PDA

View Full Version : Prop 75



Waldo
10-07-2005, 07:24 AM
Does it have a hidden agenda to weaken public employees? :confused:
I'd like to hear some informed opinions...not personal attacks please.
Not trying to start a battle here...
I have read the initiative and both sides sound strong IMO.

slink
10-07-2005, 07:38 AM
Being that this issue effects me, I am voteing NO. As far as having a hidden agenda HMMM? Think back to last year when Arnie was trying to make major changes to PERS (Public Employee Retirement System) and all of the sudden he had to back away from it due to all the heat he was catching from nurses, teachers, fireman, L.E. and others. Well now this Prop 75 appears on the special election and is designed to directly target how these unions collect and spend money from their designated P.A.C (Political Action) funds. HMMM, you tell me :idea:

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 08:15 AM
I'm voting yes on it

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 08:22 AM
From what I understand, the unions can take money from paychecks and use it for whatever purpose (policital) they want. Regardless of the employee's opinion on the matter. So your giving your money to the union to champion a cause that you are against and have no say in the matter. I'm voting yes.
I've worked for union's and for the most part they are not needed....

bruddah
10-07-2005, 08:26 AM
firefighters say no!

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 08:35 AM
firefighters say no!
firefighter's union says no. :rollside:

Jyruiz
10-07-2005, 08:41 AM
I am voting yes.

Brooski
10-07-2005, 08:48 AM
I am voting no. In my opinion, the only people that should even have the right to vote on this are the public employees of the unions involved. Why should the rest of the general public have a say what my union does and where my money goes and what it is used for? We dont have any control over private companies and where they place their money. Like Slink said, its all a way for Arnold to get back at the unions. Vote No!

Waldo
10-07-2005, 08:50 AM
I am not interested in who is voting Y/N...I am insterested in "why" you are voting Y/N. I asked a specific ? and would like informed opinions. I know what the public unions say as I am a member of one. Anyone want to add?
Thanks Slink, Stoneman & Brooski.

SixDays
10-07-2005, 08:53 AM
Don't just say "yes." Tell us why you think this is a good thing. As a firefighter, I will be voting NO, because it has the potential to destroy my pension and the pensions of all those to come. We already have a choice on how to spend our union money, we just have to voice it!

HM
10-07-2005, 08:55 AM
I am voting yes.
Prop 75 is making it so they HAVE to "opt in" and are not requiring anything different from the "opt out" process, except it is in reverse. Right now, it is assumed that the members agree to having money taken fromt their checks and they have to "opt out" on each issue and fill out the paper work correctly. Now, they would have to "opt in" on each issue.
The unions are heavily against this as they know the majority will not opt in and lose a ton of money for their political battles. That is why they set it up as an opt out...as they know the majority wouldn't bother and perhaps many are intimidated to go down and officially "opt out". No one would be intimidated to opt in, infact I am sure the Union would roll out the red carpet for the people who choose to "opt in" and do their best to make sure they filled out everything correctly, efficiently, and painlessly....which is not true for the existing "opt out" process.
The agenda is, Arnold is fighting the Unions and trying to knock out some of their financial power. Should unions have so much financial clout just because people are too lazy or a possibly intimidated to "opt out"? If the Unions had such a compelling cause, would it be difficult to get members to use the exact same process in reverse?
That is Prop 75 - Cut and dry. Anything else is spin - from either side. The pro 75 people are calling it a Paycheck Protection Initiative...that is b.s. The union is saying that Arnold is trying to take their choices away...that is b.s.
I can't wait for when people have the ability to get a job (that is unionized) and have the ability to join or not join a union. What do you think the future of unions would be if the union was "optional"?

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 08:58 AM
I am voting no. In my opinion, the only people that should even have the right to vote on this are the public employees of the unions involved. Why should the rest of the general public have a say what my union does and where my money goes and what it is used for? We dont have any control over private companies and where they place their money. Like Slink said, its all a way for Arnold to get back at the unions. Vote No!
That is like saying only victims should vote on crime bills. My Corp does not make me give them due's!!!!!! ;)

SixDays
10-07-2005, 08:59 AM
Sorry, I forgot to explain why! By approving 75, unions will not be able to collect money for political action. Not that that is a bad thing, but timing is everything. It will take the state 4-6 months to create a form that will allow us to authorize union fund allocation, in which time, the union will not be able to raise funds to lobby against the pension destroying measures already attached to the june elections. It will be like we are fighting with our hands behind our backs, and it's not fair. I usually just lurk aound the forums, and unfortunately this is my first post, but it is very important to all the people that make this world go 'round that this prop does not pass!

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 09:02 AM
Public employees are paid via tax dollars. I pay more than my fair share of taxes.
While I fully support the public employees my tax dollars support, I believe they should not have the benefit of a pension that pays them more money than they made while working. It should be significantly lower than what they made while working.
Further, public employees should be subject to the same retirement plans the rest of us in the private sector manage. I.e. 401K's where you contirbute money from personal earnings and the gov't would match up to 6% of annual income with matching of 50% of what the employee contributes.
Lastly I think Unions are poison to our overall economy are reduce our competitiveness. Just look at what the Airline and Auto industry face with pension obligations. The unions are going to bankrupt some of the largest companies in the US due to these obligations not to mention creating a situation where they lack the funds to invest back into those companies to remain competitive.

slink
10-07-2005, 09:03 AM
I am voting yes.
Prop 75 is making it so they HAVE to "opt in" and are not requiring anything different from the "opt out" process, except it is in reverse. Right now, it is assumed that the members agree to having money taken fromt their checks and they have to "opt out" on each issue and fill out the paper work correctly. Now, they would have to "opt in" on each issue.
The unions are heavily against this as they know the majority will not opt in and lose a ton of money for their political battles. That is why they set it up as an opt out...as they know the majority wouldn't bother and perhaps many are intimidated to go down and officially "opt out". No one would be intimidated to opt in, infact I am sure the Union would roll out the red carpet for the people who choose to "opt in" and do their best to make sure they filled out everything correctly, efficiently, and painlessly....which is not true for the existing "opt out" process.
The agenda is, Arnold is fighting the Unions and trying to knock out some of their financial power. Should unions have so much financial clout just because people are too lazy or a possibly intimidated to "opt out"? If the Unions had such a compelling cause, would it be difficult to get members to use the exact same process in reverse?
That is Prop 75 - Cut and dry. Anything else is spin - from either side. The pro 75 people are calling it a Paycheck Protection Initiative...that is b.s. The union is saying that Arnold is trying to take their choices away...that is b.s.
I can't wait for when people have the ability to get a job (that is unionized) and have the ability to join or not join a union. What do you think the future of unions would be if the union was "optional"?
Most L.E unions are "Optional". What's funny for example are those few in my department that don't belong, don't pay dues, don't contribute to PAC, the first time their azz is in the fire who do they come crying to trying to save their azz.

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 09:06 AM
Sorry, I forgot to explain why! By approving 75, unions will not be able to collect money for political action. Not that that is a bad thing, but timing is everything. It will take the state 4-6 months to create a form that will allow us to authorize union fund allocation, in which time, the union will not be able to raise funds to lobby against the pension destroying measures already attached to the june elections. It will be like we are fighting with our hands behind our backs, and it's not fair. I usually just lurk aound the forums, and unfortunately this is my first post, but it is very important to all the people that make this world go 'round that this prop does not pass!
I personnaly don't think the Gov wants to get rid of your pension. Maybe teachers and other non-critical jobs. Plus Arni want's to only apply the new pension plans to new hires. Any why should Californian's go broke paying for retired gov workers. Most have a very easy job and are very lazy.

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 09:06 AM
Slink - sounds like the Union is protecting those who aren't performing or did their job improperly.
In the private sector, you'd be out on your azz. Just as it should be.
Another example of how Unions protect sub-par performance.
This is not what makes America strong

slink
10-07-2005, 09:12 AM
Slink - sounds like the Union is protecting those who aren't performing or did their job improperly.
In the private sector, you'd be out on your azz. Just as it should be.
Another example of how Unions protect sub-par performance.
This is not what makes America strong
Considering the 95% of citizen compliants are BS and people file BS law suits against cops everyday, I'll take this as an assumption that you don't know how hard our union reps and lawyers work for us "Non- performing" cops protecting your AZZ. Off my soap box NO ON 75

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 09:34 AM
Hey bro - I never accused you of being an underperforming employee.
If there were no unions, the government would then step up and hire the attorney's to defend against these kinds of issues. Cause lets face it, they are suing the government, the department, and the employee. Directly toward the deep pocket.
What do you call 100 attorney's at the bottom of the ocean? - An excellent start.
P.S. I fully support or L.E, Fireman, etc. I think they should be exempt from lawsuits. Except in those instances where its crystal clear that gross negligence took place. Or improper moral/ethical issues took place.

h2ospdskir
10-07-2005, 09:35 AM
slink prop 75 is just a way to borrow from pers

HM
10-07-2005, 09:35 AM
Most L.E unions are "Optional". What's funny for example are those few in my department that don't belong, don't pay dues, don't contribute to PAC, the first time their azz is in the fire who do they come crying to trying to save their azz.
Hey, I didn't know it was optional! That is b.s. if they don't join, then run to the union for help.

ROZ
10-07-2005, 09:39 AM
Isn't there a political forum for this? :supp:

ROZ
10-07-2005, 09:50 AM
Most L.E unions are "Optional". What's funny for example are those few in my department that don't belong, don't pay dues, don't contribute to PAC, the first time their azz is in the fire who do they come crying to trying to save their azz.
So if you're in the union and disagree about where your "political" fundsgo, or any funds for that matter, can you as an individual opt out and have your contribution be withheld and not get crap from your union reps?
My aunt disagrees with her teachers union about taking out money from her paycheck for political reason she doesn't agree with.

slink
10-07-2005, 10:08 AM
So if you're in the union and disagree about where your "political" fundsgo, or any funds for that matter, can you as an individual opt out and have your contribution be withheld and not get crap from your union reps?
My aunt disagrees with her teachers union about taking out money from her paycheck for political reason she doesn't agree with.
At my department yes, we have our union dues which a small portion gets allogated to PAC, then most members also contributed extra $$$ into PAC, this is a signed waiver over and above the normal dues. It is not required to sign this to be a member, in fact a few people don't.

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 10:09 AM
She shouldn't have 1 cent of HER money go to something she does not agree with. Get the point.

Stoneman
10-07-2005, 10:11 AM
At my department yes, we have our union dues which a small portion gets allogated to PAC, then most members also contributed extra $$$ into PAC, this is a signed waiver over and above the normal dues. It is not required to sign this to be a member, in fact a few people don't.
I think this is the whole point behind 75. If you want to give fine, it just shouldn't be mandatory .

HM
10-07-2005, 10:19 AM
I think this is the whole point behind 75. If you want to give fine, it just shouldn't be mandatory .
It is not "mandatory" right now. They have the ability to opt out.
But, the unions know that if their members had to opt in, that most would do the same thing they do now...which is nothing. Only the hard core opt out now. Only the hard core would opt in, thus reducing these political funds to nothing.
I am voting yes for 75 as I know that will help cripple them politically. I won't support any union, especially ones funded by tax payers.

Jyruiz
10-07-2005, 10:20 AM
I am voting yes for 75 as I know that will help cripple them politically. I won't support any union, especially ones funded by tax payers.
And that is why I am voting yes.

ROZ
10-07-2005, 10:25 AM
It's too bad that the public and public services workers are used as pawns by both side... I blame both the state and unions for whatever happens...

OGShocker
10-07-2005, 11:56 AM
I am voting no. In my opinion, the only people that should even have the right to vote on this are the public employees of the unions involved. Why should the rest of the general public have a say what my union does and where my money goes and what it is used for? We dont have any control over private companies and where they place their money. Like Slink said, its all a way for Arnold to get back at the unions. Vote No!
This should be moved to the PR!
With all due respect, are you a buffoon? Let's say put a welfare minimumization proposition on the ballot. Do we then tell the voters of this once great State that only Welfare Moms can vote on it? :hammerhea
The unions in this State have a strangle hold on the law makers. This prop 75 does nothing more than ask the members of unions to OK, in writing whether their dues can be spent by the union as they see fit.

Waldo
10-07-2005, 12:06 PM
Let's say put a welfare minimumization proposition on the ballot. Do we then tell the voters of this once great State that only Welfare Moms can vote on it?
Not to rock the boat (as I'm not a good master-debater)...but...
Do "welfare moms" pay into welfare? If so, then they should have a voice...If not, no way! I think this might have been his thinking.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 12:38 PM
They are at it again!
This year we had to fight Governor Shwarzenegger and his political allies who wanted to privatize our pensions and eliminate death and disability benefits for our families if we die or are injured in the line of duty. We made our voices heard, loud and clear. We told them: hands off our pensions!
We've stopped them for now... but they have pledged to come back next year and before they do, they want to silence our voiices in November so we can't be heard again!
Why? Well its all about a hidden agenda.
While we were fighting against their risky pension scheme, teachers were fighting to restore funding taken from our public schools, and nurses were battling against reductions in hospital staffing to protect their patients. Its precisely our voices on the these kind of issues that proponents of prop 75 want to silence.
Thats what Proposition 75 is all about - and we must defeat it!
Right now corporations out spend labor associations 24 to 1 when it comes to political contributions. If Prop 75 succeeds, this lopsided playing field will be tipped even more in favor of those who want to privatize our pensions, and force take backs in our hard earned rights and protections.
The men and women of the fire service put their lives on the line every day for the citizens of California. We must protect thier voices... pensions... and jobs... they deserve a strong future as you do.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 12:39 PM
no On 75!

HM
10-07-2005, 12:42 PM
They are at it again!
This year we had to fight Governor Shwarzenegger and his political allies who wanted to privatize our pensions and eliminate death and disability benefits for our families if we die or are injured in the line of duty. We made our voices heard, loud and clear. We told them: hands off our pensions!
We've stopped them for now... but they have pledged to come back next year and before they do, they want to silence our voiices in November so we can't be heard again!
Why? Well its all about a hidden agenda.
While we were fighting against their risky pension scheme, teachers were fighting to restore funding taken from our public schools, and nurses were battling against reductions in hospital staffing to protect their patients. Its precisely our voices on the these kind of issues that proponents of prop 75 want to silence.
Thats what Proposition 75 is all about - and we must defeat it!
Right now corporations out spend labor associations 24 to 1 when it comes to political contributions. If Prop 75 succeeds, this lopsided playing field will be tipped even more in favor of those who want to privatize our pensions, and force take backs in our hard earned rights and protections.
The men and women of the fire service put their lives on the line every day for the citizens of California. We must protect thier voices... pensions... and jobs... they deserve a strong future as you do.
What flavor is that koolaid?

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 12:44 PM
That would be that special Union Koolaid.....The union comes up with the "SPIN". Then the Spin gets spun like a DJ at a party

slink
10-07-2005, 12:48 PM
That would be that special Union Koolaid.....The union comes up with the "SPIN". Then the Spin gets spun like a DJ at a party
We are the DJ and will make Arnie "moonwalk" again on this :D

Throttle
10-07-2005, 12:52 PM
What flavor is that koolaid?
It becomes real when you look outside the box.
:cool:

SixDays
10-07-2005, 12:55 PM
I personnaly don't think the Gov wants to get rid of your pension. Maybe teachers and other non-critical jobs. Plus Arni want's to only apply the new pension plans to new hires. Any why should Californian's go broke paying for retired gov workers. Most have a very easy job and are very lazy.
The problem with changing future pensions and leaving current pensions untouched is that in a number of years, the new pension contributions will be less amd will not be able to support the older employees under the opld pension. NOOOOOOOO on 75!!!!!!!!!

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 12:55 PM
What really pisses me off more than anything is the teachers association. Their "misinformation" campaign is deplorable. You would think that educators would be into honesty and and source of factual information. But now I understand why our education system is in the state its in. I've lost a lot of respect for the Union and Teachers over this. They think they can pull the wool over our eyes. Fortunately there are enough free thinking and educated voters out there to see right through this.
Our government systems need serious revamping. GO ARNOLD! :D

H20Advantage
10-07-2005, 12:56 PM
Here is an Email my wife, a Special Education Teacher, put together. What I think about Prop 75 if it passes is that it cripples the unions and the private business can dump as much money into special interest as they want. We may not like the money the unions spend but it keeps a balance for all...
Hi everyone,
It's not my nature to be a pusher of political views. You guessed it... here's the "but":
The upcoming November special election called for by the Govenator presents three propositions that are potentially devestating for education in California.
PLEASE PASS THE WORD ALONG - PUBLIC EMPLOYEES DON'T HAVE THE CAMPAIGN FUNDS THAT THE GOVENATOR HAS.
PROPOSITIONS:
PROP 74: would eliminate teachers due-process protections, extending the probationary period for teachers from two to five years. It does nothing to solve the real challenges facing our schools like reducing class sizes or providing up-to-date textbooks to all students, but it will make it harder to recruit and retain quality teachers in our classrooms.
PROP 75: has a hidden agenda that is meant to weaken public employees and strengthen the influence of big corporations by making it harder for public employees to participate in the political process.
PROP 76: would gut Prop. 98, the law approved by voters to guarantee minimum funding to our public schools and community colleges. It would also undermine our system of checks and balances by giving the governor broad new power to make midyear school funding cuts and cut vital education, health care, police and fire servies without approval of the Legislature or anyone.
BACKGROUND INFO:
There are a few things that are not widely known by non-educators. (1) Tenure does not mean that teachers cannot be fired. It only means that the teacher is no longer probationary status. Tenure is what the private sector calls "permanent" employee versus temporary or probationary. (2) Through the teacher's union, teachers fund our participation in the political process. Our dues pay for commercials to educate the public about issues that are important to education. (3) Currently, we begin the school year with a budget that is set for the current school year. At my school, the budget this year translates to $150 budget per teacher to buy supplies for the classroom for the entire year. (Believe me, that is not nearly enough to cover the costs. Ask Gentry, the remaining funds needed come from our bank account. Give or take about $700 a year.)
Like I mentioned, I don't enjoy pushing my political agenda at anyone. In this case, education is at stake. Even if you choose to place your children or grand children in private school (and there are lots of good ones) there are children that do not have that option. Low income and special education students need a good education to become responsible contributors to our communities. We need to fund education to make our communities better places today and in the future.
There you have it. I will now get off the soap box.
Thank you for your attention.
Diane

H20Advantage
10-07-2005, 01:00 PM
What really pisses me off more than anything is the teachers association. Their "misinformation" campaign is deplorable. You would think that educators would be into honesty and and source of factual information. But now I understand why our education system is in the state its in. I've lost a lot of respect for the Union and Teachers over this. They think they can pull the wool over our eyes. Fortunately there are enough free thinking and educated voters out there to see right through this.
Our government systems need serious revamping. GO ARNOLD! :D
You probably think Arnold has dumped more money into the schools also. What he has done is basically a shell game. He has taken money the state pays into teachers retirement from a direct deposit from the state to the pension fund to sending it to the school districts which in turn send it to the pension fund. This makes it appear the schools are getting more funding.
Smoke and mirrors is all I can say about these campaigns......

