Craig24 Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 With 68% of precincts reporting, Governor Walker leads by 15 points. That is triple the margin of his win two years ago. Governor's Victory Deals Costly Blow to Organized Labor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 That's good news. I think the recent recession has made people aware that (while nobody was looking) state and municipal government employees were getting raises that were not justified by market conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FeatherFall Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 There were also four Republican Senate seats up for recall. All but three survived, so one Democratic Senator will hold the office for the remainder of the recess between now and January when the Senate reconvenes... In the meantime there will be another election. I stay in touch with a lot of my old "progressive" friends from the area, and their lamentations are funny. My favorite goes something like this, "It looks like money can buy anything - even a state!" I laugh because I don't know a single person who was convinced to vote one way or another by the campaigning. Conventional wisdom says that the money changes voter turnout, not ballot choices, and high voter turnout increases the confidence that people in the state actually like who was elected. Here is an interesting irony. In the debates, Tom Barrett (Scott Walker's opponent) would laud FDR as one of America's greatest presidents. Apparently he missed the fact that FDR didn't think public employees should be allowed to have unions. utabintarbo and softwareNerd 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 I've heard that "bought election" rhetoric from them. It is ok when Obama "bought" his presidency, however. It gives me hope that 36% of union households voted for Walker. That's very telling. My wife is an involuntary member of AFSCME and would love to see the reforms that Walker is making. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 While public unions are bullshit, I oppose right to work laws and think most libertarian, Objectivist and generally classical liberal support of them is confusing. FeatherFall 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapereAude Posted June 6, 2012 Report Share Posted June 6, 2012 (edited) Are you sure you fully understand them? While in a fully capitalist society they (RTW laws) would not be necessary, if the system currently in place is the one one has to work in RTW laws are better than nothing. The bulk of RTW is that unions cannot force a person to join and union cannot force an employer to fire an employee for refusal to join. Edit to add: I'm not saying RTW laws are ideal or perfect- just that they are better than the currently available alternatives. Edited June 6, 2012 by SapereAude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 The right-to-work is one of those controls that has been created to counteract the effect of other controls. When a union is formed following certain government-specified procedures, the employer and the employees who did not want that union are forced to recognize it. Having forced the employer and all employees to negotiate with a union formed against their wishes, it is not wrong to restrict the things that such a union can negotiate. Such a restriction is just a counter-balance. It would be nice to remove the laws that force unions on us. However, since that is not going to happen, having some restrictions on what unions may force upon us is an extremely good idea. FeatherFall 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whYNOT Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 So if I understand right, this is "open shop" under another name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiral Architect Posted June 7, 2012 Report Share Posted June 7, 2012 So if I understand right, this is "open shop" under another name? How about "Open Shop The Hard Way"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 The right-to-work is one of those controls that has been created to counteract the effect of other controls. When a union is formed following certain government-specified procedures, the employer and the employees who did not want that union are forced to recognize it. Having forced the employer and all employees to negotiate with a union formed against their wishes, it is not wrong to restrict the things that such a union can negotiate. Such a restriction is just a counter-balance. It would be nice to remove the laws that force unions on us. However, since that is not going to happen, having some restrictions on what unions may force upon us is an extremely good idea. Some libertarians have argued that business has also been given privileges over labor with the NLRA and other various regulations. Why not focus on taking out government-enforced privileges instead of just piling on regulatoin to a complex problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Some libertarians have argued that business has also been given privileges over labor with the NLRA and other various regulations. Why not focus on taking out government-enforced privileges instead of just piling on regulatoin to a complex problem?That would be ideal. I assume anyone on this forum would advocate allowing business-owners and employees to enter into whatever contracts they agree. Some employers may agree to unions where every employee has to be a member; others may say they will fire anyone who they suspect of being sympathetic to unionization. I doubt any Objectivist would suggest that a system with countervailing controls is better than one without controls. However, when one has to choose between a system with certain controls and one with a different set of controls, it is fine to prefer one to the other. SapereAude and JASKN 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.