General Politics Discussion (II) [ARCHIVED] • Page 848

This guy is going out of his way to do this...

 

Don't have time to type right now but basically it means people can enter a union workplace, get all the benefits to union provides, without being forced to pay dues. More and more people stop paying dues, union loses its ability to fight both politically and in the workplace, wages and benefits get eroded, etc.

 

He just suggested to go nuclear, he also looks like he's gonna pass out... hopefully the latter

 

The way the right to work functions is, you can enjoy the contracts negotiated by a union in your workplace without being compelled to pay dues, which makes it more difficult for unions to exist because sections of the workforce aren't paying towards the infrastructure required for unions to continue to exist.

 

This is the same family me and @David87 were talking about yesterday that this Chris guy is going after.

 

Getting to call this "right-to-work" has to be one of the biggest PR coups ever

 

Ah, thank you. If unions fought for wage increase or increased benefits, why wouldn't the results of said fight only benefit those in the union? Why would it apply to the whole workforce regardless of union status?

Edit: Sorry I could probably look this all up on wiki.

 

It wouldn't, unless it was mandated by law, which is exactly what right-to-work does

 

It would benefit all. That is the point. The union can only operate effectively with the money from dues. But the benefits for which it negotiates are for the benefit all, even non dues paying employees. Essentially, non dues paying employees are free riders. Reaping all the benefits with none of the cost. If more employees aren't required to pay union dues, more people will free load, because why not?

That means less dues and a less powerful union. Which ultimately means the union negotiates less benefits. And eventually the death of the union entirely.

 

Yikes. I know hypocrisy is rampant right now but damn....

 

They're also paid protestors right

 

Is it mandated by law that they give all workers the same benefits? Or are companies just free to go "yeah we'll give all these benefits to people who don't pay dues either, because it'll weaken the union"?

 

Yes it is.

 

So it being about "right to work" is just an alternative fact. Figured as much.

 

Lol, of course there are no replies!

This is taking a toll on my health. Not good.

 

It's just a very weird liberal/dem response that never made sense to me lol

So many people on and off here have said they've learned from me and what I've shared and I appreciate that. I appreciate people have tried to listen at least.

We can't just brush them aside. We need to challenge. Not stay in our bubble. I hope I've improved the left with what I've shared. But it's not enough. If you think someone is a lost cause, then go ahead and stop. But what's important in debate is to personalize, make it about them, and point out hypocrisies through there.

 

Just got through to Durbin's office and said, verbatim "Tha fuck Dick?!"

JK but actually did call and read out a typed up statement of why he needs to filibuster Gorsuch. First time contacting my rep, democracy in action right?

 

Breitbart editor's college grant for white men draws fire

 

You mean like what happened for the GOP for 8 years under Obama LOL

 

I just threw up.

 

IIRC he took a bunch of donations for this and ended up keeping the money and dissolving the company

 

So, the democrats are going to get slaughtered in 2018 and 2020. And they have no one to blame - not Jill Stein, not Bernie Bros, not the far left- but themselves. They're more invested in the appearance of morality and being above conflict than they actually listening to their constituents who want them to fight.