Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

OpportunityCost said:

No. It is what occurs. You want to say that corporations seek political advantage through legislative issues. All well and good, but they do not force employees to contribute as a condition to working there. Unions require contributions in non right to work states...as a condition of employment. They have legislated this protection scheme into law in several places. That is the difference.

The fact you cannot or will not address this makes it easy to see how you want to steer the conversation, and are failing to do so. Its not my argument, it is the facts and the context of "corporate legislative advantage" and how Unions use legislation to their advantage. You just dont want to see it.

Click to expand...

How this for a "corporate legislative advantage"?

Federal laws prohibiting unions from spending general funds on politics if its members object to such use. Corps are free to spend their general treasuries on politics while the stockholders object to the financing of the political activity they are engaged in.:2wave:

In a non right to work state, does every working person in the state have to belong to a union?

Or does it just mean that, if you choose to work in a place where the workers have opted to have a union represent them, you mush help to pay the cost of said representation?

If you buy a condo that has an association that maintains a pool and tennis courts, do you get to opt out of the association, or do you still have to pay for the pool and courts?

Conservative said:

Do you have such little faith in your own ability that you would happily retire after a lifetime of union membership and on a union generated pension that may or not be fully funded? I will never understand anyone that spends their entire career as a union employee and never being rewarded for individual initiative or creativity.

Click to expand...

I make a great wage with no college education. I never had to go into great debt to make enough money to support my family.

I get a great pension plus a SMA fund which closely resembles a 401k, with great health benefits. My pension is fully funded and is one of the strongest in the nation. Besides just the idea of getting a pension these days is quite the dinosaur.

Initiative and creativity dont belong on a jobsite where you spend 90% of your day above 100 feet off the ground w/the only thing below you a 6 inch wide beem. Its not exactly art class.

OnWisconsin said:

I make a great wage with no college education. I never had to go into great debt to make enough money to support my family.

I get a great pension plus a SMA fund which closely resembles a 401k, with great health benefits. My pension is fully funded and is one of the strongest in the nation. Besides just the idea of getting a pension these days is quite the dinosaur.

Initiative and creativity dont belong on a jobsite where you spend 90% of your day above 100 feet off the ground w/the only thing below you a 6 inch wide beem. Its not exactly art class.

Click to expand...

Well then congratulations as this is what you will be doing for the rest of your life while you complain about what someone else has and pays in taxes. I always had more initiative and drive than that but then again that is me.

Fenton said:

There is nothing democratic about being forced to pay Union dues because of your geographical location.

But we may not have to put up with the Union stealing for long with more States going to right to work.

That and the stupidity of the union tendency to kill the golden goose will rid us of the union curse once and for all.

Click to expand...

Dues are there for a reason. And it has nothing to do with your geographic location. Apparently that part has completely went through your skull. No one forces you to join a union, I imagine before you go into a career you learn a little about what it takes to start that career. If you didn't want to join a union I'm assuming you would pick a different career.

Just like I would never choose to work in a fast food restaurant because I wouldn't want to smell like french fries. I wouldn't go demanding that they stop making french fries just cause I want to work there, how arrogant of me would that be.


Kill the golden goose.. ? not following you there dude..

Union curse...? now you just sound like a Inquisitionist going on a witch hunt.

Conservative said:

Well then congratulations as this is what you will be doing for the rest of your life while you complain about what someone else has and pays in taxes. I always had more initiative and drive than that but then again that is me.

Click to expand...

You are just so special:roll:

Dittohead not! said:

In a non right to work state, does every working person in the state have to belong to a union?

Or does it just mean that, if you choose to work in a place where the workers have opted to have a union represent them, you mush help to pay the cost of said representation?

If you buy a condo that has an association that maintains a pool and tennis courts, do you get to opt out of the association, or do you still have to pay for the pool and courts?

Click to expand...

In a "non-right to work state" unionized industries require you to join the union if you want a job.

"Right to work" means an individual has the choice weather or not to join the union.

Progressives and unions in general believe workers shouldn't have the right opt out.

Unions are against "right to work" because they know their leverage over the business would go bye-bye, because their threats of shutting down businesses would become moot if those who chose not to join the union could continue to work during a strike. Not to mention fading membership among other union ideas workers are forced into.

Considering what unions allege what they stand for is already federal law, there really is no reason to join a union - and every knowledgeable and intelligent worker that is a union member knows this.

You shouldn't have to join a union if you don't want to just to work and put food on your table, neither should I or anyone else.

I'd rather work for 20 bucks an hour than get 20.50 an hour and have to pay union dues of 100 bucks a month.

Screw that.

Conservative said:

Well then congratulations as this is what you will be doing for the rest of your life while you complain about what someone else has and pays in taxes. I always had more initiative and drive than that but then again that is me.

Click to expand...

Who's complaining about what someone else pays in taxes? I pay a good chunk of my wages, I could pay more if it meant reducing the national debt and putting us in a healthier place overall in this country.

OnWisconsin said:

Who's complaining about what someone else pays in taxes? I pay a good chunk of my wages, I could pay more if it meant reducing the national debt and putting us in a healthier place overall in this country.

Click to expand...

I didn't see you complain.

Conservative said:

Well then congratulations as this is what you will be doing for the rest of your life while you complain about what someone else has and pays in taxes. I always had more initiative and drive than that but then again that is me.

Click to expand...

you're kind of an angry person.. you need to drink some tea or do some yoga or something.

The bottom line is: This attack on unions is all about one thing. The right wings need to demonize someone for the troubles they see going on in the country.

The left does it too, but in this topic of discussion the right is simply pointing the finger at Unions and saying "You are what is wrong with this country" and instead giving the pass to SO many others that might better suit that accusation.

OnWisconsin said:

The bottom line is: This attack on unions is all about one thing. The right wings need to demonize someone for the troubles they see going on in the country.

The left does it too, but in this topic of discussion the right is simply pointing the finger at Unions and saying "You are what is wrong with this country" and instead giving the pass to SO many others that might better suit that accusation.

Click to expand...

Unions have dropped to a 7% membership rate in this country....Ever ask yourself why that would be, if it is such a great model?

Mr.Nick said:

In a "non-right to work state" unionized industries require you to join the union if you want a job.

"Right to work" means an individual has the choice weather or not to join the union.

Progressives and unions in general believe workers shouldn't have the right opt out.

Unions are against "right to work" because they know their leverage over the business would go bye-bye, because their threats of shutting down businesses would become moot if those who chose not to join the union could continue to work during a strike. Not to mention fading membership among other union ideas workers are forced into.

Considering what unions allege what they stand for is already federal law, there really is no reason to join a union - and every knowledgeable and intelligent worker that is a union member knows this.

You shouldn't have to join a union if you don't want to just to work and put food on your table, neither should I or anyone else.

I'd rather work for 20 bucks an hour than get 20.50 an hour and have to pay union dues of 100 bucks a month.

Screw that.

Click to expand...

Then, obviously, you would choose the 20 bucks an hour job and forgo the union. That's your choice, as it should be.

What shouldn't be your choice would be to work in a plant where the workers are represented by a union, but not pay your dues. That would be the same thing as opting for a condo in a gated community where dues pay for the clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis courts and landscaping, but deciding you didn't want to pay the homeowner's association dues. It would be like finding a way to buy gas that isn't taxed, then used it to drive on highways paid for by everyone else. It would be being a freeloader.

OnWisconsin said:

Who's complaining about what someone else pays in taxes? I pay a good chunk of my wages, I could pay more if it meant reducing the national debt and putting us in a healthier place overall in this country.

Click to expand...

Most people agree with you as do I however the problem is higher taxes have never gone to reducing the debt, economic growth creating revenue is better than raising taxes. This country has a spending problem and isn't being addressed. All Congress and the President do is micromanage the economy and individual lives. The last Bush full year of spending in 2008 was less than 3 trillion dollars and that includes all the cost of the war for that year as well as Medicare Part D. The war in Iraq is over and Obama spent 3.8 trillion dollars in 2012. You explain that to me.

OnWisconsin said:

The bottom line is: This attack on unions is all about one thing. The right wings need to demonize someone for the troubles they see going on in the country.

Click to expand...

Given that you are retired what difference does it make to you?

Is it possible that what you see as an attack on unions is actually an effort by the state government to make itself more competitive? I know that Alabama has won the last few job competitions. Maybe the state is tired of losing all the competition for more jobs. Becoming a right to work state puts them back in the game.

Conservative said:

Most people agree with you as do I however the problem is higher taxes have never gone to reducing the debt, economic growth creating revenue is better than raising taxes. This country has a spending problem and isn't being addressed. All Congress and the President do is micromanage the economy and individual lives. The last Bush full year of spending in 2008 was less than 3 trillion dollars and that includes all the cost of the war for that year as well as Medicare Part D. The war in Iraq is over and Obama spent 3.8 trillion dollars in 2012. You explain that to me.

Click to expand...

Careful, Conservative. You're getting dangerously close to my own point of view.

Can I explain that 3.8 trillion dollars? Sure. It's the result of decades of out of control government growth, much of which has happened during the past five or six years.

I've got a solution, too. It's quite simple, really:

No more giving away money, not to foreign powers, not to corporations, not to individuals, not to anyone. End the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and the war on terror. Fund the military, but let's not spend as much as the rest of the world combined. In short, let's quit wasting money. Spend what is saved upgrading our infrastructure, funding research, but not subsidizing plants, not even "green" ones. There is private venture capital for that, after all.

Dittohead not! said:

Then, obviously, you would choose the 20 bucks an hour job and forgo the union. That's your choice, as it should be.

What shouldn't be your choice would be to work in a plant where the workers are represented by a union, but not pay your dues. That would be the same thing as opting for a condo in a gated community where dues pay for the clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis courts and landscaping, but deciding you didn't want to pay the homeowner's association dues. It would be like finding a way to buy gas that isn't taxed, then used it to drive on highways paid for by everyone else. It would be being a freeloader.

Click to expand...

Nonsense....The union doesn't own that business, and didn't build it. They worked there, and one could argue have over time held it back.

j-mac said:

Nonsense....The union doesn't own that business, and didn't build it. They worked there, and one could argue have over time held it back.

Click to expand...

The union doesn't own the business, nor does it work there. The employees who hired the union work there. It is the job of the union to work for better salaries and working conditions for their employees.

The union- worker relationship is much like the lawyer - client relationship. The difference is, no one seems to think it is wrong for a group or individual to be represented by a lawyer.

Dittohead not! said:

The union doesn't own the business, nor does it work there. The employees who hired the union work there. It is the job of the union to work for better salaries and working conditions for their employees.

The union- worker relationship is much like the lawyer - client relationship. The difference is, no one seems to think it is wrong for a group or individual to be represented by a lawyer.

Click to expand...

Lawyers are a problem.....Until you need one....heheh....But come on Ditto....$79 per hour total compensation to attach two wheels and tires to each car coming down the line? Really?

j-mac said:

Unions have dropped to a 7% membership rate in this country....Ever ask yourself why that would be, if it is such a great model?

Click to expand...

Because Republicans and Conservatives like you have got a hard-on for attacking everything we stand for simply because we contribute to the democratic party.

j-mac said:

Lawyers are a problem.....Until you need one....heheh....But come on Ditto....$79 per hour total compensation to attach two wheels and tires to each car coming down the line? Really?

Click to expand...

You sound jealous

Misterveritis said:

Given that you are retired what difference does it make to you?

Is it possible that what you see as an attack on unions is actually an effort by the state government to make itself more competitive? I know that Alabama has won the last few job competitions. Maybe the state is tired of losing all the competition for more jobs. Becoming a right to work state puts them back in the game.

Click to expand...

Becoming a right to work state puts them back in the game

Click to expand...

This is what becoming a right to work state gets ya.:2wave:


Persons below poverty level, percent, 2007-2011 Us =17.6%.............. Alabama=14.3%

Per capita income 2007-2011 US=$27,915............Alabama=$23,483


Persons below poverty level, percent, 2007-2011 US=17.6% .............Alabama= 14.3%

High school graduate or higher, percent of persons age 25+, 2007-2011 US=85.4% Alabama =81.9%

How this for a "corporate legislative advantage"?

Federal laws prohibiting unions from spending general funds on politics if its members object to such use. Corps are free to spend their general treasuries on politics while the stockholders object to the financing of the political activity they are engaged in.

Click to expand...

Really. You dont understand that stockholders are voluntary? They can sell out their shares at any point if they dont agree with corporate positions. Further if corporations spend too much on political activity they have a board to answer to and that board is ultimately answerable to stockholders. Stockholders expect a return on their investment, if any expense is too high they will want to know why and curtail it if its too much.

