Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 104
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    My credentials regarding ANYTHING has never been a topic of discussion.
    Only in your desire to try and discredit me has my experiences ever came up.

    If a Gorilla signs to you that you two plus two is four, what does his life experiences have to do with the factual acuracy of the statement?

    Just as you pointing out from day one...I HAVE A DEGREE!!!
    WHOOP DEE DO!!!
    what the hell does that mean? Nothing. I know general practitioners that have a hard time tying their shoes, you think a piece of paper mean your knowledgeable?I have little respect for acedemia..It is simply a measure of your patience , financial resources, and rote memeorization....I can teach a monkey to do that.
    All that matters is FACTS.
    YOU FAIL TO SUPPLY THEM.
    In regards to your claim that the reports are varying Regarding right to work, once again the superficial nature of your sources belies any serious attempt to understand the issue, I inturn have researched more then a dozen papers on the matter and the one I choose to provide was the most comprehensive and by the most accomplished author on the subject. Conversely, the ONLY papers i could find that did not support his finding were convieniently limited in scope, choosing to focus on a single example such as Michigan, or Idaho, instead of compiling a comprehensive coast to coast comparison across all sectors of the economy.
    But, that doesnt stop you from asserting that what the local Highschool journalism class put out is Just as substantive as the material I supplied...and youve done this over, and over and over.
    and then you claim IM OFF BASE? lololol.
    Once again,believe whatever the hell you want, I could care less, Like the last time we exchanged, I continue to address you for any other readers who might want acurate information,Not because i feel compelled to defend myself in your eyes.
    You are total Grade school.

    BTW, It clearly IS about validation, you or anyone else could tell me your the freakin King of Rexon Prime and I wouldnt waste a second concerning myself with the validity of that statment.
    You should be concerned with factual representation of the subject matter, thats it,but when you get rebuffed in your efforts to pass off a .30 second google search as Knowledge, your response is consistently to attack me on some other level...Grade school....

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    Your credentials are only an issue because you make them an issue. The most recent example is you referring to your age and status as a business owner to defend your points. Every single time you argue about anything, you reference your own "expertise" on the subject matter. And I doubt the validity of those claims. The fact that you are willing to lie about receiving "several" PMs "howling with laughter" indicates that you are very willing to exaggerate and lie to help buttress your appeals to your own authority and personal experience.

    As far as studies of other states go. The reason some studies focus on one state, is to focus on the most recent states to adopt right to work laws. That way you can study what the economy was like before and after the legislation. That's an attempt to reduce the impact of other factors. Your source attempts to do that through a series of calculations -- which is a fine thing to do, but it is also very theoretical. It's the sort of thing you would rail against if you didn't agree with the paper's findings.

    As far as posting facts goes: here:

    The wages of workers in right to work states tend to be a bit lower. The unemployment rate, however, also tends to be a bit lower. This isn't direct proof of anything because correlation does not equal causation. However, it is a fact.
    http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/briefi...ngPaper299.pdf (the chart on table 3 shows that the unemployment rate in right to work states is 1% lower than in non right to work states)

    Here is another fact from my earlier source: "In Indiana -- the most recent example -- 90 companies have said right-to-work will factor in their decision whether to locate there, with 31 already committing."

    So, there definitely seems to be a factual basis for my assertion that with right to work laws the choice might be between less jobs but a higher wage, and more jobs but a lower wage.

    Once again. I eagerly await your rambling, incoherent response that addresses none of the points I have made. Feel free to include a reference to Fox News.
    Last edited by gcoll; 12-13-2012 at 09:15 AM.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    Only an adoloescent mind would make that correlation.
    I support my ideas and opinions through my life experiences.

    Facts require no supportive extrapolation through personal experience.
    that has already been done by the compilation of historical evidence.

    if i say the world is round, that is a fact, if i go on to say i know this becasue Ive sailed the globe, the validity of that statement has no direct effect on the factual nature of the claim.

    Rather then directly address the facts that you cant refute, you focus on a juevenile attempt to discredit the source, rather then admit your failings.


    As I pointed out, Ive researched a dozen studies, I can supply several others , but you will simply ignore them as you tend to do, and instead make some comment about grammatical structure, or spelling, or some such nonsense, to allow yourself some sense of leverage in a discussion which once again you have clearly failed to adequately support.

    Just as In my debate regarding benghazi I made the following contentions on oct.9th

    1) additional support was available....It was
    2) CIA assets in the area, were not porperly equipt to deal with Mortars, Rocket launchers and a planned assault.
    3)The Bhengazi facility was not designed for defensive measures, Embassies have bullet proofing, fire suppression, egress plans,etc.
    4) Opsec/comsec dictate the control of inteligence regarding what has happened to allow for investigation and retaliation.


    all of that has been proven out as acurate in the days following the assault.

    Now, have I ever been to Behngazi? no, ofcourse not, so my understanding of these circumstances arent helped at all by my experiences, but rather my efforts to research things thoroughly.
    The debator that I had engaed with, when confronted by my facts, then tryed to reframe the debate, just as you,BMD, and a couple of others have tryed to do.
    When You have no factual basis to refute a contention Ive made, you try to indicate somehow I dont have the proper "credentials" to Understand the subject matter.
    Another poster referenced an f-16 squadron in Italy as being available to help,something I had heard on RT leaning media.
    This was and is just plain stupid. when the RT media caught up to the obvious failure in the idea, they said, well we mean they could have just did a fly over and scared them away....priceless.
    But at each step along the way like a rat in a maze, you guys simply ignore when youve been wrong and start down another path hoping to gain validation.

    the same egomanical behaviour has been at the center of every exchange that has turned sour that I have had in here including ours.

    It is not debateable when the middle class has enjoyed their strongest penetration into shrinking wealth disparity. Similarly, it is not debateable that social problems have escalated in every society in recorded history when wealth concentration has increased.
    these are Iron Clad facts.
    what is debateable is what is the CAUSE of this apparent correlation, in the latter case, and historical fact in the former.
    But youve never tryed to approach the debates from that perspective.
    Not once.
    why?
    because you simply dont know anything about it.
    so you insist on repeating what facts that you have made available to yourself over and over as if you repeat it enough times it will changed its relevance in the discussion at hand. It does not.
    when that doesnt work, youve tryed to be insulting.
    when that didnt work you actually reduced yourself to an unbelievably childish attempt to mitigate your discomfort, by babbling nonsense, in the hopes of either conflagerating the discussion or drawing some vague reference to provide in rebuttal at a latter time, that I was "unaware" of your grade school ploy(hilarious).

    but worst of all(from all of you who do it)is this contention that for some reason I would try and misrepresent my life ina an attempt to curry favor or admiration,or whatever it is you have in your head.

    Why on earth would being 50 be a GOOD thing?
    If being in the military is such an impressive endeavor in your mind, I can have you signed up in a week or two...trust me, just let me know(lol).
    I can tell you that ,And Im sure pats, and TX.raider will tell you the same, it isnt anywhere near as glamorous as it seems to play across your mind.

    My Buisness generates about 1.7 million in annual sales, as a point of refernece I managed a very small Autozone at one point and we did 4 million anually, I had a competitor that was an Independent like myself, and he was bringing in over 100,000 a week, more then 5.2 miilion in sales.
    when you factor in expenses, its not nearly as "successful" as you are once again imagining...
    If i was going to B.S. you guys...wouldnt I be an Astronaut or something?(lol).
    In my exchanges with HCF, and flipp, I also disclosed that I had been homeless and a drug addict when i was a younger man...i gues thats REALLY cool Too?

    You, again, like some of the other guys in here have consistently implied that for whatever reason Ive been dishonest.
    One of your VERY first replys to me was
    "wait a minute, didnt you say you were 50 before?"

    People who see lies under every rock have been conditioned to expect lies by their own dishonesty, It would never occur to me for one second that anything you or anyone else shared about their lives or experiences in here was not true, becasue
    1) I am completely content with who I am, and what Ive done...nothing anyone else has accomplished could ever marginalize how I fealt about myself
    2) experiences are not the basis for facts.But rather for opinions.
    when you are old enough to say "ive been doing (x) for 30 years, you will realize how empty that fact is...hell you couldve been doing a REALLY crappy job for thirty years(lol) what of it?
    and as always I will once agin try to impress the one idea that is at the core of everything Ive written about in my time here.