HM
10-07-2005, 01:02 PM
Why are the unions so scared of people having to choose to opt in? If the union members felt it was so valuable, there would not be a problem of opting in
The reality is that most will not opt in. This is a simple fact. They know it, and is why they are fighting it. It is not about pensions, paychecks, benefits and etc. That is the spin and koolaid talking from either side. It is that they retain huge financial resources due to people being lazy or intimidated.
There is no rational argument to vote no on 75. Do you want the unions to just be able to take our tax money and use it for their cause without having to rally support from their members...or do you want them to have ACTUAL support of their cause.
Again, if anyone tells you anything different...especially throttle... that this is designed to destroy the benefits, pensions, and etc..... that is pure koolaid. On the flip side, it is not protecting anyone's paycheck...except the tax payers. If the union members feel moved, they get to opt in if they CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE, not because they don't choose to not participate.
Again, logic is needed to understand the difference, and it helps if you have been off of koolaid for atleast 30 days and completed 6 steps of your 10 step koolaid recovery program.
Let the flames begin. :D

OGShocker
10-07-2005, 01:18 PM
PROP 75: has a hidden agenda that is meant to weaken public employees and strengthen the influence of big corporations by making it harder for public employees to participate in the political process.
If Diane fails to convince others to vote her way, can't she sign the letter to her union? The form should read, "Please spend my $300.00 on all things political".
Not everyone in the unions supports the same causes as the unions. They can opt out but at what cost to them?
The only thing lacking in her email is the Kennedy line of *Blank* wants to starve your children and kill old people.

Supultlbich
10-07-2005, 02:04 PM
Why are the unions so scared of people having to choose to opt in? If the union members felt it was so valuable, there would not be a problem of opting in
The reality is that most will not opt in. This is a simple fact. They know it, and is why they are fighting it. It is not about pensions, paychecks, benefits and etc. That is the spin and koolaid talking from either side. It is that they retain huge financial resources due to people being lazy or intimidated.
There is no rational argument to vote no on 75. Do you want the unions to just be able to take our tax money and use it for their cause without having to rally support from their members...or do you want them to have ACTUAL support of their cause.
Again, if anyone tells you anything different...especially throttle... that this is designed to destroy the benefits, pensions, and etc..... that is pure koolaid. On the flip side, it is not protecting anyone's paycheck...except the tax payers. If the union members feel moved, they get to opt in if they CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE, not because they don't choose to not participate.
Again, logic is needed to understand the difference, and it helps if you have been off of koolaid for atleast 30 days and completed 6 steps of your 10 step koolaid recovery program.
Let the flames begin. :D
Last time I checked not a penny of your tax dollars went to my union, I earned the money and agreed to pony it up. The fact that you think that somehow you are funding the unions is false. Is the money that goes into my checking account every two weeks yours? Last time I checked I didnt have to call you and ask for an allowance. You made your point, but dont go after throttle and other folks here with a bunch of BS rhetoric.

HM
10-07-2005, 02:20 PM
Last time I checked not a penny of your tax dollars went to my union, I earned the money and agreed to pony it up. The fact that you think that somehow you are funding the unions is false. Is the money that goes into my checking account every two weeks yours? Last time I checked I didnt have to call you and ask for an allowance. You made your point, but dont go after throttle and other folks here with a bunch of BS rhetoric.
Teachers, Police, and Firefighters Unions are funded by the members who are paid by tax dollars. Hello. Simple math. Next?
By the way, the BS rhetoric is the thickest coming from them by claiming this is about their pensions, benefits, and etc. I also pointed out that spin from the yes on 75 group was crap as well.

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-07-2005, 02:43 PM
OK.......NO SPIN !!!!!
Just the straight facts.......
C A L I F O R N I A C O M M E N T A R Y :
Crunch Time for California
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Ballot Recommendations for the November 8 Special Election.
HJTA recommends a YES vote on the following measures that appear on the November 8 special election ballot:
Prop. 74 -- Extends length of evaluation for period before public school teaches are given permanent status.
Prop. 75 -- Provides paycheck protection for public union workers by requiring employee consent before their dues can be used for political contributions.
Prop. 76 -- The Live Within Our Means Act would slow down increases in state spending.
Prop. 77 -- Reapportionment; would bar politicians from drawing lines that guarantee their re-election.
HJTA recommends a vote of NO on
Prop. 80 -- it locks in monopoly control of electricity by the bureaucratized utilities and forbids consumers from being able to shop around for the lowest-priced electricity available.
HJTA also urges a vote of NO on all local bonds that do not require a two-thirds vote for passage.
Good enough for me!!!!
Later,
CJG
:D

ssmike
10-07-2005, 03:09 PM
They are at it again!
This year we had to fight Governor Shwarzenegger and his political allies who wanted to privatize our pensions and eliminate death and disability benefits for our families if we die or are injured in the line of duty. We made our voices heard, loud and clear. We told them: hands off our pensions!
We've stopped them for now... but they have pledged to come back next year and before they do, they want to silence our voiices in November so we can't be heard again!
Why? Well its all about a hidden agenda.
While we were fighting against their risky pension scheme, teachers were fighting to restore funding taken from our public schools, and nurses were battling against reductions in hospital staffing to protect their patients. Its precisely our voices on the these kind of issues that proponents of prop 75 want to silence.
Thats what Proposition 75 is all about - and we must defeat it!
Right now corporations out spend labor associations 24 to 1 when it comes to political contributions. If Prop 75 succeeds, this lopsided playing field will be tipped even more in favor of those who want to privatize our pensions, and force take backs in our hard earned rights and protections.
The men and women of the fire service put their lives on the line every day for the citizens of California. We must protect thier voices... pensions... and jobs... they deserve a strong future as you do.
did you cut and paste from the CTA newsletter? Just curious assclown.
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, teach P.E.

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 03:14 PM
Public employees are paid via tax dollars. I pay more than my fair share of taxes.
While I fully support the public employees my tax dollars support, I believe they should not have the benefit of a pension that pays them more money than they made while working. It should be significantly lower than what they made while working.
Further, public employees should be subject to the same retirement plans the rest of us in the private sector manage. I.e. 401K's where you contirbute money from personal earnings and the gov't would match up to 6% of annual income with matching of 50% of what the employee contributes.
Lastly I think Unions are poison to our overall economy are reduce our competitiveness. Just look at what the Airline and Auto industry face with pension obligations. The unions are going to bankrupt some of the largest companies in the US due to these obligations not to mention creating a situation where they lack the funds to invest back into those companies to remain competitive.
and with that said RAISE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PAY TO THE LEVEL OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEN YOU CAN CORREECTLY ASSES WHAT SHOULD BE EQUAL....
SECOND WHO THE F@CK ARE YOU TO SAY WHAT I SPEND MY MONEY ON....
ITS MY MONEY
Unions can only contribute X amount of dollars BY LAW.. If it goes higher than that inwhich is prescribed... It most go to a vote of the general membership.....
So I aldready have the power to stop wasteful spending.....within the union.....
MOSYT OF YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT THE UNIONS DUE FOR US...
All you know is the Jimmy Hoffa shit and ILWU and the likes....

my21advantage
10-07-2005, 03:16 PM
no!

CA Stu
10-07-2005, 03:16 PM
and with that said RAISE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PAY TO THE LEVEL OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THEN YOU CAN CORREECTLY ASSES WHAT SHOULD BE EQUAL....
Yeah, them security guards are pulling down the BIG BUCKS! :messedup: :messedup:
Thanks
CA Stu
PS Vote Yes on Proposition No!

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 03:16 PM
I am voting yes for 75 as I know that will help cripple them politically. I won't support any union, especially ones funded by tax payers.
FIRST OFF ARE YOU IN ANY OF THESE PUBLIC AGENCY UNIONS, cuz if your are not, WHAT MONEY ARE YOU PAYING....
NONE that is the correct and only answer.
TAX PAYERS ARE NOT PAYING MY UNION DUES, I PAY MY UNION DUES FROM MY EARNED PAY CHECK....

my21advantage
10-07-2005, 03:19 PM
FIRST OFF ARE YOU IN ANY OF THESE PUBLIC AGENCY UNIONS, cuz if your are not, WHAT MONEY ARE YOU PAYING....
NONE that is the correct and only answer.
TAX PAYERS ARE NOT PAYING MY UNION DUES, I PAY MY UNION DUES FROM MY EARNED PAY CHECK....
I couldn't have said it any better

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 03:20 PM
This should be moved to the PR!
With all due respect, are you a buffoon? Let's say put a welfare minimumization proposition on the ballot. Do we then tell the voters of this once great State that only Welfare Moms can vote on it? :hammerhea
The unions in this State have a strangle hold on the law makers. This prop 75 does nothing more than ask the members of unions to OK, in writing whether their dues can be spent by the union as they see fit.
That is the worst example I have ever seen, you may want to redirect the buffoon statement.
Lets ask the people leaching off the system if we can continue there leaching.... ARE YOU SERIOUS...
The spin you guys put on this is unbelieveable, Its my hard earned money... WHAT GIVES YIOU THE RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT SPEND IT ON....

slink
10-07-2005, 03:22 PM
I knew it would get good once my lunch line buddy arrived :smile: J/K Kilr......go get em boy

CA Stu
10-07-2005, 03:37 PM
That is the worst example I have ever seen, you may want to redirect the buffoon statement.
Lets ask the people leaching off the system if we can continue there leaching.... ARE YOU SERIOUS...
The spin you guys put on this is unbelieveable, Its my hard earned money... WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT SPEND IT ON....
Does Prop 75 say you can't give money to the union for PAC, or does it say you can't be forced to give money to the union for their PAC?
Interpret it for us dummies.
Thanks
CA Stu

OGShocker
10-07-2005, 03:38 PM
That is the worst example I have ever seen, you may want to redirect the buffoon statement.
Lets ask the people leaching off the system if we can continue there leaching.... ARE YOU SERIOUS...
The spin you guys put on this is unbelieveable, Its my hard earned money... WHAT GIVES YIOU THE RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT SPEND IT ON....
I think you know me well enough to refrain from yelling.
You can spend your money on what you like. I don't think the unions have a right to use funds taken from employees without written permissions.
I have my opinion that Unions leach off their members. Ask the fat cat in your union (not the rep.) what kind of company car they drive. What their salary is, most are paid in access of $300,000.00 p/y. Some fat cat tells you guys who or what to support in an election by throwing your/YOUR hard earned money around. If that is what you want them to do, sign the paper telling them it's OK with you.
As for my analogy. Do you think as a representative democracy we should limit voting on issues to those effected by the outcome?
Now stay out of the HOV lane when you're alone and have a nice day. :rollside:

riverfamily
10-07-2005, 03:47 PM
You can spend your money on anything you want! BUT QUIT ASKING ME FOR A F---ING RAISE! :mad:

J540
10-07-2005, 03:58 PM
I personnaly don't think the Gov wants to get rid of your pension. Maybe teachers and other non-critical jobs. Plus Arni want's to only apply the new pension plans to new hires. Any why should Californian's go broke paying for retired gov workers. Most have a very easy job and are very lazy.
Teachers are a non-critical job :hammerhea . you must mean this as a joke.

