Cheeseheads

Timothy Smith

gp4jesus wrote: »

Someone fill me in.
Been extremely busy the past few days. Just heard on GNN radio "...that the Wisconsin governor's race negatively impacted the White house."

How's that? How could it?

Wisconsin usually votes Democrat like the large margin for Obama in 2008.

The defeat of the Walker recall, in slightly larger numbers than walker was elected 1-1/2 years ago may indicate a shift.

People are saying that Wisconsin electoral vote for 2012 are "in play" now and not solidly Dem.

It will get moreso if Conservative Repub Governor Walker's reforms keep working, showing that spending can be controlled and private sector jobs and investment increases despite Dem predictions of disaster.

Obama gave near zip/zero to support Barrett and public sector unions in the recall effort (probably hoping not to connect himself to an embarrassing loss). That should erode Wisconsin support for him in the Presidential race.

Exit Polls showed a "win" for Barrett in approx. the same % as they showed support for Obama. Since they were way of for the former, it's likely they are similarly off (and in the same direction)for the latter.

(My $0.02)

bmbguy

"Canada Bracing for Massive Influx of Wisconsin Boat People"(link)

98Badger

Timothy Smith wrote: »

It will get moreso if Conservative Repub Governor Walker's reforms keep working, showing that spending can be controlled and private sector jobs and investment increases despite Dem predictions.

How is taking money from the UW system, tech colleges and public schools and giving it to big business controlling spending? I agree spending needs to be reigned in, but shifting tax dollars to the private sector does not save anything. It simply shows our government is for sale.

Timothy Smith

98Badger wrote: »

How is taking money from the UW system, tech colleges and public schools and giving it to big business controlling spending? I agree spending needs to be reigned in, but shifting tax dollars to the private sector does not save anything. It simply shows our government is for sale.

I have 2 kids in the UW system, my Daughter is a 5th-year Senior at UW-Madison, my Son just finished his Freshman year at UW-Milwaukee. The out of pocket cost is killing me, not to mention our high taxes, but a want my kids to have this opportunity. How come no one ever talks about reducing spending and waste at these universities?, it's always that we don't spend enough?

And what about parents who don't want to, or can't afford to send their kids to college? Or singles or married that don't have kids? They should really be screaming.

If you are personally broke, do you think someone else should give you money (maybe through the government), do you look for another credit card. or do you get serious about controlling your own spending?

nooshinjohn

cnh wrote: »

I hate to say this, but no one really thinks much about Wisconsin except the media which loves this left/right, right/left chasm that has torn our nation into TWO. And shows that there is NO end in sight. There are no 'real' majorities in the U.S. and each party is "deathly" afraid of the other winning by a few percentage points. American politics? What happened to us? A nation "united" not "divided". We can't agree about "anything" anymore.


cnh

The way to get back to where things came off the rails is to end the social experimentation and go back to the real reason America became the greatest nation on earth... our Constitution and our founding documents need to be followed in order for the U.S. to exist at all, and we have stopped talikng about them in any fashion unless it is to disparage them as some old and irrelevant document of "negative liberties"...

Our Constitution can right the ship and guide us away from the brink, we just have to follow it and tell the political parties to go to hell if they don't.

98Badger

Timothy Smith wrote: »

I have 2 kids in the UW system, my Daughter is a 5th-year Senior at UW-Madison, my Son just finished his Freshman year at UW-Milwaukee. The out of pocket cost is killing me, not to mention our high taxes, but a want my kids to have this opportunity. How come no one ever talks about reducing spending and waste at these universities?, it's always that we don't spend enough?

And what about parents who don't want to, or can't afford to send their kids to college? Or singles or married that don't have kids? They should really be screaming.

If you are personally broke, do you think someone else should give you money (maybe through the government), do you look for another credit card. or do you get serious about controlling your own spending?

I'm a UW-Madison grad myself and you are right that wasteful spending needs to be addressed. Tuition has more than doubled since I graduated. I think it is outrageous, but that is what the market will bear. As long as they are turning away applicants, tuition will keep rising. You yourself are an example. You realize your children will be at a great disadvantage without a good education so you are willing to pay.

I am not personally broke, but if I was I wouldn't expect the government to bail me out. I live within my means and manage my spending well. Those that buy more expensive houses, cars ect than they can afford should not be bailed out. Neither should businesses that make poor decisions.

Still waiting to hear how shifting tax dollars from the public to the private sector saves money.

Timothy Smith

98Badger wrote: »

I'm a UW-Madison grad myself and you are right that wasteful spending needs to be addressed. Tuition has more than doubled since I graduated. I think it is outrageous, but that is what the market will bear. As long as they are turning away applicants, tuition will keep rising. You yourself are an example. You realize your children will be at a great disadvantage without a good education so you are willing to pay.

I am not personally broke, but if I was I wouldn't expect the government to bail me out. I live within my means and manage my spending well. Those that buy more expensive houses, cars ect than they can afford should not be bailed out. Neither should businesses that make poor decisions.

Still waiting to hear how shifting tax dollars from the public to the private sector saves money.

How are tax dollars "shifted from the public to the private sector"? Are you talking about tax revenues? Does the public sector pay tax dollars? Public employees pay tax dollars on their incomes like public sector employees do.

Reply:

Are you talking about spending tax dollars? The government cannot spend a dollar unless it takes in a dollar in taxes. If a government takes a tax dollar from a citizen to spend on schools, roads, police etc. it is spending what it takes, not somehow creating money. Hopefully it spends on needs and not wants, and stays within it budget (doubtfull). You and I likely cannot name something a government does cheaply and efficiently. Businesses do not pay taxes. If you "charge" a business an additional tax dollar, it has to raise the price of the product or service it sells to maintain a profit for it's stockholders or owners, otherwise they would not invest. If tht business can't raise it's price to cover the new tax in a competitive market it might go broke and jobs are lost. Otherwise the Consumer eventually pay the additional tax in the form of higher prices for goods or services. Or the business moves to a different state, or country with a lower tax burden. Then you lose the jobs, and taxes on the wages paid by the employee to the government on the money paid by the business to the employee in the form of wages or salaries.


"Tax businesses at a 100% rate and see what happens (they go out of business or don't start up). Tax businesses at 0% rate and see what happens (if they have a good product or service they add jobs and expand, resulting in income taxes paid by employees on wages).

98Badger

Tim,

I've been referring to the latest tax cuts for business that essentially came from making spending cuts to education.

I would also counter your argument by pointing out that when workers take pay cuts, they have less disposable income to buy goods and services from businesses. I have talked with a few small business owners over the last year, and quite a few have remarked that sales are down significantly due to many people having less money to spend.

Timothy Smith

Walker's Act 10 legislation allowed the school districts to get their own wages and benefits under control which more than compensated for reduced funding from the state to the school districts. Nearly all school budgets now show a surplus (except for those that signed contracts before Act 10 went into effect). Even Barrett's Milwaukee school district used some of the tools in Act 10 to reduce their spending and then turned around and tried to recall Walker who gave them those tools.

Cutting taxes increases revenues. JFK proved it, Reagan proved it, Clinton (begrudgingly) proved it when forced to, and then took credit for it (rightly so).

Due to uncertainty of the political and tax climate, many individuals (like me) and businesses (like the 55,000 employee one I work for, and my wife's one-person business) have held off on spending, investing, hiring, etc. like you mention. Now that a pro-business (at least not hostile), low-tax, anti-union message has been sent, watch Wisconsin be rewarded by jobs, tax revenues, businesses moving here (from Illinois especially), and consumer spending. I think the same will happen on a national scale after the next election brings a change in leadership and philosophy. Wait and see if I am correct.

tonyb

98Badger wrote: »

Tim,

I've been referring to the latest tax cuts for business that essentially came from making spending cuts to education.

I would also counter your argument by pointing out that when workers take pay cuts, they have less disposable income to buy goods and services from businesses. I have talked with a few small business owners over the last year, and quite a few have remarked that sales are down significantly due to many people having less money to spend.

Well, now thats a sales pitch. Tax cuts for buisnesses taken out of cuts to education. When government hands out tax breaks, it has less money, correct ? Now, how they decide to compensate for that loss revenue is up to them. They can cut back themselves on wastefull spending, or find another avenue to raise the money.....or, tax someone else. Unfortunately the idea of cutting back on the wastefull spending isn't very appealing to them so you get a twisted reaction in a election year.

Nobody is against public union employee's making money, thing is it has to stay inline with what private sector workers make. Even after Walkers legislation went into effect, public sector employees where still payed higher than their private sector counterparts. It's not about doing away with, but keeping under control public unions demands for more tax payer money. Kinda like the private sector. If you ever dealt with corporations, they have a salary range for every position. You pay the position, not the person, generally speaking. Public sector unions are well above the salary range for their positions. Then again, it's not all about money either. It's control, power they seek. Many plans have come forth to pay teachers on a scale that would bring them well into the 6 figure arena, but have been shot down by unions because they would lose control.

Sure, people have less money to spend these days, isn't that somewhat obvious ? It's not just public sector employees, it's everyone across the board. Comes a time when everything corrects itself from runaway wages, home values, markets, etc, and if I might add, runaway spending both public and private. What happens afterward can be a tell tale sign of what was wrong to begin with.

Timothy Smith

Well said TonyB.

Things get out of control, and then there is a correction.

We usually are not smart enough to adjust or change things before they get out of control, and the correction is usually painfull, or humbling, for some or for all, but the correction will happen.