You know your history as much as you know your spelling.<quoted text>
Yes, they did. I am not a Union member, never have been. But I know my history. In the early 1900's in the steel mills of Pennsylvania, men were working 7 days a week, under dangerous and horrible conditions, and yet could not earn enough to feed their children. When they went on strike against the owner, Andrew Carnegie, he brought in the Pinkerton Security forces to actually force the workers out of the mill. 9 men died. The union was busted, and it would be decades before the mills got unions, and thus, got decent wages and decent working conditions. And this is just ONE story of hundreds.
Every single worker in the US owes their clean, safe workplace and fair wage to the unions. Yes, much of this is now codified in law. But as Wisconsin demonstrates, the idea that workers have rights is tenuous. The laws can be scaled back at any time, and seems likely given the current thoughts that gaining massive wealth on the backs of the people is the only thing that matters.
The Second Amendment was written so that an armed citizenry could defend themselves in the event of a corrpupt government. And Unions are needed in the event of greed and the re-introduction of virtual slavery. Unions fight for fair wages, thus ensuring ALL OF US a good wage, as companies have to compete. Corporations left to themselves demostrated 100 years ago that they will starve people, leave the homeless and whatever else they can get away with. No way. I hope the unions fight, and fight, and fight. They are all that keeps the Middle Class alive.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.
Saint Paul, MN
#21 Feb 23, 2011
Saint Paul, MN
#22 Feb 24, 2011
And the unions? They have long over-stayed their usefulness in America.
Rita Kroon, Shoreview
Well at least they have helped the common good. I could much easier put Wall Street and the thieves that work there in place of unions in your statement. Of course you are probably white collar so you won't see it the same as union folks do. To each his own as they say.
#24 Feb 24, 2011
Teacher's union spends millions on dinners, parties as thousands of teachers face layoffs
As nearly 5,000 city teachers face the ax, their union shells out millions of dollars on feasting, boozing and partying, the Daily News has learned.
Free-spending United Federation of Teachers brass last year spent nearly $1.4 million for the UFT's 50th anniversary gala at the Hilton - complete with a movie, a book and a paperweight.
Records show they:
Ponied up $514,000 to 16 separate caterers. Dropped $278,417 on the annual Teachers Union Day ceremony at the Waldorf-Astoria.
Bought $6,100 in gift baskets from a lower East Side candy store - and plowed $179,000 into training retreats at a Connecticut resort boasting golf, scuba diving and aqua aerobics.
In one amazing feat of spending, they shelled out $114,870 for annual "coffee supplies" at their five offices across the city - paying the Coffee Distributing Corp. on Long Island $324,000 over three years, records show.
but remember, It's "for the children".
#25 Feb 26, 2011
I have lived in Wisconsin for 30 years and I have raised 4 children in this place I call home. My children are now starting their families in this state. I have traveled from border to border, and there is no place like Wisconsin. If we look at our State Coat of Arms, established in 1881, it contains symbols that represent the diversity, wealth, and abundance of resources in Wisconsin. Let us not forget our official state motto,“Forward,” adopted in 1851, which reflects Wisconsin’s continued drive to be a national leader. However, this does not appear to be the case since the election of our new appointed governor.
Wisconsin has made, and continues to make, national headlines since Gov. Scott Walker has taken office. A recent USA Today Gallop poll found that 61percent of respondents would oppose a law in their state, similar to the one being pursued by Walker, which would reduce the ability of Wisconsin state employee unions to bargain. Just 33 percent said they would support such a measure (USA Today).
What has become the focus of Gov. Scott Walkers “budget repair” bill is collective bargaining. Do people not realize that the governor's proposed "budget repair" bill that would strip most public employees of their collective bargaining rights, would also allow the Walker administration to make potentially drastic changes in health programs with little legislative oversight. The result is that “large numbers of people will lose BadgerCare," a component of Wisconsin’s Medicaid program (Weaver, 2011). An analysis, conducted by the independent state Legislative Fiscal Bureau, says Wisconsin could drop about 70,000 higher-earning adults from Medicaid without getting permission from Washington.
My husband happens to be a state employee of Wisconsin. I do not believe for one minute that the state of the state budget is solely the fault of state employees. What does collective bargaining have to do with the state budget, anyway? Yet, state workers are the target and the answer to the budget shortfalls according to Gov. Scott Walker. Or is it just a cover, for what his true plan is for the budget repair bill, to cut even more in state agency spending and aid to local governments and schools? Governor Scott Walker did say, "Right-sizing state government starts by identifying the areas where state government has not been a good steward of taxpayer dollars”( walker.wi.gov ). Cuts in state agency spending and aid to local governments and schools have not helped to manage the budget in the past; in fact it has only made things worse. Would Gov. Scott Walker have a bigger issue on his hands if he further wants to cut spending to programs that cannot already sustain due to previous cuts? The people of this state affected by collective bargaining is a much smaller group than those who would be affected by another round of significant budget cuts. The point is he currently has fewer people opposing the repair bill, and more people masking the real issues.
So, if this bill is passed as written, what does it mean for those we have minimal healthcare coverage that essentially will end up with no healthcare coverage? The state budget may get balanced, but we will have to pay more for healthcare due to the increased number of people who went from underinsured to uninsured. It no longer is a state problem, it becomes a national problem.
#26 Feb 28, 2011
If you oppose what Walker is putting on the table...
Where should the cuts come from?
And you're right...the Union in bed with the DFL (while the taxpayers pay for the hotel room) will not be the only cut.
That's for sure!
There will be deeper cuts to come.
Explain to me this...
How do you balance a budget?
Raise taxes?(aren't we taxed enough?)
Cut spending?(great idea! too bad so many people rely on government handouts to survive!)
This has become a very unfortunate situation...for sure!
But...because of wasteful government spending and most politicians taking bribes and making promises they could never keep....Here we are!!!
Welcome to reality!
Every state will do exactly what Walker did to try to get some type of control of the budget.
And unfortunately...some cuts will be very hard to swallow because of our dependency on Government...which is never a good thing!
The government should rely on us!
Saint Paul, MN
#27 Feb 28, 2011
Don't worry Tamara, we will all be ok once we get the health care raise our President promised us.
March 17 2010
Visiting a Cleveland suburb this week, the president described how individuals and small businesses will be able to buy coverage in a new kind of health insurance marketplace, gaining the same strength in numbers that federal employees have.
"You'll be able to buy in, or a small business will be able to buy into this pool," Mr. Obama said. "And that will lower rates, it's estimated, by up to 14 to 20 percent over what you're currently getting. That's money out of pocket."
And that's not all.
Mr. Obama asked his audience for a show of hands from people with employer-provided coverage, what most Americans have.
"Your employer, it's estimated, would see premiums fall by as much as 3,000 percent," said the president, "which means they could give you a raise."
A White House press spokesman later said the president misspoke; he had meant to say annual premiums would drop by $3,000.
You can't make these lies up fast enough for this administration but you can ignore it if makes you feel better
Add your comments below
|Judd Gregg: A rogue agency at risk||Jun '17||Newt s Gimlet Rage||1|
|Trump looks to refocus his presidency in addres... (Feb '17)||Mar '17||too much||271|
|New Hampshire has a new governor - but only for... (Jan '17)||Jan '17||Pope Closet Emeritus||6|
|UPDATE 1-Trump vs Clinton: Debate will mark big... (Sep '16)||Sep '16||Kiss6729||9|
|Bush calls for campaign - reset' in N.H. primary (Feb '16)||Feb '16||Wehms2||2|
|Letter: Oppose tuition deal for illegal immigrants (Jun '09)||May '15||Swedenforever||3|
|Wyden bringing ambitious agenda to a powerful n... (Jan '14)||Jan '14||fatbacks x||1|
Find what you want!
Search Judd Gregg Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC