Politics/Unions.. Corruption Cycle

[Lumpy 1]

You support this?

1)Politicians.. Vote to approve Public Unions and give them whatever they can .. they sell out the taxpayer for votes. They also mandate that all public union employees must join the union and pay union dues.

2)The public union collect union dues and support the political party or candidates that support the continuation of the corruption cycle.. ie screwing the taxpayer ..Individual union member are forced to pay union dues no matter who they personally support.

3)The Unions payoff and throw their support behind the political party or candidates that are willing to screw the taxpayer for excessive benefits...

4) cycle back to (1)

 

[Meister]

As long as the politicians can buy votes with the taxpayers money and not their own....they are on it like white on rice.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Yup.... the public sector unions are just money laundering rackets.

 

[Intense]

They make Bank Robbery and Extortion look respectable by comparison.

 

[Avorysuds]

If Unions want their money it looks like they will be donating a shit ton of cash to the Republicans... Then We'll see Dems freaking the fuck out about how fucked everything is...

Of course Obama beat McCain in corporate donation in 2008, and we still hear about Republicans being the evil corporate party... I guess some corporations went from being bad to good overnight when they game money to Democrats...

 

[Lumpy 1]

I'm thinking this kinda crap.. has to stop..

I find it difficult to blame union members, sure their principles are being sold to the highest bidder by their Union Leadership while they stand by and watch but in the same vein the American people (not all) are standing by right now and doing the same thing...or fighting for a continuation of the insult..

It would be nice, though, I suspect impossible if political leanings took a back seat to integrity, common sense and the principles of fairness...

 

[Avorysuds]

It's threads like this that sink to the bottom... There are just no talking points to attack it.

Wait, RW might jump in to ask "why do you hate the middle class?" As if that somehow gets around the question of why does he support such massive corruption based on destroying the middle class.


You really need to say stuff like. Fuck you you fuking fuck ass (liberal/conservative) fucks! To get any real play on these forums.

 

[Lumpy 1]

It's threads like this that sink to the bottom... There are just no talking points to attack it.

Wait, RW might jump in to ask "why do you hate the middle class?" As if that somehow gets around the question of why does he support such massive corruption based on destroying the middle class.


You really need to say stuff like. Fuck you you fuking fuck ass (liberal/conservative) fucks! To get any real play on these forums.

Yup.... ever since I've tried to be more balanced, less partisan, my threads go right to the bottom.. sheesh...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's my simple explanation.

Of course Unions are corrupt.
EVERYTHING is corrupt. If management has the right to buy lobbyists and politicians in order to write management-friendly laws and regulation, I think it's the job of the Unions to buy lobbyists and politicians to fight those laws, and try to pass labor-friendly laws and regulations.

CEOs of corporations have the duty to the shareholders to increase shareholder value. There's nothing wrong with that, it's the way it should be. Unions have the the same duty - to get the workers the most they possibly can. If corruption exists, it has to exist on both sides.

That's the way the market works.

 

[Trajan]

then there's no objection when the balance of power shifts, its a pendulum, it shifts back. *shrugs* right now it appears that the unions have over reached.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Here's my simple explanation.

Of course Unions are corrupt.
EVERYTHING is corrupt. If management has the right to buy lobbyists and politicians in order to write management-friendly laws and regulation, I think it's the job of the Unions to buy lobbyists and politicians to fight those laws, and try to pass labor-friendly laws and regulations.

CEOs of corporations have the duty to the shareholders to increase shareholder value. There's nothing wrong with that, it's the way it should be. Unions have the the same duty - to get the workers the most they possibly can. If corruption exists, it has to exist on both sides.

That's the way the market works.

So the result is the taxpayer gets screwed no matter what... Sheesh...

What you're saying makes reasonable sense.. but eh...sucks

 

[JFK_USA]

Or we could do Republicans:

1. Citizens United gives corporations unlimited donations.

2. In the 2010 election, 7 out of the 10 groups that donated to campaigns donated to republicans. The other 3 were unions.

3. Republicans then take out the unions.

4. Unions successfully taken out, workers have no rights.

5. Minimum wage gets repealed, no unemployment insurance, no worker compensation, no safe workplace.

6. Republicans make laws impossible to be repealed.

7. Then everyone becomes poor, worked like slaves.

8. We are Honduras.

Thats the Republicans goal. You see it with Bucs. They want to destroy America for profit. Thats not America.

 

[kyzr]

This debate has a foregone conclusion. I don't think anyone can refute the actual facts:
1. The Federal Employees cannot unionize because of conflicts of interest. Everyone from FDR forward has agreed with this.
2. State employees have civil-service protections, they don't need unions
3. The States simply cannot pay for promised benefits, something needs to change, and fast because taxpayers can't pay any more
4. Taxpayers elect pols to fix their States, end of discussion
5. Besides, when unions contribute to pols, they expect favors, that is the ultimate conflict of interest.

 

[Meister]

Or we could do Republicans:

1. Citizens United gives corporations unlimited donations.

2. In the 2010 election, 7 out of the 10 groups that donated to campaigns donated to republicans. The other 3 were unions.

3. Republicans then take out the unions.

4. Unions successfully taken out, workers have no rights.

5. Minimum wage gets repealed, no unemployment insurance, no worker compensation, no safe workplace.

6. Republicans make laws impossible to be repealed.

7. Then everyone becomes poor, worked like slaves.

8. We are Honduras.

Thats the Republicans goal. You see it with Bucs. They want to destroy America for profit. Thats not America.

This post really reflects on what a moron would say. Sheesh....smoke more hemp, dude.

 

[Greenbeard]

This thread could easily be titled "Politics/[any organization or interest capable for raising money].. Corruption Cycle." If you have a problem with the influence over politicians that money buys various interests (including unions), then that's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. If, on the other hand, in principle you have no qualms with that sort of 'speech' and its effects on our political system, then a thread that could've been interesting turns out to be simply another pre-text for union-bashing.

 

[Trajan]

and?

 

[kyzr]

This thread could easily be titled "Politics/[any organization or interest capable for raising money].. Corruption Cycle." If you have a problem with the influence over politicians that money buys various interests (including unions), then that's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. If, on the other hand, in principle you have no qualms with that sort of 'speech' and its effects on our political system, then a thread that could've been interesting turns out to be simply another pre-text for union-bashing.

You did not address the debate points of conflict of interest, no Federal unions allowed, so why allow State unions? etc.

Freely donating private money to someone is free speech, just ask the USSC.

 

[Agit8r]

The influence of unions AND every other sort of monied corporation ought to be limited. That is what this country was founded upon

 

[Greenbeard]

You did not address the debate points of conflict of interest, no Federal unions allowed, so why allow State unions? etc.

Freely donating private money to someone is free speech, just ask the USSC.

That's the point. Virtually all money in politics could be considered a conflict of interest; asking state elected officials to negotiate compensation with members of unions that contributed to their campaigns is no different than asking, for example, any politician to effectively regulate (or deregulate) an industry that contributes heavily to him.

The efforts of unions to use money to influence the political winds in a way that's advantageous to them is no more or less legitimate that any other interest doing the same thing. If your answer to the question of whether money should buy outcomes from political leaders in our system is "sure, but only when it's not a union buying them" I'd have to suggest you're considering an important issue a bit too narrowly.

 

[Samson]

You did not address the debate points of conflict of interest, no Federal unions allowed, so why allow State unions? etc.

Freely donating private money to someone is free speech, just ask the USSC.

That's the point. Virtually all money in politics could be considered a conflict of interest; asking state elected officials to negotiate compensation with members of unions that contributed to their campaigns is no different than asking, for example, any politician to effectively regulate (or deregulate) an industry that contributes heavily to him.

The efforts of unions to use money to influence the political winds in a way that's advantageous to them is no more or less legitimate that any other interest doing the same thing. If your answer to the question of whether money should buy outcomes from political leaders in our system is "sure, but only when it's not a union buying them" I'd have to suggest you're considering an important issue a bit too narrowly.

Of course this would then expand the restrictions on any political campaign contribution to individuals? No. Then only wealthy individuals will be represented.

The only realistic solution is for the Government to pay for political campaigns.