    The problems we face as a country are not inherint to society, or economic philosophies,
    they are inheirent to people.
    the balances that need to be drawn through less then rigid adherence to any one philosophy isnt an indictment of the philosophy but rather its expression through the failings of our general character or nature If you will.

    You dont redistribute wealth to ONLY help those in need, but to offset the unmitigatable corruption of the process by those that "win"
    Unions at one point became too powerful and corrupt, just like everything else.
    The solution shouldnt be their destruction, as has been the goal, it shoud be to balance their power.
    when you dont adjust for the cancerous nature of any one behaviour ,entity whatever, be it capitalism, communism,being lazy, being over active, being
    emotional, being too detached,Being faith less or a zealot, the result is always ruin one way or another.
    Any and ever other point of contention Ive tryed to address was soley in the hopes of breaking closed minds away from a unshakable reliance and loyalty to ideas that are at best Half truths.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,946
    vCash
    1500
    1. Percentage Growth in Non-Farm Private Sector Employees (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 12.9%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 6.0%

    2. Average Poverty Rate-Adjusted for Cost of Living (2002-2004)
    a. Right to Work States: 8.5%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 10.1%

    3. Percentage Growth in Patents Annually Granted (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 33.0%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 11.0%

    4. Percentage Growth in Real Personal Income (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 26.0%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 19.0%

    5. Percentage Growth in Number of People Covered by Employment Based Private Health Insurance (1995-2005):
    a. Right to Work States: 8.5%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 0.7%

    http://www.insideindianabusiness.com...rs.asp?id=1189

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justinnum1
    Wade will be a lot better next season now that he got knee surgery. Hate on. - 7/31/2012

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    Longhorn, the only reason that the question is even debateable is do to the efforts to eliminate Unions for the last 70 years.
    Simply looking at the michigan model where the UAE has already surrendered close to half of the benchmark Highs of compensation and benefits,l the eefects of the law are intended to eliminate their existence entirely, similarly to the efforts in Wisconsin.

    Once again, In MI. the two most costly Unions are the Police and Fire fighter unions...they are the ONLY two exempt from the law LOL...

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    I support my ideas and opinions through my life experiences.
    No. You attempt to disqualify other people's opinions and analysis based on your life experiences.

    You argue that your opinions are more valid, not because they are more strongly supported by logical argumentation and facts, but because of who you are.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    Any and ever other point of contention Ive tryed to address was soley in the hopes of breaking closed minds away from a unshakable reliance and loyalty to ideas that are at best Half truths.
    "Why are you too close minded to see that I am right about everything?"

    That's what you keep saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    But youve never tryed to approach the debates from that perspective.
    Not once.
    why?
    Because debating you is impossible. You don't respond to direct points.

    Look at your response to Longhorn. He posted numbers from a study on right to work vs. non right to work states. All he posted were numbers. Your response was to try and make the point that states are trying to kill unions -- a point that has nothing to do whatsoever with any of the numbers he posted.
    Last edited by gcoll; 12-13-2012 at 04:14 PM.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,134
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Longhornfan1234 View Post
    1. Percentage Growth in Non-Farm Private Sector Employees (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 12.9%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 6.0%

    2. Average Poverty Rate-Adjusted for Cost of Living (2002-2004)
    a. Right to Work States: 8.5%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 10.1%

    3. Percentage Growth in Patents Annually Granted (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 33.0%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 11.0%

    4. Percentage Growth in Real Personal Income (1995-2005)
    a. Right to Work States: 26.0%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 19.0%

    5. Percentage Growth in Number of People Covered by Employment Based Private Health Insurance (1995-2005):
    a. Right to Work States: 8.5%
    b. Non-right to Work States: 0.7%

    http://www.insideindianabusiness.com...rs.asp?id=1189

    Well done, sir.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    facts are facts...your core issue appears to be Ive offended your sensibilities with my directness.
    when the F-16 reference came up, it is not a matter of debate, or opinion wether or not it is a suitable weapon system for the mission at hand, thats not a matter of ANYONE being right or wrong, it is just fact.
    Because I am supplying that fact is nothing to be "proud" of or to draw your ire as it clearly has done.That is your insecurities, and Inferiority issues being projected out over the internet.
    When BMD suggests increasing production to lower prices, so as to change the effective cost of fixed expenses, that is simply wrong.You dont operate a buisness like that.
    when he claimed crude oil fluctuated wildly, thats wrong,from 47 into the 90s the price of crude was constant, as was the comprehensive cost per unit of steel based consumables...Its all researchable.
    when it was suggested that shipping costs cut into increased profits to a great degree, I provided the actual cost per shipping container.
    I am not the copyright holder to the truth(lol).
    and I deserve no recognition or credit for supplying it, it is relevant all on its own.

    When YOU claimed that Manic- depressives suffer from substantitive visual halucenations, that was flat wrong, I mean you read one little paragraph and you present your "research" with an " as a a mtter of fact" attitude which is laughable,If youd like I can supply you with additional reference material on every subject weve covered that supports the conclusions Ive drawn,
    You, nor anyone else need to take my word for it.

    There are dozens of opinion based threads in here.
    In those I tend to offer mine and walk away,for they very reason you are suggesting i do not appreciate.Matters of opinion are open for interpretation.

    Facts are not.
    What CAN be done to facts is sort them, twist them and try to present them in such away as to produce a conclusion that is not based in the facts themselves.
    This tactic is exactly what the Ideaology youve shown a prefernce to support does as a M.O.

    In regards to Longhorn, what am I to infer from the 'numbers" he produced?
    I mean I could tell you that as a AGR technician the Stae of Ca. did a cost analysis of standard of living and wages and determined that under the "labor" guidlines established years ago,the STARTING rate for a GS-7 was 28.00 an hour with full benefits
    that is a starting, bottom of the barrel wage.based on what Unionized workers recieved adjusted for inflation and cost of living.
    that was my hourly wage when I was staioned at LAAAF,CA.

    I could tell you that the reason Police and Fire are excluded from the law is becasue their cost structures are way out of line with privaitization efforts
    effecting the wage scale.

    I could tell you a friend of mines father was an uneducated delivery driver for a local bakery and with Union wages at the time was able to buy a house in a good neigborhood,support his family of 4 without his wife working,and ultimately retired in San Clemente(if you dont know where that is, its a slice of heaven on earth)
    Now because of the effects of supply side,Voodoo economics,free trade,open markets menatality, Union wages are in line with the non Union sector in every segment that they have been able to encroach into including the "bakers" union whos statring wage is LESS then it was in 1964 adjusted for inflation,and youd be lucky to afford rent in So.Ca. on that in 2012.


    I could explain that the studies both you and he are offering ,once again focus on a compartive of the SECONDARY levels.
    Most Union gains and wages had already been decimated by the point the comparison was drawn.This is exactly the twisting of facts that I am refering to that the sources youve embraced rely on you not questioning.

    I havent disqualified any opinions, people are welcome to believe whatever they choose, they are not welcome to present their own set of facts, especially when they are from sources that are intentionally misconstruing data for an intended result, as the Brietbarts and most other Rt. refernce sources attempt to do.
    My opinions have no more validity then anyone elses, The FACTS I present are what I argue,and I do so simply becasue the truth isnt malleable.

    "why are you to closed minded to see I am right about everything"
    look at that statement.
    You are approaching these discussions with a win/lose menatlity.
    Can you see how it is riddled with your own issues?
    In truth facts are just facts...I am nothing, I am no one.
    who is right or wrong is valueless.
    I dont need your recognition, encouragement, admiration, fellowship, or whatever it is that youve placed value in, when you attempt to show a superior understanding of a subject matter.
    whether that is an acurate assessment or not, to me anyways, is eaqually valuless.
    The only thing I truley care about is the depth of compassion people have for each other.
    I push you(and others) becasue quite frankly buddy,I know that even if you are doing it solely with the intent to try and "put me In my place", the result of your efforts winds up being you do exactly what it is I am hoping you will do, EXPLORE THE INFORAMATION TO A GREATER DEGREE.
    if in your final analysis you determine you simply dont agree, what more can I ask of you or anyone else?
    But suffice it to say, due to the canned responses and banal talking points and inacurate material presented, I can see my work isnt done here(lol).
    so I welcome your critcism, your insults, your accusations,your grammar lessons,...I proceed undetered as you pointed out, becasue at the end of the day, I am all I ever hoped to be,
    and that isnt a soilder, or a buissness leader, or a PHD, or a genius..
    I am a loving father and a patriot who cares about his brethern...even you(lol) and I want you to be happy and successful and enjoy the fruits of your forefathers efforts, even as you champion ideas which seek to bring them crashing down.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,297
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    Well done, sir.
    Turns out not so well done at all. The methodology is seriously skewed, and here is how:

