Issue 2

[TTQ B4U]

I dont think there would be an issue of paying 25% if thier pay was on par with the private sector. And if it were on par with the private sector then I would push for an increase in what the do pay for benefits. They get the cheaper benifits because of their low pay.

 

Times are changing, the value of her job isn't what is once was, just as everyone else in today's economy. I no longer have the base salary or income I used to either.

 

• So where does money you need to make the above happen come from?
  
• Changes are needed to get that money, what changes are the Public Sector Employees supporting to make this happen?
  
• How is overturning SB5 going to help their cause in accomplishing this?
  
• If you were running a business that lost tons of revenue and you just lost an opportunity to stop the bleeding what would you do next?
  

 

I understand that there is always going to be a need for minimum wage but what would you do if you all of the sudden had no choice but to make 7.50 an hour?

• What would you expect me to do? I'd change what I had to in order to survive. What I wouldn't do is support a move to stop helping the greater cause in order to save me a few bucks because I know if that greater issues isn't resolved, I might not have that $7.50 job at all.
  

 

Not speaking on my wife's behalf but yes there are people who have painted themselves in to a corner and may only have training in one particular area. Does that make it right to take that away from them and tell someone at say 50 years old, "sorry but you have to learn a new trade even though you have been doing this same job for the last 25 years?

• Does it make it right? I won't say it makes it wrong.
  
• Again, who's responsibility is it if people paint themselves into a corner?
  
• What do you expect them to do? I know I would expect them to cope. What that looks like is up to them.
  

 

My wife and I both have an out and plans in case of disaster. Should she be forced to throw away the last 7 years that she has spent at the State trying to advance her position and make a better life for her family because the government mismanaged funds?

I'm not saying she is forced to chuck it all. What I am saying is that it's time for her and all the other state employees to realize that they need to drive the change that's needed. It's not simply up to the State Knuckleheads. We all know they aren't going to make that change happen. It's also not entirely up to the citizens to keep coughing up taxes. Only her and the others can change what they need changed. Again, they have to ask themselves what their role is in their future.

 

But again, what I'm asking is was SB5 going to impact her for the worse? It wasn't. It was actually going to help. We're like 5 pages into this thread and again, no real examples of how SB5 was screwing anyone.

 

I agree we are in a pickle and sacrifices need to be made but they need to be made evenly across the board. I feel that the majority of state worker have already done their part to help out. Is there room for more in there?

Really? So they have taken many of the same sacrifices the private sector workers have taken as far back as 2003 and most notably starting again in 2008. What's their next move? What are they doing to help invoke change? Believe me, if they rely on same old same old, it's only a matter of time before they get fucked. It's not going to get any better. IMO, it's going to get much worse.

 

If the govt is broken and continues to mismanage things then how can we expect them to take over in terms of decision making over the unions? If my wife had to pay more in to her benefits right now then that would be another cut in her pay so to speak.

What SB5 was going to do was save some serious money. So while the gov't has and likely always will mismanaged the hell out of our tax money, at least this was a step into getting rid of the union BS that exists. Is everything union bad, no; but much of what they were cutting is still needed. Again, the local gov't is out of money, saying no to SB5 doesn't change that. IMO, your wife is about to see things get even worse. Prepare my friend. I don't see this ending well for her and others.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

Times are changing, the value of her job isn't what is once was, just as everyone else in today's economy. I no longer have the base salary or income I used to either.

 

• So where does money you need to make the above happen come from?
  
• Changes are needed to get that money, what changes are the Public Sector Employees supporting to make this happen?
  
• How is overturning SB5 going to help their cause in accomplishing this?
  
• If you were running a business that lost tons of revenue and you just lost an opportunity to stop the bleeding what would you do next?
  

 

• What would you expect me to do? I'd change what I had to in order to survive. What I wouldn't do is support a move to stop helping the greater cause in order to save me a few bucks because I know if that greater issues isn't resolved, I might not have that $7.50 job at all.
  

 

• Does it make it right? I won't say it makes it wrong.
  
• Again, who's responsibility is it if people paint themselves into a corner?
  
• What do you expect them to do? I know I would expect them to cope. What that looks like is up to them.
  

I'm not saying she is forced to chuck it all. What I am saying is that it's time for her and all the other state employees to realize that they need to drive the change that's needed. It's not simply up to the State Knuckleheads. We all know they aren't going to make that change happen. It's also not entirely up to the citizens to keep coughing up taxes. Only her and the others can change what they need changed. Again, they have to ask themselves what their role is in their future.

 

But again, what I'm asking is was SB5 going to impact her for the worse? It wasn't. It was actually going to help. We're like 5 pages into this thread and again, no real examples of how SB5 was screwing anyone.

 

Really? So they have taken many of the same sacrifices the private sector workers have taken as far back as 2003 and most notably starting again in 2008. What's their next move? What are they doing to help invoke change? Believe me, if they rely on same old same old, it's only a matter of time before they get fucked. It's not going to get any better. IMO, it's going to get much worse.

 

What SB5 was going to do was save some serious money. So while the gov't has and likely always will mismanaged the hell out of our tax money, at least this was a step into getting rid of the union BS that exists. Is everything union bad, no; but much of what they were cutting is still needed. Again, the local gov't is out of money, saying no to SB5 doesn't change that. IMO, your wife is about to see things get even worse. Prepare my friend. I don't see this ending well for her and others.

 

On a totally different side I think that we have some hard times ahead of us but I also that the people are starting to speak and our voices are being heard. Everyone is tired of big government and big spending to make the govt even larger and more powerful. I think cutting govt positions and beauracrats back down to an intended size would probably more than fill our budget deficit.

[TTQ B4U]

On a totally different side I think that we have some hard times ahead of us but I also that the people are starting to speak and our voices are being heard. Everyone is tired of big government and big spending to make the govt even larger and more powerful. I think cutting govt positions and beauracrats back down to an intended size would probably more than fill our budget deficit.

 

I agree. The sweeping public message of no new taxes was definitely heard. That's why I'm so opposed to levy's and anything that feeds the dip-shit-machine we call gov't. If we continue to feed the system, there's no reason for change.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

I agree. The sweeping public message of no new taxes was definitely heard. That's why I'm so opposed to levy's and anything that feeds the dip-shit-machine we call gov't. If we continue to feed the system, there's no reason for change.

 

I agree. Hell maybe we needed all of this to happen in order to force a change and put things back in the peoples hands. Let's just hope that this is not just the beginning and its gonna need to get much worse.

[CRed05]

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2011/nov/15/thursday-6-pm-nbc4-investigates-firefighter-contra-ar-829653/

[greg1647545532]

We're like 5 pages into this thread and again, no real examples of how SB5 was screwing anyone.

 

<snip>

 

What SB5 was going to do was save some serious money.

 

I know this is a dead horse, but I wanted to point out this contradiction. SB5 had the potential to screw people over, you have to acknowledge that. SB5 had the potential to save a lot of money; I'll readily acknowledge that. What was missing from the entire debate were any kind of specifics. What contract measures was the state trying to get through that they can't right now? What is the financial impact of those measures? What is the impact to the union members of those measures?

 

I was having a debate about it on another board and someone said it better than me, so I'm just going to quote him:

 

The underlying issue is that the Republicans are pushing an agenda, and selling it not on its own merits, but on the basis of the good things that will come of the agenda if the Republican model of how the world works is correct. This is a rather entitled approach, since the whole point of elections is that you're supposed to convince the voters that your ideas are the ones that work best. It's literally a case of:

 

1. Retain SB5

2. ...

3. Profit!

[TTQ B4U]

I know this is a dead horse, but I wanted to point out this contradiction. SB5 had the potential to screw people over, you have to acknowledge that. SB5 had the potential to save a lot of money; I'll readily acknowledge that. What was missing from the entire debate were any kind of specifics. What contract measures was the state trying to get through that they can't right now? What is the financial impact of those measures? What is the impact to the union members of those measures?

 

I was having a debate about it on another board and someone said it better than me, so I'm just going to quote him:

 

It's not a dead horse man. I'm not going to go through all the economic measures that were clearly outlined in SB5. Your friend is either ignoring them or I'm sorry, just too dumb to understand them. The profit he speaks of is the opposite of where we are today and if he thinks more of the same is good for "the little guy" he's a fool.

 

Let me just leave you with this now that public employee unions will continue to hold their way over local governments' budgets thanks to the recent voting last week. IMO, the victory is short lived. Folks who posted in this thread are dead right; the Republicans in the General Assembly will get right to work on passing laws that codify the many things in Senate Bill 5 that are widely listed under one single bill. It's just a matter of time.

 

So from here on out, look out all you union members who are low on the totem pole. Don’t celebrate but rather as I just warned above, you better get your resumes in order. Mark my words, most all of the low-seniority union members are going to get the ax. How can I be so sure? I’ve already said it. 1. The economy sucks and it’s going to get even worse before it gets better because the gov’t and private debt won’t let it. Remember, the state is bleeding money. 2. Tuesday’s election didn’t come with a bag of money to support public service workers, so unless there’s a money tree on the Statehouse Lawn, good luck making the budget work.

 

You all got taken big time as supporting your local public employee costs real money and there isn't a pot of gold at the end of your rainbow to do it. Opposition to SB5 did a great job funding a propaganda campaign to drag the local school or public safety levy’s across the finish line, expect they forgot one thing….. the taxpaying voters in most every jurisdiction to took a different view and said FUCK YOU to more taxes. The irony of it all is the only thing that’s rich; The public employee unions string the voters along with self-serving threats and promises, in turn the voters are stringing along the public employee unions with support that will dissipate when levies hit local ballots and they say FUCK YOU – NO.

 

Congrats on your voting SB5 down. Now you can continue to preserve the old, familiar game of hostage-taking. No school levy? Fine, no sports and no buses -- and that's the taxpayers' supposed advocate, the school board, talking! If that doesn't break the public's resistance, a teacher strike will. Want to lay off a firefighter? Fine, here's a union grievance and a bill for thousands of dollars, payable by the taxpayers. You may win, but it will cost you a bundle. And you may not win. Or you may win for now, only to have an arbitrator decide you shouldn't win later. Then you get a bill for the reinstated employee's back pay, too. Way to support the public you serve. :dumb:

Look, I’m not against the public employees. I supported SB5 for a lot of reasons but it’s not because I hate public employees, or envy them, or because I believe public employees are overpaid. The reason I and thousands of others supported SB5 is because we have studied the financial status of our very own household and have decided, on that basis alone, we are unable or not interested in committing more money to mis-managed programs that abound in this government.

 

The BULLSHIT is that SB5 opponents have worked hard to fill the heads of the public with emotion. They have also ignored the certainty that the financial situations of localities all across Ohio will necessitate layoffs. They are quite prepared, though of course they will not say so, to resort to the time-honored union practice of "eating their young" when layoff time comes, so as to protect union leaders and other senior employees. Again, if you’re low man on the pole, bend over and get out the lube.

 

Again, congrats you won. IMO it’s just another gleaming example of how Ohioans do not understand the seriousness of an impending fiscal crisis at all levels of government. Eventually, though, it will become clear that neither the money nor the public will exist to sustain the system that SB 5 aimed to change. Wait and see; or please, show me how it will survive.

 

The only reason the union bullshit existed as long as it did, the only reason all the structural defecst in the system continued as long as they did is because for nearly the past 30 years there was enough money was sloshing around that system to satisfy everyone. Too bad not everyone is willing to admit it, that is no longer the case.

Good luck to you all. You’re going to need it.

 

Sorry for the long rant.

[greg1647545532]

It's not a dead horse man. I'm not going to go through all the economic measures that were clearly outlined in SB5. Your friend is either ignoring them or I'm sorry, just too dumb to understand them.

