- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 34,078
- Reaction score
- 37,464
- Location
- With Yo Mama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I was.
George Tech fan, right?
I was.
Lets see, Hostess liquidated because it was a profitable company. No it was competition in the market place and the higher cost of 18,000 workers was the reason it closed. As for any golden parachutes the owners are out of a business, don't know what a kind of a parachute that is, when you go out of business sounds like that parachutes had big holes in it.
Maybe you can tell me why unions have been losing membership for decades. Never mind I already know, bad ****ing management.
George Tech fan, right?
It's interesting, isn't it? From the same people who want to control women's bodies! If it weren't for unions women would all be at home, barefoot and pregnant. That, ironically, is where many wrong minded ultra-conservatives would like women to be.
UGA, but I am more of a hardcore NFL fan.
You're pissing on the wrong tree, code. Apparently you are the kind of Conservative who needs to find a reason to be offended. Get a grip on yourself and try to unhissy fit for just a second. If you will notice I did not say ALL Conservatives. I didn't even say Conservatives. So unless you represent wrong minded ultra-conservatives you are not the dog in this fight.
I know and work with many conservatives. Most of them are good people who are normal mainstream folks. Some are extremely conservative socially and fiscally and while their positions don't align with even most conservatives, they are aware of that. They work, as most Americans, to have their views represented more in legislation. Then there is the cabal of ultra-right religionists, whom by the way, I referred to in an earlier post, which you apparently avoided in your haste to become immediately offended.
These mouthy group of malcontents seek to impose their limited world view on the rest of us. I don't like them for doing that. It's fine with me until they try to impose their twisted beliefs on the rest of us via legislation and social engineering. Santorum, Perry and Beck - as I mentioned in a previous post you chose to ignore or missed in your rush to be a victim - people of that ilk and Akin and Bachmann and the people who support them are the conservatives I'm talking about. The conservatives who give conservatism a bad name. These kinds of people, who are small in number, but conservatives none the less are the reason I left the GOP. Until most conservatives can remove these ultra-right crazies from the neck of the GOP, the conservative crazies will continue to suck the life out of conservatism until it is dead.
UGA, but I am more of a hardcore NFL fan.
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061225537 said:It appears his post was an attempt to denigrate your choice of higher education.
This comes from a guy who confuses Auburn with higher education. :roll:
Let's see... Non-union jobs vs no jobs at all.
It's been my experience that something beats nothing every time.
Are there any Hostess Former Bakers who are making more now than when they had jobs?
It's that attitude that CEOs count on to keep wages low.
"At least you have a job."
A job that doesn't pay a living wage isn't that worth having. Those are supposed to be the jobs for learning how to work, developing work ethic, and improving your skills.
Sadly, those are the jobs that adults are still filling, leaving teens and young adults out of the workforce.
Simply put, the longer a graphic designer or computer engineer is working at Whole Foods as a cashier, the worse it is not just for them - but for all of us. The longer people are out of career-oriented work, the lower the wages in those fields go and as wages lower and/or stagnate it cause damage economy wide. Some of this is natural (some industries simply become outdated - being a whaler is not a particularly hot skill anymore); but some of it is manipulated and blame misplaced.
Hostess didn't shut down because of the bakers. Hostess shut down because they failed to see a changing food economy - one that is steering away from processed food, making their products less marketable.
That wasn't the bakers fault. It was the fault of leadership. The bakers simply gave them an out and a scapegoat.
What this shows is that despite the liberal crowing about the Obama victory, republicans gained power at the state level. When a state like Michigan elects a republican governor and a republican legislature and is able to pass this sort of legislation, it tells you republicans should not run from their ideals and principles, but embrace those that have shown to be so successful on a state level. Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Virginia all have republican governors and many have republican controlled legislatures. There is no reason a republican cannot win those states on a national level and take the White House.Michigan GOP pushes right to work; Zorn against | MonroeNews.com
It is incredible this now. I'm not sure the state is ready for this...opinions?
ps. I'm betting Haymarket's head is about to explode about right now...
Great another stomp on unions and workers rights... Great... Moving back in time i see...
I think this man said it best:
Allowing people the right, to not associate with a union, is moving back in time?
This change in law, does not ban unions, it bans forced payment of union dues.
This is flat out wrong! I live in a right to work state and yes it is true you will get more jobs. However, most will be low paying jobs period. One of the main reasons middle class income has not gone up in over 30 years is the fact that some people have been told the lie that Unions are the reason. No it is not! This country was built on Unions. Please look at Texas most minimum wage jobs created, poor schools, and bad healthcare. I know you all have seen our disaster Rick Perry. He and his minions are behind these problems. Michigan just fell into a sink hole right to work. More like right to give corporations the right to do whatever whenever they see fit.
Economists: Right-to-work states have lower-income residents, poor labor relations | Michigan Business | Detroit Free Press | freep.com
Limits free rider problem, a way of ensuring that all workers incur the costs of collective bargaining (e.g., join the union and pay dues) so that everyone is better off, restricts freedom of association by not allowing workers and employers to agree to contracts that include share fees and then also creates the free rider problem, lowers wages and worker health and safety is also endangered, also these kind of laws place limits on the sort of agreements individuals who act collectively can make with their employer.
Bot do deserve because both pay into the union and both are part of the union.Due pay member has it's own free rider problems to.
Those are hardly never addressed.
Example: One worker busts her/his butt, while the other does the absolute minimum.
Both are protected equally by the union, even though one clearly doesn't deserve it.
True but more often than not the only way workers gain concessions is through collective action and more often than not the collective action comes from the union and the union members.If some workers want to agree, then they are free to pay the dues.
Others are free to negotiate their own wages.
Bot do deserve because both pay into the union and both are part of the union.
True but more often than not the only way workers gain concessions is through collective action and more often than not the collective action comes from the union and the union members.
Given that no matter what people will always outpefrom each other and often different tasks even inside of union require different amounts of work. No matter what (if i understand your example) is that some people are lazy that is part of any workplace some workers are more lazy than others. However saying that they still pay into the union and are part of the union.Then you're making contradictory examples here.
One in my example, is a free rider, while the other is not.
Paying the same dues, while performing less work, means that someone else is doing more for your lack of work.
Its fair. They all benefit from the unions concessions and the unions benefits.They can still form unions, it just may not be with all workers.
It's not fair, to unionize a whole work force, when only some want to be a part of it.
Given that no matter what people will always outpefrom each other and often different tasks even inside of union require different amounts of work. No matter what (if i understand your example) is that some people are lazy that is part of any workplace some workers are more lazy than others. However saying that they still pay into the union and are part of the union.
Its fair. They all benefit from the unions concessions and the unions benefits.
Limits free rider problem, a way of ensuring that all workers incur the costs of collective bargaining (e.g., join the union and pay dues) so that everyone is better off, restricts freedom of association by not allowing workers and employers to agree to contracts that include share fees and then also creates the free rider problem, lowers wages and worker health and safety is also endangered, also these kind of laws place limits on the sort of agreements individuals who act collectively can make with their employer.
Not really. Who is continuing, even after the election, to attempt to ramrod female reproduction control down the throats of America? Even though the majority of Americans support pro-choice. Even though 50 percent of Catholics supported Obama. Who voted against ratification of a U.N. treaty that calls upon countries to ensure disabled citizens receive the same rights and freedoms as their able-bodied peers? (Because, they said, in part that it would support abortion!) The same dickwits that cannot understand that America doesn't accept the reactionary ideals of the Tea Party, Rick Santorum, Glenn Beck, Rick Perry and their ilk.
These people, this small cabal of ultra-right religionists, who are apparently hell-bent on social engineering an entire nation to conform with their twisted world view, who are intolerant and narrow minded, who are unwilling to recognize views and the wishes of the majority of citizens in this representative democracy, are doing all they possibly can to take the nation backwards. There intentions are evident in all that they say and do. It is thus no surprise to me that these same people who would deny equal rights to women and to people who are disabled would also deny rights to American workers.
Talking points? Not ****ing likely. Anyone on this board who is familiar with my posts knows that I truly have no political affiliation other than commonsense and equality. More people here seem to be leaning toward commonsense. Some continue to be predictable partisan hacks, partisan hacks who have displayed time and time and time again that they are unable and unwilling to think for themselves.