Hts121

Here's some actual stats to inject into the discussion. Janitors with 20+ years of experience make, on average, $21,000-$39,000 - http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Custodian_Janitor/Salary Another chart showing average wage of all janitors to be in the low-mid 20's - http://www1.salary.com/Janitor-salary.html Average for a "senior" school janitor is $27,000 per http://www.chacha.com/question/what-is-the-average-salary-for-a-school-janitor And a state-by-state comparison - http://www.salaryexpert.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Browse.School-Janitor-salary-data-details&PositionId=33303&CityId=300&dsp=by%20State Can we move off of this strawman argument now?

^^Then it would seem that the public employer would be in a good position to negotiate a new wage structure for its janitors.

How much do custodial staff make? You consider that "top wages"? Be serious. Amazing how you all will fight tooth and nail to ensure "Buckley Smith IV's" irrevocable trust is fully protected, but want to take a shite on the little guy creating an even larger wealth gap than we have (in which the richest 1% has more money than the bottom 50% COMBINED). It really is puzzling...

I think you have a monumental misconception Eighth and State. Whether or not 'most' people would use the 3-C should not be a determinative factor. Hell... if more than 50% of the people in Ohio would just use the 3-C once per year (i.e. 6 million riders), then there would be private companies beating each other over the heads with train couplings trying to lay these tracks and kick off the service. That is not the way passenger rail works. We only need a small percentage of the population to even want to ride it for it to make sense, especially considering that a significant segment of that small percentage would ride it multiple times a year. The fact is, nobody (individuals or companies) is going to move out of Ohio or choose not to move here BECAUSE we have a train. On the other hand, we are much more likely to lose (or not attract) residents and/or businesses due to the lack of this transportation option. On your thought that we, as a collective, are nothing but a bunch of optimists.... maybe it is not that at all, but rather that you are a pessimist?

I would have hoped he would have written the article from less of a partisan lens. He is using all the keywords - i.e. his sarcastic and partonizing "thanks to President Obama" comment - to pull at the heartstrings of conservatives instead of presenting an objective argument. It's too bad, because I agree with him on a whole. There are several classifications of public employees that need not and should not be entitled to union protection. That doesn't mean that we should do away with ALL public sector unions or, as Kasich would do, take away any leverage they have.

^^^Cops, Firefighters, Paramedics, etc. are going to vote for public officials who treat them well and against pulbic officials who do not. This will not change, regardless if they are entitled to the rights and protections of Chapter 4117 or not. Kasich can't take away their right to vote, nor their right to political speech. Also, with the new prohibition on residency requirements, many of the employees aren't even electors anymore, so your concerns have been greatly diminished (if they were ever legitimate at all). If a Mayor embarks on an effort to diminish minimum manning, shift strength, safety equipment, etc because he/she feels that more $$ is needed to water flower baskets, the emergency responders are going to make him/her pay for it come election time. The effect collective bargaining has is to provide these employees a means of disputing those changes to the terms and conditions of employment by means OTHER than through elections. And FYI, only emergency responders are prohibited from striking and not all individuals employed by our political subdivisions are entitled to collectively bargain.... and even those who are entitled to collectively bargain are not entitled to negotiate over every aspect of employment, but rather only those subjects which qualify as mandatory subjects of collective bargaining.

Yes. It was just a visit. Back in 'the Land' now. Good luck with your search. My buddy down there I went to college with in Greensboro just bought a house on Wedgeworth... a small, 3bdrm ranch with a walkout basement... and he said it was the closest he could get to Uptown for under $300,000. He's about a 15 minute drive out. I told him he could have bought a house 3 times as big up here in the Heights for the same price and same distance from our downtown ;) He actually paid $25,000 more than my sister paid for her 5 bdrm, 3,500 sq ft colonial, with two stair cases, a butler's pantry and a smoking room! And her house has a 81 score on the walkability test, while his has a 52.

^The immigrant populations in the eastern suburbs at the fringe of and just beyond the inner-ring is encouraging. Mayfield Hts has had a heavy former-USSR influence for some time, but it appears that is spreading into places like Richmond Heights, which according to the article now contains one of the higher immigrant concentrations in the state at nearly 20%.

My post was absolutely serious. But I wasn't discussing the prevailing wage law. I was only talking about how he plans (or at least will attempt) to screw our cops, firefighters and other emergency responders out of their right to meaningfully engage in collective bargaining. That is a topic totally separate from any discussion on the prevailing wage law, which I have mixed emotions about.

Agreed.

^Good point about electing the first black mayor. One could also point out that Cleveland has an abnormally large Jewish population, which tends to be a very liberal segment of society (save for a few specific issues). Even our jewish orthodox and catholic communities are fairly liberal, relatively speaking.

Just stay in Ohio. F&ck Philly.

Scarlett.... yum. My wife would have to give me "a pass" for her. Anyone care to make an admission in this thread that you don't think she is (...cultural blasphemy coming...) foxy?

Hmmmm.... that's playing loosely by the rules. At the very least, your name has to be said 3 times, no?

That's odd... I get the feeling that a lot of CTown's ex-pats get some sense of joy from seeing the City fall on hard times and have some weird desire to downplay the current momentum. Almost as if they are trying to justify the fact that they simply weren't tough enough to 'make it' on the north coast ;)

Conservatism, IMO, places the premium on percieved traditions and maintenance of the status quo. While many self proclaimed liberals villify it, the philosophy serves the vital purpose of injecting a necessary cooling effect whenever liberalism runs amuck or its intentions are misguided. I believe it was Churchill who said that if you're not a liberal at 30 you have no heart and if you're not a conservative at 40 you have no brain.

Speaking of cultural blasphemies... does anyone else think MTS's new avatar resembles a "tramp stamp"?

Liberalism, in my book, is defined by constantly trying to evolve society so as to place a premium on individual liberties for all (not just when it personally affects you) and equal rights under the law, even if detrimental those who "have it good" under the status quo. Environmental consciousness is not near the top of the list IMO. That's like saying that whether you are pro or anti choice defines whether you are conservative.... even if the most staunch "conservatives" are all opposed to a woman's right to choose.

I don't care for the way certain parts of Philly acheives its density levels. Certain parts, especially where my family lives in NE Philly, almost seem like a waste of density with large, nealry unwalkable blocks of rowhouses (don't call them townhomes) with strip mall infill throughout. And don't even get me started on Franklin Blvd and its affection with chain restaraunts and retail. Personally, I prefer the western suburbs, which can be very nice and walkable,to some of the denser areas of the City. Center City (Philly's downtown) is also very nice...... MUCH improved from what it was.

My second wind comes around 11pm.... so if I am still up at that point (most days) then I am no likely to go to bed until 1 or 2am

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/metro/081205libs.pdf This study is with regard to pure voting record (so hardly limited to, yet suggestive of, social stances), but FWIW, Cleveland ranks #11 in the Country. It also appears to be limited to the City proper. The only city in Ohio in the Top 25 and ahead of places like Boston and Providence (which are commonly thought of as very liberal). Dayton was 42, Akron was 48, Toledo was 53, Cincinnati was 56, Columbus was 78 (out of 237). But, like I said, it is better to describe Cleveland as "not conservative". It is not very socially conservative at all, fairly tolerant for a City with blue collar roots, and at least tries to be progressive.

Cleveland is not conservative. I think that is the better way to put it. It is heavily democratic for many reasons, liberal leaning residents being a major (but hardly the only) player. The eastern suburbs of Cuyahoga County are more liberal than the western suburbs, especially when the more affluent neighborhoods are compared. But something happens out east when you cross the Chagrin River and it becomes staunchly conservative. There are also some true meccas of liberalism, like Cleveland Heights which had the first domestic partnership registry in Ohio (years before Cleveland) that was also the first such registry anywhere in the nation adopted by voters. All of the urban neighborhoods are very liberal, and not just for the purposes of convenience or personal gain.

The 9th, 18th, 20th, 21st, 23rd, 25th, 27th, and 29th Presidents were from Ohio (at least originally), the last one being Harding 90 years ago. We had quite a run for a while there. I don't know that we have had a candidate since then. I can't think of one.

I'm pretty sure he read this the first hundred times you suggested it. Keep fighting the good fight, KJP.

Still no statement from "Team Kasich"?