On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Union card check > > > So the thugs from the local union office can come to everyone houses and > tell them to sign the union card "or else"? And if you don't think that is > exactly what is going to happen, you are fooling yourself. >
"Thugs"? Thugs? Bite me. I hope you were drunk when you wrote this because it is intolerable and stupid. > Card check is totally un-American and has very little public support. If > workers can't manage to get a majority vote for unionization on a secret > ballot, they don't deserve a union. If such a law passed, it would end up in > the courts for years. I could see it coming down to a Supreme Court decision > and being knocked down on the grounds of ... wait for it ... the right to > privacy. Bing! I'll leave it with the above comment and simply say that I think you lack an understanding of the realities in the workplace. > > Renegotiate mortgages in bankruptcy > > > That is already being done. Wow, you like something Bush did! Is it? It was my understanding that that provision was shot down when it was proposed as part of the comprimise in the bailout bill. My understanding is that 2nd mortgages have been allowed to be renogtiated during bankruptcy under current law but primary residence mortgages were not. If that changed, then I applaud the move, even if it was done by Bush. Especially if it was done by Bush. >> Eliminate statute of limitations on workplace discrimination suits > > > Horrible, horrible idea. Statute of limitations are in place for good > reason. Are you familiar with the Supreme Court case that brought this up? The case in question was where a women didn't find out for some years on the job that she was being paid less than her male co-workers in the same position.The crux of the problem was that she didn't know she was being discriminated against until after the (absurdly low) statute of limitations had passed (6 months as I recall). How was she supposed to know? Do you expect her to just go around asking "Hey, are you breaking any laws I should know about?" > >> Bar funding for the Iraq War (also a radical way of putting it) > > > Like I said, Obama will lose a winnable war. Americans don't like the war > but will punish the politicans who lose a winnable war. We disagree on that. Nothing new there. >> Windfall profits tax on oil companies > > > We should offer them a choice to pay a tax or invest the money in new > development inside the US. Depending on how it was put together, I could agree to that plan. It still amounts to a tax, the question is the method of execution. Judah ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:275374 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
