Page 46 of 66 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 660

Thread: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

  1. #451
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Sig View Post
    With the considerably violent and unjustly repressive opposition which organized labor endured from the beginning of the labor movement in the mid 19th century and far into the 20th century, continuing to this very day in the second decade of the 21st century (though in much more politically sophisticated form), it should be of no surprise to see union members exert pressure upon their co-workers to sign up. Their very livelihoods depend upon maintaining a collective front in order to maintain a union wage.

    I thought so, you have to go back 80 years or more to justify the union with conditions that don't even resemble what they were in a time that made unions a necessity. Stirkes anymore are rarely, if ever for reasons that precipitated the formation of unions in their inception. They now are for ever increasing pay, and benefits that are unsustainable, and they know it, but in their greed demand them anyway regardless of how it will effect the long term longevity of the company they work for.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #452
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Whipsnade View Post
    So whats your point?From your link.

    <"Traditional workers really feel these [new] people have gotten a raw deal," she says, "but entry-level workers are looking at it differently, figuring, 'If I stick around long enough, I'll get the wage you got.' They understand the bargain.">


    <"These are still good jobs. They still pay benefits," Schwartz says. "The health care is extremely good. ... We're talking about an industry that's competing very hard in a global marketplace, where they tend to have a labor-cost advantage. This is one way of trying to overcome it without damaging anybody who's already there.">

    When the economy kicks in (when the obstructionism in the house gets kicked to the side of the road) they will get brought back up to scale.Why the hatred for working folk trying to help bring work and wages back to the home county?

    Hahahaha, obstructionism in the house....get real man. This is the union having to make concessions because they were strangling the company. The longer time union auto worker gets on average $79 wage, plus benefits per hour. That is insane. And these jokers have the gall to demand more and more, then threaten violence if they don't get it....

    Now, don't get me wrong, there is a place for unions, but I think they have to change their model of operation. If they are as great as they think they are then more people would want to join them.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  3. #453
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    No, I have never suggested that they were not impossible. It was you who has repeatedly stated my proposal was ‘impossible’ all the way to 'fantasyland'. I have not reversed myself yet, which is your duty to attempt. It was my (and has been) assertion that individuals can (and commonly do) negotiate their individual employment compensation package. This should be overly obvious as currently the union maintains merely +/-7% of the total workforce. How do you suppose the employment compensation package for the other +/-93% are secured? Further it was my assertion that an individual maintaining employment in a union shop can secure a better employment compensation package than the union does (CAN not DOES or WILL). You have stated that this would be impossible and impractical but the current arrangement in +/-93% of the workforce proves otherwise…where am I wrong?
    "How do you suppose the employment compensation package for the other +/-93% are secured?"

    I assure you that it is not secured through collective bargaining, at least not directly. It is, however, secured by the existential threat of collective bargaining, which a great many employers try their very best to avoid by offering various benefits packages in order to placate their employees so they do not organize. Of course, if there were no unions, there would be very little existential threat of collective bargaining and these very same employers would not even bother to offer benefits packages to their employees, let alone pay them anything close to a middle class wage. Instead, they would exploit the pool of desperately unemployed workers and pay them just enough to keep them from walking off the job, or dropping dead on the line from malnutrition and lack of health care.

    I am not going to keep knocking down your same flimsy argument, over and over again. You may be obtuse. I am not. Find something useful to revive your failed argument, such as the example requested earlier by me. Otherwise, have the grace to admit that you are wrong, to admit that you do not know what you are talking about, and to get lost.

    Once again, if you would like to take this discussion to the basement, that would be fine by me.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  4. #454
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Hahahaha, obstructionism in the house....get real man. This is the union having to make concessions because they were strangling the company. The longer time union auto worker gets on average $79 wage, plus benefits per hour. That is insane. And these jokers have the gall to demand more and more, then threaten violence if they don't get it....

    Now, don't get me wrong, there is a place for unions, but I think they have to change their model of operation. If they are as great as they think they are then more people would want to join them.
    Evidently you don’t know the meaning of a union(a number of persons,states,etc.,joined or associated together for some common purpose: student union; credit union.)The UAW, like most unions of the 21,st century are Represented by elected leaders and have a vote on who/what they do in their work places.Do you think that the country woulda been better off if GM/Chrysler would have folded?
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  5. #455
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Sig View Post
    I assure you that it is not secured through collective bargaining, at least not directly. It is, however, secured by the existential threat of collective bargaining, which a great many employers try their very best to avoid by offering various benefits packages in order to placate their employees so they do not organize…

    I am not going to keep knocking down your same flimsy argument, over and over again.
    Again you have failed to present any contrarily cogent argument and yet claim to have been ‘knocking down your same flimsy argument’. I am understanding this time your supposition is that ‘it is not secured through collective bargaining’. Well no sh*t considering my argument is based on an individual negotiating his benefits agreement. I also understand you profess it is ‘secured by the existential threat of collective bargaining’. This may be true since the original supposition was based on an individual negotiating in a ‘union shop’ environment. It has been my belief that said individual would/could negotiate a better benefits package than the union and your ‘existential threat’ assertion supports this belief somewhat. Thanks for that!

    Once again, if you would like to take this discussion to the basement, that would be fine by me.
    What is your obsession with taking this to the basement? I predict once there you will go on a vile derogatory tirade that will be neither productive nor pleasant. I will refrain from that but if you wish to go to the basement do so now…and knock yourself out!
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  6. #456
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Whipsnade View Post
    Evidently you don’t know the meaning of a union(a number of persons,states,etc.,joined or associated together for some common purpose: student union; credit union.)The UAW, like most unions of the 21,st century are Represented by elected leaders and have a vote on who/what they do in their work places.Do you think that the country woulda been better off if GM/Chrysler would have folded?
    Insulting me will not get you far friend. There are indeed many different types of unions, and your trying to muddy the water by confusing labor unions, with other types of unions like credit unions is laughable.

    do I think that we would have been better off? I don't own a crystal ball, but I will say this, not bailing out GM/Chrysler did not help them much as they went into bankruptcy anyway. But, they wouldn't have gone under, they would have restructured, just like they ultimately did anyway, and come out stronger. However, instead of screwing the shareholders to benefit the unions like Obama did, they would have come out stronger without the political payback promised them by Obama for their support...Corruption at its finest....
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  7. #457
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    I thought so, you have to go back 80 years or more to justify the union with conditions that don't even resemble what they were in a time that made unions a necessity. Stirkes anymore are rarely, if ever for reasons that precipitated the formation of unions in their inception. They now are for ever increasing pay, and benefits that are unsustainable, and they know it, but in their greed demand them anyway regardless of how it will effect the long term longevity of the company they work for.
    WRONG.

    I don't even have to go back a single day to justify the necessity of labor unions. The fact of the matter is that today, and tomorrow, and next week, there are and will be millions of workers in America, and all around the world, who are being grossly exploited by their employers by not being paid a living wage, by having to work in unsafe conditions, by being exposed to unconscionable abuse by their supervisors, etc..

    You talk about greed as if it is something peculiar to the union worker. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of union workers in America earn nothing more than a middle class wage. If you doubt me, then I challenge you to present evidence to the contrary.

    The greed to which you are referring is attributable to the real estate moguls who set the price for the middle class housing in which the union workers reside, and the health care providers who set the price for the health insurance which the union worker needs in order to maintain his physical existence in the world, as well as his job and the health of his family.

    Henceforth, be careful of whom you accuse of being greedy. Maintaining a middle class lifestyle does not make one greedy. It only makes one middle class. In other words, it only makes one desirous of maintaining a modest standard of living.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  8. #458
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Again you have failed to present any contrarily cogent argument and yet claim to have been ‘knocking down your same flimsy argument’. I am understanding this time your supposition is that ‘it is not secured through collective bargaining’. Well no sh*t considering my argument is based on an individual negotiating his benefits agreement. I also understand you profess it is ‘secured by the existential threat of collective bargaining’. This may be true since the original supposition was based on an individual negotiating in a ‘union shop’ environment. It has been my belief that said individual would/could negotiate a better benefits package than the union and your ‘existential threat’ assertion supports this belief somewhat. Thanks for that!



    What is your obsession with taking this to the basement? I predict once there you will go on a vile derogatory tirade that will be neither productive nor pleasant. I will refrain from that but if you wish to go to the basement do so now…and knock yourself out!
    this is an interesting take.

    <It has been my belief that said individual would/could negotiate a better benefits package than the union and your ‘existential threat’ assertion supports this belief somewhat>
    Care to get me up to speed on your interpretation on that brief sentence and spare me from rooting thru the whole thread. Would that include negotiations for whole industries, such as national agreements that represent, maybe, several hundred shops?
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  9. #459
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by Whipsnade View Post
    Care to get me up to speed on your interpretation on that brief sentence and spare me from rooting thru the whole thread. Would that include negotiations for whole industries, such as national agreements that represent, maybe, several hundred shops?
    Sure:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Your point is based on the a presumption that the 'scab' cannot get a better deal than the union for HIS individual compensation. Consider if the 'scab' did individually negotiate a better compensation package AND through fair negotiation discovery the union finds out the 'scab's' package then moves their goal to his should the 'scab' then receive the negotiation fee the union would have justified?
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  10. #460
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

    Re: Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Insulting me will not get you far friend. There are indeed many different types of unions, and your trying to muddy the water by confusing labor unions, with other types of unions like credit unions is laughable.

    do I think that we would have been better off? I don't own a crystal ball, but I will say this, not bailing out GM/Chrysler did not help them much as they went into bankruptcy anyway. But, they wouldn't have gone under, they would have restructured, just like they ultimately did anyway, and come out stronger. However, instead of screwing the shareholders to benefit the unions like Obama did, they would have come out stronger without the political payback promised them by Obama for their support...Corruption at its finest....
    Didn’t mean it as an insult,just showing you the definition of the word union.(what follows is an insult).I assumed that you had the intelligence of an omega. I was wrong.


    Now for the rest of your fail. You say that you don’t have a crystal ball when answering “Do you think that the country woulda been better off if GM/Chrysler would have folded? “but somehow the crystal ball miraculously appears in the next sentence, when you say “ they would have restructured “.


    That begs the question.

    Where would the $64 billion come from?As an aside ,do you know which of the big three that owes the Gov money now?CLUE. its not GM or Chrysler that owes$5.9 billion it borrowed in June 2009. Another CLUE. This company didn't take a bail out.
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

Page 46 of 66 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •