Advertisement

NotAGolfer

Follow

Comment history

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

You're a little mixed up. Hitler consolidated and "improved" unions. Unions loved and supported him and his socialist policies (before they discovered, too late, they'd sold their freedom for a bowl of proverbial porridge).
http://thegraph.com/2011/02/hitler-di...

Unions are doing the same now, giving politicians power in exchange for the politicians writing laws that coerce companies and the public into giving them what they want. If you give too much power to bureaucrats to control society (based on the politicians' promise to take care of you), they'll soon control society, having no more use for the useful idiots who helped them consolidate power.

March 15, 2013 at 1:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

The point is that now I, who don't agree with many union political stances, will no longer be forced to pay the administration costs of collecting union dues for the unions. As I wrote to weeslicket, What if you were forced to pay the administrative costs for churches to collect tithes from state employees who wanted to tithe to their church? Do we just let anybody who'd like to collect money from state employees for some cause burden state administrators with the task of handling the payroll deductions and forwarding the money? No, of course, we shouldn't.

March 15, 2013 at 1:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

weeslicket, I don't want my tax money going to administrate dues collection for unions, whose politics I mostly don't like. If they want to collect dues, they should pay for the administrative costs out of their own dues. Why is that difficult for you to understand? What if some Christian organization wanted the state to collect tithes from state employees through their state paychecks? Would you want to pay for that administrative cost?

Then, yes, unions are always trying to pass or keep coercive laws, such as those that require open ballots and those that require employees of a unionized plant to join their union. In many states, they are successful in keeping these coercive tactics legal.

March 15, 2013 at 1:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

The unions use taxpayer money (from Dems and Repubs alike) to administrate their dues collection that supports mostly Democratic candidates. That's what I said and what I meant. Unions have bought off past politicians to get govt to cover their administrative costs (and to make the dues come out of paychecks like taxes do--less noticed and less questioned than if the employeees had to write out checks each time).

March 15, 2013 at 12:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

That sounds completely fair, if this happens. Does the state handle payroll for organizations that deduct for YMCA and Christian orgs, though? Or is that a strawman argument? If private companies deduct for these things using their own HR personnel to do payroll, and if the employees have a completely free choice on whether or not to give, then that's their business.

March 15, 2013 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

"The Legislature has crossed the line," said Sen. Tom Holland, D-Baldwin City. "That is flat-out wrong. That is tyranny," he said.

Who's tyrannical? The GOP for saying that people can CHOOSE whether or not to support unions on their own check-writing time? Or the unions for using tax-payer money (from Dems and Repubs alike) to automatically withhold money from people's paycheck for unions, which use almost all their money to support Democrats, who write law to make it easier for unions to coerce money from people?

You people have logic problems.

March 15, 2013 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

They should. The United Way is a wasteful organization. The only reason it can say it has "low expenses" compared to the money it donates is that it doesn't count the untold hours that the managers of different companies devote to coercing employees to give money. Fortune 500 companies support full time managers over various divisions, plus a host of other part-time managers in various departments. The United Way doesn't "count" the cost of sucking people away from creative and productive activity into coercive activities. When your boss's boss tells you that he wants everone to give to the United Way, people do it, whether they'd rather give to a different cause or not.

March 15, 2013 at 8:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

Who's dictating how your paycheck gets divided? THE UNIONS. You people have logic problems.

March 15, 2013 at 8:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate approves Chamber-backed bill opposed by unions

That's a GREAT idea. No payroll deductions for anything. If every American had to write out a check for their taxes, taxes WOULD come down. Payroll deductions are a way to disguise and prioritize people's money for them. The United Way, despite all the supposed reformation, is still a corrupt, wasteful organization. Corporations spend untold dollars allowing their high-paid managers (taking time away from their productive activity--some in full time United Way support roles) to be used as pawns, to coerce employees into giving to the United Way (instead of, perhaps, their charity of choice).

March 15, 2013 at 8:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Republican budget writers propose 4 percent across-the-board cut to higher education

"Why do I feel this has Koch brothers written all over it."

Because you're the type to need imaginary demons to make your fantasy world complete.

March 13, 2013 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal )