WI Teachers Union: Making You an Offer You Can't Refuse

[Eric Cartman]

That's just BS. union paid teachers aren't practicing capitalism. They have no competition. Competition is what fuels capitalism. Now give each community the right to choose union teachers or non union teachers and you got you some capitalism.

1 They are not paid by the union.
2 Competition= private school or home school.
3 Unions fit nicely in a hypothetical capitalistic economy or a mixed economy like ours.

no, true competition is giving communities the right to choose non union or union, whichever provides the best outcomes and the best their budget can manage. States should not go broke trying to meet union demands. It's just that simple.

That is silly... our state and federal governments are republics not democracies. Our elected representatives do have the right to choose by not agreeing to contracts or changing existing laws that might be a barrier.

A union is a business that offers 3rd party negotiation for its clients/members like a agent. It is very much part of the free market. I guess you could outlaw them like most oppressive regimes have in history.

Freedom anyone?

 

[boedicca]

Tea Party: Boycott Businesses That Backed Obama | FrumForum



Pure thuggery?

Did the Tea Partiers force businesses to put up posters in their windows claiming that they didn't support the stimulus bill as a condition of patronizing them?

Just so I get this right the next time. You need an example of someone requireing for a busness to hang something in a window before its a good example for you? So you're anti-poster not so much anti-boycott?

I am anti GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES interfering in the private business and first amendment rights of citizens.

Even FDR opposed collective bargaining for government employees. The situation in WI is a case study in why it's a bad thing.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Again, reread Oddball's posts and try to compreheand what he's actually saying...

oddball's whole outrage is predicated on the idea that "liberal"="violence", which I don't buy. Somehow no one seems to get that the folks in question have a right to shop where they want.

So until you can substaniate threats of violence, you're down to trying to argue against Capitalism. Good luck with that.

 

[boedicca]

1 They are not paid by the union.
2 Competition= private school or home school.
3 Unions fit nicely in a hypothetical capitalistic economy or a mixed economy like ours.

no, true competition is giving communities the right to choose non union or union, whichever provides the best outcomes and the best their budget can manage. States should not go broke trying to meet union demands. It's just that simple.

That is silly... our state and federal governments are republics not democracies. Our elected representatives do have the right to choose by not agreeing to contracts or changing existing laws that might be a barrier.

A union is a business that offers 3rd party negotiation for its clients/members like a agent. It is very much part of the free market. I guess you could outlaw them like most oppressive regimes have in history.

Freedom anyone?

Wow. You really don't understand how unions work.

If they are for freedom, then explain Card Check.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Good idea as long as the GOP supporting businesses hang portraits of Leona Helmsley, Martin Harty, Max Blanck and Isaac Harris (look them up) in their windows.

.

How about Thomas Jefferson and James Madison instead?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Oh for crying out loud! The teachers are exercising their right as private consumers, not acting in their professional capacity. Are folks really so dense they don't understand that private citizens can shop wherever the hell they want using whatever reasoning they want?

 

[boedicca]

Oh for crying out loud! The teachers are exercising their right as private consumers, not acting in their professional capacity. Are folks really so dense they don't understand that private citizens can shop wherever the hell they want using whatever reasonin they want?

B'loney. If they were acting as private consumers, they wouldn't be threatening businesses into putting up signs in favor of their collective bargaining agenda.

 

[Eric Cartman]

no, true competition is giving communities the right to choose non union or union, whichever provides the best outcomes and the best their budget can manage. States should not go broke trying to meet union demands. It's just that simple.

That is silly... our state and federal governments are republics not democracies. Our elected representatives do have the right to choose by not agreeing to contracts or changing existing laws that might be a barrier.

A union is a business that offers 3rd party negotiation for its clients/members like a agent. It is very much part of the free market. I guess you could outlaw them like most oppressive regimes have in history.

Freedom anyone?

Wow. You really don't understand how unions work.

If they are for freedom, then explain Card Check.

Don't tell me you are that naïve. Lots of business lobby their government for advantages (fair or unfair). Take a look at our tax code.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Oh for crying out loud! The teachers are exercising their right as private consumers, not acting in their professional capacity. Are folks really so dense they don't understand that private citizens can shop wherever the hell they want using whatever reasonin they want?

B'loney. If they were acting as private consumers, they wouldn't be threatening businesses into putting up signs in favor of their collective bargaining agenda.

You're just dense. Of course a person will act in their own best interest. If it is in my interest as a consumer to only shop at stores that support teachers, then so be it.

You're just so desperately scared that the people might support the teachers you're grasping at straws. As consumers, they're free to make any demands they like. Business owners can acquiesce or not as they please.

 

[boedicca]

That is silly... our state and federal governments are republics not democracies. Our elected representatives do have the right to choose by not agreeing to contracts or changing existing laws that might be a barrier.

A union is a business that offers 3rd party negotiation for its clients/members like a agent. It is very much part of the free market. I guess you could outlaw them like most oppressive regimes have in history.

Freedom anyone?

Wow. You really don't understand how unions work.

If they are for freedom, then explain Card Check.

Don't tell me you are that naïve. Lots of business lobby their government for advantages (fair or unfair). Take a look at our tax code.

You can't call Card Check "freedom".

And why unions representing GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES need to lobby their supposed employer is inane.

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh for crying out loud! The teachers are exercising their right as private consumers, not acting in their professional capacity. Are folks really so dense they don't understand that private citizens can shop wherever the hell they want using whatever reasoning they want?

Private shoppers who decide to take their business elsewhere do not make statements or demand fealty to their beliefs lest they take their business elsewhere.

The union has made their consumption a public expression of political philosophy. Every day consumers don't do that. They decide who they will shop from and their reasons are their own, not for public debate, awareness or motivation by inflicting their position on other consumers or businesses.

 

[mnbasketball]

Let us not forget the other side of that coin.

Taxpayers can tell union members what they can and cannot spend their paycheck on...

and

The government can withhold the pay of union members if they boycott businesses.


Who's the thugs here?

Now it's the taxpayer's the bad guy cause they won't shell out for Cadillac bennies while they suffer?? Is that what we're going to try now that the game's exposed to be morally bankrupt as it is? Are you high or something?

Your problem is you want to drive a Cadillac but pay for an Edsel. You want the best employees you can get and as many as you need but you and you alone will decide what they are worth based on your side of the argument.


The answer is there for you, pay the going rate or do without. If you can only afford a dozen apples, and needed two dozen do you think the store would/should be told that they need to sell the apples for half the price because that's all you can afford?

If your running a business and the govt awards you a contract to do a job and after you have committed your self to the job they now tell you that GOSH GUYS, we are having a tough time right now so your going to have to do the job for 70%, and we have voted that you will have no say over it from now own, you would be happy and say dam it I though I had a good job but what the hell, if I lose money and can't pay my bills I committed to, so be it.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Oh for crying out loud! The teachers are exercising their right as private consumers, not acting in their professional capacity. Are folks really so dense they don't understand that private citizens can shop wherever the hell they want using whatever reasoning they want?

Private shoppers who decide to take their business elsewhere do not make statements or demand fealty to their beliefs lest they take their business elsewhere.

The union has made their consumption an expression of political philosophy. Every day consumers don't do that.

Yes, they do. You're living under a rock if you missed the repeated boycotts and threats of boycotts on any of a thousand issues in the past few decades. As consumers, you can be as irrational as you wish when it comes to how you spend YOUR money.

I'm damned surprised I have to explain that to a bunch of freedom loving cons.

 

[boedicca]

By no stretch of the imagination do the dismal service levels provided by government employees these days qualify as "cadillac", bub.

Here's what we've gotten for our Cadillac Spending:

 

[Dr.House]

Somehow no one seems to get that the folks in question have a right to shop where they want.

You continue to "not get it" and try to argue with nobody... At this point I have to assume it's either on purpose or you are not very intelligent... Either way, good luck with that...

So until you can substaniate threats of violence, you're down to trying to argue against Capitalism. Good luck with that.

Past activities of actual violence related to people or groups being coerced into "complying with union wishes" exist... A simple google search would show you this...

Again, my original statement stands:

Let us not forget that there may aso be a fear of retaliation against these businesses that choose NOT to put up the signs, beyond a boycott of the business...

 

[Dr.Drock]

I said before that I would go out of my way to shop, or eat, at any establishment that publicly told these public leech thugs to go fuck themselves.

Which would be you practicing capitalism, the same way the teachers are, not one thing wrong with either instance.

You really do not understand the concept of Capitalism. Here's what it is not:

Capitalism is not GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES coercing private businesses to hang up signs (in violation of their first amendment rights, btw) in support of their collective bargaining efforts OR ELSE.

It's not. And repeating over and over again that it is, doesn't make it so.

I see, let me paint out a scenario;

A business owner posts a say that says "God loves Westboro Baptist and so do I."

A group of marines asks the owner to take it down or else they'll stop shopping there.

Would you have a problem with the marines doing this? I mean I'd be a lot more worried about potential marine violence than teachers, not because marines are worse ppl but their version of violence would be much worse.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Honestly, I see nothing wrong with the welfare recipients boycotting businesses that don't support their union.

AS LONG as they don't pull the usual Union shit of going all Kristalnacht and breaking the windows or burning down businesses that don't support them.

 

[boedicca]

Which would be you practicing capitalism, the same way the teachers are, not one thing wrong with either instance.

You really do not understand the concept of Capitalism. Here's what it is not:

Capitalism is not GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES coercing private businesses to hang up signs (in violation of their first amendment rights, btw) in support of their collective bargaining efforts OR ELSE.

It's not. And repeating over and over again that it is, doesn't make it so.

I see, let me paint out a scenario;

A business owner posts a say that says "God loves Westboro Baptist and so do I."

A group of marines asks the owner to take it down or else they'll stop shopping there.

Would you have a problem with the marines doing this? I mean I'd be a lot more worried about potential marine violence than teachers, not because marines are worse ppl but their version of violence would be much worse.

Where are the examples of marines rioting and beating up private citizens in the U.S.?

You are also making a bogus analogy. If you want to make a proper one try this:

The Marines show up and tell the business owner to put up a poster denouncing Westboro Church or else. Prior to this, they have rioted for days on end at City Hall, leaving a path of destruction and garbage. There are also several well publicized incidents of the marines threatening public officials and their children, protesting in front of their homes; and sending letters threatening violence to press commentators who oppose their agenda.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

@Dr.House: if you can substantiate a threat of violence you have a point. All that's happening here is consumers saying they will spend money elsewhere if their demands are not met.

There are countless examples of violence when religious groups have demands that are not met. Were the Southern Baptists engaging in extortion when they threatened to boycott Disney?

The whole argument is stepped in two issues: a failure to understand how Capitalism works and a belief that liberals are inherently violent. I can't fix folks too stupid to get the first, and I don't agree with the second. So that's that. We're at impasse.

 

[Eric Cartman]

You can't call Card Check "freedom".

And why unions representing GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES need to lobby their supposed employer is inane.

I didn't call 'card check' freedom.

Card Check (which I think they removed from the dead legislation) was a federal proposal that would apply to the formations of unions. These are state and local employees in existing unions.

You can freely ask the government for anything but it doesn't mean you will get it.

Card check=straw man?