No. This is spin:
Nowhere does that state the 19% was spread out over a period of time. Nowhere does it state that 3% of that had already been negotiated in prior contracts.
That is misleading at best, and an intentional lie at worst.
I think it's a fair point to say it didn't tell the whole story but this came directly from the News Journal. I didn't embelish it, and it wasn't a lie.
Sorry. I can't see anything wrong with the first statement. Politicians promise all the time. If a politician runs on a campaign of "If elected, I will raise the minimum wage to $10.00 per hour.", then the people of course, will vote for him.
As far as taxpayers being "left out of the boardroom", where were they when Citizens United allowed corporations the right to back politicians with nearly unlimited funds in order to pimp their agenda?
Seems to me a hell of a lot more of the taxpayers (which also consist of firefighters and policemen and teachers) were "left out of the boardroom" in that situation...
Citizens United again? I guess like the 2nd amendment, you must think that the 1st only applies to governments too. At least you're consistent...
I think the problem here is that you don't see anything wrong with the first statement. To you, promising bread and circuses is how the art of politics is supposed to work. I don't think I can cross that bridge to explain to you why I disagree with that. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.
More spin:
Nope. I knew there was a contract. I never said firefighters were working for minimum wage, either. But you knew that too, didn't you?
Apparently, since a new contract was negotiated, there were "years of inequity". As I was told:
I don't think the fact that there was a new contract is a prima facie proof that there were "years of inequity". When a contract expires, you renegociate a new one. Since they were getting raises every year before, I think they may have a very different view of what "years of inequity" really mean than I would.
Now maybe you could explain to me, what exactly were you looking for when you were googling to reply to me on this issue? I mean, the fact that you tracked down a union rep shows you put some effort into it, but for what? What exactly were you looking for and what did you ask him? I
