Wisconsin Unions to Businesses- you are with us or against us, period

[Trajan]

she prefers it when politicians collude with corporations.... particularly the ones that offshore our jobs.

And that's probably the thing that cracks me up the most...It's evil for workers to get together to collectively bargain. Unions are evil, but corporations who give bonuses to executives whose company's fail are A Ok!

and limitless campaign funds to the rightwingnuts from oil companies, insurance companies, special interest lobbyists... that's all fine.

but they can't stand it when anyone who opposes them responds.

your response makes little sense, this is not a private entity at stake here , it is public funds funding public works.

In addition there a lot more money from bus's you'll find that crosses over from rep to dem than union money that crosses over from dem to rep. So, of there is a some semblance of balance to be found, it won't be on that side of the ledger.

 

[Stephanie]

she prefers it when politicians collude with corporations.... particularly the ones that offshore our jobs.

And that's probably the thing that cracks me up the most...It's evil for workers to get together to collectively bargain. Unions are evil, but corporations who give bonuses to executives whose company's fail are A Ok!

and limitless campaign funds to the rightwingnuts from oil companies, insurance companies, special interest lobbyists... that's all fine.

but they can't stand it when anyone who opposes them responds.

Jilly dear, are you REALLY going to stand on this statement. when you know FULL WELL that Democrats are supported by the same.

 

[Trajan]

Well boys, you Teabaggers started this game of hardball. Now you are squeeling like little girls when the opposition joins the game. Too bad, it is going to get tougher. There are a lot more things than just this which can be done legally to create an even meaner environment.

so, the tea party played hardball? how so?

 

[Trajan]

That's capitalism for ya

she prefers it when politicians collude with corporations.... particularly the ones that offshore our jobs.

And that's probably the thing that cracks me up the most...It's evil for workers to get together to collectively bargain. Unions are evil, but corporations who give bonuses to executives whose company's fail are A Ok!

actually yes it is okay and if you cannot see why well, good luck and all that.

 

[manifold]

No, it is not, are you having trouble parsing the English language? This isn't even nuanced;

there's a difference between asking someone to withdraw sppt. from a cause and take a seat on the side lines.

However, they demand they actively repudiate their former cause and actively sppt. the new one. Or else. They add that they will provide a quid pro quo as well.

I'm having trouble parsing your usage of the English language. Especially that middle sentence.

Regardless, the only material difference I can see between this and most garden variety boycott threats is they didn't invoke the Bible.

 

[Stephanie]

These UNIONS need to be charged just like the mob, UNDER RICO
This is threatening INTIMATION at it's finest

 

[WillowTree]

I find nothing objectionable about this.

Then you are a corrupt individual.

 

[Big Fitz]

Well boys, you Teabaggers started this game of hardball. Now you are squeeling like little girls when the opposition joins the game. Too bad, it is going to get tougher. There are a lot more things than just this which can be done legally to create an even meaner environment.

That cuts BOTH ways; I suggest you remember that. Go ahead, up the ante; our side can do likewise. Let's see what you got.....

Their idea of hardball is Homestead.

 

[Dr Grump]

she prefers it when politicians collude with corporations.... particularly the ones that offshore our jobs.

And that's probably the thing that cracks me up the most...It's evil for workers to get together to collectively bargain. Unions are evil, but corporations who give bonuses to executives whose company's fail are A Ok!

actually yes it is okay and if you cannot see why well, good luck and all that.

So it is OK to give bonuses to execs of companies that aren't performing? hhhmmm..

 

[Trajan]

No, it is not, are you having trouble parsing the English language? This isn't even nuanced;

there's a difference between asking someone to withdraw sppt. from a cause and take a seat on the side lines.

However, they demand they actively repudiate their former cause and actively sppt. the new one. Or else. They add that they will provide a quid pro quo as well.

I'm having trouble parsing your usage of the English language. Especially that middle sentence.

they boycott if they don't stop sptting walker, as in withdrawing their co. sppt., they won't boycott if they do, as they become neutral, that is take a seat, get out of the fight, sit on the SIDELINES.......

Regardless, the only material difference I can see between this and most garden variety boycott threats is they didn't invoke the Bible.

here, let me help you;

A boycott is a form of consumer activism involving the act of voluntarily abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with a person, organization, or country as an expression of protest, usually for political reasons.
Boycott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

boy·cott
   /ˈbɔɪkɒt/ Show Spelled[boi-kot] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.
to combine in abstaining from, or preventing dealings with, as a means of intimidation or coercion: to boycott a store.
2.
to abstain from buying or using: to boycott foreign products



boy·cott
verb \ˈbȯi-ˌkät\
Definition of BOYCOTT
transitive verb
: to engage in a concerted refusal to have dealings with (as a person, store, or organization) usually to express disapproval or to force acceptance of certain conditions
— boycott noun
— boy·cott·er noun
See boycott defined for English-language learners »
Examples of BOYCOTT

1. plans to boycott American products
2. They boycotted the city's bus system.
3. We boycotted companies that were polluting the environment.

Origin of BOYCOTT
Charles C. Boycott †1897 English land agent in Ireland who was ostracized for refusing to reduce rents
First Known Use: 1880


Boycott - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Charles Boycott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regardless, the only material difference I can see between this and most garden variety boycott threats is they didn't invoke the Bible.

the bible, I see, thats totally meaningless as a reference. thx.

 

[Trajan]

And that's probably the thing that cracks me up the most...It's evil for workers to get together to collectively bargain. Unions are evil, but corporations who give bonuses to executives whose company's fail are A Ok!

actually yes it is okay and if you cannot see why well, good luck and all that.

So it is OK to give bonuses to execs of companies that aren't performing? hhhmmm..

its a PRIVATE business, what they do is not my concern and its never that cut and dry anyway.

 

[Sheldon]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

 

[Trajan]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

yes, I believe they are.

 

[Big Fitz]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

yes, I believe they are.

Shouldn't be, but one public sector union at a time... one public sector union at a time.

 

[Sheldon]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

yes, I believe they are.

I wouldn't be surprised if those exemptions were an attempt at vote-fetching from those professions, which may not pan out if this letter is any indication. I can't think of any other reason why they were exempted.

 

[Big Fitz]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

yes, I believe they are.

I wouldn't be surprised if those exemptions were an attempt at vote-fetching from those professions, which may not pan out if this letter is any indication. I can't think of any other reason why they were exempted.

I can. They need to not bite it all off in one shot. To destroy the public sector union stranglehold, you have to go either for the biggest or the smallest. Since the biggest was the most obvious in trouble due to budgetary percentage, it gave Walker an easy in. Fix the budget crisis. Fine, here's a big chunk that needs fixing. It'd been a sacred cow for many years, and now, we're having Sacred burgers with cheese.

I suspect strongly that these other unions will not be safe for too much longer, but you can't have all of them striking you at once. It's one thing the libs got right. Divide and conquer and the lynchpin in WI was the teacher's union. It's how they got so much power, and how you get them back in line.

 

[Trajan]

I just noticed that several of the signers of that letter are from police and fire-fighter unions. Aren't they exempt from most if not all of the provisions in Walker's law?

yes, I believe they are.

I wouldn't be surprised if those exemptions were an attempt at vote-fetching from those professions, which may not pan out if this letter is any indication. I can't think of any other reason why they were exempted.

Possibly, but I don't know whats in Walkers head or heart, and have not seen and indicator other than garden variety politics, maybe he doesn't want to mess with public safety.

In any case yes, it seems that has in this case not worked out. But, being totally cynical for a moment, this is a cheap one for them, they went along as they had lost nothing and may have nothing to lose, walker at this point and time has achieved his objective.

Oh and one other point, if you look back at my OP, the Soprano remark was made in the context of a Trumka, if you are familiar with this history you may see what I mean.

 

[Sheldon]

I can. They need to not bite it all off in one shot. To destroy the public sector union stranglehold, you have to go either for the biggest or the smallest. Since the biggest was the most obvious in trouble due to budgetary percentage, it gave Walker an easy in. Fix the budget crisis. Fine, here's a big chunk that needs fixing. It'd been a sacred cow for many years, and now, we're having Sacred burgers with cheese.

I suspect strongly that these other unions will not be safe for too much longer, but you can't have all of them striking you at once. It's one thing the libs got right. Divide and conquer and the lynchpin in WI was the teacher's union. It's how they got so much power, and how you get them back in line.

That third sentence looks like a false dilemma. WHY would Walker and co want to go through all this again? By putting off the further gutting, he and the Republicans have done themselves no favors and only increased the risk of negative public opinion considering that such a strategy will drag Sconi through all this again. This time dealing with cops and firefighters who are just as sacred as teachers, if not more; cops and firefighters who, if this letter is indicative, would be more than willing to fight him on that front. And let's be clear here, this is about disemboweling public unions, not the budget shortfalls--but it is the budget shortfalls that the voters want to see addressed. Would such another, big distraction from an issue the voters care about REALLY work in Walker's favor? If your scenario is true, it's an amateur move in political chess. Like my grandpa said: men rip band-aids; little boys peel!

 

[JFK_USA]

Read the letter from the OP again.

Yup, still just a boycott. Exactly the kind of free market mechanism Milton Friedman argued works better than government regulations.

Surprised to see alleged free market conservatives getting their panties in a twist over it.

I don't what know what to say, I don’t like being snarky, so, I’ll just say it appears to me manifold, your comprehension skills are off, I’ll break it down;

As such, we are contacting you now to request your support.

In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining,
please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the
goods and services provided by your company.

And they even promise a quid pro quo. In addition to not boycotting them...

However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership

So businessmen can work as a partnership but not unions? Thats ridiculous. Republicans hate freedoms, thats obvious.

 

[mnbasketball]

5000 to educate a student in 1970 would be 27,000 in 2009, but it's only between 9,000/11.000

Current data is only available till 2009. $27600.00 in the year 2009 has the same "purchase power" as $5000 in the year 1970.

The 2009 observation is preliminary and will change.



Source note for "Purchasing Power of Money"




Another Computation?


















Citation
Lawrence H. Officer and Samuel H. Williamson, "Purchasing Power of Money in the United States from 1774 to 2010," MeasuringWorth, 2009.


URL: Measuring Worth - Measures of worth, inflation rates, saving calculator, relative value, worth of a dollar, worth of a pound, purchasing power, gold prices, GDP, history of wages, average wage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please let us know if and how this discussion has assisted you in using our calculators.


HOME
ABOUT US
CONTACT US
USER GUIDE
GLOSSARY & FAQ