Wisconsin Dems fail again!

[brett636]

A worker's paycheck is earned in exchange for their labor, not from "voluntary contributions". How the employer earns their money is their business. If you choose to hire a group of workers, then those workers have the right to bargain for the price of their labor.

Where do you think UPS gets the money that it deposits in my bank account each week? Does it get it from thin air, or from businesses who voluntarily use UPS's service to fulfill their business needs? What would happen if UPS sent a gang of armed account reps to a business, put a gun to a business owner's head and demanded he/she ship their products UPS? There would be a huge public outcry followed by investigations, subpoenas, trials, and convictions at all levels of UPS. While UPS does not have this luxury the government does, and will send in a gang of armed officials to a business or individual's home over unpaid taxes. Taxes are involuntary meaning you have no choice but to pay them, and if you don't the government can and will deny you your property, liberty, and or life to get that money. This gives government laborers unparalleled job security. I pay taxes at the rate the government tells me I have to pay it, and I must object to some of that money ending up in the political coffers of politicians who support public unions. FDR has even stated that public employees should not be allowed to unionize for this very reason. That is due to the fact that a public employee union was not dreamed up on the basis of protecting the employees of the government, but to recycle government tax money into the pockets of politicians who support them in order to assist with their re election.

 

[wkmac]

I disagree. When someone's paycheck is derived from the voluntary contributions of others by offering products and services people want and or desire is one thing. To enrich yourself at the point of a gun is completely different and morally reprehensible.

If you actually sat down and pondered deep into that thought which BTW is correct, the picture of what you see going on around would take a major change. And you might actually become a real true free market kinda guy!


Trplnkl,

The constitution by no means lists all the rights of man or for that matter any man. In fact, the constitution in truth is a real poor if not terrible device when it comes to even defending and celebrating all the natural rights of any given man.

I await with pregnant anticipation your objection and rebuttal!

 

[wkmac]

Where do you think UPS gets the money that it deposits in my bank account each week? Does it get it from thin air, or from businesses who voluntarily use UPS's service to fulfill their business needs? What would happen if UPS sent a gang of armed account reps to a business, put a gun to a business owner's head and demanded he/she ship their products UPS? There would be a huge public outcry followed by investigations, subpoenas, trials, and convictions at all levels of UPS. While UPS does not have this luxury the government does, and will send in a gang of armed officials to a business or individual's home over unpaid taxes. Taxes are involuntary meaning you have no choice but to pay them, and if you don't the government can and will deny you your property, liberty, and or life to get that money. This gives government laborers unparalleled job security. I pay taxes at the rate the government tells me I have to pay it, and I must object to some of that money ending up in the political coffers of politicians who support public unions. FDR has even stated that public employees should not be allowed to unionize for this very reason. That is due to the fact that a public employee union was not dreamed up on the basis of protecting the employees of the government, but to recycle government tax money into the pockets of politicians who support them in order to assist with their re election.

If the unions were removed, would the State also remove all compulsory laws and make it's operation purely voluntary? All taxes voluntary?


Who is really the one holding the gun in the room here?

 

[bbsam]

"To enrich yourself at the point of a gun...." I believe it is called "law enforcement" and tax evasion is against the law.

 

[brett636]

"To enrich yourself at the point of a gun...." I believe it is called "law enforcement" and tax evasion is against the law.

Then so should be the case for public unions considering my money is the source of their union dues which go to support politicians I disagree with.

 

[trplnkl]

If you actually sat down and pondered deep into that thought which BTW is correct, the picture of what you see going on around would take a major change. And you might actually become a real true free market kinda guy!


Trplnkl,

The constitution by no means lists all the rights of man or for that matter any man. In fact, the constitution in truth is a real poor if not terrible device when it comes to even defending and celebrating all the natural rights of any given man.

I await with pregnant anticipation your objection and rebuttal!

What. me object? nawww, but I do offer a rebuttal. I didn't say the constitution was the best at even addressing all natural rights of man (kind). I was placing the document as the law of the (our) land. The constitution is held as the definitive authority in this country, way above any proclamation from the UN. Of the natural rights of mankind, I'm not sold on the idea that collective bargaining is on the list.

I hope this helps your labor pains.

 

[bbsam]

Then so should be the case for public unions considering my money is the source of their union dues which go to support politicians I disagree with.

None of us agree with the way the government spends every cent, but that is part of living in a representative democracy. When a sufficient number of people disagree with the administration of money and power, they vote in the other crooks.

 

[trplnkl]

"To enrich yourself at the point of a gun...." I believe it is called "law enforcement" and tax evasion is against the law.

Did you misunderstand his point or are you being funny again?

 

[bbsam]

Little bit of both.

 

[trplnkl]

Little bit of both.

OK, then I will pass on further comment.

 

[bbsam]

As you wish.

 

[Jones]

Yea, in a way I am saying just that. There is no right granted in the Constitution of the Untied States of America. I'm not ,despite how it comes across, anti-union but on the other hand I'm not pro-union either. I don't have a problem with unions that use common sense and what is actually best for the members they are supposed to be protecting from dishonest and greedy companies. I shutter at the thought of working for UPS without a union, not so much to do with pay scale as with employee abuse(like the teamsters are helping with that much). The workers are not the only element in the equation nor are the unions or the employers. Actually I'm in favor of collective bargaining as long as there is real bargaining involved using a common sense approach. The employer should have as many rights as the employees in regards to pay and benefits. Do you think it is a good idea to demand higher wages and benefits when a company is operating in the red? Is that common sense? Does that properly address the issues at hand?


side note:
Actually Mrs. Roosevelt was one of 9 people that drafted the document, not exactly the author. But that is really unimportant.

As far as the ad hominem attack, you are the one that brought forth the UDOHR as if it was relevant to the discussion .

The NLRA was passed in 1935, and Article 7 defines the protected activities in the following manner:

Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection.

The NLRA survived a constitutional challenge in 1937 (NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp) so yes, it is in fact a constitutionally protected right to form a union and collectively bargain.

Just to be clear, I emphatically do not believe that the only rights we have are the ones specifically listed in the constitution, nor did the Founding Fathers (they believed that men had inalienable rights). The UDOHR is absolutely relevant to this discussion because it lists rights that all free people can and should have. The fact that the only countries to abstain from signing it were the old Soviet Bloc should speak volumes. You're in fine company, Comrade .

As far as my own opinions on specific contract negotiations, eh, I'm not really sure how that's relevant. Sure unions will make mistakes and do some dumb things, that's a given. But that's one of the consequences of real freedom. IMHO it's not a valid reason to strip workers of their rights.

 

[wkmac]

What. me object? nawww, but I do offer a rebuttal. I didn't say the constitution was the best at even addressing all natural rights of man (kind). I was placing the document as the law of the (our) land. The constitution is held as the definitive authority in this country, way above any proclamation from the UN. Of the natural rights of mankind, I'm not sold on the idea that collective bargaining is on the list.

I hope this helps your labor pains.

Many things in life never justify faith but in your case I never had any doubt!

 

[wkmac]

"To enrich yourself at the point of a gun...." I believe it is called "law enforcement" and tax evasion is against the law.

Some people just believe it's not moral unless it's done at gunpoint!

Why is it if you are poor or of modest means and unconnected, it's tax evasion but if rich and well connected, it's tax avoidance?

 

[trplnkl]

The NLRA was passed in 1935, and Article 7 defines the protected activities in the following manner:

Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection.

The NLRA survived a constitutional challenge in 1937 (NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp) so yes, it is in fact a constitutionally protected right to form a union and collectively bargain.

Just to be clear, I emphatically do not believe that the only rights we have are the ones specifically listed in the constitution, nor did the Founding Fathers (they believed that men had inalienable rights). The UDOHR is absolutely relevant to this discussion because it lists rights that all free people can and should have. The fact that the only countries to abstain from signing it were the old Soviet Bloc should speak volumes. You're in fine company, Comrade .

As far as my own opinions on specific contract negotiations, eh, I'm not really sure how that's relevant. Sure unions will make mistakes and do some dumb things, that's a given. But that's one of the consequences of real freedom. IMHO it's not a valid reason to strip workers of their rights.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Jones]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

That's generally the way it goes on the internet.

 

[bbsam]

Some people just believe it's not moral unless it's done at gunpoint!

Why is it if you are poor or of modest means and unconnected, it's tax evasion but if rich and well connected, it's tax avoidance?

Willie Nelson, Wesley Snipes, Al Capone, Leona Helmsley and others would disagree.

 

[bbsam]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Yeah, regardless of what the facts say.

 

[wkmac]

Willie Nelson, Wesley Snipes, Al Capone, Leona Helmsley and others would disagree.

Great PR value aren't they? Just perfect for your argument is it not? You masses thinking of cheaping the gov't of even a penny? Willie Nelson, Wesley Snipes, Al Capone, Leona Helmsley should be an instant reminder to stay in line.

Keep thinking that too!

 

[bbsam]

Do they not refute your point that it's only the poor sop getting screwed by the IRS?