If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   Bush administration: Hey, let's get rid of all these difficult rules that hamstring corporations. Obama administration: Hey, let's get rid of all these difficult rules that hamstring unions. American public: Facepalm   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 481
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

12387 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Apr 2009 at 2:22 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



481 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-04-27 12:26:37 PM
Because it's the fault of the unions that the housing bubble burst? Because it's the fault of the unions that companies like Enron and Worldcom farked California over? Because it's the fault of the unions that the economy has collapsed after the September crash? Because it's the fault of the unions that financial institutions became "too big to fail" after Gramm-Leach-Bliley?

The plank in your eye, let me show you it.
 
2009-04-27 12:38:23 PM
Unions are to Democrats what Big Oil is to Republicans... a drug sickness of the most repugnant kind, they get so caught up in it, they don't see anything wrong with having to service the big corporate cocks as long as they get their cash, their voting endorsements, and they can carry on about towing the party line. The best interests of the nation and the people be damned.

Unions were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.
 
2009-04-27 12:43:59 PM
Union transparency is a good thing.

I mean, it's not like unions haven't been corrupt as fark for a long time, right? Increased regulation and "oversight" of unions should go hand in hand with increased regulation and "oversight" of businesses -- because let's not kid ourselves, unions are a business just as much as the entity that the workers they represent are employed by.
 
2009-04-27 12:46:30 PM
Holy shiat, that is really boring.
 
2009-04-27 12:57:23 PM
Bloody William: Because it's the fault of the unions that the housing bubble burst? Because it's the fault of the unions that companies like Enron and Worldcom farked California over? Because it's the fault of the unions that the economy has collapsed after the September crash? Because it's the fault of the unions that financial institutions became "too big to fail" after Gramm-Leach-Bliley?

No, because it is the fault of the unions that GM and Chrysler are on government life support, and because it is the fault of the unions that America's public education system is the laughing stock of the industrialized world, and because it is the fault of the unions that California and New York are in such dire financial straits due to pension and benefit overcommitments to public employees.

Unions are human institutions just as much as corporations, no better and no worse. Goose, gander, sauce, and all that.
 
2009-04-27 12:58:52 PM
rcain: Unions*1 were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.

*1 CEOs, shareholders, greedy motherfarkers hellbent on shafting their labour pool for a bigger profit, unions, etc...
 
2009-04-27 01:25:21 PM
snuff3r: *1 CEOs, shareholders, greedy motherfarkers hellbent on shafting their labour pool for a bigger profit, unions, etc...

What you just said is that you wholeheartedly disagree with the capitalist system.
And while I respect your view as your own, I don't share that view.
I will say that there is a very fine balance between corporate profits and outright greed.
But that does not make the entire system bad.
 
2009-04-27 02:24:24 PM
UNIONS SUCK...that is all
 
2009-04-27 02:25:20 PM
as a fark independent who's happy to have unionized after a 17 year process hamstringed by corporate lawyers, i'm getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2009-04-27 02:25:30 PM
Farkers: TO THE BATTLE STATIONS!
 
2009-04-27 02:26:07 PM
Obama apologists calling conservatives stupid/butthurt in 3...2...1...
 
2009-04-27 02:26:28 PM
"The Labor Department noted in a recent disclosure that "it would not be a good use of resources" to bring enforcement actions against union officials who do not comply with conflict of interest reporting rules passed in 2007. Instead, union officials will now be allowed to file older, less detailed conflict reports."

A little tit for tat, thanks for the endorsements and money.


Yea, GREAT JOB there guys.
 
2009-04-27 02:26:47 PM
sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

this

/formerly in a steelworkers union
//PT stocking at a shopnsave
 
2009-04-27 02:26:56 PM
sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

I'll second that
 
2009-04-27 02:27:24 PM
As a sidenote, I'd love to hear a justification as to why requiring unions to report LESS information about potential financial conflicts of interest is a good thing.
 
2009-04-27 02:27:31 PM
The problem is that those two forces are not equal and opposite.

Corporation = only looking out for itself
Unions = only looking out for the workers

Who's looking out for the consumer?
 
2009-04-27 02:27:40 PM
Eliminating the sanctity of the ballot box in deciding whether or not employees want to unionize? No big deal after November.
 
