|
Post by redleg on Oct 28, 2014 19:12:10 GMT -5
The problem is that unions have become nothing more than money laundering scams for Democrats. The Dems give tax money and perks to unions, and the unions turn around and give dues money to Democrats. And pressure their serfs to vote Dem. Too many people are waking up to the destruction that Dems are imposing on the country, so unions are losing their power. Most every sentence here is not true... but I'm not even gonna try to get into it today... resting after my doctor visit this AM... I will say that unions primarily support Democrats because Democrats support more issues of importance to union members... what would you expect?... and like I said here earlier... private sector unions are losing membership primarily because unions have done too good of a job for those members... Like making states closed shops, so unions have a monopoly, or making sure that unions are protected from exposure? What I said is absolutely true. Trumpka spent more time in the WH than any of the Secretaries of his Cabinet. Wonder why that is? Couldn't possibly be because The Puppet wanted more money, or union "personnel" for photo shoots, or to disrupt opponents rallies, could it? Nah, never.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 28, 2014 21:56:20 GMT -5
More bull sh!!t from someone who's elevator doesn't even leave the bottom floor... No reason to make a real response... like talking to a fence post... Awwww... Hit too close to home, did I? Didn't address anyone... I guess you just felt like it was you... if the shoe fits...........
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 28, 2014 21:58:09 GMT -5
Your choice... as always... I've seen more than a few former employees say that very same thing as they walked out the door... terminated or suspended for frivolous or no reason at all... that I could have helped keep their jobs had I been their union rep and they had a working agreement... "Being a man"... doesn't always get one fairness... I've worked in the construction trades, agriculture, manufacturing government and occupational safety for over 45 years total, I can honestly say that I've never seen an employee fired or suspended whom did not deserve it.
Union or non union does not signify, my statement applies to both.
But then, I have no obligation to explain or prove anything to you...
Didn't ask you to prove anything... and obviously you haven't been looking... or didn't care to look... or ask what happened...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 28, 2014 22:00:22 GMT -5
Most every sentence here is not true... but I'm not even gonna try to get into it today... resting after my doctor visit this AM... I will say that unions primarily support Democrats because Democrats support more issues of importance to union members... what would you expect?... and like I said here earlier... private sector unions are losing membership primarily because unions have done too good of a job for those members... Like making states closed shops, so unions have a monopoly, or making sure that unions are protected from exposure? What I said is absolutely true. Trumpka spent more time in the WH than any of the Secretaries of his Cabinet. Wonder why that is? Couldn't possibly be because The Puppet wanted more money, or union "personnel" for photo shoots, or to disrupt opponents rallies, could it? Nah, never. There are no closed shops in the U.S... they're illegal... And maybe Trumpka had more time... those Secretaries were our doing their jobs... so was Trumpka...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Oct 29, 2014 5:26:43 GMT -5
Awwww... Hit too close to home, did I? Didn't address anyone... I guess you just felt like it was you... if the shoe fits........... Sure you did. You posted directly below me, and didn't mention anyone else. Still, I can understand the personal attack. I mean, it's not really possible to hit my statements back with substance.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 29, 2014 6:26:46 GMT -5
I would never join a union be a man and stand on your own two feet and fight your own fight at your work place. Your choice... as always... I've seen more than a few former employees say that very same thing as they walked out the door... terminated or suspended for frivolous or no reason at all... that I could have helped keep their jobs had I been their union rep and they had a working agreement... "Being a man"... doesn't always get one fairness... No doubt your representative abilities are legion. So with the ability to force someone to employ another is settled, would it be "fairness" to force others to purchase from your union? If purchasing labor can be imposed why not groceries or fuel oil?
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 7:14:12 GMT -5
Didn't address anyone... I guess you just felt like it was you... if the shoe fits........... Sure you did. You posted directly below me, and didn't mention anyone else. Still, I can understand the personal attack. I mean, it's not really possible to hit my statements back with substance. You're right... I didn't mention anyone... and you have no way of knowing who's comments I had read before I made my comment... but like I said... if you feel the shoe fits..................
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 7:18:51 GMT -5
Your choice... as always... I've seen more than a few former employees say that very same thing as they walked out the door... terminated or suspended for frivolous or no reason at all... that I could have helped keep their jobs had I been their union rep and they had a working agreement... "Being a man"... doesn't always get one fairness... No doubt your representative abilities are legion. So with the ability to force someone to employ another is settled, would it be "fairness" to force others to purchase from your union? If purchasing labor can be imposed why not groceries or fuel oil? When mutual contracts are made... the terms should be enforced by both sides... nobody should be forced to join a union... but if you don't, you shouldn't be able to reap the benefits from one...
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 29, 2014 7:30:10 GMT -5
No doubt your representative abilities are legion. So with the ability to force someone to employ another is settled, would it be "fairness" to force others to purchase from your union? If purchasing labor can be imposed why not groceries or fuel oil? When mutual contracts are made... the terms should be enforced by both sides... nobody should be forced to join a union... but if you don't, you shouldn't be able to reap the benefits from one...Good. So you agree that people should have to right to make purchases as they see fit...... unless they sign onto an obligatory obligation that says otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 7:40:34 GMT -5
When mutual contracts are made... the terms should be enforced by both sides... nobody should be forced to join a union... but if you don't, you shouldn't be able to reap the benefits from one...Good. So you agree that people should have to right to make purchases as they see fit...... unless they sign onto an obligatory obligation that says otherwise. "Making purchases" has nothing to do with my comments... but yes, I do agree that people should be able to buy most anything they can afford... with a few exceptions... of course... "Purchases" can't be/aren't made from a union... but I would encourage the "purchase" of "union made" products...
