Discussion: All Things Union

I'll have to look, but the news cited other polls last night that were opposite....so who knows. Also, it depends what part of the country was polled....of course a state that is not "Right To Work" is going to poll in favor to anything unions....


I watched a lot of good interviews last night.... the legislation in question does not touch private unions...not even mentioned.

Also, there are 25 states that are "Right To Work" and they are doing just fine....there are many states that do not allow Public Service workers to strike, and they are doing just fine as well....

When you have been on a drug for as long as these people have, it is hard to just cut it off.....
 
Last edited:
Ok, now that's weird.....I had not read that article...lol
 
what about tech companies...no unions there and they usually have the highest standards

Google, Apple, Microsoft?
 
BlackLantern said:
what about tech companies...no unions there and they usually have the highest standards

Google, Apple, Microsoft?
Click to expand...

The tech sector doesn't have unions because it doesn't need them. In tech, there's a constant war for talent, which is why they're always innovating and coming out with breakthroughs. The tech sector knows how to take care of workers, because they've figured out that human capital is the last source of competitive advantage in today's business world.

Compare to the major unionized occupations. U.S. autos. Newspapers. Public service. Hollywood, even. People are treated as just space-filling meat, there's little innovation, good ideas from individuals get killed before they even see the light of day. No growth, no movement.

It's a viscious cycle though: management sees workers as meat instead of talent, so workers organize to gain advantages that are based on tenure rather than ability, which reinforces the management view, and so on. I take the view that if a business unionizes, then the owner/manager's the one who effed up.
 
I've avoided this thread as it seems so inherently ideological. Much like how Thatcher destroyed the unions--and by extension the entire coal mining industry--in Britain, this is less a matter of fiscal stability as an ideological anti-union purge. You either agree with it or you don't. I personally think it is abhorrent that Scott Walker is willing to tear his state apart over hatred of unions. If it is a fiscal issue...he has already (rightfully) won the cuts he has proposed and prevented teacher layoffs. But if in return all he wants to do is for all public workers to give away their ability to sit at the table....then this is nothing more than right-wing ********.

....Anyway. I finally entered this thread to post this:

BLOGGER PRETENDING TO BE DAVID KOCH GETS WALKER TO ADMIT SLEW OF HONEST, TROUBLING THINGS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-berney/walker-koch_b_827129.html

Now, HuffPo makes a big deal out what is just political gamesmanship (trying to make a big deal out of wanting to cut missing Dems's pay) and this does come from an ethically questionable practice (crank calling a politician and recording the results)....

But this is pretty revelatory. He admits/agree:

1) This is about breaking unions around the country and says he thinks Ohio and Florida will follow him. Possibly Michigan, if they get enough "support" (he thinks he's talking to a billionaire). When asked if he sees himself as the "first dominio," he says "Yes."

2) Walker considers billionaire special interests to be confidants on public policy by telling him all of his secret strategies for the Senate Democrats and thinks it would be "Outstanding" to have a "good time" with David Koch when he comes to Wisconsin. This highlights the horrifying connection between big monied, organized special interests and politicians.

3) Walker planned to get the Democrats back in the state while having the state legislature in recess, but to somehow quietly have the Senate Republicans pass the bill while Walker is meeting with Democrats. And people claimed the Democrats were "sneaky" in passing Health care reform?!

This stuff is pretty shocking.
 
Last edited:
it is a tipping point...the union model today is obsolete and corrupt...I am not saying there isn't a place for unions BUT its current incarnation is broken
 
chaseter said:
Perry probably took some cash, he is a snake and I have no idea why people elected him back to the office. I have never read where all the funds went to so you may be right. All I remember him is saying that he will not accept any bailout funds over and over again in interviews so I assumed.

Business propaganda? Is Forbes somehow in cahoots with Texas? I am not saying Texas is the prime example of how to run a state but we are no where near as far deep as California and New York are. They are perfect examples of how not to run a state. Not to mention how big of a state TX is with only 20 something million people in it. It is going to cost more on average per person to maintain this state than it does for someone who lives in Rhode Island. The economy hurt everyone, but New York and California were having budget woes before the collapse.
Click to expand...

Lots of politicians say they won't accept stimulus funds. Sarah Palin and Mark Sanford (remember him, libertarian favorite pre-Appalachain trail?) also made a big show of not taking any...and then they did after their state legislatures pointed out how stupid that was. The reason states weren't making the tough choices and crunches in the worst of the recession budgets of 2009 and 2010 was because of the stimulus. What we're seeing now is how states handle it without the stimulus. Some are not the most impressive.
 
we're getting a tax raise here in CT, I don't like it, but all other avenues have been exhaused at this point
 
DACrowe said:
I've avoided this thread as it seems so inherently ideological. Much like how Thatcher destroyed the unions--and by extension the entire coal mining industry--in Britain, this is less a matter of fiscal stability as an ideological anti-union purge. You either agree with it or you don't. I personally think it is abhorrent that Scott Walker is willing to tear his state apart over hatred of unions. If it is a fiscal issue...he has already (rightfully) won the cuts he has proposed and prevented teacher layoffs. But if in return all he wants to do is for all public workers to give away their ability to sit at the table....then this is nothing more than right-wing ********.

