Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire good job unions!

The union said they werent invloved in the build. How do you link them with the accident? By the sounds of the article the stage was assembled non-union. Our country does not have rules forcing jobs to be 100% union.

There it is folks, the horrors of putting in a full days work, what with having to eat in a basket without someone to bullschit about last nights happenings, or having to sit along side the road and eat, nobody bringing you cold water, someone actually wanting to impress the bosses and or clients with hard work and performance... The humanity... Thank GOD for unions where these horrific conditions are no longer imposed on the poor workers.

Sometimes you have to grow a pair and just say no.



I managed to see that I had drinking water for years. When a boss, I managed to see that my men had water because a lot were too lazy to fix it themselves. They would find the energy to bitch and moan about it instead of filling up the water can. You don't have to be in a Union to take care of yourself. miles

So, how many of you voted for him????

Bullspit...
Don't tell me unions aren't destroyers of business, I saw the steel mills crumble due to their G R E E D.

Your union dues is about due...Oblamo can use your cash about now...

I have been accused of many things over my tenure here but condescending only in repay of kind. Might want to check your tone out if my gibes cause you to cringe.

Fact is I've been listening to economic gibberish around here for so long that most of it I just ignore. I only speak up when things get so comically out of kilter than a normal response has to include some level of attention getting... call it condescending if you will but blaming unions for the decimation of American industry is putting the cart before the horse.

I asked you about currency manipulation which is used to permanently underprice another country's labor costs... you ignored me.

I asked you about the textbook mercantilism which China, Japan, and many other countries have employed to strip productive capacity from the US... you ignored me.

I asked you to comment on the use of the dollar as reserve currency and its contribution to the loss of industry (because it facilitates the first two)... and was again ignored.

These aren't rhetorical questions. They are the means and ways with which one country can target and take down the productive industry of another country. These are the primary foundations upon which a chronic and non-selfcorrecting trade deficit is laid. These are enablers of the dollar recycling trade which has mutated our economy from a muscle bound industrial giant into a bubble generating, debt fueled zombie that staggers from one emergency to another.

I don't pay much attention to the gibes directed to me on matters economics. I remember well several years ago when I warned of an economic collapse and was ridiculed. I remember a damned large portion of the people supporting you on this thread agreeing that the onset of the crisis was a 'Democratic conspiracy to talk down the economy'. I remember people here applauding the imbecile Phil Gramm when he spoke of a 'mental recession'.

I'm not trying to pick on you, honestly I'm not.

But to understand ~why~ and ~how~ the economy has been strip mined necessitates going beyond coin operated economists and know it all pundits. You are going to have to understand that there are now two economies the produce/consume traditional one and the finance based one that has become parasitic in nature and is encouraging the very policies that are causing the middle class to wither.

Blaming unions is worse than being merely wrong it misdirects the honest blame from those who have helped to devalue goods producing activities. It distracts from the fact that the most massive fraud in the history of mankind has only recently concluded and the statutes of limitations is running out without the prosecution of one single Wall St welfare queen.

So forgive me if I seem trite... tbh I've just heard the usual ideological bullshit machine running one too many times.

Will

So the 400 plus million given to politiciansm, by the union, who monetize our debt, make sweetheart trade deals with China, refuse to impose tarrifs on countries screwing us over, giving amnesty to millions of illegals has no implications for our country and economy will?


The unions provide the dinero to bankroll all of these nightmares

I know you are a big fan of Obama but come on

Now I don't wish to keep this monstrosity of a thread on life support any more than absolutely necessary...

But do you honestly believe that unions are opposed to import tariffs to counter the currency manipulation/mercantilism I have noted? Really? Is that honestly what you believe?

In addition do you really believe that trade unions were in favor of giving most favored nation status to China and allowing an ongoing currency peg? Really?

On immigration you will find disagreement among the various unions. Those with large hispanic membership, now or anticipated, do favor immigration while those who do not tend to disagree. It is nuanced. Don't expect the IUOE membership to have a similar stand to the hotel workers union. By and large the democratic party ~has~ folded. The republican party was in favor of large scale immigration for decades while the democratic party had platform planks opposed to it. Both have given in and joined the Chamber of Commerce.

But I have to say you have a grave misunderstanding of what trade unions desire politically and have pursued if you believe what you just posted.

Will

400 PLUS million?!? You dont say....what a significant contribution to the liberal machine. Holy fcking balls thats really gonna bankrupt America...


No one managed to answer to me why that article of the stage collapse was mentioned either. Can anyone help me? I know im a union sociaLOST so there really is no help for me...but give it a try.

Edited. Too hard to type on a smart phone.

Funny, you side-stepped/ignored the health and safety issues I mentioned, the workers comp claims I mentioned and went right for the easy pickings. Thanks for walking into that one. You aught to be a Liberal Politician...

God bless union people. America needs them!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not easy picking, just pointing out how a complete non-issue, such as an employer not providing drinking water, is construed as a legitimate problem within a union. A simple solution would be to bring a few bottles of water from home, nobody thought of that:O instead you get together like a bunch of old women and bitch about it.

Now when you cannot figure out how to bring water from home I don't expect you to stand up for your own health and safety, I certainly don't expect people to fill out injury forms, or go to the hospital when injured, without the bosses permission.

