Wisconsin Takes A Stand For Fiscal Sanity

[Wezil]

Most states and mucipalities have requirements. The ability to bypass them depends on location, the specifics of the law, and the amount of "pull" you have.

I was reading how Obama's pal was declared a resident of Il because he kept some stuff stored in the basement of some property he owns.

[Wezil]

I've a close friend who makes that exact argument. I've rejected it in the past. Now I'm not so sure.

I like winning, I don't care much for losing (but I can handle it) but I refuse to play a rigged game.

Great. Now imagine if you'd done only one of those things.

-Arrian

You guys are up against some absurd court ruling that claims corporate donations = free speech. As long as that legal turd stands you are in a tough spot.

[Arrian]

Which was the point I was trying to make earlier, Wezil, about unions tilting the scale one way, and others tilting it back the other way. This isn't about fixing the problem (which is real), it's about power.

-Arrian

[Wezil]

I'd balance the system by removing the outside influences, not trying to play them off against each other.

[Jon Miller]

This is somewhat orthogonal, but interesting article about unions:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/unionism?fsrc=scn%2Ffb%2Fwl%2Fbl%2Freallygoodquestion

JM

[Wezil]

Interesting article.

As a solution (to the question it asks) you might start by opening up the political system to allow for more than 1.5 choices.

We have a left wing party strongly aligned to unions (and the underclass they supposedly speak for). Although never elected to government they have affected enough political influence over the years to have most things Americans look to unions for covered for all the population. In fact, they've been more effective than unions.

[Wezil]

The more I think on it the more convinced I am that you guys are truly ****ed. It can't be long now before the whole system implodes and we can put our annexation plans into play.

You truly don't deserve to govern yourselves.

[giblets]

The more I think on it the more convinced I am that you guys are truly ****ed. It can't be long now before the whole system implodes and we can put our annexation plans into play.

You truly don't deserve to govern yourselves.

Speaking of hyperbole...

[Wezil]

That was sarcasm actually.

[DaShi]

[DD]Looks like Obama is on the losing side of this issue. Hopefully, he and other democrats will follow the will of the people:



[/DD]

[giblets]

Duh. I'm not stupid enough to think you literally believe Canada will annex the US. The hyperbole is calling a system seriously broken when something you don't like is possible.

[Wezil]

My thoughts on why the system is broken is much deeper than what is going on in WI gribbler.

[giblets]

We have a left wing party strongly aligned to unions (and the underclass they supposedly speak for). Although never elected to government they have affected enough political influence over the years to have most things Americans look to unions for covered for all the population. In fact, they've been more effective than unions.

I thought you didn't like it when a minority party exerts influence? If there's nothing wrong with that then why are you griping about how politics in Wisconsin allow a minority to stall legislation?

[Wezil]

The NDP always manage to show up to vote and have never once fled the jurisdiction to avoid doing so.


edit - Further on that...

The closest I have seen was actually quite recently when our minority governing party shut down parliament rather than face an embarrassing vote they were destined to lose. They ran away from governing.

Unfortunately for you there is no "gotcha moment" as I was opposed to this tactic (as was the Canadian public).

[giblets]

Look, I don't care if people in Canada think that having a majority of the seats should mean you never have to compromise on anything. A system isn't broken because people have to occasionally make compromises.