• 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!

Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

Last two years beginning of a downward slide for Public Sector Unions?


  • Total voters
    64
Yes! unions are on the decline, and this will be accelerated when the conservatives win full control.....It would be interesting to know the stats in other nations as to unions and prosperity (for the middle class)....
I am open as to whether or not unions are a necessity....
At this point in time, I am prone to say yes....people just do not change that fast....
 
Agreed. "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" seem a higher priority.

Pursuit of happiness is an interesting one. Mason meant to only include the whole range of legal protections that allow a free society to flourish that allow most importantly the means of acquiring and possessing property.
 
Do you have the right to with you body as you see fit or not? Answer the question hay.

NO. You do not.

Now its your turn - is this self ownership in the Constitution?
 
NO. You do not.

Now its your turn - is this self ownership in the Constitution?

Oh..so basically what you're saying is that that when you're created you don't have the right to do with your life whatever you want. So the American dream that you believe in is actually a farce. Its a bit funny watching you not realize the connections of things.
 
Last edited:
Oh..so basically what you're saying is that that when you're created you don't have the right to do with your life whatever you want. So the American dream that you believe in is actually a farce. Its a bit funny watching you not realize the connections of things.

I gave you a straight and no nonsense answer to your question. Are you going to answer mine?
 
When they left an area? What does that mean? You seem to not be aware that you either take claim to property or you don't.
It means exactly what is says. Which word don't you understand?



Let's try this. What do YOU think "... ancient tribes "owned" the land only in so far as they stopped other tribes from using it" means???
 
NO. You do not.
Now its your turn - is this self ownership in the Constitution?

It's above, prior to and independent of, the constitution. It would make no sense for human rights to originate with a document we wrote. How would we have known WHAT to write in the first place, if it originated from the document itself?

An example below:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,

Government, such as ours. Your willingness to hand over absolute authority to government just to pad your pension is tragic. We all have a price I suppose.
 
I gave you a straight and no nonsense answer to your question. Are you going to answer mine?

What do you think those rights are based on?
 
A right only exists if you have it to exercise. If your government does not recognize what you claim is a right - then you simply do not have it and it does not exist for you.

That is called reality.

Nothing I say or do changes that reality. Nothing I believe or do not believe changes that reality.
 
Last edited:
What do you think those rights are based on?

Again, you play prosecutor with me on the stand. No thank you.

Your turn: Is this "self ownership" a right listed in the US Constitution?
 
Many younger doctors will use the Internet regularly when they see a patient. Ask people that go to the doctor all the time and they will testify to this.
No doubt consulting cloud storage or maybe even simply LAN storage instead of the Internet. I doubt the common Joe would know the difference and no doubt you are scrambling even now to find out what those terms mean.
 
It means exactly what is says. Which word don't you understand?

Well what I get out of it is if they left the land they have no interest in the land any further renouncing their claims. In the context given that appears to be accurate, but I'm assuming you meant something else.
 
Do you have the right to with you body as you see fit or not? Answer the question hay.
Does a pregnant woman have these bodily rights you seem to believe in so much? No??? LOL! So much for rights.
 
No doubt consulting cloud storage or maybe even simply LAN storage instead of the Internet. I doubt the common Joe would know the difference and no doubt you are scrambling even now to find out what those terms mean.

That is interesting considering I saw the website in person as they were looking at it.
 
Does a pregnant woman have these bodily rights you seem to believe in so much? No??? LOL! So much for rights.

You assume much in my position on that and much on the facts of the topic.
 
How in the hell is that comparable? The first is the same transaction and the later is creating a new transaction.
LOL! And why is that? What exactly makes them different?
 
A right only exists if you have it to exercise. If your government does not recognize what you claim is a right - then you simply do not have it and it does not exist for you.

That is called reality.

Nothing I say or do changes that reality. Nothing I believe or do not believe changes that reality.

So basically what you are saying is that the amendments don't exist or is now obvious what I meant by my question that you called me playing prosecutor with you?
 
LOL! And why is that? What exactly makes them different?

I already went over it. The labor is a separate transaction from what you are attaching it too. I also went over the reasons why the property goes to owner and why the labor is merely assistance and treated as such.
 
Well what I get out of it is if they left the land they have no interest in the land any further renouncing their claims. In the context given that appears to be accurate, but I'm assuming you meant something else.
So you ignored the other half of the post. Then let's try again.

What do YOU think "... ancient tribes "owned" the land only in so far as they stopped other tribes from using it" means???
 
So you ignored the other half of the post. Then let's try again.

What do YOU think "... ancient tribes "owned" the land only in so far as they stopped other tribes from using it" means???

I'm more looking for you to answer that since I asked you the question first.
 
I already went over it. The labor is a separate transaction from what you are attaching it too. I also went over the reasons why the property goes to owner and why the labor is merely assistance and treated as such.
Then let the owner produce whatever he wants without labor.

Or let him do the labor himself, in which case he also becomes the worker - I have no problem with that. :)
 
I'm more looking for you to answer that since I asked you the question first.
No, you accused me of back-tracking (or contradicting myself), which I did not do. Obviously you interpreted that phrase to mean something specific so I'd like to know what it was. I can't fix it if I don't know what's wrong. So, once again:

What do YOU think "... ancient tribes "owned" the land only in so far as they stopped other tribes from using it" means???
 
I have no idea what you are talking about.
That is because you lack any form for logic, and to compensate for your lack of understanding you decide to act like an immature jerk.

You seem to be completely incapable of understanding the difference between.
1. To show what the average household income is in RTW states and non-RTW states. (adjusted for costs)
2. To evaluate if RTW states or non-RTW states are better.
When I say my aim and the aim of this random professor are not the same. I mean, my aim is 1. His aim is 2. To evaluate number 1, you only need to find income adjusted for living costs. For evaluating number 2, you need to evaluate multiple factors, and he fails because he correlates for factors like unemployment and the age of the state.

Also, again. I see no response to the holes I pointed out in his research, and this is the fourth time. Why should I trust his research if you are incapable of defending it? The only argument you seem capable of expressing is the failed argument above, and appeal to authority. Except no one here apart from you know who he is.
 
That is because you lack any form for logic, and to compensate for your lack of understanding you decide to act like an immature jerk.

You seem to be completely incapable of understanding the difference between.
1. To show what the average household income is in RTW states and non-RTW states. (adjusted for costs)
2. To evaluate if RTW states or non-RTW states are better.
When I say my aim and the aim of this random professor are not the same. I mean, my aim is 1. His aim is 2. To evaluate number 1, you only need to find income adjusted for living costs. For evaluating number 2, you need to evaluate multiple factors, and he fails because he correlates for factors like unemployment and the age of the state.

Also, again. I see no response to the holes I pointed out in his research, and this is the fourth time. Why should I trust his research if you are incapable of defending it? The only argument you seem capable of expressing is the failed argument above, and appeal to authority. Except no one here apart from you know who he is.

The liberals on this board just don't get it. We need to look at the places with the strongest economies and adopt their labor laws.

Which nation has had unbelievable economic growth the last ten years? That would be China.
 
The liberals on this board just don't get it. We need to look at the places with the strongest economies and adopt their labor laws.

Which nation has had unbelievable economic growth the last ten years? That would be China.

wow...joking or simply uninformed?
 
Back
Top Bottom