Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Ed Miller The TEA Party’s take on the propositions

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Ed Miller

Ed Miller

“The unions, the city management and the council all have an understanding of this item, but nobody else does. Frankly, this proposal should have seen the light of day via a public hearing, instead of appearing to be slipped under the radar.”

Ed Miller, Citizens In Action

“They say they’re going to be trans- parent then they’re not. Short of running for office myself, I don’t know how to get them to change other than have people stand up and be counted.”

Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 5:47 am, Sat Mar 1, 2014.

On Nov. 6, we will vote for 12 propositions. Of those 12, six concern social issues, which, as per our policy, we avoid comment upon because they are divisive. But how do the remaining six stack up against the Tea Party Patriot tenets of promoting "government fiscal responsibility," "constitutionally-limited government" and "support of free markets"?

Prop. 30, Governor's Tax initiative:

Fails "fiscal responsibility in government" criteria and we recommend a vote of "no." Supporters allege that it will offset proposed education spending cuts. Most likely, its revenues will prop up the insolvent teachers pension fund, a grossly mismanaged fund, and increase the size of the education bureaucracy. The California School Board Association backs the new tax but admits it provides no new funding to schools. The proposition is alleged to be a "temporary" tax; right, just like the temporary 0.25 percent sales tax it extends. Bottom line is that it is yet another tax without a reduction in spending. Competes with Prop. 38 — if both propositions are passed, the one with the most votes prevails.

Prop. 31, State Budget initiative:

Fails our "constitutionally-limited government" criteria and we recommend a vote of "no." Some are referring to this proposition as a "Trojan horse" because it attempts to change the state budgeting process but devotes 2,041 words to "Community Strategic Action Plans." That section of the proposition would establish de facto unelected regional governing groups to which cities, schools and counties would voluntarily give some of their governance. In exchange, cities, schools and counties would receive additional funding from the state (unfunded by the proposition) and receive authorization to rewrite state laws and regulations they do not agree with (that "interfere with their Action Plans"). Trial lawyers will love this.

Prop. 32, Political Contributions initiative:

This proposition meets all three of our criteria and we recommend a vote of "yes." This proposition, while not perfect, attempts to curb the "crony-unionism" that is bankrupting the state. As we have written before, the present system is a money laundering system that people go to jail for in the private sector. This initiative prohibits mandatory (payee did not expressly approve) payroll deductions for political use as determined by union and corporate management. This is the so-called "hard money" in the California political system. Estimates are that union political funding in the California system would be reduced from $100 million to $15 million, making the playing field even for all. Strong opposition by the California Teachers Unions means that this proposition has the right stuff.

Prop. 37, Genetically Engineered Foods Labeling initiative:

Fails all three of our criteria and we recommend a vote of "no." First off, we already have food regulators; why fund more? Second, the cost will be passed on to consumers in their food bills as another "hidden tax" driven by regulation. Moreover, defined labeling requirements are inconsistent, requiring labeling in one instance and not in another for the same "genetically engineered" food. It should be understood that this would be fertile ground for lawsuits and possible significant impact on products produced in the Lodi area.

Prop. 38, Tax to Fund Education and Early Childhood programs initiative:

Fails "fiscal responsibility in government" criteria and we recommend a vote of "no." What can be said? Yet another good-sounding tax initiative for the schools. According to the California Department of Finance, 52 to 55 percent of the State General Fund budget is spent on K-12 and higher education. Voters should be asking why the school systems need more.

Prop. 39, Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses initiative:

Fails all three of our criteria and we recommend a vote of "no." It raises taxes by at least $1 billion annually on businesses that do not base their operations in California, and the funds would be used to fund clean energy jobs. Multistate businesses presently represent the third-largest revenue source for the state's general fund. If this proposition passes, why would these companies maintain a presence in California at all? No, this is a net job-killer.

Ed Miller is a leader of the Lodi TEA Party. Find out more by attending the Lodi Tea Party general meeting on Oct. 22 at 6:30 p.m. in the United Congregational Christian Church, 701 S. Hutchins St., Lodi.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

69 comments:

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 7:32 am on Mon, Oct 15, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2963

    Michael J. Taylor, former chief legal counsel for Monsanto, and current Food Safety Czar of Obama's Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was responsible for a loop-hole that removed the requirement to have GMO products labeled while he was a lower level FDA official in the mid-1990s.

    [sleeping]

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:25 am on Sun, Oct 14, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mike, lets just leave it that you are right and I am wrong... any other position would be a waste of time as I do not have the ability to communicate with someone who is as advanced as yourself...

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:25 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    No comment Mike, you are getting a bit out of touch.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:23 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    And the CTA killed Jimmy Hoffa? If CTA existed when Jimmy Hoffa disappeared, I

    Mike... You do know that Hoffa said it at a rallywhen he introduced Obama... You probably are thinking of Hoffa senior who has been dead for years.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:19 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mike stated... Perhaps, Darrell can point out where he got this stupid idea:
    "04. Unions are happy to tell teachers to F themselves and get another job if they simply want the freedom to represent themselves in wage negotiation."

    Be happy to Mike ...the following post is less colorful than mine, but means the same thing from my perspective...You and Eric said it ...

    01. Mr Barrow posted at 3:31 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012... Darrell if you don't want to join a Union don't take a Union job.
    02. If I do not want the union to represent my interests, I cannot decide... " THAT'S RIGHT YOU CAN'T

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 7:17 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    Darrell likes to think he knows liberals. What he knows is the same old tired cliche's he has heard his entire white bread life. He doesn't even know he doesn't know.

    Perhaps the merry couple of Darrell and liebich can get together on liebich's pretend radio show where Darrell can pretend to be saying something nobody wants to hear and liebich can talk about stuff that never happened.

    Perhaps, Darrell can point out where he got this stupid idea:
    "04. Unions are happy to tell teachers to F themselves and get another job if they simply want the freedom to represent themselves in wage negotiation."

    Pretending to swear Darrell? "tell teachers to F themselves". What's not pretend is Darrell can't come up with a source for this quote and Darrell doesn't know how to swear. I think I'll report this.

    And the CTA killed Jimmy Hoffa? If CTA existed when Jimmy Hoffa disappeared, I'm sure CTA didn't have anything to do with is. CCPOA or SEIU either.

    " Unions rule by force. They do not like competition and free markets. They join together to get what “they” want, not what the public wants."

    You know, I think I'm wrong!!! Darrell also believes a lot of things he is saying here actually did happen when obviously they couldn't. Darrell liebich - andrew Baumbach? Which is which? Which one is nuttier?

    And a little nugget before you go to bed tonight....NPR is reporting that more young people in CA are registering to vote.... most of them are registering Democrat.
    Not long 'till we get that super majority, then things are going to go bad for the Darrells of this state. He'll be taxed out of his home. His business will cease because nobody can afford insurance, high taxes you see. We'll have to educate everychild, not just the ones with red or blonde hair wearing sleeveless sweaters with their initials sewn to the front. Some children will be from single parent homes.
    Young women will get pregnant and can you believe it, they won't be kicked out of school? What is this world, I mean state coming to?

    Hopefully a Darrelless state. That alone would make it a better place to live.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:54 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403


    Mr Croder stated...Obama wants the government to take over Social Security. That's why I'm voting Tea Party.


    Cute really...let me try... Obama wants to bring on death panels for the elderly... too many of them and they are too expensive for the tax payer... that's why Im voting for Obama and his democrats.[tongue_smile]

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 9:36 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Obama wants the government to take over Social Security. That's why I'm voting Tea Party.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:25 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    But Mr Crowder, since liberals like yourself harvest organs of Tea Party members, I would suggest you and your company join forces so you both get what is wanted.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:37 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mike stated... I get up every morning knowing I belong to one of the most powerful collectivesin CA politics - CTA.

    Yes, and I get up every morning thankful that I can get what I want only by providing a product and service that is better than my competition. That if I do not help others before I help myself, I will not get what I want.

    I am thankful that I am in a position to decide my own fate. I would rather live in poverty that force people to give me money. The union enjoys that force.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:29 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mike stated…We can do what we want because we almost always get what we want… Deal with it..

    Thanks Mike! A conservative can talk all they want about how bad unions are for our country, but independents sometimes think we are just biased. It isn’t until I get ultra-liberals like you and Mr. Barrow to articulate how liberals think in public that I become successful in substantiating my claim. I thank you and Eric sincerely for helping me.
    So let’s examine what you and Eric confirm.
    01. Unions join forces to behave like thugs to get what they want. As witnessed in Wisconsin and the Occupy Wall Street gangs, they bully and resort to violence to get what they want. Eric in another thread stated there is nothing wrong with unions getting violent.
    02. The union is a powerful collective…yes it is, and they will use that power with anger, hate and bigotry …as evidenced my Jimmy Hoffa Junior is support of Obama’s elections stated… We're going to win that war," Jimmy Hoffa said to a heavily union crowd…"President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let's take these son of bitches out …
    03. Unions rule by force. They do not like competition and free markets. They join together to get what “they” want, not what the public wants.
    04. Unions are happy to tell teachers to F themselves and get another job if they simply want the freedom to represent themselves in wage negotiation.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 8:06 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 244