2009-04-27 02:27:45 PM
RHMolBio: Obama apologists calling conservatives stupid/butthurt in 3...2...1...

Boy, somebody's on the quick defensive...
 
2009-04-27 02:28:02 PM
rcain: What you just said is that you wholeheartedly disagree with the capitalist system.

You know what's funny about that?

We were "capitalist" 30 years ago. However, shareholder greed was not very high on the list of problems with our economy... relative to today. Why?

Oh, that's right, because we used to be smart enough to recognize a few of the failures of "true" capitalism.
 
2009-04-27 02:28:02 PM
sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

There was a time when they served a useful purpose, but there are plenty of govenment agencies now to ensure safe workplace, hours, etc. The unions are now just a cash cow for the officials to use to bribe politicians, etc.
 
2009-04-27 02:28:04 PM
Raise your hand if you have ever seen an LM-2.

Everyone who didn't raise their hand, please STFU. Thank you.

This is a good decision. The Bush D.O.L. was hostile toward Unions. The Obama Admin is just swinging the pendulum back the other way.
 
2009-04-27 02:28:35 PM
It's not like many of the unions of this country are being run as quasi-legal mafias or anything. We should give them more deference as to how they manage their massive cash flows, conflicts of interest, and political contributions.
 
2009-04-27 02:28:41 PM
rcain: snuff3r: *1 CEOs, shareholders, greedy motherfarkers hellbent on shafting their labour pool for a bigger profit, unions, etc...

What you just said is that you wholeheartedly disagree with the capitalist system.
And while I respect your view as your own, I don't share that view.
I will say that there is a very fine balance between corporate profits and outright greed.
But that does not make the entire system bad.


Actually, everything on that list is at the extremes of the capitalist system. 90% of good that comes out of capitalism don't involve those things. Unions shouldn't be necessary as no corporation should be so big as to need them as a counterbalance. By CEO's, he probably meant the big shot ones. Again, companies shouldn't get that big.

Pure, unadultered capitalism will never work. But that's not to say it's not a good system if moderated by democratic oversight.
 
2009-04-27 02:28:43 PM
rcain: Unions were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.

Unions are an *absolutely necessary* evil. Without a union, the corporation has ALL the power.

You need a balance; the union plays dirty to get its way, the corporation/employer plays dirty to get ITS way, and they meet somewhere in the middle, and everybody is (mostly) happy.

It's called negotiation. And you are called a retard.
 
2009-04-27 02:29:30 PM
snuff3r: rcain: Unions*1 were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.

*1 CEOs, shareholders, greedy motherfarkers hellbent on shafting their labour pool for a bigger profit, unions, etc...


Thank you, comrade.
 
2009-04-27 02:29:31 PM
It would not be a good use of resources to bring enforcement actions against __________ who do not comply.

/Epstein's mom.
 
2009-04-27 02:29:47 PM
Awesome.

The bill is about COI reporting, and in the 3rd or so paragraph you get this:

The regulation, known as the LM-30 rule, was at the heart of a lawsuit that the AFL-CIO filed against the department last year. One of the union attorneys in the case, Deborah Greenfield, is now a high-ranking deputy at Labor, who also worked on the Obama transition team on labor issues.


So there is now a COI involving the ruling on COIs. Gotta love it.
 
2009-04-27 02:30:21 PM
Unions aren't even that necessary anymore, or at least they don't need to be so damn powerful. They were brought about out of concern for workers who were getting financially raped by robber baron types.

I disagree with Obama on this one. Unions should be watched carefully. Too many people get in a union and then feel they are entitled to much more than they should, IMO.

There are some protections they have that are good and useful, but they are way over the line in many other areas.

I'm talking to you, teamsters.
 
2009-04-27 02:30:23 PM
KaponoFor3: As a sidenote, I'd love to hear a justification as to why requiring unions to report LESS information about potential financial conflicts of interest is a good thing.

You're already running with the premise that Unions are just a device to garner worker's wages for private enrichment.

What's the point of any dialog with you on the issue?
 
2009-04-27 02:30:36 PM
sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

So I take it you would happily work 60+ hours a week (including weekends), with no overtime pay or health insurance?

