In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

AFL-CIO to battle NRA

TorinoTorino Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
edited April 2002 in General Discussion
Taken from The Union Advocate 4/10/02
Washington-In the 2000 election,labor-backed canidates won more than 60 pecent of union members' votes-unless those union members were white males who own guns.(smell racism here?)
According to the article we were influenced by Charlton Heston and his $20 millon dollar campiagn.( gees howd he get 20 mil?)
The battle plan, to establibish Union Sportsmen of America (USA) USA will compete by selling union-made firearm-related products-everything from Colt,Winchester and Remington rifles to caps.( where can I sign up? not)

To sumarize the article, unions are finally realizing it doesn't help if their canidate is pro-labor as long as they support gun control they're out. So we are making a difference,keep up the good work.

As long as I have my gun I'll always eat something.
«1

Comments

  • k.stanonikk.stanonik Member Posts: 2,109 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    and to think of all the flack i got from my unioun brothers for voting for bush.
  • alledanalledan Member Posts: 19,541
    edited November -1
    American Federation of Liars-Congress of Industrial Oppression!

    Never ask why but only the value of.
  • stanmanstanman Member Posts: 3,052
    edited November -1
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Union leadership sucks.

    PC=BS
  • RembrandtRembrandt Member Posts: 4,486 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    What I have never understood is why pro-gun or conservative Union members let the AFL/CIO spend nearly $40 million of of your Union dues on liberal candidates like Gore & Clinton?....
  • stanmanstanman Member Posts: 3,052
    edited November -1
    Rembrandt,
    I was briefly a member of a union connected to the AFL-CIO and I protested that very point.
    I was told to shut up or move on, I moved on! I don't believe those union members have any say whatsoever how those dues are spent!
    Unions = legalized extortion!
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    All things considered, I do not understand why union members object when their unions support anti-gun candidates. Just about every aspect of the Union mentality is Socialism, so it should be expected that they would support anti-gun candidates. I think there is some disconnect in the thinking of "pro gun" union members. To be "pro gun" goes against the Socialist philospohy of Unions.

    Happiness is a warm gun
  • TorinoTorino Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Rembrandt,

    Seems the carpenters union didn't care for the way the AFL-CIO was spending their dues and are no longer associated with them, you should have heard the other trades grumble.

    salzo,

    I dont mind helping a brother who's helping himself but a guys got to have limits, right? I do my part and let them (my union) know that I would like them to support candidates who believe in the Constitution. I think that maybe they're finally starting to catch on.


    As long as I have my gun I'll always eat something
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    salzo,

    Because one chooses to work with a signed contract hardly makes them a socialist. It sounds like you would rather we return to the days of McCarthy where there is a commie lorking around every corner.

    When you take out a loan would you call the bank socialist for having you sign a contract? If it involves money than a contract should be expected.

    Gore found out the hard way about leaning too far left. Like Torino said the AFL CIO found out from the carpenters that they had crossed the line. Union members are no different than non-union. Informed people vote accordingly, regardless of union affiliation or not.

    It suprises how so many union bashers are former union members or have never belonged to one. If you got out because things didn't go your way than I'd say you're probably one of those guys that * at work the day after the union meeting about what took place at the meeting, even though you didn't bother to attend, and more than likely you never served your union as any form of officer or sat on any commitee. If you never belonged to a union than your opinion of unions is insignificant to say the least.
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Typical of a Union/Socialist to pull out the "McCarthy" trump card to diffuse a legit accusation of Socialism.
    I am actually in a Union-American Federation of Musicians. I always find it interesting when they take "dues" money and "pension" money out of my paycheck. The funny thing is, I do not have a pension with the Union, and I get absolutely nothing for my dues. My dues "allows" me to take union jobs. And what do those union jobs provide? Nothing. I make less money on union jobs than I do on non union, because the contractors do not have to pay all of the ridiculous fees to the union, therefore the "workers" get the money.
    But my dues and pension payments are used to support the Pensions, insurance, and other benefits of the major orchestra in the area.
    Sure is funny that the musicians who make the most money in the area, are benefiting from payments made to the union by other musicians in the area. The union will go to bat for the major orchestra whenever it is needed, but the rest of us? Forget them. Just take their money, and use it to help the big guys.
    A few years ago I was playing a show in Atlantic city. It was a 4 month run, the pay was great(better than union wages), and the conditions were great. I get a call from the Union, and they inform me that this was not a union job, and I should cease playing. They called all of the other orchestra members, and told them the same. Now the funny thing is, livem music in atlantic city has been all but eleiminated. The cost of hiring union musicians cost too much, so they rely on recorded music. The cost was not too high because of the musicians salaries, but because of all the union BS.
    Yey here I am, working, making good money, no thanks to the union, and the union tells me I should go unemployed because it is not a "union shop." They as all unions do, felt that I was aiding in the demise of employment oppurtunities(which did not exist, because the union forced the casinos to go with "canned" music), by working for a non union shop. Of course this was untrue-it was the union that caused musicians to become unemployed. The union screws everyone up, but is trying to place blame on a few working musicians.
    Now I am supposed to quit this job, because the union claims that it is hurting other musicians, and eventually myself. The truth is, me working is hurting the union big wigs, because it takes away their power. It was not about the "little guy", it was about the head honchos losing power that they relish. So when someone tries to be independent, and better themselves, the union claims that this freedom is detrimental to the whole. Sure sounds like Marxism to me.

    Happiness is a warm gun
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    salzo,

    So you got caught "scabbing" and it's all the unions fault? Why would you pay dues to them and expect them not to try to secure union work for you. You wouldn't be getting much bang for your buck if they sat on their hands while taking your money. Typical of someone that believes the rules apply to everyone but them. The notion that I'll work union as long as I can profit from it, but when the going gets tough I'll turn my back, is what has gotten unions where they are today. Too many members with their hands out instead of lending a hand.

    Did you do anything to change what you felt was an injustice, or did you just quit? If you quit, I'd say the American Federation of musicians is better off. No flame, just an observation from a former member of the same union.(I got out because I quit playing)
  • NOTPARSNOTPARS Member Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'm a high school teacher and one of the other teachers has a Union bumper sticker on his truck saying the Democrats support "working" families. I guess because I am not in a union that means I am not a working person. In addition, I have never understood how they can square this alleged support for "working families" with the FACT that Union leadership supports liberal Democrats who are:

    1. The biggest taxers
    2. The biggest spenders
    3. Support socialist economic policies which destroy the economy
    and make our lives so much more difficult
    4. And who oppose the Constitution as our Founders intended (look at
    their position on the Second Amendment
    5. And support such family friendly measures as support for
    homosexual marriages, homosexual adoptions, and abortions at any
    time for any reason.

    Real "family" guys these liberals and Union leadership

    P.S. I used to be in the AFL-CIO, not any longer....


    "Hitler was a socialist..."
  • beantolebeantole Member Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Oh com'on........everyone knows that unions originated with Karl Marx.
    An everyone knows unions were the biggest supporters of Klinton/Gore.
    That speaks volumes.

    Bruce
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Torino's post is about how unions are changing as a direct result of not representing its members.

    http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020226-9805895.htm

    Instead of just belly-aching and quiting, some of us have stayed and tried to effect change in the leadership of our respective unions.

    But I guess some here have missed the point of Torino's post. Conservative union members are starting to make a difference.
  • TorinoTorino Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    My purpose in placing this post was not to cause dissention in the ranks but to show that they're realizing that gun owners a force to be dealt with.
    As far as the Klinton/Bore years. The American public was served up the WTA and NAFTA both of which more or less destroyed the soverenty of this Nation. See if your local politician can tell you how much the American tax payer is out,or will be out, over law suits filed by other counties because of these agreements.
  • mudgemudge Member Posts: 4,225 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Beat me up if you like, but....I've never belonged to a union. Never wanted to. Somehow I got through my entire working life by representing myself, not paying someone else to "maybe" represent my views and concerns. One thing that really "torques my jaws" are these people who come to a company looking for a job. "Oh yes, I'll be the best employee you ever had." Until he gets the job, joins the union and then, through his union, says; "You'd better give us what we want or we'll go on strike and put you out of business."
    Just my $.02

