quote:To many, Labor Day represents yet another meaningless "feel-good" liberalist holiday such as Martin Luther King Day.
quote:Labor unions remain one of the filthiest and most immoral ideas that leftivists in this nation have ever concocted.
Ummm...
quote:The fact of the matter is that the free market, if it is given a chance to actually work, will guarantee all of the things that labor unions claim to fight for. The unregulated free market will naturally favor employers who offer the best wages, the safest workplaces, the most feature-rich benefits packages, etc. Companies that have hazardous workplaces and poor salaries are going to fail because nobody will want to work for them.
What fantasy world does this guy live in?
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
That site has to be a satire.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Generally I can't believe that most the authers of these posts are actually serious."
Neither can I. In fact, I don't.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Yeah... coming back to the other thread now I'm beginning to think its satire as well. I'm so gullible... *cry*
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Whether this site is satire or not, there are plenty of people in America who think that labor unions are evil, and generally also either communist or part of organized crime. You find these people mostly in upper management, where they've never needed the guarentees of a living wage or decent benefits that labor unions helped provide.
No matter how outrageous a belief seems, there's probably someone out there who holds it.
--Enigmatic
Posted by J T Stryker (Member # 6300) on :
I think these guys are serious, but just flat out nuts.... but then again, communism does that to people.
<--- proud union member
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Yes, there can be no doubt that M31 is very beautiful. But then again, so was Helen of Troy. Her beauty was unparalleled, but she ended up causing the Trojan War, a bloody conflict in which countless thousands of Greeks and Trojans were killed. History is full of examples of beauty being a front for deviousness, treachery, violence, and mayhem. Look at Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, and Margaret Thatcher. And this principle is not limited to living things; the bickering over the lush and disputed province of Kashmir (which has been described as a "paradise on Earth") has the possibility of spiraling into a nuclear war between Pakistan and India.
And so it goes with M31. Despite its splendor, the galaxy represents a clear and present danger to us. The fact of the matter is that it is quickly advancing towards the United States of America at an incredible rate of speed (approximately 300 kilometers per second) and in time, it will collide with us. It doesn't take a degree in astrology to realize that if this were to happen, it would visit untold destruction and mayhem upon all Americans.
There is no obvious reason for this aggressive behavior. Certainly, the U.S. has never threatened or otherwise maligned M31, yet here it comes anyway. M31 has never proven itself to be particularly useful; in particular, it has served no purpose in the recent (and ongoing) war on terrorism. With the lack of any evidence to the contrary, I think the conclusion is elementary: M31 needs to be considered an enemy galaxy. There is no other explanation for its belligerence.
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
I think some unions are bad, but in some situations they are needed. I think there are two things that should be required of a union.
1) A union should never be able to tell a company that they cannot hire non union workers, nor should they be able to restrict where the members of the union work. This is a problem in some theater productions. I don't know if this is true everywhere, but I have some friends in Gainesville that complain that members of a union can get in trouble for working in a non union house (even if it is a community theater) and if you are non union you can't get a job in a union house. A union is supposed to protect the rights of workers, not limit their rights
2) A Union should not be able to use money from dues to pay for any political cause UNLESS the majority of the members of the union voted and said it was OK to spend their dues money on that cause. I think it is wrong that there can be an organization that a person is required to pay money to that can use that money to support a cause that the person is against. If it is a union where a person is not punished for not being a member of it, then this restriction would not be as applicable (since you could quit the union if you were annoyed with how they spent your money).
Posted by J T Stryker (Member # 6300) on :
Lupus,
1. I'm a union stage hand, and the reasoning behind the way that unions work as far as where non-union members can work is not entirely the unions fault, it depends on state laws. I know in Indiana some one can not be denied a job due to their status as a union member or not. If the individual is a non-union, then they would be expected to work according to the union contract with the house (they also would receive union wages). A lot of unions however won't allow their members to work a non-union house for pay (or in other words, you can volunteer your services, but you can't receive any compensation). This is a way of trying to force a house to negotiate with the local union to become a union house. The idea is that everyone in town wants union benefits, so no one will work for a non union house (cause no labor, translates to no show) and thus force the house to either hire cheap unskilled labor, or pay for what they want.
2. These are Right to work states. This site is a little outdated (it was last updated in 2003, and it misses a few states i think, IN for sure) but it explains Right to Work Laws very well.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
Workers of the worlds unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
What fantasy world does this guy live in?