Scott Walker is a Liar.

[Mindcrime]

ILOVEDNY says so...

Originally Posted by ILOVEDNY:
Yet Scott Walker, who started getting unsustainable, public sector benefits under control resulting in NO public sector jobs being eliminated..

Walker told him that "no public sector jobs were eliminated," EXCEPT the 17,800 that actually were lost under Walker's regime. Walker lied to ILOVEDNY about the job numbers. How embarrassing.

While Wisconsin Gov, Scott Walker (R) fights to keep his job in a recall election scheduled for June, he is being forced to confront a harsh reality in his state: It lost more jobs during the past 12 months than any other state in the United States.

...Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs between March 2011 and March 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The state’s lead in job losses is significantly greater than the rest of the 50 states: No other state lost more than 3,500 jobs.

The majority of the losses in Wisconsin, 17,800 were in the public sector. However, the state lost more private-sector jobs, 6,100, than any other state...

My, that's awkward. And not only that...

Even Walker himself admitted that his union busting efforts had nothing to do with saving money. So let's stop spreading the lie that "unsustainable, public sector benefits" had anything to do with the union-busting engaged in by Walker. You don't have to love unions to love the truth, like ILOVEDNY does.

[WNYresident]

The state is still ahead budget wise..

[ILOVEDNY]

Mindlesses numbers from his libtard websites are the frauds.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LASST...a_tool=XGtable

From the BLS.
In March of 2011, Wisconsin had 2,838,145 people employeed.
In March of 2012. Wisconsin had 2,856,829 people employeed.
According to mindless, that's a loss.

[ILOVEDNY]

And it looks like Wisconsin added 6,761 jobs in April alone.
WTG Gov. Walker.

[wnyerlaughs]

ILOVEDNY says so...

Walker told him that "no public sector jobs were eliminated," EXCEPT the 17,800 that actually were lost under Walker's regime. Walker lied to ILOVEDNY about the job numbers. How embarrassing.

My, that's awkward. And not only that...

Even Walker himself admitted that his union busting efforts had nothing to do with saving money. So let's stop spreading the lie that "unsustainable, public sector benefits" had anything to do with the union-busting engaged in by Walker. You don't have to love unions to love the truth, like ILOVEDNY does.

And you don't have to love the truth in order to recognize that not even the govt union memmbers in wisconsin wanted to be in the union. Look it up MC. Be thankful that the gov was aware that not even the union membership wanted to be in the unions. The unions mandated it. This is america and no one should be forced to join a union.

Learn it, Live it Love it MC.

[Mindcrime]

The state is still ahead budget wise..

Well...

Partial Truth: “We wiped out a $3.6 billion deficit.” — Walker in a campaign ad.

What’s Left Out: That’s true if you use the cash accounting method. However, using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) accrual accounting methods, there is a $3 billion deficit in Wisconsin’s budget in each of the next two years. While it’s perfectly legitimate for Walker to cite the cash accounting figure, that may confuse some folks who may remember that Walker used the GAAP figures to argue for cuts in state health programs.

Source

[Mindcrime]

And you don't have to love the truth in order to recognize that not even the govt union memmbers in wisconsin wanted to be in the union. Look it up MC. Be thankful that the gov was aware that not even the union membership wanted to be in the unions. The unions mandated it. This is america and no one should be forced to join a union...

Really? Someone forced them to take those jobs?

[Mindcrime]

And it looks like Wisconsin added 6,761 jobs in April alone.
WTG Gov. Walker.

You're cherry picking. For the purposes of this discussion, you want the CES number, which shows Wisconsin lost 5,900 jobs. Good try, though.

[wnyerlaughs]

Really? Someone forced them to take those jobs?

ya know MC,,,lets assume the ytook those jobs by their own free will...which they DID. no one held a gun to their head..BUT..in order to get the job, the govt unions WERe, in effect, holding a gun to their head: "you want to work here for the govt, you're gonna pay us whethe you like it or not". That, MC, is extortion...AND. as witnessed by the EXODUS of employees from the rolls of the govt unions in Wisconsin, its obvious the employeeds didnt like the unions either.

Sit down MC, and take a lesson. :rolling my eyes: again and again.

Despite how yo might perceive it, govt jobs do not exist for the purpose of financially propping up unions whose ONLY real interest is to serve the interest of the union leadership and their chosen Dem political freinds. The employees themsves are jus treceivers of paychecks to which the union attahes itself like a leech.


As far as "no one forced them to take those jobs"...we can all say the same exact thing abuot teachers (public schools) who b*tch that they dont get paid enough. No one forced the mto be a teacher did they? IF they dont like th epay, they should choose another profession.

You are correct MC...in a way, depending on the local economy and job market, some people have not choice but to get a govt job (if available) because of a lack of private sector jobs. It's like WNY / Buffalo / upstate ny. One of the consequences of the govt unions being in bed with the dem politicos, is that the relationship ensures govt jobs in the area, while also increasing taxes in same area, which, consequently, has the effect of driving away businesses, and preventing new small business from starting up, or from being viable over the long term. The businesses are fighting for survival, because the politics want more regulations. more fees, more taxes...to cover the bills to make sure the govt unions are well fed. PRetty simple math..just follow the $$ trail. The govt unions (and their brethren) call the shots in NYS..to serve THEIR special interest, whcih, in turn, keeps $$ flowing to the chosen elected politicos. You have some brains, so i know you know that already

When businesses fold up and move away, or choose to startup someplace more business friendly, it reduces the # of privat sector jobs in the area, which has the effect of reducing the employment choices that people have. In WNY, there are far too many govt employees for the population while, at same time, there are far too few meaningful private sector opportunities.

With that said, I know many people who would prefer to not have govt jobs but they have families and know that the govt job is secure because the govt is never gonna go out of business. Some are just office workers, feelign suffocated within the bureacracy they go to every day. They know that there is no such thing as merit pay...its all based on poltics and time served.

So..reaility MC, if you care for a dose or 2, is that if there are few opportunities in the private sector for that employees skill set, AND AND AND, the people are relatively low skilled, or low educated, then yes indeedy, they may have no other choice other than to get a govt job, even if they'd prefer to work in private sector. BUT...it does NOT mean that they want their wages attached by the unions, to pursue political agenda that the govt employee may not support personally.

Why can't you respect the employees' freedom of choice? You seem to be saying "union dues and union membership is the price they have to pay in order to have a govt job". That's just pure cr*p.

Again, its called freedom: people shouldnt have to be FORCED to join a union in order to earn a paycheck.

The employee is working for the govt..public service. They are NOT working for the union, and the union has no right to any part of their earned wages.

:rolling my eyes :

:rolling them again: see that? i rolled my eyes twice.

IN SEPARATE DIRECTIONS.

[WNYresident]

You're cherry picking. For the purposes of this discussion, you want the CES number, which shows Wisconsin lost 5,900 jobs. Good try, though.

Pot meet kettle.............

[ILOVEDNY]

You're cherry picking. For the purposes of this discussion, you want the CES number, which shows Wisconsin lost 5,900 jobs. Good try, though.

Sure.
Give us the CES number.

Stupid me for citing the Bureau of Labor statistics for factual numbers on labor.

[4248]

The Dem orchestrated recall attempt was a miserable failure. The Unions tried to turn it into a national media event. They failed in their efforts - thus proving their efforts were exposed for what it was - Union Backed pre Presidential Election show of power.

It failed.

Unfortunately no other party has a candidate Americans can get behind. Regardless of the ongoing loss of power suffered by Unions - despite their continual pouring of millions and millions into the Dem Party - even if President Obama retains his office - the tax funded Unions will be the subject of more and more cost reductions sponsored by the same Politicians they funded.

[Mindcrime]

Sure.
Give us the CES number.

Stupid me for citing the Bureau of Labor statistics for factual numbers on labor.

Do you know what the CES number is, or how stupid you just make yourself look?

(Hint: check your own source.)

[Mindcrime]

Pot meet kettle.............

Not really. The BLS uses two different metrics to calculate employment. The method ILOVEDNY used measures a variety of labor force factors via random polling. The number he should have used only measures actual employer payrolls. So for the purposes of his claim, he chose the much higher of two starkly contrasting figures, and the one that doesn't apply when calculating unemployment accurately. -5,900 versus +6,700 is pretty different.

[ILOVEDNY]

Not really. The BLS uses two different metrics to calculate employment. The method ILOVEDNY used measures a variety of labor force factors via random polling. The number he should have used only measures actual employer payrolls. So for the purposes of his claim, he chose the much higher of two starkly contrasting figures, and the one that doesn't apply when calculating unemployment accurately. -5,900 versus +6,700 is pretty different.

The method I used?
I simply went to the BLS website to check out your claims of Wisconsins job losses between 3-01-11 to 3-01-12.
And the BLS says you are full of ****.
Here's the link again. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LASST...a_tool=XGtable
This website is updated daily so I'd say these are Current Employment Statistics.
There is nothing there that supports you CES numbers.
So either provide some proof for your claims.
Or I'll just declare game, set, match.