    In promoting new right-to-work laws as the answer to
    the jobs crisis, the National Right to Work Committee
    trumpets the fact that “in the past decade, non-agricultural
    employment in Right to Work states grew twice as fast
    compared to that in non-Right to Work states.”1 This
    statement is statistically true, but only in the same way
    that it is true that if Bill Gates walks into a bar, everyone
    in the bar is suddenly, on average, a multimillionaire.
    The problem with averages, in the absence of standard
    deviations, is that they create the misleading impression
    that all members of the group are more or less close to
    the average. In the case of RTW states, nothing could
    be further from the truth.2 And the radical disjuncture
    between high- and low-performing right-to-work states
    makes it clear that it is not the law itself but rather other
    factors in the local economy that explain these states’
    economic fortunes.
    For an in-context look at how these laws actually impact states, try an academic study. .pdf link.

    To little surprise, the answer turns out to be more complicated than "this one law makes states more economically productive." For example, in the case of Oklahoma, the state also implemented a flat 5% payroll rebate to employers at the same time it implemented right-to-freeload legislation like Michigan's. It's hard to tell if bribing employers outright, letting them treat their employees like dirt or some other factor was the key to Oklahoma's "success," in attracting businesses afterwards.

    A response to the specific shortcomings of the exact study the prior poster cited is here. It's a pretty convincing dismantling of a clearly skewed presentation of the underlying data.
    Last edited by Labgrownmangoat; 12-14-2012 at 12:05 PM.
    “A riot,” said Martin Luther King, “is the language of the unheard.”

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    I wonder how long it will take for a competeing "report" to surface claiming the exact oppsosite...
    endless debate about who is right or wrong on 1000 differnt issues and the crooks rob the bank....I wish I could tell you how many times Ive seen this show...the sad part is they could tell us exactly when ,where and how, they were going to do it, and how this methodology works...and people would STILL fall for it....
    Last edited by stephkyle7; 12-14-2012 at 12:39 PM.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,134
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Labgrownmangoat View Post
    Turns out not so well done at all. The methodology is seriously skewed, and here is how:



    For an in-context look at how these laws actually impact states, try an academic study. .pdf link.

    To little surprise, the answer turns out to be more complicated than "this one law makes states more economically productive." For example, in the case of Oklahoma, the state also implemented a flat 5% payroll rebate to employers at the same time it implemented right-to-freeload legislation like Michigan's. It's hard to tell if bribing employers outright, letting them treat their employees like dirt or some other factor was the key to Oklahoma's "success," in attracting businesses afterwards.

    A response to the specific shortcomings of the exact study the prior poster cited is here. It's a pretty convincing dismantling of a clearly skewed presentation of the underlying data.
    Well, looking at the linked source for his data, it says:

    The American Legislative Exchange Council recently published research completed by the National Institute for Labor Relations which provides five different forms of tangible information regarding the economic differences between right to work and non-right to work states. The research completed was based upon statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Census Bureau, United States Patent and Research Office and Bureau of Economic Analysis. Five economic factors were analyzed in right to work and non-right to work states in the Midwest, with the following statistical outcomes:
    That to me doesn't say anything about being a "Right to Work" site. Secondly, your link comes from Berkely, once of the most liberal, slanted universities on the face of the planet we call home.

    I'll take the one that seems to come from a less biased source.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,592
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7
    In regards to Longhorn, what am I to infer from the 'numbers" he produced?
    That right to work laws might have a positive impact on the overall economy?

    Or, at the very least, that the impact of right to work laws is open for debate and not a matter of fact.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    6,279
    vCash
    1500
    Right...
    and both he and you lack the proper historical perspective, or indepth study on the matter to be making that suggestion.

