Indiana right to work state?

http://news.yahoo.com/walkout-indiana-democra... Let the workers decide if they want to pay union dues. Is that not what freedom should be?

A union never signed the front of MY paycheck. A union never created a job. A union never manufactured anything. There's NO reason I should be FORCED to join a union just to have a job.

Yeah, enjoy your weekend, guys...

Cyclops Rex wrote:

Yeah, enjoy your weekend, guys...

For 26 million Americans everyday is a weekend, only without money.

Living Large2 wrote:

<quoted text>For 26 million Americans everyday is a weekend, only without money.

That is because corporations control government, instead of the other way around, as it should be.

Tariffs and reasonable trade policy, not to mention because respect for the worker, would fix many problems in this country.

Cyclops Rex wrote:

<quoted text>
That is because corporations control government, instead of the other way around, as it should be.
Tariffs and reasonable trade policy, not to mention because respect for the worker, would fix many problems in this country.

So,....it would be better in your mind if government controlled corporations?
Sounds kind of like communism to me.
Not surprising, considering the source.

Cyclops Rex wrote:

<quoted text>
That is because corporations control government, instead of the other way around, as it should be.
Tariffs and reasonable trade policy, not to mention because respect for the worker, would fix many problems in this country.

That is because government controls the people instead of the people controlling the government as it should be. Unions have become nothing more then an extension of the government and it's controlling policies placed on workers.

Living Large2 wrote:

<quoted text>That is because government controls the people instead of the people controlling the government as it should be. Unions have become nothing more then an extension of the government and it's controlling policies placed on workers.

Corporations control the government. Government controls the people... I think we can agree that the whole damn thing is upside down.

And Jim, if I want to hear from an idiot, I only need to wait for your next post.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php This shows who elects our government officials.

Cyclops Rex wrote:

<quoted text>
That is because corporations control government, instead of the other way around, as it should be.
Tariffs and reasonable trade policy, not to mention because respect for the worker, would fix many problems in this country.

Good Day,

Yup... just like the NLRB interfereing with Boeing's wish to manufacture in South Carolina costing them the possibility of many good paying jobs. That's right, government should control industry (insert sarcasm here).

Or what of the EFCA that would make union votes public instead of leaving them private so employees can't be harassed?

How about arbitrary regulations issued by fiat from such organizations as the EPA and Energy Department? Or Supreme Court cases like Schechter v United States or Wickard v Filburn? In both cases the government attempted to control a buisiness and lost.

Steelie

Good Day,

Furthermore, I seem to remember reading an article lately (issued by Jim DeMint?) that showed Right to Work States tended to have better economies than States that are not Right to Work. I may have to look it back up, but it was either Alabama or Kentucky that brought in an extra $51 million in tax revenue after becoming Right to Work. Furthermore, more people are moving to Right to Work States which further improves their economy while those States that are not Right to Work lose precious talent and as the populations shrink, and lose Congressional seats. In other words, RTW States gained 9 seats vs. a loss of 9 seats for forced unionized States. RTW States had something like 46% more private business growth. Also, from 1993-2009 private sector job growth in RTW States increased by nearly 39% compared to a comparitively paltry 19% for non-RTW States. During the period from 1993 - 2010 individual income increased by 39.5% in RTW States vs. only 35.7% in forced unionization States. So, the picture is emerging that RTW States may have it better off than forced unionized States.

Steelie

Right to work = Right-to-work-for-less.

Rtw states have lower wages, more uninsured, less benefits, lower education, lower live birth rates, less worker rights, and greater dropout rates.

Rtw = anti-worker and anti-American

The Rtw movement is to divide workers against each other, and while the teabaggers swallow it hook line and sinker, the elite rich are laughing all the way to the bank.

RTW- means improving your lot in life based on your own efforts, not depending on a bunch of union thugs sitting at their union retreat drinking beer, having your conpensation mandated.
I worked in a union at Keeler Brass many years ago where the union mantra was "slow down, your working too fast - making the rest us us look bad."
Wrong - you make yourself look bad.

Arctic49519 wrote:

Right to work = Right-to-work-for-less.
Rtw states have lower wages, more uninsured, less benefits, lower education, lower live birth rates, less worker rights, and greater dropout rates.
Rtw = anti-worker and anti-American
The Rtw movement is to divide workers against each other, and while the teabaggers swallow it hook line and sinker, the elite rich are laughing all the way to the bank.

Good Day,

Not so. Please refer to my post above. RTW states generally have better economies, wages, and private business growth than those States that support forced unionization. Just look at what happened to Michigan during the Granholm administration.

Steelie

Cyclops Rex wrote:

<quoted text>

And Jim, if I want to hear from an idiot, I only need to wait for your next post.

Or better yet,... just go back and read some of your own!

Gville Jim wrote:

<quoted text>Or better yet,... just go back and read some of your own!

"I know you are, but what am I?"

Arctic49519 wrote:

Right to work = Right-to-work-for-less.
Rtw states have lower wages, more uninsured, less benefits, lower education, lower live birth rates, less worker rights, and greater dropout rates.
Rtw = anti-worker and anti-American
The Rtw movement is to divide workers against each other, and while the teabaggers swallow it hook line and sinker, the elite rich are laughing all the way to the bank.

This, folks, is just another union hack throwing crap against the wall hoping it sticks! What a bunch of BS, Arctic. The only one who wants to divide people against each other is you and your fellow Democrats.

Arctic49519 wrote:

Right to work = Right-to-work-for-less.
Rtw states have lower wages, more uninsured, less benefits, lower education, lower live birth rates, less worker rights, and greater dropout rates.
Rtw = anti-worker and anti-American
The Rtw movement is to divide workers against each other, and while the teabaggers swallow it hook line and sinker, the elite rich are laughing all the way to the bank.

Wait... didn't the Union wages go down this year... along with the benefits when the new union contracts were signed? Oh... never mind, that was just for NEW hires. The current union brainwashed masses still get their same rates/benefits. Go Union!

I don't know about other states, but in Michigan, no one can force you to join a union. What does happen is that those who work for a union company and do not join the union are required to pay a fee to pay for their union benefits which is only right since they do benefit from the union. At those companies where new hires now get lower pay than old hands, the old hands do not have to be members to keep their higher pay. Companies do not have separate pay scales for union and non union personnel.

right to work means lower wages. lower wages means the needy will need more welfare to survive. republicans are brilliant when it comes to failing.