Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(NJ.com)   Public employee unions fear political shift in N.J. Supreme Court. Alternative headline: Public employee unions fear political shift in N.J. Supreme Court will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse   (nj.com) divider line 71
    More: Obvious, N.J. Supreme Court, supreme courts, civil servants, Communications Workers of America, Chatham, Philip Kwon, unions fear, publications  
•       •       •

664 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Mar 2012 at 1:01 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



71 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-20 11:46:49 AM  
...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.
 
2012-03-20 12:19:40 PM  

keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.


Everyone is bad so vote to murder everyone
 
2012-03-20 01:10:24 PM  
That's a trolling headline.
 
2012-03-20 01:10:51 PM  
Obvious troll is.....etc..
 
2012-03-20 01:12:32 PM  

ArkAngel: keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.

Everyone is bad so vote to murder everyone


I've heard worse suggestions, and certainly less egalitarian ones.
 
2012-03-20 01:13:27 PM  

keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.



Let's not forget that unions are some of the wealthiest most politically influential entities out there. Their campaign contributions are right up there with the biggest corporate donors.

That's not to say "unions are teh evil" or anything, in this time of DECADES of wage depression and shrinking wealth for just about everyone but the already rich we probably need unions now more than at almost any other point in our history. But union political donations can have every bit as much a corrupting influence in politics as corporate donations. There's a middle ground in there.
 
2012-03-20 01:13:35 PM  
This headline is a great argument for keeping abortion legal.
 
2012-03-20 01:13:57 PM  

trotsky: That's a trolling headline.


it's too stupid to troll.
 
2012-03-20 01:16:17 PM  
Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.
 
2012-03-20 01:16:21 PM  
Unions represent the little guy. Who needs that.
Politics is to give a voice to those who have no problem being heard.
 
2012-03-20 01:17:27 PM  
images.sodahead.com
 
2012-03-20 01:18:47 PM  
will not give away the statehouse

I think Gov. Christie meant the steakhouse. He does most of his business there anyway, by the looks of him.
 
2012-03-20 01:21:10 PM  
The fact that politics is part of the criteria for selecting a supreme court justice by itself makes me weep for humanity.
 
2012-03-20 01:21:27 PM  

sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.


No kidding.

i457.photobucket.com
 
2012-03-20 01:23:05 PM  

Bagelox-99: will not give away the statehouse

I think Gov. Christie meant the steakhouse. He does most of his business there anyway, by the looks of him.


To clarify a bit further: When Chris Christie says "steakhouse", he's talking about his vacation home which is made of steak.
 
2012-03-20 01:23:34 PM  
Yet another reason to replace all judges with my new "Cold Logic" Judgomatic 3000 line of robotic judicial representatives. Guaranteed to never show any bias, remorse, or emotion during the trial, sentencing, and execution phases of the judicial process.
 
2012-03-20 01:24:15 PM  
Subby likes the taste of Koch.
 
2012-03-20 01:25:06 PM  
I don't understand why everyone's so down on unions. It seems an acceptable way for the state to view both hetero- and homo-sexual partnerings that keeps religious influences out of the secular, much like the first amendment intended. The marriage is really just how you represent yourself before your god/friends/family, whatever. The law shouldn't care what you call yourselves, but instead just say "do you want to be treated as one unit? Are you both consenting adults? Fine, consider yourselves united."

But the pundits on the right don't want them at all (not natural!) and pundits on the left don't want them because they don't go far enough. It just strikes me as asinine not to accept them. Unions seem like the best way to achieve real change and equality in the future

As for the headline, is there some NJ law-in-the-works preventing public employees from getting hitched? I'd be worried too if I spend all that money on a fabulous ceremony and then the New Supreme Court said it didn't count anymore, just because we both worked for the government.

Though I've heard dual-government employee households are pretty rare. You really don't both need to work there to get the health care and benefits, so it's a smart choice all around for one of you to head to private industry where the pay is better. So, it shouldn't impact too many people, but still, when they came for the public employees in civil unions, I did not speak out...
 
2012-03-20 01:25:42 PM  
Grats on your first greenlight submission, Governor Christie.
 
2012-03-20 01:25:44 PM  

meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]


Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?
 
2012-03-20 01:26:28 PM  

keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.


Both sides are equally bad so vote Obama!
 
2012-03-20 01:27:55 PM  
I believe in many liberal policies but I think private sector unions can be a problem for a state's bottom line. That said they are also one of strongest pieces of the base for the democratic party and based on the fact that republicans are basically at war with the middle class public sector unions have my support. But in a perfect world they would not.
 
2012-03-20 01:29:02 PM  
Is this another thread where failures see union guys who can actuallu make their house and car payments, and think that instead of joining unions and making a better life for themselves, they should make sure the union guys have it equally shiatty?

Good thinking there guys!
 
2012-03-20 01:38:02 PM  

Headso: I believe in many liberal policies but I think private sector unions can be a problem for a state's bottom line. That said they are also one of strongest pieces of the base for the democratic party and based on the fact that republicans are basically at war with the middle class public sector unions have my support. But in a perfect world they would not.


I would think the lack of an alternative to a private sector union is really what impacts the bottom line. Don't get me wrong, I'm mostly in favor of unions across the board, but when a union gets a monopoly on the local labor, the whole competitiveness of the market goes out the window and that's when problems start.
 
2012-03-20 01:38:04 PM  

Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?


I think they are others on Open Secrets, but more striking than the left right split is the percentage of money spent by business over labor.

Business outspent labor by a large margin. They spent over 1.3 billion, while labor spent .093 billion. If my math is right, for every dollar labor spent, businesses spent $14.
 
2012-03-20 01:41:22 PM  

palelizard: Headso: I believe in many liberal policies but I think private sector unions can be a problem for a state's bottom line. That said they are also one of strongest pieces of the base for the democratic party and based on the fact that republicans are basically at war with the middle class public sector unions have my support. But in a perfect world they would not.

I would think the lack of an alternative to a private sector union is really what impacts the bottom line. Don't get me wrong, I'm mostly in favor of unions across the board, but when a union gets a monopoly on the local labor, the whole competitiveness of the market goes out the window and that's when problems start.


I actually wanted to say public sector unions, private sector unions are fine IMO and any problems they "create" are because management agreed to the terms.
 
2012-03-20 01:45:09 PM  

ghare: Is this another thread where failures see union successful guys who can actuallu make their house and car payments, and think that instead of joining unions and making a better life for themselves bettering yourself, working smarter and really trying to get ahead they should make sure the unionsuccessful guys have it equally shiatty?


Liberal thought in a nutshell. If your political philosophy considers "bootstrapping" a dirty word you've got serious problems.
 
2012-03-20 01:46:03 PM  

Headso: I believe in many liberal policies but I think private sector unions can be a problem for a state's bottom line. That said they are also one of strongest pieces of the base for the democratic party and based on the fact that republicans are basically at war with the middle class public sector unions have my support. But in a perfect world they would not.


I really don't have any problem with the idea of public sector unions rt all.

In some ways, if you think about it they make actually be MORE justified than private sector unions are. Private sector employees have the possibility of government intervention if the actions of the employer are harmful enough. There is a third party out that that can pass laws setting standards and regulation conditions.

In the public center setting there is no third party. The government IS the employer. If their actions as employer are harmful, there may be no recourse in regulation or legislation, as they will exempt their own actions.
 
2012-03-20 01:50:55 PM  

Headso: I actually wanted to say public sector unions, private sector unions are fine IMO and any problems they "create" are because management agreed to the terms.


Ah. Yeah, one would think, in a decent world, a public sector union would be unnecessary at best, counter-productive at worst. But no, teachers and other civil servants do actually need someone to speak for them when demonized by their bosses looking for re-election.
 
2012-03-20 01:55:28 PM  

radioshack: ghare: Is this another thread where failures see union successful guys who can actuallu make their house and car payments, and think that instead of joining unions and making a better life for themselves bettering yourself, working smarter and really trying to get ahead they should make sure the unionsuccessful guys have it equally shiatty?

Liberal thought in a nutshell. If your political philosophy considers "bootstrapping" a dirty word you've got serious problems.


And here's Republican thought in a nutshell: if you're doing better than I am, I'll bring you down.
 
2012-03-20 02:00:37 PM  
radioshack
Liberal thought in a nutshell. If your political philosophy considers "bootstrapping" a dirty word you've got serious problems.

Your "fixes" to the prior post are unintelligible and your knowledge of the role of unions is nonexistent. How about bootstrapping yourself out of that cesspool of ignorance for a change?
 
2012-03-20 02:03:43 PM  

meat0918: Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?

I think they are others on Open Secrets, but more striking than the left right split is the percentage of money spent by business over labor.

Business outspent labor by a large margin. They spent over 1.3 billion, while labor spent .093 billion. If my math is right, for every dollar labor spent, businesses spent $14.


Business has profits to draw from...labor only has dues the members are forced to give them no matter what party the members belong to.

Plus there are alot more businesses out there then unions.
 
2012-03-20 02:05:53 PM  
seriously, you've ruined that chicken from all the farking, you can't even fark it anymore... and somehow, still..
 
2012-03-20 02:07:41 PM  

Giltric: meat0918: Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?

I think they are others on Open Secrets, but more striking than the left right split is the percentage of money spent by business over labor.

Business outspent labor by a large margin. They spent over 1.3 billion, while labor spent .093 billion. If my math is right, for every dollar labor spent, businesses spent $14.

Business has profits to draw from...labor only has dues the members are forced to give them no matter what party the members belong to.

Plus there are alot more businesses out there then unions.


Are you claiming that only profitable businesses may political contributions?
 
2012-03-20 02:13:07 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Are you claiming that only profitable businesses may political contributions?


No, I'm claiming labor accidentally the whole thing.
 
2012-03-20 02:14:23 PM  

ArkAngel: keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.

Everyone is bad so vote to murder everyone


mongbiohazard: keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.


Let's not forget that unions are some of the wealthiest most politically influential entities out there. Their campaign contributions are right up there with the biggest corporate donors.

That's not to say "unions are teh evil" or anything, in this time of DECADES of wage depression and shrinking wealth for just about everyone but the already rich we probably need unions now more than at almost any other point in our history. But union political donations can have every bit as much a corrupting influence in politics as corporate donations. There's a middle ground in there.


Nice lie there sparky.
 
2012-03-20 02:15:27 PM  

Giltric: Plus there are alot more businesses out there then unions.


And the GOP has been working for that for a looooong time. VICTORY!!
 
2012-03-20 02:16:20 PM  
My Republiderp dad says that public sector unions result in bloated state budgets, enabling taser-happy pigs (among other undesirables) to make over 100k a year. I'd say public sector unions aren't really necessary because the bureaucratic branch of the executive takes care of its own and attempts at demonization rarely translate into action.

Private unions are a necessity, though, because the personhood of the corporation is embodied in a metaphorical giant black guy in every cubicle waiting for your pen to roll off your desk.
 
2012-03-20 02:16:43 PM  

Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?


You still think the democrats are a left wing party? How cute.
 
2012-03-20 02:22:28 PM  

sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.


The preposterous has a well known Right Wing bias.
 
2012-03-20 02:22:32 PM  

Madbassist1: Giltric: Plus there are alot more businesses out there then unions.

And the GOP has been working for that for a looooong time. VICTORY!!


I like the intentions of labor as far as worker safety and fair wages and benefits and whatnot, I'm not fond of the tantrums and holding the state or business hostage though.

I have no problems with people who perform getting a raise.....but unions seem to portect the people who have been there longest....its just another good old boys club.
 
2012-03-20 02:24:45 PM  

Rozotorical: Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?

You still think the democrats are a left wing party? How cute.


yes.....considering I always thought myself to be a right winger until I took one of those political inclination tests which show me to be a centrist.
 
2012-03-20 02:28:36 PM  

sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.


Yeah but you're talking about the reality based community and you know reality is always picking on the cons.
 
2012-03-20 02:42:05 PM  
Because it's OK for courts and statehouses to kowtow to corporate campaign donors.
 
2012-03-20 02:45:49 PM  

MBrady: Giltric: Madbassist1: Giltric: Plus there are alot more businesses out there then unions.

And the GOP has been working for that for a looooong time. VICTORY!!

I like the intentions of labor as far as worker safety and fair wages and benefits and whatnot, I'm not fond of the tantrums and holding the state or business hostage though.

I have no problems with people who perform getting a raise.....but unions seem to portect the people who have been there longest....its just another good old boys club.

I was member of two private sector unions two different times at two different companies. Guys who were there for 20 years bascially "closed their toolboxes," did the minimal amount of work, let the "new kids" do all the work, letting them think they were safe. When contract negotiations came around, the senior members tried to vote down merit raises (they felt that they wouldn't get their "good raise" because they KNEW they didn't do any work). Of course when the work slowed down, the company laid off the new people (based of course on senority). Companies like that wonder why no one wants to work for them if they have a union shop.

Fark the unions.


So you prefer to work for companies that fire the older workers first because they are generally paid more?
 
2012-03-20 02:54:40 PM  

Giltric: Rozotorical: Giltric: meat0918: sickb0y: Labor has been dying a slow death for 40 years, to even entertain the pretense that union influence on the left still is equal to corporate influence on the right (and what used to be the left for that matter) is preposterous.

No kidding.

[i457.photobucket.com image 491x801]

Seems like labor leans to the left while businesses are split 50/50 .

I wonder if a union could capitalize on contract negotiations with a demcratic administration representing the state.....businesses seem to play both sides of the aisle so they get what they want no matter who gets elected....which is actually a smart business move

Also do you have any charts that break it down on the state level like contributions during gubenatorial races?

You still think the democrats are a left wing party? How cute.

yes.....considering I always thought myself to be a right winger until I took one of those political inclination tests which show me to be a centrist.


Ok so define what you mean by left wing then.
 
2012-03-20 03:13:04 PM  
Alternative headline is too long, and a grammatical disaster area.

/stet orig. hed
 
2012-03-20 03:14:38 PM  

Rozotorical: mongbiohazard: keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.


Let's not forget that unions are some of the wealthiest most politically influential entities out there. Their campaign contributions are right up there with the biggest corporate donors.

That's not to say "unions are teh evil" or anything, in this time of DECADES of wage depression and shrinking wealth for just about everyone but the already rich we probably need unions now more than at almost any other point in our history. But union political donations can have every bit as much a corrupting influence in politics as corporate donations. There's a middle ground in there.

Nice lie there sparky.



Which part? The part that wages are declining and we need unions very badly now?
The part that unions aren't some evil caricature?
The part that money plays a corrupting influence in politics?
Or the fact that unions give TONS of cash in political donations (if that is what you meant, then I'll give you a little hint that you should check what they donate on a STATE level before you rant at me based on just the federal level donations).
The part that there is a middle ground in between demonizing unions and worshiping them?
 
2012-03-20 03:18:09 PM  

mongbiohazard: Rozotorical: mongbiohazard: keylock71: ...will not kowtow to their every whim and give away the statehouse

Of course not, that's only for the wealthy and their lobbyists.


Let's not forget that unions are some of the wealthiest most politically influential entities out there. Their campaign contributions are right up there with the biggest corporate donors.

That's not to say "unions are teh evil" or anything, in this time of DECADES of wage depression and shrinking wealth for just about everyone but the already rich we probably need unions now more than at almost any other point in our history. But union political donations can have every bit as much a corrupting influence in politics as corporate donations. There's a middle ground in there.

Nice lie there sparky.


Which part? The part that wages are declining and we need unions very badly now?
The part that unions aren't some evil caricature?
The part that money plays a corrupting influence in politics?
Or the fact that unions give TONS of cash in political donations (if that is what you meant, then I'll give you a little hint that you should check what they donate on a STATE level before you rant at me based on just the federal level donations).
The part that there is a middle ground in between demonizing unions and worshiping them?


I think I quoted the wrong person sorry mongo. Quoting is hard.
 
2012-03-20 03:19:42 PM  

patrick767: radioshack
Liberal thought in a nutshell. If your political philosophy considers "bootstrapping" a dirty word you've got serious problems.

Your "fixes" to the prior post are unintelligible and your knowledge of the role of unions is nonexistent. How about bootstrapping yourself out of that cesspool of ignorance for a change?


Don't blame me for your lack of reading comprehension. And you have no farking idea of my dealings with unions. you stupid cock.
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report