View Poll Results: Last two years beginning of a downward slide for Public Sector Unions?

Voters
73. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, their power has waxed and now it shall wane.

    44 60.27%
  • Unions will respond and their power will grow.

    14 19.18%
  • It depends on November.

    15 20.55%
Page 91 of 124 FirstFirst ... 41818990919293101 ... LastLast
Results 901 to 910 of 1237

Thread: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

  1. #901
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Let's see how much profit he makes from his property without some else's labor.
    Lets see if you notice they were already paid for their labor and part of a different transaction.

  2. #902
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:50 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,084

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    I'll bring up the origin of nonsense if I feel like doing it.
    ABSOLUTELY!!!! As is well evidenced by countless posts filled with nonsense you have made in thread after thread after thread.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  3. #903
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    They can't strike? You'd better tell the Chicago Teachers Union that. Apparently they didn't get the memo. In reality, that's a state-by-state question.
    Yes it is a state-by-state question and I very specifically stated in my very first post in our little discussion that they couldn't take over the government HERE. I repeated that same word "HERE" many times. If you weren't reading correctly that's not my problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Not that it really matters, when strike isn't allowed, [... blah, blah, blah - on and on about BS unrelated to what I originally posted ...]
    And none of the rest makes a damn bit of difference.


    It all comes down to local laws so your blanket statements about how unions can "take over government" is just crap to scare people. Unions can only do what local laws allow them to do. Demanding they be dismantled because people don't like the local laws governing them is just ignorance and/or stupidity.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  4. #904
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    You're just thinking about this at a much more generalized level than what I'm talking about. Of course people should get paid for stuff they sell.

    Maybe an example of the kind of rules I'm talking about would help. I worked at a number of start up and mid sized tech companies. In those situations generally it is more in the interests of the employees for the business to release realistic revenue numbers and grow steadily based on revenues, and generally it is more in the interests of the investors to produce spectacular sounding revenue figures to attract investors, shoot the value of the company up, sell it off, and then leave it to come collapsing back down once they're out with a flurry of firings and maybe a bankruptcy. Certainly not all investors want that and that isn't applicable in all companies, but it certainly is a situation that arises with some frequency. So, take just one very small rule that we as a society have to set- how are revenue numbers determined. There are lots of options. You could require that each department head signs off on a number for their department, you could require outside auditing companies to produce the numbers, you can allow them to count revenues for sales that haven't been delivered yet or not, you can have the investors elect people to come up with the numbers, you can allow them to count annual revenue streams in whatever quarter they want or you can make them even it out across the whole year, etc. Each of those choices either favors investors or workers in some way.

    There are literally tens of thousands of rules like that that we as a society have set up.

    My contention is that right now they are very imbalanced to favor investors and to disfavor employees. IMO that is why our income gap is exploding like it is.
    I understand better now. When you say "we as a society", do you mean the government? The federal government? You want the federal government to establish tens of thousands of rules controlling the behavior of businessmen?

  5. #905
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Last Seen
    07-07-16 @ 08:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    2,854

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I have read his findings and there is no doubt that his data is solid and his conclusions are firm and true. After adjusting for cost of living, right to work states have workers earning $1,500 LESS than workers in unionized states. And their benefits are far less as well.
    No, he is adjusting for all sorts of factors, not just cost of living. He says so himself. I am just adjusting for cost of living, I am not adjusting for how many blacks there are in each state.

    I do not know you. But allow me to get this straight. This man is a well respected professional who travels around then nation informing people about right to work. But you label him as a fraud and say that is how you become famous.
    That is how they all become famous. He is probably as well respected as Paul Krugman. I looked through his research, and I saw fraud. He stated there was no correlation with growth, when his data show there is an correlation. And he said there were no more manufacturing losses, and only show about 15 states. He is only well respected by the liberal crowd who also think Paul Krugman is well respected.

    Why should I take your word over his? Your analysis clearly does not account for the variables and differences that these major studies allowed for
    Why should it? I only ajusted for one factor, cost of living. My aim was never to see if right to work is better or not. My aim was to see which states are richer. Just because you have a lot of hispanics and blacks, do not mean your state is richer.

    And you can not deny it. Right to work states are richer then forced unionism states.

  6. #906
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,804

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    You totally miss the point that traveled at least a mile above your head.

    Far too many right wing warriors like to throw out the name of Marx like a parent trying to scare a four year old with tales of the Boogeyman. So when that happens, I feel it is the duty of thinking people to gently tweak the invoker of Marx a bit. Its a gentle reminder to leave the frankenstein monster on the lab table as he is not fooling anybody.
    1) The fact is-many of your comments have a basis in Marxist philosophies

    2) You have never made a post that would go over my head-or that of Henrin or most of the conservative posters on this board. You often confuse disagreement or non-acceptance with a failure to comprehend.

    3) I find it amusing you consider marx a frankenstein monster. I thought he was more like an attack dog for your side

  7. #907
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    I understand better now. When you say "we as a society", do you mean the government? The federal government?
    No, not necessarily. Certainly the federal government is the biggest player in setting those rules, but depending on how you look at it, they are really set by a much broader slice of society. The Nasdaq sets up rules like that for stocks to be reported there. We have certain conventions that companies just follow because that's how it has always been done. Employees expect some things and not others. Employers enact their own policies, etc. The rules of the game are vast and complicated network of legal rules, private organization rules, conventions, traditions, expectations, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    You want the federal government to establish tens of thousands of rules controlling the behavior of businessmen?
    No, the federal government already has tens of thousands of rules controlling the behavior of businessmen. I want them to be less skewed to favor owners over workers.

    To be clear though, there isn't really a "don't make a rule" option in most these cases. For example, take the question of how corporations report expenditures on capital equipment. Right now the rule is that you have to record the cost spread across the years it is likely to be used. That is that way because otherwise you could just buy the number of widgets you'll sell in 5 years in year 1 and count it all in year 1. It would look terrible for you year 1, but then years 2-5 you would look radically more profitable than you are. So, the federal government says everybody needs to count it across all 5 of those years. If nobody made the rule, even the stock exchanges, then each company would just do it differently. In effect, the "rule" would be "each company can count expenses however they like". That wouldn't be good for anybody because investors couldn't put any weight on the numbers and companies couldn't signal investors that they were actually, really, doing well because there would be tons of companies faking it. So then auditing agencies or stock exchanges would come up with rules, but they would differ, so at least for non-professional investors, it would be a pretty useless system. You can say that the investor could just ask what rule they were using, but remember there are 10s or even 100s of thousands of rules like that. You'd need a Phd. and tons of time to dedicate to figuring it all out. So, better to just have one standardized system for that.

    Now, other kinds of rules are better left to cultural norms or convention. For example, that the employer reimburses meal expenses, but not booze that you consume, when you travel for work is probably the norm. But what rule is optimal varies from company to company, situation to situation and position to position. For example, maybe a sales guy taking a customer out for drinks at one company should be reimbursed for the booze and maybe in another situation an employee that is traveling to one location for nine months for work shouldn't be able to expense every meal at another company. And it's ok in that situation to have them vary from company to company because it isn't that hard for an employee to learn the policy of their one employer and that's all that really needs to know.

    So, different rules are optimally set at different levels.
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  8. #908
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:50 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,084

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Camlon View Post
    I only ajusted for one factor, cost of living.
    Which is why the research of Dr.Lafer and the studies he used are far superior to your rather cursory and incomplete approach.

    But do not feel bad - he is a professional and uses other well respected professionals respected research.
    Last edited by haymarket; 06-12-12 at 10:46 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #909
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:50 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,084

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    1) The fact is-many of your comments have a basis in Marxist philosophies

    2) You have never made a post that would go over my head-or that of Henrin or most of the conservative posters on this board. You often confuse disagreement or non-acceptance with a failure to comprehend.

    3) I find it amusing you consider marx a frankenstein monster. I thought he was more like an attack dog for your side
    1- You do realize that much of what Karl Marx wrote about was not original and lifted in whole or in part from others - often going back hundreds of years? But yet you and other right wing warriors wallow in the self imposed delusion that he invented Original Sin and all that came with it.

    2 - If I had a dollar for every post that went over your head and that of Henrin I could hire you for a few hours of legal advice.

    3- And your Marx as frankenstein monster flub just proves it. Thank you!!!! The point was that you guys attempt to use him as a frankenstein monster because that is what Marx is to you. Others just shrug and say 'big freakin' deal'.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #910
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,804

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    1- You do realize that much of what Karl Marx wrote about was not original and lifted in whole or in part from others - often going back hundreds of years? But yet you and other right wing warriors wallow in the self imposed delusion that he invented Original Sin and all that came with it.

    2 - If I had a dollar for every post that went over your head and that of Henrin I could hire you for a few hours of legal advice.

    3- And your Marx as frankenstein monster flub just proves it. Thank you!!!! The point was that you guys attempt to use him as a frankenstein monster because that is what Marx is to you. Others just shrug and say 'big freakin' deal'.
    1) you are assuming facts not in evidence. where he got his philosophies matter not as long as he adopted them his own I can call them part of the marxist agenda.

    2) you would have zero and would be several thousand dollars short. however, I constantly give you legal advice on this board for free so you might luck out

    3) marx is not a monster-its the idiots who treat him as some sort of inspiration

Page 91 of 124 FirstFirst ... 41818990919293101 ... 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
  •