The Glade 4.0

I didn't say government employees should be prohibited from banding together to form a union. I said that governments should be prohibited from negotiating with that union.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

And who would prohibit the government from negotiating? The government? The people?

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

There's no reason taxpayers should have special legal protections against the possible costs of a union-negotiated contract ont he part of a union any more than that union should have special legal protections.

If the government is legally prohibited from negotiating with the union, then the workers should, and probably will, quit. The taxpayers can then (maybe) get inferior workers who get payed less and do worse work.

In any case, there is no reason that employees of the organization that makes the laws should not be able to negotiate as a unionized force. As it is, they would be weaker than other unions anyhow because they cannot and should not be able to go on strike. Government employees are already in a weak position in relation to their employer compared to private organizations because their employer can change the law; there is no justification for legally prohibiting them from negotiating via a union. Taxpayers are not entitled to use the force of law to get themselves a better deal, just like Unions should not be allowed to do so.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You don't honestly belive that, do you?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Rynar, perhaps you can explain why organized employees should not be allowed to negotiate with organized government?

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Yes, of course I do. In fact, I'm rather surprised that you would take exception to the idea that the government ought to get special privileges in dealing with the citizens and taxpayers it employs. Dressing it up as protection of the taxpayers does not make it any better; government workers pay taxes as well.

If there are no special legal protections for unions, there is no good reason why the government shouldn't negotiate with them for its own employees. If it wants to just ignore them and hire nonunion people, it can do that too, but there's no reason whatsoever to legally mandate it.

The idea that it's somehow "holding taxpayers hostage" if they do is absurd. The only unions in any position to do that (with the sole exception of teachers unions) are prohibited from striking already, and since Teacher's unions should be prohibited from stirking anyhow that wouldn't continue to eb a problem.

Taxpayers, however, should not be exercising force of law against their fellow taxpayers and citizens to get services at rates below what the market dictates. If part of that market includes the choice of their fellow citizens and taxpayers to negotiate as a group, then the government that represents the taxpayers should ahve to choose: negotiate with them or find other people to do it. The force of law should not be used to get bargains for the government.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Governments don't exist for the same purpose as corporations so why should they be treated the same?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Off-topic, but the same question arises in my mind when the issue of corporate personhood comes up: Corporations don't exist for the same purpose as people, so why should they be treated the same?

I don't believe in corporate personhood, though I don't know what that has to do with the discussion at hand.

Corporations aren't people but they are compromised of people. And just because someone owns a business either directly or though stock shouldn't mean their rights should change.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Ah, there's why I was drawing a parallel in my mind.

I ask again, again.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Maybe you need to try something else, cause the broken record thing has got to be annoying for more people than just me...

Maybe if you were Socrates, but that was a different "forum."

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

I do what I do.
You. Go be someone else, too.
What I do

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Yep and a corporation or government shouldn't be forced to associate with them. The people of Wisconsin through their elected representatives made that choice.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

I wonder if citizens would vote for a tax increase every time they wanted a raise?

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Our Senators and Representatives do, why shouldn't we?

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Good question.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

businesss get special treatment,
why shouldn't unions?

Because my wallet can't take either ones special treatment anymore.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

What special treatment are we speaking of? I don't think anyone should get special treatment.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Most enjoy the rights of an individual and the protections of a LLC or Corporation, political protection, special exemptions from the law, etc. Union and corporations.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/white-h ... rway-execu

Private corporations? WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR!?!?!?!?!?!? WHERE DID YOUR MONEY GO!?!?!?!?!?!?

Unions? Hey guys...we got y'all covered...don't sweat it...

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Uh, "doing business" with the federal government is entirely different on basically every level from donated campaign contributions. It doesn't even make sense to apply this to unions in general, should every person or entity that donates money to a political cause be required to disclose every other donation they've made to any other political cause? The only area where there's even the slightest trace of hypocrisy is dealing with federal public unions, but that's a pretty minor aspect.

It's "pretty minor" when everyone has to do it except public employee unions and grant recipients? Come on, even you can't be that myopic and naïve.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

what a bunch of cum dumpsters this administration is. I hope for surprise bukakke for all of them.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut