Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: lazs2 on October 09, 2005, 10:50:12 AM
-
Prop 75 here in kalifornia for november.
It basicaly says that unions have to get written permission from all of their members every year in order to spend said members dues on political contributions.
This is of course making the teachers and firefighters and other unions and especially democrats.... hopping mad.... the idea! to actually offer people a choice! this is allmost as crazy as vouchers!
the idiots that pay dues don't have the brains to know what is good for them.... Offer those idiots a choice on how or on who they support?
course... if you think the union is doing a good jog and you agree with the "list-0-commies" that they trot out every election cycle then you merely need to check the box that says "yes, I am too stupid to know who to support and would like to continue allowing my comrades in the plitiburo to spend my money."
lazs
-
What's worse is the opposition commercials to these propositions. They make it sound like Arnie is taking candy from children and while he's at it he's smashing their piggy banks and will give them nightmares for the rest of their lives.
I also like the one that says independent judges NOT the politicians will decide districting lines
-
yep... arnie is talking about and airing stuff that the socialists don't really want people to think about.... which is just about everything they have their wet little milky white hands on.
Since mostly women watch the commercials tho... I imagine that they are simply talking to the choir.
lazs
-
Laz,
Is it true you don't pay for your own gas - that the county buys yours for you?
And, what year is your El Camino? I think I saw a '70 today-- very, very sharp. Two big fat white racing stripes on the hood. Prolly a 396 in it?
-
oboe... the citizens taxed on their sewer and water bill pay for my gas in my work car that I can not use for personal reasons. I am on call most of the time tho so put about 12k a year on the vehicles. The option would be for me to get a car allowance and do that but since I put so many miles on it would not be practical.
My car is a 69.. it is a 468 6 speed. My other car is an Austin Healey with a 331 and 4 speed... my other car is a Lincoln Town car with a baby seat in the back. I also own an old BMW bike. I also buy gas for my girlfriends car about every week when she comes to see me.
What is your point?
lazs
-
Two points, really. One, is every time you get on your high horse about the evils of socialism I feel the need to point out that you are biting the hand that feeds you. Some people may view it as hypocrisy on your part. How did you swing a gas allowance/reimbursement bene? What a nice deal that is for you! What if the county proposes an increase in taxes to help defray the recent, drastic increased cost in gas? Would you favor such an increase?
Second, the '69 El Camino is one of the most beautiful vehicles ever made, IMO. The lines just look so...right.
(http://www.djwool.com/tree05.jpg)
Do you remember the Ford Ranchero? I think the body/cab was based on the LTD. Just didn't have the pleasing lines of the Elky. By the mid to late 70s though, El Caminos were looking pretty plain.
-
It's a shame that most of the unions have become corrupt to the point of making themselves irrevelant.
J_A_B
-
I would not join an union that would make political contributions. But why do you need a law for it? People have the choice to join an union or not, and it's their personal responsibility to acquire the information how the union uses it's assets.
-
"People have the choice to join an union or not"
Not always. In some cases you either join, or find a new career. That's a "choice" only in the most literal sense of the word.
J_A_B
-
A lot of companies make political contributions as well. Would you quit your job if the company contributes to a party you don't like? Worse, many companies contribute to BOTH sides in the U.S. I don't know what the answer is but I heard in Texas they have a law prohibiting corporations from making political donations. And that is supposedly how Tom Delay broke the law, by laundering this type of money.
I don't know if most unions are corrupt to the point of irrelevancy, but it seems to me we've gone round on this before. I think Toad's wisdom is succinct and apt here - the only thing worse than a union is NO union.
-
Originally posted by oboe
A lot of companies make political contributions as well.
But they use their money.
Unions force members to contribute from their own paychecks.
A fundamental difference.
-
Originally posted by oboe
A lot of companies make political contributions as well. Would you quit your job if the company contributes to a party you don't like? Worse, many companies contribute to BOTH sides in the U.S. I don't know what the answer is but I heard in Texas they have a law prohibiting corporations from making political donations. And that is supposedly how Tom Delay broke the law, by laundering this type of money.
I don't know if most unions are corrupt to the point of irrelevancy, but it seems to me we've gone round on this before. I think Toad's wisdom is succinct and apt here - the only thing worse than a union is NO union.
