Shady Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 At least the media's beginning to recognize the complete hatred and psychosis of the Wisconsin union protestors. Walker is Hitler! Walker is Mussolini! Walker is Mubarak! Walker is a rapist! Reload on Walker (with gunsight over his face). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 At least the media's beginning to recognize the complete hatred and psychosis of the Wisconsin union protestors. Walker is Hitler! Walker is Mussolini! Walker is Mubarak! Walker is a rapist! Reload on Walker (with gunsight over his face). It's still a side issue, and has no bearing on what we're talking about here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 It's still a side issue, and has no bearing on what we're talking about here. I agree that it's a side issue. But it cuts to the heart of fairness in the media, and what's suppose to be media objectivity. And it's pretty clear there is none. If this was a Tea Party rally, these signs would be all over the evening news, the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc. Even the panel on MSNBC admits it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 You do realize that the business tax is to be reduced to the tune of many of millions of dollars while at the same time the working folks(middle class) are having their pay and benefits cut. How do you reconcile such conduct? Secondly the Governor did not campaign on the premise that he would be removing collective bargaining rights if elected. How many buisnesses do the Koch brothers own in Wisconsin and how much did their contribution to the Governor's campaign bear on the changes the Governor is attempting to ram through? Lower businesses taxes allow for greater job creation. If the businesses do not turn a profit people will be laid off en masse. This is how business works. Profits means more jobs, less profits means job losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Here's a decent editorial on these events from CNN (no doubt lefties will accuse it of being biased): http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/21/avlon.wisconsin.unions/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn I tend to agree. The issue isn't so much "union busting" as the simple reality that the budgets need to be balanced rather than simply taking on more and more debt, and that public sector obligations take up a huge and increasing portion of the budget. Unions are what they are: they use their power to look out for the best interests of their members, and do not consider the best interests of their employers, be they private or public. It appears taxpayers can no longer afford such a system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Lower businesses taxes allow for greater job creation. If the businesses do not turn a profit people will be laid off en masse. This is how business works. Profits means more jobs, less profits means job losses. That's an old theory but it doesn't allow for a lot of variance. Maybe more profits mean investing your money overseas. Maybe more profits mean just paying yourself, as owner, more money, buying a bigger house. Maybe more profits mean you buy another business, merge it with yours, and fire a bunch of employees. There is absolutely no guarantee that more profits = more jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Lower businesses taxes allow for greater job creation. If the businesses do not turn a profit people will be laid off en masse. This is how business works. Profits means more jobs, less profits means job losses. WOW! Straight from the Fascist manifesto... Amazing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Not at all, Scotty. I have always believed in individual responsibility and individual duty and obligations. As do I. I was automatically made a member of the union when I joined my current employer a dozen years ago. I worked diligently and proactively at my work and became one of the best workers in the building. My being a member of the union had no affect on that, one way or another. I became a shop steward after witnessing some good people getting screwed over by a mindless, bureaucratic system which just didn't care a damn about what was right or wrong, and which didn't even follow its own policies, never mind common fairness. As an example, there is a fellow who worked for the employer for almost thirty years, in progressively more responsible positions, and then, due to a sudden serious illness (Parkinsons) was no longer able to work at quite his own pace. Now to me, I'd say, let him ride, give him a break, he's not that far from retirement anyway, and he's been a loyal employee for decades. All his boss could see, though, was he wasn't working up to full pace, and so he began to harass him about that and every little thing he did, basically trying to force him out. You think that's the kind of thing where maybe it'd be helpful to have the union to assist the guy? Unions encourage and promote laziness, slagging, lying (witness the so-called teachers phoning in sick in Wisconsin) and dishonesty enforced by physical violence and/or murder and death. This is blather, Jack, nonsense. It's the equivalent of those people who fear corporate hit squads are out there ready to murder anyone who threatens the profits of multinationals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 My arguments - at least regarding unions - are totally unassailable. But silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 WOW! Straight from the Fascist manifesto... Amazing... You mean the Fascsist Manifesto that was penned,in part,by one Benito Mussolini?? The one that advocated for a government run national worker syndicate?? (see...government run extortion body that would squash all workerplace rights in the corporate state) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I'm not sure one can use the word join if it's involuntary. The term join is an indication of some type of choice. There is no choice. When I came to my current city, I didn't choose to join, but I have to pay taxes regardless. Why can't the city just collect taxes off people who use specific services, like schools, etc? I don't use the schools so I shouldn't need to pay for them, right? I choose to forego police and fire protection. That's okay, right? So I don't have to pay for them. I will take my own garbage out of the city in my truck. So I shouldn't have to pay garbage taxes, right? Of course, there is, in reality, no way of opting out of any city services. You take them whether you need them, or think you need them or not. The city provides services to all who live in the area, and you benefit from the existence of those services, even if you don't personally use them. In the same way, a person who works at a company benefits from the union, regardless of what he thinks of them. And just as city services couldn't function properly if taxpayers could 'opt out' so to would the union not function if half the people could opt out - while still benefiting from the union's existence and work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Jack Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I remember when the Tea Party crowds demonstrated all over the United States they were called racists because there were rather few black faces to see. The crowds protesting in Wisconsin must be at least as racist, because there is a definite dearth (for those 'educated' by public school teachers, dearth is something they should look up) of black faces in the Wisconsin crowds. RACIST BIGOTS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 You mean the Fascsist Manifesto that was penned,in part,by one Benito Mussolini?? The one that advocated for a government run national worker syndicate?? (see...government run extortion body that would squash all workerplace rights in the corporate state) As I said before my friend, you are extremely "SHARP" today... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 As I said before my friend, you are extremely "SHARP" today... Interesting how RTW legislation acts like the labour organizing theories of the Fascist Manifesto??? No wonder the NAM is behind it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I remember when the Tea Party crowds demonstrated all over the United States they were called racists because there were rather few black faces to see. No, Jack, they were called racists because a lot of them said some pretty racist things. Maybe you're thinking of the Republican Party? :-P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 WOW! Straight from the Fascist manifesto... Amazing... Wow. I didn't know that JFK was a fascist. I also didn't know reality was a fascist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 That's an old theory but it doesn't allow for a lot of variance. Maybe more profits mean investing your money overseas. Maybe more profits mean just paying yourself, as owner, more money, buying a bigger house. Maybe more profits mean you buy another business, merge it with yours, and fire a bunch of employees. There is absolutely no guarantee that more profits = more jobs. However there is a guarantee that no profits or a loss will equal less jobs. We need business to be successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 However there is a guarantee that no profits or a loss will equal less jobs. We need business to be successful. Exactly. Good salaries and benefits are paid for with profits. Except in the case of public unions. There salaries and benefits have nothing to do with the revenue of the government they work for. Their solution is to take more money from other people in order to keep the gravy flowing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) That's an old theory but it doesn't allow for a lot of variance. Maybe more profits mean investing your money overseas. Maybe more profits mean just paying yourself, as owner, more money, buying a bigger house. Maybe more profits mean you buy another business, merge it with yours, and fire a bunch of employees. There is absolutely no guarantee that more profits = more jobs. Yes and the Koch's various businesses laid off hundreds in the past several years while increasing their billions of dollars. Edited February 22, 2011 by pinko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) Exactly. Good salaries and benefits are paid for with profits. Except in the case of public unions. There salaries and benefits have nothing to do with the revenue of the government they work for. Their solution is to take more money from other people in order to keep the gravy flowing. Psst public sector workers pay taxes and buy goods and services in the private sector. Try harder. Edited February 22, 2011 by pinko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I remember when the Tea Party crowds demonstrated all over the United States they were called racists because there were rather few black faces to see. The crowds protesting in Wisconsin must be at least as racist, because there is a definite dearth (for those 'educated' by public school teachers, dearth is something they should look up) of black faces in the Wisconsin crowds. RACIST BIGOTS! Ummm, you may want to look at the racial demographics of Wisconsin as compared to, oh lets say Alabama (or pretty much any Southern or Eastern State), before coming to such a conclusion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Psst they pay taxes and buy goods and services in the private sector. Try harder. Uh.... How 'bout "Union busting is about personal freedom!!!" (see getting rid of outside impediments to the free market) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinko Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Uh.... How 'bout "Union busting is about personal freedom!!!" (see getting rid of outside impediments to the free market) But of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) Ummm, you may want to look at the racial demographics of Wisconsin as compared to, oh lets say Alabama (or pretty much any Southern or Eastern State), before coming to such a conclusion... He also might want to look at the discrepancy in wages,benny plans,and,health and health and safety in the workplace in the RTW states he idolizes...(many in the Southeast)..As oposed to union states... Ah...The "freedom"... Edited February 22, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 He also might want to look at the discrepancy in wages,benny plans,and,health and health and safety in the workplace in the RTW states he idolizes...(many in the Southeast)..As oposed to union states... Ah...The "freedom"... Ahhh yes, the freedom of the slave entering serfdom, such amazing advancements in culture are to be um, ahhh, err, what's the word I'm looking for, can you help me out here Jack, I've got a bad headache... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.