Unions spent billions in the last few election cycles. They dont seem to have any problem getting around general funds limitations. Just to clarify, individual members cannot object can they? It has to be a majority vote objection doesnt it? Just checking, because Im not sure on this one.

Whipsnade said:

This is what becoming a right to work state gets ya.:2wave:


Persons below poverty level, percent, 2007-2011 Us =17.6%.............. Alabama=14.3%

Per capita income 2007-2011 US=$27,915............Alabama=$23,483


Persons below poverty level, percent, 2007-2011 US=17.6% .............Alabama= 14.3%

High school graduate or higher, percent of persons age 25+, 2007-2011 US=85.4% Alabama =81.9%

Click to expand...

Per usual if you want to cite statistic facts, please cite them so we can see the entire picture not just the one you want us to see.

OnWisconsin said:

Dues are there for a reason. And it has nothing to do with your geographic location. Apparently that part has completely went through your skull. No one forces you to join a union, I imagine before you go into a career you learn a little about what it takes to start that career. If you didn't want to join a union I'm assuming you would pick a different career.

Just like I would never choose to work in a fast food restaurant because I wouldn't want to smell like french fries. I wouldn't go demanding that they stop making french fries just cause I want to work there, how arrogant of me would that be.


Kill the golden goose.. ? not following you there dude..

Union curse...? now you just sound like a Inquisition going on a witch hunt.

Click to expand...

Dues are taken from workers with out their consent by draconian State laws that implicitly take away their rights. What's worse is those dues are then sent to Democrat re-election funds to re-install more useless Democrats who's ideology is to weigh down the private sector.

The modern day union supporter still thinks we have the same type of economy we had in the 1960's, the same manufacturing base when in reality America's largest economic sector is the Tertiary sector and manufacturing is now a global market.

In fact the Unions have elected time and time again a party that ignorantly drives out the private sector and the manufacturing base with high taxes and regulations.
You guys should re-think your political positions.

The Union could only grow and survive if it has the benefits of mandates. Mandated Union Dues in a Union shop or State. Mandated manufacturing base by imposing massive tariffs on imported goods. Mandated participation through oppression or laws that force Non-Union members out or give Union members Carte-Blanche to attack "scabs" and non-union supporters.

So the survival of the Unions depend on taking choices away from free people in a free economy. If the Unions ran the show manufactured items would be made in america with strict union control over compensation thus cutting out the benefit of free trade agreements and competition between Corporations. And it's members in spite of their political position are forced to

Remember the Chrysler K-Car ? The cars of the 70's and early 80's that were so badly built a 100k life span was a miracle ?

You've killed the golden goose by pushing a level of compensation in both the private and the public sector that cannot be supported by natural market forces and you did it in a global economy.

You personified the Corporate entities as the old stereo-typical ""fat cat" rich greedy Capitalist when most modern Corporations are public and owe their profits to share holders as dividends. And then the Unions supported a President that supposedly is pro-union but has imposed policies on the private sector that cause corporations and growth to shrink, to move elsewhere or simply shut down.

The UAW ran GM into the ground with outrageous compensation levels for unskilled, uneducated Americans that packed on legacy cost into the thousands on every car GM sold and when the company should have gone bankrupt Obama soaked the bond holders and gave 51% control to the unions.. how unbelievably stupid.

Did i help ? No, GM is still going to wind up going bankrupt and now the Unions are left with a shrinking private sector base and a public sector that's struggling to pay it's workers. HELL the Federal Govt's paying their employees with borrowed money. How strong is a Union that relying on borrowed monopoly money to keep them afloat ?

So you support the political party that's marginalized the people that hire you and price yourself out of a global manufacturing market and still insist with archaic arguments that Unions are still relevant. That are literally reaching into the pockets of workers whether they like it or not and then contribute to Democrat campaigns and/or candidates.

Unions and the politicians that support them have turned entire States into desperate situations with workers leaving to look for a way to support their families. When a legislature finally tries to get control of their states fiscal issues the Unions lose it and turn to destructive and violent mob. Get over it, be respectable and realize the voters have chosen to elect Republican politicians.

Sorry guys but Unions are shrinking because of Union tactic's and their demands for compensation that are not supportable in the WORLD economy. The sooner the Unions let go of the old way of looking at things and remember that ALL workers deserve the choice of paying dues and/or entering a union the better off you'll guys be.