....Anyway. I finally entered this thread to post this:

BLOGGER PRETENDING TO BE DAVID KOCH GETS WALKER TO ADMIT SLEW OF HONEST, TROUBLING THINGS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-berney/walker-koch_b_827129.html

Now, HuffPo makes a big deal out what is just political gamesmanship (trying to make a big deal out of wanting to cut missing Dems's pay) and this does come from an ethically questionable practice (crank calling a politician and recording the results)....
Click to expand...

*jaw drops*

I just read the details. It is kind of shocking how candid he is there.
 
I still don't understand why people get so upset when corporations buy politicians to lobby for something that they want but when unions do it everything is fine. Unions use dues to campaign for politicians who they then make deals with once they are in office. That is the highest level of legal corruption in this country. That is collusion.
 
The wolf or the wolf in sheep's clothing is what this amounts too.
 
I think you guys are pointing out the fundamental flaw of modern unions. They've simply become political parties that force people to join and give money (or not accept a certain job). They have their own objectives and goals now-a-days that are less about protecting their members and more about ensuring the power of their high ups. I think we need to go back to localized unions and break up the national entities.
 
and what about this blogger who impersonated David Koch? is there some sort of ethical thing there...or is it ok because people don't like David Koch?
 
Marx said:
UPDATE: RICK SANTORUM COMPARES WISCONSIN PROTESTORS TO DRUG ADDICTS
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ompares-wisconsin-protesters-to-drug-addicts/
Click to expand...

Kel said:
Ok, now that's weird.....I had not read that article...lol
Click to expand...

Yeah, Santorum is a weird, weird guy. When his fourth child was stillborn, instead of sending it to a funeral home, he brought it to his house where he and his wife as well his own children proceded to (by his own admission) "cuddled it, kissed it, hugged it, sang it lullabys, took pictures with it."

He then apparently buried it in the family's yard. I mean....whatever you need to do to grieve....but its still very strange, especially to expose your young children to that.
 
Sadly, it really happened. Like I said, Santorum is a weird guy. And he's running for president. Though I think he is only doing it in the hopes that if someone like Romney or Pawlenty wins, he'll get the national attention to warrant VP consideration as he'd make an idealogical balance for their ticket.

That said, if Santorum is on any ticket I will have no choice but to vote Obama again.
 
BlackLantern said:
it is a tipping point...the union model today is obsolete and corrupt...I am not saying there isn't a place for unions BUT its current incarnation is broken
Click to expand...

So is the greedy Rich who have been in power since the industrial revolution..the system needs a purge...
 
Last edited:
Matt said:
I think you guys are pointing out the fundamental flaw of modern unions. They've simply become political parties that force people to join and give money (or not accept a certain job). They have their own objectives and goals now-a-days that are less about protecting their members and more about ensuring the power of their high ups. I think we need to go back to localized unions and break up the national entities.
Click to expand...

The fundamental flaw is allowing them to use member dues to fund political campaigns to get their guy elected to then turn around and make deals with them. People point out how much Haliburton gave to Bush's campaign but nobody cares about how much the UAW, NEA, SEIU, etc gave to Obama. I bet if you look back locally to Wisconsin, I imagine WEAC gave all they could to Jim Doyle and then turned around and made deals with him. This isn't only unions, corporations do it also but nobody seems to care about unions doing it...that is until now it seems.

Then again I think we need campaign finance reform anyways and that certainly would dull the teeth on a lot of these special interest groups.
 
chaseter said:
The fundamental flaw is allowing them to use member dues to fund political campaigns to get their guy elected to then turn around and make deals with them. People point out how much Haliburton gave to Bush's campaign but nobody cares about how much the UAW, NEA, SEIU, etc gave to Obama. I bet if you look back locally to Wisconsin, I imagine WEAC gave all they could to Jim Doyle and then turned around and made deals with him. This isn't only unions, corporations do it also but nobody seems to care about unions doing it...that is until now it seems.

Then again I think we need campaign finance reform anyways and that certainly would dull the teeth on a lot of these special interest groups.
Click to expand...

Unions give money to both sides. If they allow corporations to do that, I don't see why a union can't.
 
Unions give money to both sides? Rofl. Unions are the strong arm of the DNC. It is wrong when corporations buy politicians and it is wrong when unions do it too.
 
dnno1 said:
Unions give money to both sides. If they allow corporations to do that, I don't see why a union can't.
Click to expand...

The problem I have with it is this......In many states, you are FORCED to pay Union dues, be a part of a Union, etc.....and if the said Union you are forced to be a part of to do your job gives money to a candidate you disapprove of....there is not a damn thing you can do. THAT IS THE PROBLEM, IMO.

I can assure you, the Teacher's Union in Wisconsin DID NOT give money to the Brown campaign....lmao...

Nor did the Teacher's Union in Ohio give money to Kasich's campaign....

BUT, if I were a teacher in those states, I would be a member of a union that gave money to a campaign I did not agree with, and there would be nothing I could do about it. THAT IS NOT RIGHT....and it doesn't matter if the money is given to a Democrat or a Republican....if your dues are being used in a campaign, and you have NO SAY, as to what campaign it goes to, that is not right, and there is no way to explain it where it is.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

StorminNorman
San Francisco At It Again
6 7 8
Replies
177
Views
14K
hippie_hunter
hippie_hunter

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 2,282 (members: 15, guests: 2,267)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,272
Messages
22,077,992
Members
45,878
Latest member
Remembrance1988

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"