Fallin cuts top tax rate, says state revenue growth is enough.

[Red Arrow]

And any bargaining power the company had would be pretty weak wouldn't it?

The power the employer has is the right to end your employment.

And shady is a pseudonym for ..coercive, bullyish, thuggish. It is weak defense to justify such behavior by noting that both sides have used such tactics in hte past.

I understand a man stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family.  I don't condone it.

I hope you never lose your office level status and have to go back to labor status. It has been an awakening for me. Some effort has been made on TV with a program that places owners/managers in low labor jobs within their own companies where they get an update on what effect their policies and procedures have on real people. I'm no union man, I just think both sides benefit from the balance of a more level playing field.

I guess I was fortunate in my younger years when working as labor to not be mistreated.

[Red Arrow]

I don't understand why you would use the prhrase in context of Oklahoma's education problems. Historically studies show that we do not make as strong an investment in public school education as other states who are showing greater returns measured by accepted testing. Whether that is a function of the the rural nature of the state geograpically or mentally is not clear to me. It may be the result of a proliferation of school districts that forces too much money into administrative cost.

I do not believe that throwing money at the problem will fix it.  The attitude of parents, including the ones you list below, are more likely to be the problem.  The threshold of a few obvious things are money for books, buildings, teachers.  I believe that, in general, teachers deserve more pay but I won't pretend to know how much.

Or, more likely, it is the political/religious nature of the state that manifests itself in the phrase, "If I can't have her...nobody can. " IOW, if they insist on teaching our young'uns about sexual reproduction, gays, unions, communism, socialism ect. that differs from what we currently believe, then we're by God not going to fund such nonsense. In my gut I feel that is what's happening.

Instead they look towards private schools, charter schools, and home schooling where learning may be better controlled.

[Red Arrow]

Never heard him say that. But no, we do know what was life in OK before RTW, we know what was promised with RTW (more jobs, better jobs, more corporations moving to the state) and we know what happened after RTW passed (more low skill phone center jobs, exit of high paying corporate jobs, higher unemployment).

To imply that RTW caused low skill phone center jobs, exit of high paying corporate jobs, and higher unemployment without regard to the overall economic situation would be too simplistic.

[Red Arrow]

That is revolutionary thinking. That just leaves PAC's doesn't it?

People use organizations to leverage their power. The NRA, the NOW, the ELCA, all use that leverage to influence government. I don't think that is wrong. Once you start picking and choosing which organizations should have the use of that leverage it gets dicey.

If my employer choses to support a candidate I don't want, I am working to support a candidate I don't want.  If "my" Union supports a candidate I don't want, my dues (or whatever) are being used to support a candidate I don't want.   Both of these options involve my ability to put food on the table and a roof over my head.

If the Aircraft Owners and Pilot's Association (AOPA) supports a candidate I don't like, I can refuse to renew my membership.  Same for ASPCA, AARP, NRA, NOW.....  (I don't necessarily belong to the second batch of organizations)

[Red Arrow]

Nor did I intend to. It was tongue in cheek using the same sort of faulty logic that Spoiled Cabbage used. However, my statistical sample is the only one available as there are only 6 states that have enacted zero income tax who alse either did or did not enact RTW. I couldn't really fabricate any more to get a larger statistical sample could I?

I was thinking of a full correlation of the states to show the combinations of income tax (and perhaps the average overall rate) and RTW and where they stood on unemployment.  I do think we are getting way beyond the original intention of your post though.

[Red Arrow]

Even when our state was primarily a Democratic leaning state, it was not the party that mattered it was the issues.

You have lived in OK a lot longer than I have so I will bow to history somewhat.  What I did see when we moved here in 71 was an attitude of vote Democratic because they are Democrats.  I didn't see so much of the issues being what mattered.

[AquaMan]

The power the employer has is the right to end your employment.

He always has that power, just like the employee, without a contract, has the same power.

What I am saying is that if you were to limit the employer by forcing him to provide the same elements of a contract to those who don't sign the employment contract as those who do, then you weaken his position. He may want to offer a more lucrative contract to those who agree to work for a specific period of time to recoup his investment. However, if you limit his ability to do that, just like a union in Oklahoma is prohibited from requiring those who didn't join the union from receiving the fruits of their negotiations...you weaken their position.

This is all about weakening labor by using the legislature to enact a law that the corporations themselves could not tolerate.

[AquaMan]

I do not believe that throwing money at the problem will fix it.  The attitude of parents, including the ones you list below, are more likely to be the problem.  The threshold of a few obvious things are money for books, buildings, teachers.  I believe that, in general, teachers deserve more pay but I won't pretend to know how much.

Nor do I. But historically OK has not thrown money at schools in an attempt to fix them. They don't care enough to do that. And, unfortunately, no amount of gubernatorial leadership will change that because our governor position is weak. The leadership will have to come out of the rural areas who do not want to end the free flow of money into their unconsolidated school districts and the cities who have become so conservative and anti-public school that they refuse to elect anyone who specifically states the problems and their solutions.

Most young people do not know that students of our age actually had books paid for by the taxpayer that we took home each day to study. They have no idea that poor behavior students now are often just considered ADD, and pushed off onto special needs buses and separate curriculum. If their parents have money they end up in private or parochial schools, if they don't they end up as drug addicts, thieves and prisoners. Instead, those younger generation people only see the result of the system and blame teachers and administrators.

