Which states will be "right-to-work" in 2025?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:53:05 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Which states will be "right-to-work" in 2025?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Which states will be "right-to-work" in 2025?  (Read 7511 times)
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2014, 10:20:36 AM »

Yeah! Heil Hitler!
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2014, 12:16:26 PM »
« Edited: December 14, 2014, 12:24:36 PM by Bandit3 the Worker »

The 1920s were kind of like the 1990s. Everyone acts like they were so great but really they were a poopbox.

My grandparents grew up in the 1920s, and all they ever talked about was how poor they were. They were poor long before the Great Depression officially started. My grandmother talked about how she didn't even have an electric fan (although electric fans had been invented). My other grandmother talked about how she had to keep chewing the same wad of gum because they couldn't afford fresh gum. She also said that the only recreation she had was a pit in her front yard that filled up with rainwater. My grandfather's family was paid only in company scrip - not real money - that could be spent only in the company town.

So that was the "booming" 1920s. It's like the "booming" 1990s when I had to cook flies on the skillet after the Contract With America killed my job.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2014, 12:51:07 PM »

I have never hated things more than I hate labor unions…

1) Why? 2) Do you got a job?

Labor unions are a distortion of capital being connected with human resources. They inflate (artificially) what these workers are worth and they distort the market. More often than not, unions try to force membership on whole groups of people to increase their bargaining power. You can't enter some jobs without joining the local union - and paying union fees - which I find inherently anti-democratic. And lastly, by paying union dues, I'm indirectly subsidizing the Democratic Party, a Party I am most definitely not interested in supporting or subsidizing. them.

Why does the job bit matter by the way? I'm between jobs at the moment, but even if I had one, I don't want to work for a union and give union dues to one.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2014, 12:52:26 PM »

I hope nationally right to work on the federal level is the law of the land.  I want to return to the Calvin and Grace Coolidge days. Cheesy

I have never hated things more than I hate labor unions…


Yeah, that was a grand old time, wasn't it?



I believe these people are Democrats. Really. They are. 1920s Democrats. Our party in Coolidge's heyday was the one winning 75% of the black vote. So yes, I advocate a return to Coolidge's heyday, before the New Deal.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2014, 12:58:17 PM »

I hope nationally right to work on the federal level is the law of the land.  I want to return to the Calvin and Grace Coolidge days. Cheesy

I have never hated things more than I hate labor unions…


1920s -- a slum of a decade, an era of corruption, mindless hedonism, social stasis, and destructive speculation. Coolidge kept the screws tight on German reparations, which harshened economic conditions in Germany -- which may have led to one of the greatest political disasters of inhuman history, the rise of Adolf Hitler. 

Labor unions give workers a stake in capitalism; without them workers get stepped on so often and so hard that working people might as well have Karl Marx as their savior. 

The Roaring 1920s were actually one of the most economically prosperous and productive times in American history. They were a time when radio and electronics became available to the masses, in greater quantities than ever. The average American was more prosperous than anytime before and voted accordingly (as you can see by Coolidge almost carrying New York City in 1924).

The Teapot Dome Scandal was terrible, but President Coolidge was a squeaky clean President who exercised minimal governance and was among the most principled Presidents in history. The Republican Congress was also fairly scandal free.

As an internationalist, I'll agree that the German reparations were unfair. The isolationism of the Coolidge era was a mistake, I'll concur - and I'll cop to being an internationalist.

I don't see the problem with hedonism, as long as consenting adults operate in the confines of their bedroom. I don't see why you have a problem with it.

As for the destructive speculation you speak of - had the Federal Reserve intervened in 1929, we could have continued the 1920s and staved off the worst effects of the Great Depression. The very fact the Federal Reserve didn't is what hurt us the most. I'm going to once again point out that speculation is not necessarily bad (the telecommunications boom was a speculative endeavor in the 1990s but gave us cheap internet in the process).

And Karl Marx - heh. If he had his way and had the Soviet Union followed him, we'd be all be under the foot of a far more authoritarian force than mere business.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2014, 01:00:30 PM »

As for the next right to work states: Nevada, Missouri, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The Republicans in Nevada are in control for the first time since 1929. They'll try to (I hope) push right to work through. Missouri's Republican legislature has enough votes to now override the governor. And Wisconsin is a given. Ditto West Virginia (simple majority needed to override the Democratic Governor). So +4 right to work states.

Pennsylvania is off the table because of the Democratic governorship (Tom Corbett should really have pushed right to work through when he had the chance and the legislature for it).

Down the line if we win Kentucky's lower house (plausible in the next 5 years), Kentucky will become a right to work state.
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2014, 01:05:27 PM »

As for the next right to work states: Nevada, Missouri, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The Republicans in Nevada are in control for the first time since 1929. They'll try to (I hope) push right to work through. Missouri's Republican legislature has enough votes to now override the governor. And Wisconsin is a given. Ditto West Virginia (simple majority needed to override the Democratic Governor). So +4 right to work states.

Nevada already is. Kentucky may actually be more likely than some of the others, even though it's still not very likely, since "right-to-work" is so tremendously unpopular statewide.

However, a few counties in Kentucky (such as Warren County) are about to implement a county "right-to-work" law.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2014, 02:12:57 PM »

The Master Class simply wants all but themselves to suffer for their unrestrained greed. More profit through longer hours for less under brutal working conditions -- that's the fascist way. Don't fool yourself: fascism will be no better in America because it is American than a tornado will be better than one that strikes outside of America because it is an American tornado.

It's adorable that your inflated sense of self-importance makes you believe that US plutocrats care enough to spend their short lives controlling us.

In general, Democrats are actually begging for more attention from the Master Class because they have no idea what's holding down the lower-middle class, but somehow they've convinced themselves that the Master Class can fix the problem. Master Class votes don't outnumber the masses of dumb Democratic voters who demand more poverty, and the Master Class isn't about to spend their political war chest to liberate people who enslave themselves for no reason.

When you see a bunch of Miserables throwing themselves in the gutter for sport, what are you supposed to do, besides ask them to stop?
Logged
Kraxner
Rookie
**
Posts: 179


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: December 14, 2014, 02:40:08 PM »

The Master Class simply wants all but themselves to suffer for their unrestrained greed. More profit through longer hours for less under brutal working conditions -- that's the fascist way. Don't fool yourself: fascism will be no better in America because it is American than a tornado will be better than one that strikes outside of America because it is an American tornado.

It's adorable that your inflated sense of self-importance makes you believe that US plutocrats care enough to spend their short lives controlling us.

In general, Democrats are actually begging for more attention from the Master Class because they have no idea what's holding down the lower-middle class, but somehow they've convinced themselves that the Master Class can fix the problem. Master Class votes don't outnumber the masses of dumb Democratic voters who demand more poverty, and the Master Class isn't about to spend their political war chest to liberate people who enslave themselves for no reason.

When you see a bunch of Miserables throwing themselves in the gutter for sport, what are you supposed to do, besides ask them to stop?



http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27094248/minimum-wage-dissent-san-joses-law-resulted-lost?source=infinite



They done a good job against their own in San Jose.


Hours cut for workers, while progressives claimed that san jose was booming due to a higher minimum wage. While ignoring that San Jose's economic turnaround was due a revived tech sector. As it was in the past.


Besides, progressives now that their cheerleading for more illegal immigrants and giving amensty just to get future votes should convince the rest that they have NO moral authority to claim they are for the poor.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: December 14, 2014, 03:17:31 PM »

I have never hated things more than I hate labor unions…

1) Why? 2) Do you got a job?

Labor unions are a distortion of capital being connected with human resources. They inflate (artificially) what these workers are worth and they distort the market. More often than not, unions try to force membership on whole groups of people to increase their bargaining power. You can't enter some jobs without joining the local union - and paying union fees - which I find inherently anti-democratic. And lastly, by paying union dues, I'm indirectly subsidizing the Democratic Party, a Party I am most definitely not interested in supporting or subsidizing. them.

Why does the job bit matter by the way? I'm between jobs at the moment, but even if I had one, I don't want to work for a union and give union dues to one.

Employers have told me that they prefer to negotiate individually with workers so that they can reward people based upon their merits. In practice that means something very different: finding the weaknesses of negotiation of individual workers and exploiting those as much as possible. Supervisors are expected to spy upon their subordinates to find any possible vulnerabilities. At times having a vulnerability means getting a pay cut, let alone getting subpar pay.

Thus a scenario like this is possible.

Bill's wife has a baby. His boss congratulates him and then tells him that since it is in the best interest of Bill and his enlarged family that he take a pay cut on behalf of the security of his job. Oh, yes -- and do some unpaid overtime.

Collective bargaining, something that unions can offer, is well worth the union dues. Don't fool yourself: that is what Big Business hates about unions. 

 
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: December 14, 2014, 03:29:08 PM »

Joining the union was one of the best decisions I ever made.
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: December 14, 2014, 03:30:21 PM »

The ultimate goal of the "right-to-work" thought police is to outlaw labor unions completely.
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: December 14, 2014, 03:55:29 PM »

Yeah, that was a grand old time, wasn't it?



I believe these people are Democrats. Really. They are.
Seriously? I bet nobody on this site would've known that if not for you. Thanks! Smiley
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: December 14, 2014, 04:25:16 PM »

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27094248/minimum-wage-dissent-san-joses-law-resulted-lost?source=infinite

They done a good job against their own in San Jose.


Hours cut for workers, while progressives claimed that san jose was booming due to a higher minimum wage. While ignoring that San Jose's economic turnaround was due a revived tech sector. As it was in the past.


Besides, progressives now that their cheerleading for more illegal immigrants and giving amensty just to get future votes should convince the rest that they have NO moral authority to claim they are for the poor.

Arguing that the minimum wage does no harm is about as good as it gets for the min wage proponents. Same goes for Kruger's tepid support of Obamanomics and ACA. If they are really lucky, other policies might poison the environment sufficiently to allow min wage et al to improve commerce, but that's like hunting unicorns.

We have better ways of raising lower-middle class income and stimulating demand for unskilled laborers (which also increases wages). I understand that localities use minimum wage because their policy tools are limited, but the federal government is not in the same situation. The reason DC continues to live 50 years in the past is anyone's guess. Maybe it's because only the over-50 demographic is voting.

Americans are worried about heart disease and cancer, but DC has convinced most voters that we really need to be inoculating for small pox and polio. Some day people will come around.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: December 14, 2014, 04:50:47 PM »

@Cal: Yeah, and the black vote then was like the Asian vote WWII, one token minority to prop on.

Last I checked your Cal also heckled the Irish to hell like every other GOP big-head, while the Democrats had Al Smith. Also the GOP lacked pretty much any type of religious vote that wasn't Protestant.

Also the GOP never officially denounced the Klan either, not since Grant, yes there were token speeches by Harding and Teddy,but only them and them alone. 1924 Democrats at least considered it.

So don't try Klan-baiting away from the issue.

Now with that back on hand, I could see Nevada and Virginia eventually going the other way, but otherwise it's depressingly very likely to get the whole map that way sans the West Coast and Northeast...and maybe New Mexico.

Because people like buzzwords, and currently the sane Keynesians can't seem think up any counters to Reago-Mellonomic bullsh**t like "Personal responsibility", "welfare queen", "union top dogs", etc...."golden parachute", "Wall Street Fat Cats" just aren't sticking like they should.


@Krax: Don't kid yourself, that tech sector wouldn't have gone anywhere without those at the bottom...those student interns, those young graduate programmers, all being paid decently rather than exploited. And someone's got to do those other services that tech workers do not. Ergo if those services fail because of a revolt, those programmers are screwed, and that should seriously embarrass the likes of Meg Whitman.

@Agg: Like what? Unless it's something like "Ensure employers pay their employees something that can be comfortably lived on" like Norway has, then minimum wage can and will always be the only sure-fire option.

Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2014, 05:25:25 PM »

What will happen:
The GOP will gain the Presidency in 2016, so they will pass a national right-to-work legislation after having ended the filibuster rule, and just to make sure this wouldn't be repealed after, they will appoint pro right to work judge to the Supreme Court.

So RIP american unions
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2014, 05:31:49 PM »

What will happen:
The GOP will gain the Presidency in 2016, so they will pass a national right-to-work legislation after having ended the filibuster rule, and just to make sure this wouldn't be repealed after, they will appoint pro right to work judge to the Supreme Court.

So RIP american unions

How would labor supporters react though? It's hard to see how the "right-to-work" Taliban would go that far without touching off a people's revolution.
Logged
RedSLC
SLValleyMan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,484
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2014, 05:54:32 PM »

What will happen:
The GOP will gain the Presidency in 2016, so they will pass a national right-to-work legislation after having ended the filibuster rule, and just to make sure this wouldn't be repealed after, they will appoint pro right to work judge to the Supreme Court.

So RIP american unions

Yup. And if not 2016, 2020.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: December 14, 2014, 05:57:52 PM »

I have never hated things more than I hate labor unions…

1) Why? 2) Do you got a job?

Labor unions are a distortion of capital being connected with human resources. They inflate (artificially) what these workers are worth and they distort the market. More often than not, unions try to force membership on whole groups of people to increase their bargaining power. You can't enter some jobs without joining the local union - and paying union fees - which I find inherently anti-democratic. And lastly, by paying union dues, I'm indirectly subsidizing the Democratic Party, a Party I am most definitely not interested in supporting or subsidizing. them.

Why does the job bit matter by the way? I'm between jobs at the moment, but even if I had one, I don't want to work for a union and give union dues to one.

Employers have told me that they prefer to negotiate individually with workers so that they can reward people based upon their merits. In practice that means something very different: finding the weaknesses of negotiation of individual workers and exploiting those as much as possible. Supervisors are expected to spy upon their subordinates to find any possible vulnerabilities. At times having a vulnerability means getting a pay cut, let alone getting subpar pay.

Thus a scenario like this is possible.

Bill's wife has a baby. His boss congratulates him and then tells him that since it is in the best interest of Bill and his enlarged family that he take a pay cut on behalf of the security of his job. Oh, yes -- and do some unpaid overtime.

Collective bargaining, something that unions can offer, is well worth the union dues. Don't fool yourself: that is what Big Business hates about unions.  
The thing to remember is this.

First off people should be paid what they're worth. That's the gist of a market economy. But I'll address how employers abuse workers and how we can avoid them without the need for a union. But I want to get into a tangent a bit.

If Bill is an IT worker, Bill can command a decent salary and can have a baby and start a family, especially if Bill is important enough to his company to be paid well enough, then Bill has nothing to worry about. That's the basis of our new economy: skills based economy. That's the case for most workers. They have, are important enough, and are valuable enough to their employers that their employers won't abuse them. And I would argue we're transitioning to an economy where skills and knowledge are going to be considerable assets, enough to make sure that people like Bill can a) argue for themselves b) prosper c) and shop their skills around to competitors.
 
Now onto your arguments that employers are coercing their workers. While this is probably true on some scale, how much of the working population is being abused the way you claim they are being abused? I'm curious because you're providing anecdotal data, not empirical data. If you were right, I'd wager that a sizable majority of people are treated more or less fairly. Your line about "supervisors are expected to spy on their subordinates to find any possible vulnerabilities" seems bordering on hyperbolic.

As a note, most people stay in the jobs they have because of the health care model which attaches itself to employers and other attached benefits, not per se the wages themselves. One of the (more conservative; I should point out the Administration stole this outright from the GOP) elements of the Affordable Care Act allows you to buy health care on the insurance market, thus lessening your dependence on employers. I'm guessing as the exchanges stay in force (also a Republican idea), we'll see employers enticing their workers to stay in their jobs with more than just threats. (This is accepting your argument that employers coerce workers to accept pay cuts and unpaid overtime).

To me, labor unions argue in favor of inflating wages and the like unnecessarily. For example, Detroit's Big Three, a while ago, were being outsold because of the cheaper wages that their Japanese rivals were offering (and thus could undersell them). One major difference is that collective bargaining was in force in Michigan, and unions were winning substantial reqwards for their members. Factories were being relocated to the South (especially in right to work states) and jobs were going there, because they had right to work.

Another more pressing problems that unions have caused - especially public sector unions - they have negotiated very generous pension settlements that leave the states on the hook for billions of dollars, with little way to pay for it. One reason these settlements are so generous and the retirement conditions so favorable? Public sector unions. And who's left to pay the bill, when states must raise taxes to pay for the retirement of public sector workers? Working people, who have to pay more in taxes.

Unions, I readily acknowledge, have a place in American history and provided many positive benefits. I feel however their day has come and gone, and that we need to start moving beyond labor unions. That's why Right to Work - on the federal level - should be the final nail in the labor union movement's coffin.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: December 14, 2014, 05:59:30 PM »

Yeah, that was a grand old time, wasn't it?



I believe these people are Democrats. Really. They are.
Seriously? I bet nobody on this site would've known that if not for you. Thanks! Smiley

It's funny because the picture has nothing to with what I'm advocating (hardly anyone would say I'm advocating a return to the days of the KKK; I'm not even white). I was advocating (in this thread) a return to economic thought as was in the days of Coolidge (sans free trade and the Federal Reserve, I'll admit).
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: December 14, 2014, 08:19:15 PM »

@Cal: Yeah, and the black vote then was like the Asian vote WWII, one token minority to prop on.

Last I checked your Cal also heckled the Irish to hell like every other GOP big-head, while the Democrats had Al Smith. Also the GOP lacked pretty much any type of religious vote that wasn't Protestant.

Also the GOP never officially denounced the Klan either, not since Grant, yes there were token speeches by Harding and Teddy,but only them and them alone. 1924 Democrats at least considered it.

The Klan dominated Republican politics in Indiana in the 1920s.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it is by State action, then Wisconsin is next. The Koch family regent Scott Walker has stated his desire to transform Wisconsin into a cheap-labor state. Kentucky and West Virginia? Anyone who does is going to have big trouble with the United Mine Workers.

Ultimately whether labor unions are even allowed to exist will be a decision of federal legislation. I would not be surprised if the GOP tries to bring up a federal Duty to Starve
law in the next Congress. President Obama will veto it every time. 2017? Sure -- if the Republicans elect a President and maintain control both Houses of Congress. In such a case America becomes a highly-centralized, monolithic absolute plutocracy until the government is overthrown.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know whether you think that there is a recycling of historical trends at roughly the span of a long human lifetime, but there's a good reason for the worst tendencies in human nature in any time resembling those of something like eighty years. Figure that the children born in the early 1920s associate the Great Depression with a cause in reckless speculation and an anything-goes attitude toward Big Business did everything possible to prevent a recurrence of such folly even if it tempted younger people. Whether one was a liberal like Abraham Ribicoff or a conservative like Bob Dole one resisted the shady finance that looked like late-1920s folly so long as one could. Around 2000 people like them were out of public life. The temptations of shady finance and weak regulation of hustles in the securities business were always there,but around 2000 nobody was around to stop either. By 2005 the stage was being set for a 1929-style crash.

The extinction of child memories of an event makes a repetition of folly that leads to a near-repeat of a similar catastrophe all the more possible.

http://blog.lifecourse.com/

This may be interesting, and I post heavily there. Elections are a big part of American history, and generational differences are a big part of electoral demographics.  

Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: December 14, 2014, 08:24:40 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I missed this. I have no idea what you mean about World War II's Asian voters. But given the Civil War and Reconstruction, the African American vote was a solidly Republican one. It also helped the GOP outside the South. It wasn't token. The leading African Americans of the day were mostly or all Republican.

The Irish are white (and I think they were considered white by the turn of the 20th century). So I don't know how it's racist. Despite you trying to downplay the GOP efforts, it wasn't the GOP who couldn't pass laws banning lynching. It was the Democratic Party - particularly their Southern wing - who was intent on stopping these laws.

The Klan picture commentary is accurate. They weren't Republicans. They were Democrats. And they and their leadership supported the Democratic Party. Anyone can see that, especially by viewing any Presidential election return in the South from 1876 to 1928.

It's obviously not the modern Democratic Party but the Klan was heavily and staunchly Democratic back then.
Logged
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,952


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: December 14, 2014, 08:29:52 PM »

If it is by State action, then Wisconsin is next. The Koch family regent Scott Walker has stated his desire to transform Wisconsin into a cheap-labor state. Kentucky and West Virginia? Anyone who does is going to have big trouble with the United Mine Workers.

Wouldn't there be just as much trouble in Wisconsin considering the type of stuff that went on in Madison 4 years ago? Unions are popular in Kentucky, but they're not really that powerful with public officials.
Logged
Deus Naturae
Deus naturae
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,637
Croatia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: December 14, 2014, 09:59:29 PM »

@Krax: Don't kid yourself, that tech sector wouldn't have gone anywhere without those at the bottom...those student interns, those young graduate programmers, all being paid decently rather than exploited. And someone's got to do those other services that tech workers do not. Ergo if those services fail because of a revolt, those programmers are screwed, and that should seriously embarrass the likes of Meg Whitman.
Pretty much no computer programmers are unionized.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: December 14, 2014, 10:03:46 PM »

What will happen:
The GOP will gain the Presidency in 2016, so they will pass a national right-to-work legislation after having ended the filibuster rule, and just to make sure this wouldn't be repealed after, they will appoint pro right to work judge to the Supreme Court.

So RIP american unions

How would labor supporters react though? It's hard to see how the "right-to-work" Taliban would go that far without touching off a people's revolution.

Nobody in America cares enough to do a "revolution" over anything. They'd get mad, write some angry comments on the internet, maybe do a protest, then go back to eating McDonalds/watching Honey Boo Boo and will forget about it within a month.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.072 seconds with 12 queries.