I heard that if you Google "union related violence" it actually slows the internet down because there are so many items found.
The best part of union violence is that nobody on that side of the political spectrum says one negative thing about it. The left constantly calls the right a bunch of hate mongering violent nut jobs yet one of their core support groups is more violent than anyone on the right.
The thing that really drives me nuts about the unions is that a typical union member (and forgive me for stereotyping) is narrow minded, likely to have racist tendencies, is a flag waving patriot, probably doesn't dig the gays, hates foreigners and their cultures, is sick and tired of watching minorities get free educations and such while they have to bust their ass to put their kids through school (yes, I've actually heard that conversation), is religious, etc., etc.
Basically, they are the exact opposite of liberals, progressives, and the political left. And I'm not calling the right racist, narrow minded, etc., I'm simply pointing out that those are traits the left loves to apply to the right, and claim they've risen above.
So even though your typical union guy wants less government in his life, wants to pay less taxes, thinks the free handouts should end, wants to see the US as less of a follower and more of a leader internationally, etc. they vote Democrat because they are completely brainwashed into thinking that if their union falls then the evil fat cats will drop their salary to 10 cents an hour, and they'll lose all of their benefits.
If union members could collectively pull their heads out of their asses they'd see that the real problem is their own leadership. I'm pretty sure one union did that a few years ago? Didn't one of the biggest unions in the country have half of its members file some big petition telling their leadership to stop spending union money on Democrat candidates or something to that effect?
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:53 pm
by TPRJones
Down here we call them Yellow Dog Democrats, and it's the only reason any Democrat gets elected to anything in the state outside of Austin and certain primarily hispanic or african american districts in Houston.
More on point, loyal unionists are idiots. If a company tried to seriously slash their wages just because they deunionized, they'd lose all their employees. All that labor available on the market coupled with increased product demand due to the major supplier shutting down for lack of employees would open up the market for new and better companies to compete, and then they'd need to hire those same workers. And typically if they are trying to attract new workers, they'll pay better to get them at least at first. So it will result in less job security, but in the end it's better for the local economy to churn through companies like that from time to time.
But these old union guys can't see that sort of thing. They still expect to work for the same company until the day they die. But that's just not how the world works anymore in most industries.
Edited By TPRJones on 1313618338
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 11:11 am
by GORDON
Apparently unions are sinking the US Post Office, since according to this article labor is 80% of their costs.
“We’re going to fight this and we’re going to fight it hard,” said Cliff Guffey, president of the American Postal Workers Union, which represents 207,000 mail sorters and post office clerks. “It’s illegal for them to abrogate our contract.”
I hope they do. Ideally they'll take down the whole postal service with them. Then UPS or FedEx or somebody will step in to fill the gap they leave in the marketplace, and we'll have private mail service instead.
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:38 pm
by GORDON
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:13 am
by GORDON
Are all truck drivers union? If so, here's a nice blow against them:
Labor union sues Indiana, calls working alongside nonunion employees ‘slavery’
...
Indiana’s law prohibits employers from making union membership a condition of getting or keeping a job. The union’s February lawsuit claimed the law violated its members’ Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of “equal protection” under the law.
But an amended complaint filed on Wednesday added a Thirteenth Amendment claim as well. The new lawsuit suggests that when nonunion employees earn higher salaries and better benefits because of the union’s negotiation on behalf of its members, the union has been forced to work for those nonunion employees for free.
And being forced to work without compensation, the union suggested in its revised lawsuit, is slavery.
wtf
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:33 pm
by TPRJones
so much wtfery
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:07 am
by Leisher
Walker kept his seat in the recall vote. Democrats and union leaders pulled no punches in trying to get him removed. This was the most expensive election in history, and the unions lost.
What's the political message coming out of this situation? Are we, as a nation, finally ready to get rid of the corruption that is unions?
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:21 am
by GORDON
Palin got run out of Alaska with frivolous lawsuits, because of a law saying that the state would not pay for lawyers for the governor to defend against lawsuits. Does Wisconsin have a law like that?
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:36 pm
by GORDON
In honor of the hippie tears today, I am playing the album, "Wisconsin Death Trip" by Static X.
The really shocking thing? The article's writer never mentions the political leaning of the judge.
The governor does, but the "journalist" doesn't.
Must have been an oversight since every article where a conservative judge does something starts off with "a conservative", "who is conservative", "might as well be Bush", or something similar.
