Today is

Wednesday, March 04, 2015

Ouch! Business Owner Flogs RTW Critics. Urges Passage.

Personal bankruptcy attorney James Murray testifies in favor of Right-to-Work legislation. Watch it:

Monday, March 02, 2015

Idea: General Strike Should Take The Form Of a General Boycott

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
-- President Abraham Lincoln

Therein lies the problem. Unfortunately today, capital IS superior to labor and it does get higher consideration because it is taxed much less than labor. You might have noticed too that labor is treated like worthless crap. That is why I suggest the form of a general strike should not be by withholding labor, because you'll just be replaced for your actions. Instead it should be in the form of a general boycott by withholding capital.

What do I mean exactly?

Cut your cable and dish connections. Cut all your magazines and newspaper subscriptions and private club memberships, Turn on free digital TV and radio. Start exercising instead of going to a Badger or Bucks game. Start preparing dinners and eating at home instead of going to restaurants.

Mow your own lawn, do your own gardening and shovel your own snow instead of hiring a service. Cancel those services. Delay contractor home remodeling and ALL other non-essential expenses. You'll save money. Go for walks and start bicycling instead of driving to shopping malls. Discover your family and neighbors and get off the junk wagon of perpetual consumerism and aimless spending.

Imagine the local cable company getting 1,000 calls to disconnect the cable on a single day OR a city newspaper or other major subscription service getting thousands of calls for cancellations on a single day and the calls keep coming in for a week. That's what I'm talking about.

For however long it takes.

The beauty in this is no companies or business sectors are specific targets. It's a general boycott of the entire statist establishment.

If only half of the 46 percent of those voting against Walker did this, Wisconsin would come to a complete standstill. No need to picket. No need for demonstrations or rallies. No talk or need for civil disobedience. No need for petitions and no need to put your own job in jeopardy by not going to work. No need to give a reason to anyone why you have cut spending. Conservatives in particular should quickly relate.

I also understand that some people in general can be a spoiled lot who simply won't give up their latte. That's why I don't understand why labor unions haven't developed a strong Plan B strategy similar to this from the heavy citizens participation during previous protests in Wisconsin.

Since a strike like this would be effective only if carried out in unison with a start date, why they didn't have a check box for supporters who would be willing to participate in a general boycott when called upon is beyond me. If at least to gage interest of such action.

It's still not too late to organize for something like this, but I leave this suggestion on the podium at this time for your consideration with the question: What are the alternatives?

IF RTW Raises Wages, How Do Unions Hurt Businesses?

In an interview segment of "Here and Now" hosted by Frederica Freyberg, comes a frighteningly parsed yet laughable string of statements from the WMC's VP Scott Manley.

Under a basic line of questioning, Manley delivers a dumpster full of convoluted corporate hack talking points that simply doesn't square with reality. The amazing thing here is, Manley attempts to sell his entire pro-RTW meme on the reconstruction of a few soft facts, A) wage growth is faster in RTW states vs non-RTW, B) rate of job growth is better vs non-RTW, and C) RTW gives businesses "flexibility."

Of course even the street level little guy knows Manley's iterations about rates of growth are measures of speed and lift from a new "dropped" bottom and have nothing to do with actual wages or quality of jobs.

So, after Manley opens by building his foundational argument with RTW bringing higher wages and greater union membership, Freyberg follows through with a few simple questions in an effort to square the circle.

She asked, "how do wages go up?"

Manley, "It's based on the market ...and in RTW states, keep in mind they're growing jobs twice as fast and ...when you have more jobs available and the same number of employees, that creates higher demand for employees, and when you have higher demand for employees, those employees can command a higher wage."

Hoo ...hoo,hoo,hoo,hoooo.

The main problem is Manley begins his response with a giant hole by failing to explain the cause of the demand for jobs in RTW states. The demand he's talking about is not market demand for product's demand for a rock bottom wage environment for employers.

With some deductive reasoning applied, half of the giant hole is an economic environment tapped out and incapable of creating more jobs through generally accepted supply-and-demand principles. What he won't say is RTW creates an artificial way to add jobs without increased product demand while cutting the payroll at the same time. Manley of course can't bring himself to the truth of the matter because his house of cards would instantly collapse.

My other point is, IF the endgame of RTW is to foster an economy of higher wage employees circularly creating more demand, we're already there with unions. So why go through all the trouble?

Well, we know RTW is primarily about the confiscation of earnings and political power.

Freyberg then asked, "...How do unions hurt businesses...?"

Manley spins the question completely around in his reply, "it's not about hurting unions ...a lot of people assume that right to work automatically results in a bad outcome for unions and that hasn't been the case."

Of course, Manley never answered the question and a lot of people have it all wrong. cough ...cough. There's no question in my mind his entire RTW meme is dripping in bullshit.

But the question every RTW supporter should answer is, SINCE RTW brings higher wages and benefits unions, "how do unions hurt businesses?"

The Freyberg/Manley interview, only 4 minutes long, is highly recommended viewing and can be seen here.

Sunday, March 01, 2015

Gazette, Forward Janesville Scream Support For RTW With Silence

With Gov. Scott Walker's office announcing he will sign the controversial so-called Right-To-Work regulations into law if when the bill arrives on his desk, came an absent series of deafening editorials from both the Walker-endorsing Janesville Gazette and the local "divide and conquer" booster group Forward Janesville.

Besides their devotion to Scott Walker, Forward Janesville you might recall, lobbied successfully for manufacturing and "enterprise zone" tax credits including transferable "portable" income tax credits for businesses that create zero jobs.

In Wisconsin, the "doubling" of cut-wage jobs resulting from RTW for just one manufacturer can lead to getting thousands of dollars per employee in state tax credits, thus doubling the extraction rate of capital from wage-earning taxpayers.

Forward Janesville also played a major role in changing the state aid dollars ratio split between local road maintenance/repairs and interstate expansion money. That shift alone created a greater burden on communities to cope with existing revenues to fix local roads. Crumbling local roads replaced by dirt and gravel or huge tax hikes on declining wages are the expected remedies.

Make no mistake. When it comes to public policies of Rock County's economic development, Forward Janesville and the Gazette are the area's top two bloviators. Yet, with the ramming of the immensely wrong-headed right to work regulations, their silence is equal to screaming support for it from the rooftops.

Saturday, February 28, 2015

Business Supporters For RTW "Freedom" Deny The Same For Their Customers

From the category "what you don't know can hurt you" ...

Democurmudgeon Excerpt:
State Senator Chris Larson confronted Steve Nass about "not seeing a single person that hasn't gotten money from the Bradley Foundation." That money provides cover for the donors pushing right-to-work. Nass defended anonymous Big Businesses, saying they were fearful of blowback, boycotts and retaliation by those unhappy with the legislation.

Nass suggests some folks, otherwise known as customers or clients, might refuse to spend money at their business establishment because they don't want their purchase to support politics they don't agree with? That's blowback? That's boycott? That's retaliation?

Isn't that freedom?

Interesting from the angle that these RTW supporters are pushing a policy in which a major but false talking point includes; people (workers) shouldn't have to be "forced" to pay (in dues) for politics or a product they don't agree with. Scott Walker calls that option for choice, freedom.

Of course first, they have to know what those politics are.

But, by refusing to come forward publicly with their support for RTW, these businesses are denying their customers the same freedom to "arm" their pocketbooks with the comfort to know the politics their purchase might be supporting.

Businesses willingly hiding their identity for supporting legislation BECAUSE they know it will make their customers unhappy, yet continue to sell them products and service without disclosure, is not only freedom denied - it's dishonest business.

Watch this incredible exchange from the Senate Conference Room:

Thursday, February 26, 2015

CPAC Walker: I Can Beat ISIS Since I Handled Union Protesters

The protests in Wisconsin during 2011 by all measures relative to their size, structure and general disposition were indisputably among the most peaceful protests in the USA over the past 50 years.

But watch Gov. Scott Walker compare his inability to engage with Wisconsin constituents during those protests as proof that he has the ability to engage the global threat posed by Islamic terrorists.

National Review!! Excerpt:
Secondly, it is insulting to the protesters, a group I take no pleasure in defending. The protesters in Wisconsin, so furiously angry over Walker’s reforms and disruptive to the procedures of passing laws, earned plenty of legitimate criticism. But they’re not ISIS. They’re not beheading innocent people. They’re Americans, and as much as we may find their ideas, worldview, and perspective spectacularly wrongheaded, they don’t deserve to be compared to murderous terrorists.

Strike-through edits are mine.

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Scott Walker Channels Saddam Hussein In Jihadist Comment

National Review Excerpt:
Noteworthy, Walker argued that when Reagan fired the PATCO air-traffic controllers over their illegal strike, he was sending a message of toughness to Democrats and unions at home as well as our Soviet enemies abroad. Similarly, Walker believes his stance against unions in Wisconsin would be a signal of toughness to Islamic jihadists and Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Don't be shocked. That is the typical mindset of today's republican party. They demonize any opposition first by associating them with some completely unrelated but known scourge, then transform those displaced associations into fear to be projected onto an unsuspecting constituency.

Even more disturbing than that is how Walker despicably draws a composite of Democratic and union contributions to America together as something that must be stopped as equally and urgently as the murderously destructive activity Islamic Jihadists impose on the Middle-East. It's not just patently wrong, Walker's comment is outrageous.

But, as despicable as Walker's comments are, they are not unusual coming from members of today's Republican Party.

In 2007, Rep. Paul Ryan said labor unions offered its members the same protection and opportunities Saddam Hussein offered Iraqis if they joined his Ba'ath Party. So, Republicans in general don't see Democrats or democratically instituted free market labor unions as productive components of the American Experience. They see them as terrorists and thugs. For more proof, all you need to do is read some of the articles and comments about unions posted at conservative right-wing websites and blogs.

Walker's message is both laughable and yet very disturbing with its dangerously aggressive and divisive construction because he thinks he is sending a message to outside enemies that he would rule with the same authority not of a Ronald Reagan, but as thug dictator Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq. Why Hussein? Because Putin or ISIS don't give a rats ass about Ronald Reagan, the Democratic party or the PATCO strike in 1981 - they simply can't relate, at all.

BUT, Walker is banking they understand fear and can relate to the psychoticism of a deranged American who knowingly hurts his own people simply for political gain, in the same context they fear a thug dictator would gas his own villages to hold onto power, like Saddam Hussein.

Walker is saying, if I do this to my own people, just think what I would do to you. THAT, they understand.


Crooks and Liars - Walker Is Attacking Wisconsin Workers Because Of Putin, ISIS

CogDis - Scott Walker I can't even with you

Friday, February 20, 2015