Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

What ever happened to give SOMETHING to take away SOMETHING..madison stand off

no matter what side you fall on
can we agree ?
that both sides need to give a bit of something away to get something they want

i am sick of it all and just want some compromise

is it not part of our two party system ... each side HAS to give in SOMETHING

 
fiatpax

Asked by fiatpax at 10:49 AM on Feb. 27, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 46 (221,572 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (18)
  • They've already agreed to all the consessions but would like to retain the right to collectively bargin.

    Republicans spit in their faces.
    UpSheRises

    Answer by UpSheRises at 10:50 AM on Feb. 28, 2011

  • Don't the Democrats have to, I don't know, show up for that to happen?
    lovinangels

    Answer by lovinangels at 10:50 AM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • True...but the Union side has to give a weeee bit more than the non-union side! The union side has taken more than their fair share!! :o)

    I support starting with the elimination of the Taft-Hartley Act a.k.a. "Right To Work" law, which makes it MANDATORY to join the existing union in your profession, if you want to work in that field. Being forced to join a union you do not agree with in order to work (ESPECIALLY with unemployment numbers the way they are) is WRONG!! It should be up to the individual.
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 10:54 AM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • I agree with lovin. How are you supposed to compromise when one side wont even show up?
    gemgem

    Answer by gemgem at 10:53 AM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • I think the people of WI have given all they have to give. Ultimately, it is the taxpayers of WI who are getting the shaft in all of this. A very limited group of people are demanding the rest of the citizens of their state pay their way. I just don't get it. There is no 'give and take' in this. There is only take. It is time for this type of selfishness to be over. The laws of the country now protect the worker in safety, whistle blowing, environmental, and harassment. Unions are only for one purpose now. Get rich. They don't care if the people have to pay, which I do as a teacher in NC. They just want all the money to go to them. If this wasn't true, there wouldn't be all this silliness. They would be more interested in the people keeping a job. Fine. Now the jobs will have to go.
    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 11:36 AM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • I for one don't think they are the ones who shouldn't have to sacrifice.


    I teach public school. I get paid. I'm not 'sacrificing' anything. I work for my money which means I am compensated for the job. There is nothing magnanimus about teaching. It isn't like a teacher gave up something important to teach. I love teaching, and I know my work is important to people, but it isn't like I cure cancer. I just try to teach people who might cure cancer. But, there is no sacrifice to be made. My state requires I put in 6% to pension and pay for insurance if I want more than the bare bones basic crap policy. I use my husband's instead. But, there is NO sacrifice - just personal responsibility.

    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 1:26 PM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • Part of whats funny about all this is that the Dems tried to force through contracts after Walker was elected but not in office yet. That would have been ok with them even though he asked them not to that they had their chance to do it before they knew they were losing the majority. They didn't listen and it was actually an out going Dem that stopped it saying it wouldn't be right to do it at the time.
    Charis76

    Answer by Charis76 at 10:57 AM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • Bottom line- Most want to complain about the economy, deficit, taxes.......but FEW, if ANY, are accepting of being PERSONALLY affected. Great subject to complain about, but NO ONE person or group appears to want to man-up and take the hit.


     Newsflash folks, EVERYONE will be affected!

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 12:17 PM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • Everyone always feels like its the other group that should take the cuts or is acting selfish. Until it's their group that is being asked to do so.

    @ lorikeet
    "I support starting with the elimination of the Taft-Hartley Act a.k.a. "Right To Work" law, which makes it MANDATORY to join the existing union in your profession, if you want to work in that field. Being forced to join a union you do not agree with in order to work (ESPECIALLY with unemployment numbers the way they are) is WRONG!! It should be up to the individual."

    You are misinformed. The right to work act actually does the exact opposite. It says that a person can NOT be made to join a union.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law
    kayslay

    Answer by kayslay at 12:48 PM on Feb. 27, 2011

  • My bad! :o) I was thinking that in PA I do NOT work in a Right To Work state and therefore HAVE to join the teacher's union. As you can tell I'm also new to the whole idea....since this is only my second year working as a teacher, and last year at 41 years old it became my first ever "union job!" Ugh.

    This whole issue has me spitting nails! :o)
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 1:16 PM on Feb. 27, 2011