State Troopers Hunting Democrats

[cebeu]

Bottom line with Wisconsin is they have a supposed budget issue. The deficit is something he created himself, prior to his tax cuts for business's the state was at 54 million positive balance for the year. Had he left things as they were there would be no issue, but he cut taxes to business's and is attempting to crush unions.

Suppose there is some sort of real budget issue they can cut back on teachers, money per student, and facilities. If they did this they would hear a groan and people would go back about life as normal. But instead they are taking the opportunity to crush unions claiming fiscal responsibility. Which by taking away these rights I have not found any information showing that it would actually reduce deficit.

I guess this is a conservatives dream, kill a union, cut schools, support business's with tax breaks rather then let capatalisim work.

Supposed? Go do some balanced fact-checking and come-on back with your findings. I'll give you a hint...go ask Rachel Madow how well propagating this false-hood worked out for her.

Created himself? You are confused on this, again, go do some fact-checking and come-on back. Also, I suspect you know very little of WI's coporate tax structure historically nor what challenges businesses in the state are facing. If you did, you might realize how foolish it is to toss that comment out re: "leave it as was/is."

Conservative dream statment - What a crock-of-shit and one borne of emotion in a meager attempt to demean, a fucking worthless comment.

I'll give you this, "kill THIS union" is accurate, WEAC is a pile of shit that should have been dealt a death blow long ago.

Let me ask you this, "what direct experience do you have as a resident and tax-payer of WI?" Although I'm certain I know the answer.

[Mobat555]

Supposed? Go do some balanced fact-checking and come-on back with your findings.

Happily,

Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated that the state would end fiscal year 2011 with a gross positive balance of $121. 4 million and a net balance (after mandated reserves) of $56.4 million

Created himself? You are very confused on this, again, go do some fact-checking and come-on back.

Again, I happily oblige,
Companies that relocate to Wisconsin won't have to pay income taxes for two years under a bill signed into law Monday by Gov. Scott Walker. ($67 million tax break)

He also signed a bill Monday that increases by $25 million the money available for economic development incentives. However, there is already more than $73 million in tax credits in the fund that have not been allocated, so the additional $25 million is not expected to be tapped over the next two years at least.

Walker previously signed into law a bill that eliminates state income taxes on contributions made to health savings accounts, which comes with a $49 million price tag, and a sweeping lawsuit reform measure.

This one is just for fun:
Gov. Scott Walker has signed into law a measure that will replace public employees at the Department of Commerce with private workers. Even though workers will now be private, they will be eligible for the state retirement system and health benefits.

Please let me know if the information gathered from Fox News and Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau is insufficient.

[cebeu]

Happily;

First, I'll ask you again since you failed to answer; "what direct experience do you have as a resident and tax-payer of WI? You have none do you?

Second, the WLFB is insufficient and misleading, is that your base-line (I gave you the Madow hint)? Link out to Journal Sentinel and AP references as well, you'll find your WLFB stake-in-the-ground is inadequate and the source of untruth you are choosing to spread. This problem is not of Walker's making and the state would not be running a surplus.

lastly, we'll address your "other" pasted links later but let me ask you this, "Are they intended to support your false statements condemning Walker as the cause of the budget problem?" My point, tell us what you know about the business climate in WI. If you are going to suggest that corporate/business [and other] tax reductions "should be left alone" and those actions in and of themselves would "solve the state’s budgetary problem" you know nothing of what has been / is occurring in the state, and pasting links about the topic does nothing to support what you stated incorrectly above about Walker.

[Mobat555]

This problem is not of Walker's making and the state would not be running a surplus.

You are correct and I was wrong, but via the same information it shows Walker is planning to create a un-warranted larger deficit over the next two years: The tax cuts will cost the state a projected $140 million in tax revenue -- but not until the next two-year budget, from July 2011 to June 2013. The cuts are not even in effect yet, so they cannot be part of the current problem./

lastly, we'll address your "other" pasted links later but let me ask you this, "Are they intended to support your false statements condemning Walker as the cause of the budget problem?"

They simply show the changes Walker is making at the cost of the state.

First, I'll ask you again since you failed to answer; "what direct experience do you have as a resident and tax-payer of WI? You have none do you?

I have Zero experience as a resident or tax payer in WI, I have zero experience in Economics on any level, I have zero experience in politics of any kind. I wrongfully assumed that I could convey information I believed to be correct in a open forum.

[Byte Stryke]

I wrongfully assumed that I could convey information I believed to be correct in a open forum.

Dat'll lern ya!


Now you guys hug and make nice

[Bailey Guns]

They simply show the changes Walker is making at the cost of the state.

Why is it some people still think that taking less money from taxpayers, money that belongs to taxpayers who have a reasonable expectation that elected officials will spend it wisely, is taking away from the state.

The money belongs to the citizens of WI...not the goddamned govt.

That type of thinking is why we (collectively, as a country) are in this mess.

Reagan: "You PATCO air traffic controllers better go back to work or I'll fire all of you."
PATCO: "WTFE, dude. We're going on strike. You can't fire us. We belong to a UNION!"
Reagan: "You're all fired."
PATCO: "Holy shit! He fired us."
Reagan: "That's right, bitches."

You pro-union types can get your panties all wadded up if you want. Unions are part of the problem...not part of the solution. They should all be fired. And the elected representatives of the people in WI should be impeached and removed from office.

Fuckin' unions and democrats. They're perfect for each other.

[weirjf]

Why is it some people still think that taking less money from taxpayers, money that belongs to taxpayers who have a reasonable expectation that elected officials will spend it wisely, is taking away from the state.

The money belongs to the citizens of WI...not the goddamned govt.

That type of thinking is why we (collectively, as a country) are in this mess.

Reagan: "You PATCO air traffic controllers better go back to work or I'll fire all of you."
PATCO: "WTFE, dude. We're going on strike. You can't fire us. We belong to a UNION!"
Reagan: "You're all fired."
PATCO: "Holy shit! He fired us."
Reagan: "That's right, bitches."

You pro-union types can get your panties all wadded up if you want. Unions are part of the problem...not part of the solution. They should all be fired. And the elected representatives of the people in WI should be impeached and removed from office.

Fuckin' unions and democrats. They're perfect for each other.

+1

The unions/union members think that just because they are making "slightly more" than their public counterparts that they are OK. Its the fact that they are getting cadillac benefits/perks and paying for a sliver of the cost is the issue. The people who are paying the taxes that fund the lion share of their cadillac benefits packages don't get these benefits. Then, they fund and support the politicians to get them elected who they will then be negotiating with?

It is corruption and redistribution of wealth in its most basic form.