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Oct 29, 2014 7:50:02 GMT -5
Good. So you agree that people should have to right to make purchases as they see fit...... unless they sign onto an obligatory obligation that says otherwise. "Making purchases" has nothing to do with my comments... but yes, I do agree that people should be able to buy most anything they can afford... with a few exceptions... of course... "Purchases" can't be/aren't made from a union... but I would encourage the "purchase" of "union made" products... You said you could have forced the employer to purchase the services of the disgruntled worker if only you could have represented him. Being compelled to "pay for" a commodity, whether electricity or groceries or labor is a purchase.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 8:00:15 GMT -5
"Making purchases" has nothing to do with my comments... but yes, I do agree that people should be able to buy most anything they can afford... with a few exceptions... of course... "Purchases" can't be/aren't made from a union... but I would encourage the "purchase" of "union made" products... You said you could have forced the employer to purchase the services of the disgruntled worker if only you could have represented him. Being compelled to "pay for" a commodity, whether electricity or groceries or labor is a purchase. That's not what I said at all... (maybe you need to re-read what I DID say)... it's your own interpretation of my comment... and a stretch... I don't agree... but it's not worth arguing to me... I'm gonna take a morning nap...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Oct 29, 2014 9:19:59 GMT -5
Sure you did. You posted directly below me, and didn't mention anyone else. Still, I can understand the personal attack. I mean, it's not really possible to hit my statements back with substance. You're right... I didn't mention anyone... and you have no way of knowing who's comments I had read before I made my comment... but like I said... if you feel the shoe fits.................. Yeah. And you do this regularly... Replying to a thread rather than a poster who just mercilessly shredded one of your ridiculous posts hoping that they won't notice that you posted some more ridiculousness that evades the topic being discussed. Or when you're really deep in a hole, some mindless personal attack. And you don't even have the guts to name your target.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 10:11:53 GMT -5
You're right... I didn't mention anyone... and you have no way of knowing who's comments I had read before I made my comment... but like I said... if you feel the shoe fits.................. Yeah. And you do this regularly... Replying to a thread rather than a poster who just mercilessly shredded one of your ridiculous posts hoping that they won't notice that you posted some more ridiculousness that evades the topic being discussed. Or when you're really deep in a hole, some mindless personal attack. And you don't even have the guts to name your target. I have a message for you from former VP Dick Cheney...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Oct 29, 2014 10:36:27 GMT -5
Yeah. And you do this regularly... Replying to a thread rather than a poster who just mercilessly shredded one of your ridiculous posts hoping that they won't notice that you posted some more ridiculousness that evades the topic being discussed. Or when you're really deep in a hole, some mindless personal attack. And you don't even have the guts to name your target. I have a message for you from former VP Dick Cheney... Yeah. That's a fine example of the sort of personal attack you post when you've dug your hole too deep.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Oct 29, 2014 10:56:03 GMT -5
I have a message for you from former VP Dick Cheney... Yeah. That's a fine example of the sort of personal attack you post when you've dug your hole too deep. Yeah... that's the same thing Pat Leahy told ole Dick... only difference, he was right...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Nov 1, 2014 12:23:51 GMT -5
Like making states closed shops, so unions have a monopoly, or making sure that unions are protected from exposure? What I said is absolutely true. Trumpka spent more time in the WH than any of the Secretaries of his Cabinet. Wonder why that is? Couldn't possibly be because The Puppet wanted more money, or union "personnel" for photo shoots, or to disrupt opponents rallies, could it? Nah, never. There are no closed shops in the U.S... they're illegal... And maybe Trumpka had more time... those Secretaries were our doing their jobs... so was Trumpka... Trumpka "had more time" because he was buying the union's way out of Puppettax, and buying more and more influence with The Puppet. Besides, he and The Puppet had to coordinate the attacks on the Tea Party, and figure out where to send the goons to disrupt rallies and make the TP look "racist". The Puppet doesn't meet with his Cabinet Secretaries because it's "boring" to actually have to do the job he was installed to do, and neither he nor his Secretaries understand what's going on anyway.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Nov 1, 2014 12:58:07 GMT -5
There are no closed shops in the U.S... they're illegal... And maybe Trumpka had more time... those Secretaries were our doing their jobs... so was Trumpka... Trumpka "had more time" because he was buying the union's way out of Puppettax, and buying more and more influence with The Puppet. Besides, he and The Puppet had to coordinate the attacks on the Tea Party, and figure out where to send the goons to disrupt rallies and make the TP look "racist". The Puppet doesn't meet with his Cabinet Secretaries because it's "boring" to actually have to do the job he was installed to do, and neither he nor his Secretaries understand what's going on anyway. Trumpka didn't have to make the TEA party look anything... but I thought you guys blamed that mostly on the SEIU, didn't you?... you know, the green shirts?... not the Teamsters...
|
|