Your point would be relevent if it were a company contributing your 401k contributions without your consent or opinion. Yes people have a choice to be in a Union. Personally, I think this will be a great law. It will keep an influencial player out of politics.
-
Originally posted by oboe
Two points, really. One, is every time you get on your high horse about the evils of socialism I feel the need to point out that you are biting the hand that feeds you. Some people may view it as hypocrisy on your part.
Oboe do you really think people would not build water treatment plants without socialism? It's not Lazs' fault that his profession is dominated by government monopolies.
-
Originally posted by mora
People have the choice to join an union or not
Not in the USA. Maybe you understand why so many of us dislike unions?
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Not in the USA. Maybe you understand why so many of us dislike unions?
that depends on what State you work in, some States have "right to work" laws that say workers don't have to join a union.
*"right to work" law....some people call them "right to fire" laws, you can be fired with no notice and without cause.
on CEO pay, the board of directors decide CEO pay and bonus but the board is made up of CEO's from other companys, so you have CEO's voting big pay and bonus for each other, ( you vote for my 20million bonus and i will vote for yours)
-
Originally posted by mietla
But they use their money.
Unions force members to contribute from their own paychecks.
A fundamental difference.
These are good reasons for living in a "right to work" state.
-
To Mietla and Gunslinger, yes, you are right. Point conceded that the source of the money is different. I was thinking in principle only, but your point is well-taken.
To Funked, Yes, I think it is quite possible for people to build water plants without socialism. I think it probably makes more economic sense for the government to do it, however. And that is probably why we would find the overwhelming majority of water treatment plants are publicly-owned and operated. You misunderstand, I do not blame Laz for this situation at all.
I do think it is interesting that a person who participates in and benefits from socialism would rail so loudly against it though. Hearing him denigrate socialists as commies, idiots or women you might think he was a self-made capitalist, rather than a public servant who collects his salary and benefits at the expense of the taxpayers.
The other evils of Socialism notwithstanding-- if they are efficient and well-run, public utilities are an example of socialism that just makes sense. Laz himself has proved the point when he successfully competed against several privatization proposals, IIRC. I consider him to be a knowledgeable and first-rate water treatment plant manager.
Now, what about the Ford Ranchero vs Chevy El Camino?
-
Not in the USA. Maybe you understand why so many of us dislike unions?
People DO have the choice to join a union or not. It's just that not many people know this.
Plus the unions have the things stacked their way so much that it's hard to get by if you're not in.
Btw, if you choose not to join a union (you're automatically in), you still pay a base "Fee" to the union. Roughly around 25-20 percent of what you would be paying.
-
The union I belong to has the option for me to be a beck objector but the fees required of me to pay under objector status are appx 85% of regular union dues and plus I would have send in a check every two weeks or I would lose my job. Its union extortion as far as Im concerned.
-
give them this :
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Aug05/240805perspective.htm
ant they stop whining. :D
-
I don't really understand how the unions work over there... How is it possible to lose your job if you don't join the union? Do the other union people kick your bellybutton or go on strike or something?
-
Originally posted by oboe
To Mietla and Gunslinger, yes, you are right. Point conceded that the source of the money is different. I was thinking in principle only, but your point is well-taken.
To Funked, Yes, I think it is quite possible for people to build water plants without socialism. I think it probably makes more economic sense for the government to do it, however. And that is probably why we would find the overwhelming majority of water treatment plants are publicly-owned and operated. You misunderstand, I do not blame Laz for this situation at all.
I do think it is interesting that a person who participates in and benefits from socialism would rail so loudly against it though. Hearing him denigrate socialists as commies, idiots or women you might think he was a self-made capitalist, rather than a public servant who collects his salary and benefits at the expense of the taxpayers.
The other evils of Socialism notwithstanding-- if they are efficient and well-run, public utilities are an example of socialism that just makes sense. Laz himself has proved the point when he successfully competed against several privatization proposals, IIRC. I consider him to be a knowledgeable and first-rate water treatment plant manager.
Now, what about the Ford Ranchero vs Chevy El Camino?
working as a public servent is not a socialist concept. Neither is a "company vehicle" for that matter.
-
I dont pay alot of attention to it myself mora.....
It seems a union can get together with itself and decide to be a "closed shop" which means you have to belong to the union or you cant work at that job at that location....or something. But then some court overruled that concept at least to a point ......thats the Beck dude that objected....I guess.
