Churches provide many benefits to the community; maybe non-members should be assessed for their non-participation and non-worship.
At the Freedom @ Work blog they suggest that Obama's job summit should have included more Right to Work laws:
- "For many years, U.S. Labor Department data have shown that states with Right to Work laws on the books have far faster private-sector job growth than states that do not protect employees from federal policies authorizing the termination of workers for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union.
Between 1995 and 2005, private-sector jobs in Right to Work states increased by a net 20.2%. That’s a 79% greater increase than the relatively small increase in private-sector jobs experienced by non-Right to Work states over this period. Link.
Posts
11 comments:
CO just had our first try at becoming a "right to work" state, but the unions campaigned heavily to scare everyone out of it. I have one friend who won't shop at a particular store because the owner supported the bill. sigh!
Funny, the bill wasn't trying to get rid of unions. It was just trying to give workers the option of not HAVING to be in a union.
I sure wish there was some sort of education requirement for voter registration. we have way too many uninformed voters out there.
Why some workers would feel the need for a Union to represent their positions is completely beyond me. Really, all those misguided people need do is put their well-being into the benevolent hands of the Captain's of Industry.
I disagree with both Jab and Renee. although we have too many uninformed voters who are easily led by "registration" and get out the vote groups, the alternative is worse. But its interesting that Mr. Jab Low can only think of Jim Crow. Motor Voter comes to my mind and manipulating illegals and union threats.
Mr. Heywood: I'm sure you think you're clever and cute, but you'll either change your "name" to post here, or I'll repost it for you. That's middle school stuff. Or maybe I'll just report you to blogger.com and they can track your ISP.
Mr. Heywood, wrote at 12/06 11:16
Speaking of uninformed voters, with the above wish, you have demonstrated that you would fit quite nicely into that group.
If you had any sense of history at all. You would know that in the not too distant past, many areas of our country did use methods similar to your absurd proposal to keep those they deemed not worthy of voting from doing so. While I know that the good Ol' days of the Jim Crow Laws still have a decided appeal to some. I'm still hopeful that most people are decent enough to be appalled by such a despicable idea. But then, who knows?
Well, Mr. Been There, though it shouldn't be necessary, I'll explain the reason I discussed Jim Crow and not Motor Voter. The reason is, because what they apply to are complete opposites. Jim Crow laws were used to deny people the vote and the Motor Voter Act is supposedly a method to extend the vote to more people.
So had the previous poster's wish been for an easier way to register people to vote, then discussing the Motor Voter Act would have been applicable. But since their expressed desire was to find a way to do just the reverse, suppress the vote. Mentioning that Jim Crow had, in the past, employed their aforementioned wish to restrict the vote was entirely appropriate.
Mr. Heywood: 12/07/2009 10:12 AM
Jim Crow and Motor Voter are flip sides of the same issue--both are intended to influence the outcome of voting.
Yes, Ohio has "fair share" requirements for teachers who don't join the union. It is partially rebated for the political activities of the union.
Columbus school teacher, union member.
I've just been informed that here in Manchester, Tennessee, non-union teachers are being charged union dues. I'm checking with our elected representatives to see what can be done to put a stop to this. No non-union teacher should be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment. This is just reprehensible and must be stopped.
Post a Comment