• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers[W:702:1041]

Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I see. You don't want to defend your position. I don't blame you.

My comments were clear, you failed to grasp them and now want to change the subject to be about some misunderstanding on your part. Understood.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

People are ignoring the fact that many types of persuasion are legal and ethical. Violence, stalking, vandalism, making threats and workplace harassment are all illegal and no one has advocated those methods. Making the list of freeloaders is not a call to take illegal action. Providing information, convincing, arguing, shunning, and embarrassing are all legal and ethical ways to influence the freeloaders.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

why should I care if those folks disagree with me? if they wanted representation for free, why do they put in mechanisms for unions to get paid for representation in their right-to-work legislation?
Uh, they don't. I suppose you can take a union job, not join the union, and volunteer to pay the union in a RTW state, but the legislation certainly doesn't say that you have to pay -- quite the opposite.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

So failing your arguments on topic (unions) you now want to argue semantics (the definition of scab), understood.

umm, you're the one who claimed "it doesn't mean that!!"
And scabs are the workers who work across picket lines, not generally all non-union workers.

I used the word correctly, and you tried to argue that "it doesn't mean that!!"

And now that you failed, you'll pretend that someone else was making it an issue.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Scabs should be harassed and intimidated. It is an affront to every working man out there that you've got people who'll bottom feed and piss on all the work and effort that has gone in to organized labor.

As I said in an earlier post, The Right to Work For Less crowd's take on this is completely hypocritical. They'd gladly let union busting, employer intimidation, and use of the police to further the ends of the employer but then when not even a fraction of their tactics are used by the other side, they get all indignant, all, --"Why I NEVER?!?!? This must be stopped, those poor people!!"

I mean get bent, seriously...

I disagee with harassing and intimidating as a strategy. It is unethical, creates blowback, and provides ammunition to the enemies of workers. Action should be limited to providing information, convincing, arguing, shunning and embarrassing.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

My comments were clear, you failed to grasp them and now want to change the subject to be about some misunderstanding on your part. Understood.

If you say so:lamo
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

they aren't stealing anything from you, regardless of what the union propaganda says.

I take it you've never been on a picket line and watched scabs take your jobs. Scabs are stealing; that's why they're called scabs.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

They are ignorant, easily swayed by one or two anecdotes, and arrogant, but mostly sincere. Many fools identify more with the boss's interests than their own. They have been conned to think that the billionaires that profit off of other people's labor care about liberty and constitutional principals when they are only trying to maximize their profits. Some call these fools house niggers. I call it Stockholder's Syndrome.

I call it Koch-Brother Syndrome. We bailout the banks and insurance industries and then it's time for small government and self sufficiency? I mean, gtfoh...

But I agree, people have been duped. Any talk of a more equitable dispersement of compensation is met with "YOURE A GODDAMN MARXIST!" As if they even know what that means. "You want to take from the producers!!" No. I want to give to those who produce the same as those who aggregate. That's all a business owner or a corporation is, an aggregator of production, by and far none of them are producers themselves. That's what the Labor is for. The "Capitalist" aggregates commodities, labor, and tools which in turn produce a product he takes to market. He thinks his aggregation, or amalgamation entitles him to the lion's share of the return. As if he done anything other than bring together a worker and his tools to transform a low value commodity into a high one. Did he create the value? No. He merely set the conditions so that the Laborer can.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

umm, you're the one who claimed "it doesn't mean that!!"

And now that you failed, you'll pretend that someone else was making it an issue.

I did. And like the word "immigrant", it has become polluted, muddied. But I like how you ignored the rest of the post.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

NALC branch 1100 for 10 years, shop steward for 2.

You were in the post office. So how did you protect people who weren't doing their jobs? You said you were a steward, so you must have protected those lazy union employees.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

So failing your arguments on topic (unions) you now want to argue semantics (the definition of scab), understood.
I'm sorry you were wrong about the definition, but it was your choice to keep persisting after you'd already been shown to be wrong. Glad we got it settled now :peace
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I disagee with harassing and intimidating as a strategy. It is unethical, creates blowback, and provides ammunition to the enemies of workers. Action should be limited to providing information, convincing, arguing, shunning and embarrassing.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, I say... :shrug:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

You mean the Unions that built Vegas where I am right now?
Which has now turned into a scab town with some folks like Adelson ?

Vegas is nowhere near a "scab town"... nor are adelsons workers "scabs"

you being a tourist in Vegas doesn't mean you know anything about the city....

adelsons properties are non-union (right to work,actually)..every other property is overwhelmingly union.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I did indeed say so, that's why you are responding. Or did you miss that as well?

Your offering nothing at all to the discussion. You make a little swipe and now refuse to offer your reasoning behind that swipe. That's fine, but don't pretend it meant any deep thought. It was merely your way of throwing in a little insult.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

well, nearly everything the pro-unionists use as evidence that Unions are the bees-knees ( weekends, 40 hr workweek, safe work environment etc) has been codified into law or regulation.... so much of what unions were once good at has already been co-opted by government.

workers can go to govt for help now... where once upon a time, they only had unions to turn to.

unions don't do much to "protect" anyone in the workplace....much like the govt , they offer an "after the fact" outlet to arbitrate grievances.


and really, don't **** on govt too much.... those govt workers you are ****ting on are union members.( public sector membership is pretty large, private sector, not so much)

The argument that we don't need unions because we can trust the government to protect workers doesn't sound consistent with your libertarianism. In my view, the temptation to exploit workers is so strong that we need both government and organized labor protection.
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers


Yes, you did try to argue semantics, and then when you failed, you whined about people trying to argue semantics

And like the word "immigrant", it has become polluted, muddied.

And you continue to do so
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

The argument that we don't need unions because we can trust the government to protect workers doesn't sound consistent with your libertarianism.

Nor does it stand the test of reality as has been shown by what the State of IL is trying to do to its pensioners...
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I'm sorry you were wrong about the definition, but it was your choice to keep persisting after you'd already been shown to be wrong. Glad we got it settled now :peace

Nice try, google "scab wiki", it will take you to "strikebreakers". That is where the term comes from. Those crossing the picket line.

I'll persist as long as you and others persist in muddying the language. Again the usage of "immigrant" is a prime example.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

You said absolutely zero about the OP in this waste of bandwidth. Except for another Girly quip about a WiFi hotspot--was that yer MO where you came from? At least here you'll learn to grow a pair on a manly website where the conservative women are tougher than the men .

Actually watching you and Karl tag team is hilarious. As well as a lot like watching a bad Keystone Cops caper. There is so much so wrong with your tortured bridgecasting. You are in such a rush to bash out a quick (you think) witty reply that you just shoot yourself in the foot over and over. The last posts from both of you has to rank up there in some sort of 'bumble and stumble your way through already tortured thread' hall of fame.

First this post is singularly impressive in that it manages to be hypocritically obtuse and hilarious at the same time.


The level of hilariously obtuse hypocrisy Karl's post managed to achieve was then raised by yours. Presumably because you could not catch a clue which poster's "lecturing what constitutes proper debate" contributions you were actually mangling. Hint: Was not me, it was your PM buddy.


Irony is a bitch, particularly when you are the last one to figure it out. But you go on with your bad self. The problems that come about because you are operating from a WiFi hotspot under a bridge are many. And obvious too. Danged if you are not determined to illustrate as many as you can as possible in one thread!:popcorn2:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

He read the story that is how he knew that only the freeloader's names and the department they work in were listed.

If he read the story, then he knew Fox wasn't lying. So instead of making him lazy, it makes him dishonest.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, I say... :shrug:

I don't like to stoop down to the low level of our oppressors unless absolutely necessary.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Nice try, google "scab wiki", it will take you to "strikebreakers". That is where the term comes from. Those crossing the picket line.

I'll persist as long as you and others persist in muddying the language. Again the usage of "immigrant" is a prime example.

No link, huh?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I take it you've never been on a picket line and watched scabs take your jobs. Scabs are stealing; that's why they're called scabs.

no way, i have ever been on a picket line.... I don't join unions, as a rule

and no, those scabs are not "stealing" ... you walked away from that job voluntarily, they stepped in to do the job when you refused to.

jobs don't do themselves... someone has to get it done... if not by you, then by someone else.

as far as i'm concerned... you gave your job away voluntarily, and they accepted it....that's not "stealing" ,that's ..."gifting"
I have sympathy for your grievances, but not for you walking off the job or the consequences that followed.... you brought them on yourself if you went on strike.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Your offering nothing at all to the discussion. You make a little swipe and now refuse to offer your reasoning behind that swipe. That's fine, but don't pretend it meant any deep thought. It was merely your way of throwing in a little insult.

The same can be said for you, unless you're admitting that you really didn't understand what was posted, and it was so simple and clear I don't think you really want to admit that. I never claimed it was deep, in fact just the opposite, so simple anyone could get it.

And no, I don't mean to insult you, you are doing that for yourself. I OTOH believed you were playing a simple game of false misunderstanding thinking you to be bright enough to grasp a simple statement.
 
Back
Top Bottom