 

I feel like you quoted me, but completely missed the point of everything I said just to make way for your rant. And it's cute that you went straight to personal insults.

 

The economic measures you speak of were not outlined in SB5, because SB5 wasn't a budget bill. It was a collective bargaining bill. There were no immediate cost savings from SB5.

 

Let's say that 2 years ago Ohio renegotiated some fire department contract. Ohio said, "Hey guys, right now we're paying x people for y hours of work. We don't think we can afford that, but we don't want to fire anyone, so we're going to pay you for z hours of work this year." But the union threw a fit and refused to budge, so Ohio had to re-up for y hours.

 

As I understand it, this is one of those things SB5 took off the table for the union. And if the Republicans in power had come to me as a voter and said, "Look, we don't want to have to do this, but if we pass this bill and restrict the power of the union, we can save Q dollars by cutting the FD hours like we wanted to 2 years ago." Presumably they'd have a list of things like this, with an estimated cost savings, adding up to some substantial number.

 

As a voter, I could then make an informed decision. Would saving Q dollars be worth not having those fire fighters on duty? Was the union really being unreasonable? I'm not saying I'd want to micro-manage every decision, but give me a gist of what you hope to accomplish, you know?

 

But I never saw that discussion. Instead, I saw a power grab and made up numbers.

 

And the crazy thing? There's absolutely nothing stopping the State from realizing whatever cost savings they anticipated under SB5 RIGHT NOW. All they need to do is convince the unions that cuts need to be made. Voting down SB5 didn't magically add dollars to the budget, because again, it wasn't a budget bill. All it did was say, "No, you guys still need to hash these things out at the bargaining table." After all, that's what we pay them for.

 

The profit he speaks of is the opposite of where we are today and if he thinks more of the same is good for "the little guy" he's a fool.

 

Not every "no" voter swallowed the tripe in 30 second ads about how SB5 was going to make babies die in fires. Lots of voters would love to see the cost of government go down. In fact, I think it's safe to say that nearly everyone would like that. But if you'd like voters to be smart enough to see through the dead baby fear tactics that the left used, then you also should want them to be smart enough to see through the "teachers are bankrupting the nation" bullshit coming from the other side.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

Here is something that a lot of people did not consider.

There was a really good article about this in the distpacth on Sunday.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/insight/2011/11/13/headline-on-issue-2-vote-went-astray.html

 

Here is one MAJOR thing that I agree with 100% and part of the reason why I am glad SB5 went down in flames badly. I am totaly against big government and government stuffing stuff down our throats. The government is for the people and by the people and this is not a dictatorship.

 

Quote from the article

 

“What the headline blatantly fails to take into consideration is that many Ohioans, like myself and my spouse, voted against Issue 2 not because a union influenced us to do so, but because we were so offended by the tactics used by those who rammed S.B. 5 through the Statehouse last winter. We were also disgusted when Gov. Kasich, the Senate president and the Speaker of the House, publicly conceitedly wallowed in the afterglow of the whole sordid affair, gloating in his magnificence, at being able to strip taxpaying workers of their rights. It was disgusting."

[TTQ B4U]

The economic measures you speak of were not outlined in SB5, because SB5 wasn't a budget bill. It was a collective bargaining bill. There were no immediate cost savings from SB5.

 

So the long term gains realized by ditching the salary schedules and steep increases and replacing them with merit pay provisions don't count towards making a better Ohio? Last I heard the elimination of automatic step and longevity pay increases currently built into most contracts would save us huge money.

 

So eliminating excesspublic employer contributions toward health care & benefit costs isn't going to save Ohio?

 

So capping vacation, sick and other paid leaves and limit what employees can cash in from those benefits when they leave their positions isn't a fiscally wise move?

 

So requiring annual evaluations of teachers to include student performance data isn't going to better Ohio? and requiring that any lay-offs be based in part on these evaluations isn't the right thing to do?