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 04:06 PM
UNION'S DAYS ARE NUMBERED.
They are driving manufacturing and service jobs out of the country driven by their demands for higher pay/ benefits that employers cannot financially handle. Then add insane pension plan obligations to the mix and you've bankrupted a company (or in the case of government workers, the government and taxpayer system).
Our economy is at risk of trending from a 1st rate economic power to a 2nd rate service economy. We are simply not competitive with foreign competition. WAKE UP AMERICA....... Just look at General Motors or any airline. They are saddled with overhead that cannot be economically justified and pension plan obligations that make it impossible for them to compete with foreign competition. Government systems are in the same boat. But their revenue source adds alot less to the economy versus private sector jobs.
When companies and local governments can no longer afford to pay for these benefits, the result is obvious. The jobs disappear or the wages and benefits are are significantly reduced. Bankruptcy is the result. Then everyone looses - the company executives, employees, stockholders, lenders, consumers, real estate markets, etc.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 04:09 PM
Why are the unions so scared of people having to choose to opt in? If the union members felt it was so valuable, there would not be a problem of opting in
The reality is that most will not opt in. This is a simple fact. They know it, and is why they are fighting it. It is not about pensions, paychecks, benefits and etc. That is the spin and koolaid talking from either side. It is that they retain huge financial resources due to people being lazy or intimidated.
There is no rational argument to vote no on 75. Do you want the unions to just be able to take our tax money and use it for their cause without having to rally support from their members...or do you want them to have ACTUAL support of their cause.
Again, if anyone tells you anything different...especially throttle... that this is designed to destroy the benefits, pensions, and etc..... that is pure koolaid. On the flip side, it is not protecting anyone's paycheck...except the tax payers. If the union members feel moved, they get to opt in if they CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE, not because they don't choose to not participate.
Again, logic is needed to understand the difference, and it helps if you have been off of koolaid for atleast 30 days and completed 6 steps of your 10 step koolaid recovery program.
Let the flames begin. :D
holymoly, thanks for refilling my cup of koolaid! I just burned the popcorn too!
hopefully if I spell it out for you a bit you may be able to understand more clearly why this is really important to us.
I can only speak of my knowledge within the union that I am a member. Key, here's your sign, I am a member, I choose to to be a member. When I signed up to be a part of this organization I know that a very small part of my dues will be used for Political Action (less than $1 per day I work). So here is my first opportunity to to opt in or out. I do not think that you or anyone else should force me to decide where my money goes. I most definately do not think that the Governors office has that right either! The governor and his allies are raising money and spending tens of millions of dollars to wage this war, who are you to decide that my money can't defend him? Your statement of opting in or out is really the part that I think is misleading, the governor wants to silence us, so he can come back again and change our retirement security.
You speak of huge financial resources, as mentioned above the governor is raising money, if we did not have PAC funds available for this battle is would be like a cat chasing a mouse in a box. How could we save ourselves and protect our futures?
To clarify the fact that the unions are after your tax money is incorrect. This is our (as union members) money. Again, I paid it, I decided for it to be spent, not you or the general public. This has NO effect on on you unless you are a public employee.
Its not about distroying benefits and pensions, its about a secure future. There are several other things that you have no idea that keep you and your family safe that our unions do not just for us but at the state legislative level.
Current law already protects union members and their political rights. As firefighters, we are not required to join the union. If you choose to join, you can let your voice be heard anytime... in union meetings, with a union rep and at election time. If you don't like what your leaders are doing, vote them out! In your union, the majority rules. Under Prop 75, only th special interests rule.
:coffeycup

HM
10-07-2005, 04:13 PM
FIRST OFF ARE YOU IN ANY OF THESE PUBLIC AGENCY UNIONS, cuz if your are not, WHAT MONEY ARE YOU PAYING....
NONE that is the correct and only answer.
TAX PAYERS ARE NOT PAYING MY UNION DUES, I PAY MY UNION DUES FROM MY EARNED PAY CHECK....
:sleeping: Where does your money come from? Oh yah, tax payers. Then you pay the unions to fight to get more tax payer money. Yes, tax payer money funds the unions. Very simple math.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 04:20 PM
Does it have a hidden agenda to weaken public employees? :confused:
I'd like to hear some informed opinions...not personal attacks please.
Not trying to start a battle here...
I have read the initiative and both sides sound strong IMO.
Back to the original ???
Yes, hidden agenda to weaken public employees voice.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 04:23 PM
It is not "mandatory" right now. They have the ability to opt out.
But, the unions know that if their members had to opt in, that most would do the same thing they do now...which is nothing. Only the hard core opt out now. Only the hard core would opt in, thus reducing these political funds to nothing.
I am voting yes for 75 as I know that will help cripple them politically. I won't support any union, especially ones funded by tax payers.
this is wrong... unions do not and can not use tax payers money... nor do unions have access to taxpayers funds... how have you been led to believe this?

SixDays
10-07-2005, 04:25 PM
Quote from HolyMoly:
Where does your money come from? Oh yah, tax payers. Then you pay the unions to fight to get more tax payer money. Yes, tax payer money funds the unions. Very simple math.
tax payers pay me to put my ass on the line every day at work, and after that, its my money to do whatever the f**k I want with it, so unless you want to tell me how to spend my hard earned money, HolyMoly, then f**k off!!! No on 75!!!

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 04:27 PM
Does Prop 75 say you can't give money to the union for PAC, or does it say you can't be forced to give money to the union for their PAC?
Interpret it for us dummies.
Thanks
CA Stu
What they are trying to due is already in place... If i so choose to not be part of what they are spending funds on I fill out a little card and give it to them an dthen my unions dues go down some where in the neighborhood of 10 dollars a month
YEP 10 DOLLARS A MONTH

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 04:28 PM
I think you know me well enough to refrain from yelling.
You can spend your money on what you like. I don't think the unions have a right to use funds taken from employees without written permissions.
I have my opinion that Unions leach off their members. Ask the fat cat in your union (not the rep.) what kind of company car they drive. What their salary is, most are paid in access of $300,000.00 p/y. Some fat cat tells you guys who or what to support in an election by throwing your/YOUR hard earned money around. If that is what you want them to do, sign the paper telling them it's OK with you.
As for my analogy. Do you think as a representative democracy we should limit voting on issues to those effected by the outcome?
Now stay out of the HOV lane when you're alone and have a nice day. :rollside:
Once again you are confused...
PUBLIC UNIONS, not PRIVATE UNIONS...
There is a huge differance....
as for big fat salaries YES THEY HAVE THEM , IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, Not the public....
Go after the private unions, Not the public... You guys are confusing your gripes in the wrong place....

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 04:29 PM
:sleeping: Where does your money come from? Oh yah, tax payers. Then you pay the unions to fight to get more tax payer money. Yes, tax payer money funds the unions. Very simple math.
Now I know your smarted than that, Come on and come back with a more realistic idea....
Since that is the case. Why dont you stop buy and pick up my checkbook and start dictating what Im going to spend my money on.... :hammerhea

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 04:31 PM
UNION'S DAYS ARE NUMBERED.
They are driving manufacturing and service jobs out of the country driven by their demands for higher pay/ benefits that employers cannot financially handle. Then add insane pension plan obligations to the mix and you've bankrupted a company (or in the case of government workers, the government and taxpayer system).
Our economy is at risk of trending from a 1st rate economic power to a 2nd rate service economy. We are simply not competitive with foreign competition. WAKE UP AMERICA....... Just look at General Motors or any airline. They are saddled with overhead that cannot be economically justified and pension plan obligations that make it impossible for them to compete with foreign competition. Government systems are in the same boat. But their revenue source adds alot less to the economy versus private sector jobs.
When companies and local governments can no longer afford to pay for these benefits, the result is obvious. The jobs disappear or the wages and benefits are are significantly reduced. Bankruptcy is the result. Then everyone looses - the company executives, employees, stockholders, lenders, consumers, real estate markets, etc.
You are right they provide NO REVENUE ....
But they due provide public saftey, health and education and those are priceless....

