I think you should get disability from any job that screws you up. Hell I'm 100%VA disabled, and I still can't get SSDI after paying in for 25 years.
Also, military service is NOT the same as a regular job. If companies treated their employees the way we're treated execuives would be in prison. On Dec 11, 2012 5:56 PM, "Larry C. Lyons" <larrycly...@gmail.com> wrote: > > question then, > > why should I get the same benefits you're living on right now Tim? I > never served in the US military, but by the logic used by the right to > work legislation I should get the same benefits as you get for your > service. > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 5:13 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > It's called liberty. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Eric Roberts < > > ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> But how do you have something like that without a requirement to join? > Why > >> should workers who do not join benefit from the workers that did join > and > >> thus got the benefits of collective bargaining?? > >> > >> ------------------------------------ > >> Three Ravens Consulting > >> Eric Roberts > >> Owner/Developer > >> ow...@threeravensconsulting.com > >> tel: 630-486-5255 > >> fax: 630-310-8531 > >> http://www.threeravensconsulting.com > >> ------------------------------------ > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: LRS Scout [mailto:lrssc...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:08 AM > >> To: cf-community > >> Subject: Re: Mandatory Union Tax Ending in Michigan? > >> > >> > >> But we're talking about the government forcing a third party into the > >> process of two parties negotiating compensation. Like I said I don't > have > >> any problem having unions, we need collective bargaining, hell several > >> years > >> ago I suggested starting an IT union on this very list to represent the > >> interests of "exempt salaried" employees who regularly get screwed over. > >> > >> I just don't want to see it forced on anyone. when the government > becomes > >> involved in that process to my mind it steps far outside the bounds of > it's > >> responsibilities and powers. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com > >> >wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > Well, hell, if you are just going to take an arbitrary Libertarian > >> > stand point, then you have perfect free and voluntary association even > >> > with union representation because no one is requiring you to apply for > >> > or take a union-represented job. If the notion of a union is too > >> > odious to you, then don't apply for a union job. You still have self > >> ownership. > >> > > >> > Personally, I think that taking it that far is kinda ridiculous. But > >> > it is exactly true in the same reductive Libertarian logic as the > rest of > >> it. > >> > > >> > Judah > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:54 AM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > My statement is based on the fact that ALL LAW is based on the > >> > > monopoly > >> > on > >> > > the initiation and use of force in order to enforce said law. > >> > > > >> > > Every law on the books is only backed by someone with a gun and a > >> > > jail cell. We need to be more careful about what we decide rises to > >> > > that > >> > level. > >> > > > >> > > What about free and voluntary association, and self ownership? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Judah McAuley > >> > > <ju...@wiredotter.com > >> > > >wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > No one said anything about force, dude. I was talking about the > >> > structure > >> > > > of labor law. > >> > > > > >> > > > I do have some mad respect for the old Wobblies though. They were > >> > > > some > >> > > hard > >> > > > mofos. I don't think we need that now, I do think that things have > >> > > evolved > >> > > > to the point where union structure and power needs to be looked > at. > >> > > > > >> > > > That's not what these laws are intended for, however. If you start > >> > > > with > >> > > the > >> > > > premise that unions are bad, you aren't going to do a good job of > >> > > enacting > >> > > > reforms that make unions better. That simple. If you want to start > >> > > > from > >> > > the > >> > > > premise that unions are a good thing but need to be reigned in and > >> > > > make sure that they continue to be a force for good rather than > >> > > > evil, that's another matter. > >> > > > > >> > > > I feel the same way about corporations. Corporations are > >> > > > fundamentally > >> > a > >> > > > good thing. Left unchecked, however, the things that make them > >> > > > good can morph into structures that are capable of a great deal of > >> > > > harm. Unions > >> > > are > >> > > > much the same. > >> > > > > >> > > > Judah > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 8:40 AM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Yes those things can suck man, but is force really the way to > >> > > > > fight > >> > it? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:359118 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