    Obama won't let my company harvest the organs of immigrants. That's why I'm voting Tea Party.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 7:51 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    If you don't like what we serve, you are free to move to another state where they have crummy restaurants. Maybe you can get tomatoes on your grilled cheese sandwich. Right now, CTA, SEIU, and CCPOA determine what's on the menu.
    Thomas is right. Freeloaders are generally not allowed. And they are never part of the group. Probably during your exhaustive "research" you overlooked a local school district that allows freeloaders. Typical of someone who doesn't know the slightest of what they speak.

    Please continue you efforts make CA an open shop. The three big boys on the block will never allow a change.

    Try Idaho. I understand there's a lot of your kind living there. Angry white men.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 7:40 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    Darrell: I get up every morning knowing I belong to one of the most powerful collectivesin CA politics - CTA. And we are proud to join forces with SEIU and CCPOA. We can do what we want because we almost always get what we want.

    Deal with it because it's not going to change.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:26 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    but in your world, I am forced to go to your restaurant.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 3:55 am on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2239

    If anyone ever needed proof of the Tea Party's corporate toolhood, they need look no farther than to their opposition to Prop 37.

    How can anyone possibly object to letting people know what they are feeding to their children?

    The Tea Party is bought, paid for and wholly owned.

    Tools........

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 9:33 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    You won't be forced to join a union if you don't take a union job. What exactly don't you understand about this?

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 9:24 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Darrell said
    "No Mr Barrow, freedom is getting a job to support your family. A free worker has the freedom to join a union or not after they get the job.

    Your position is ideal in a country ruled by communism. That is not freedom. I do thank you for demonstrating how much you enjoy forcing others to do as you want..."
    Freedom is DON'T GET A UNION JOB IF YOU DON'T WANT TO PAY DUES. Taking a union job and not paying the dues is not freedom ITS FREELOADING. JIts like ordering food in a resturant and not paying. It can be viewed as freedom or FREELOADING. Its like buying insurance after you have a need rather than ahead in case you need it. Can you relate to that or are you poor at understanding the insurance business.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:02 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Exactly!

    I do not think much of predictions from you, me, or anyone. ..which is why I laugh at your contention that the election is over andObama has it in the bag... I cannot predict who will win and think either candidate can win.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:59 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403


    Mr. Barrow stated...Darrell if you don't want to join a Union don't take a Union job... It's called Freedom

    No Mr Barrow, freedom is getting a job to support your family. A free worker has the freedom to join a union or not after they get the job.

    Your position is ideal in a country ruled by communism. That is not freedom. I do thank you for demonstrating how much you enjoy forcing others to do as you want...

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 6:41 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    "Therefore, one is forced to join a union and pay dues or pay a charity, no choice in the matter. If I do not want the union to represent my interests, I cannot decide... "

    THAT'S RIGHT YOU CAN'T

    I believe you're safe though from ever getting employment in CA as a teacher in a public school though, but if you want to keep playing half-##sed "I got you games", go ahead. I can promise you, you won't even get close to getting a credential. Ever.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:31 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    Darrell if you don't want to join a Union don't take a Union job. If you don't want to drive a Ford don't buy a Ford. It's called Freedom. Freedom to join together and accomplish things that benefit your situation. I think the problem is is that you think Unions are separate entities in your mind they are only the union leaders not the hard working Californians that they represent.

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 3:26 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Walt Posts: 1075

    "Predictions are not worth much from a politician."

    Nor from you, our partisan "friend".

    [beam]

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:11 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    The Unions should stand up for the interest of their members. After all Unions are the members. You seem to think that Unions are separate entities when, as the name implies they are collections of workers joining together to demand better working conditions. Many have said that Unions are outdated but with the shrinking of the middle class they are more necessary that ever.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:32 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    No ,was not a waste of time at all, I like proving that I am correct, by you not naming any districts it substantiated my claim...

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:29 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mike stated...Yes if you opt out, you generally have to pay a charity an amount equal to your union dues, That is there just to make sure people aren't just refusing to pay and then try to collect the benefits to being in a union without paying.

