Sheilbh's Scott Walker Lovefest and Union Bashing Megathread

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah, it's always the teachers.  Or the nurses.  Or the laborers.  It's never the cops or the firefighters or anybody else who traditionally votes conservative as a bloc.   Amazing how that shit works.

Therefore what?  They both suck, or they're both great, or you only dislike Republican unions?

[CountDeMoney]

Yeah, it's always the teachers.  Or the nurses.  Or the laborers.  It's never the cops or the firefighters or anybody else who traditionally votes conservative as a bloc.   Amazing how that shit works.

Therefore what?  They both suck, or they're both great, or you only dislike Republican unions?

If we're going to make efforts to eliminate unions, then eliminate them all--not just the ones with negros and women in them.

[frunk]

To be clear, by bribery I mean campaign contributions.

And I'm positive that many posters will not agree that a closed shop is bad.

I agree that campaign contributions by non-citizens are bribery, and should be stopped.  Closed shop is a more contentious issue.

[Berkut]

Yeah, it's always the teachers.  Or the nurses.  Or the laborers.  It's never the cops or the firefighters or anybody else who traditionally votes conservative as a bloc.   Amazing how that shit works.

Therefore what?  They both suck, or they're both great, or you only dislike Republican unions?

If we're going to make efforts to eliminate unions, then eliminate them all--not just the ones with negros and women in them.

In a shocking turn of events, Seedy plays the race card in a discussion that previously had nothing to do with race until he joined.

[Jacob]

To be clear, by bribery I mean campaign contributions.

Thanks for clarifying. How do you feel about corporations and private citizens with great wealth (and relevant legal and financial interests) giving campaign contributions with the expectation of being able to influence policy? Is that bad also, or is it only bad when unions do it?

And I'm positive that many posters will not agree that a closed shop is bad.

Like me. There's a big distance between "it can be a problem" to "it's bad."

[Siege]

Yeah, it's always the teachers.  Or the nurses.  Or the laborers.  It's never the cops or the firefighters or anybody else who traditionally votes conservative as a bloc.   Amazing how that shit works.

Therefore what?  They both suck, or they're both great, or you only dislike Republican unions?

If we're going to make efforts to eliminate unions, then eliminate them all--not just the ones with negros and women in them.

This is a great idea. Unions have outlived their ufulness.
They were pivotal in reaching today's working conditions, but have degenerate in a pool of corruption.

[Siege]

To be clear, by bribery I mean campaign contributions.

Thanks for clarifying. How do you feel about corporations and private citizens with great wealth (and relevant legal and financial interests) giving campaign contributions with the expectation of being able to influence policy? Is that bad also, or is it only bad when unions do it?

And I'm positive that many posters will not agree that a closed shop is bad.

Like me. There's a big distance between "it can be a problem" to "it's bad."

Its only bad when unions do it.
Unions do not create taxable wealth or employment.

[Berkut]

To be clear, by bribery I mean campaign contributions.

Thanks for clarifying. How do you feel about corporations and private citizens with great wealth (and relevant legal and financial interests) giving campaign contributions with the expectation of being able to influence policy? Is that bad also, or is it only bad when unions do it?

I don't think it is bad per se, but it is certainly problematic in the manner it is happening today.

However, the issue with public sector unions is not the same thing at all. They are a special case since there is such a obvious "quid pro quo" in that the very people responsible for negotiating the employment agreement with the public sector unions are in fact the exact same people who are getting elected (and largely beholden to these powerful public sector unions), so there is a problematic and significant conflict of interest. And the results pretty much speak for themselves. States with large and powerful public sector unions get into a position where it is nearly impossible to be elected without the support of those unions, and the price for that support is a abandonment of any actual attempt to rationally negotiate on behalf of the non-union citizens when it comes to labor agreements.

You don't get any actual effective resistance then until the state becomes nearly bankrupt trying to service the ridiculously over market priced benefits given to those union members.

I am with you on the need to deal with the fact that now we have a "democracy" where the politicians are only tangentially (if at all) beholden to those who elect them (as opposed to those who fund them), but that is a very different issue.

[Admiral Yi]

If we're going to make efforts to eliminate unions, then eliminate them all--not just the ones with negros and women in them.

I've got no problem with this.

[CountDeMoney]

In a shocking turn of events, Seedy plays the race card in a discussion that previously had nothing to do with race until he joined.

In a shocking turn of events, Berkut does his White Guy's Rolleyes "only racists bring up race!" shtick.

Teaching and nursing are professions heavily weighed by gender and race, while public sector government is the largest employer of the African American workforce after health and education.  And why?  Because these sectors were the first and best defenses from discrimination in hiring practices.   Funny how these are the same ones that Scott Walker, the GOP and union-haters are targeting for elimination.  It's all about race and gender, asshole.

So go fuck yourself you nasty fuck, you piece of shit Employer Rights assfuck cocksucker.  You fucking hate unions so fucking much, eliminate the cops and firefighters unions, too.  You know, the ones that vote GOP.

[frunk]

Ii don't see why there is any real distinction between corporation and public (or private for that matter) union campaign contribution.  They both expect obvious and clear quid pro quo for their contribution, and it erodes the ability of citizens to influence their politicians.  Do you think an oil company is making a political contribution because they like the politician's stand on non-oil related items?  The big difference between the two is that in the past unions were the big contributors but that isn't nearly as true now.

[CountDeMoney]

If we're going to make efforts to eliminate unions, then eliminate them all--not just the ones with negros and women in them.

I've got no problem with this.

Eliminate the concept of corporations as well.  Then we're all back to a level playing field, circa 1601.

[Siege]

I just had a great idea to reform democracy.
Actually, several ideas.
I'm fucking brilliant!

1- Only people that is not on welfare can vote. Accepting goverment welfare means forfeiting your right to vote for as long as your are on the dole. This eliminate buying votes with welfare, so poor people stop selling their votes to whoever promise them mo' money.

2- People can own several votes depending on wealth. So if we agree a poor persone not on welfare is worth 100,000, a person who's wealth is worth 1 million can vote 10 times, or cast 10 different votes, and so on. This will means that people who create the most wealth and contribute the most in taxes gets to bigger voice in how to run the nation.

3- Instead of basing the number of vote in the amount of owned wealth, base the number of votes in the ammount of money contributed to the state. This way the people that pays the most taxes get a bigger voice.


I am a fucking genious, and Jacob is going to have a heart attack!

[Valmy]

Eliminate the concept of corporations as well.  Then we're all back to a level playing field, circa 1601.

Stupid Dutch East India Company.

[Jacob]

Yeah, the elected politicians are involved in the negotiations the working conditions with public sector unions that may have contributed to their election.

But they're also involved in the setting up of legislation governing the businesses that may have contributed to their election, or the individuals who have extensive commercial interests that legislation can impact.

I don't really see how the employer-employee relationship is more egregious than any of the other ones.