I just pay my dues and pretend to read the stupid monthly newsletter and they leave me alone.
-
Apathy is the glove into which evil slips its hand.
-
There are states which have laws which require you to be part of a union in order to work there (New York is one I know for sure).
There are states which have a "Right to work" law. Basically, this means you do not have to be part of a union to work, and you cannot be denied work if you chose to not join a union. Texas has such a law.
There may be states which have neither law in place. Not sure about this category.
It is pretty much up to the states.
I have never been, nor never will be, part of a union, so I am really unqualified to state how they work, once you are part of one.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
working as a public servent is not a socialist concept. Neither is a "company vehicle" for that matter.
GS, Socialism is a political theory which espouses state ownership of industry. So, public utilities (water treatment, power generation, etc) are aspects or examples of socialism.
If the "company vehicle" is publicly owned, that is, paid for by the taxpayers ("state owned"), then I think it is, by extension an example of socialism.
-
"Two points, really. One, is every time you get on your high horse about the evils of socialism I feel the need to point out that you are biting the hand that feeds you. Some people may view it as hypocrisy on your part. How did you swing a gas allowance/reimbursement bene? What a nice deal that is for you! What if the county proposes an increase in taxes to help defray the recent, drastic increased cost in gas? Would you favor such an increase?
Second, the '69 El Camino is one of the most beautiful vehicles ever made, IMO. The lines just look so...right."
first... you are right on your last point... the 69 just looks right..
Socialism is pure evil. Water and wastewater plants are about 50/50 prvate and public owned... in most cases the private plants are WAY more cost effective but...
There is more to it than that. It is impossible for private entities to remove all liability from the city sooooo... most cities run the plants themselves in order to better control their liability
In my case it makes not much difference... I would be paid as much either way. I would have a job either way... there aren't enough qualified people at this time.
now... as for my "gas allowance"... do you think I should pay for gas to do the work of the city? should UPS drivers for instance... pay for fuel for their deliveries? If you do deliveries for a company most companies will figure fuel into the pay...
as for raising taxes for fuel costs.... any item that raises the cost of doing the job will affect the budget the next year... Again... what is your point?
and... as for the union thing... it is merely choice... If you wish to continue to contribute to the candidates the union selects you would not be prevented from doing so under prop 75. The key is that union dues are your money that is being spent to contribute to candidates that you may or may not agree to. Hell.... I don't care to pay less.... let the money go to other union benifiets... widows and orphans.... whatever.
It is simply a matter of choice and fairness.
lazs
-
and... not everyone pays the tax on water or wastewater.... some people are on a septic tank and have a well... they pay no users fees at all... this is of course fair.
lazs
-
I pick my fights well and the union fight is one not currently worth the energy. Especially putting up with the moronic union zealots. I just take a pass on the whole thing.
We thought Texas was where the company in which I work was going to move simply because of the right to work laws. Makes sense. The unions have made it harder and harder for the company in which I work to compete, hence all the offshoring.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
People DO have the choice to join a union or not. It's just that not many people know this.
Plus the unions have the things stacked their way so much that it's hard to get by if you're not in.
Btw, if you choose not to join a union (you're automatically in), you still pay a base "Fee" to the union. Roughly around 25-20 percent of what you would be paying.
In my workplace you pay the full fee whether you join the union or not. There's no choice at all - it's confiscated from your paycheck just like witholding taxes.
-
and... a portion of it is used to support the campains of the commies you vote against.
That is the crux of the situation.
lazs
-
Originally posted by oboe
I do think it is interesting that a person who participates in and benefits from socialism would rail so loudly against it though. Hearing him denigrate socialists as commies, idiots or women you might think he was a self-made capitalist, rather than a public servant who collects his salary and benefits at the expense of the taxpayers.
Who would know better than someone whose profession has been taken over by government monopolies? There's nothing interesting, curious, or surprising about it. Go look up "ad hominem tu quoque." :)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
and... a portion of it is used to support the campains of the commies you vote against.
That is the crux of the situation.
lazs
As I explained to you earlier, no. I get to check a box that says that LEA (the local), CTA (the state union), and NEA (the national union) can't use any of my money for political stuff.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
In my workplace you pay the full fee whether you join the union or not. There's no choice at all - it's confiscated from your paycheck just like witholding taxes.
Ditto. But then, we have a choice of two or three different health plans, three different dental plans, and the premiums are covered 100% whether you're single or are married with 10 kids...and if you choose to opt out (if you have other coverage), they give you a ~$250 monthly kickback to your paycheck.
-
An example of closed shop = SAG aka Screen Actors Guild
You can NOT work unless you are in the Guild.
You can NOT join the Guild unless you are working.
Thier answer is to Taft Hartley someone into the Guild.
You join the Guild and get a job at the same time. Your Guild admission fee comes out of your paycheck FIRST!
Thus they have a HUGH amount of control on who works and who doesn't.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
"Two points, really. One, is every time you get on your high horse about the evils of socialism I feel the need to point out that you are biting the hand that feeds you. Some people may view it as hypocrisy on your part. How did you swing a gas allowance/reimbursement bene? What a nice deal that is for you! What if the county proposes an increase in taxes to help defray the recent, drastic increased cost in gas? Would you favor such an increase?
Second, the '69 El Camino is one of the most beautiful vehicles ever made, IMO. The lines just look so...right."
first... you are right on your last point... the 69 just looks right..
Socialism is pure evil. Water and wastewater plants are about 50/50 prvate and public owned... in most cases the private plants are WAY more cost effective but...
There is more to it than that. It is impossible for private entities to remove all liability from the city sooooo... most cities run the plants themselves in order to better control their liability
In my case it makes not much difference... I would be paid as much either way. I would have a job either way... there aren't enough qualified people at this time.
now... as for my "gas allowance"... do you think I should pay for gas to do the work of the city? should UPS drivers for instance... pay for fuel for their deliveries? If you do deliveries for a company most companies will figure fuel into the pay...
as for raising taxes for fuel costs.... any item that raises the cost of doing the job will affect the budget the next year... Again... what is your point?
and... as for the union thing... it is merely choice... If you wish to continue to contribute to the candidates the union selects you would not be prevented from doing so under prop 75. The key is that union dues are your money that is being spent to contribute to candidates that you may or may not agree to. Hell.... I don't care to pay less.... let the money go to other union benifiets... widows and orphans.... whatever.
It is simply a matter of choice and fairness.
lazs
I disagree that socialism is "pure evil", any more than capitalism is "pure evil". Public schools, municipal fire and police departments, road maintenance depts, water and wastewater treatment - all these are examples of socialism, and all can serve their purposes well if citizens stay involved and keep a close eye on them. I think there is a tendency to exaggerate on this board to make a point.
If I were a taxpayer in your county, I would prefer not to pay for your gas commuting to and from work. Outside of that, I got no problem, but if a vehicle is constantly required for daily tasks, perhaps the county should provide one for your facility. I doubt UPS drivers own their trucks...
Laz, is it your impression that municipal wastewater treatment was once an industry dominated by private service providers and has been 'taken over' by government monopolies? Or is the other way around - an industry once dominated by publicly-funded and run facilities is now being threatened with privatization, on the promises of cost reductions and reduced taxpayer load?
-
Originally posted by wrag
An example of closed shop = SAG aka Screen Actors Guild
You can NOT work unless you are in the Guild.
You can NOT join the Guild unless you are working.
Thier answer is to Taft Hartley someone into the Guild.
You join the Guild and get a job at the same time. Your Guild admission fee comes out of your paycheck FIRST!
Thus they have a HUGH amount of control on who works and who doesn't.
only in Hollyweird.
-
water and wastewater were allmost 100% publicly owned at one time... the trend seems to be for privatization.... it is a tossup for most cities at this time.
I would also like to point out that I was a private licenced contractor for 15 years... that does not make me a self made capitalist success story but you have to admit that it could give me perspective by working in both the public and private sector and being in charge of opperations in both venues?
socialism is evil.... I know in minn. that is like balsphemy but.... in every case... competition from private companies improves things... if we took the money we are spending on taxes for roads say and used it to bid out construction and maintenance.... we would have the best roads in the world with a huge and embarassing surplus of funds.
Public schools? please... is there anyone left in the country who still buys the teachers unions excusses and guilt trips? They are outperformed.... no.... spanked by the religious schools who offer no excuses... just value.
The only thing that government does well is raise an army to protect the borders... that is pure waste no matter who does it and the only waste we should put up with... The founders had this stuff all figured out allmost 250 years ago.
lazs
-
Delphi files Bankruptcy. GM is predicted to follow suit shortly.