    Thanks Mike... so nice of to you demonstate "liberal think"... One earns a dollar from the labor they perform and the union decides how you will spend it. If you do not give it to them, you cannot keep it...

    Therefore, one is forced to join a union and pay dues or pay a charity, no choice in the matter. If I do not want the union to represent my interests, I cannot decide...

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:17 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Eric stated...Prop 32 will certainly be fought by the Unions all the way to the Supreme Court costing California millions and in light of recent court decisions California will probably lose

    Great post Eric, could not have said it better. You substantiated how greedy, selfish and ruthless the unions are.. They do not care about Californians or their economic plight. They will force tax payers to pay millions even though they know how bad the economy is... they should be ashamed. If the voters support this proposition and it passes, they should avoid their normal vicious bully tactics and consider compassionate actions for the betterment of Californias as a whole..

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 2:10 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Yes, and Obama stated that Obama"not" care would save money but in reality, costs trillions more over time...

    Predictions are not worth much from a politician.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:08 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Ms Bobin stated...At the very least, you may have recouped a portion of dues through their tax deductibility!

    Ms Bobin, Union dues are a tax deduction in Schedule A when filing your tax return. there was no tax advanatge either way.

    It is so liberal of you to have a desire to force people to join a union. I could care less if it is an advantage or not. It is the principle of having the choice to participate or not.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:01 pm on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    No Mike, I do not like being forced to do anything that is inappropriate in a free society ...

    If I had had a choice, I might have wanted the union. But that should be my choice, not yours.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 11:50 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    "When I asked you to name two school districts that do allow complete opt out, I knew in advance that you could not possibly name one as it does not exist. As expected, you ave a silly excuse as to why you could not name one..soooooooooo predictable.

    So no, I was not attempting to trick any school district, I was simply bluffing you and the expected results took place."

    And another way of looking at is to say you deliberately wasted my time responding to your concerns. I think that says a lot about you Darrell. And it isn't very good.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:23 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    The Secretary of State predicts that prop 32 will cost the state a million dollars annually what happened to fiscal responsibility.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:18 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    Mr Miller seems to be very concerned with Trial Lawyer and lawsuits. Prop 32 will certainly be fought by the Unions all the way to the Supreme Court costing California millions and in light of recent court decisions California will probably lose.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:14 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    With the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by individuals and corporations on super pacs, shackling Unions with prop 32 certainly does not level the playing field it silences public employees and Mr. Miller is well aware of this.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 10:04 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    I think Darrell just doesn't like unions.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 10:03 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    So Darrell, If I read your rant correctly, you asked me questions (that you presumed to know the answer to) and I answered them correctly (according to you)..

    What was your point now or back then.

    I don't know what experiences you claim members of your family have had. I haven't talked to them or even know if they are in CA.

    Yes if you opt out, you generally have to pay a charity an amount equal to your union dues, That is there just to make sure people aren't just refusing to pay and then try to collect the benefits to being in a union without paying.

    People who opt out are not entitled to additional pay, equal the amount of union dues they are not paying.

    Honestly, I don't know what your are trying to prove other than being clone of your new found friend.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:45 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    Mr Miller I am not agreeing to your theory of corruption by unions. but if you admit that "crony -capitalism" should be addressed and you shackle unions without stopping free market influence (Citizens United decision) do you not understand that you put union members at a political disadvantage or is my assumption correct that you do understand this?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:19 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403


    Mike stated...My guess is you couldn't pull off your gambit to trick a local school district into giving you any information about teachers who opt out of collective bargaining.

    Mike, you do realize that I had no intention of calling the school district as I have confirmed long ago what I say is true. I personally attempted to get out of all union dues for my family. It was not possible. I have talked with at least 10 teachers over the years that attempted to do as my family did. None were successful. In addition, 100% of all teachers who do a partial opt out did not get one penny in salary increase as the money went to mandated charities, not their pocket book.

    When I asked you to name two school districts that do allow complete opt out, I knew in advance that you could not possibly name one as it does not exist. As expected, you ave a silly excuse as to why you could not name one..soooooooooo predictable.

    So no, I was not attempting to trick any school district, I was simply bluffing you and the expected results took place.


     
  • Mike Adams posted at 6:35 am on Fri, Oct 12, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    My guess is you couldn't pull off your gambit to trick a local school district into giving you any information about teachers who opt out of collective bargaining.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:12 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    What business has Mr. Baumbach owned that had employees?

    Ms Bobin, I have always had between 2-10 employees throughout my 30 years of running my own opperation. Currently, I have 2 employees.
    However, a vast majority of my knowledge froms from the hundreds of businesses that I have had as customers. I have worked with many HR managers and owners wheretheir experinces were shared with me...

    How many businesses have you run Ms Bobin?

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 4:50 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    Mr. Barrow,
    What is "smoke and mirrors" about sticking to "government fiscal responsibility," "constitutionally-limited government" and "support of free markets"? Seems pretty clear to me.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:45 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Did YOU address the corruption? I must have missed that.

    The only thing you talked about was your IMAGINED system of corruption by union officials and politicians, however I totally missed where you discussed the subject of corporate corruption - as in individuals like billionaires Sheldon Adelson (looking for BILLIONS in tax cuts if Romney wins), the Koch brothers buying just about EVERY Republican politician who will take their money and attempting to socially re-engineer America, private equity manager Mark Leder (where Romney gave the 47% speech), a man who enjoys throwing naked orgies at his Long Island estate, and a myriad of other millionaires and billionaires in big oil who expect to get special environmental concessions and tax breaks from a Romney administration.

    You should direct your concerns to ALL corruption, and not single out one entity that you especially despise, Mr. Miller.

    It reveals a lot about what you are REALLY all about.

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 4:39 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    Mr. Heuer,
    Agreed that the corruption goes beyond the unions and includes corporations and politicians. Prop 32 attempts to deal mostly with the union side, crony-unionism. Measures should be taken to curb crony-capitalism also. What Ms. Bobin does not get is that the Tea Party does not trust corporations and neither party. A prominent Democrat said a couple of weeks ago that "the Democrats are the party of corruption and the Republicans are the party of stupid!" Which is worse? We would submit both.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:33 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Ms Bobin... I mean Mary, can you please post the names of three major unions where members can opt out of the union representing the employees in wage negotiations. The website you provided did not list any.

    In addition, can you tell me how many teachers in Lodi unified School District do not have to pay dues to the teacher's union even if they opt out? The contract I read stated a teacher can opt out for a portion of the union dues ( the amount that is used for political purposes) but cannot get the opt out money in their paycheck. They are forced to give it to a charity. Either way, wages a teacher earns are taken from them and can cannot be used as the teacher decides .

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 4:24 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Mr Miller
    You must be a boss because you are being very bossy (a polite term for bully). As I already stated there is corruption but it is the nature of our politics and many groups are involved. To simply focus entirely on unions means 1 you are not bipartisan and 2 you insist on focusing on unions as the sole culpret. So to say corruption isn't addressed is false and to say it is only unions involved is false. It seems you have a personal grudge against unions and that is your only target of coruption. Corruption has been addressed but again you are trying to control the outcome of any discussion. And Joanne is absolutly right that conservatives take an extreme view of their soverenty over others lives if it relates to tax dollars. Public employees are working peole as any one else and have the right to be represented by anyone of their choosing. Those that don't want to be represented simply want to enjoy the benefits with out paying. That is a violation of most conservative principles.

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 2:24 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    Ms. Bobin,
    Still incapable of addressing the corruption....

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 1:04 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Mr. Baumbach wrote: "Mary, can you list 3 major unions that members do not have to pay dues to the union for their services in bargaining for their wage... never heard of one.If a person is forced to eitherpay a union or pay a mandated charity, it is still force..."

    Let me direct you to this website so YOU can get yourself educated, Mr. Baumbach:

    http://www.nrtw.org/a/a_1_p.htm

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 1:02 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Mr. Miller wrote: "So nice to hear from my progressive “friends.”

    If Mr. Miller and his TEA Party friends were really "non-partisan," as he stated in his very first "Patriot's Corner" column, he would not be making an distinctions based on left or right thinking.

    Mr. Miller wrote:
    "Ms. Bobin,
    As your “manna” is paying public-sector union employee dues, you, as god, ought to have a say in how it is spent."

    First, let me say that this sentence doesn't even make sense, and the use of the word "manna," except in an extremely remote sense, makes even less sense.

    But, from what I gather Mr. Miller is TRYING to say is, that HE, as "god," is paying the public employees through his tax dollars. Therefore, he gets to "have a say in how it is spent." WHY? What makes YOU think that, once a paycheck is delivered to an employee, you can dictate the terms of that payment?

    Mr. Nardinelli's comments below are right-on.

    How far do you, as "god," want to take your control of the public sector employees' paycheck? Why should it stop at union dues?

    Why not control food, shelter, what doctor they see, what medicines they take, how they raise their children - whether or not they can HAVE children - what toilet paper they use?

    The TEA Party's insistence on their so-called RIGHT to dictate whether or not a public employee can pay union dues is assinine at best.

    How far do you take this idea? As a patron of many stores in Lodi, I help pay employees' salaries. I DEMAND to have a say in what they spend their money on!

    Example of corporate strong-arm tactics:

    "Several miners at Murray Energy’s Century coal mine in Beallsville, Ohio, contacted a nearby morning talk radio host, David Blomquist, over the last two weeks to say that they were forced to attend an Aug. 14 rally for Romney at the mine. Murray closed the mine the day of the rally, saying it was necessary for security and safety, then docked miners the day's pay. Asked by WWVA radio’s Blomquist about the allegations on Monday’s show, Murray chief operating officer Robert Moore said: “Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.”

    This COO must be a TEA Party member since he cannot equate the words "mandatory" and "forced" as being equal.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 12:58 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Mr Miller
    I can rest my case with your response that by "substantive argument" you are saying I must "speak directly to the process of corruption" meaning I must conceed that 1 coruption exists and 2 it is unions responsible for it. If you were to say there is too much money in the politics of influence and it is corrupting we would be in 100 % agreement. However by saying it is mostly unions and only giving an honorable mention to othersw then you are just picking sides now. If yours is the business side and mine is the workers side you are activly promoting to criple my side while promoting/preserving your side. This I can't agree to and yes we will not afford you a a "substantive argument" since I am asked to limit my arguement to your criteria.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:29 pm on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Mr. Baumbach wrote: "Obviously, you have never owned a business."

    What business has Mr. Baumbach owned that had employees. As far as we can tell, he is a one-man show who can take 3-4 months-long vacations annually and conduct his business on the Internet from the quaint little Thai villages he visits.

    As far as WalMart goes - 28 stores in 12 states have had employees protesting this week and 200 employees have traveled to Bentonville, Arkansas to protest at WalMart headquarters against low wages, cuts in hours and retaliation for speaking out about conditions at WalMart.

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 11:35 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1334

    I read somewhere that most of the houly employees at WalMart have medical insurance through Medi-Cal. So if true, that great icon of capitalism and it's uber-rich upper management is getting the citizens of CA to pay for the medical insurance of tens of thousands of employees.

    They also take out life insurance for older workers without telling them and when they pass, WalMart gets a big pay-out.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:54 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1449

    It is interesting that Ed and the Tea party won’t discuss those Props that have to do with social issues because they are divisive but they have no problem discussing Prop 32 which is obviously a very divisive topic. More smoke and mirrors from Ed and the Lodi Tea Party

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:46 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Mr Heuer stated..."legalized blackmail" How does that work ?

    Obviously, you have never owned a business.

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 10:14 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Walt Posts: 1075

    Thanks Ed.

    Considering the topic of the letter…

    The author that originated it…

    And the “participants” involved in the ongoing discussion…

    I replied appropriately.

    So I’ll take your brief note as a complement!!


    [beam]

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 8:13 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    Mr. Chang,
    Nothing substantive from you either.
    Bingo!
    [whistling]

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 8:08 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    Mr. Heuer,
    By "substantive" I mean speak directly to the process of corruption, for example. Is my description accurate or not? Yes, unions have had value, but, like all good ideas, they have become a serious problem over the years. I am not ignoring anyone dipping into the corruption. Prop 32 is about corporate and union mandatory dues in our state's political system. I do not demonize our government, only the corruption.

     
  • Walter Chang posted at 4:36 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    Walt Posts: 1075

    "You nonworking guys don't really have a clue"


    Bingo!!

    [wink]

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 12:15 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Good post Mary

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 12:13 am on Thu, Oct 11, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    "Build nothing?" They build support for workers blackmailed by employers wanting them to give up rights if they want to keep their job.
    "blackmail businesses?" "legalized blackmail" How does that work since they negotiate contracts like any other business entity or attorneys or lobbiests.
    "Unions to not care if their members perform well on the job," That is the job of management. Why would they interfere?

    You nonworking guys really don't have a clue.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:07 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Tom stated... Luckily we live in a country built both by unions and free enterprise.

    Unions build nothing. They blackmail businesses... Unions use legalized blackmail to get what they want . Unions to not care if their members perform well on thejob, merit means nothing. Communism is better for people than unions.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:50 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Many "unions" or other "organizations" DO NOT FORCE their members to pay dues directly or pay at all

    Mary, can you list 3 major unions that members do not have to pay dues to the union for their services in bargaining for their wage... never heard of one.If a person is forced to eitherpay a union or pay a mandated charity, it is still force...

    The opt out does not apply to wage bargaining...

     
  • Mary Ragusa posted at 9:02 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    lilragu Posts: 20

    ...Teamsters, grocers, autoworkers...blah, blah, blah...but you are still wrong, Mr. Miller. Many "unions" or other "organizations" DO NOT FORCE their members to pay dues directly or pay at all. We are given the choice to opt out and put our money towards another worthy cause of our choice. We must give the exact same amount, but it does not have to go in to the general fund. So you need to do better research and ask some of your local friends who may be part of a group that gives the opportunity to opt out. If they are in the Tea Party with you, chances are they did opt out!!

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 8:33 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Thanks Joanne. The most incious idea is that the tea party is using a divide and conquer by saying unions spend dues on political activities. The political activities are for the workers benefit. Contributions go to both political parties however democrats get a lions share since they have workers interests at heart and republicans don't. The dues go to influence decisions that get things like maternity leave, bereavement leave even paid holidays which republicans have always fought. Since many workers have adopted the attitude of not wanting to support union political activities through their dues fails to understand it is really nonpartisan. The dues go to whom ever is willing to give employees basic rights and decent compensation.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 8:18 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Mr Miller
    By "substantive arguments" I'm assuming you are saying arguments that you can agree with which would then not be an argument. However I disagree with you but then I worked for a living and know the value of the unions now and through history. You probably own your own business and see workers having a say in their, I mean, your business is seen as cramping your authority. Then when you see that unions have some voice in our overnment you say oh those rascally culprits managed to get a tid bit from the government. In state government wprkers usually get more taken away than receive.

    But you never see or you conveniently ignore the hundreds of other lobbyists and, chambers of commerce, associations of Drs lawyers et al, who are grabbing favors and influencing legislation in their favor which occurs on a daily basis. So your constant union bashing just rubs me the wrong way.

    As you may be able to tell I have little respect for any of the tea party groups and see them as systematicly destroying our country. They talk budgets and jobs but get into office and become the most obstructionist, most partisan bunch focused on abortion and and gay bashing or entitlements. I see them creating mythoogies about free enterprise that I need to buy Cnsumer Reports to find the latest scams and frauds that are being perpetrated on people in the name of rip off profits.

    I hate the demonizing of my American government which you want to treat as a little provincial government to play with rather than the super power America is that is trying to maintain a global enterprise and military power. The same with our state government which is a world class major economy. I detest your stealing the constitution and trying to interpret it to your myopic vision of a pre 20th century island between oceans. Your endeavors contribute to the decline of the middle class which will destroy this country which became great because of the middle class.

    Treating free enterprise as the panacea for all our ills fails to understand the goal of any business is to be a monopoly and that paying key employees not on their worth but on the bidding war needed to nab them from other companies has escalated what those get at the top as opposed to what is paid to those who actually work.With unions the earnings of the company would be negotiated with the workers doing the work. All efforts by any company is to reduce costs including labor to maximise profits where political influence is simply a business expense. Workers and their unions work in the public view while business through lawyers and lobbiests work behind closed doors and become more incideous. So I don't think you could accept any kind of "substantive arguments" from me or anyone without considering any of what I have said here. Of course I am just talking off the top of my head here and not doing due diligence but I think you might get my point.

     
  • Thomas Heuer posted at 8:12 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1314

    Great posts Mr Nardinelli you have my utmost respect.

     
  • Ed Miller posted at 5:05 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Ed946 Posts: 70

    So nice to hear from my progressive “friends.” It is reassuring that you guys still have no substantive arguments, just personal attacks. By the way, Ms. Parigoris is going fine; thanks for asking.

    Ms. Bobin,
    As your “manna” is paying public-sector union employee dues, you, as god, ought to have a say in how it is spent. Since you have forgotten, here is how the corruption works: the state mandates all public-sector employees must join the unions --> you pay taxes (manna) --> public-sector employees get paid (thank you, lord) --> union management collects mandatory dues --> union management “buys” politicians, state and local --> politicians vote for higher union salaries/benefits and more union positions --> you pay more taxes (more manna)--> employees pay more dues (thanks again, lord) --> unions buy more power…and around it goes until you run out of money, sorry, manna. Currently, that is $100,000,000 if our "hard" manna controls politics in this state.

