dayman

So what are we to think about these public sector workers? Reagan/HBush/WBush all added more during recession to help and we've been in the worst recession basically ever and yet we've lost public sector workers. TV crap says 1.whatever million workers could be added with the money Obama wants Congress to give to states. Theoretically this is 1.whatever million unemployed people now employed with income who are then ready to buy housing and goods and get off unemployment/food stamps/other programs etc...spend this income to help the private sector come back...and we've done this over and over in the past to help the overall economy in times of need. At the same time...the money isn't forever and a lot of the states that fired all these people did so b/c they ran out of money... presumably they will again unless we get back to booming and the revenue is back up which is a big "if" relative to when the money runs out etc...it does put the states in a rough spot...plus as we all know reform in public sector benefits is a big issue (rightfully so in many states) and until that is taken care of it's even more reasonable for states themselves to feel apprehensive about this from a management standpoint...even assuming they would phase some out gradually as the economy gets better b/c some may be unnecessary they fired them at great political cost even now it will be more difficult in a theoretical future where we are back to normal and revenues are better... All that said...these unemployed people live in these states so it's not as if they take on the burden without getting some of the benefit. Then there's the money in the first place...some people want to aggressively attack the federal deficit now others are fine for now provided we link it with long term stability... ...what to think...is there truth somewhere in the middle? Should we maybe hire some back but not all, should we hire a bunch, should we not hire any, should we cut more? How does the answer to that effect how we view the actions of past Presidents who have increased public sector workers in recession? Also we know Romney doesn't plan to slash government spending/public employment when he's in office based on his Time interview so are we just waiting until Obama is out?

The single biggest gripe I can possibly have with any and all union policies I've seen in any context is the idea that a principal can observe a class only once or twice a year and only with notice. Can't get my head around that one. I obviously don't know the exact rule but it's something like that where I live. No dropping in to see what's going on by the boss.

$56K on AVERAGE in NY? OMFG...how are there any teachers left in my state...

...never seen a toll booth w/ out a tv...

I love what passes for news on tv these days

I know Karl Rove tweeted he was drunk and this board is anti-Obama but when the report says not alcohol or drugs and then it comes out the man had multiple seizures...at some point it's unbecoming of the American people and Karl Rove.

I don't know what I've typed that makes you think I'm advocating for Public Sector Unions. As for political whims I'm not sure why that isn't fairly self explanatory...there are clear cut differing ideologies (at least in my state IDK where you live) about the compensation some of these jobs should receive...there are frequent elections...etc etc

Of course I am and that's b/c unions are not necessary in modern times in most industries...however they still function in some. As for the rest of your comments about gov't workers...that is your opinion...you would have no mechanism by which they can engage in a dialogue as a group beyond the political process...so be it...the way I see it they should rely primarily on the political process but also have some limited internal mechanism that is protected from mere political whims. I'm sure the situation can vary from state to state/profession to profession but where I live if your profession is "teacher" or "fireman" or "policeman" ... you don't exactly have the traditional options of going to find another job/company anywhere/anytime you want...

Most people would have it 0 if they are not unionized (which a fair enough people aren't) AND not skilled enough so that they are totally replaceable...but they "have it 1 time" by virtue of that union or by virtue of their individual negotiation if they are a skilled worker... Everything else you said are reasons why they may not need a union as much as other workers (whether or not everything there is true is besides the point), but those don't address issue of bargaining power. "Do you have bargaining power?" and "Do you need bargaining power" are two different questions. Personally I think every employee group should have some reasonable ability to bargain for wages/benefits ... what is reasonable within different contexts is highly fact specific and as I said I think some limited internal process for this for public sectors protected from political whims would probably be enough...how limited?...pretty limited (but not totally lacking)

It's not necessarily that the jobs are "non-hazardous" but as others have hinted at when they strike they strike against the tax payers. They are the tax payers. "Management" in this instance is the government...and workers are citizen voters. So it's not really not really management v. workers bargaining for wages ... b/c the workers are all ready represented by the political process as voters. They can vote as they wish, and they can also lobby their fellow voters to persuade them that it's important to give x, y, and z conditions to public sector workers b/c they need to attract certain talent or whatever....Obviously that political representation is there and thus the public union is sort of "having it twice." Now, at the same time it probably isn't fair (IMO) to ONLY have that "first level" political influence as a citizen ... b/c while it's not the traditional management v. worker relationship it still IS a management v. worker relationship (lol) ... so long story short I think they should have some ability to "collectively bargain" but it should be significantly downscaled and ultimately it shouldn't resemble what we think of as a union at all there really should just be some sort of internal process of sorts that is protected against political whims (perhaps built into the state level constitutions?) that allows for some reasonable give and take/dialogue over various benefits and interests that are within the feasibility of whatever the current budget limitations are as set forth by the state congress. Long story short a traditional union would be having it twice. No protection is less than having it "one full time." Some lower-level bargaining power protected from political whims + the fact that they are voters will amount to a fair situation IMO.

LOL this topic is destroyed. I don't mind of course it was predictable but I do which it warped into something more interesting.

LOL, we sure did.

It's an entitlement program to allow students educated in American higher education institutions majoring in STEM fields to then put the education to work in America? And I'm not sure irrational fear of terrorists should be brought up every time people talk about any foreigner ... last I checked it takes years to graduate from college plenty of time to blow something up while here on their student visa.

On a note related to American Competitiveness...recently saw some stuff about the real flaws in our skilled-labor legal immigration process. Why on earth we would take talent from around the world suck them through our higher education system often coming out with graduate degrees in STEM fields and then make it difficult for them to get green cards? Needless to say, if you are an immigrant student graduating with a degree in a STEM field a green card should come with your diploma...no questions asked.

lol I'm sorry Tom but migratory birds **** in that puddle in your back yard that'll be $10K worth of impact studies before you can build a dog house there.

Now now, I wouldn't be so sensitive as someone who wages crusades against workers of other professions.

LOL yes 3rdling illegals are here not in accordance to our current immigration laws. However I have a forward looking approach to the issue of fixing the problem today for today and the future. What are your answers to the issues facing us in this realm?

Personally no I would not build a wall. Fareed's personal conclusion at the end of his special outlines what he sees a possible solution (his opinion of course). Basically give papers to existing illegal immigrants without criminal records, deport those with criminal records. Those given legal status would still have a long route to citizenship most likely lasting 15 years (back of the line) during which they have to pay taxes and stay crime free (of course). Then we would reduce the number (currently 75%) of all immigrants who come in currently b/c they have been sponsored by a legal immigrant, we would increase the number of immigrants who come in with skills we need (needless to say every higher education diploma we give out in our schools to an immigrant student studying STEM fields should include a green card). Lastly make some orderly provision for temp workers who pick crops seasonally. This is basically the crux of the bill co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy and John McCain and strongly supported by then President George Bush...but the right opposed any path to valid status for those who came illegally in the past, some leftist forces opposed the shift to skills based immigration (I assume to protect the higher percentage of legal immigrants sponsoring family members relative to those coming in for skills based reasons?), and the unions opposed the temp worker provisions. I am no expert on immigration but I don't see huge problems with that basic outline.

Of course I'm for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. I'm also against political manipulation of the issue in a way the prevents common sense reform. What about you 3rdling? Is this an issue you care about/what are your general thoughts and irks regarding various options?

IDK but piss me off and I will fear for my life don't think I won't.

So long-story short: Japan is basically insanely anti-immigration despite the fact it seems it would help with some serious problems they face. European nations have many of the same problems we have in the way they view the problem and the politicization of it. Canada and Australia do it well. We can do it well and know how (Ted Kennedy/John McCain/George Bush tried) but the extremes of the parties on both left and right oppose it and it's not likely we are politically capable of enacting intelligent reform anytime soon. No use writing a summary but it's worth watching even if you think you hate Zakaria or are generally "anti-immigration" (whatever that means to you personally).... Some fair discussion on the illegal issue....and some light shed on the backwards policy we have related to the educated immigrants (educated in our schools no less) particularly Silicon Valley's frustration with an inept skilled-worker policy.

Oh of course not....it's not even in Florida (although I would be shocked if Texas didn't have as similar law)...he's arguing self-defense (which is why he introduced the video into court Wednesday)...

If anyone is interested the special starting now on "making immigration work" should have some decent ideas whether anybody agrees or disagrees.

IDK about that...he called the police over a noise complaint...the police actually came out and said it was fine and left (apparently the guy was hosting a birthday party for his wife) http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Subject-in-Huffman-shootings-always-judging-1698753.php ...he then went down and stood on the road off the edge of the guys driveway with a flashlight, camera, and gun...b/c he was not happy taht the police didn't stop the party....and eventually shot 3 drunk people all on that dudes the driveway (the guy died on his own driveway)...I'm not sure he was within any right to do any of that let alone shoot.

LOL yes that is what I'm saying. But please spread the word. It is obvious, but people don't know this. I'm serious too...people don't understand this.