Legacy costs, and some downright stupid labor agreements are going to effect Autoworkers very shortly. What the US Steel worker experienced in the 80s' is now going to be experienced by US Autoworkers. Combination of jobs, permanent loss of jobs, wages MAY stay the same and retirement and health benefits will be reduced.
Unions and Companies of the US automakers jointly caused this problem.
Also....ever check what the salary is of the CEO of US Honda and other Foreign companies that manufacture autos in the US? Less then half of what the CEOs' of the 3 major US automakers make yearly.
Delphi will be closing plants in the US. Bet none will be closed in Mexico. Read an article by a Wall St. Insider that states that US Auto Makers like GM etc. will eventually be making their product in China and Mexico. Little or no benefits to pay.......and no Legacy Costs. Ain't Bankruptcy Grand?
-
"socialism is evil.... I know in minn. that is like balsphemy but.... in every case... competition from private companies improves things..."
What happens when the corporations get together and decide that real competition is less profitable and just fix prices with each other? That's exactly the nature of completely unrestricted capitalism as happened back in the 1800's.
Socialism might be pure evil, but laissez-faire capitalism is no better. I think bureaucracy in any form tends toward corruption.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
"socialism is evil.... I know in minn. that is like balsphemy but.... in every case... competition from private companies improves things..."
What happens when the corporations get together and decide that real competition is less profitable and just fix prices with each other? That's exactly the nature of completely unrestricted capitalism as happened back in the 1800's.
Socialism might be pure evil, but laissez-faire capitalism is no better. I think bureaucracy in any form tends toward corruption.
J_A_B
In the US that is illegal. It's is a violation of anti-trust laws. It's not always easy to prove but many cases have been won. This is the job of the government in a capitalist system. It is not to control the market but to make sure that the market is fair. While it's not a perfect system it does not breed the rampant corruption that the absolute power of socialist control usually does.
-
unions = organized crime
-
Wisconsin must not have a "right to work" thingy. best friend was forced to join a union at his current job at a quarry. family of 4 children, and they take a HUGE pre-tax cut for "dues"
one union rep actually tried to tell him he could be fined for not voting democrat, it was a pile of BS, but "scare tactics" like that were used on everyone in the shop.
that rep is no longer a union rep, but still...
oh yeah, each year they stop by the shop (the only time the ever come by) handing out forms of how much to donate to the democratic party.
-
Originally posted by Mustaine
Wisconsin must not have a "right to work" thingy. best friend was forced to join a union at his current job at a quarry. family of 4 children, and they take a HUGE pre-tax cut for "dues"
one union rep actually tried to tell him he could be fined for not voting democrat, it was a pile of BS, but "scare tactics" like that were used on everyone in the shop.
that rep is no longer a union rep, but still...
That's why I live in the land of cotton
Unions here are long forgotten
Stay away, stay away, stay away, from Dixie land!
(Unions that is!)
Born and raised in the North East, will never ever return!
-
Does GW have to get written permission from every citizen when he makes a decision?
-
Originally posted by mietla
But they use their money.
Unions force members to contribute from their own paychecks.
A fundamental difference.
They use shareholder money, should they get written permission from every shareholder?
Here you are not forced to join a union, you can choose not to. And the union still must represent you even though you are not paying dues. We have scabs, and they are usually the first ones to call for a steward, go figure.
Can one person prevent a whole union from contributing? Seems like they are just try to tie the unions hands to me.
I tell ya what, let's make it so it applies to everyone. Any politician must get written permission from every person he represents before he can take a contribution, deal?
-
Sixpence, this ain't a frickin IQ test.
The unions get money from the people. They then donate to democratic politicians, sometimes against the will of the union workers.
If you think about it (I know it's tough), each person contributes a certain amount. As it is now, they really have no say what happens to this money.
This proposition would make it so that if the Unions want to use anybody's money towards political contributions of any party, they need to get the consent of the worker.
For example. Let's say one union has 10 workers. Each pays 100 dollars in Union fees.
Let's say the union wants to contribute all of this money to a Republican. That's 1000 dollars. But wait, 5 of those workers are democrats. Why do they want the money they paid to go to a republican without their consent?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Sixpence, this ain't a frickin IQ test.