Throttle
10-07-2005, 04:37 PM
Teachers, Police, and Firefighters Unions are funded by the members who are paid by tax dollars. Hello. Simple math. Next?
By the way, the BS rhetoric is the thickest coming from them by claiming this is about their pensions, benefits, and etc. I also pointed out that spin from the yes on 75 group was crap as well.
Here is some simple math for ya... I get a salary, I use my salary to pay union dues... How is that tax dollars?

prop check
10-07-2005, 04:57 PM
F.Y.I.
I am firefighter and I am voting no. If you want to donate to a political action account it can not be from the same account that your dues money comes from. That is the law so I had to write a letter to ask that a specific amount be donated to the political fund. I think prop 75 is a B.S. deal to try to take some of the political actions away from public employees. If Arnold stops selling $1500. dollar steak dinners to corporate america I will stop contributing to my political voice. just my two cents.

hotlavey
10-07-2005, 05:38 PM
I am voting yes.
Yes for me too.

hotlavey
10-07-2005, 05:41 PM
That is the worst example I have ever seen, you may want to redirect the buffoon statement.
Lets ask the people leaching off the system if we can continue there leaching.... ARE YOU SERIOUS...
The spin you guys put on this is unbelieveable, Its my hard earned money... WHAT GIVES YIOU THE RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT SPEND IT ON....
What gives the union the right to tell "ALL" their members how their dues are spent politically?

Brooski
10-07-2005, 05:44 PM
That is like saying only victims should vote on crime bills. My Corp does not make me give them due's!!!!!! ;)
Thats a bad analogy. Anyone can become a victim not by choice. I, or we, chose to work for a public agency that was unionized. My choice, our choice. Being a victim of a crime is not anyone's choice.

Ultrafied
10-07-2005, 05:46 PM
Quite a few of us had opportunities to go into the private or public sector. I went into the public sector for a time, but left for reasons such as this. My employer was essentially the people of the State of California, as it should be. As that type of employee, decisions were made, good or bad, by the states tax input, why I didn't like. Off to the private sector I went.
Is Prop 75 good or bad. As some of you have read before, I am voting Yes, I feel it is best for the State and for myself. In management, that should be the determining factor keeping the personal feelings out. Currently, I don't feel it will be detrimental to the employees.
If No wins, I at least have had my say by placing my vote. The majority of the "No" votes that I have read here are all from the employees, which may or may not have an impartial view.
No matter what though, why isn't this in the political forum?

uncle larry
10-07-2005, 05:52 PM
Not living in California anymore - i saw the title of this tread (on a boating website) and I thought of a prop for a boat...
so Prop 75 -- my first thought was HOT DAMN that must be one hellava prop...
Ah but then then i read the tread... damn damn.. not a prop after all

Supultlbich
10-07-2005, 05:52 PM
Teachers, Police, and Firefighters Unions are funded by the members who are paid by tax dollars. Hello. Simple math. Next?
By the way, the BS rhetoric is the thickest coming from them by claiming this is about their pensions, benefits, and etc. I also pointed out that spin from the yes on 75 group was crap as well.
What Math are you talking about???????? Are you saying that because tax dollars pay my salary that once that money is given to me that it is in someway still your tax dollars?? Imposiible, its mine not yours. Get over yourself for a minute and read what your saying. My contribution is my money!!! Not yours or any other tax payers for that matter. There is no way that any of your money goes to my union, and I challenge you to prove otherwise, but you won't. So stop with all of the ten dollar words and bullshit and move on. I for one am not impressed.

hotlavey
10-07-2005, 05:54 PM
They are at it again!
This year we had to fight Governor Shwarzenegger and his political allies who wanted to privatize our pensions and eliminate death and disability benefits for our families if we die or are injured in the line of duty. We made our voices heard, loud and clear. We told them: hands off our pensions!
We've stopped them for now... but they have pledged to come back next year and before they do, they want to silence our voiices in November so we can't be heard again!
Why? Well its all about a hidden agenda.
While we were fighting against their risky pension scheme, teachers were fighting to restore funding taken from our public schools, and nurses were battling against reductions in hospital staffing to protect their patients. Its precisely our voices on the these kind of issues that proponents of prop 75 want to silence.
Thats what Proposition 75 is all about - and we must defeat it!
Right now corporations out spend labor associations 24 to 1 when it comes to political contributions. If Prop 75 succeeds, this lopsided playing field will be tipped even more in favor of those who want to privatize our pensions, and force take backs in our hard earned rights and protections.
The men and women of the fire service put their lives on the line every day for the citizens of California. We must protect thier voices... pensions... and jobs... they deserve a strong future as you do.
75 does not take away your voice. It gives a voice to your fellow workers who don't support all the political decisions made by your union. What are you afraid of? You will still have your voice and you will still make your contributions as you see fit. Just give that same right to your buddies.

Brooski
10-07-2005, 06:04 PM
Teachers, Police, and Firefighters Unions are funded by the members who are paid by tax dollars. Hello. Simple math. Next?
So, using your analogy, everyone that provides you with your income should be able to tell you how to spend your money? did you flunk math? Taxpayers money goes to the government to provide services. The government pay the employees for the work they do. Your employer or customers, whichever it may be, pay you to provide a service. The way you figure it, every person that contributes to your income should have a say. I dont think you would want that now, would you? :hammer2:

Brooski
10-07-2005, 06:06 PM
That is the worst example I have ever seen, you may want to redirect the buffoon statement.
Lets ask the people leaching off the system if we can continue there leaching.... ARE YOU SERIOUS...
The spin you guys put on this is unbelieveable, Its my hard earned money... WHAT GIVES YIOU THE RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN NOT SPEND IT ON....
Very well said, Kilr.

Throttle
10-07-2005, 06:45 PM
75 does not take away your voice. It gives a voice to your fellow workers who don't support all the political decisions made by your union. What are you afraid of? You will still have your voice and you will still make your contributions as you see fit. Just give that same right to your buddies.
They have the same right and I do not know a single one of them that are unhappy about the way things are, there is NO need to change. How is it going to save money for the state? Why is the Governor using millions of tax $$$ to pay for this special election, c'mon?

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 06:46 PM
What gives the union the right to tell "ALL" their members how their dues are spent politically?
The MEMBERSHIP gives the UNION LEADERS the right to speak for the MEMBERSHIP. If you so choose to not particpate, FILL OUT THE FORM THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE and you can use your right to not participate....
That is right people, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TODAY TO NOT PARTICIPATE IF WE SO CHOOSE NOT TO....., We dont need prop 75 to tell us what to do...

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 06:47 PM
You want o fix the states problem,
REINSTATE THE VLF LAWS OF OLD......
PROBLEM SOLVED....

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 07:13 PM
Why is the Governor using millions of tax $$$ to pay for this special election, c'mon?
Its called an "investment". One that will pay huge dividends for the people of Cali in the future

HM
10-07-2005, 07:14 PM
You want o fix the states problem,
REINSTATE THE VLF LAWS OF OLD......
PROBLEM SOLVED....
We have gone over this. Revenue is not the problem. Spending is. CA, even with driving businesses out of the state, still enjoys mid 20% growth of revenue each year. Population grows below 20%, but spending grows by nearly 40% each year. Stop the bleeding. RAising taxes will only reduce revenue as it will drive business away...already proven in CA. People with money are smart. They only take so much abuse then take their ball an go somewhere else.
Taxing as an anwer is for the incompetent.

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 07:17 PM
We have gone over this. Revenue is not the problem. Spending is. CA, even with driving businesses out of the state, still enjoys mid 20% growth of revenue each year. Population grows below 20%, but spending grows by nearly 40% each year. Stop the bleeding. RAising taxes will only reduce revenue as it will drive business away...already proven in CA. People with money are smart. They only take so much abuse then take their ball an go somewhere else.
Taxing as an anwer is for the incompetent.
The problem is not raises unions lazy workers.... The problem is
ILLEGAL ALIENS...... THEY ARE DRAINING THIS STATE ........ Fix that and this will be a very cash rich state

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 07:21 PM
The problem is
ILLEGAL ALIENS...... THEY ARE DRAINING THIS STATE ........ Fix that and this will be a very cash rich state
This is your first statement I agree with. But that is a different issue. Both need to be addressed for the state to climb out of financial ruin

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 07:24 PM
This is your first statement I agree with. But that is a different issue. Both need to be addressed for the state to climb out of financial ruin
What you are failing to realize is this...
ARONOLD raises money the old fashion way, he sells his popularity and then tries to implement his views, thru these fund raising revenues.
The unions use their members money,WITH THEIR MEMBERSHIPS PERMISSION to argue against his views. He is trying to put a stop to this so he can steam roll his views......
Is that the american way...... or wait he wasnt born here....
And no tax dollars were used in this post :jawdrop:

HM
10-07-2005, 07:37 PM
The unions use their members money,WITH THEIR MEMBERSHIPS PERMISSION to argue against his views.
That is not correct. The money is automatically taken out as people have to CHOOSE to opt out. Utah adopted this exact measure with the teachers unions and contibutions dropped from 68% to 6.8%.
The union is scared as they know that people will NOT opt in. Simple as that. If the union is so valuable to the members, they should not be scared of members having to agree, instead of having to disagree. American way my ass.

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 07:50 PM
That is not correct. The money is automatically taken out as people have to CHOOSE to opt out. Utah adopted this exact measure with the teachers unions and contibutions dropped from 68% to 6.8%.
The union is scared as they know that people will NOT opt in. Simple as that. If the union is so valuable to the members, they should not be scared of members having to agree, instead of having to disagree. American way my ass.
You are making it sound like a big secret, this opt out option...
Everyone knows about it, BUt they choose not to as I choose not to....
those unions dues also cover lawyer fees.....have you used a lawyer lately.... I have on a B.S. Depo... If I had to pay for this, it was around 4k..... That is also what my union dues cover....
You guys need to understand something, these unions are not the JIMMY HOFFA UNIONS....

J540
10-07-2005, 07:52 PM
You can spend your money on anything you want! BUT QUIT ASKING ME FOR A F---ING RAISE! :mad:
I WILL ASK FOR IT AND I WILL GET IT. Just like your self. Are you makeing the same mony today as 10yr, ago, NO. Did the cost of living go up? YES.
Just because DWP got a 15% raise in 3yr, dont act like we are breaking the bank, that is 5% A YEAR. WOW Thats a whole lot when the price of my house just went up 300% among other things.
On the union thing. If i feel my union is jacking off my $$$ then i dont have to give it to them. I could give it to the REDCROSS if i want.

