Your New Job

androsblaze Says:

Aug 1, 2009 - Actually, our nation's foundation is republican. The founding fathers distrusted democracy pretty explicitly, hence the republican-style government and constitution. Democracy didn't start entering political rhetoric until FDR.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - The union movement attracts the kind of people who would rather kill companies than suffer constant violations of their rights at the hands of company management. If they *elected* the management, and could recall it at any time, then such struggles would be irrelevant.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - Violation of what rights, might I ask? As your question was loaded, so your rebuttal is vague and nebulous. Don't you think you're being a little naive, just assuming that elections will solve the problem of bad management? After all, there's still a chance that the workers could elect the industry-killers to their own expense. If you want examples of elections going bad, just look at any electoral scandal in history. Hell, look at any election that put madmen into power.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - Chiefly, of the rights to a living wage, decent working conditions and (in the US) healthcare, but many bosses routinely violate other rights as well. Elections won't necessarily solve the problem of bad management, but genuinely democratic elections will solve the problem of exploitative management.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - I would disagree that those are rights. The way I understand it, those aren't rights so much as arrangements made between employers and employees. Isn't part of the hiring process negotiating a contract that provides for those "rights"? Exploitative management and bad management go hand in hand (again, election scandals and madmen in power): if the elections don't solve one, the solution for the other will be unsurprisingly short-lived.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - Except that the hiring process doesn't involve negotiation, it involves the employer telling the prospective employee what the terms are, and the employee either accepts those terms or goes somewhere else for an equally bad deal.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - Now you're imposing unreasonable conditions: that, in effect, every employment contract offered, regardless of the task, terms, and/or considerations, is necessarily a "bad deal," therefore necessitating union intervention. What a fine thing not to have any confidence in the legal system, the employers in its jurisdiction, and anyone who buys into either. You've just insulted the characters of the majority of the working population. Congratulations.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - Not every contract, but certainly most. Some professional occupations have reasonable conditions pay, and some are even disproportionately good, but obviously it would be impossible for everyone (for example) to be a doctor - who would build the hospital? Even assuming 'the majority of the working population' buys into both the legal system and the social structure it enforces - which is quite a stretch - when did I even mention the legal system?

androsblaze Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - When you talk about hiring policies, you talk about employer/employee contracts. When you talk about contracts, you talk about contract laws, and the legal system in place to enforce those laws and mete out punishment for breach of those laws. Also, 'the majority of the working population' has been buying into that legal system and the social structure around it since the country's founding. Why do you think it's still in place?

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - In my experience, most people are cynical about the system but either also cynical about potential alternatives or sceptical about what they can do about it (or both).

androsblaze Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - So they've given it their tacit approval of that system by deferring the decision to revise it. Still, I would contend that there would be more widespread and publicized moves to change it if there was a legitimate problem. Revolutions, on any scale, don't happen because of the whims of a few disgruntled, since it's appropriate, employees (not even Communist ones).

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - Approving of something - even tacitly - is a very different thing to being unconvinced you have the power to reject it.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - Do explain the difference, please, and how it applies here.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - Republic = public affair == democracy = government by the people

androsblaze Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - "A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy ...", from James Madison. The Federalist, Number 10, The New York Packet, 23 Nov., 1787

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 4, 2009 - James Madison != the font of all knowledge. I understand what Madison et al meant by a republic, but it was neither republican nor democratic.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 4, 2009 - If not that, he's a direct source. Another, a direct quote from the Pledge of Allegiance: "And to the Republic, for which it stands," referring to the USA, of course. Further, from the US Constitution, Article IV, Section 4: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of government..." So far that's three in support of a Republic, zero in support of a democracy, and zero in support of "neither". I think I've outsourced you, if you're still up for it.

Spartacus21C Says:

Aug 4, 2009 - All of the above are inadmissible due to being examples of doublethink.

androsblaze Says:

Aug 4, 2009 - Yet again you demonstrate your uncanny ability to make unsupported assertion. Unless of course you're joking, in which case it was a weak reference.

BobMccartyWrites Says:

Aug 11, 2009 - What a load of crap!

restlesswings Says:

Aug 22, 2009 - I worked for this guy once! He's still out there!

embeddedprogrammer Says:

Oct 21, 2009 - This is very expensive, well produced, and entertaining tripe, attempting to reinforce the liberal class envy plank to promote more union infiltration of our diminishing manufacturing base. The actor and production quality are top notch. Thank you Mr. Sauros.

notNEWW Says:

Nov 4, 2009 - I agree ... i work in a hospital that is unionized ... and they pay me 12$ more an hour to an independent contractor ..... i won't say anything about how lazy the folks i work with are .... nor will i mention how un skilled they are .... but i will mention this ...... because they have unionized ... the hospital is on the brink of bankruptcy.... they pay me extra bc i'm not affiliated with a union contract .... the employees there think they deserve a job ......

ma2jh Says:

Nov 15, 2009 - unions ruined the economy.

DruidAnthony Says:

Nov 20, 2009 - Also don't forget in the right to work state they can fire you for any reason they want too... Like when someone in your family gets sick and they fire you because they don't want their insurance rates to go up next year... Yup just walk in the door and say your fire... There's nothing you can do about other then leave like a slave. The right to work state means someone that isn't sick has the right to work...