As I said I took care of myself, even though washrooms, breakrooms, and drinking water is mandatory union or not. I simply highlighted the fact that some non-union companies arent the peaches and cream operations you people make them to be. I still started at the bottom, worked up to foreman and eventually quit and went on to other things. But again you dodged my original health and safety comments by insulting my intelligence and backbone.

Good show sir. Theres a cubical at the UAW hall for you.

I thought "Union" was slang for "I'm a lazyasss". You'd never make it in the oilpatch.

The illegal aliens love the unions. Unions keep phugging American workers yet many on here still say unions are wonderful

http://www.zimbio.com/Illegal+immig...cago+Teamsters+Rally+Support+Immigration

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/issues/unions/afl-cio-turns-its-back-us-workers-endors.html

I know, Im not a drunk cokehead with a grade 10 education and 2 ex-wives.


The oil patch aint for everyone...rig pig.

What a [bleep] joke of a spin that is. What, the GOP has no culpability on cheap labor flowing into this country? Unions foght against illegal immigration for years, including Cesar Chavez and the UFW union. Business is just as culpable by stuffing the pockets of the GOP to allow the cheap labor spigot open and jobs to flow over seas.


Another point of view to ponder...

In the wake of labor�s defeated effort to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) last week, both pro- and anti-union pundits have opined that unions are in an all-but-irreversible decline. Privately, a number of my friends and acquaintances in the labor movement have voiced similar sentiments. Most don�t think that decline is irreversible but few have any idea how labor would come back.

What would America look like without a union movement? That�s not a hard question to answer, because we�re almost at that point. The rate of private-sector unionization has fallen below 7 percent, from a post-World War II high of roughly 40 percent. Already, the economic effects of a union-free America are glaringly apparent: an economically stagnant or downwardly mobile middle class, a steady clawing-back of job-related health and retirement benefits and ever-rising economic inequality.

In the three decades after World War II the United States dominated the global economy, but that�s only one of the two reasons our country became the first to have a middle-class majority. The other is that this was the only time in our history when we had a high degree of unionization. From 1947 through 1972 � the peak years of unionization � productivity increased by 102 percent, and median household income also increased by 102 percent. Thereafter, as the rate of unionization relentlessly fell, a gap opened between the economic benefits flowing from a more productive economy and the incomes of ordinary Americans, so much so that in recent decades, all the gains in productivity � as economists Ian Dew-Becker and Robert Gordon have shown � have gone to the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans. When labor was at its numerical apogee in 1955, the wealthiest 10 percent claimed just 33 percent of the nation�s income. By 2007, with the labor movement greatly diminished, the wealthiest 10 percent claimed 50 percent of the nation�s income.

Today, wages account for the lowest share of both gross domestic product and corporate revenue since World War II ended � and that share continues to shrink. An International Monetary Fund study released in April shows that the portion of GDP going to wages and benefits has declined from 64 percent in 2001 to 58 percent this year. The survey compared the United States with Europe, where the only other nations in which labor�s share declined were Greece, Spain and Ireland � countries whose economies are at death�s door. Our economy is nowhere near so weak, but as Americans� ability to collectively bargain has waned, so has their power to keep all corporate revenue from going to top executives and shareholders.

When unions are powerful, they boost the incomes of not only their members but also of nonunion workers in their sector or region. Princeton economist Henry Farber has shown that the wages of a nonunion worker in an industry that is 25 percent unionized are 7.5 percent higher because of that unionization. Today, however, few industries have so high a rate of unionization, and a consequence is that unions can no longer win the kinds of wages and benefits they used to.

Deunionization is just one reason Americans� incomes have declined, of course; globalization has taken its toll as well. But the declining share of pretax income going to wages is chiefly the result of the weakening of unions, which is the main reason American managers now routinely seek to thwart their workers� attempts to unionize through legally questionable but economically rewarding tactics (rewarding, that is, for the managers).

The weakening of unions has had a huge political effect as well: the realignment of the white working class. Since the �60s, exit polls have shown that unionized blue-collar whites vote Democratic at a rate 20 to 30 percent higher than their nonunion counterparts. The decline in union membership has weakened Democrats in such heavily white, increasingly deunionized states as West Virginia and Wisconsin � the main reason Republicans such as Walker have sought to reduce labor�s numbers. Liberals who have been indifferent to unions� decline will find it difficult to enact progressive legislation in their absence.

Understandably, some liberals are searching for ways to arrest the economic decline of the majority of their fellow Americans in a post-union environment. I fear they�re bound to be frustrated. If workers can�t bargain with their employers, it can�t be done. If and when Big Labor dies � it�s on life support now � America�s big middle class dies with it.

meyersonhwashpost.com

The joke, is the hysteria surrounding Walker's efforts. They were billed as an assault on unions, by the press, the democrats, and labor leaders - so of course the rank 'n' file believed it.

Nothing could be farther from reality, as Walker's efforts were aimed squarely at the public sector. PERIOD.

By recall time, even the lefty press in Wisconsin had to retrace their earlier steps. Oh, they still hate Walker, but were forced to at least be honest in their presentation - Walker's bills have ZERO direct effect on private unions, and the only indirect effect, is reduced taxes - primarily property tax.

Can't argue the fact that the GOP has no culpability here,...but the rest of that article qualifies as deer camp TP.

Love this gem...



The author doesn't address that these unsustainable benefits are the reason that many businesses cease to exist. There is simply no money to pay for them.

Look at Greece (which ironically he mentions) for a case-in-point.