Time to vent.... and I'm not talking Coors Beer

[EBSB52]

Poorly managed companies go out of business

No we call those defense contractors.

(well... until recently).

Don't forget the rest of that quote.

If you're trying to poke fun at my employment, as you have in the past, understand that my employer's largest business unit operates in the commercial arena.

And yes, the DOD, and government in general, acquisitions process if FUBAR and seldom represents a good value proposition for taxpayers.

Let's be real, DOD contarcts are a form of corporate welfare.

[EBSB52]

Go find where I poked fun at your job. I was refering to my last job working as a supervisor for 19 babies err. union employees. Id take maybee 5 to work for me any day, the rest were useless. That was for one of the big DOD contractors.

WOOPS... Sorry. I misread you. For some reason I thought that post was EBS instead of you.

I'll blame unfamiliarity with the new forum scheme to reduce my loss of cool points.

You're unable to agree with the dictionary when it defines, "Imperialism," maybe that explains your inability to understand a clearly-stated point.

[The Dark Side of Will]

shit, you were quote deleting posts long enough to have no cool points left.

That's the interesting thing about cool points. I can't read my own balance.

[The Dark Side of Will]

I knew I could count on you for incomplete data. This is how Republicans fool the uneducated masses; lie.

Pots and kettles. You say "Unionization is on the rise" while not bothering to mention it is from all-time lows. In the stock market, that's called a dead cat bounce and is frequently followed by lower lows.

IIRC, the UAW has tried to organize in multiple assembly plants in US locations other than Detroit and failed miserably almost everywhere. I guess workers at those plants just don't need higher wages. There couldn't possibly be any other reason than Ronald Reagan, could there? Workers just must not want to make more money. We all know that's just the only thing that Unions do, isn't it? They are purely a force for good and only evil people oppose them? What the fuck else in human endeavor has EVER had that description? You refuse to acknowledge the downside of unionization... and then accuse the rest of us of intellectual dishonesty... Seriously dude, get real.

And while you're berating us, why don't you come up with a rebuttal other than name calling on your favorite political whipping boys?

[p8ntman442]

Yes DOD contractors are corporate welfare. Guess what, they are also Solely UNION based labor. In fact, outside contractors can not even work on the premesis unless they are union.


SO logically you agree that unions are extensions of corporate welfare.

I had a guy go to the hospital on me, with a mild heart attack.
He called from the hospital needing a ride back as he was recently divorced and had no family local, and no wallet on him to pay for a cab, or change to use a payphone. He had to ask the nurses for a phone to borrow.

My Boss instructed me I could not go pick him up and that company policy was that he take a cab, and the cab be paid at he gate when they reached the site.

I called the Union president, who had every right to leave the site at any time for any reason. He refused to go pick the guy up. Hows that for union brotherhood and looking out for each other.

When the ambulance bill was sent to him, I took it and had it payed immediatly.

So Managment is not out to get you or take your bennefits. And the union is not out to help you. They want your dues and to milk the company for all the money they can. the guys who are loudmouths get voted in out of intimidation, and then do whatever they want.

Government is hard to agree with, but Unions are equally greedy, selfish, and corrupt.

[EBSB52]

.

Yes DOD contractors are corporate welfare. Guess what, they are also Solely UNION based labor. In fact, outside contractors can not even work on the premesis unless they are union.

There are a few seperate issues here, let me divide them.

1) Guess what, they are also Solely UNION based labor. I was at the Mesa LOngbow facility and they are non-union, BIG TIME. I'm sure many Texas DOD-based facilities are also non-union. That is not true at all, which is why these places are moving out of blue states and into red states.

2) In fact, outside contractors can not even work on the premesis unless they are union. That's a pretty broad brush, I bet some union shops have outside vendors that are not union. Furthermore, in right to work states, that wouldn't be true. Right to work merely means that you cannot be compelled to join a labor union to work for the company, so that is not true but for the few closed shop staes with strong unions, which are few anymore.

I don't think most people understand unionixation which is why there is some discord towards them. Don't you think employers should have to follow federal law and allow workplaces to organize if the workers agree?

SO logically you agree that unions are extensions of corporate welfare.

No, they are an example of strength in numbers. Mesa Boeing is corporate welfare, all they manufacture/rebuild is the Longbow. They are strict non-union, but are corp welfare. The variable here is not being a union shop or not, the indep variable is that they are funded by the gov w/o any real mandated target to perform......endless cash w/o performance = welfare/corp welfare. When I worked for Rockwell on the B-1B I called it Rockwellfare, they would hire mothers out of the welfare lines to work there.

I had a guy go to the hospital on me, with a mild heart attack.
He called from the hospital needing a ride back as he was recently divorced and had no family local, and no wallet on him to pay for a cab, or change to use a payphone. He had to ask the nurses for a phone to borrow.

My Boss instructed me I could not go pick him up and that company policy was that he take a cab, and the cab be paid at he gate when they reached the site.

I called the Union president, who had every right to leave the site at any time for any reason. He refused to go pick the guy up. Hows that for union brotherhood and looking out for each other.

When the ambulance bill was sent to him, I took it and had it payed immediatly.

So Managment is not out to get you or take your bennefits. And the union is not out to help you. They want your dues and to milk the company for all the money they can. the guys who are loudmouths get voted in out of intimidation, and then do whatever they want.

That's a lovely, lovely story, perhaps you could provide 1 more so we have a fair sample size of 2. I hope you realize that's sarcasm.

1) So your boss, a management person established company policy, not union policy. Just because you are union doesn't mean you can ignore company policy, but how is that the union's fault?

2) As for the union president not picking him up, he's not a babysitter and he may have been busy or just had a personal policy of not putting bandaids on everyone. If he was treated and released, it couldn't have been that bad. As well, we are receiving this info from a staunch non-union person, take it for what it's worth. Brotherhood doesn't mean you are actually sworn brothers in all aspects of life, you just have teh same agenda to support the same wage/benefit position.

3) You say management is not out to take your benefits, but it was a manager that told you not to go to the hospital, right? Did you forget to think about the liability? If I were your boss I would say the same thing because if I directed you to go pick him up and you got into a wreck, I/the company would be liable as you were on company-directed business. I'm not sure you understand liabilities that well.

4) The union is not out to help you individually, they are out to help the entire body, whcih is utilitarian. Again, I don't expect anyone in here to understand the dynamics of utilitarianism either. Unions help the individual by helping the masses. Wages are up and workplace mortaility rates are down in union states and you want to tell me that unions aren't here to help. Of course you won't comment on this, will you?


Government is hard to agree with, but Unions are equally greedy, selfish, and corrupt


A lot of that is true, but the outcome is that union members have a SUBSTANTIALLY better quality of life over non-union workers.

[p8ntman442]

ok, my bad, I thought all DOD was Union, I guess it was my former employer and the other three local ones that were all union that led me to believe the entirety was.


why do you think im so anti union.

Born and raised on a farm
non union card holder laborer
union card holder laborer
non union card holder supervisor
non union employee of small comapny <100 ppl >15M sales anually So small in personell.

A strong work ethic and my personal experiances on both sides of the fence allow me to form an educated opinion about the subject.

[DiggityBiggity]

How many times are you (EB) going to blame the "neo-cons" and the "Republicans"...

Clinton... Yeah, Clinton was WONDERFUL wasn't he... NAFTA, GATT, WTO... All these things helped you, right?

The Dot Com bubble... that was REALLY Clinton (you know, since Gore CREATED the Internet)

This entire thread is bullshit... I just wasted an hour of my life.

WAKE UP... The plan is larger than REPUBLICANS...

[EBSB52]

.

ok, my bad, I thought all DOD was Union, I guess it was my former employer and the other three local ones that were all union that led me to believe the entirety was.

That's cool, and I would say the majority is. Boeing in Seattle and Witchita are, Washington is a right to work state and I believe Witchita is as well,not sure tho. It's hard to say what % are union and which are not. Most of the waste with military contracts has to do with billing rather than so-called lazy workers tho, several hundred dollars for nothing, touch (labor) employees bill out at > 100/hr, whereas in civilian acft repair stations they bill at 45/hr if you can believe that. Engineering must be twice that. The scam is between the US Gov and the contractor for the most part, they're just not efficient.

why do you think im so anti union.

Born and raised on a farm
non union card holder laborer
union card holder laborer
non union card holder supervisor
non union employee of small comapny <100 ppl >15M sales anually So small in personell.