J540
10-07-2005, 08:00 PM
75 does not take away your voice. It gives a voice to your fellow workers who don't support all the political decisions made by your union. What are you afraid of? You will still have your voice and you will still make your contributions as you see fit. Just give that same right to your buddies.
What are you talking about. my BUBBIES as you call them dont have to kick in to the union, put your $$$ else where.

J540
10-07-2005, 08:03 PM
That is not correct. The money is automatically taken out as people have to CHOOSE to opt out. .
Wrong!!!! I had the choice if i wanted to join the union. talk about drinking koolaid :rolleyes:

J540
10-07-2005, 08:07 PM
So, using your analogy, everyone that provides you with your income should be able to tell you how to spend your money? did you flunk math? Taxpayers money goes to the government to provide services. The government pay the employees for the work they do. Your employer or customers, whichever it may be, pay you to provide a service. The way you figure it, every person that contributes to your income should have a say. I dont think you would want that now, would you? :hammer2:
I was just going to tell this ASSCLOWN (OOPS Holymoly) the same thing.

Waldo
10-07-2005, 08:08 PM
Wow...this thread started slow but sure gained some speed!!
I appreciate all responses.

rivercrazy
10-07-2005, 08:09 PM
I was just going to tell this ASSCLOWN (OOPS Holymoly) the same thing.
Very nice. Your a class act.....

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 08:12 PM
Wrong!!!! I had the choice if i wanted to join the union. talk about drinking koolaid :rolleyes:
WTF , who is giving out my KOOL AID.....
J540, these people make it sound like we are held at gun point against our will....

hotlavey
10-07-2005, 08:12 PM
The MEMBERSHIP gives the UNION LEADERS the right to speak for the MEMBERSHIP. If you so choose to not particpate, FILL OUT THE FORM THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE and you can use your right to not participate....
That is right people, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TODAY TO NOT PARTICIPATE IF WE SO CHOOSE NOT TO....., We dont need prop 75 to tell us what to do...
Then maybe you can tell me why the unions are spending millions to fight this. You know why? They are afraid of losing their cash cow by giving members a voice and a choice- get real. It is all about the unions income, period.

Kilrtoy
10-07-2005, 08:19 PM
Then maybe you can tell me why the unions are spending millions to fight this. You know why? They are afraid of losing their cash cow by giving members a voice and a choice- get real. It is all about the unions income, period.
No what you dont understand is a year ago arnie came after everyones pensions. The unions stopped it.. So now he wants to place this crap on the ballot and if it passes, he then can have another election in june and yes the forms needed for the unions will not be in place. Hence the union dollar will not be available to stop him and counter him. So he will win a one sided fight... You dont see or cannot see the BIG PICTURE of what he is trying to do...
he underestimated the Police fire, teachers and nurses.....
he now has found a LEGAL loop hole to silence them....
he has already said I will get it fixed in 06

Supultlbich
10-07-2005, 08:34 PM
Then maybe you can tell me why the unions are spending millions to fight this. You know why? They are afraid of losing their cash cow by giving members a voice and a choice- get real. It is all about the unions income, period.
They are spending money to fight it because this is just another attempt by arnold to weaken the unions voice and get us to roll over and let him pass legislation as he wishes. Funny how the measure to change pension funding came off of the ballot, and now a measure to try and decrease the unions ability to spend money on political action. We vote on how this money is spent before it is spent, so why should we have to say its alright if we have already voted?? What you dont understand is that Most of us here belong to public safety unions, not grocery store or bus drivers unions. We cant just walk out and strike.
As far as this supposed cash cow, thats not correct. Our union heads make no extra income, they make the same as the other guys on the job.

HM
10-07-2005, 08:36 PM
I was just going to tell this ASSCLOWN (OOPS Holymoly) the same thing.
Hey now. AssClown? That is funny. You know, you don't have to get upset that you don't understand economics. If you ask nice, I will explain it to you.:D

hotlavey
10-08-2005, 08:01 AM
What are you talking about. my BUBBIES as you call them dont have to kick in to the union, put your $$$ else where.
Reading lesson: It says buddies, not bubbies. Now I know where some of your union dues should have gone. If this so-called opt out is available, why are the unions spending millions fighting it, and why did they up the dues from teachers without their approval? They are scared. Their cash cow is going to die.

slink
10-08-2005, 08:30 AM
So glad Arnie's approval rating is a whopping 31%.....just hope all these haters get out and vote on Nov 8

H20Advantage
10-08-2005, 12:35 PM
What gives the union the right to tell "ALL" their members how their dues are spent politically?
What right do non-union people have to vote on a union issue? If the people in the unions want this changed they can do that by proxy vote and election of union leadership.
Don't you think Arnold has plans in place once these propositions pass. How about being able to cut school funding which in turn makes it easier to fire, without cause, a larger group of teachers with less than five years and load up the classroom sizes. How does this effect the 20 year slugs, it doesn't. How does larger class size and school funding cuts effect our children?
Without Union money there to fight this he will have his way. All the propositions have hidden agenda's.

hotlavey
10-08-2005, 01:32 PM
What right do non-union people have to vote on a union issue? If the people in the unions want this changed they can do that by proxy vote and election of union leadership.
Don't you think Arnold has plans in place once these propositions pass. How about being able to cut school funding which in turn makes it easier to fire, without cause, a larger group of teachers with less than five years and load up the classroom sizes. How does this effect the 20 year slugs, it doesn't. How does larger class size and school funding cuts effect our children?
Without Union money there to fight this he will have his way. All the propositions have hidden agenda's.
Oh I get it- we have an agenda and the unions don't. Give me a break. I also think the amount of the increase in school funding is the only thing that was cut- they still get more. How about stating facts instead of union speak?
As far as our voting on union issues, we have every right to vote on an issue the affects the amount of taxes we pay.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:04 PM
Prop 75 will make it almost impossible for us to exercise our political rights. it is a ploy to silence us , so that we can not fight back. The restrictions that prop 75 will set up, will only affect us ( public employees) The big corporations can still give millions to their cause.
The prop 75 proponents are telling people that we do not have a say where our dues money is going,THIS IS FALSE. The US. Supreme court says that no public employee can be forced to have dues money used for politics. The bottom line is if I do not want my money used for political action then I can make sure that it does not through my employer.
Last year the Governor tried to cut school funding,cut nurse staffing levels and take away death and disability benefits from the widows and children of firefighters that died in the line of duty. It was the teachers,nurses,cops and firefighters that stood up to him through political action and said NO we will not allow this to happen.. The governor and his political allies came up with this prop and this special election,so he could silence us politically then follow through with all of his previous plans.
Big corporations already outspend unions by 24 to 1, if this prop wins it will then be 24 to none.
If this measure passes then Arnold can impose his agenda on all public employees,virtually unchallenged.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:11 PM
. My Corp does not make me give them due's!!!!!! ;)
Neither does my union.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:22 PM
[QUOTE=rivercrazy]Public employees are paid via tax dollars. I pay more than my fair share of taxes.
While I fully support the public employees my tax dollars support, I believe they should not have the benefit of a pension that pays them more money than they made while working. It should be significantly lower than what they made while working.
QUOTE]
Believe me when I retire my income will be significantly lower than when I was on the job.I can max out at 90% if I can or am able to put in the years required. After almost 17 yrs. my body is already telling me no way. I'll be happy if I can obtain 75%. Then my medical insurance for my wife and I will come out of that 75%,so my actual retirement will probably be in the low 60% range.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:28 PM
So if you're in the union and disagree about where your "political" fundsgo, or any funds for that matter, can you as an individual opt out and have your contribution be withheld and not get crap from your union reps?
My aunt disagrees with her teachers union about taking out money from her paycheck for political reason she doesn't agree with.
Yes I can opt out and I have so in the past without repercussions.
As far as your aunt is concerned the supreme court of the US. said it was illegal for a union to use dues money if the employee disagrees and does not want her money used for political purposes.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:31 PM
I am voting yes for 75 as I know that will help cripple them politically. I won't support any union, especially ones funded by tax payers.
Spoken like a true elitist.

OGShocker
10-08-2005, 02:31 PM
So glad Arnie's approval rating is a whopping 31%.....
Just about the size raise the Corrections Officers received from Joe (call me Grey Davis.
Davis has accepted $3.4 million in campaign contributions from the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) -- the state's prison guards' union. The union gave Davis the largest single check he has ever received from a group -- $251,000. And Davis is repaying them many times over.
Despite pay hikes in 1998, 1999 and 2000, Davis has approved raising the average prison guard salary even more -- to a whopping $73,428 by 2006. That will cost taxpayers an extra $120 million this year(2003). By 2006, the annual price tag will be about $700 million.
Now that this thread has gotten big and sometimes ugly. I'll tell you, I do not like Arnie Blackplowman. He is NOT a conservative and would like to see all Americans dis-armed. I am pro LEO, plain and simple. I am against the pollution in our system caused by monies generated on both sides of issues in our State/Country.
Funny how we are all a bunch of happy boaters for 9-10 months. Then the election cycle hits and its FOCK YOU A$$CLOWN. Because of our opinions.
So, have a nice weekend and remember, the a$$clown you're mad at today might be the MOTHER****ER who tows you back to the dock next time out.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:34 PM
This should be moved to the PR!
The unions in this State have a strangle hold on the law makers. This prop 75 does nothing more than ask the members of unions to OK, in writing whether their dues can be spent by the union as they see fit.
The unions don't have the stranglehold it's the large corporations.
As a union member I already say when and where my dues are spent in writing.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:36 PM
The problem with changing future pensions and leaving current pensions untouched is that in a number of years, the new pension contributions will be less amd will not be able to support the older employees under the opld pension. NOOOOOOOO on 75!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]
And this is the prob. for all of us public employees.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:39 PM
FIRST OFF ARE YOU IN ANY OF THESE PUBLIC AGENCY UNIONS, cuz if your are not, WHAT MONEY ARE YOU PAYING....
NONE that is the correct and only answer.
TAX PAYERS ARE NOT PAYING MY UNION DUES, I PAY MY UNION DUES FROM MY EARNED PAY CHECK....
Amen to that.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:44 PM
IYou can spend your money on what you like. I don't think the unions have a right to use funds taken from employees without written permissions.
I have my opinion that Unions leach off their members. Ask the fat cat in your union (not the rep.) what kind of company car they drive. What their salary is, most are paid in access of $300,000.00 p/y. Some fat cat tells you guys who or what to support in an election by throwing your/YOUR hard earned money around. If that is what you want them to do, sign the paper telling them it's OK with you.
Now stay out of the HOV lane when you're alone and have a nice day. :rollside:
Mark your view is from a business owners standpoint. There are no fat cats in public safety unions,they are firefighters and cops elected by their peers that they work alongside.
I already have the say wheter I want to give MY money or not.

