public unions versus the public

[Frediano]

It was sex with the eagle, Look! A squirrel!...

[caroljane]

I'll think about it. I dated an eagle once... maybe they have evolved over the past three decades?

[caroljane]

Of course I have nothing, and am nothing under your philosophy and its well-defined terms and conditions. But I bet you laughed at the Nothing. Laughing at nothing is one of the first Signs....

[caroljane]

When you only have spelling, you can still provide services to those who don't have it. When you misspell in two languages, yet obviously should write a bestseller (I agree with moralist on this), you will need a better spellchecker (your grammar is not bad) and human ones are the best, but no one would expect you to jettison your principles and hire one.

[caroljane]

Where is Xray when I need her? I may have found the Secret B at last, but I fear I have not made a good impression on him.

[Mikee]

“What makes people feel good on the left, really, at the roots, what makes people feel great on the left, is a sense of unearned moral superiority. It’s all they care about,” Ben Shapiro tells me during my latest interview. “They wake up in the morning and a lot of them can’t point to accomplishments. A lot of them can’t point to things that they’ve done that are worthwhile, but they can point to you. And they can say, well, at least I’m not you. You know, you’re the bad guy, I’m the good guy.”

Interview: Ben Shapiro Talks Bullies

[caroljane]

It is feeling good left right and centre that matters, although apparently not to Mr. Shapiro.

[caroljane]

And uh, moral superiority is kind of central to Objectivist philosophy, as is the connection between what you think and what you feel.

[Mikee]

And uh, moral superiority is kind of central to Objectivist philosophy, as is the connection between what you think and what you feel.

Yes, objectivist's view objective reality, reason, self interest and free market capitalism as superior to the alternatives. This website exists because of people who have a belief in those principles, and is frequented by adherents of those principles. Why are you here? Have you had a single new idea or changed your mind about anything since you were about 10 years old and realized you had a "way with words" and could pretty much talk your way around anything? You can make people run for cover but have you ever convinced anyone of anything? And really believe it yourself? You are a sideshow, nothing more. Of your own choosing. Perhaps you think you can bait people into being rude to you and getting moderated. You have the skills for it. That's your big win, isn't it? Pathetic.

[caroljane]

And uh, moral superiority is kind of central to Objectivist philosophy, as is the connection between what you think and what you feel.

Yes, objectivist's view objective reality, reason, self interest and free market capitalism as superior to the alternatives. This website exists because of people who have a belief in those principles, and is frequented by adherents of those principles. Why are you here? Have you had a single new idea or changed your mind about anything since you were about 10 years old and realized you had a "way with words" and could pretty much talk your way around anything? You can make people run for cover but have you ever convinced anyone of anything? And really believe it yourself? You are a sideshow, nothing more. Of your own choosing. Perhaps you think you can bait people into being rude to you and getting moderated. You have the skills for it. That's your big win, isn't it? Pathetic.

[caroljane]

"Why are you here"?

I like it here.

[caroljane]

As to the last part of your post, you are psychologising me, I think unfairly. I do not write to bait, and I have never encountered the moderation process here and know nothing about it. I absolutely know that nobody should ever be moderating for insulting me, as I have never been insulted in a way I perceive to be personal or outside the bounds of heated debate, and anyway it is part of the Secret Plan to elevate Flame Warriors to the Best They an Be.

[moralist]

"Why are you here"?

I like it here.

...and I like you being here. : )

Different views are good because they stimulate lively entertaining discussions. And just for the record, you have never upset or offended me in any way. Agreement is never the goal, but rather it's each of us stating our view and clearly describing how it is different from the view we did not choose.

I also enjoy your wit. You make remarkably good use of the half you possess. ; )

Greg

[caroljane]

And so do you moralist!

- Yang

[dldelancey]

I'm just hanging out, enjoying this discussion from the sidelines. Don't mind me. I only wanted to pop in and point out that dear Fred is already an author, although I think he's still working on the bestselling part. I'm anxiously awaiting his next work. In the meantime, I recommend the below:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=running%20through%20the%20dark

[Mikee]

As to the last part of your post, you are psychologising me, I think unfairly. I do not write to bait, and I have never encountered the moderation process here and know nothing about it. I absolutely know that nobody should ever be moderating for insulting me, as I have never been insulted in a way I perceive to be personal or outside the bounds of heated debate, and anyway it is part of the Secret Plan to elevate Flame Warriors to the Best They an Be.

Frankly, that's all I got (psychologizing). I'm afraid I now consider socialists of all stripes are suffering under some kind of collective delusion. I don't blame the run of the mill person who simply believes things that are not true because of listening to a lifetime of nonsense. You believe, for instance, that "free market", "objectivists", don't care about the "little guy" delight in their misfortune and perhaps wish them dead or out of the way. Because you "care" about the "little guy" that makes you morally superior and justifies the use of force against "the rich" who wouldn't help anyone if they weren't forced to. NO AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY will dissuade you from this point of view. This makes you a bigot, by the way. Same thing with 2nd amendment rights and handgun ownership, NO AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY will dissuade you from the point of view that gun ownership by lawful citizens should be forcibly restricted. Conveniently, the evidence contains statistical facts, but that's mathematics which has nothing to do with feelings so is irrelevant to your point of view.

You do bait. You don't answer questions directly, you evade, you go off on irrelevant asides, you change the subject, you mock. You cover practically every thread with your banter. You are obviously entertaining. But entertainment is not the primary purpose I'm here, not sure about others. And I particularly like Fred.