    Mudge the resourceful

    I can't come to work today. The voices said, STAY HOME AND CLEAN THE GUNS!
  • GreenLanternGreenLantern Member Posts: 1,647 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This is why I seldom read a post after there's been about 8 replies. It's usually has become a flame war with little relevent information coming from successive replies
  • LightningLightning Member Posts: 945 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well said Mudge
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES UNITE!
    -Karl Marx (Manifesto of the communist party)

    Happiness is a warm gun
  • NOTPARSNOTPARS Member Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For Mudge,

    I suspect you are well acquainted with meritocracy and the free market and how, in the long run, it benefits everyone, except, of course, those looking for a handout and an easy ride. The other method not only rewards but creates a system that caters to the lowest common denominator. In the long run, everyone is hurt by such practices.


    "FDR was a socialist..."
  • NOTPARSNOTPARS Member Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For Smokey 1,

    You say conservatives should stay in unions (especially when one considers how socialistic the agendas of so many unions are) but you also seem rather defensive of unions in general. Not an attack, just an observation.

    Second, raising the Joe McCarthy communist thing leaves me a little suspicious of your concern for conservatives. Have you read anything about the Venona Papers? How about the Amerasia Affair? If you had, you would know that the only thing McCarthy said which was wrong was the number of spies and pro-Soviets in the FDR and Truman White House. It was much more than he even knew. Even liberal scholars, long the self annointed appointed crucifiers of McCarthy have been force to admit that McCarthy was right. FDR's administration was completely dominated by both Marxist professors and Red spies...you have heard of Harry Hopkins I assume. The evidence released since 1996 has shocked many good liberals who thought the man was an evil vile liar. Turns out, he was right all along.

    Gore didn't lean too far to the left. He was already way over in their ideological spectrum.

    Union bashers are either people who are ex-union or never in a union? Kind of narrows down our choices does it not? I was FORCED to be in the AFL-CIO when I worked for Lockheed. I had NO CHOICE and NO FREEDOM to say NO. Each month I received the AFL-CIO's leftwing rant and rave rag sheet. I couldn't believe, as a teacher, how much what they spew out reminded me of the ravings of Marxists from the 60s!

    In my government class was a little girl who used to love talking about shooting her lever action .357 with her dad who had a .357 revolver. He was pro-Second Amendment and NRA. She came in to my class after the last election and told me her dad voted for Gore. I said how could he seeing he was a big firearms enthusiast. I said, "Wait a minute, let me guess, he is in a union." She said yep, the union told him he had to vote for Gore. Even she understood that Gore was a leftwing environmental extremist and hardcore anti-gunner.

    Maybe conservatives should remain in unions to try to change them. But I wonder if that is sort of like telling devout conservative Christians they should remain in the Episcopal Church to reform it...?


    "FDR was a socialist..."
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Every time a union topic is posted here it turns into a free for all, and winds up getting poofed.

    The AFL-CIO has had it's problems with organized crime, they had and still have politicians in their pockets, the new supposedly cleaned up administration is crime free.

    I doubt that anyone really believes that, in Chicago and other big cities around the country, the old union organizers and reps, have simply moved into politics, and now run their scams from city halls.

    Unions are one reason why, business have been fleeing the US borders, due to taxes, insurance and union benefits demanded by these organizations.

    Union workers ought to have their own unions start up a business producing products that can be manufactured by their own members, and then marketed, so they can see how difficult it is for manufacturer's to compete against forign products in the market place.

    Then we will see if they would standby while their unions supported these leberal anti business democratic politicians with there millions of hardearned union dollars.

    Unions destroy the incentive for business to manufacture goods and products within the US borders.

    And they, (unions) wonder why they are losing jobs to foreign manufacturers.