 

But you want numbers right? Okay, SB5's intent capped school district contributions at 85 percent, so that teachers would have to pay 15 percent. By comparison, the collective bargaining agreement for Cleveland sets the employee share of premiums at about five percent. So what else is happening, the nearly $300k per year admin for Cleveland is coming to Columbus.....why? More money and to reek the same havoc down here as he did up there.

 

Let's look at their insurance plan in Cleveland...Currently collective bargaining agreements established that there are no deductibles at all for in-network coverage. Really? Damn, even I don't have it that good and I work for an insurance company! Zero deductables are below industry standards, even for generous plans, like those at Ohio State and other Universities, let alone grades schools. But hey, these provisions are written into the union contract so they stay.....

 

Great news eh? Okay, so tell me how the City of Cleveland is going to afford that? They can't. So what do you think they are going to do if they can't afford the benefits for teachers? Hmmm....cut teachers? Yep, that's a win for everyone.

 

Let's say that 2 years ago Ohio renegotiated some fire department contract. Ohio said, "Hey guys, right now we're paying x people for y hours of work. We don't think we can afford that, but we don't want to fire anyone, so we're going to pay you for z hours of work this year." But the union threw a fit and refused to budge, so Ohio had to re-up for y hours.

Well, I hate to say it, but what would you do if you were running a business and had to make a choice? Would you fire people or offer them to take less? Their call to make really. How are you going to pay for this otherwise?

 

As I understand it, this is one of those things SB5 took off the table for the union. And if the Republicans in power had come to me as a voter and said, "Look, we don't want to have to do this, but if we pass this bill and restrict the power of the union, we can save Q dollars by cutting the FD hours like we wanted to 2 years ago." Presumably they'd have a list of things like this, with an estimated cost savings, adding up to some substantial number.

Again, has the Union or FD shown them another way? Nope. Perhaps they need to go water the money tree.

 

As a voter, I could then make an informed decision. Would saving Q dollars be worth not having those fire fighters on duty? Was the union really being unreasonable? I'm not saying I'd want to micro-manage every decision, but give me a gist of what you hope to accomplish, you know?

As a voter, I know that there will be fire fighters. There's a line out the door for qualified candidates that are waiting their turn to train. Employees that are willing to take less and allow the budget to work. We all have to do more with less and in the case of the link about fire fighters getting a bonus to work 9-5...really? Where was that story a couple weeks ago?

 

But I never saw that discussion. Instead, I saw a power grab and made up numbers.

Well, the voters have been waiting around for the Union who currently has the power to offer up a solution to the numbers but guess what...they can't deliver a plan that works. They only know one thing, fight for what they have now, even if the numbers don't pan out. Again, great minds we have there.

 

And the crazy thing? There's absolutely nothing stopping the State from realizing whatever cost savings they anticipated under SB5 RIGHT NOW. All they need to do is convince the unions that cuts need to be made.

Really? How's that Union understanding worked out over the past few years for us all? It hasn't.

 

Not every "no" voter swallowed the tripe in 30 second ads about how SB5 was going to make babies die in fires. Lots of voters would love to see the cost of government go down. In fact, I think it's safe to say that nearly everyone would like that. But if you'd like voters to be smart enough to see through the dead baby fear tactics that the left used, then you also should want them to be smart enough to see through the "teachers are bankrupting the nation" bullshit coming from the other side.

The education system and pension systems in place are ABSOLUTELY Fucked up and breaking the system. That's not bullshit coming from the other side; it's a fact. The pensions we pay all the retired Police and FD people are sucking the system dry just as all the pensions for General Motors did to them. How did GM respond? Closed plants, and did what they had to do to stay alive. Guess what the local municipalities are going to do? The same thing.

 

Again, good luck with all that.

Edited November 16, 2011 by TTQ B4U

[Comebackkid]

Wow a lot of info in 5 pages. I also agree with pdqgp parent's can not afford schools to go on strike.

[downingracing]

As a parent, I've always voted yes for every tax increase and school levy. Even when I don't agree with how they are spending money - I voted yes.

 

After the failure of issue 2 - I'm now a no vote for any tax increase or school levy. I'm done supporting the unions. All the 'old' folks who voted no on issue 2 are the same folks I'll be voting no with for those tax increases that will be requested soon... It is a math problem and there is no more money!

[1fast5gp]

Its not any different but how many times can you expect the same group of people to take cuts? Is it going to be enough when everyone has to pay 100% for their benifits and makes minumum wage because our local goverment fucked this all up? Don't get me wrong. I am all for sacrifice and I think it should be spread evenly across the board. You can not say ok guys we are not giving raises this year so we can help balance the budget. Com back 2 months later and say ok guys, you have to take 10 unpaid days off a year to help balance the budget. And again and again. It has been one thing after the other for more than the last year. I have always worked in the private sector and I have taken some hits on my end but nothing like what my wife has had to go through. NOW I could understand if she made 100k a year and had the same benefits and what not. The issue is that the mojority of the people who are affected by all of this don't make that kind of money and are living paycheck to paycheck. When you take and take and take then the well dries up and what do you have then? I dont think that State workers are exempt at all. I think that they have taken enough from them already and now its time to look at other places to cut costs. Our government mismanaged the state budget NOT the state employees. How fair is it for the state employees to carry this entire burdeon? 3 raises in 7 years is good? Not by my standards. I have had some years without raises but not like that. Again, this is another thing that is part of their overall compensation package that they have already given up as well.

You know your wife probably wouldn't have to take those pay cuts if there were more accountibility and less mismanagement in our State Government. Your wife probably knows many state employees that should have been fired for the work or the lack of work they do. My fiance use to work for the Auditor of State and has audited many state agencies and she has first had experience on how mismanaged our state government is. And you are right, the state doesn't reward good workers enough, that is one of the reasons my fiance left and took her talent else where.

[smokinHawk1647545499]

let see my job on the private sector, when the economy took a dump.

i had to take two unpaid days off (i'm salary) a month for 6 months, they stopped matching our 401k during that time, laid off a few people based on performance, raised our benefit costs, stopped the tuition reimbursement program (just when i was started going back for my masters) . We had no negotiation rights, but the business survived.

 

why should the public sector be any different? the government wont survive if it keeps it up, we are not to far off from greece.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

You know your wife probably wouldn't have to take those pay cuts if there were more accountibility and less mismanagement in our State Government. Your wife probably knows many state employees that should have been fired for the work or the lack of work they do. My fiance use to work for the Auditor of State and has audited many state agencies and she has first had experience on how mismanaged our state government is. And you are right, the state doesn't reward good workers enough, that is one of the reasons my fiance left and took her talent else where.

 

Your absolutely right

[KennyFKINPowerz]

let see my job on the private sector, when the economy took a dump.

i had to take two unpaid days off (i'm salary) a month for 6 months, they stopped matching our 401k during that time, laid off a few people based on performance, raised our benefit costs, stopped the tuition reimbursement program (just when i was started going back for my masters) . We had no negotiation rights, but the business survived.

 

why should the public sector be any different? the government wont survive if it keeps it up, we are not to far off from greece.

 

I am with ya on that. When Netjets ran in to financial trouble, we had to do similar things and EVERYONE shared the cuts, some more than others.

 

My issue with what they were trying to do was take even more and more and more from state employees after they have already taken. Lets face it, people have to eat and have families to take care of. Thats why we go to work in the first place. Whats to happen when they keep taking from our state employees until there is nothing left to give and then the only people we can get to work state jobs are going to be illegal aliens because people don't want to work for nothing?

 

On a serious note, you can only take so much from a single group of people and the state employees should not have to take 100% of the brunt of the governments inability to manage our budget.

 

And if is up to us to fix what the government sc rewed up then why should'nt ever citizen in the state be tasked with some type of cut or another or a tax increase? I am totally against that but look at the logic.

 

Everyone of us in the state of Ohio has reaped some type of benefit from state funds. It could be as simple as a pot hole being filled on 270 or what have you. The State employees are not the only people who reaped that benefit so why should it be soley up to them to fix it by making them take all of the cuts and forcing them to struggle at home?

 

Whats to happen when State employees get hit so hard that they can't take care of their families and all of those families start drawing welfare?

 

Just some things to think about.

[RyM3rC]

Whats to happen when State employees get hit so hard that they can't take care of their families and all of those families start drawing welfare?

 

Cut welfare.

 

Guess what? If the services you provide aren't valuable enough for you to buy food/shelter/necessities, you get to provide them all by yourself! Is that the endgame these people want?

 

Bring it on.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

Cut welfare.

 

Guess what? If the services you provide aren't valuable enough for you to buy food/shelter/necessities, you get to provide them all by yourself! Is that the endgame these people want?

 

Bring it on.

 

HA HA DO you think that will honestly happen? The welfare system is to busy supporting foreigners that come to our country.

 

 

I am not sure I follow what your trying to say about ther services though.

[RyM3rC]

I don't know if/when it would happen, but if it's not sustainable then the clock is already ticking down, so to speak.

 

The services comment was a reference to our society's dependence on each other. I don't have the time to break it down for you right now remind me later.

[KennyFKINPowerz]

I don't know if/when it would happen, but if it's not sustainable then the clock is already ticking down, so to speak.

 

The services comment was a reference to our society's dependence on each other. I don't have the time to break it down for you right now remind me later.

 

I follow you know. The way it was worded didnt make sense to me.

I agree that we have a huge dependancy on each other. But I believe that bureaucracy has a lot do do with that. I would personally rather it be the opposite of that and people should be more relilant on themselves. Unfortunately the way society has been molded makes that almost impossible unless your rich.

[RyM3rC]

I follow you know. The way it was worded didnt make sense to me.

I agree that we have a huge dependancy on each other. But I believe that bureaucracy has a lot do do with that. I would personally rather it be the opposite of that and people should be more relilant on themselves. Unfortunately the way society has been molded makes that almost impossible unless your rich.

 

Or a crazy hermit? You're right though, they're not just giving away land anymore

[Sam1647545489]

I JUST VOTED YES AND NO ON ISSUE2

 

 

 

I'M A BAUCE.....

[downingracing]

I am with ya on that. When Netjets ran in to financial trouble, we had to do similar things and EVERYONE shared the cuts, some more than others.

 

My issue with what they were trying to do was take even more and more and more from state employees after they have already taken. Lets face it, people have to eat and have families to take care of. Thats why we go to work in the first place. Whats to happen when they keep taking from our state employees until there is nothing left to give and then the only people we can get to work state jobs are going to be illegal aliens because people don't want to work for nothing?

 

On a serious note, you can only take so much from a single group of people and the state employees should not have to take 100% of the brunt of the governments inability to manage our budget.

 

And if is up to us to fix what the government sc rewed up then why should'nt ever citizen in the state be tasked with some type of cut or another or a tax increase? I am totally against that but look at the logic.

 

Everyone of us in the state of Ohio has reaped some type of benefit from state funds. It could be as simple as a pot hole being filled on 270 or what have you. The State employees are not the only people who reaped that benefit so why should it be soley up to them to fix it by making them take all of the cuts and forcing them to struggle at home?

 

Whats to happen when State employees get hit so hard that they can't take care of their families and all of those families start drawing welfare?

 

Just some things to think about.

 

It was a starting point. Everyone said "There are other low hanging fruit to get - why start here?". AKA - Don't take anything away from me - go get some from someone else. It wouldn't have been the only step... Like I said - screw it! I'm a NO VOTE for any new (or renewal) taxes!!!

 

The people spoke and they said: None of us is as dumb as all of us!

[KennyFKINPowerz]

I JUST VOTED YES AND NO ON ISSUE2

 

 

 

I'M A BAUCE.....

 

 

That's that pimp shit right there.