The unions get money from the people. They then donate to democratic politicians, sometimes against the will of the union workers.
If you think about it (I know it's tough), each person contributes a certain amount. As it is now, they really have no say what happens to this money.
This proposition would make it so that if the Unions want to use anybody's money towards political contributions of any party, they need to get the consent of the worker.
For example. Let's say one union has 10 workers. Each pays 100 dollars in Union fees.
Let's say the union wants to contribute all of this money to a Republican. That's 1000 dollars. But wait, 5 of those workers are democrats. Why do they want the money they paid to go to a republican without their consent?
Did it take a majority vote to elect the union pres?
lol, 5 out of ten. Let's say a union has 3000 members, but does not get written permission from 200 of them, then what?
-
Aye, when I worked for UPS for 2 years, it was required you were part of the Union. And they were very prompt at raising dues and always taking their cut...but seldon, if ever, addressed our calls, questions or even greivances.
Quite a racket. Paid to serve the members, yet never quite doing so.
Oh wait, where's Airhead rant about how beautiful the union is?
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Aye, when I worked for UPS for 2 years, it was required you were part of the Union. And they were very prompt at raising dues and always taking their cut...but seldon, if ever, addressed our calls, questions or even greivances.
Quite a racket. Paid to serve the members, yet never quite doing so.
Oh wait, where's Airhead rant about how beautiful the union is?
An ex girly worked for UPS, union supplied free health, eye care and dental. That union has one of the best benefits for members.
Greivances? Didn't they risk alot to strike to keep from more jobs going to part time?
How much would you have made and what would your benefits have been if there was no union?
-
You make the assumption that the unions are directly responsible for all the worker's benefits, not the people themselves.
-
six... I called my union because they sent a flyer saying that we could opt out of the political contribution.... what they meant was that I could opt out of contributing any EXTRA money to them for political funding.
I then explained that no, I did not want my regular dues to go to socialist candidates and they said that.... I had a choice... I got to vote for a representitive in the elections. I said.... Please tell me which of the candidates was a libertarian or even a Repulican.
Point being... there is no choice. No matter who you vote for they will spend the money on finesteins and boxers next run...
All 75 says is.... if the union spends 5% of each persons dues for example on direct political contributions and you do not wish your money to go to that... you can opt out... I would either take a reduction or let them support the libertarian with it or .... simply put it in the widows and orphans fund.
If prop 75 is defeated I will leave the union. I have felt that it was right to contribute because most all others do and it did not seem right to reap the benifiets of the barganing without contributing but... It is morally wrong for me to contribute to the likes of boxer or finestein or klinton or all the other big government socialists they (the union) support who would try to take away my freedom at every chance.
lazs
-
The Healthcare was thru CIGNA. Any place you used your card, medical staff would groan. CIGNA was very slow to pay and would try to squirm out of paying. I was having surgery on my hand and wound up going thru my fulltime job healthcare plan since the co-pay wouldve been a lot more. As my Dr's office told me, CIGNA is worse than Medicaid.
Did they negotiate a good contract? Sure. UPS was trying very hard to avoid a strike.
But what we gained in the contract in wages would go out the window if we voted for the liberal super spenders these guys insisted we vote for.
Hug that Union Propoganda, Sixpence. If the union was that confident it was offering the best deal in town, why require union membership?
You want me to be impressed by the Teamsters? Have them return a call someday, or respond to a greivance or on the job injury issue. They sure couldnt when myself and others were in that situation. But they certainly were around the first week of November, insisting who we vote for :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by lazs2
water and wastewater were allmost 100% publicly owned at one time... the trend seems to be for privatization.... it is a tossup for most cities at this time.
I would also like to point out that I was a private licenced contractor for 15 years... that does not make me a self made capitalist success story but you have to admit that it could give me perspective by working in both the public and private sector and being in charge of opperations in both venues?
socialism is evil.... I know in minn. that is like balsphemy but.... in every case... competition from private companies improves things... if we took the money we are spending on taxes for roads say and used it to bid out construction and maintenance.... we would have the best roads in the world with a huge and embarassing surplus of funds.
Public schools? please... is there anyone left in the country who still buys the teachers unions excusses and guilt trips? They are outperformed.... no.... spanked by the religious schools who offer no excuses... just value.
The only thing that government does well is raise an army to protect the borders... that is pure waste no matter who does it and the only waste we should put up with... The founders had this stuff all figured out allmost 250 years ago.
lazs
Thanks, I wanted to see if Funked1 knew what he was talking about when he said your industry has been taken over by government monopolies. My impression, confirmed by you, is that they all started as government monopolies and have been moving to private ownership, not the other way around. I imagine after enough of them privatize we'll get to see firsthand the shortcoming of that method of ownership.
Sure I give you credit for being on your own as a private contractor. Actually I feel kind of bad for you, holding the libertarian/anti-union/anti-socialist views you do but depending on the government for a job and being a union member. It must get pretty frustrating.
Minnesota had traditionally been a high tax/high service state, with resulting excellent public education and healthcare systems, and generally high quality of life. In the 70s Time magazine did a feature article on the "Minnesota Miracle". All that has been eroding with the cultural shift toward selfishness and individualism and away from community values. Now our state government is divided and has trouble accomplishing anything except partisan bickering.
Thomas Jefferson was a founder who believed in the value of public education to a democracy. Minnesota has been experimenting with privatizing education through the creation of charter schools, with several spectacular bankruptcies and frauds.
Regarding Prop 75, in general I like Cali's method of getting legislation out there to vote on from the grass roots level, so we'll see what happens.
-
"if we took the money we are spending on taxes for roads say and used it to bid out construction and maintenance.... we would have the best roads in the world with a huge and embarassing surplus of funds."
I just noticed that one.
We already have the best roads in the world. Try going to Italy or Mexico or pretty much anywhere else sometime.
For every private contractor that makes an honest bid, there's 3 or 4 that bid low and save money by cutting corners and using sub-standard materials. I don't trust private corporations to do public works one bit. I'd rather put up with a job well done with wasted money, than a cheap poorly-done job.
J_A_B
-
jab... the same people who inspect public works building projects would and do inspect any private contractor...
If there is a problem with poor construction you need to look at the inspection.... the government end of it.... see how it works?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
It is pretty much up to the states.
Not really....some companies will give preference to unions when hiring (why I don't know)...and since the union concept is a shady concept, non union workers are bullied into joining..ask anyone who worked at Jacksonville Shipyards (before they went under) who refused to join the unions there...slashed tires and all sorts of general meyham...It's a concept of the old days that has no place in todays USA. They are nothing but trouble.
Here's an example..back in late 97 the teamsters went on strike against UPS..I didn't work for UPS so you think "no big deal" right?
I worked at a Sears Auto Center at the time.....our paychecks were delivered by a company called Airborne Express, from the main office somewhere in Georgia.
Well because of the stoppage of UPS deliveries, the smalled companies took up that slack..so it was good for the competitors.
However, because of the extra load on Airborne express, when a few of their aircraft broke down, there were no ready replacements.
All of the sudden no one in the southeast who worked for Sears could get paid on time. Someone like me, fresh out of the Navy (the one year I got out) who had afamily to support, could not afford to have a paycheck be late. It put me behind on a few things and that delay effected me for more than a month.
Do I blame Airborne ERxpress? No. I blame the teamsters. Especially since the crap they were striking about at the time was stupid little crap.
-
It really boils down to...
If you like the commie candidates that the union supports and feel that everyone should be forced to help them win then prop 75 will infuriate you..
If you think that people should have a choice on who to contribute to with money they are being forced to pay then you will love the fairness of prop 75
No matter what... prop 75 exposes more of the union lies and corruption... the unions are on the way out and this just helps.... like most bad things... the more light you shine on em the worse they look.
and oboe... Jefferson was right (as usual) we do need to educate Americans.... We are not doing so right now... we have a monopoly that is doing an abysmal job and costing a fortune. The American people are being cheated by the public schools... Only vouchers will save or redeem tax based funding for education.
If the military was turning out soldiers who couldn't fight or behave then we would be right in looking for someone else to train our soldiers right?
lazs
-
unions are govn'ts without a nation, add them to the public servant arena and it becomes a breeding ground for inept and lazy workers. thrown into the private sector most public servants would wither on the vine.
teacher, what a great bunch. ask them to work more than 165 days a year or more than 4.5 hours a day, the first thing they do is hold the children hostage.
-
damn... I am agreeing with torque on something?
maybe there really is something to this global warming thing and it's effects on all of us. Better get my ozone level checked or whatever.
lazs