    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I just had the great fortune of watching STEVE ROSENTHAL on CSPAN. For those who do not know Steve, Steve is the political director of the AFL-CIO. Steve was talking about campaign finance reform, and stated there will always be problems, until there are;
    Public Funding of Campaigns
    Free radio and TV time for candidates.
    It is nice to hear Mr. Rosenthal express that he thinks I should pay for candidates that I do not agree with.
    It is also nice to see that Steve feels that American business should be forced to give their services, for free, to american politicians. Why draw the line on TV and radio? Why not have ALL elements of advertising supplied to the candidates for free. Why not force billboard owners to give politicians free use of their property.
    Now for all you fellas who do not think that Unions are socialist, ask yourself a question: Do these proposals that your political director propose more in line with Constituional principles, or Marxist principles? The answer is obvious. It is Marxism.
    So I ask you gun toting union members, why do you think it is OK to ignore constitutional principles, EXCEPT for the Right to Bear Arms? Sorry but I do not feel the need to get behind people who want gun ownership rights for "selfish" reasons. If these gun owning union members did not own guns, they would have no problem supporting their union in ALL of its communist goals.
    So you Union Gun owners should stop being so selfish on this one issue, and stop being a thorn in your Unions side,ansd stop fighting them on the gun issue. Toe the Union line, and be good Union Members.

    Happiness is a warm gun
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Never happen.

    Ifn the lite bulb lit up, union gun owners members would chose union membership over gun ownership.

    Job is to cushy to give up..

    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • k.stanonikk.stanonik Member Posts: 2,109 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I disagree with the above post, i am a gun owner and a unioun member, i dont agree with all that the union stands for but if it means good money and work then i will go along with some things. If i had to make a choice right now between my guns or the union then i would quit the unioun in a heart beat
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think the original idea of unions was good and needed and that the time had come for them. Today the unions have grown both ways, some communist, some controlled by organized crime, a few for the good of their members but as far as an see all are anti capitalist. I believe that, by and large, workers and business owners are too stupid to understand that they need each other. The unions want to extort the businesses and * when their jobs go overseas, the businesses don't realize the same thing is going to eventually happen to them in their foreign countries. I have never joined a union. And never will. They're all a bunch of extortionists.

    PC=BS
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Again the orginal intent of unions was protection of the worker. There was a need for that protection. I belonged to a union (carpenters) a long time ago. And they provided me with benefits I would not have been able to broker on my own. Also when a construction conpany failed to pay me, they were able to put pressure on the company, and suddenly there was a check.
    Unions definetly have left / socialist leanings. This is in conflict with a lot of construction people, because they are mostly outdoorsman and hunters. Now they must choose between what their unions say, and what they know to be true.
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
  • k.stanonikk.stanonik Member Posts: 2,109 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thank you alpine, you have stated what i was trying to say , if we look at everything in life there are good and bad, what may be good for you may not for me and visa versa.
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I say do away with the bad, and in with the good, unions need to be control of the membership, administrators like the late J. Hoffa, and Fitzgerald.

    Afterall, there are plenty of these types around that know how to extort money, decent folks don't need to help these types, by seating them of governing boards.

    There are enough Jesse Jackson's around, that effect businesses negatively, he doesn't head up a union, he just owns a non profit corp, and does the same things union do, only difference is he doesn't have to worry about delivering goods and being re-elected, his family controls the whole enchilada.



    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Jesse Jackson is a poster child for the Rico Act. If only the justice department had the ba**s to act.

    Edited by - Alpine on 04/19/2002 20:57:51
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I say do away with the bad, and in with the good, unions need to be in control of the membership, not administrators like the late J. Hoffa, and Fitzgerald.

    Afterall, there are plenty of these types around that know how to extort money, decent folks don't need to help these types, by seating them of governing boards.

    There are enough Jesse Jackson's around, that effect businesses negatively, he doesn't head up a union, he just owns a non profit corp, and does the same things union do, only difference is he doesn't have to worry about delivering goods and being re-elected, his family controls the whole enchilada.



    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry


    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Geeesh...I take off to go fishing and look what happens.:)

    NOTPARS,

    I didn't mean to be defensive. I was simply providing counter-point when Torino's original post was misinterpreted by several other posters, and turned into a union slam-fest.

    I only threw McCarthy out there because salzo slung the "socialist" mud first. It seems I have some reading to do to catch up to speed with you on McCarthy, as I'm not familiar with either The Venona papers or the Amerasia affair. Are they available to read on the web?

    As far as Lockheed goes, you had a choice...you chose to work there. Must not have bothered you too much.

    The union ASKED me to vote for Gore also...guess what I did.

    turbo,

    "Unions are one reason why, business have been fleeing the US borders, due to taxes, insurance and union benefits demanded by these organizations"

    Businesses are fleeing to foreign soil to maximize profits period.

    Unions have set the standards for all workers in the USA. Minimum wage, workmans comp, unemployment insurance, even the 40 hour work week were won from the struggles of unions. Some of these standards you may not agree with... but I bet you would have your palms open if they could benefit you and yours, now wouldn't ya? Unfortunately these standards are not enjoyed by workers in many countries. Cheap exploited labor is why companies flee the USA, to say otherwise is denial.

    salzo,

    As long as public funding of campaign financing is done in a fair way, I see no problem with it. It would level the playing field so that even poor slobs like me, that would otherwise never stand a chance of having a voice, to be heard. Hell, our government wastes money on far less noble endeavours than this.

    "Why draw the line on TV and radio? Why not have ALL elements of advertising supplied to the candidates for free. Why not force billboard owners to give politicians free use of their property."

    This is a strawman arguement. Next.

    Alpine,

    Your obsevations about unions, and more specifically construction trade unions, hits the x-ring. Construction trade unions are a far cry different than many union orgs.

    Geeesh... I feel like going fishing this weekend. Now if I can just get my commie wife and pinko kid to go with me...






    Edited by - smokey1 on 04/20/2002 01:22:24
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    SMOKEY 1- "this is a straw man argument". -I am assuming that you are all for, free radio and television ads for candidates. So you think it is OK for the government to force businesses to supply their services for free, to the government. So if it is OK for radio and terlevision, why do you think it is not OK to force billboard owners to provide their services for free?Why would you think ANY business should not be required to supply service for free to candidates, if you think it is OK to force TV and radio to provide their services for free? Please explain- Your "strawman" comment makes no sense at all on its face. It needs clarification.Or at least try and explain why you think the billboard comparison to forcing tv and radio to provide free services is a "strawman" argument.
    I am glad you acknowledgesd your Socialist stripes with your "As long as public funding for campaign financing is done in a fair way, I seen no problem with it. (Again I have to ask, if you think this obvious Socialist infringement is good, why are you worried about your right to bear arms? You are obviously not concerned at all about living in a free society, so why do you think the "right to bear arms" deserves protection that other rights of freemen do not deserve.Must be 'cause you hunt or something.) It will level the playing field...(Ah yes, the LEVEL PLAYING FIELD that you and your communist ilk constantly refer to)" Of course you seen no problem with forcing the citizens to contribute to something they do not agree with. I cant contribute money on my own to a candidate of my choice, but it is OK for the government to tax me so that they can fund candidates that I do not agree with. I guess stomping on my freedom to contribute to who I want to, is outweighed by the good that taxing me to pay for candidates who I do not agree with will do more for society as a whole. Sure smells like SOCIALISM to me. Your stripes are noted.

    Happiness is a warm gun
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Smokey1,

    Whats wrong with business making a profit? If there were no businesses here to employ workers, there is no need for a union.

    This is the major problem with the liberal mentality employed by those that are seated on the left, its called redistribution of wealth.

    Imposition by statute of minumum wages scales and insurance benefits including other benes, are one of the leading causes of businesses fleeing the country.

    All unions want to get their hands on these benefits programs to administrate them, like fifedoms, health insurance premiuns are the highest charged and continue to grow each year to the point where they drain the companies providing the benefits, wages are such that entry level employees are paid wages which non union journeyman workers would gladly take, if things weren't locked up, and kept private. Prevailing wage rates are ridiculesly high, an entyr level Laborer 1 makes in excess of 28.50 per hour on public job contract.

    I personally know of an individual who's union insurance pays him eye care benefits whose insurance only pays for exams and glasses at 20/20 Vision Care ; he says they pay 198.00 for an exam and over 600.00 for his prescription bifocals, while an eye exam at Costco costs 39.00 and double vision glass maximum cost would be 135.00. There is a huge disparity here (the union obviously pockets profits made by the eye care place and I bet the employees are not union employed), all because of union provided insurance benefits. Since the member pays zero, no big deal is made over this huge disparity, cause it's ultimately an expense borne by the company, in the end the consumer pays for this, or refuses to buy the products.

    Union workers are not pro business, and certainly not faithfull to their employers as a general rule, at the slightest provocation they are stirred up by their unions to extrort demand, and impose their will on their employers, making the public pay the price as well.

    Case in point the National Teachers Union. Thru deceit, manipulation and arrogance, they have convinced the government that it is essential to have 3.4 administrative employees supporting every front line teacher, while the private sector employed teachers prove otherwise, while doing a better job at educating the students, only diference is, we, the public can't chose to spend our money elsewhere.

    Unions as they exist today may be more harmful than beneficial to the business sector and the economy.

    Union employees need to reign in there unions and not allow them to run as rogue operations.

    They are another reason for the thriving, of illegal immigrant employment in this country.





    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry

    Edited by - turbo on 04/20/2002 11:20:15
  • Big Sky RedneckBig Sky Redneck Member Posts: 19,752 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have 4 business partners and we are looking at opening a small plant to manufacture our products. We spen a year finding a good location for that plant and after findiong a good spot with tax breaks and a strong work force we settle in on a town. We build our plant and hire 2500 workers. We pay them $8.00 per hour and a few supervisors $10.00 per hour. The plant is in op0eration for a year and things are going well. The owners are making money and we have employed 2500 workers who are making some money. The wage is better than the town had to offer before we came so while we are making money we are also helping the local economy. Now the unions come in and rally our employees. Now the demand $15.00 per hour for the general workers and $19.00 for supervisors along with an incredible benifits package. They go on strike and the plant loses money. The demands are such that we are no longer profitable for our selves. The money we are making is now being taken away and placed in the hands of the employees. We started the plant to make money for ourselves and now we are told by the unions that we cannot enjoy the profits of our venture and that it must be all given to the employees. After 6 months of this we have been informed that due to the union increase we are now $1.5 million over budget and we can no longer afford the size workforce we have now. We need to lay off. When we announce the layoff the unions strikes some more and demands more money for the displaced workers. We are out of business. An offer is made from a company in Tiawan to buy our patent so they may manufacture the product and market it here. We sell out as it is our only choice and come out with less money than we started with.

    According to the unions we are the ones at fault, not them. They struck and demanded a very high wage for a job that did not warrant the money they wanted. They milked us dry and cried foul. We are told that we cannot profit from our ideas and that all profit must go to the union workers. It is our money and our plant, we set the rules but the union see's it differently. They come in and make demands that are unrealistic and drive us into bankruptcy. But we are the bad guys. Enjoy your foriegn made widgets, you left us no choice.
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    7mm,

    Your lucky Jessee didn't get to you first.

    I like to fish and shoot, and watch footbal, but I'm not a fanatic about doing either.

    I have noticed however, that most fanatics who live for all of these types of entertainments are union members.

    Maybe it's just my own personal observation.

    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • legn4legn4 Member Posts: 481 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    7m/m nut 1) can You live on $8.00 per hr. 2) Isn't a good supervisor worth more than $10.00 per hr. I have been there done that, worked 10yrs for a company that paid more on the west coast than they do here (midwest) 13 yrs. later, went out on a ULP strike, lost my job , now have a better job & pay. And really do less. Oh well I don't buy little green boxes any more.

    Work'n like a dog all nite
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thats the whole point, thats being made here.

    Employees don't have to work for $8.00 perhour if they are worth $10.00, they can keep looking till they find their $10.00 per hour job.

    Employers shouldn't be forced to pay $15.00 per hour for a $10.00 per hour employee, not to mention the benefits on top of that.

    In a free open market, Employers will get what they are willing to pay for; if all they will pay is $8.00 per hour for a worker, obviously the $10.00 or $15.00 employees won't seek work in that establishment.

    Unions are just like the government,whenever they get involved in the business of setting pay rate, they wind up screwing the employers, at the expense of the owners, and the consumers.

    When the products can't sell for a worthwhile return on the owners investment, the only thing left to do is close the doors, or move elsewhere.

    The politicians use the governemnt to sets pay scales, to benefit unions for, union support come election time and, to as a deceptive way raise taxe revenues.

    Either way the employee doesn't care one way or the other; the employer has no options but to pay or close shop.

    For those who have the entrepenurial spirit fighting the costs of operating is bad enough, but if you got to fight the governement and the unions theres,

    No way He Can WIN.

    "The great object is that every man.... everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    salzo,

    Here's a nice simple definition of a strawman argument.

    "A Straw Man Argument is a statement you make if you want to more easily attack an opposing position. You intentionally make a silly caricature of that position, one that no one would believe, knock down that silly, unrealistic caricature, and then proclaim that the original version of the argument has been demolished."

    In this case the "silly caricature" is in branding union organizations socialist in nature because some members may find the public funding of political campaigns to be of value. It's a strawman.

    The gun grabbers use the same argument technique when they claim that since guns are used in murders than it follows that guns are bad and should be removed from society.

    Have you studied the history of trade unions? Guilds? Before Marx died he denounced trade unions as being too conservative. The unions of the modern day are not the "country clubs" of days gone by.

    I'm sure that there are members of the socialist party within not only the leadership of unions, but within the rank and file as well. Does this make unions a socialist organization? If you believe that, than I guess you would believe that Catholics are pedophiles by nature given current events. Pretty outrageous eh? S T R A W M A N.

    I've noticed that you also "read into" statements and make some pretty outlandish assumptions as a result. From this you put words in peoples mouths that were never stated. An occasional ad hominen even enters your vernacular. While entertaining, it hardly makes for good debate. If you wish to continue to debate from the position that unions are socialist organizations, please stick to facts.

    turbo,

    "Whats wrong with business making a profit?"

    Please point me to where I made the claim that businesses should not make a profit. Did you and salzo attend the same debate class?

    I fail to see where your opining on the internal business of benefit packages that union members participate in is worthy of debate. Of course if you are a union member, and feel that money is being wasted by all means work to change it. Otherwise refer to the definition I supplied salzo of a strawman argument.

    Employers sign contracts with unions for profit. No one holds a gun to their head. It is a mutual agreement. Businesses routinely lock-out employees for failure to negotiate to their terms. Likewise union members strike for the same reason. If you believe that employers sign for anything other than profit, I humbly submit that logic should tell you otherwise.

    Hey, at least you didn't resort to mud slinging.


    Back on topic, what's so wrong with a union member being conservative? Without us, we would ALL have Al Gore in office. Think about it.
  • smokey1smokey1 Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    turbo,

    I almost forgot.

    "I like to fish and shoot, and watch footbal, but I'm not a fanatic about doing either.

    I have noticed however, that most fanatics who live for all of these types of entertainments are union members.

    Maybe it's just my own personal observation."

    I know that this statement was directed at 7MM, but I have read back through the posts several times and I fail to see the connection you are attempting to make.

    I love to hunt and fish, but that's because that was how I was raised. Long before I had political leanings whatsoever.

    If you really believe this to be true, could you elaborate. You've peaked my proletareate interests.

    ROTFLMAO!

    Edit:

    AHHHH...NOW I GET IT! And correct me if I am wrong here, but you are suggesting that union members hold social interests in higher regard than monetary. At least that's the conclusion that I have drawn given the lowest common denominator of your statement.

    Us country boys may be slow but that's another topic.[D)]

    This would actually make for a pretty good NEW topic. "Wealth vs Fun...What Do You Value?" Although I think you would have a hard time drawing a concencus from either side of the political spectrum, it would still be enlightening. I would favor the middle of the road, where the two meet intra-dependently.

    However turbo, if this is your true feelings regarding union members and their value system, I would suggest that these same people might consider your views to be rather neoliberalist.

    And for those interested, while contemplating the ill-effects of the bourgeoisie on modern day economics, I found the fishing to be almost utopian-like this weekend.





    Edited by - smokey1 on 04/22/2002 05:40:21
Sign In or Register to comment.