Union extortion now illegal in Michigan

abandonconflict said:
Capitalists will continue to send jobs overseas as long as wages are lower in 3rd world countries and that affects jobs here. When our industries can not compete because our workers demand high pay, the answer seems obvious, pay them less and loot their pensions. NO, pay the 3rd world people more and raise their standard of living.
Click to expand...

capitalists will continue to make their products where the cost of the manufacturing + shipment to the market is lower than making the product locally. thats why we are supposed to have tariffs. sadly the left has spent nearly 50 years decrying "protectionism" and the right has more than a few free trade morons as well. the lack of tariffs ensures that cheap "collectivized" labour markets like china will be the low cost manufacturing option, and when chinese collectivized labour ceases to be the cheapest option, off we go to the vietnamese collective, then the former soviet republic of whateveristan's collective, and so on.

"raising the wages" and "fucking the bourgeois" may make you popular with the proles in the short term, but when nike, adidas and apple move their factories to indonesia your proles will have LESS than they do now.

also, way to finally embrace the marxist language you have been hiding for so long.

viva zapatista. viva la revolucion.
 
ginwilly said:
I'm expecting 20 hr work days in boiler rooms over 100 degrees with no holidays, vacation or sick time to start by the first of the year. I wonder if we'll still get Sundays off.
Click to expand...

See how this thread went from righties sardonically describing union aims as extortion, to sardonically describing wage slavery? The difference is, they actually want to have you believe that they are not being sardonic when describing union "thugs" but then dismiss a dismal description of poor work conditions. Why is honesty out of the question in both cases? Just be honest.

Even if conditions don't get that bad, it won't change the fact that wages will decrease. Aside from that, what is to stop conditions from being so bad with out union thugs? Oh let me guess, you want a big government to protect workers?

If you oppose big government AND you oppose unions, you really just oppose workers.

Here folks, you have an example of a person who buys into fake corporate libertarianism and spreads its BS propaganda designed to make the bourgeois even more wealthy at the expense of the proletariat. In other words, a member of the proletariat brainwashed into supporting the very people dismantling what made America great in the first place. Fucking FASCISTS!
 
abandonconflict said:
Capitalists will continue to send jobs overseas as long as wages are lower in 3rd world countries and that affects jobs here. When our industries can not compete because our workers demand high pay, the answer seems obvious, pay them less and loot their pensions. NO, pay the 3rd world people more and raise their standard of living.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid this runs headfirst into one of the great basic premises of economics ... and i mean day one, lesson one, Economics 101 type stuff.
The value of goods is an indicator of their scarcity and utility.
Money is the distilled essence of this scarcity/utility.
There simply isn't enough money to raise every worker's standard of living, because there aren't enough things to buy, and the money devalues.

You could mount an essentially Keynesian argument that all that money being traded for all those goods will stimulate the manufacturing end of the economy ... but I don't believe in perpetual motion, either physical or fiscal. I don't see that there is a way to do what you propose. cn
 
Dr Kynes said:
capitalists will continue to make their products where the cost of the manufacturing + shipment to the market is lower than making the product locally. True
thats why we are supposed to have tariffs. so you support protectionism? cool.
sadly the left has spent nearly 50 years decrying "protectionism" false, that would be both right wing parties
and the right has more than a few free trade morons as well. true
the lack of tariffs ensures that cheap "collectivized" labour markets like china will be the low cost manufacturing option, and when chinese collectivized labour ceases to be the cheapest option, off we go to the vietnamese collective, then the former soviet republic of whateveristan's collective, and so on. yeah cause the American way is no longer greatness, it is exploitation

"raising the wages" and "fucking the bourgeois" may make you popular with the proles in the short term, but when nike, adidas and apple move their factories to indonesia your proles will have LESS than they do now. No idiot, I am talking about raising 3rd world labor conditions

also, way to finally embrace the marxist language you have been hiding for so long. and the crux, if I use any words you deem Marxist, I am automatically a Marxist. That makes things pretty easy, huh, just categoraically call anyone opposed to corporatocracy a Marxist enemy of America, how long do you think this will work?

viva zapatista. viva la revolucion.
Click to expand...

The funny part is, most of South America has embraced protectionism. That is why the US is really in crisis. They have been our "crown jewel of the empire" as India was to the British, and now that we can't exploit an entire continent, our empire is doomed.

Also, you're a moron, protectionism is a very left-wing measure.
 
cannabineer said:
I'm afraid this runs headfirst into one of the great basic premises of economics ... and i mean day one, lesson one, Economics 101 type stuff.
The value of goods is an indicator of their scarcity and utility.
Money is the distilled essence of this scarcity/utility.
There simply isn't enough money to raise every worker's standard of living, because there aren't enough things to buy, and the money devalues.

You could mount an essentially Keynesian argument that all that money being traded for all those goods will stimulate the manufacturing end of the economy ... but I don't believe in perpetual motion, either physical or fiscal. I don't see that there is a way to do what you propose. cn
Click to expand...

I know that this runs DIRECTLY counter to the bullshit they feed kids in economics classes.

Now look carefully at what you just said, you are maybe not condoning, but certainly justifying, that we continue exploiting a major portion of the human population in order to maintain higher living standards.

What I am saying, is that you are going to get exploited too, just like them.
 
4% of the 08 bailout could have solved world hunger for a year.

Less than 3% of the annual defense budget yearly could solve world hunger and would have a far greater national security impact.
 
abandonconflict said:
I know that this runs DIRECTLY counter to the bullshit they feed kids in economics classes.

Now look carefully at what you just said, you are maybe not condoning, but certainly justifying, that we continue exploiting a major portion of the human population in order to maintain higher living standards.

What I am saying, is that you are going to get exploited too, just like them.
Click to expand...

I see no way to avoid that. And I don't see the basic tenet I've posted as bullshit, but rather a hard limit. I do not share with you the utterly Engelsian idea that the synthesis (in the dialectic collision of historical forces) is progress, i.e. that the direction of revolution is forward, at least for our society. Revolution is replacement ... with all the lessons of running a state or land to learn all over again, from scratch. Jmo. cn
 
cannabineer said:
I see no way to avoid that. And I don't see the basic tenet I've posted as bullshit, but rather a hard limit. I do not share with you the utterly Engelsian idea that the synthesis (in the dialectic collision of historical forces) is progress, i.e. that the direction of revolution is forward, at least for our society. Revolution is replacement ... with all the lessons of running a state or land to learn all over again, from scratch. Jmo. cn
Click to expand...

Most Americans are not aware of how the US government has kept the western hemisphere devoid of governments that were unsympathetic to corporate interests. Whether they become aware or not, has no bearing on the fact that many of the nations in the hemisphere have recently begun embracing protectionism, nationalization of resources and even turned to preference of Chinese trade. This is referred to as the Pink Tide in some parts of South America and in a few countries, it is downright Marxist (EG Bolivia and Ecuador). 3rd world people aside from those in Africa have begun demanding better living standards. Africa is following soon and is a rich land mass. When the rush to "spread democracy" was a major theme in world politics, we were installing leaders in smaller nations to keep them "open for trade". Now the greed is turning its eye back onto American workers and it could well be that this spread of leftist sentiment is liberating serfdoms. Obviously, corporations don't want to pay workers well, I think we can agree on that. Remember, politics and economics are not at all separate, ever, not at home, not abroad. That is why capitalists are anticommunist in the first place. Revolution is inevitable and believe it or not, I don't think it is necessarily forward either, but it can be.

All of the struggles in history have been either contrived to mask, or symptoms of, the only true and timeless struggle that has always plagued mankind throughout history, class struggle. Even race struggle has only been provoked as a false dichotomy.
 
Oh no what will unions do now, they cant push out regulars just because they don't want to pay them dues. They cry greedy capitalists, yet they are greedy hypocrites themselves.
 
RyanTheRhino said:
Oh no what will unions do now, they cant push out regulars just because they don't want to pay them dues. They cry greedy capitalists, yet they are greedy hypocrites themselves.
Click to expand...

Apparently, they're going to knock down tents, accost women, seniors and disabled people, as well as, assault reporters from media sources they don't like. Cause they're the model of civil disagreement, as always. Oh, and Lefty media outlets will outright lie and say it was staged, despite UNEDITED video proof.
 
abandonconflict said:
Most Americans are not aware of how the US government has kept the western hemisphere devoid of governments that were unsympathetic to corporate interests. Whether they become aware or not, has no bearing on the fact that many of the nations in the hemisphere have recently begun embracing protectionism, nationalization of resources and even turned to preference of Chinese trade. This is referred to as the Pink Tide in some parts of South America and in a few countries, it is downright Marxist (EG Bolivia and Ecuador). 3rd world people aside from those in Africa have begun demanding better living standards. Africa is following soon and is a rich land mass. When the rush to "spread democracy" was a major theme in world politics, we were installing leaders in smaller nations to keep them "open for trade". Now the greed is turning its eye back onto American workers and it could well be that this spread of leftist sentiment is liberating serfdoms. Obviously, corporations don't want to pay workers well, I think we can agree on that. Remember, politics and economics are not at all separate, ever, not at home, not abroad. That is why capitalists are anticommunist in the first place. Revolution is inevitable and believe it or not, I don't think it is necessarily forward either, but it can be.

All of the struggles in history have been either contrived to mask, or symptoms of, the only true and timeless struggle that has always plagued mankind throughout history, class struggle. Even race struggle has only been provoked as a false dichotomy.
Click to expand...

Im_not_reading_that.jpg


just kidding. i read all that shit.

"Class Struggle" only occurs within a single social unit, such as a city-state, a nation,, or an empire. external conflicts (both overt and covert) are generally resource/market struggles, but are sometimes purely ideological.

Stalin and Mao did not attempt to export authoritarian socialism to other nations out of any need for "class struggle"', they wanted the resources of those nations, and they desired to expand the reach of their ideology

your simplistic and ultimately flawed vision of history politics and indeed, FACT leads you astray again.

Rome did not battle Carthage out of some desire to be the true descendents of Troy, they were engaged in a market struggle, which led to a butthurt fued.

England and France did not make war on and off for nearly 1000 years over "class struggle"

Germany has not attempted to take over the known world 6 times out of some mysterious dedication to the proletarian cause or loyalty to the aristocracy.

Somalia's warlords are not fighting over who's vision of africa's political future is most philosophically correct.

the Catholics didnt execute millions of "pagans" around the world over some foppish coffeehouse argument on the nature of religion.

your assertions fail on their face.
 
Dr Kynes said:
Im_not_reading_that.jpg


just kidding. i read all that shit.

"Class Struggle" only occurs within a single social unit, such as a city-state, a nation,, or an empire. external conflicts (both overt and covert) are generally resource/market struggles, but are sometimes purely ideological.

Stalin and Mao did not attempt to export authoritarian socialism to other nations out of any need for "class struggle"', they wanted the resources of those nations, and they desired to expand the reach of their ideology

your simplistic and ultimately flawed vision of history politics and indeed, FACT leads you astray again.

Rome did not battle Carthage out of some desire to be the true descendents of Troy, they were engaged in a market struggle, which led to a butthurt fued.

England and France did not make war on and off for nearly 1000 years over "class struggle"

Germany has not attempted to take over the known world 6 times out of some mysterious dedication to the proletarian cause or loyalty to the aristocracy.

Somalia's warlords are not fighting over who's vision of africa's political future is most philosophically correct.

the Catholics didnt execute millions of "pagans" around the world over some foppish coffeehouse argument on the nature of religion.

your assertions fail on their face.
Click to expand...

I agree about Stalin and Mao, they were authoritarians who wanted nothing more than resources. I do consider this a symptom of class struggle. A big kid is taking lunch money from a small kid. Britain and France, you had aristocracies and serfdoms being mobilized because a "permanent wartime economy" was an outstanding way to keep such a form of government running smoothly. The Catholics shaped the world into first and third strata and gave Europeans impetus to enslave, yes, ENSLAVE. Somalia has been kept unstable by the west for decades so they don't get in the way of the colonial plunder of the horn (and the rest) of Africa. Roma and Carthage, come on, I don't think you and I are the only ones here who have read the Aenead of Virgil, but I doubt that war was really about Juno and her irrational jealousy. I bet I could link that shit to class struggle easily if I had a better historical source.
 
canndo said:
why? why should a company be able to enforce certain things upon their employees yet a union not? As I said, the law states that workers no longer have to pay dues. If they do not, then the union will no longer exist, when the union no longer exists then sooner or later, probably sooner, that which the union enforces upon the company no longer is applicable.

I used the term reproductive rights to denote more than "abortion rights" as the term includes woman's ability to obtain and use birth control and be free from cohersive practices like invasive ultrasound.
Click to expand...

Women are not blocked from buying and using contraception. While a few nitwits have tried to create laws mandating ultrasounds, none have been successful.

The "war on women" was an invention created for use during the 2012 presidential election. Its time has past. You can drop that bit of silliness now.
 
desert dude said:
Women are not blocked from buying and using contraception. While a few nitwits have tried to create laws mandating ultrasounds, none have been successful.

The "war on women" was an invention created for use during the 2012 presidential election. Its time has past. You can drop that bit of silliness now.
Click to expand...


You, sir, are quite wrong. It was not and is not silliness. There have been roughly a thousand bills across the country attacking women on several fronts. Unless you can explain to me why there needs to be a law enforcing vaginal ultrasound before a woman can have an abortion. Unless you can explain what legitimate or "forceable" rape is as opposed to .... rape. You are generaly aware of what goes on in this country and I am surprised that you have missed this trend. Invasive ultrasound requirements have indeed been sucessful in at least one state - and the fact that it may not have been sucessful in others does not demonstrate that there is no war on women, only that the war is being lost in those states. The very fact that such a bill would reach a vote indicates that there is, such an assault.
 
Class struggle is what comes from fight over the droppings of power. And nothing is black and white. Nothing is Pubs vs Dems. It is all, haves and have nots. What the two parties stand for, the Planks also changes and swaps back and forth over the generations. But, the Mob violence with no regard to anyone's safety is the only and very real problem. Nero fiddled while Rome burned. But why was it burning?

Two theories exist, basically called Realism and Liberalism in World Politics. Both lead to tyranny, as far as I can see it. It is not a class struggle it is a struggle over who controls the Water, the Food, the Necessities, the Laws. It is a struggle over how to control and contain the hungry Mob from burning down the place. It is a struggle to deflect the real issues into the nothingness of public debate, the opiate of opinion.

There is a line from a song that I have held dear since I heard it. It defines reality for me.

"I have no opinion about that!" Paul Simon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jimihendrix1
Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear Signs Executive Medical Marijuana Order
Replies
9
Views
862
jimihendrix1
jimihendrix1
Jimdamick
  • Poll Poll
What's the use?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
hanimmal
hanimmal
C
Greetings, OneLove, and Peace from a lost soul....
Replies
2
Views
608
BarnBuster
BarnBuster
hanimmal
AP: NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn't happen this week.
Replies
5
Views
327
RonnieB2
R
Steep Hill
Legalization in the U.S. - What Do You Think?
Replies
0
Views
825
Steep Hill
Steep Hill
Back
Top