On Wednesday Gov. Scott Walker attended the annual Governor’s Small Business Summit in Eau Claire. During the event, Blogging Blue contributor Steve Carlson, who is a steering committee member of 15 NOW Northwest Wisconsin, asked Gov. Walker about living wages. Predictably, Gov. Walker refused to answer Steve’s questions about living wages.

Watch for yourselves.

According to Steve, 15 NOW Northwest Wisconsin was determined not to let Walker come to Eau Claire and talk about jobs without talking about living wages. The group is part of the larger Fight for 15, and their definition of a living wage includes $15/hour, full time hours, consistent schedules, affordable health insurance, paid sick leave and vacation time, and publicly funded child care.

34 Responses to Scott Walker: The Inartful Dodger (VIDEO)

  1. wisconsin Conservative Digest says:

    Living wages have been stopped by the Left and obama, Doyle lost us 130,000 jobs in 8 years. Obama has screwed the middle class by electric, food, misc prices, only part time jobs, 94 million unemployed worst in history, no bennies. The Left wants to cover up this mess by yakking about $15 min wages which have been disaster out west, and the living wage which only comes from good businesses making money.
    Milwaukee, run by th eLeft is disaster, worst poverty in country, 57% youth unemplloyment.

    • Tina says:

      You are completely wrong!

      • Duane12 says:

        Tina, in addition CD’s comment is a perfect example of trolling and an attempt to “hijack” or change the topic. Not a word, none, zero is pertinent or contributes to the discussion. “Scott Walker: Inartful Dodger.”

        In a formal debate, he would be ruled out of order. IMO it’s about time such as CD be denied the privilege by BB that trusts he will make relevant comments to and on the topic.

        I agree that Walker is well skilled in changing or denying or “dodging” the truth or the issue. He has had years at the taxpayer’s expense to practice prevarication and posturing.

  2. CjMcD says:

    Steve did a great job pressing Walker to answer his question. Of course, Walker didn’t. Dodgey little wiggler.

    Scott Walker– Leaving Wisconsin workers in a lurch. A new slogan.

  3. Denis Navratil says:

    If someone produces enough value for an employer, they can demand “$15/hour, full time hours, consistent schedules, affordable health insurance, paid sick leave and vacation time.” If they can’t, why must employers pay more than the value they offer to the employer? If you can’t cut it as an employee, ask your mommy for some money. Don’t bother employers. They have enough real problems with which to concern themselves.

    • John Casper says:

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are,

      1. How’s business today at “Dimple’s” in Racine? How many c-u-s-t-o-m-e-r-s have you had?

      Back on BB’s 40-hour thread

      http://bloggingblue.com/2015/09/the-40-hour-work-week-brought-to-you-by-labor-unions/

      in response to Steve Carlson’s request for links, you wrote,

      “Where is your link proving that a dramatic increase in the price of labor would not result in business closings? Or better yet, forget the link and use common sense instead. What happens when costs go up? Demand goes down, right? If demand for labor decreases, we have an increase in unemployment.”

      I responded with four links which you have ignored.

      (1) FDR appointed wealthy Utah banker Marrineer Eccles to the Federal Reserve in 1933:

      “It is utterly impossible, as this country has demonstrated again and again, for the rich to save as much as they have been trying to save, and save anything that is worth saving. They can save idle factories and useless railroad coaches; they can save empty office buildings and closed banks; they can save paper evidences of foreign loans; but as a class they can not save anything that is worth saving, above and beyond the amount that is made profitable by the increase of consumer buying. It is for the interests of the well to do – to protect them from the results of their own folly – that we should take from them a sufficient amount of their surplus to enable consumers to consume and business to operate at a profit. This is not “soaking the rich”; it is saving the rich. Incidentally, it is the only way to assure them the serenity and security which they do not have at the present moment.”

      http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/marriner-eccles-on-the-need-to-save-the-rich-from-themselves.html

      (2) From Eccles’ book, “Beckoning Frontiers,” in 1966.

      “As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth, … to provide men (sic) with buying power. … Instead of achieving that kind of distribution, a giant suction pump, had by 1929 – 30 drawn into a few hands an increasing proportion of currently produced wealth … The other fellows could only stay in the game by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped.” –Marrineer Eccles

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriner_Stoddard_Eccles

      (3) “GRAPH: As Union Membership Has Declined, Income Inequality Has Skyrocketed In The United States”

      http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/03/147994/unions-income-inequality/

      (4) “Homeownership rate drops to 63.4%, lowest since 1967”

      http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/28/home-ownership-rates-drop-to-lowest-since-1967.html

      On that same thread you wrote, “Simply put, if I was required to pay a “living wage” for employees, even if that was as low as $15 per hour, I would in all likelihood have to let go of every one of my employees.”

      2. Why won’t you respond to my question about how many employees you have at “Dimples” in Racine?

      • Dan says:

        John, how come the range on the right side of the graph is different from the range on the left side? The “union membership rate” varies between (based on my visual estimate) 28% and 13%, while the “middle class share” ranges between 53% and 46%, less than half the spread of the “union membership rate”. Doesn’t it look a bit like the author adjusted the parameters to force a correlation?

  4. MaseMan says:

    What the “small business owners” ignore on blogs like this is the fact that a meaningful minimum wage increase would put more cash into the hands of local consumers, creating more demand for their services and products. People can’t spend money on things like dining out, sports for their kids, gym memberships, hobbies, or other “frills” when they are living hand to mouth on $10.00/hr or less.

    • Denis Navratil says:

      Maseman, I appreciate that you have something to add to the actual subject. But consider if you would that you are only looking at one side of the equation here. Yes, employees paid more would have more money to spend. But the business would have an equal amount less money to spend. Perhaps they can’t pay down debt, invest in new equipment etc.. Or, if you want an actual person involved, suppose they cancel advertising in order to pay for the wage increases. An advertiser loses an account, some money, and, to use your words, “can’t spend money on things like dining out, sports for their kids, gym memberships, hobbies, or other “frills”’.
      Paying people more money does not by itself create more money, it merely moves it from one to another. Maybe you identify more with the employee and that is fine, but if you really do, you might consider that there will be less of them if you drive up the cost of doing business.

      • John Casper says:

        Denis, you wrote, “But consider if you would that you are only looking at one side of the equation here.”

        1. Isn’t that an endorsement of labor unions? They provide stable and equal labor costs across an industry.

        2. Per your comment above about the “conflict banana,” doesn’t a minimum wage give consumers confidence that they’re not unfairly exploiting some worker some where in the supply chain?

  5. Denis Navratil says:

    John, I will answer questions about my business if two conditions are met.

    1) if your questions are relevant to the subject at hand, and

    2) If I feel like it.

    Neither threshold has been met.

    Does the phrase “none of your business” mean anything to you John?

    And to Zach, I suggest for John’s sake you kindly point out to him that his tangents, biblical queries, conspiratorial ramblings about my identity, and pointless questions about my business etc… are an embarrassment to him and to the progressive members of the BB community.

    • John Casper says:

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are,

      1. You volunteered that you owned a small business.

      Denis Navratil
      September 8, 2015 at 8:24 am
      Duane, I am a small business owner.

      http://bloggingblue.com/2015/09/the-40-hour-work-week-brought-to-you-by-labor-unions/

      In that same thread you used that claim to buttress your arguments.

      “Simply put, if I was required to pay a “living wage” for employees, even if that was as low as $15 per hour, I would in all likelihood have to let go of every one of my employees. ”

      In that same thread, you disclosed knowledge of “Dimple’s” in Racine that only the owners would have.

      “Denis Navratil
      September 8, 2015 at 9:02 pm
      …Denis Navratil
      September 8, 2015 at 9:02 pm
      Not sure what you are finding objectionable or what your point is. I had and have serious concerns about Islam, or at least some of the more fervent adherents who are causing problems worldwide. That said, I have sold a few products over the years that come from predominantly Muslim nations. I don’t ask people what their religion is if they are selling a product that I think customers might want to purchase. Feel free to call the Journal Times for whatever reason of your choosing. I don’t write for them anymore.”

      Did you intentionally write stuff about your handle that you knew wasn’t true, accurate, and complete?

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are, w/r/t “And to Zach, I suggest for John’s sake you kindly point out to him that his tangents, biblical queries,….”

      Read what you wrote about Islam, the Koran, and Mohammed.

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are, w/r/t “….conspiratorial ramblings about my identity, and pointless questions about my business etc… are an embarrassment to him and to the progressive members of the BB community.”

      If the real Denis Navratil contacted you and Nemo to complain, you should immediately disclose that your name is not Denis Navratil. You should immediately disclose that you do not own “Dimple’s” in Racine.

      1. On Tuesday, you had no problem with me contacting the Racine Journal Times about your claims.

      Is that still your position?

      2. When did I ever claim to be a “progressive?”

      “(Federal) Taxes For Revenue Are Obsolete”

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-mosler/taxes-for-revenue-are-obs_b_542134.html

      Aside from @stephaniekelton , who is an economist (and a lot of other economists who support Modern Monetary Theory #MMT), not a politician, what “progressives” or Democrats support that?

    • John Casper says:

      Denis,

      Per what I said earlier, “Back on BB’s 40-hour thread

      http://bloggingblue.com/2015/09/the-40-hour-work-week-brought-to-you-by-labor-unions/

      in response to Steve Carlson’s request for links, you wrote,

      “Where is your link proving that a dramatic increase in the price of labor would not result in business closings? Or better yet, forget the link and use common sense instead. What happens when costs go up? Demand goes down, right? If demand for labor decreases, we have an increase in unemployment.”

      I responded with four links which you have ignored.”

      Where are your links?

  6. nonquixote says:

    Whaaaaa whaaa whaaa cries @ 4. No answers to someone responding and engaging @4 in a discussion, so refuses to participate and plays the victim card once again, applying some indefinable by anyone else, “conditions,” and follows with yet another ad hominem attack on another commentator.

    Get the hook….please. Enough, way more than enough trolling!

    Puts even Walker to shame with deflection and avoidance tactics, hands down.

  7. Sue says:

    I don’t believe you. This is obviously some sort of clever video mashup, although a good one. You’re just trying to make Scott Walker look bad.
    Ha ha, Scott Walker in Wisconsin, tell me another one…

  8. Denis Navratil says:

    Zach, on a handful of occasions I have mentioned that I own a small business. I do so because said ownership at times helps inform my views on economic issues. I have not mentioned the name of my business as it isn’t relevant to the discussion. Some BB commenters have needlessly mentioned the name of my business. I don’t really see the point, but whatever. But I have to alert you to nonquixote’s recent comment wherein he (?) accuses me of illegal business practices, among other falsehoods. I have been in business for over 20 years. Our business enjoys a well earned reputation. I don’t expect you to care about my reputation, so I will appeal to yours. Do you want to run a site that allows commenters to spread libel and slander on your site? I ask for your sake and mine that you delete the entirely unproven accusations of illegal business practices on my part. Thank you.

    • John Casper says:

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are,

      You wrote, “Some BB commenters have needlessly mentioned the name of my business. I don’t really see the point, but whatever.”

      No one could confirm the link of your handle to “Dimple’s” until you did it on Tuesday.

      “Denis Navratil
      September 8, 2015 at 7:09 pm
      Anyone could pretend to be Denis” says John Casper.

      It is not so easy as you claim John. For starters, you have to be devilishly handsome like the “real” (as you call him) Denis Navratil featured in the video. And you must be logical, well read, articulate, sensible, etc… which pretty much eliminates BB commenters from impersonating me, er him. You indeed discovered a real Denis Navratil, business owner in Racine. You even found the correct telephone number. Now all that is left to do is alert the “real” Denis Navratil that someone has been writing newspaper columns, a blog, and participating in online discussions (ok beatings would be more accurate) at Blogging Blue for several years. How do you know that the person in the youtube video is the real Denis Navratil and not the impersonator? Maybe the business owner is impersonating yet another, even more real and as yet undiscovered Denis Navratil.”

      and then you reconfirmed it,

      “Denis Navratil
      September 8, 2015 at 9:02 pm
      Not sure what you are finding objectionable or what your point is. I had and have serious concerns about Islam, or at least some of the more fervent adherents who are causing problems worldwide.

      *****That said, I have sold a few products over the years that come from predominantly Muslim nations.*****

      I don’t ask people what their religion is if they are selling a product that I think customers might want to purchase.

      *****Feel free to call the Journal Times for whatever reason of your choosing. I don’t write for them anymore.”*****

      http://bloggingblue.com/2015/09/the-40-hour-work-week-brought-to-you-by-labor-unions/

      Asterisks are mine.

      Denis, Jim, whoever you are, am I still “free” to call the Journal Times for “whatever reason?”

      You wrote, “But I have to alert you to nonquixote’s recent comment wherein he (?) accuses me of illegal business practices, among other falsehoods. I have been in business for over 20 years. Our business enjoys a well earned reputation. I don’t expect you to care about my reputation, so I will appeal to yours. Do you want to run a site that allows commenters to spread libel and slander on your site? I ask for your sake and mine that you delete the entirely unproven accusations of illegal business practices on my part. Thank you”

      Do I have to recopy what you posted at Blogging Blue in 2012 about Islam, the Koran, and Mohammed? In 2015 you’re not denying any of it. A lot of U.S. citizens would take offense if they read you slandering their religion. Without explanation you apply different interpretations to Christianity, the Bible, and Jesus.

    • nonquixote says:

      More attempted artful dodging again, I see, @ 7. There is a huge difference in asking about child labor, saying that child labor is illegal in the US, and wondering if a business model that uses goods manufactured by child labor (overseas or not) is morally acceptable here and now, and actually claiming that you are engaging in it. So,here you are with blatant lies about me FOR ASKING YOU A QUESTION about child labor, which you have yet to confirm or deny even after having been asked.

      To wit, part of my response and comment on the father of female reporter killed, and guns, speaking that you ignored responding to in any fashion:

      “You brought your chirping concern trolling for children’s innocence to this forum, so answer my prior question about child slave labor here. No need for me to take that private because you now declare that the issue has suddenly become “inconvenient,” for you here.”

      http://bloggingblue.com/2015/09/father-of-slain-journalist-weve-got-to-do-something-about-crazy-people-getting-guns/comment-page-1/#comment-149620

      • Denis Navratil says:

        I believe I have addresses your questions on child labor in the past. But I don’t think you are really looking for answers, rather you are seeking opportunities to insinuate that I am engaging in the practice. In any case, child labor is illegal in the countries from which I directly import goods. I have actually toured the company from which we get the much of our product. I saw many people working, none of whom appeared to be children. I didn’t ask for ID because that would be racist. I also didn’t ask to see the architectural drawings of the building, so it is possible there is a dungeon with children toiling away awaiting the next serving of gruel. Then again, I might have eaten a conflict banana this morning. I am not sure what I could do to satisfy nonquixote concerning my business practices as it is impossible for any person to ensure that all the people involved in bringing products and services to the worldwide market have done so without the use of child labor, slavery, violence, whatever…. It must be gratifying to be as self righteous and clueless as nonquixote.

        • John Casper says:

          Denis,

          You wrote, “Then again, I might have eaten a conflict banana this morning..”

          “The Rich Man and Lazarus”

          “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house—for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”

          (Luke 16:19-31 ESV)

        • nonquixote says:

          OFF TOPIC: Another ad hominem attack, completely uncalled for.

          I know and deal with several certified fair trade importers who can verify numerous levels of compliance to laws and best practices involving living wages and environmental issues, so I am not clueless to what is involved in the import business.

          But I appreciate you addressing your claimed concern for children and admitting that you consider verification an impossible task, so you don’t bother much beyond a cursory glance. Not surprised.

          OnTopic: Walker on wages for WI labor and pie-in-the-sky plans to get better jobs for people with “training,” that will never materialize under his supposed promises, and on the topic of his DNR issuing unenforceable suggestions to industrial manufacturers for limiting pollution discharge making us depend on large corporations for regulating themselves results in us becoming the third world country in many respects.

    • Waukesha Blue says:

      It’s only libel and slander if you can prove that the statements are false. Can you be 100% sure they none (zero) of the products in your inventory are child labor free or slave labor free? If even one… one item is a product of such practices then the libel and slander argument goes out the window. I would never be silly enough to claim that nothing in my possession is child labor or slave labor free. It would be at the least naive. Furthermore, why delete something that you refuse to admit or “own”. Are you trying to suppress ones right to free speech. Matters of opinion don’t make them matters of fact. Lighten up.

      • Denis Navratil says:

        WB says “It’s only libel and slander if you can prove that the statements are false.”

        Nonsense WB. With that standard, I could accuse you of all sorts of illegal behavior. How, for instance, could you prove that you have never driven while intoxicated? It is exceedingly difficult, especially with vague allegations, to prove ones innocence. If someone is sued for libel, they would have to prove that their statements ware true. It is not up to the victim to prove they are false. Wrong again WB. At least your consistent.

        • Waukesha Blue says:

          Denis,
          My personal experience with a lawsuit I filed against my wife’s ex-employer for libel/slander (in the commission of a crime) is the perfect example of how wrong you are. First, we had to produce witnesses willing to verify and testify that the statements were made. Our attorney independently crossed referenced their stories and confirmed that the statements were made and made in front of others.
          Second, one of those witnesses informed us the accusations were actually reported to the police. We verified that and in the process found out that the real criminal had been caught and confessed.
          The accuser denied everything to the employer but was advised by he corporate lawyers not to talk. Turns out she had a personal vendetta against my wife and for some reason she tried to destroy me to bring down my wife. Love the corporate world and that’s why my wife now has her own business. So you see, I (the victim) had to prove the statements were false. The accuser hid behind corporate lawyers who eventually recognized the malice and settled out of court for a substantial amount of money.
          Furthermore, I will use your example to prove you wrong. If you accuse me of DWI in print or verbally and others have read or heard these statements I could file a civil suit. Me, the victim, of your false accusations would have to present a case and prove it. You as the defendant are protected by the Fifth Amendment and wouldn’t even have to testify. I would have to prove your statements false by presenting evidence and witnesses. You on the other hand would deny ever making the statement or would you, how would you, prove the statement true. See, if I know, factually, the statement is false how could you possibly prove it true. Prove someone was drinking and driving three days after the fact. The burden of proof in this situation would lie with me… The victim… The plaintiff.
          However, I do agree the personal attacks, like when you accused me of supporting pedophilia, need to stop. Unless of course we are talking about Scott Walker and then I say it’s open season. Did you know Scott Walker has herpes? I wonder how many Scott Walkers there are in the world. You, if you really are who you say you are, were actually identified by business name, wife’s name, address and phone number. There is know doubt who’s the victim could be but I don’t think the statements would pass the litmus test. They were to generalized and more of a question if I remember right. But again I ask why defend a person or business that you don’t acknowledge and won’t confirm?

          • Denis Navratil says:

            Oops, added an extra letter on my name by accident, putting me in the moderation file. Should not be viewed as an admission of identity confusion, new handle etc… Anyway, I wrote to WB

            WB, a few comments. For starters, you should realize by now that I wasn’t really saying you support pedophilia. That was an example of a straw man argument, meant only to illustrate that straw man arguments are illogical and can be nasty as well. Regarding libel or slander, of course the accuser must prove the offending statement was made. Once that is established, the burden would fall on the accused who might argue the statement was true, taken out of context, whatever. Otherwise, a person could make all sorts of claims, nearly impossible to prove untrue. Prove to me your not a serial rapist, arsonist, murderer. You see, there are all sorts of unsolved crimes out there. Neither you, I, or anyone else could prove we haven’t committed at least some of them. Yet if I claimed publicly that you are a serial rapist, I could and should lose a lawsuit brought by you.

            • nonquixote says:

              Off Topic: I already addressed this same comment above at what is currently 8.B. and no response to me and this is the third time you’ve brought this same off topic yakking to the boards.

              Zach, would you please restore the comment(s) you removed as the auto-numbering in my comments is not referring to the same comments as originally intended and directed.

              Makes my comments appear to be addressed to the wrong places.

              Thanks

            • Waukesha Blue says:

              Is that an apology or admission? Either way, thank you once again for pointing out where the burden of proof lies. I was not wrong!

    • Yeah, I don’t understand the need to delve into every conservative commenter’s personal history, as John has done more than once.

      Let’s try to keep things civil here, because I really REALLY don’t want to have to start overmoderating comments.

  9. You’re on to me Sue. 🙂

  10. I’m going to ask everyone to cool it with the personal attacks/delving into other commenter’s personal history/details. You can attack the ideas someone else espouses all the livelong day, but there’s no need to attack the person.

    Stick to the topic(s) at hand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.