[caroljane]

I do not know any run of the mill persons or little guys, and I do not collectivize free-marketers in the way that you do.

I certainly am here primarily to entertain myself, interacting with people who are smarter than I and know about things I do not know about, which is to me a form of entertainment. You and Fred have not provided me with any new basic information, but fleshed out theories I was already familiar with. If I have entertained anybody else besides myself I am overjoyed because that is a big part of my own entertainment.

What part of "Online Community" do you not get?

[caroljane]

And as to Fred I kind of like him too, though probably you will not believe that. I like people who live their beliefs however much I think their beliefs are wrong. I have a personal dislike of gloating and bragging, but in the sum total of a person this is not very important.

[caroljane]

As this thread started out about unions, I remember something Fred wrote, "Do you know everybody?" And of course I don't , but I do know a great many union members and leaders. You will be surprised to hear that they are all individuals. Some are intellectuals. All of them, that I ever met or knew personally, had actually thought about the theories and practices on which labour relations are based. Very few were Marxists or interested in mass wealth redistribution. They were interested in Toronto, Canada, here and now.If they can no longer provide a valid service to enough people, they know they will no longer factor in the economy. Sorry, the economies.

[moralist]

You do bait. You don't answer questions directly, you evade, you go off on irrelevant asides, you change the subject, you mock. You cover practically every thread with your banter.

I regard those qualities you just described as a personal challenge for me to remain centered and focused when others are not.

You are obviously entertaining. But entertainment is not the primary purpose I'm here, not sure about others.

Guilty as charged. I enjoy visiting here as an entertaining interactive alternative to television. The cordial atmosphere here is quite pleasant.

And I particularly like Fred.

So do I.

Fred can really turn a phrase.

Reminds me Hedley Lamar of Blazing Saddles...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxf5GDZ_o1w

[Brant Gaede]

As to the last part of your post, you are psychologising me, I think unfairly. I do not write to bait, and I have never encountered the moderation process here and know nothing about it. I absolutely know that nobody should ever be moderating for insulting me, as I have never been insulted in a way I perceive to be personal or outside the bounds of heated debate, and anyway it is part of the Secret Plan to elevate Flame Warriors to the Best They an Be.

Frankly, that's all I got (psychologizing). I'm afraid I now consider socialists of all stripes are suffering under some kind of collective delusion. I don't blame the run of the mill person who simply believes things that are not true because of listening to a lifetime of nonsense. You believe, for instance, that "free market", "objectivists", don't care about the "little guy" delight in their misfortune and perhaps wish them dead or out of the way. Because you "care" about the "little guy" that makes you morally superior and justifies the use of force against "the rich" who wouldn't help anyone if they weren't forced to. NO AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY will dissuade you from this point of view. This makes you a bigot, by the way. Same thing with 2nd amendment rights and handgun ownership, NO AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY will dissuade you from the point of view that gun ownership by lawful citizens should be forcibly restricted. Conveniently, the evidence contains statistical facts, but that's mathematics which has nothing to do with feelings so is irrelevant to your point of view.

You do bait. You don't answer questions directly, you evade, you go off on irrelevant asides, you change the subject, you mock. You cover practically every thread with your banter. You are obviously entertaining. But entertainment is not the primary purpose I'm here, not sure about others. And I particularly like Fred.

Goodness, gracious! Why would anyone want Carol to change her mind about these things? It's useful to have her as a point of reference, like thorns on a rosebush. If you want to win an argument, stop arguing.

--Brant

[caroljane]

Mikee, I take exception to your calling me a bigot, which to the best of my conscious knowledge I am not. It was a "by the way" comment and I request you also by the way, to retract it.

[Selene]

Mikee:

Simple question.

Is there a purpose in a laissez faire society for individuals to form unions? Yes, or no?

A...

[Samson Corwell]

In my home city of Providence, RI, the pension system has been pushed to the verge of bankruptcy by the police and fire unions. In the early 90's, eight out of every ten police officers in the city retired on disability, which gave them a totally tax-free pension and health care for life with 5-6% compounding cost of living adjustments not tied to inflation (a doubling time of about 12 years). The nearby city of Central Falls actually did file for bankruptcy due to its pension obligations. The city of East Providence has been put into a bankruptcy-like receiver process, and Woonsocket is preparing to file shortly.

There have been a number of egregious cases in the news over the past few years - one "disabled" firefighter with an alleged shoulder injury was caught on camera lifting heavy weights in a local Gold's gym. After a city investigation, his disability was renewed and he continues to collect today. The implicit defense from apologists is typically that they "risk their lives" so they deserve to perpetrate whatever frauds they can get away with and the public should simply defer. Some actually continue to assert the disabilities are legitimate. I think these people are doing incredible damage to the public trust left in our society, but ultimately I blame the system which has created all the wrong incentives and fails to adequately safeguard against human nature.

Private unions aren't inherently better or worse than public unions, although the public unions can sometimes "elect their employer" and exacerbate what some call the "union life cycle." Unions bankrupted the U.S. steel, automotive, and airlines industries, as they are now bankrupting many of our municipalities. Making unions voluntary through right-to-work legislation solves many of the problems - turns out most workers want little to do with them when given the option. My wife and I save $1100/year in membership dues by not joining the unions in our workplaces. It's the mandatory nature of unions in most states and the special protections and privileges bestowed upon organized labor by the federal government that have created much of the problem.

Ayup. Shit like that is still going on around here.

[Samson Corwell]

Mikee:

Simple question.

Is there a purpose in a laissez faire society for individuals to form unions? Yes, or no?

A...

I'd say so.