I am pro-liberty. That is why I hold the views that I hold. I see
nothing wrong with holding a view for no other reason than it is a
pro-liberty view. My ideology is the ideology of liberty. There are
people who describe their views as libertarian who disagre with me on
this issue. I believe of course that their view is wrong. Some people
who use the labels libertarian and conservative support right to work
laws because they don't think union membership should be compulsary in
order for one to work for any employer. I believe that employers have
the right to enter into a contract with unions that state that union
membership is compulsary as a condition of employement. Personally I
would not work for an employer in which union membership was
compulsary but I believe it should be legal to have such a
requirement. An anology is that I don't smoke but I don't think that
it should be illegal for restaurants and bars to allow their customers
to smoke. If it really bothered me I simply would not patronize a
place that allows smoking. It doesn't bother me however. I support
property rights and thus believe it should be up to the property
owner. Unless a union official sticks a gun to the head of an
employer's head and tells the employer to sign a contract, I do not
see that unions are forcing employers to sign contracts that state
that union membership is compulsary as a condition of employment.
No person is forced to work for an employer.
$
--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> You have no reasons other than idealogy?
>
> I'am from a no right-to-work state who's economy is on a downward
> spiral, and the fact is that the 10 states with the worst rate of
> worker exodus are non right to work states. My brother is a trained
> welder, and he quit his very well paying job for a less paying job
> out of frustration over the many problems inherint in unions of non
> right-to-work states.
>
> Michigan's unemployment rate is growing, its economy is griding to a
> hault. The downside of right-to-work as that it, for obvious
> reasons, statistacly results in lower wages for workers. However, it
> seems the benifit to the over all economy and decrease in
> unemployment outwieghs that draw back.
>
> Now, your blind anti goverment point of view is understandable, but
> there are more forms of intitutional agression than just government.
> Are you simply an anti US goverment person, or are you one who
> stands for the right of the individual. You claim an employers
> rights, but if that employer can not resit the strength of a union
> is that realy his free will or an act of agression by the union
> coercing him to agree to there terms.
>
> Drop the ideology, I am looking to talk pragmaticly
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "hrearden_hr" <HRearden@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > It is a matter of the right for an employer to enter into certatin
> > working arangements with employees. Employers are not forced to
> sign
> > contracts that state that being a member of a union is a condition
> of
> > employement. No person is forced to work for a particular
> employer. If
> > one does not want to join a union and union membership is
> compulsory
> > in order to work for a particular employer then they can choose not
> > work for that particular employer. At one time there were employers
> > who actually prefered to hire union members because unions trained
> > workers for certain skilled jobs and thus if one was a union member
> > the employer knew that they had been trained for the job by the
> union
> > or guild. Why should the government not allow employers and
> employees
> > to enter into certain working arrangements? I support the freedom
> of
> > employers and employees to enter into whatever contract they both
> > agree to. The government does not and should not be involved.
> >
> > $
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > That does not apply much to the points I actualy care about. The
> > > ratio between loss and gain from the balancing act of wages
> versus
> > > unemployment.
> > >
> > > You can attack right-to-work, from both sides with a Libertarian
> > > standpoint, either yours against or as a protection of the
> > > individuals libertey to not be coerced by unions. Making an
> > > idealogical point for or against is not, effective. If you could
> > > quantify your stance though, it would be intrest to me. IE You
> don't
> > > believe it is the role of the state because it has *THIS
> NEGATIVE
> > > IMPACT* supported by *THIS SET OF STATISTICAL FACTS*.
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "hrearden_hr" <HRearden@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I live in a right to work state but I don't work in a unionized
> > > > industry. I oppose right to work laws because they interfere
> with
> > > the
> > > > type of agreements employers and employees can enter in to. I
> > > support
> > > > a separation of economy and state. In a capitalist economy the
> > > state
> > > > would dictate which type of agrrements employers and employees
> can
> > > > enter in to. It is a matter of principle with me. I don't
> believe
> > > the
> > > > state should favor either the employer or employee in matters
> of
> > > > employement, benefits, wages, salaries, etc... or act as a
> > > arbitrator
> > > > in disputes between employees and employers. I don't see that
> as a
> > > > legitimate roll of the state.
> > > >
> > > > $
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit"
> <uncoolrabbit@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Any one here working in a right-to-work state , preferably
> one
> > > working
> > > > > in a unionized industry, who could give there point of view
> on
> > > right-
> > > > > to-work legislation? I am from a state with out such
> legislation
> > > and I
> > > > > want a better perspective of the pro's and cons of such
> > > legislations,
> > > > > or lack of legislation, effect on economic growth, work
> force
> > > growth,
> > > > > saleries and unemployment.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
