Fiscally Conservative, Socially tolerant, Anti-War
Well, Walker is decidedly not Hitler. But his anti union stance and methodology definitely squirts Hitler's own.
I still wonder if Walker has stopped anyone from joining a union if they feel they want to, or giving the a union as much as they would like to. Just one person. Union membership actually went up in Indiana after they passed right-to-work. I guess it all depends on the unions themselves. In an environment where workers have the choice of whether or not to join (right-to-work), bad unions will drive people away, and good unions will attract workers. It's a lot more worker-centric, for sure.
All that Walker did was get rid of collective bargaining and even then he kept it for wages. I don't know, I guess that I have a lot more sympathy for the taxpayers than I do for special interests.
Yeah, Americsn workers are special interest.Guess you either get it or you don't.
Public sector workers who are reaming the taxpayers and bankrupting their states (dolts who I used to work with for the state of CT retiring at age 55 and pulling in 60 grand a year - it's disgusting). So, you're basically not a libertarian anymore, I guess.
Unions are a special interest that represent a small sector of American workers. You cannot equate the two groups.
Greed run amok, Will.
You shouldn't guess. Defining terms is important and boilerplate is used to divert attention.I am and always have been a civil libertarian.I am and always have been an economic conservative.I am and always have been cognizant that liberty demands individual responsibility.Understanding goes beyond ideology yet many fail to recognize this being too wrapped in their paradigms and neatly packaged in their boxes to grow. If only we had a Franklin, Madison, and Jefferson alive and walking, writing, and speaking with us today.Yes, I am also a Classical Liberal. Go figure.
I'm with dmarks on this one, Les. And I am all in favor of expanding the libertarian tent (a la, Charles Murray) but, Les, you've been denigrating capitalism and even giving credence to a serial prevaricator like Picketty. It's great to be fair and balanced but at some point it would be great to hear the old RN (and I actually did hear a little of it directed at wd over the Mohammed fiasco).
to avoid any misunderstanding by you as a result of my intentional delay in responding to your most recent challenge to my post here is my explanation. In order to give your comment the special and considered thought (which I realize you feel it deserves) I took the extra time required to give your comment the attention it deserves.Yes Ayn Rand opposed compulsory unionism (closed shop) and in a pure philosophical discussion I agree. Individuals should not be coerced by force to join any affiliation in order to work in their trade. I now take this time to remind you that Ayn Rand never felt unions, in and of themselves were evil, only that forced membership was evil and I agree; philosophically. The truth is Dervish Ayn Rand had great admiration for the tradesmen and craftsmen that built American to be what it is. She was not opposed to the productive and capable earning wages their skills and productive efforts rightly entitled them to, based on what the market was willing to pay. For their services. On this I am in total philosophical agreement.What Rand (as well as any businessman) objected to is the payment of wages to those who are either incapable, inefficient, lazy and or unmotivated as a result of union protection of those type of laborers and tradesmen. Few if any have a problem with paying those their worth and neither did Rand. BTW, because unionization results in everyone within a job classification receiving the same pay (the result of collective bargaining) this results in businesses often keeping wages for top performers artificially low in order to control overall labor costs. There is a downside to the closed shop and anyone who refuses to recognize this fact is drinking somebody’s kool aid.Philosophically I agree completely with Ayn Rand. It is a truism that there are lazy workers that loaf and contribute as little as possible, only desiring to get by without getting fired. It is a fallacy that all workers loaf and contribute as little as possible, only to get by without getting fired. On this I have the authority to speak as I managed workforces for 36 years in industry. Factually a large majority of workers want to do well and take pride in their work. If forced to pick a number I would say the number who are motivated to be productive to be about 90-95%, depending on the culture. As for the 5-10% who do not contribute, who are lazy and loaf? Well, that is a problem for management and when properly documented poor performance combined with appropriate corrective action fails to produce behavioral changes then management should fire the individual employee. If properly and justly handled management WILL win in a challenge from labor.Ayn Rand’s views are ultimately rational, and in a perfect world in which every individual was purely rational her philosophy would work beautifully in application. However, this is not a perfect world and yes, there are nefarious and greedy individuals all too willing to take advantage of labor at every possible turn. And that Dervish, in my view, defines Governor Walker and his wealthy supporters. Which is why this post went up. And… this is what Rand failed to perhaps realize and certainly failed to acknowledge if she did.
Well Will, I happen to believe the GOP has done more to destroy capitalism as it should be than any other ideology or party. I am also very certain that Ayn Rand and would agree. Capitalism can not exist long term without a strong, vibrant, and ,growing middle class. Supply side economics worked great for the SHORT term but unless the population has security and money to spend there will be little ability to create demand for much beyond the essentials and necessities of life.I will not switch to the democratic party or the libertarian party (I am currently registered conservative and cannot vote in the primaries). Too much regulatory control and too high a tax rate is as bad as too little regulatory control and too low a tax rate. Neither party IMO is doing enough to address infrastructure, global realities (the worst thing is the GOP want conflict as it funnels money to the MIC while the democrats want to blame the USA for most of the problems), proper trade policies that benefit the USA (other countries get it better than we do), and the social issues that affect quality of life (healthcare) and social behaviors.American politics are broke, and so is the government because of it. For years I supported the GOP and listened to their disingenuous bullsh*t only to find it really was bullsh*t. So, I chose to be more critical of the party that fed a lot of bullsh^t to a lot of people in hopes of helping to open the eyes of those who at least have an inquisitive enough mind that is active enough to listen, think, and consider alternatives. There is more I can say but unless there is real interest in it would be a total waste of my time.
Guess my clarifications didn't cut it.Oh well. Actually expected. Honest discussion is becoming a rare thing.
All your bluster aside Lester.....you are actually just a big cry baby,put on a pair of big boy pants.
Go fuck yourself lady. You are an A-Grade asshole ChuckleNutz.
Yes,of course I'm an asshole and your point is? Me being an admitted asshole doesn't change the fact that you are a whining crybaby.
Like I said racist ignorant pussy, fuck off.
Post a Comment