How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again! (Mark Twain)
How I spent the last hour
To: Denver Post, Open Forum
From: moi
Please consider printing the following letter:
Wisconsin governor Scott Walker is widely thought of as a “conservative”, but is nothing of the kind. Conservatives are humble people who know that we cannot fully comprehend the workings of complex social structures. So they are cautious. Change is important but should be gradual and carefully monitored to avoid doing more harm than good. Conservatives respect the people and wisdom of the past. Those who preceded us were not fools, even though we don’t always understand why they did what they did.
Frequently spins in graveThere aren’t many conservatives around. Governor Walker is a wild man who might harm hundreds of thousands of people for decades to come. Yet he’s absolutely certain that he is right and so does not listen to or negotiate with people who hold different views.
The modern right wing was born in the turmoil of the fifties and sixties. Far from offering any wisdom, they are mere reactionaries. The fervor, the recklessness, the absence of a thoughtful grounding philosophy – all of this makes them dangerous.
We are allowed only two parties here in the land of the free. One is comprised of radical reactionaries. The other most often shows no grit, no fight.
To: Denver Post, Open Forum
From: a concerned citizen
Recently a Mr. Tokarski submitted a letter for consideration. After a somewhat flattering portrayal of conservatives, he goes on to say that the policies of Scott Walker “might harm hundreds of thousands of people for decades to come”, and he calls the modern right wing “dangerous.
I notice Mr. Tokarski offers no examples of specific policies that will do all this damage. I will also guess that Mr. Tokarski advocates the usual slate of left-wing policies that have consistently brought economic, social, and demographic ruin in their wake.
Specifically, loss of collective bargain rights for workers means lower wages and fewer benefits. Since union wages prop up wages for the rest of society, it means that all workers in Wisconsin will face lower wages and fewer benefits. In addition, without union protection, they can be abused, fired at will, replaced by political cronies.
Selling off state power plants means higher utility costs, perhaps even rolling blackouts as seen in California. Crony capitalism benefits only crony capitalists.
The larger point is that we do not know the fallout from this, as it is reckless and maniacal. Conservatives would not do such things, being conservative and all. Radical reactionaries would.
Well, the Wisconsin bill rolled back some collective bargaining, and exempted some occupations.
Public sector employees enjoy a lot of job security and benefits sans unions. They are, for the most part, in a non-competitive market.
Long term economic growth comes in spite of unions, not because of them. To call for more unions as a strategy for economic improvement is simple minded.
The idea that you promote, and here the Koch Brothers agree with you, is that since the private sector has been largely de-unionized and there is no job security out there anymore, that we need to lower all of the boats in the harbor to that level. That is backwards thinking, but typically Tea Party-ish, in that that group are ‘useful idiots’ for the oligarchy.
The idea behind public sector benefits was that they would take smaller pay in return for better job security and benefits. There was also the problem of ideology and cronyism – teachers espeically need to be protected from those who want to impose their private ideology on students. Cronyism was a large part of the thrust behind public employee unions, that politicians were using those jobs as payoffs to friends.
It’s not as simple as you make it out to be. Further, there is incredible pressure on the public sector in the form of the anti-tax movement. Ask any one of them, and I guarantee you that they will tell you that 1) people demand a high level of service, and 2) people demand a low level of taxation. If you think that in that environment they can write their own paychecks, you are sorely mistaken.
Your statement that economic growth comes in spite of unions is disheveled thinking at best. On the continuum at one end you will have slavery and sweatshops, on the other complete eating of the seed crop with no wealth set aside for future investment. Unions push us towards the latter, and can indeed force companies to leave a locale and search out lower wages elsewhere. But it totally depends on the skill level of the work force – take for example the relative power of retails clerks versus baseball players.
Worker-owned businesses are an anathema to the owning class, but not a bad idea in my view.
You uncork lines like this that are rude and off the mark. I think I’ll get an M. T. voodoo doll so at times like this I can sit around and stick pins in it. Make myself feel better.
ideology and cronyism
You get more of this with unions.
…there is incredible pressure on the public sector in the form of the anti-tax movement.
I don’t know about this. Taxes and public spending seem plenty high around my parts. Public employees seem well compensated. To add even more taxes and spending…well, at some point we reach diminishing returns.
For that matter I’ve been before the County Commission and State agencies madly lobbying for my pet projects, so I’m familiar with the battle for public funds. In this I’m even less enthusiastic about public sector unions, since more for them means less for my public sector area without unions. In a way, we should have all unions or no unions.
In this day and age we have most job protections written in the statutes.
Your statement that economic growth comes in spite of unions is disheveled thinking at best.
It’s what I do best.
Here’s an example: ethnic Han Chinese emigrants often become a market dominant minority in places like Malaysia, all without a union, and in fact going up against a gov’t enforced union type ethic favoritism on part of the locals.
Worker-owned businesses are an anathema to the owning class…
Here, Freddy. I think this pretty much covers it. Oh, by the way, if you ever run into scott walker, PUHHHLEASE thank the hell outta him for me, would ya? What a dufus. I mean, he ate the WHOLE koch enchilida! How stupid is that??
Neoconservatives also violently oppose raising minimum wage laws to a “living wage” standard. In Montana, union bosses also refuse to support such humanitarian wage laws. The fake fight for modest gains in minimum wage were get-out-the-vote tactics, rather than an actual commitment to improve the lives of blue-collar workers. With no friends in high places left, it might be a good time to go Egyptian (little-d-democrat).
I detect here a bit of liberal paternalism: “Oh, those people of color, and the dispossessed. They must be brought into our clan and made into our image, a people who petition the government for cash compensation.”
Interesting outlook you have there. Race relations in the union movement have always been strained, as white workers always saw minorities as a threat, just as you do.
Nichols is merely saying that the movement needs better solidarity and needs to reach out to minorities and the unemployed to gain strength. It is a ‘duh!’ kind of statement, painfully obvious.
Race relations in the union movement have always been strained, as white workers always saw minorities as a threat, just as you do.
Not “threat”, but more like “competition” as it has been for all of history, except for recently when modern wealth has let some dabble in racial magnanimosity.
Generally resources are limited, and I want resources going to my kind. That’s just the way it is. That you sit in the comfort and safety of the Boulder cafe and tell me otherwise is a temporary indulgence.
Piece of Mindful 
To: Denver Post, Open Forum
From: a concerned citizen
Recently a Mr. Tokarski submitted a letter for consideration. After a somewhat flattering portrayal of conservatives, he goes on to say that the policies of Scott Walker “might harm hundreds of thousands of people for decades to come”, and he calls the modern right wing “dangerous.
I notice Mr. Tokarski offers no examples of specific policies that will do all this damage. I will also guess that Mr. Tokarski advocates the usual slate of left-wing policies that have consistently brought economic, social, and demographic ruin in their wake.
LikeLike
Specifically, loss of collective bargain rights for workers means lower wages and fewer benefits. Since union wages prop up wages for the rest of society, it means that all workers in Wisconsin will face lower wages and fewer benefits. In addition, without union protection, they can be abused, fired at will, replaced by political cronies.
Selling off state power plants means higher utility costs, perhaps even rolling blackouts as seen in California. Crony capitalism benefits only crony capitalists.
The larger point is that we do not know the fallout from this, as it is reckless and maniacal. Conservatives would not do such things, being conservative and all. Radical reactionaries would.
LikeLike
Well, the Wisconsin bill rolled back some collective bargaining, and exempted some occupations.
Public sector employees enjoy a lot of job security and benefits sans unions. They are, for the most part, in a non-competitive market.
Long term economic growth comes in spite of unions, not because of them. To call for more unions as a strategy for economic improvement is simple minded.
LikeLike
The idea that you promote, and here the Koch Brothers agree with you, is that since the private sector has been largely de-unionized and there is no job security out there anymore, that we need to lower all of the boats in the harbor to that level. That is backwards thinking, but typically Tea Party-ish, in that that group are ‘useful idiots’ for the oligarchy.
The idea behind public sector benefits was that they would take smaller pay in return for better job security and benefits. There was also the problem of ideology and cronyism – teachers espeically need to be protected from those who want to impose their private ideology on students. Cronyism was a large part of the thrust behind public employee unions, that politicians were using those jobs as payoffs to friends.
