Jackson Jambalaya

Funny, but it is liberating to hear truth.

The guy gives a great speech but a bit simplistic.

There is no question that unions got out of control. There is no question that government is out of control.

The concern for me is that throwing the baby out with the bathwater isn't the answer.

We need to remember WHY unions came into existence . We need to try to remember that government is necessary to prevent chaos and that when it comes to things like infrastructure a state cannot do it alone.

OUR state would still have dirt roads and cross rivers by boat if we had to go it alone.

It's just too easy to " buy" influence with an elected official or political party these days. It's too easy for monied groups to sell their agenda ( however stupid or dangerous) to the public as if it were toothpaste. And, it's too easy to pretend you can deliver votes for a candidate or that your group is larger than it is.

When Christine O' Donnell was asked what Supreme Court decisions she didn't like, she should have said, " imminent domain" and " corporations as citizens".

You avoid the point. He was pointing out how they take over $100 million a year in dues from the teachers in his state, they raised hell over contributing ANYTHING towards their benefits, and when the state was worse than broke, fought him tooth and nail on everything.

When you say "corporate citizens", do you think unions should be included?

I like the simple, straightforward, common-sensical approach.

I thought too about the purpose of Unions, but much like the old 8-track tape player, the need for Unions has changed.

Unions need to be more like churches. Don't keep a lot of money to make the bosses rich, stay out of political races and do your best to protect your members. I freely admit that unions were necessary at one point to protect the health and welfare of working men, but I doubt that soaking the members for millions to enrich union leadership and lobby for specific political agendas was what John L. Lewis had in mind.

Governor Christie gets better every time I see him. He may not be a candidate for President in 2012, but the nation's governors could sure use his model to clean up their states. Bill Billingsley

KF, I do think unions or any other special interest group should be seen as " citizens" when it comes to campaign contributions.

If a citizen wishes to contribute to a cause or candidate, they can do that without job or peer pressure. Bill Gates should have the same limit as John Doe. Resources would be naturally " pooled". Campaign contributions IMHO should ALL be INDIVIDUAL with INDIVIDUAL limits...NO exceptions!

I didn't miss the point he wanted to make, I just don't accept without question that he is accurate. He may be. I just don't know.

$100 million sounds like alot but he doesn't say what the expenses are or what services are provided. IF , for example,the union provides representation for teachers sued by students or unfairly fired, or for liability insurance, the costs can run up quickly. IF the expenses were for bogus union salaries, travel, etc. , he should be able to give examples as a union budget is hardly a secret.

For sure, the union got the teachers a sweetheart health care package that reduces individual health care costs by more than what dues are each member, each year.

Nor are dues really " tax payer dollars' in the sense that it's out of teacher salaries. The taxpayer doesn't directly support the union and the teachers can dissolve the union, boycott , etc. That he makes that argument at all, makes me less trusting of his point of view. The teachers, like anyone else, can spend their earned dollars anyway they please.

And,here's an inconvenient fact...those states with strong teachers' unions have historically done a FAR better job of educating students. Odd until you think that perhaps union have managed to help attract more qualified teachers.

I'll accept that the collective bargaining in past years has resulted in better pay and benefit for teachers, thereby making it a more lucrative profession for people in union-heavy states. However, I don't accept that union teachers somehow do a far better job of educating students. Your claim of factual evidence to that effect needs to be backed up with data. Lots of variables go into a child's education, and assuming that a teacher somehow becomes better when he or she joins the union is not supportable.

Teachers have a right to spend their money in any way they choose, but they can't simply choose not to be in a union. I'm not sure how teacher unions work, but most unions have workplace elections, and if the majority of the workers vote to unionize then they all unionizes. I'll happily stand corrected if teachers are allowed to make individual union decisions, but I have my doubts. Further, government at some level pays the salaries and benefits that are negotiated in the CBA, so it's mathematically impossible for the statewide number not to be higher when unions are involved, especially when they're not covering health benefits. The only time that's not the case is when the union management overhead is zero, and I can't think of a ready example that fits that condition.

Yes, some teachers have safety issues with their jobs, but most aren't faced with the cave ins and explosions and other unsafe conditions that the coal miners suffered prior to organizing. Unions today are in place to maximize pay and benefits for their members, sometimes beyond what is reasonable in the current economy. While arguably necessary in some professions, I don't think teachers get their money's worth from their union.

8:55 New Jersey consistently ranks in the top five states in education whether you choose census data or data from the US Dept. of Ed.

The lists of the states with teacher unions like NJ, NY, MASS, IL,CA consistently outperform non-unionized states .

You can get very detailed information via your search engine and break it down by pop, income, race , teacher pay etc.

The Hope Scholarship in Georgia has improved that states rankings so I'm not arguing that unions championing the issues of educators is the only way to improve. I'm just saying they apparently have had some positive role as pay/benefits attract the most qualified teachers and helping legislators and the people understand the educators' perspective is useful.

But, I'm not doing your homework for you.

God forbid we should base our opinions on facts or pay any attention to expert opinions on anything.

It's fashionable to be anti-intellectual, anti-expert,and let lay analysis trump professional analysis. And,forget comprehending what we read, let's just lift a sentence or two out of context.

We even think our representatives should just poll us and make policy decisions based on how we FEEL no matter how ill informed we are.

It's fashionable to be anti-intellectual, anti-expert,and let lay analysis trump professional analysis. And,forget comprehending what we read, let's just lift a sentence or two out of context.

You sure as hell aren't remotely an intellectual.

Unions are a drag on NJ education. Imagine the investment in students if teachers were actually paid what a "lay person" earns and receives in benefits. I can see it now, iPads for all the kids; then I can see the teachers clamoring for their benefits back. All the while, we are thinking about the children, right?