    You were not involved in or a party to the Labor movement.
    You clearly have not studied the economic enviorment which led to the Rise of Unions.
    Most of the Federal and state labor laws came from Union Gains.
    Literally, almost every single one.
    Now Corporations and R law makers have been fighting for years to reverse all the gains that Labor had provided.
    Minimum wage laws?Minimum age laws? work hours?
    they want to get rid of them all.
    Killing Unions is just a first step.
    Youve grown up in a insular,and polarized enviorment that has been refined and enriched for 30 years and you refuse to try and see beyond the beliefs you hold, wether or not they are supported by facts.
    I used to be a free market,Full blown conservative Republican.For many years.
    But at some point I stopped and asked why does the model fail?
    why does, what we predict will happen...never actually happen?

    The answer became very clear, the Model was suceeding, very well and effectively,the problem was the Model that was for public consumption, was not the actual model that was being worked from. The actual model was one of protecting and building plutocratic wealth and immunity from the market or Government interference or reproach.

    Now, if you were a multi millionaire....I would understand completely you perspective...it really REALLY benefits you to support these jokers, but if your just a white collar guy trying to make ends meet..the only, ABSOLUTE ONLY way you could support them is to not know, what they are doing, or not care because theyve appealed to you through a proxy issue like gay marriage, race relations, etc, etc.

    there is always a back door of excuses, but at the same time the model is failing and the finger pointing starts, The culprits ALWAYS emerge unscathed and better off for the efforts....
    Even when the Enrons of the world do get caught, they escape with our money.
    That is the nature of unregulated capitalism.
    You can never NEVER change that, so you have three choice, accept it ,try to be a part of it, or fight against it.
    Unions Fight against it, plain and simple , you can trot out one inaccurate assessment after another, it diesnt pass the smell test.

    just as a tangental comparison to what Im saying Ill give you two examples.

    Drug testing for welfare benefits in Florida. Seems reasonable Right?
    BMD even made a reference to it being a great Idea.the Florida version was written and pushed through by Governor rick scott and his political allies.

    Just so happens he owns a really big holding in various labs through various proxys...get it? he pays himself with the tax dollars.
    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://w...daaz8YHPUaLLBw

    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://w...T3HXsf12m7t2Eg

    or we can look at Arizonas papers please laws.
    as federal detainess for deportation, they cannot be housed in local jails.
    The obvious influx of addditional hundreds, perhaps thousands of deportees, is
    being handled through private prisons built exclusively for the purpose...
    guess who owns the prisons?
    the same people who wrote the law and funded the Republican Politicains who introduced and passed the law.
    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://a...9Fbx4__-22lh6w

    these are the people you are indirectly supporting through your ideology, the fact that supply vs demand side economics can be equally defended is almost secondary...look at the results and who wins.
    dont listen to peoples words, watch what they do.
    Last edited by stephkyle7; 12-14-2012 at 10:58 PM.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,687
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    Most of the Federal and state labor laws came from Union Gains.
    Literally, almost every single one.
    Now Corporations and R law makers have been fighting for years to reverse all the gains that Labor had provided.
    Minimum wage laws?Minimum age laws? work hours?
    they want to get rid of them all.
    Killing Unions is just a first step.
    Your first part is why I believe that unions at one point in history had a very vital role they played. And now all of their gains they got have been enshrined in laws they play a much less vital role in the world. That even before the RTW laws union membership was severely waning in the private sector.

    Who is fighting to do away with all of these laws? Who is fighting to send us back to the days of sweatshops?

    How are RTW laws killing unions? Or even attempting to for that matter?
    French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century – that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,459
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by hoosiercubsfan View Post
    Your first part is why I believe that unions at one point in history had a very vital role they played. And now all of their gains they got have been enshrined in laws they play a much less vital role in the world. That even before the RTW laws union membership was severely waning in the private sector.

    Who is fighting to do away with all of these laws? Who is fighting to send us back to the days of sweatshops?

    How are RTW laws killing unions? Or even attempting to for that matter?
    It is my thinking that we will see those laws slowly rolled back over time. It won't be a blatant "ok now that unions are gone lets bring back sweat shops". It will be a slow move towards that type of environment. As you take away a groups right to bargain, it is only a matter of time. The businesses have lobbied this very successfully in not just this matter but also in class action lawsuits. If you eliminate unions and eliminate class action lawsuits, the divide and conquer strategy is very effective.
    Member of the Owlluminati!

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •