@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Not entirely false; unions have helped nonunion workers gain benefits, better pay, working hours, and safety.
True enough, but that was a long time ago. Now all those advances are codified in our law and we no longer need unions to preserve them. In recent decades we have seen unions focusing very narrowly on their own interests to the exclusion of everyone else. They have been the major contributors to the competitive failure of most of our manufacturing, metals and textile industries, resisting innovation, productivity enhancing automation, and the associated adjustment to obsolete work rules in every instance. Unions are obsolete monopolies.
cicerone imposter wrote:It seems only conservatives are against unions; some mystery I can't seem to wrap around the idea of logic. Conservatives must not work for unions; none, and none benefited from unions.
The evidence isn't with you here. Whenever union membership and dues paying is made voluntary, unions shrivel up and die. Their own membership deserts them en mass whenever it is given a choice. Without government sanctioned monopolies few unions would exist.
cicerone imposter wrote:The harm done to unions by Wisconsin is a FACT that boggles my mind. I'll never be able to reconcile the motives of conservatives who would suppress voters from voting in this country, don't want Americans to have health care, want to control women's sex organs, don't support minimum wages, don't want the rich to pay more taxes, but want to keep our defense budget - while we cut funding for our schools and infrastructure.
Well you're partly right here. Wisconsin enacted legislation ending the forced collection of union dues by the state. This law gave the state employees, who are voters as well, the right to make their own choice in the matter. In addition the law required the unions to periodically recertify their role by majority votte of the emplouees involved. The result of this law was indeed seriously harmful to the state employees unions, given the free choice most of its members deserted the union. What does that tell you?
cicerone imposter wrote: Complain that our educational system is too expensive, while the average teacher salary is in the mid-forty thousand range. All while class size continues to increase, and you complain our kids aren't getting the right kind of education.
One of the many problems in our school system is the bloated bureaucry that directs its increasingly intrusive currucula and inefficient management. A few years ago while I was living in Washington DC, then with the most expensive school system in the country, based on per capita costs, and one of the worst in terms of measured student performance, faced a "funding crisis" for which they proposed to lay off 1,000 teachers and increase class size. An investigation quickly revealed the administrative staff running the city's schools was significantly larger than the teaching staff; and the presence of significant fraud and embezzlement by the managers from school budgets. A year later the D.C. schools teachers union president was also convicted of embezzling over $1 million dollars (over a several year period) from the union local. Under questioning from a Congressional committee as to why the national union hadn't audited the books of the D.C. local for over twelve years, even though the charter called for annual audits, the president of the national union (AFT) testified that, "there is no legally enforcable requirement for these audits to be performed".