And if you're injured on the job and can't work, you won't be making a workers' comp claim?

And if you're laid off, you won't file for unemployment?

Feel free to shiat on unions (like any organization, they can become corrupt), but don't pretend that they've never accomplished anything positive.
 
2009-04-27 02:31:02 PM
Emrick: This is a good decision

Why? Please, tell me why reporting less information about potential union financial conflicts of interest is a good thing.
 
2009-04-27 02:31:05 PM
Bloody William: "Because it's the fault of the unions that companies like Enron and Worldcom farked California over?"

How did Worldcom "fark over" California?
 
2009-04-27 02:31:28 PM
tortilla burger: Corporation = only looking out for itself
Unions = only looking out for the workers

Who's looking out for the consumer?


Just recently, and specifically in the case of GM... the consumer has begun looking out for the consumer by using the ultimate power feared by corporations and unions alike: Tempered product purchasing
 
2009-04-27 02:31:43 PM
I don't dislike unions, I don't like them either.

Some greater measure of transparency would help dispel the longstanding perception that they're all a bunch of corrupt do-nothings that help gut a corporation that (while also evil) ultimately fails and leaves everyone hurting.

It's a self defeating narrative, and not all unions are corrupt and self-serving, but there has to be a reason for their existence. If management and owners are treating their workers well, the union's reason for being is thrown into question, it's purpose fulfilled.
 
2009-04-27 02:31:49 PM
Cat Food Sandwiches: sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

There was a time when they served a useful purpose, but there are plenty of govenment agencies now to ensure safe workplace, hours, etc. The unions are now just a cash cow for the officials to use to bribe politicians, etc.


There certainly was a time, and that ship has sailed. And bribery aside, members are usually severely overpaid and when they want a raise they just go on strike until they get what they want.
 
2009-04-27 02:32:21 PM
imgod2u: Actually, everything on that list is at the extremes of the capitalist system. 90% of good that comes out of capitalism don't involve those things. Unions shouldn't be necessary as no corporation should be so big as to need them as a counterbalance. By CEO's, he probably meant the big shot ones. Again, companies shouldn't get that big.

Pure, unadultered capitalism will never work. But that's not to say it's not a good system if moderated by democratic oversight.


the workers have the power dont like a company quit and go somewhere else, unions protect the worst workers and exploit the hard workers
 
2009-04-27 02:32:26 PM
Ban the unions, problem solved.
 
2009-04-27 02:32:53 PM
DarnoKonrad: You're already running with the premise that Unions are just a device to garner worker's wages for private enrichment.

OK you can answer -- why is requiring union officials to report less information about conflicts of interest a good thing?
 
2009-04-27 02:33:01 PM
While we're at it kids lets get the guys name right. It's oBAMA not Obauma. You don't say Alabauma do you? You say AlaBAMA. Glad we got that straight. Teach your children.
 
2009-04-27 02:33:02 PM
realmolo: rcain: Unions were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.

Unions are an *absolutely necessary* evil. Without a union, the corporation has ALL the power.

You need a balance; the union plays dirty to get its way, the corporation/employer plays dirty to get ITS way, and they meet somewhere in the middle, and everybody is (mostly) happy.

It's called negotiation. And you are called a retard.


So, in your not-so-humble opinion, you would say that there are no major corporations or businesses that treat employees fairly without a union?
 
2009-04-27 02:33:07 PM
realmolo: Unions are an *absolutely necessary* evil. Without a union, the corporation has ALL the power.

You need a balance; the union plays dirty to get its way, the corporation/employer plays dirty to get ITS way, and they meet somewhere in the middle, and everybody is (mostly) happy.

It's called negotiation. And you are called a retard.


the workers have the power dont like a company quit and go somewhere else, unions protect the worst workers and exploit the hard workers

/my bad meant to respond to realmolo
 
2009-04-27 02:33:08 PM
MasterThief: Bloody William: Because it's the fault of the unions that the housing bubble burst? Because it's the fault of the unions that companies like Enron and Worldcom farked California over? Because it's the fault of the unions that the economy has collapsed after the September crash? Because it's the fault of the unions that financial institutions became "too big to fail" after Gramm-Leach-Bliley?

No, because it is the fault of the unions that GM and Chrysler are on government life support, and because it is the fault of the unions that America's public education system is the laughing stock of the industrialized world, and because it is the fault of the unions that California and New York are in such dire financial straits due to pension and benefit overcommitments to public employees.

Unions are human institutions just as much as corporations, no better and no worse. Goose, gander, sauce, and all that.


You're making it sound like it's only the unions to blame for these situations. While there is considerable blame that can be laid on the unions, the responsibility is certainly not exclusively their's.
 
2009-04-27 02:33:17 PM
yay less government!
 
2009-04-27 02:34:18 PM
rufus-t-firefly: sboyle1020: UNIONS SUCK...that is all

So I take it you would happily work 60+ hours a week (including weekends), with no overtime pay or health insurance?

And if you're injured on the job and can't work, you won't be making a workers' comp claim?

And if you're laid off, you won't file for unemployment?

Feel free to shiat on unions (like any organization, they can become corrupt), but don't pretend that they've never accomplished anything positive.


It's 2009. They served a purpose once. Now they need to go away.
 
2009-04-27 02:34:19 PM
imgod2u: Actually, everything on that list is at the extremes of the capitalist system. 90% of good that comes out of capitalism don't involve those things. Unions shouldn't be necessary as no corporation should be so big as to need them as a counterbalance. By CEO's, he probably meant the big shot ones. Again, companies shouldn't get that big.

Pure, unadultered capitalism will never work. But that's not to say it's not a good system if moderated by democratic oversight.


And by capitalism, we actually mean a healthy dose of 7% of the population is rich by capitalism, and the other 83% is stuck in a system of socialist working divided up by minimum wages and careers with no corporate growth.

/Somewheres in there the unemployed and never employed.
//Welcome to the machine.

/I'm not pro-union, but I'm certainly not pro-capitalism at this point.
 
2009-04-27 02:34:27 PM
KaponoFor3: As a sidenote, I'd love to hear a justification as to why requiring unions to report LESS information about potential financial conflicts of interest is a good thing.

Because the old forms worked just fine. Look up the arguments against Sarbanes-Oxley and substitute the word "Union" for the word "Company" and you will understand why more reporting doesn't necessarily mean better reporting.
 
2009-04-27 02:34:40 PM
FilmBELOH20: realmolo: rcain: Unions were needed once, that was over fifty years ago, now like any other useless entity that subsists within another, they have become nothing more than a parasite, sucking out the lifeblood of the host body that supports them.

Unions are an *absolutely necessary* evil. Without a union, the corporation has ALL the power.

You need a balance; the union plays dirty to get its way, the corporation/employer plays dirty to get ITS way, and they meet somewhere in the middle, and everybody is (mostly) happy.

It's called negotiation. And you are called a retard.

So, in your not-so-humble opinion, you would say that there are no major corporations or businesses that treat employees fairly without a union?


That's a stupid question with a stupid implication. OMG, we found a few major corporations that treat employees fairly without a union. So let's just disband ALL of the unions!
 
2009-04-27 02:34:45 PM
rufus-t-firefly: So I take it you would happily work 60+ hours a week (including weekends), with no overtime pay or health insurance?

False dichotomy. Plenty of non-union jobs do not have those conditions.

And if you're injured on the job and can't work, you won't be making a workers' comp claim?

And if you're laid off, you won't file for unemployment?


There are laws in place and government assistance programs to deal with such events.

Feel free to shiat on unions (like any organization, they can become corrupt), but don't pretend that they've never accomplished anything positive.


Yes, they accomplished a number of positive things during the 1800's.
 
2009-04-27 02:34:47 PM
KaponoFor3: DarnoKonrad: You're already running with the premise that Unions are just a device to garner worker's wages for private enrichment.

OK you can answer -- why is requiring union officials to report less information about conflicts of interest a good thing?


when i got my part time job for extra cash i was told after my 3 month probationary period that i could join the union or not enter the store and not collect unemployment, why is that a good thing?
 
2009-04-27 02:34:48 PM
tortilla burger: Unions = only looking out for the workers union

FTFY
 
Displayed 50 of 481 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report