Sounds like you need to join a union!

Sounds like someone received one to many traffic tickets.

Thanks Max, You just reminded me that Hitler felt the same way.

Does everything you see or hear remind you of Hitler? Then you should know that Hitler's party was called "Socialist", just like the Democrats and their Clown-in-Chief.

Hmm, what do you do for a living?

OMG, thanks for posting it! The thing has to be all over the MSM... still waiting... nah, not likely. And that bunch of blood sucking leeches dares complaining about being underpaid?

I may disagree with the way hedge funds earn their money and get to pay taxes, but at least I'm not paying their salaries or their benefits out of my pocket - unlike those of public employees.

@Max -- the point is, if the superwealthy paid their fair share of taxes, your tax burden (assuming you are not ultra-wealthy) would go down.

First - What is their "Fair Share"? And how did your work out that number?

Second - If they are forced to pay what you think is their "Fair Share," how long do you think it will be before they relocate to a state with a more favorable tax climate (if I were you I would get ready to time this with a stop-watch that measures to the .0001 sec).

Third - When the legislature passed their Millionaires Tax last year it only generated enough money to goose the senior rebate program a bit. No money for property tax relief. No money to make the pension system any healthier. How much of a rate increase would be needed to fully fund all the public sector workers' wet dreams?

You might want to go back and reread the fable of "The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs." Big words. Nice pictures. Right on Point.

They already pay more than others. Fair share, you say? Just tell me who gets to decide how much is "fair", and whom to consider "ultra-wealthy".

Who gets to decide any tax rate, Max? I think it's pretty obvious that hedge fund managers should at least pay the same rate as their secretaries. Is that too hard?
And MadInNJ, -- do you believe that NJ's budget problems will be solved by simply going after union pensions and health care? Talk about geese laying golden eggs!
Also, if you raise tax rates -- even a little -- on the wealthy, where will they go? NY? CT? Taxes are high everywhere. It's like the criminals that built the housing bubble and then screamed that they would leave their companies if they didn't get their inflated bonuses. GO then...but where?

Expropriating from the wealthy worked to the economies of Russia, Cuba, Byelorussia, South Africa and a few other countries I don't care to live in, didn't it?

Oh Max, you have GOT to be kidding. The differences between those countries and ours are so vast it simply makes your attempt at an analogy ludicrous.
The fact is the rich have seen their tax rates decline in the last 2 decades, the middle class and the poor have not been so lucky. We are broke. We need money. We can go after unions and their pensions, but that will not solve the problem in its entirety. The rich need to pay more. As is so often said these days, we have socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else.

Yeah, the rich have to pay more. That's EXACTLY what Scott Walker is trying to achieve in Wisconsin. :)

"Yeah, the rich have to pay more. That's EXACTLY what Scott Walker is trying to achieve in Wisconsin. :)"
No, the rich have people on the payroll to write the tax laws in their favor, so that they get to keep/hide/decrease their tax burden. While the middle class is stuck with a higher tax burden!

@n -- A few incoming Governors, in order to reduce the cost of their inaugurations, sold access to people willing to donate tens of thousands of dollars to their inaugurations. In other words, you got lunch with the new governor for $25K. I imagine there weren't too many middle class people taking them up on those offers.
@Max -- I've seen the stories on police chiefs who retire on inflated pensions and am just as disgusted as you. Fortunately, those are the extremes. Still, as a private employee, I see no problem having gov't workers contribute to their health care and pensions (The unions in WI agreed to that much, the issue now stands solely over collective bargaining). But I've yet to meet a rich teacher.

Thirty years for the full pension benefit (based on their largest salary no less, and with all the possible gimmicks applied to bloat it up towards the end), and they need to be 55 to retire, my @#$! Was it supposed to jerk a tear? It sure did - for my lost tax money!

And why are we still applying the private-business terms, like "bargain agreement", to transactions that have nothing to do with private business? Let's call them by their true name: extortion.

As I explained to another troll on this board, I have kids in Montville school system. I have not a shadow of doubt that unionized teachers will find a way to punish my children.

Max and MadinNJ are spot on. Private sector workers not only need to fund their own retirement but those of public employees as well, and to a level of generosity that far exceeds anything that private sector workers will ever see. When public workers have to share in the cost, they will be more careful about which medical plan they choose. They should be moved to 401(k)s so when the stock market tanks, private sector workers are not left with the bill for a hole in the pension fund in addition to having to figure out how to rebuild their own retirement nest egg. Dan, until there is true pension and healtchare reform, public employees are the enemy.

Good policy. You should also have a policy of having to post under your real name. Anonymous posts often go over the top and those people should be held accountable. If you can't state you opinion without being identified then maybe your opinion isn't worth much. Max says that he is afraid his children would suffer. How silly is that. Anonymous posters talk of trolls and leeches because they can remain anonymous. A newspaper would not print a letter to the editor without a name attached to it so why is it any different in the new "newspaper" medium.

I do agree that the "discussion" turned out a wee ugly and could use some cleansing, but forcing people to sign Internet posts is one good way to limit the debate to politicos and no-skin-in-the-game people. My fear that teachers may take revenge against my kids is based on actual precedents. Just look at those enlightened, mentally balanced people protesting in Wisconsin: http://www.moonbattery.com/madison_110219_bad_03.jpg

Most educators in my town (which happens to be Montville, NJ) are about par for a public-school teacher, which isn't TOO bad but definitely doesn't mean "the sharpest knife in the drawer". Some of them are admittedly good and professional, others are tolerable, and there's a bunch that serve as a proverbial spoonful of tar. The problem is, the union is mostly about the latter group, since others need "protection" like fish needs a bicycle.

I'll take "Obamacare will lead to death panels", since it's clearly true. As for "The President is a Muslim", who said that, besides me (not a Republican) and Obama himself (not a Republican either, last time I checked)?

By the way, how about:
"If you like your insurance, you can keep it."
"We've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs."
"Willia Ayers is just a guy in my neighborhood."

And the loveliest one, from 2006:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

I suggest we discuss facts and avoid personal insults. Cue the facts, courtesy of Goggle:

Egyptian Foreign Minister Abul Gheit said on the "Round Table Show" that he had had a one on one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda. He asked that the Moslem world show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic American problems, he would show the Moslem world what he would do with Israel.

How did you feel when Obama canceled the National Prayer Day "to avoid offending other religions" but observed Islamic Prayer Day?

Reminds me of the last GOP National Convention when Republicans were screaming "drill baby drill!" at the top of their lungs during Sarah Palin's speech.