OGShocker
10-08-2005, 02:47 PM
Mark your view is from a business owners standpoint. There are no fat cats in public safety unions,they are firefighters and cops elected by their peers that they work alongside.
I already have the say wheter I want to give MY money or not.
Thank you for clearing that up Jeff. My bad on that point, just goes to prove my sigline. :)
Take care!
Mark

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:50 PM
:sleeping: Where does your money come from? Oh yah, tax payers. Then you pay the unions to fight to get more tax payer money. Yes, tax payer money funds the unions. Very simple math.
Yes tax dollars pay my salary. BUT I EARNED IT,so it is my money paying my dues.
So in the same line of thinking,when you purchase a product that a large corporation produces or manufactures your money is paying for their political agenda.
These large corps outspend unions 24 to 1.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 02:55 PM
What gives the union the right to tell "ALL" their members how their dues are spent politically?
They don't have the right and that is why we have to be informed of the political stance and then have the option to opt out.
The safeguards are already in place.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:00 PM
What you are failing to realize is this...
ARONOLD raises money the old fashion way, he sells his popularity and then tries to implement his views, thru these fund raising revenues.
The unions use their members money,WITH THEIR MEMBERSHIPS PERMISSION to argue against his views. He is trying to put a stop to this so he can steam roll his views......
Is that the american way...... or wait he wasnt born here....
And no tax dollars were used in this post :jawdrop:
Very well stated.

HM
10-08-2005, 03:06 PM
Prop 75 will make it almost impossible for us to exercise our political rights.
Really, by just reversing the current process to opting-in from opting-out makes it almost impossible? How is that? More paperwork? Do you have to go to Awnolds house to opt-in? Are special interest thugs going to be hanging out intimidating people from opting in? Exactly how does it make it almost impossible?
So, by that logic, you are saying it would almost be impossible for you to give your approval for the contributions by having to "opt-in". Therefore, right now, it is almost impossible for someone to opt-out and therefore it is almost impossible for them to have a choice..Right? Logic.
Also, I have a right to have a say in your union as the union fights for members benefits and pay that are tax payer funded. If the union has influence over the pay of tax payer supported government workers...then the tax payers have the right to get involved in your union. It has to go both ways. Government empolyees are the only one's who seem to have a problem with this academic concept.
Your members will still have a choice and the opt-in process will be no different from the current opt-out process. The reality is the majority will not choose to opt-in for the exact same reason the do not opt out now. In Utah, they already made this change with the Teacher's union. 32% choose to opt out prior to the change. Only 6.8% choose to opt in. I don't get it? If the union is so precious to its members...why don't more opt-in?

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:08 PM
Really, by just reversing the current process to opting-in from opting-out makes it almost impossible? How is that? More paperwork? Do you have to go to Awnolds house to opt-in? Are special interest thugs going to be hanging out intimidating people from opting in? Exactly how does it make it almost impossible?
So, by that logic, you are saying it would almost be impossible for you to give your approval for the contributions by having to "opt-in". Therefore, right now, it is almost impossible for someone to opt-out and therefore it is almost impossible for them to have a choice..Right? Logic.
Also, I have a right to have a say in your union as the union fights for members benefits and pay that are tax payer funded. If the union has influence over the pay of tax payer supported government workers...then the tax payers have the right to get involved in your union. It has to go both ways. Government empolyees are the only one's who seem to have a problem with this academic concept.
Your members will still have a choice and the opt-in process will be no different from the current opt-out process. The reality is the majority will not choose to opt-in for the exact same reason the do not opt out now. In Utah, they already made this change with the Teacher's union. 32% choose to opt out prior to the change. Only 6.8% choose to opt in. I don't get it? If the union is so precious to its members...why don't more opt-in?
Thats not the prob. it's the timeline the gov. has chosen. He will make it impossible for us to fight him this next june.

OGShocker
10-08-2005, 03:10 PM
Thats not the prob. it's the timeline the gov. has chosen. He will make it impossible for us to fight him this next june.
Jeff,
I was happy to hear you guys have "thugs". I made need to borrow them if WYRD gets outta hand.
Have a great weekend,
Mark

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 03:13 PM
Well.....
I would say that 4 are going to pass !!!!
YES - 74
YES - 75
YES - 76
YES - 77
The State need's it !!!!
Later,
CJG
:D

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:17 PM
Well.....
I would say that 4 are not going to pass !!!!
NO - 74
NO - 75
NO - 76
NO - 77
The State need's it !!!!
Later,
CJG
:D
Sounds good :p

HM
10-08-2005, 03:21 PM
Thats not the prob. it's the timeline the gov. has chosen. He will make it impossible for us to fight him this next june.
Really. Exactly how? What is the timeline? How is it different from the current process for the people who want to opt out?
Lots of "special interest" this and "impossible" that with no details. If you guys can show that the process is significantly different from the opt-out process and really does hinder your ability to have a choice, then you might persuade me to vote no. But, if it is not significantly different from the current process opt-out process, then I don't care....as what is good for the goose is good for the gander. But, I am willing to hear you out. Tell me what I missed when I read through the proposition several times. It is sitting on my desk and is only 5 pages long, including the cover page. So, you can point to specific paragraphs and wording.

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 03:23 PM
Please Vote YES On Props.
74
75
76
77
I'm tired of the Government ripping you poor working people off !!!
I knew I'd get you to see it my way !!!!
Welcome to the RIGHT side !!!!
CJG
:p

HM
10-08-2005, 03:25 PM
Really. Exactly how? What is the timeline? How is it different from the current process for the people who want to opt out?
Lots of "special interest" this and "impossible" that with no details. If you guys can show that the process is significantly different from the opt-out process and really does hinder your ability to have a choice, then you might persuade me to vote no. But, if it is not significantly different from the current process opt-out process, then I don't care....as what is good for the goose is good for the gander. But, I am willing to hear you out. Tell me what I missed when I read through the proposition several times. It is sitting on my desk and is only 5 pages long, including the cover page. So, you can point to specific paragraphs and wording.
Correction. Proposition is only 1 page long. The arguments for it are 1 page long and the arguments against it are 2 pages long. With a cover sheet. :D

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 03:25 PM
Here you go !!!!
www.ss.ca.gov/elections
Just the Facts !!!
Later,
CJG
:clover:

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:28 PM
Really. Exactly how? What is the timeline? How is it different from the current process for the people who want to opt out?
Lots of "special interest" this and "impossible" that with no details. If you guys can show that the process is significantly different from the opt-out process and really does hinder your ability to have a choice, then you might persuade me to vote no. But, if it is not significantly different from the current process opt-out process, then I don't care....as what is good for the goose is good for the gander. But, I am willing to hear you out. Tell me what I missed when I read through the proposition several times. It is sitting on my desk and is only 5 pages long, including the cover page. So, you can point to specific paragraphs and wording.
The forms/paperwork will come from the state level and will take 6 to 8 months(not including the time to process it once we have opted in) until it reaches us, which will not allow us to opt in for the june elections. Arnold will go unchallenged from the teachers,cops and firefighters unions.
Which is why this entire things is taking place now.

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:32 PM
PLEASE VOTE NO ON PROPS.
74
75
76
77.
Thanks Jeff. IAFF. Local 1067.

HM
10-08-2005, 03:34 PM
The forms/paperwork will come from the state level and will take 6 to 8 months(not including the time to process it once we have opted in) until it reaches us, which will not allow us to opt in for the june elections. Arnold will go unchallenged from the teachers,cops and firefighters unions.
Which is why this entire things is taking place now.
O.k. so now your saying that there is nothing wrong with Prop 75? That is not what the arguments say that are against it.
So now the problem is the paper work will take 6-8 months? I never read that in any of the arguments. Looks like the paper work is already done as it is written word for word in the proposition. The union has to wait for the state to print it and ship it?
Why all the arguments about the proposition and now that is not the argument?

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 03:35 PM
The forms/paperwork will come from the state level and will take 6 to 8 months(not including the time to process it once we have opted in) until it reaches us, which will not allow us to opt in for the june elections. Arnold will go unchallenged from the teachers,cops and firefighters unions.
Which is why this entire things is taking place now.
Just like I've said many times.......
None of you Public Service Employees care a "Rat's Ass" about the good things he's done for California.
You only care about yourselves.......
You would rather have the w*h*o*r*e Gray Davis back.....
Just as long as YOU guys are OK.......F' the rest of the State and out future !!!
CJG
:hammer2:

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 03:39 PM
PLEASE VOTE NO ON PROPS.
74
75
76
77
I would starve in the private sector !!!!!
Thanks Jeff. IAFF. Local 1067.
:D

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:39 PM
O.k. so now your saying that there is nothing wrong with Prop 75? That is not what the arguments say that are against it.
So now the problem is the paper work will take 6-8 months? I never read that in any of the arguments. Looks like the paper work is already done as it is written word for word in the proposition. The union has to wait for the state to print it and ship it?
Why all the arguments about the proposition and now that is not the argument?
because the gov. knows we can not possible fight him politically if we lose this. He knows this will silence us for the june election.
The arguement is that we already have the option to opt out.which is true. This prop. ties our hands by making us opt in,which is what we are already doing.