    The one thing you did get right is that government produces nothing, nor is it supposed to. Therefore, by definition, the effects of taxes are parasitic.

    I have many friends and relatives who are either current working in the public-sector or are retired. The ones working would not join the union if it were optional and do not necessarily agree with how their dues are spent. The ones retired are scared to death that their state pension funds will fold if state and local governments are unable to prop them up going forward. Little Lodi is putting in $1,000,000 per year for the next 15-years and that number may grow.

     
  • Tom Nardinelli posted at 4:31 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Tom Nardinelli Posts: 8

    The door swings both ways! Every time I spend any of my earned dollars I pay another person's salary. That even goes for all of our out sourced buddies in 3rd world countries. I pay taxes which pays part of my own salary also. I think the only place that I even hear about the tea party is Lodi. Sara Palin even dropped off the face. I do not take your response personal as it is a typical anti union attitude. So we agree to disagree. Luckily we live in a country built both by unions and free enterprise. I do not begrudge CEO's that are getting paid over 10 million annually and believe me there are plenty of them. My brother-in-law works for a large corporation, he is in management, they own over 425 subsidiaries, and they are given directives/mandates on how to vote for each election. That sounds far beyond socialism and more like communism. I mean they are told exactly how to vote from the president to the local elected officials. Hmmm! So if you think unions are bad you better pull your head out of the sand and realize that the private sector is as bad if not worse. What do you think would happen to Wal-Mart if they went union, paid there employees decent salaries, gave everyone benefits, etc.? Sorry if you happen to work for Wal-Mart and I mean that truly. Yep, that is exactly why that company fights it tooth and nail as opposed to Costco that treats their employees like human beings and give them a net worth. There are multiple sides to each story. So instead of making this a bigger issue than it has to be I guess we just need to let things be.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:37 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4485

    Mr. Nardinelli: If you thought the above anti-union comments were out-of-order, this is what Ms. Kim Parigoris, Mr. Ed Miller's buddy and fellow "TEA Partier" had to say about public employees in response to Jeff Johnston's letter regarding Prop. 32:

    To your second question, my tax dollars pay public employees, public employee dues are extracted from that pay to fund the unions.. Without my tax dollars there would be no salaries to pay the union dues- it is actually rather simple, but many people who have always been on the public sector payroll see their salaries as manna from Heaven, or it just comes off the government money tree. That government money tree is tax dollars as the government does not have any revenue other than tax dollars.

    Not only is the TEA Party anti-union, they also want to control how public employees spend their money because, as stated, "they pay YOUR salary."

     
  • Tom Nardinelli posted at 12:06 pm on Wed, Oct 10, 2012.

    Tom Nardinelli Posts: 8

    We accidentally had a copy of the Lodi News Sentinel delivered to our house. We stopped out subscription over a year ago. Reading slanted, fabricated, biased,
    distorted, and most of all "Tea Bag" garbage by people like yourself makes me glad
    I do not pay for this paper. Yes you are entitled under the first amendment to speak your piece (not peace) you know nothing about your nonsensical verbiage that plays to the Right Wing Base. You bag on unions, but do you have any input into the oil industries lies they always advertise even though "WE" are paying exorbitant gas bills to support their ads. How about outsourcing? Address big companies outsourcing to 3rd world companies in order to keep profits soaring and unemployment high in the USA. Do you write articles about CEO's making obscene salaries so we can pay ludicrous prices for themselves and their cronies. You can not have it both ways. Obviously you hate unions. How many hours do you donate to your community annually? Instead of griping, complaining, orchestrating, and giving your stupid opinions why don't you do something constructive. Oh well, welcome to Lodi! I hope someday our community will at least leap forward to the 1900's!

     

Recent Comments

Posted 18 hours ago by Rick Houdack.

article: Letter: Arab and Jewish conflict is due…

It is unfortunate you misunderstood, Walters. Other religions are "those guys". Mormons are "those guys" to Snake danc…

More...

Posted Yesterday by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Obama may be protecting his chi…

Thanks, Thomas. Yours are the last words I'm going to read here tonight, and I will fall asleep with a smile and sleep soundly on that tho…

More...

Posted Yesterday by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Obama may be protecting his chi…

I don't need verification from you, Andrew, you didn't produce the video.

More...

Posted Yesterday by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Just a thought

[beam] Thanks for the chuckle!

More...

Posted Yesterday by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Questions for Obama supporters

Very interesting theory, Mike. And plausible to an extent, I think. So, who/what do you see as the new major party to replace the Republi…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists