*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Boise_Lib.

*election

Adding video to channels (Election) - requested by NetRunner.

"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.

"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.

"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.

"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.

"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."



Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "

In the end, it's the predatory "American" corporations that are destroying the country by outsourcing jobs to the lowest global bidder with the laxest environmental and labor regulations.

It really seems like the capitalists of this country aren't going to be satisfied until the middle class is transformed into a locally available source of 3rd world labor.

Outsourcing jobs means Americans pay less for their products.

Would you like a 75% increase in costs of goods you buy? That is what will happen if jobs come back to America.

Unless you'd like the gov't fixing prices, wages, etc.

"We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote."

I'd like to see where your source got those numbers.

Dear Quantum Mushroom, as an Ohioan who votes and knew the issues fully going into the election, and who voted against SB5 aka issue 2 (Also, here's a link to the "tricky" wording of the bill. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2011/2-language.pdf I was glad I could take a few weeks to fully comprehend the wording, especially the part that read "A 'yes" vote means you approve of the law. A 'no' vote means you reject the law" I mean, what does "yes" and "no" reaaaallly mean here. Please, QM, if you could help straighten this out you'd be doing a great service to us all. Anyways...) I guess what I really want to say is.... Nyah nyah nyah We win, you lose. Pffffffffff.

>> ^quantumushroom:

"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.
"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.
"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.
"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.
"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."

Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "


The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote? I'd consider what the long term effects of that were before chasing that dream if i were you. You might find yourself either in a civil war or at the helm of an oppressive government in effect holding half a nation prisoner.

Democratic government was founded upon the mindless whims of the masses, it is supposed to be subject to the national will.

And now it serves the mindless whims of the few. Up with Occupy.

I think most people would be happy to pay more for goods and services if they knew it meant better working conditions, higher wages and more jobs. Low prices have played a big part in the destruction of the global economy. Unregulated capitalism is unsustainable. @lantern53>> ^lantern53:

Outsourcing jobs means Americans pay less for their products.
Would you like a 75% increase in costs of goods you buy? That is what will happen if jobs come back to America.
Unless you'd like the gov't fixing prices, wages, etc.

>> ^lantern53:

Outsourcing jobs means Americans pay less for their products.
Would you like a 75% increase in costs of goods you buy? That is what will happen if jobs come back to America.
Unless you'd like the gov't fixing prices, wages, etc.


There would be some increase in the cost of goods we buy if we brought them back in country, and they would be higher at first. I don't think you can say that there would be a sustained 75% increase in costs of the goods we buy after processes are completely moved over and in full production.

The other thing that's crazy is the increasing pay as you travel up the ladder in these companies and the focus they put on profit. Our manufactured goods are moved overseas because they want a 60% profit margin instead of a 30% profit margin. But their profit margins shrink when the other countries demand higher wages and the countries begin to implement environmental laws to be followed. They shrink further when companies in the country setup competing goods and services or completely copy the product they are making and sell it.

It's simply not possible for companies to continue to make 10 and 15% more each quarter/year producing the same and similar products without something giving. Right now it's them hopping to new countries every few years, avoiding taxation through shelters, and other unknown questionable activities.

Cost is not what we are paying for, profit margin is. To me it's very similar to the "cost" we bear because of oil futures and speculation. We pay more because someone somewhere is making a buck on a process they have no hand in at any point. They don't drill it, refine it, transport it, test it, deliver it, retail it, manage it, or anything else to it. They bet on it for profit add no beneficial value to it, and we pay for it. Stockholders, Management, CEO, CIO, COO, etc drive cost to the company down so they increase profit margins not drive down cost to the consumer.

There will always be goods that are best suited to be imported, especially region specific wood, fruit, vegetables, beans, etc. Putting your car or ipad together is done that way because it increases profit margins. It's disingenuous for them to say they do it to lower cost to consumer, it MAY be a byproduct of what they do but it's not the reason they do it...profit is.

I read the link. It explains NOTHING of what the amendment does or does not do.

I lost nothing, you're the one who got screwed; at least you're happy.

>> ^jcf79:

Dear Quantum Mushroom, as an Ohioan who votes and knew the issues fully going into the election, and who voted against SB5 aka issue 2 (Also, here's a link to the "tricky" wording of the bill. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2011/2-language.pdf I was glad I could take a few weeks to fully comprehend the wording, especially the part that read "A 'yes" vote means you approve of the law. A 'no' vote means you reject the law" I mean, what does "yes" and "no" reaaaallly mean here. Please, QM, if you could help straighten this out you'd be doing a great service to us all. Anyways...) I guess what I really want to say is.... Nyah nyah nyah We win, you lose. Pffffffffff.

According to the U.S. census bureau, 49 percent of Americans currently live in a household where someone is receiving federal benefits of some sort...

Read more:

http://www.care2.com/causes/almost-half-of-all-americans-get-a-check-from-the-government.html#ixzz1dXy4CDlA

QM adds: And 50% pay no federal taxes either.

>> ^bmacs27:

"We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote."
I'd like to see where your source got those numbers.

The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote?

Nowhere does it state in the text of the column that voting is to be restricted for anyone, only that stupid, uninformed voters may be the end of the Republic.

Civil war? May happen anyway.



>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Consider the Ohio voters. Ohio has a failing economy with one of the nation’s highest state income tax rates and forced unionization – Ohio private sector workers can be forced to join a union in order to work. By a narrow margin they elected a governor, John Kasich, who promised to bring government employee unions under control. Kasich ushered a law through the Ohio legislature that restricted collective bargaining rights for government employee unions.
"OK … let’s stop here for a moment and consider government unions engaging in collective bargaining. Would you like to know two prominent people in American history who steadfastly opposed government union collective bargaining? That would be Franklin D. Roosevelt and labor giant George Meany, the former president of the AFL-CIO. That’s not to say these men didn’t support the growth of unions! Come on! FDR and George Meany? Of course they were pro-union. But they recognized that while private sector unions were bargaining for a share of the profits they produced through their work, government sector unions didn’t generate profits. They were merely negotiating for taxpayer money … negotiating with politicians they put in office with their campaign contributions and volunteer efforts on election day.
"So now the uninformed and often flat-out ignorant voters of Ohio have handed these collective bargaining rights back to the government sector unions. They will not resume negotiations with the very officials they put into office for the money in the pockets of the people who gave them that power. The only way Ohio government entities will have to handle the rising costs will be to raise taxes, cut services or fire workers.
"Yes --- I understand. The question on the ballot for Ohio voters was poorly worded. Worded, in fact, to favor the union organizers who got that question put on the ballot through a petition process. That doesn’t excuse the voters. This is their money, their economy, their future and the future of their children. They owed it to themselves and their children to become informed on the issues. They didn’t. Ohio will suffer. They will suffer. Their children will suffer if they don’t get the hell out of Ohio and move to Wisconsin or some other state with right-to-work laws where government sector unions don’t have collective bargaining rights.
"Democracy is ugly. Majority rule can be a disaster. There is a reason our founding fathers thought it to be a good idea to limit who had the privilege (not the right) of going to the polls and selecting our leaders. There was a reason our founding fathers did not include a right to vote in a federal election – including voting for our president – in the constitution. They didn’t trust mobs. They didn’t want to see the “mindless whims of the masses” translated into law. They were right … but to no avail. Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. Now you tell me how we’re supposed to survive that."

Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country "

The solution is to only allow 50% of people to vote? I'd consider what the long term effects of that were before chasing that dream if i were you. You might find yourself either in a civil war or at the helm of an oppressive government in effect holding half a nation prisoner.
Democratic government was founded upon the mindless whims of the masses, it is supposed to be subject to the national will.
And now it serves the mindless whims of the few. Up with Occupy.

You don't get this type of turnout with this type of a percentage voting "no" on an issue with a failure to understand simple text (sorry you couldn't understand it) And I'm not happy, by the way, if that makes you feel better. We won this fight, but I'm sure that Kucinich has plan B in effect to make the working class feel the hurt, however... Times will be tough, but it will be tougher on those who choose to take advantage of the working class. We know struggle, we know sacrifice, we are the 99% and we have shown that we can prevail.
>> ^quantumushroom:

I read the link. It explains NOTHING of what the amendment does or does not do.
I lost nothing, you're the one who got screwed; at least you're happy.
>> ^jcf79:
Dear Quantum Mushroom, as an Ohioan who votes and knew the issues fully going into the election, and who voted against SB5 aka issue 2 (Also, here's a link to the "tricky" wording of the bill. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2011/2-language.pdf I was glad I could take a few weeks to fully comprehend the wording, especially the part that read "A 'yes" vote means you approve of the law. A 'no' vote means you reject the law" I mean, what does "yes" and "no" reaaaallly mean here. Please, QM, if you could help straighten this out you'd be doing a great service to us all. Anyways...) I guess what I really want to say is.... Nyah nyah nyah We win, you lose. Pffffffffff.

>> ^quantumushroom:


Nowhere does it state in the text of the column that voting is to be restricted for anyone>> ^quantumushroom:
"... Now the masses are taking their ignorance to the polls. We live in a country where over half of the people get some kind of a check from the government every month without working for it … and they vote. ..."

... Neal Boortz from "In the end ... it's the idiot voters destroying the country"


Has anyone got a dictionary? I want to look up the word "insinuate".

Thanks to this vote, Ohioan taxpayers are now BACK on the hook for 66 billion dollars in government union pensions. That's JUST the pensions, nothing else.

Times will be tough, but it will be tougher on those who choose to take advantage of the working class.

This is how the people who control the emotional state of left-wingers fool you.

"We're losing a hand, but that's OK, because the Rich Guy is losing an arm!"







>> ^jcf79:

You don't get this type of turnout with this type of a percentage voting "no" on an issue with a failure to understand simple text (sorry you couldn't understand it) And I'm not happy, by the way, if that makes you feel better. We won this fight, but I'm sure that Kucinich has plan B in effect to make the working class feel the hurt, however... Times will be tough, but it will be tougher on those who choose to take advantage of the working class. We know struggle, we know sacrifice, we are the 99% and we have shown that we can prevail.
>> ^quantumushroom:
I read the link. It explains NOTHING of what the amendment does or does not do.
I lost nothing, you're the one who got screwed; at least you're happy.
>> ^jcf79:
Dear Quantum Mushroom, as an Ohioan who votes and knew the issues fully going into the election, and who voted against SB5 aka issue 2 (Also, here's a link to the "tricky" wording of the bill. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/2011/2-language.pdf I was glad I could take a few weeks to fully comprehend the wording, especially the part that read "A 'yes" vote means you approve of the law. A 'no' vote means you reject the law" I mean, what does "yes" and "no" reaaaallly mean here. Please, QM, if you could help straighten this out you'd be doing a great service to us all. Anyways...) I guess what I really want to say is.... Nyah nyah nyah We win, you lose. Pffffffffff.

I don't see how this double standard exists. At some point in history there was an agreement that these people would get their pensions due to their employment with the government entities.

The same goes for companies like GM, they made agreements to pay their employees.

It's not as if these two entities are some old senile man someone took advantage of, they are made up of many people who at the time thought it was a fair deal.

Now, we have discussions about how it's unfair to expect these companies to pay for agreements they made and are trying to pass things that not only absolve them of what they owe, but then also try to make it so in the future they don't have to negotiate.

On the other side of the coin, we have individuals who have lost their ability to pay and no one is saying that they shouldn't have to pay what they owe whether it's their fault or not they are in that circumstance. The vast majority of them are people who had no hand in creating the financial mess we are in except for maybe buying a house at a vastly inflated price.

So the individual is supposed to pay back their debts, but with companies and governments it's cool if we just vote away their obligations or bail them out.


And then we have the other hypocrisy where the guys elected into government, who are making good money with benefits and pretty much have job security for their term unless they really screw the pooch. They want to tell people who are hired and have to perform their job based on some sort of testing, performance, and other criteria that they can't negotiate. These same people are also held back in their pay rate by time served instead of performance based in some areas of government employment. For this they used to gain some job security (not really true anymore due to cost cutting), good benefits packages, and some retirement security.

We have these discussions about taking their benefits or making them pay more, removing retirement benefits for current and past employees (I don't agree with retro-active cancellation at all, they should pay retired employees, pay partially to current employed based on length of employment, and anyone with very short employment spans or signing on after the passing don't get anything), and keeping them on these neutered advancement ideas they have. There's also massive nepotism in government, which they are not trying to fix..because it allows them to influence business opportunities in their favor during and after their employment whether elected or hired.

Try any civilian work at a military base whether contracted or employed directly by the government, it's full of nepotism. New hires who know someone will hire in on unrelated departments and shoot right past you whether you're a long time employee or know more than them...because they know a guy. They are really blatant with the nepotism.

It's wrong how government operates, especially the higher you go. Negotiation makes it possible for the lower level guys to at least attempt to keep them honest. Instead of making deals and then retroactively changing the terms once they've also gotten rid of the ability to negotiate.

It's not the individuals fault that the government can no longer meet the obligations they made because they removed too many regulations and let the banks and lenders go hog wild for almost a decade. I'm sure if they looked around a bit, they might find some government officials who had a massively growing net worth to accompany that decade of uncontrolled growth. Excusing debts to fix problems they created should not even be up for discussion, it sets a precedent to make bad faith deals to get what they want. And would create the next "exploitable" avenue for all these nepotism filled departments.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Thanks to this vote, Ohioan taxpayers are now BACK on the hook for 66 billion dollars in government union pensions. That's JUST the pensions, nothing else.
Times will be tough, but it will be tougher on those who choose to take advantage of the working class.
This is how the people who control the emotional state of left-wingers fool you.
"We're losing a hand, but that's OK, because the Rich Guy is losing an arm!"