Exactly. If a company is successful in creating great returns to shareholders
it is a model to be copied. If a union gets great benefits and salaries for its
workers it is an unsustainable entitlement for special interests and as such
needs to lose its power and the members may need to give up their right even to
form such an entity
. The public looks at successful companies as public goods whereas many see
successful unions as bad especially if they are in the public sector Many
workers themselves look at successful union workers as getting better pay than
they do for no good reason and are happy enough to see their power curbed and
losing benefits. The ideology of the U.S is anti-union and the working class
has no sense of class unity or solidarity it would seem but often is quite
happy to cooperate with those acting in opposition to their own class interest.
Cheers, Ken
Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
________________________________
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2012 6:24:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Wisconsin
That's the tail end of the story isn't it?
In fact, when Walker walked into office he cut tax rates on the rich thus
creating deficits that had to be patched with takeaways from unionized workers.
So, the dems could have said revoke the tax cuts and support public workers.
But the dems were also pushing austerity. So....
Getting workers to turn on each other is an old and effective tactic. Still
seems to be working wonders.
Joanna
________________________________
Let's assume that Koch and the unions spent an equal amount saturating the
airwaves getting our their message to the voters, so they equally got out their
respective messages. What was the message that the voters would have received
from the unions that they did not actually receive in the actual campaign?
What message would have convinced more voters that it was in their
self-interest to transfer more of their money to their neighbors who were
government employees?
David Shemano
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Louis Proyect
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 3:49 PM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Wisconsin
On 6/6/12 6:42 PM, David Shemano wrote:
> Why do you says they chose "corporate interests" instead of their own
> self-interests? As Mr. Rhone stated, I assume most people who voted
> for Walker saw themselves as part of the "tax-paying" class as opposed
> to the "tax-receiving" class, at least with respect to government
> employee benefits, so Walker's actions aligned with their
> self-interest.
You make it sound like the debate club at Princeton. Instead what happened is
Koch millions paid for a tsunami of television ads. We don't have democracy. We
have dollarocracy.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