HM
10-08-2005, 03:45 PM
The forms/paperwork will come from the state level and will take 6 to 8 months(not including the time to process it once we have opted in) until it reaches us, which will not allow us to opt in for the june elections. Arnold will go unchallenged from the teachers,cops and firefighters unions.
Which is why this entire things is taking place now.
Perhaps you would like me to cut and paste the proposition and you can point out where it says the paper work must come from the state? It is pretty specific in the wording and size font to use...but does not say that it must be sent by the state or approved by the state...just what the form has to say.
Also, explain to me all the pages on this thread about the proposition and just now the "REAL" problem comes out? Really...why all the back and forth only to end up on this? (which I don't buy).

HM
10-08-2005, 03:49 PM
because the gov. knows we can not possible fight him politically if we lose this. He knows this will silence us for the june election.
The arguement is that we already have the option to opt out.which is true. This prop. ties our hands by making us opt in,which is what we are already doing.
O.k..... make up your mind. Is it the paper work coming down from the state or is it the proposition.
The forms/paperwork will come from the state level and will take 6 to 8 months(not including the time to process it once we have opted in) until it reaches us, which will not allow us to opt in for the june elections.
That was in response to my question telling you to point out EXACTLY how the proposition makes it almost impossible. Now your saying it is the proposition.
Can you make up your mind...and then get specific. If you can't get specific...you are full of shit. The proposition is only a page long. Point out what the problem is? Paper work, time lines....etc? Is there a secret page I am missing?

MOBrien
10-08-2005, 03:50 PM
If LE, FF, and Teachers were paid what they are actually worth in the first place (way more than they get)........whether this passes or not becomes somewhat of a non-issue IMO.
Here's another problem.....if Awnold is voted out of office in the next election, we're still screwed if Warren Beat-off gets in. California has lost it's marbles IMO. Actors turned politicians.....WTF? They're trained to pretend they're someone else for a living. :mad:
popcorn, red vines, and a pepsi please .............

Billy Heinlein
10-08-2005, 03:57 PM
I am sorry I believe that most of you are missing the point, I do not care if you op-in or op-out that semantics’. The real point is that the unions use 100%of their money to support democrats while statistics show over 40% of the member are republicans. So basically the union tell 40% of the members to stick there view in their A**, they are too stupid to understand the issues. For this reason alone I am supporting the measure :yuk:

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 03:58 PM
O.k..... make up your mind. Is it the paper work coming down from the state or is it the proposition.
That was in response to my question telling you to point out EXACTLY how the proposition makes it almost impossible. Now your saying it is the proposition.
Can you make up your mind...and then get specific. If you can't get specific...you are full of shit. The proposition is only a page long. Point out what the problem is? Paper work, time lines....etc? Is there a secret page I am missing?
Im telling you the prop is a ploy and telling you why.

HM
10-08-2005, 03:59 PM
Actors turned politicians.....WTF? They're trained to pretend they're someone else for a living. :mad:
popcorn, red vines, and a pepsi please .............
Old news. Remember Ronald Reagan? So, what should the previous experience of a politician be? I don't know...I think actors are the most qualified since politicians are full of shit and have to pretend they are not and lie thru their teeth while smiling? Sounds like a perfect fit!!! LOL

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 04:03 PM
I am sorry I believe that most of you are missing the point, I do not care if you op-in or op-out that semantics’. The real point is that the unions use 100%of their money to support democrats while statistics show over 40% of the member are republicans. So basically the union tell 40% of the members to stick there view in their A**, they are too stupid to understand the issues. For this reason alone I am supporting the measure :yuk:
Not true, most union money is spent on local non-partisan issues. Typically our unions don't care about political party it's the issues that matter to the members.

HM
10-08-2005, 04:04 PM
Im telling you the prop is a ploy and telling you why.
You have not told me shit. You have made accusations of what is does without pointing out specifics. You then say it is the time lag of the paperwork and then quickly retreat from that back to that members already have a choice.
POINT OUT EXACTLY HOW IT MAKES IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAVE A POLITICAL SAY? Do you hear the words coming out of my mouth...I mean keyboard?
You are running in circles and have NOT answered any of the questions.
do you need help with the answers?

HM
10-08-2005, 04:22 PM
How many have read the proposition? Here is the link to it Prop 75 (http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_nov05/voter_info_pdf/entire75.pdf)
Actually read it. Then point out exactly how the proposition makes it almost impossible. Point out where you need to get the paper work from the state when the proposition dictates the exact wording that the form must be. Point out how requiring the Union to get specific approval to take money for contributions is a bad thing and how assuming it is o.k. to take their money unless they "opt-out" is a good thing. I am going to take your money unless you tell me not to. It is quite funny.
Point out exactly how it is different from your current opt-out process? Is the current opt-out paper work only a half page long instead of this combersome full page? Does the union have the same "processing" issues with the opt-out that you said would cause delays for opting-in?
How are you able to keep a straight face in these arguments?

little rowe boat
10-08-2005, 05:04 PM
You have not told me shit. You have made accusations of what is does without pointing out specifics. You then say it is the time lag of the paperwork and then quickly retreat from that back to that members already have a choice.
POINT OUT EXACTLY HOW IT MAKES IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAVE A POLITICAL SAY? Do you hear the words coming out of my mouth...I mean keyboard?
You are running in circles and have NOT answered any of the questions.
do you need help with the answers?
If you don't understand clean the shit out of your ears.Or eyes.
I have already told you that we can and do have a say what our dues are used for,which means that there is no need for the prop.The only reason the gov. is doing this special election is to tie us up for 6 to 8 months to get his agenda through unopposed what don't you understand.
We can not have a political voice if it can't be funded. What is there not to understand.

Creator
10-08-2005, 05:41 PM
A vote is a political voice! Why don't you all stop crying and go out and vote. No one is going to change anyone’s mind on here, you guys run around in circles and all sound like a bunch of crying 3 year olds. I'll tell you, the LEO’s and FF who keep bad mouthing, yelling, calling people names and throwing insults to the other board members are doing NOTHING to further your cause. You're passionate; I get it but explain yourself and your position without demeaning other people. It's much more effective. I was interested in what you guys had to say but with all the dumbass remarks and BS rhetoric that has come out of some of your mouths you have truly disappointed this Californian.

Kilrtoy
10-08-2005, 10:48 PM
A vote is a political voice! Why don't you all stop crying and go out and vote. No one is going to change anyone’s mind on here, you guys run around in circles and all sound like a bunch of crying 3 year olds. I'll tell you, the LEO’s and FF who keep bad mouthing, yelling, calling people names and throwing insults to the other board members are doing NOTHING to further your cause. You're passionate; I get it but explain yourself and your position without demeaning other people. It's much more effective. I was interested in what you guys had to say but with all the dumbass remarks and BS rhetoric that has come out of some of your mouths you have truly disappointed this Californian.
I dont recall calling anyone a name or bad mouthing anyone, i may have typed a few yells, but nothing else.....

SHAKEN Not Stirred
10-08-2005, 10:52 PM
I dont recall calling anyone a name or bad mouthing anyone, i may have typed a few yells, but nothing else.....
Don't worry Miguel.......Youu stiiiil myy fwend !!!
:cool:

1stepcloser
10-09-2005, 08:41 AM
You want o fix the states problem,
REINSTATE THE VLF LAWS OF OLD......
PROBLEM SOLVED....
Do you really believe this? The VLF offset saves me roughly $700.00 per year.
If thats what it takes to put this state in the black, I would gladly pay twice that.
But, you KNOW that it going to take alot more than that to salvage our current crisis, just like I know your fishing for a cry of NO! here to state your opinion of us vs. them.

Throttle
10-09-2005, 08:43 AM
Its called an "investment". One that will pay huge dividends for the people of Cali in the future
good, then call my PAC $$ my way of investing... secrurity!

Throttle
10-09-2005, 09:03 AM
Just like I've said many times.......
You would rather have the w*h*o*r*e Gray Davis back.....
CJG
:hammer2:
why dont we invite Pete Wilson back for you... the states long term problems were not caused because of public service employees.

riverfamily
10-09-2005, 01:06 PM
Quote by H2O Advantage "what right do non-union people have to vote on a union issue?"
OH thats a good one!! OK Ill go there---what right do non property owing people have to vote on school bonds that effect property owners?? what right do non tax paying people have to vote??( you know the ones on welfare---they dont pay a dime but can change my take home pay!!) AND WHAT RIGHT DO PEOPLE NOT IN THE TOP 1% OF THE TAX BRACKET HAVE TO VOTE TO INCREASE ONLY THE TOP 1%??? :idea: :idea:

Ultrafied
10-09-2005, 02:25 PM
why don't we invite Pete Wilson back for you... the states long term problems were not caused because of public service employees.
Actually .... we were in the black with Davis when everything was running without a problem. When it came time to make tough decisions, Davis blew it on the energy crisis. His bad. We had long recovered from Wilson.
I am not blaming the public service employees for anything. But as in any business, decisions have to be made dealing in payroll, staffing and benefits when the fiscal year(s) are not good. Bottom line .... every business and state has one.
One that will not change no matter how I vote. I really, really like Kilr's DCB!!!