It’s not as simple as you make it out to be. Further, there is incredible pressure on the public sector in the form of the anti-tax movement. Ask any one of them, and I guarantee you that they will tell you that 1) people demand a high level of service, and 2) people demand a low level of taxation. If you think that in that environment they can write their own paychecks, you are sorely mistaken.
Your statement that economic growth comes in spite of unions is disheveled thinking at best. On the continuum at one end you will have slavery and sweatshops, on the other complete eating of the seed crop with no wealth set aside for future investment. Unions push us towards the latter, and can indeed force companies to leave a locale and search out lower wages elsewhere. But it totally depends on the skill level of the work force – take for example the relative power of retails clerks versus baseball players.
Worker-owned businesses are an anathema to the owning class, but not a bad idea in my view.
LikeLike
… ‘useful idiots’ for the oligarchy
You uncork lines like this that are rude and off the mark. I think I’ll get an M. T. voodoo doll so at times like this I can sit around and stick pins in it. Make myself feel better.
ideology and cronyism
You get more of this with unions.
…there is incredible pressure on the public sector in the form of the anti-tax movement.
I don’t know about this. Taxes and public spending seem plenty high around my parts. Public employees seem well compensated. To add even more taxes and spending…well, at some point we reach diminishing returns.
For that matter I’ve been before the County Commission and State agencies madly lobbying for my pet projects, so I’m familiar with the battle for public funds. In this I’m even less enthusiastic about public sector unions, since more for them means less for my public sector area without unions. In a way, we should have all unions or no unions.
In this day and age we have most job protections written in the statutes.
Your statement that economic growth comes in spite of unions is disheveled thinking at best.
It’s what I do best.
Here’s an example: ethnic Han Chinese emigrants often become a market dominant minority in places like Malaysia, all without a union, and in fact going up against a gov’t enforced union type ethic favoritism on part of the locals.
Worker-owned businesses are an anathema to the owning class…
This is, in the main, a failed business model.
LikeLike
The phrase “useful idiot” originated with Lenin and refers to people who unknowingly carry out others’ agendas. Cannot put it better.
LikeLike
Here, Freddy. I think this pretty much covers it. Oh, by the way, if you ever run into scott walker, PUHHHLEASE thank the hell outta him for me, would ya? What a dufus. I mean, he ate the WHOLE koch enchilida! How stupid is that??
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/26-0
LikeLike
Hartmann drives me buggy.
LikeLike
Neoconservatives also violently oppose raising minimum wage laws to a “living wage” standard. In Montana, union bosses also refuse to support such humanitarian wage laws. The fake fight for modest gains in minimum wage were get-out-the-vote tactics, rather than an actual commitment to improve the lives of blue-collar workers. With no friends in high places left, it might be a good time to go Egyptian (little-d-democrat).
LikeLike
John Nichols, who is a journalist in WI and who covered the protests in detail, mentioned that there were two divides there that need to be resolved:
Black/white – there were very few blacks demonstrating, even though their interests are heavily involved;
and employed/unemployed. By definition, the unemployed were not there, but also have significant interests in wage and hour and living wage dispute.
LikeLike
I detect here a bit of liberal paternalism: “Oh, those people of color, and the dispossessed. They must be brought into our clan and made into our image, a people who petition the government for cash compensation.”
LikeLike
Interesting outlook you have there. Race relations in the union movement have always been strained, as white workers always saw minorities as a threat, just as you do.
Nichols is merely saying that the movement needs better solidarity and needs to reach out to minorities and the unemployed to gain strength. It is a ‘duh!’ kind of statement, painfully obvious.
LikeLike
Race relations in the union movement have always been strained, as white workers always saw minorities as a threat, just as you do.
Not “threat”, but more like “competition” as it has been for all of history, except for recently when modern wealth has let some dabble in racial magnanimosity.
Generally resources are limited, and I want resources going to my kind. That’s just the way it is. That you sit in the comfort and safety of the Boulder cafe and tell me otherwise is a temporary indulgence.
LikeLike
Old Fred said he wants resources going to “my kind.”
Thankfully for the rest of us, Fred, you are one of a kind.
LikeLike