That's fine, I would never want to impose a union on anyone, which is why I oppose closed shops states in theory. Would I vote that way? No, but I can appreciate a person for not wanting to participate in a union, but it's hard to explain anti-union sentiment in right to work states where shops have unions and virtually 100% membership. Even anti-union people realize that union representation and the use of their lawyers if needed is a bargain at 2 hours wages per month. Also, unions in small shops is kinda weird anyway, I see their neccessity in large shops.

A strong work ethic and my personal experiances on both sides of the fence allow me to form an educated opinion about the subject.

Yea, and with union people being a bunch of wastoids it's amazing that anything gets done. I mean, Rockwell in Palmdale is where the B1-B was made and we managed to get it built, so how is that statement fair? We had no real work ethic? That assertion is just a figment to create a point. You think there wasn't plenty of waste out at Boeing in Mesa on the Longbow?

The pro vs anti union argument reminds me of the death penalty argument. Pro DP people constantly rely on the scum that needs to go and ignores the innocent people that have been wrongly executed/jailed for life. When you look at partial facts anything is possible. How about Boeing slashing my tires, security refusing to play the videotapes? Unions, in large corporations, protect people, the good people as well as the lazy ones. Why do you think the Long Beach, Ca facility has virtually closed? Fascist corporate America looks for strongholds like Arizona with scant if any employee protection for which to set up manufacturing. In Cali the worker has rights, here really nothing. Think it's a fluke? Call it protecting the lazy people and I'll be opposed to the DP, as I want to protect innocent people (get the shift?).

[EBSB52]

.

Code: Select all

How many times are you (EB) going to blame the "neo-cons" and the "Republicans"...

Until someone can establish otherwise. Reagan and GW Bush fired or threatened to fire people for striking. Bush kille dteh Ergonomics Bill. Bush rewrote the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act. BO just undid the legislative acts of Bush. Can you show me acts where the neo-cons have helped and the Dems have hurt teh worker in the US?

Clinton... Yeah, Clinton was WONDERFUL wasn't he... NAFTA, GATT, WTO... All these things helped you, right?

Those were sytemic. Think I was happy with Clinton for signing NAFTA? Not that it was to increase trade, but it was a tax break and regulation break for big business, something that you are for. I'm surprised a Libertarian like you is against NAFTA since it deregulated. Perhaps you would like to explain that. But so understand that NAFTA was systemic, GHWB initiated it and Clinton signed it. I say it was a tax cut because there have been Maquiladoras around for decades, so the trade was nothing new, just the deregualtion, de-taxation was, something you advocate if the argument suits you at that time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maquilladora

During the later half of the sixties, maquiladora industries rapidly expanded both geographically and economically and by 1985, had become Mexico’s second largest source of income from foreign exports, behind oil.[3] Since 1973, maquiladoras have also accounted for nearly half of Mexico’s export assembly.[3] Between 1995 and 2000, exports of assembled products in Mexico tripled, and the rate of the industry’s growth amounted to about one new factory per day.[4] By the late twentieth century, the industry accounted for approximately 25 percent of Mexico’s gross domestic product, and 17 percent of total Mexican employment.[5] However, profits generated from maquiladoras are typically sent back to the United States, or other investor-based countries, and therefore, maquiladoras do not promote direct economic development within Mexico.


This will probably shed more light on what NAFTA was all about, it was for American corporation, not for Mexico, not for free trade, it was for the benifit for the US corporation.

The Dot Com bubble... that was REALLY Clinton (you know, since Gore CREATED the Internet)

The dot-com bubble generally just affected NASDAQ, a ricky venture anyway. And considering there was techinically no recession, as there were not 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth, the bubble burst was very limited to the tech industry. When Clinton took office the Dow was 3300, he left office it was 10,600. Even if you count the steepest drop after he left, after 911 the DJ was still 8200, so under Clinton the market enjoyed 4900 points growth, even if we use neo-con logic, more reasonable logic bring us us to believe that the market enjoyed 7,300 points growth. The DJ was 9600 on 9/11 and 8200 on 9/21, so that drop is directly related to the 9/11 disaster, not normal market activity.

This entire thread is bullshit... I just wasted an hour of my life.

What else would you be doing, smoking dope? I'm sure you found time to do that. Also, if this thread is such, BS, then why did you fail to answer my main points? The BS is the fact that you cherry picked the issues to answer. As you see tho, neo-cons do that.

WAKE UP... The plan is larger than REPUBLICANS

The plan? Everything isn't a conspiracy, put down the bong.

[EBSB52]

I knew I could count on you for incomplete data. This is how Republicans fool the uneducated masses; lie.

?

Pots and kettles. You say "Unionization is on the rise" while not bothering to mention it is from all-time lows.

Since you're constantly too dishonest to post what I wrote, I will.

Also, union membership is on the rise: http://www.boston.com/business/articles ... 0_in_mass/

Labor unions in Massachusetts added nearly 80,000 members last year and significantly increased the share of workers they represent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Union membership grew to 458,000, or about 15.7 percent of workers in 2008, up from 379,000, or about 13.2 percent, in 2007. Nationally, union membership rose to 12.4 percent of workers from 12. 1 percent in 2007.


So you're saying that the fact that union membership is rising is negated by the fact that it is from all-time lows. Actually I doubt all time lows, since that would be as unionization started, probably in teh early 1900's. What you mean to say is since the 1930's, it was at all time lows. Again, constant exadgeration, misrepresentations, ommisions, etc from the forum liar. Sucks to be a neo-con, doesn't it? And if it came from recent lows, now has rebounded, it must be due to fucked working conditions, benefits, medical, etc, huh? Bad management creates unionization, so therefore the workers must be fed-up; kinda refutes your point.

In the stock market, that's called a dead cat bounce and is frequently followed by lower lows.

Oh goody, more prognoctication from the forum liar.

IIRC, the UAW has tried to organize in multiple assembly plants in US locations other than Detroit and failed miserably almost everywhere. I guess workers at those plants just don't need higher wages.

Or management spends millions to keep these unions out. For yot to draw a conclusion based on some transitional matter is so Will of you. If you think the American worker is content then you are looking at your corporate welfare paycheck thru rose-colored glasses. The american worker is apathetic, stupid and all those things, but content is not in the group.

There couldn't possibly be any other reason than Ronald Reagan, could there?

Gee I don't know, when a president fires you for threatening to strike, I guess that could have an affect. Was that Carter? Hmmm, no. Was that CLinton? Hmmm, no. I'm thinking that was the fascist diaper-wearing one. Oh, and when GWB threatened to void the contracts of union workers if they struck, well, that was out of the page of fascist pig Ronnie. Do you want to pretend that teh American worker has rights? You are just a dishonst dork, Will, cry me a river, but you are just not honest.

Workers just must not want to make more money. We all know that's just the only thing that Unions do, isn't it?

They protect all kinds of benefits as well as seniority so when worthless watses of skin like you get old you have protections instead of dump the old fucker for a new one.

They are purely a force for good and only evil people oppose them? What the fuck else in human endeavor has EVER had that description? You refuse to acknowledge the downside of unionization... and then accuse the rest of us of intellectual dishonesty... Seriously dude, get real.

Those are your words, I've demonstrated in several threads how unions have a dark side, but the benefits are worth it. And if you bothered to look at the OP of this thread you would have the clue that my problem is when fascist garbage like your heros Reagan and GWB, intervein into union matters even tho they have no legal place in those matters. All I'm saying is to let the federal law be maintained and allow these workers to organize if they wish. Let the companies lock them out if they wish. This free market horseshit you would preach is really meant in a one-sided fashion, more of your dishonestly. These so-called fagotty Europeans are far tougher than Americans. American workers lay down and bend over like fags, Europeans strike and win. Then teh redneck neo-con trash calls them pussies; what a joke. The American worker is so brainwashed into thinking laying down for corporate America is tough, resisting is weak.

And while you're berating us, why don't you come up with a rebuttal other than name calling on your favorite political whipping boys?

Cry me a river you tough anti-union American. There are plenty of rebuttals I've posted and you ignore, I'm just advocating the right for workers to organize be undisturbed by the company. If the company interferes then there will be a union installed automatically, participation voluntary. Yea, if that were established you would see union membership be at > 50% of all major companies, probably 75%.