I also doubt that raising teacher pay is the solution either though it is a good tactic for retaining good teachers but the system needs reformation. Reformation is expensive and that brings us back to status quo.

[AquaMan]

To imply that RTW caused low skill phone center jobs, exit of high paying corporate jobs, and higher unemployment without regard to the overall economic situation would be too simplistic.

Hey, I was just stating what happened after RTW was passed. And it passed during a pretty good economy IIRC. Whether it was a spurrious correlation or causation I wouldn't know for sure. Would be a reasonable inference without any evidence to the contrary though.

[AquaMan]

If my employer choses to support a candidate I don't want, I am working to support a candidate I don't want.  If "my" Union supports a candidate I don't want, my dues (or whatever) are being used to support a candidate I don't want.   Both of these options involve my ability to put food on the table and a roof over my head.

If the Aircraft Owners and Pilot's Association (AOPA) supports a candidate I don't like, I can refuse to renew my membership.  Same for ASPCA, AARP, NRA, NOW.....  (I don't necessarily belong to the second batch of organizations)

Too late for those sentiments. SCOTUS has already ruled that corporations are people and should have unlimited ability to support issues/candidates of their choice even if their employees don't agree. Of course you could always quit. If they are people, then Unions should be too.

I seriously doubt many people dropped their NRA memberships when they referred to the government as "jackbooted thugs" a few years back. People just shrug and figure that most of their aims are being met by the organization. If it strays too far, like the Komen folks did, then people drop memberships like flies.

[AquaMan]

You have lived in OK a lot longer than I have so I will bow to history somewhat.  What I did see when we moved here in 71 was an attitude of vote Democratic because they are Democrats.  I didn't see so much of the issues being what mattered.

Democrats in the depression were the friend of the farmer and laborer in Ok. We were founded as a progressive state (at the time). So many folks continuued their support of the party even when it stopped being much like them. The 1964 election was the last time a Democratic presidential candidate carried OK. That was the peak of the depression babies anti-business attitudes here. The economy surged, people no longer felt they needed the party to defend them and they switched to moral/religious issues as the base of their politics.

Then we had to spend a couple of decades cleaning up the corruption, incompetence and ignorance that having one party represent us so long had delivered to us.

[Red Arrow]

He always has that power, just like the employee, without a contract, has the same power.  True.  I believe there are some complications but a contract employee is allowed to quit but generally the employer is generally not allowed to terminate a contract employee before the contract end conditions are met.

He may want to offer a more lucrative contract to those who agree to work for a specific period of time to recoup his investment. However, if you limit his ability to do that, just like a union in Oklahoma is prohibited from requiring those who didn't join the union from receiving the fruits of their negotiations...you weaken their position.

I have heard that an employer is not allowed to pay a non-union worker more than a union worker for the same job.  I admit my information is old, from my deceased dad, but I think at one time the higher pay was allowed but then the laws were changed.

This is all about weakening labor by using the legislature to enact a law that the corporations themselves could not tolerate.

When the unions are about wages, safe working conditions, and benefits I don't really have too much problem with a union.  When the union gets to say that a worker is not allowed to do a different/additional job during slack times, then the union has too much power.  When a left side wheel installer cannot install a right side wheel because that is not his job, the right side wheel installer is not at work, the company is required to have extra right side wheel installers to cover potential missing employees, and the additional right side wheel changers must sit on their butts when the regular right side wheel installer is present because their job is right side wheel installation, I object.

[Red Arrow]

Hey, I was just stating what happened after RTW was passed. And it passed during a pretty good economy IIRC. Whether it was a spurrious correlation or causation I wouldn't know for sure. Would be a reasonable inference without any evidence to the contrary though.

Kind of like the statement that everyone who ate pickles in 1786 is dead.  The correlation is that eating pickles causes death.

OK.

[AquaMan]

I would object as well. Iand, I never eat pickles on the weekend.

Its nice outside and we both have yardwork to do. I'm mixing mine with a vodka and strawberry laced limeade. Ran out of beer.

[Red Arrow]

Most young people do not know that students of our age actually had books paid for by the taxpayer that we took home each day to study.

And we had to take care of them.  I remember making covers out of grocery bags to protect the hard cover.  We were NOT ALLOWED to write in the books.  I guess it was part of learning to be responsible and our parents played a big part in it.

They have no idea that poor behavior students now are often just considered ADD, and pushed off onto special needs buses and separate curriculum. If their parents have money they end up in private or parochial schools, if they don't they end up as drug addicts, thieves and prisoners. Instead, those younger generation people only see the result of the system and blame teachers and administrators.

I don't remember too much disciplinary problems in grades 1-12 but admit to growing up in a mixed white/blue collar town in the burbs.  The city of Philadelphia may have had more problems.  I don't have kids so I won't comment on ADD beyond saying I think that ADD is sometimes a convenient excuse.  I'm sure it exists though.

I also doubt that raising teacher pay is the solution either though it is a good tactic for retaining good teachers but the system needs reformation. Reformation is expensive and that brings us back to status quo.

I understand the teachers' position that sometimes they are given a situation that makes them unable to excel by today's standards.  That needs to be worked on so good teachers can take on a real challenge and not have their career suffer.   Better pay for better teachers would be good but I don't think it fits in the present system very easily.