El 01/02/11 13:54, Nicholas Geti escribió: > "Government unions" is an oxymoron. They are not a capitalistic entity and > can only hold their jurisdictions hostage to get what they want. Most of our > local and federal governments have laws against public employees striking > and hence recognizes them as monopolies.
So govt employees may not group negotiate their salaries? Good thing teachers are not paying you any attention. "can only hold their jurisdictions hostage to get what they want" - So you never heard the term blackleg (or scab for you yanks)? You've never heard of strikers getting care of blacklegs? Is that holding the companies hostage? > You have one goofed up sense of capitalism. Sounds like you are a communist > or socialist both of which amount to the same thing. Which sadly shows the extent of your political knowledge. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ricardo Araoz" <[email protected]> > To: "ProFox Email List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 5:16 AM > Subject: Re: [OT] Egyptian unrest > > > El 01/02/11 02:19, Nicholas Geti escribió: >> Sigh!. What a pathetic mess you are. >> >> Our government unions are destroying our country. The teacher's unions are >> the worst. They care not for teaching our children; only maintaining their >> power. Michele Rhee tried to raise standards in Washington, D.C. but the >> unions were truly vicious in their campaign to remove the mayor who >> supported her and subsequently the next mayor fired her. >> >> You have been reading too many leftist newspapers. > LOL > You haven't got a clue. > It's your capitalist world, your choice, everyone for himself. So if > companies are not concerned with giving good services/goods/etc but only > with making money, why would the teachers do otherwise? Are they stupid? > Can **they** eat dirt? > If a customer won't pay what you think is proper, will you do the job > anyway? So why would the teachers be different? They do what you do, > they try to get the most money out of every work hour. The only > difference is that they group together (union) in order to bring to the > negotiating table an equivalent force to that of their employers. > Whoever said a union had to be leftist, it's a capitalistic thing > designed to obtain maximum profits. When have private companies acted > otherwise? When has a private company not maintained it's power? Have > you not seen private companies lobby and campaign towards their own > interests? Why would a union do different? > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