Before you pipe in with more idiocy, answer this: Should workers have the right to organize, strike, etc and be undisturbed by the company?

[p8ntman442]

yes.

Should they be cooperative with non union managment?

[EBSB52]

yes.

Should they be cooperative with non union managment?

Not sure totally what ur answering to or stating.

[The Dark Side of Will]

Cry me a river you tough anti-union American.

Cry *me* a river, you bitter wasted old man. Every vice and failing of which you accuse the rest of us, you demonstrate in spades. Your arguments are laughable when you commit the fallacies against which you rail.
You bring no value here.

Clinton... Yeah, Clinton was WONDERFUL wasn't he... NAFTA, GATT, WTO... All these things helped you, right?

Those were sytemic. Think I was happy with Clinton for signing NAFTA? Not that it was to increase trade, but it was a tax break and regulation break for big business, something that you are for.

[...]

The plan? Everything isn't a conspiracy, put down the bong.

You think that Diggity's *FOR* big business? Take your own advice and put down the bong.

[EBSB52]

Cry me a river you tough anti-union American.

Clinton... Yeah, Clinton was WONDERFUL wasn't he... NAFTA, GATT, WTO... All these things helped you, right?

Those were sytemic. Think I was happy with Clinton for signing NAFTA? Not that it was to increase trade, but it was a tax break and regulation break for big business, something that you are for.

[...]

The plan? Everything isn't a conspiracy, put down the bong.

.

Cry *me* a river, you bitter wasted old man. Every vice and failing of which you accuse the rest of us, you demonstrate in spades.

Old man? Funny thing is I could undoubtedly outdo you in anything physical, with your lilly, ass-sitting-in-a-chair all day ass. You can fool some of the people here, but I worked with the likes of Boeing engineers for years, I get you, many here only surmise. Funny how you cry abput berrating then you follow me, you're playing my game = you're inept.

As far as your game, you don't adress the issues, at least when I call you a government-corpoarte welfare recipient, I also address all of the issues. What next Will, are you going to critique spelling or grammar? You are w/o an argument; you lose. I really wish you would go back and address some issues but it will never happen. You should change your name to ,"won't."

And which vices or failures do I demonstrate? I guess it's just another Bush-loving neo-con cliche w/o substance.

Your arguments are laughable when you commit the fallacies against which you rail.

Demonstarte them in detail. Of course you could quit the ad hominems and actually address the issues. Of course what can you brag of, defending the benefits of a Bush and Cheney? Defending how it is great to have a government that brags of a free market, then fires people for threatening to strike or threatening to void union contracts? Of course you turn to adhominem, that's the ultimate fallacy; free market then grossly interfere with commerce in regard to employment. You are a joke.

You bring no value here.

Why, because I don't fall in line with your pecking order like P-F-F? Why not get your cronies together and cast me out then, so you can prove you're just like them over there? You support all of my neo-con and other allegations when you fail to concede to obvious points. It's painful, but act like a man and admit that Bush is a failure. The electorate really fucked America by so-called electing him twice. I can admit the failures of Clinton, a pres I did not vote for but generally support. I can demonstrate his actions and the subsequent results, rather than show my partisan followership. Quit being such an ideologue and lay support for your candidates/representatives. Spell it out so we can critique it....that is the scientific model for which I assume you support, being an engineer, a very conmpetent one as I see it. See, that's the difference between guys like you and me, I see you for the positives and the negatives, I see a sharp engineer that has been brainwashed probably by his parents and by the military, so he sticks to failed beliefs because that's what he's supposed to do. If you dislike a person for a major trait, politics, etc, then they're all fucked up in everything they do and believe. I was a registered ideological Republican at the time I came to that realization, the realization that I was buying into that mentality, it really made me sick, so I chabged beliefs to an objective one. I have beliefs from both sides, perhaps a 3rd side if we consider Libertarians relevant, so I don't "promise" a vote or support for any of them, unlike probably most people in America. EXAMPLE: I voted for Napalitano for AZ governor both times, liked what she did until the last year when she orchestrated the freeway photocams at all, but esp for teh reason to fix the AZ budget. She leaves to go to Washington, enter Jan Brewer, Republican, I think she has some great ideas, she wanst to trash the photocams, consider tax increases in some areas and other good ideas. I would vote for her in a second; would you ever vote for a Dem? Hardly. I feel sory for people stuck to their imposed, rigid beliefs.

You think that Diggity's *FOR* big business? Take your own advice and put down the bong.

He's not directly for big business, but being for total or virtual deregulation IS being for anyone with money, hence, big business. Add that to being against any social svs and that lays a platform for a tyranny for the rich and against the poor. So the effected outcome is to be pro-big business when you want to lift most or all regulations and let the market, hence the people manipulating the market have total control. Bizzare you would differ from that seeing as how the market has been manipulated and trashed whilst in the hands of the businesses that manipulate it. Of course earning 125-150k/yr as a product of the military industrial complex I don't see you cpmplaining. Brian would have your job eliminated, as military spending under his platform would be minimized by a lot, a platform Brian and I share.

Tell me, how is NAFTA not deregulation? Tell me, how is it that Libertarian ideology not about deregulation?

[p8ntman442]

Before you pipe in with more idiocy, answer this: Should workers have the right to organize, strike, etc and be undisturbed by the company?

Yes.

Should the be cooperative with non union managment?

[The Dark Side of Will]

Funny how you cry abput berrating then you follow me, you're playing my game = you're inept.

I type two lines. You type two hundred.

Who's playing whose game?

[EBSB52]

Before you pipe in with more idiocy, answer this: Should workers have the right to organize, strike, etc and be undisturbed by the company?

Yes.

Should the be cooperative with non union managment?

As a note, I directed this to Will, not you.

To answer yours, all management, to my knowledge, is non-union, so simply asking if union workers be required to cooperate with management, I would say that they are as long as it doesn't interfere with union and company regulations. If management asks the employee to operate outside of that parameter I say no, the employee can disregard management and contact their union rep.

This is easy, the US is very divisive, there is a war between worker and management and the latter have and are winning. When you have a nation where healthcare is a luxury, employee rights are slim and the chief executive interviens into labor issues where he has no position, you have an authoritarian nation to say the least, then we scoff at China for being oppressive, really funny.

If this country starts to act as they speak, ensure all have basic healthcare, solve homelessness, etc, then we can start to act as 1 nation of people, until then it's division as usual. An example, I have O- blood, the good stuff, compatable with I believe all other blood types, I wouldn't consider giving blood so some slimy corporation/hospital can make momey from it. If we had socialized meds I would feel it a duty to my fellow citizen to donate at least twice a year. That so-called (by neo-con trash) sissy European group of nations for the most part has a 1-year compulsory military for men, the so-called tough US has no such thing, I wish we had compulsory military. See, this is where people come together and share the load, reap the benefit by everyone chipping in, socialism. The US is extremely antisocial, but most Americans aren't intelligent or worldy enough to understand this, and the right wing needs those guys, pumps them full of rhetoric/cliche and exploits their vote to use against the dummies.

I know this is more info than you bargauned for, but this is a comprehesive explaination of why I feel the way I do about the people having a say rather than to be good little sheep and bend over for the superiors they fear. Insane how total submission is viewed as tough in the US, most countries call it cowardice.

[EBSB52]

Funny how you cry abput berrating then you follow me, you're playing my game = you're inept.

I type two lines. You type two hundred.

Who's playing whose game?

Are you not following along? Have you not seen my posts over the years? I'm the most long-winded SOB I know, it is my character to type long posts, so your point is beyond foolish.


You trype a few words as what else are you going to do, actually stick with the topic here? Defend your guys GWB and fascist Ronnie? Illustrate the grave data from your folks? Hardly, you misdirect the issue and try to fool everyone into forgeting what this thread is about. And Brian, did he address my point about how NAFTA is right inline with Libertarian agendas? Of course not, you guys work your ideologies from the top down; decide you want to associate with Republicans/Libertarians then try to justify why you feel that way. Brilliant.

[Shaun41178(2)]

NAFTA was passed by clinton and right after that at on of jobs went to mexico. Thank the dems for that Eb.

Oh and its obvious you won't behappy with anything untill you can sit back on your lazy ass and collect welfare, and get free healthcare and meds, govt paid for home, exempt from taxes, etc. etc.

Get it through that old head of yours. You don't get a free ride.