Debtor's Prisons?

BDboy

Posts: 3,266

Apr 29, 2012 -- 11:31PM, Ironhold wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:37PM, mountain_man wrote:

It was not uncommon for union organizers to be murdered.

You mean like how it's not uncommon for union members to harrass, intimidate, or even attack co-workers who don't toe the line?

Neither side of the dispute is entirely innocent, here.

>>>>>>> Sure. Sadly both sides ignores their own "Issues" and focus more on other's faults.

TemplarS

Posts: 5,177

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:45AM, Ironhold wrote:

Last month, Gov. Christie noted that full-time teachers at a school unionized under the NJEA must still pay annual dues even if they themselves aren't a member; they merely pay $647 / year instead of $731 / year.

In that sense, I think you can understand why some people get so upset when unions use their dues monies to pay for lobbying and political ads: not everyone who pays dues into a union is an actual union member, and so their money might well be used to support things the individuals don't necessarily agree with.

It is somewhat complex. You are right when unions use dues to pay for political activity no matter what the political views of the dues-payers. But this is no different than corporations using the money of shareholders (who may not share the views of management) for lobbying activities.

Thanks to the enlightened interpretation of free speech held by Mr. Chief Justice Roberts and his fellows, however, those practices will continue. Sorry.

But on the other side- the problem with open shops is- if the union is negotiating pay and benefits, and union and non-union employees get the same compensation- the union is effectively representing non-members as well.

mountain_man

Posts: 34,170

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:45AM, Ironhold wrote:
As one of the "regressives" you so openly mock?

You openly mock Progressives. You reap what you sow.

The problem with Big Labor in America is that a lot of the individual unions have effectively priced themselves out of the game via excessive demands and corruption / incompetence at the top tiers.

That is not the problem. The really is no such thing as "Big Labor." That's just a boogy man made up by Regressives. Greedy corporations want to make giant profits at the expense of the workers. Labor is just trying to get their fare share.

Thus, the current spate of legislation.

No, they actually believe that forcing business to not pollute our air and water and at the same time pay a fair wage, is seen by Regressives as an undue burden on those businesses. It's all about profit and the hell with anyone that gets in the way.

The idea is to give individual workers the right to opt out of any labor union who they feel does not adequately represent them or their ideals, no strings attached.

Which actually gives the worker opting out of the union a choice to work for less with no protections.

I know it is popular among Regressives to continuously cry about unions, but they are crocodile tears. With less than 12% of the workforce unionized they cannot be blamed for all the problems Regressives whine about.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.

Ironhold

Posts: 9,620

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:52AM, mountain_man wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:45AM, Ironhold wrote:
As one of the "regressives" you so openly mock?

You openly mock Progressives. You reap what you sow.

...except, I bet you can't show me where I've actually said anything of the sort, can you?

mountain_man

Posts: 34,170

Apr 30, 2012 -- 4:12AM, BDboy wrote:
Sure. Sadly both sides ignores their own "Issues" and focus more on other's faults.

Not really. Unions are just promoting democracy in the work place and protecting it's members from often unscrupulous employers. It's that democracy part that the Regressives have the most problem with. Workers actually having a say gives them fits at night.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.

mountain_man

Posts: 34,170

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:55AM, Ironhold wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:52AM, mountain_man wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:45AM, Ironhold wrote:
As one of the "regressives" you so openly mock?

You openly mock Progressives. You reap what you sow.

...except, I bet you can't show me where I've actually said anything of the sort, can you?

Your whole post that I replied to.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.

TemplarS

Posts: 5,177

A couple of points to the OP.

There is a difference between being unable to pay a debt and being unwilling to pay a debt.

But- even if a person has the money to pay a legitimate debt and refuses to do so- I'm presuming in this case garnishing wages is still an avenue to pursue- so why resort to jail? This was a big deal a few years ago as regards child support.

Some collection agencies are reputable. Others are no better than brownshirts. If a business is looking for their money, why would they care about the ethics of who they hire to get it? This is an "industry" badly in need of regulation in someplaces. Fat chance of that happening in states with Republican regimes.

Ironhold

Posts: 9,620

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:58AM, mountain_man wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:55AM, Ironhold wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:52AM, mountain_man wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:45AM, Ironhold wrote:
As one of the "regressives" you so openly mock?

You openly mock Progressives. You reap what you sow.

...except, I bet you can't show me where I've actually said anything of the sort, can you?

Your whole post that I replied to.

So basically, you're telling me that "saying anything bad about unions, no matter how true, is repression"?

mountain_man

Posts: 34,170

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:15PM, Ironhold wrote:
So basically, you're telling me that "saying anything bad about unions, no matter how true, is repression"?

ROTFLMFAO! Where did I use the word "repression"? The problem is that what you said is Regressive propaganda, not the truth.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.

Roodog

Posts: 9,743

My chief concern that prompted me to to start this thread was the the what appears to be turning back the clock in terms of the rights of the working poor. My parents and I have worked our whole lives and it seems as though that our rights and that of those who follow us is being eroded. If we are not careful, the conditions which existed in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth centuries will once more prevail.

While I am very sympathetic to the labor unions and the right of collective bargaining, I am aware of the presence of organized crime in some of these unions in the past and maybe the present.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9

Beliefnet On Facebook

What's Hot