You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

Axlin16 wrote:

You're crazy. I've seen 50+ year old doctors go out of work and STAY out of work actively looking man.

I don't know what world you live in.


Lemme guess, your next retort will be - "but were they good doctors?"

roll

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

buzzsaw wrote:

I never said anything about getting a job.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

Axlin16 wrote:

So what the hell does 'good decisions' mean?

I took that as a reference to either A) good education, B) building up your resume young, or C) a combo of both.


My point is, i've seen all of the above, and the person is totally clean, no social problems (i.e. substance abuse, poor worker), all that stuff AND be doctors and not be able to get a job.

And before you say, "well, they could've got a job, just not what they are qualified for"... a guy I know couldn't even get a job as a taxi driver and was a doctor.

I knew another guy that was a doctor working at Wal-Mart.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

buzzsaw wrote:

So what happened to the money they made as doctors?

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

Axlin16 wrote:

Divorces

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

buzzsaw wrote:

Bad decisions

mitchejw
 Rep: 131 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

mitchejw wrote:

What part getting married or divorced? I see what you're saying...you're saying hoorah for me and fuck everyone else. I see it pretty good alright.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

buzzsaw wrote:

That's not at all what I'm saying, but it's pretty telling about you that you chose to interpret it that way.

mitchejw
 Rep: 131 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

mitchejw wrote:

No...I think that's exactly what you're saying...was it being married that you objected to? I don't quite get it...

What I saw you say before...and what you continue to say is...I did it...why can't everyone else? and if you can't...well you must have fucked up.

Communist China
 Rep: 130 

Re: The battle of Wisconsin-labor unions

If the government was capable of truly helping out those is need, I would be more supportive of measures to do so. But government is NOT immune to the forces of economics, despite what it claims it can shield people from that the private sector cannot.

Terrible things happen, but injecting government hurts as often as it helps. If you don't like a permanent underclass - don't support welfare, which is its main cause. If you don't like corporatism, don't support regulatory agencies, which inevitably get captured by the most powerful people in the industry, resulting in corruption, perverse incentives, and discriminate heavily against new businesses.

The State solution isn't a solution at all, and as much as we would like to see beneficial collectivism, ultimately government can only consume, not produce. They're takers before givers, and when they try to print money to avoid raising taxes, they devalue our savings and hurt our credit. The application of force (i.e. government) freezes things in time, but progress is always about the future, not the present.

Wisconsin, like a lot of states, is broke. They made promises they couldn't keep, and sadly people believed them.

This event having made me think a lot of it, I'm against so-called 'Right to Work' laws but only because of the employer's right to choose to deal exclusively with a union.

Mitch, should federal employees be unionized too?

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB