husky Site and ask if people:
1) Support Public Sector Unions more than Private Sector Unions
2) Support Private Sector Unions more than Public Sector Unions
3) Think Public Sector Unions should've never been legal and that Private Sector Unions are fine.
My poont is that white flight (which started in the 1960's and turned into a tidal wave after the Milliken case, is what killed Detroit. Not its public employees' union, which was a gnat on the regional economy in 1960 when things were still good and is (I'm certain) even less of a factor today. Most cities have public employees' unions, and most of them are doing fine, because most cities aren't shrinking to their 1914 population like Detroit has been doing (and getting poorer, relative to the rest of the country) for the last forty or so years.
#2 is just screed on your part. Public employees are hard to fire.
#3 is wrong. From your graph, looks like Detroit shed almost 7,000 employees from 1975-1985. Peak municipal employment was a bit more than 26,000 that in the early 1970's. Where I come from, 25% is a substantial reduction in force.
#4 So what? Everyone realized that the city was completely broke and there was nothing left to do but abandon ship.
#5 Huh? And the city is raking in 2015 dollars in taxes to pay its pension liabilities. WGAF?
The unions didn't make Whitey leave Detroit. Show me that they did, somehow. I'll be waiting right here.