Disclaimer

I gave him the benefit of the doubt since his header seems to be proper. Shame on me.

Ducati did it first -- at least in the styling dept.

That being said... I've always liked the 999s, so the Buell looks good to me.

Filled batteries are OLD tech.

I dunno why anyone would use anything other than a AGM, Gel-cell, or other sealed battery nowadays.

When did I ever? It's credible as long as IT also has citations... I've always maintained that position. You must be confusing me w/ someone else.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/02/hundreds_descend_on_ohio_state.html

Sean Grayson, general counsel for the AFSCME Ohio Council 8, told the committee that there is nothing in the collective bargaining law that forced government leaders to settle on the very contract agreements they now complain about.

"There is nothing that compels a public employer to cave in because of an existing part of the collective bargaining law," Grayson said. "Neither party has to propose anything. Neither party has to concede anything. Neither party has to agree to anything."

Some proponents who testified on Thursday asked the senators to expand the collective bargaining ban to include local governments, too.

Ray Warrick, of Mason in Southwest Ohio, a tea party member, told Republicans controlling the committee that people like him voted them into office, and now the lawmakers owe it those voters to pass this bill.

"You will not see us or hear us every day," Warrick said, "but I think you know there are thousands of ordinary citizens across this state that are counting on you."

Opponents say they are willing to make some concessions but stripping their rights to bargain could lead to lower wages and benefits and hurt Ohio families.

Senate Republicans said they do not expect the bill, sponsored state Sen. Shannon Jones, a Republican from Springboro, to be voted out as it was introduced.

"My view is that everybody, Democrats and Republicans, need to understand that we can't remain with the status quo on this," said state Sen. Keith Faber, a Republican, the committee's vice chairman. "Simply saying kill the bill is not an option."

But that is exactly what some protesters want. Firefighters wore T-shirts that read "Kill the Bill,"and state workers wore bright red shirts that read "No on SB 5."

"What I'm seeing here today is that management is trying to be seen as the victim here, but they sit across the table and negotiated these deals just like us," said Lawrence McKissic, of Twinsburg, who was at the Statehouse on Thursday. McKissic is an IT specialist for the Bureau of Workers' Compensation in Garfield Heights.

I'm a firefighter and this bill needs to go down... And FAST!!! I didn't read everyones comments because I'm on my iPhone now, but I did skim over a few and I don't agree with a lot of the talk about the police and fire!!

Maybe when I get more time I'll read all this on my computer..

I just don't understand why anyone is for this bill!!

You're a fireman and you can afford an iPhone? They're paying you too much.

I think you needed a battery tender...

Here's how it's being handled in Wisconsin...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41644074/ns/us_news-life/

Wis. union vote on hold after Democrats leave state

Senate vote to end collective bargaining for most state workers delayed by opposition

The correct response from the unions would be to come to the table with solutions to the problem. Payroll cuts, benefit cuts, etc. Instead, they said that wasn't an option.

As far as the UAW, they did renegotiate and make concessions.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/05/29/UAW-approves-GM-concessions/UPI-15171243611752/

Now, if you're talking about public sector, I'm not as well read up on that.

There's nothing different here. However, the unions make it impossible to cut payroll costs. Retirement, insurance, etc. The state simply can't afford the cream of the crop anymore.

No they don't -- it can and has been done, via collective bargaining. You aren't supposed to make a contract with someone (or a group of people) and not uphold your end of the bargain. If the state doesn't want to offer those benefits, then they shouldn't be a perk of the job for new hires, but the people that were promised them - that's what they're due.

Now do you personally want to make a difference? Think that this is all bullshit, and firefighters/police/teachers/etc deserve more? Great! Take all this effort you put into arguing on the internet and start a non-profit. Collect donations from business, individuals, etc. Start a public nomination for people to nominate a public employee who has stood out and made a difference. Then put the top however many to a vote, and give them the money you raised.

Don't feel like doing that do ya? Well, maybe THAT'S what's wrong with America.

And now....I dunno where you're trying to steer this?

Best cost country sourcing (note: I said "best" cost, not "lowest" cost)... but that all changes with the shifting costs of energy, quality, and logistics.

As soon as American people make the same sh*tty wages as they do in those countries -- by spreading all those cost savings measures across all the blue-collar employees instead of just cutting the unproductive ones, it's bound to be cheaper in American since logistics costs will be less (all else equal).

But it still goes back to -- the same Mexicans that build the Chevy Avalanche / Tahoe / Suburban, probably won't ever be able to afford one. Yet, we Americans want our big trucks, but we can pay for them because we make a decent living wage. So, do you want the blue-collars Americans among us to have the same quality of life as the blue collar Mexicans? The new hires have all but lost the prevailing UAW protections and wages that the old timers got -- so that HAS in fact changed.

Regardless, we're not talking about UAW (I grew up in a UAW family, so I feel I have a little more insight than the general public, but I digress)...SB5 is about teachers and public sector unions. Private companies are bad enough, but once you start having to deal with TAXPAYERS who ALL want something for nothing, union protections may still be relevant.

Too bad we don't have some of the people 'in the fray' commenting on this. It's easy to armchair this as a taxpayer and be a proponent for the measure, but what do the people that it actually affects have to say -- I'd venture that many of them are opposed (at least what I've read). Why?

Employees are not charities. The problem is they're treated like them. You continue to help the people that don't help themselves instead of just cutting your losses for the interest of productivity and profit. Fast-track the high performers, and cut the losers. Shouldn't be an issue as long as you aren't a loser, right? That's how Jack Welch did it, and look where GE is.

In regards to unions -- It depends on where YOUR interests are.

If YOUR interest is to make the car you're buying cheap, then maybe not.

But if YOUR interest is making a good wage with benefits to support your family to be able to afford the very products you produce - then you might have a different opinion.

8/19, yikes.

It's nothing like that in actuality. I'm not a union worker. Does that mean I'm being punished, and a union worker with my same position has it better than I? Definitely not. It means when it comes time for bonuses and raises, my supervisors review my performance throughout the given time frame and make a judgment based on that instead of just giving everyone the same thing. It encourages me to bust my ass to get the better pay. This is what sparks innovation. Reward people for a job well done, not just because they showed up.

Yea, I realize there is a difference between "actual" and "in theory", how do you even know you're getting better pay? How do you know the guy picking his nose next to you, didn't get a 5% raise compared to your 3.5% raise? What if he got a 3% raise instead? Compared to how much you busted your ass is that extra 0.5% worth it? This issue occurs regardless of a union, but without collective bargaining and a contract in place, it's just that much easier to extort the working class. Do you know how much the guy next to you makes? Why is that? You keep busting your ass reaching for that dangling carrot...that's exactly what they want from their worker base.

Not true at all. At any point in time my employer could decide they need to cut payroll. That happens in one of two ways, people take pay cuts or people get laid off. It's just simple math.

...Do you lay off four people? Or do you drop everyone's pay to $40,000/yr? Or (as I would try to do if ever in the position), do you find the top 10 performers and try to leave them at $50,000/yr; find 5 mediocre employees, and cut their pay to $40,000/yr; then look at the bottom 5 performers and offer them a demotion to $20,000/yr or the opportunity to leave?

That might be YOUR solution, but that might not be the best solution when you do a business case analysis. Anytime you cut pay, you're likely to turn a mediocre employee into a lackluster one. Not only that, but the top 10 performers, once they hear about everyone else's pay cut, they have the potential to have a mild form of "survivor guilt" that also reduces morale. Then you'll have other employees that know they would've rather had you just cut the 5 "dead weight" employees to maintain their own benefits. Your solution is too socialist, why spread the pain? Just cut the low performers and be done.

With unions involved, people get laid off because most are unwilling to accept pay cuts. The automotive industry is a prime example. Look at all the layoffs that occurred before the government bailed them out. Hundreds of thousands of jobs were lost. How many could've been saved if they cut people's pay instead? Lots.

And I just explained why pay cuts all around are even worse than having a union and just laying off the dead weight. If the person or the job isn't worth saving, why bother?

A 20% cut in payroll costs is roughly what the state is facing right now. It's either cut individual programs all together, or cut costs across the board. I vote cut costs and try to save as many jobs as possible.

I'll take the other side. I vote to draw a line in the sand, prioritize, and whatever falls below the line.... gone. You don't take your charity budget and support all charities with a small amount each? No, you donate a larger sum to the couple important ones that support your causes. This is the only way to get the public and politicians to face the music on budgets and priorities.

we're putting a SECOND speedometer on your bike so you can check your speed while you check your speed!

This needs an Xzibit "Yo Dawg I heard..." poster

Harley wouldn't need it if they came with a proper set of gauges... you'd think for the price you'd pay, you'd get more than a speedo

If they'd abolished the unions in Detroit and allowed renegotiations of employee contracts, how many people would've kept their jobs? How many businesses that GM owed money wouldn't have been stuck with $$millions in unpaid bills? How much taxpayer money would've been saved in the bailouts?

I dunno, how many? You understand how collective bargaining is supposed to work right? It's like finances in a marriage (well, some), you both sit down, look at the finances together and decide as a team what to spend, what gets saved, etc. It's supposed to be a transparent process. If GM, or Chrysler, or Ford couldn't afford those benefits, they should've never signed up to provide them, but in times of feast, it's a better investment to give your employees healthcare than giving 4 guys at the top $5M bonuses. You wouldn't tell your wife she couldn't have a pair of shoes because you want a Corvette would you? Not only that, but the unions have also sacrificed in times of famine along with the white-collars. The major difference though is, the white-collars steer the ship -- so why should we punish the blue-collar force when the white-collars are in control?

If I were a state worker, I'd be a whole lot happier taking a paycut or receiving no raise than I would be if I lost my job all together. With the way things are looking with the budget, if unions keep pushing for more raises and benefits, I'd venture to says a whole lot of state jobs will be on the chopping block.

Now you're trying to have your cake and eat it to. You don't think collective bargaining is beneficial, and unions are outdated, but yet you'd rather take a paycut than to be fired. If you're one of the high-performers, why would you ever have to worried about being fired? If you're at risk of being fired or laid-off.... guess what? You're either performing a non-essential function in which case, find something with more job security, or weren't one of the 'high performers' compared to your peers... sorry.

Summary instead of the full-text: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/analysis.cfm?ID=129_SB_5&ACT=As%20Pending%20in%20Senate%20Committee&hf=analyses129/s0005-prop-129.htm

I need to do more digging, but abolishing collective bargaining probably isn't going to benefit anyone in the "middle class".

For all the LEOs and public safety workers. Here's what Kasich thinks of you...idiots.

I'm glad I didn't ride to work today. I'd probably be in the hospital if I did. On the way home, while stopped at a stoplight in my car, I got rear-ended by a drunk blond woman on oh her cell phone. A cop was right there. He whipped his car in front of mine just in time to block my view of the fleeing drunk blond woman's license plate as she took off. By the time I explained what happend to the leo she was long gone. You can almost but not quite make out the letters of her license plate in my bumper. Oh well.

Was that a local one of N Rigdetuckian's finest?

The past is the past folks. If she's cool, she's welcome back.

That's awful mature of you.

Once you make my "list" you'll have a very hard time getting back into my good graces. Lots of chicken wing debts to be paid.

I dunno where to get a goat, but I know where there's plenty of dogs.

Medina

That's sorta novel.

whatever you're willing to pay for it.

The only way to fix it is to lay it down in the snow on the OTHER side to balance it back out.