Feb 25, 2011 AD
Teachers Protest Against the People
A union of corruption
Public Enemy No. 1: Government Unions
Look for the union fable
Why Scott Walker Must Win
Many news stories showed photos of protesters in Wisconsin carrying signs comparing their actions to what happened in Egypt.
The fundamental difference is that in Egypt it was people protesting against their government.
In Wisconsin, it was the government protesting against the people.
In Wisconsin, it was government leaders who went out on strike against the people who elected them.
In Wisconsin, it was teachers walking off in wildcat strikes, forcing the innocent pupils into strike with them.
The Public School Melting Pot
The Jewish mass media talked Protestants into pushing public schools to rid the country of multiplying Catholic Schools from the Irish and Italian immigrations. Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong, but I remember well the arguments for public schools. Public schools were to bring all religions together into an American melting pot where we would all live happily together thereafter.
Well the melting pot public schools are openly hostile to the Catholic religion, as designed, but to the Protestant religion as well, and even Protestants are now pulling their kids from public schools --- if they can afford it.
Problem is, Protestants find themselves bit by the same savage tax bite that the parents of Catholic school kids were bit by -- after taxes -- parents simply cannot afford "free will" and "choice" and "liberty" in schools.
The old maxim still worked, "The power to tax is the power to destroy."
The Protestants of Old England would have told the "Education Pope" at the Department of Education that they do not want Educrat priests reading to their children, but for their kids to read the books for themselves.
The Protestants of Old England would have "burned at the stake" all the atheist-leaning secular schools.
Progressive interpretation of Checks and Balances
On another front of the cultural war, the great Judeo-Progressive promise of the early 20th century was that continued government spending in a recession would become a "balanced" counterweight to "check" a shriveling private spending.
Americans of that day and age loved the idea of what appearred, on the surface, to be proper "Checks and Balances" and were sold on this false idea of Utopian propaganda Paradise.
The idea was that the factory would not shut down, so long as government continued to pay government workers and so long as government continued to give out transfer payments in the form of unemployment payments to the laid-off, as well as transfer payments to the poor, the ill, the old, the single mother and so one, because these recipients of government largess would continue to spend in a recession, not having to worry about being laid-off. If then the factory was still selling goods as a result, it naturally followed in their eyes that the factory could not afford to lay-off needed factory workers.
As most government central planner ideals are want to do, what looks good on paper often turns to mush when rained on in the real world.
Tinkering with the Constitution
In order to implement this "workers' paradise" right here in America, the Progressives had to first do a little tinkering with the Constitution.
The Progressive Movement implemented its triple bypass operation
on the Constitution, in that fatal year of 1913.
The newly created Federal Reserve itself created the imaginary fiction called the greenback to bypass the regulatory power of real gold on constraining government expenses. After all, since gold often runs out in a recession, the idea was that being able to print money out of thin air would keep everyone working -- hence -- magic -- no recession!
The newly passed Income Tax Amendment bypassed the regulatory authority the States had over the federal purse strings. With the 16th Amendment, the propaganda was that the Federal government was now able to tax the "idle rich" like the Carnegie's and the Rockefeller's. The Progressives told us that these uber-rich bastards would just sit on all their wealth in a downturn while we ordinary folk suffered with no food or shelter -- so, the idea was that we have got to keep the money circulating. The idea of take from the filthy-rich bastards and give to the saintly unemployed poor was born. The IRS was sold as a way to help the ordinary American. Money would continue to flow and circulate during a recession -- more magic!
The newly created direct election of Senators bypassed any and all additional regulatory authority of the States to check and balance the power of the Federal government or the authority of the bad States getting in the way to stifle "commerce". To insure that the States would not try to hold up the Progressives in any way, the Senate had to be stripped from the hands of the States. This was accomplished by the direct election of Senators in the 17th Amendment. Even more magic!
The Progressives thought they had now solved the age-old problem of the business cycle.
Oh sure, there was the matter of the Great Depression, but that was just a very short 12-year blip in an otherwise stellar 100-year history. Hardly anyone noticed.
OK, OK, not to quibble, there was the Depression of 1920-21
, itself worst than any business downturn in the history of America -- worst than every business downturn we had before we got the Federal Reserve to take care of this kind of problem -- and a precursor to the Great Depression no one noticed. Then many people today remember the Arab Oil Crisis of 1973, the Savings and Loan fiasco of 1990, the Dot-Com bust of 2001 and the Sub-Prime Mortgage crash of 2008.
on the way to the
Progressive Utopian paradise?
Well, in a word -- outsourcing.
If the employees were laid-off because the job got moved to China, then no amount of government transfer payments to buy goods from China would help that person get his job back. It would help Chinese workers keep their jobs however.
There is no circulation of money, with China becoming the new Carnegie, sucking up all the greenbacks and hording them.
In fact, the federal transfer payments to a bloated government bureaucracy and a bloated dependent class, who then transferred that money to China, is a recipe for the utter collapse of our entire civilization.
Texas Instruments moved its "dirty jobs" assembly positions to Taiwan decades ago, but now outsources nearly all of its "clean jobs" fab positions to Taiwan as well.
Abbott Labs sells over 80% of its production overseas and wants to escape the intense regulation of the FDA, so it will finish outsourcing production to Singapore this summer of its 2 highest technology, medical-grade, immuno-assay instruments, with production of components for the delicate instruments being "localized" to factories in China.
Virtually every component in Apple products come from Asian factories.
And our President says that Libya's leader has no credibility?
Our federal government wants its credit card limits raised a week from now?
And public school teachers want blessings and protection from the downtrodden outsourced masses?
Public Enemy No. 1:
doesn’t matter – he is forced to pay them, even go into hock for them.
- _ Whether the taxpayer has children in the system or doesn’t,
- _ Whether he chooses to home-school his offspring, or send them to a private school,
- _ Whether he approves or disapproves of the job government pedagogues are doing,
Through property taxes he has to pay, where the richest having the biggest home pays the most, regardless of how many children are in school.
And, likewise through progressive income taxes he has to pay, where also the rich pays more, while 47% of all Americans, the ones having the most kids, pay nothing.
-- Ilana Mercer
Which makes public schools -- child-abusing propaganda machines for the State - the most odious degree of monopoly America has ever had.
Making, in turn, the government teachers union as the most corrupt monopoly ever seen in America.
In the real world of "Dirty Jobs," as described by liberal teacher's union types, you have a boss who is greedily motivated by the profit motive, always trying to get his workers to work harder for less money and benefits in less safe and healthy working conditions.
would never do a segment on
the Teaching Field
Coming in from the real hot and cold cruel world, into the Teacher's Union Fable world, teachers have a boss that is NOT motivated by the profit motive. His motive is reversed, for if he were to streamline operations, he would lose that part of his budget for the next school year.
His motivation is to have his teachers work less hard, take more vacations, get paid more benefits, reduce the teacher-student ratio (in the name of raising student quality), so he can increase his teacher fiefdom.
-- Ann Coulter
School boards are often elected without having to identify political leanings toward Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, for the reason that regulating schools is "too important to be left to politics."
Which only begs the question of "Isn't schooling too important to be left to politicians?
In fact, in terms often used to poetically describe the term "democracy", the teacher's union negotiate with the school bosses union to decide on how well-cooked the taxpayers should be.
What is Really at Stake Here?
Pat Buchanan puts it well.
"Why is the left behaving with desperation?
Because it senses what this battle is all about. Not just about pay, but about power.
The Republicans are not only resolved to guarantee government workers pay a fair share of the cost of their pensions and health care. They are in a purposeful drive to disarm and demobilize the tax-subsidized armies of the Democratic Party and end sweetheart deals between unions and the poodle politicians they put into office."
When government unions sit down with the politicians they put into office, the relationship is not adversarial. It is not healthy. It is incestuous. And taxpayers must pay the cost of their cohabitation.
They call this collective bargaining. A more accurate term is collusive bargaining.
Walker would also require public service employee unions to hold annual elections by secret ballot to determine if state workers want the union to represent them, or if they would prefer to have their deducted union dues put back in their paychecks.
[Government] legislators submit to voters every two years.
Why ought not [government] unions to do the same?
If Walker yields, governors and legislators across America will read the tea leaves and back away from taking on government unions. That means higher and higher taxes, as in Illinois, and eventual sinking of the states into unpayable debt and default.
-- Pat Buchanan
Tonight's School Play
Company chairman -- played by the School Board Leader
Union boss -- played by the Teacher's Union Leader
Shareholders of the Company -- played by the taxpayers
… and we want an additional $25 dollars an hour for our members, two weeks extra vacation per year, a fully funded pension that provides our workers 100 percent of their highest take-home pay for the rest of their lives and comprehensive health insurance for our members, their families and significant others.
Well, that might be tough. The company is already deeply in debt. But … I guess we could send letters to all of our stockholders and tell them they have to pony up enough money to be able to meet your demands.
But what if they don't?
Well, then we'll take the money we need from their bank accounts. If they object, we'll seize their homes or throw them in jail … Oh, and paint them in the media as being greedy for denying these needed benefits to the honest workers. And if that still doesn't raise enough money, we'll issue more stock and some bonds. One way or another, the stockholders will pay for it. But there's something the union needs to do for me.
Are you kidding? Name it!
There's a board election coming up. I need some money to wine and dine some of the big shareholders Also, I'd like it if you could dig up some dirt on my opponent and maybe get your members to picket his home. Get all your union members to buy some stock so they can vote for me in the election. Would your members do that for me?
Absolutely. Assuming you agree that the only people that can work for your company are members of the WWW. Believe me, if our membership wants to keep working, they'll play ball. And as far as a "donation" to your re-election goes, whether they agree or not, our members still have to pay their dues – or they don't work.
Done! Oh … one more thing. In a few years I'm going to retire. Think you could find a place for me in your organization?
We can always use another "friend of the union." How about a lobbyist position? I promise if you keep treating us right, we'll make sure you're taken care of.
-- Patrice Lewis
Article located at: