What do you think of this idea? If you don't like it, what do you propose? If you do like it, tell us why.

Why aren't those companies putting up some money to help train the workers they need? Harley, SCJ and others gave money to UWP to train the computer workers they needed. Worked great. Maybe Cat needs to partner with tech schools to get the worker they need. Maybe the tech schools need to stop funding programs that don't have any jobs out there. Just some ideas.

Interesting. Companies decry the lack of skilled workers. And they seem to expect the government (the one they don't want to support with taxes) should provide the training. I think they should provide their own training programs...perhaps in partnership with GTC or MATC.

@Heather & @melissa - you both make really good points. Companies need workers but get out of paying state income taxes through various means which brings down state revenue resulting in cuts to the very schools needed to provide a trained workforce. Funny how that all works out.

But the GOP will not make the corps pay the taxes they should, so the legislators are forced to get things done through other avenues. Certainly better than doing nothing at all. How many choices are really left? And I have to wonder if those funds wouldn't have been cut even without a deficit...even without their tax contributions.

How about this: raise taxes on everyone since we all benefit from businesses succeeding. That way everyone has skin in the game. I doubt that liberals would go for that though. I am against ANY new taxes for anyone. What liberals forget is that when taxes are imposed on a business, the consumer pays for it with increased cost for that item. The training that these potential workers need can be found in the education system. Math, science, industrial arts (for lack of a better term) on the high school level are the areas that students, parents and teachers need to focus on.

Much of the cut 34 million will be recouped by large tech school levy increases on the tax bills, rumored to be in the 8-10% range. These new tax the rich funds would be in addition to the tax increases that the tech schools already have planned. I'm not saying I am for or against, just pointing out that the "cut" funds are already being restored by the taxpayers.

How many of the 2,900 people that will be affected by this tax increase are already paying their fair share in that they are unable to qualify for some of the special interest loopholes that some of the others may be qualifying for? In other words, how fair would this so-called fair-share tax increase actually be in reality? Without knowing and divulging the specifics, all Mason and Larson are doing here is playing class warfare - plain and simple.

Besides, a mere tax increase alone is just a temporary band-aide measure. If they are serious about 'fairness,' as they allegedly claim to be, then PUT UP OR SHUT UP ALREADY!!! Fix the entire tax code and make it EQUALLY applicable to EVERYONE, without any kind of qualifiers, loop-holes, deductions, or special interest work arounds. Then uniformly adjust the rates for everyone as the elected government may require.

Everyone pays because everyone gets to play - it's that simple. But do it equally. After all, isn't one of the foundations of our nation the principle that the government should treat everyone EQUALLY???

I'm against any tax that expressly singles out people just because of their financial success, just as I'm against any qualifiers, deductions, or loopholes that allow select people to pay little or nothing at all.

Who would honestly be against this and why? So why don’t they just do it already???

@Heather @JRH - I basically agree too. The tax code needs a complete start over. While I am not so sure about a complete flat tax...there is no need or reason for complicated structures, loopholes and opportunity for scams. But while corps and lobbyists rule the roost...that will never change.

Ugh. Yet another attempt to blatantly steal money from us wealthy people who have worked hard to achieve our success. I'm not a huge corporation that uses loopholes to avoid taxes. I pay more than anyone because I do things the right way. Almost half of my incomes goes towards taxes. Enough is enough. Raising taxes will just cause people like me to start finding the loopholes...

Dickie: If, indeed, you earn the $1,000,000 per year this proposal targets, and if, indeed, you are taxed at the 50% rate you specify, then this proposal would take an additional $10,000 from you. Gee, I hope you can get by on $490,000 after taxes!

@Pete has a valid point though. The reason the wealthy pay such a large portion of all taxes is because they actually have money.

Tax breaks for corporations and wealthy shift the tax burden to to therapidly disappearing middle class. And they shop around for tax breaks and handouts of various forms, such as Walkers proposals to give breaks on energy costs to large businesses. All this does is shift their energy costs to the middle class. This, along with wage concessions, is robbing the middle class from its ability to drive a consumer driven economy.

Any\d you wonder why our gov't is broke and economy is struggling???

If you do indeed own a business and employ others to make a cool $1 million/year, then you need to pay your fair share. Who pays for the roads, rail, air, infrastructure that your company uses? Who provides the skilled work force that you profit from? Who provides the societal security of police, fire, emergency medical, education, international security, etc?

Those that do well in America should be proud to do right by America. We are not talking about tax increases of 70%, 50%, or even 30% of your $500K post tax income. So many wrap yourself in the flag conservatives celebrate those that make the ultimate sacrifice in places like Iraq (which we should celebrate). Yet, you are fretting over making a $10,000 sacrifice for the privilege of living in this great country? Priorities...

@M.S.: So, if one makes $1 million then a 50% tax is ok. What about someone that makes $500k, then 50% is also ok? What about someone that makes $250k, then 50% is ok? How about someone that makes $100k, 50% is ok? What is the basis that you use to determine how much wealth is too much for one to keep, before they pony up "their fair share"? Of course, our school system is properly managed with absolutely no waste in the process and they cannot find any savings anywhere?

About every other day there is a report proving that training is EXACTLY what we need.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/the-jobs-paradox-131104548.html

Somehow this bills purpose got a bit distorted… there is a need to expand high demand programs in the tech colleges of WI. There are long waits to get into these programs, you cannot petition until you get prereq.s done and once you petition you may have to wait 2 extra years or more to even start just because of the backlog of other students waiting ahead of you. The schools got budgets cut so now expanding some of these high demand programs is not possible. There is a need to allow more people in many of these programs. I had to wait 3 years to get in my program because there were that many people ahead of me waiting to get in. I lost my job because policies like NAFTA put the company I worked for out of business. The workers qualified for TRA trade readjustment training because of this. Problem was you couldn't utilize it for most programs because the 2 year wait disqualified them from being an acceptable approved program to retrain in. TRA only allows programs you can complete in 2 yr max and must be full time student.

cont.... Many other programs don't even allow people to get on the wait list because there are 400+ waiting already. It's disheartening to know that you ca not get the training you need after losing your job because the schools cannot accommodate you due to the enormous numbers of other dislocated workers trying to do the same and their limited budgets. Expanding high demand programs was the main focus of this bill... the companies not having skilled workers was a small part of it but I think this point got driven harder than the need of the dislocated worker who has to wait to even get in a training program. The extra funding would be used to hire more teachers and expand high demand programs. these are programs that provide higher wage jobs than most. it's a shame the issue was distorted to be all about companies needing workers with the rt training and wanting the state to pay to train them... not the purpose

If Mason and Larson are so concerned about funding tech schools, why don't they focus on rooting out decades of waste, fraud and abuse out of those organizations, and keep their hands out of other peoples pockets? Oh, yeah, that's because the Republicans would be the ones concerned with real reform and change, thanks to Reps Kerkman, Vos and others.