--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u" <wgm4u@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > Plus which, the labor movement is the only significant > > organized body to advocate for the interests of the > > wage-earning class against those of the investor class-- > > not just in terms of work rules but in terms of civil > > and economic rights in general. > > > > And that's why conservatives (and business-friendly > > Democrats) want to do away with unions. > > > > The struggle in Wisconsin isn't about budget concerns. > > It's about the forces of corporatocracy and the wealthy > > trying to pry the fingers of the labor movement loose > > from the edge of the cliff. > > > > In an excellent Mother Jones article, "Plutocracy Now-- > > What Wisconsin Is Really About: How Screwing Unions > > Screws the Entire Middle Class," Kevin Drum notes that > > the labor movement is so important because > > > > "politicians don't respond to the concerns of voters, > > they respond to the organized muscle of institutions that > > represent them. With labor in decline, both parties now > > respond strongly to the interests of the rich--whose > > institutional representation is deep and energetic--and > > barely at all to the interests of the working and middle > > classes." > > It's pretty simple Judy, Public Unions (not Private Unions) > enable the State to *launder* money directly from the tax > payer to the Democart Party
The "Democart Party"? Is that some new third party? I hadn't heard of it. > through Union dues dictated by mandatory collective bargaining. > (Unions donate overwhelmingly to Democrats) > > The *pay bosses* of the Democrats are the Public Sector Unions, > hence you see the sheepish Democrats in Wisconsin buckling > under to their Union Bosses wishes, what a foolish display of > hubris. I believe you need to look up the meaning of "hubris" in Mr. Dictionary. And did you have any comments on my post? > The election in November clearly demonstrated the trend of > the State Walker gave no indication he was going to attempt to take collective bargaining rights from the unions, so I'm afraid you can't say anybody voted for this. > in spite of what you think of Rasmussen's 'spat' comment > (big deal). It's a HUGE deal. Similar bills are pending or being proposed in several other states by conservative governors and legislators. If Walker wins this one, they'll be emboldened to press forward.
