Friday, June 08, 2012
Why do unions do all the intimidating?
The AFL-CIO, UAW, AFSCME, SEIU, NEA / AFT, et al. have been dumping bazillions of dollars into our elections for decades. They have consistently advocated for candidates who are directly responsible for our nation's current fiscal crisis and stagnant economy. These groups, as far as I'm concerned, are bad for the country.
But bankrolling Dem campaigns is just the beginning of how they operate. These organizations base their operational effectiveness on intimidation and the subversion of independent thinking. How else does one describe a picket line? Will picketing workers respect the conscience of a co-worker who decides to cross the line? Sort of. If by respect you mean ongoing harrassment and shooting up her house.
Then there are the battles to organize non-union shops. Usually these groups need some % of the current workforce to meet the legal requirement to become a union shop. Once "organized," they can impose all their union-ness, including deducting dues from everyone's paycheck, regardless of whether they want to be a member of the union (and support the union's agenda, pay for their big wigs, political agenda, etc.). [P.S. Shout out to the Professor---if you're out there, I'd love a little more clarity on the "organization" process]
Now, imagine you're one of the holdouts keeping your shop from crossing the required threshold for unionization. How do you imagine the unions will set about trying to convince you to change your position? Here's just one example of many.
And who can forget the card check nonsense that Unions asked their buddies in the BO administration to advocate? If the GOP advocated scrapping the secret ballot in politicial elections, the media firestorm would be out of control. Yet when Dems backed a union plan that calls for eliminating the secret ballot when laborers vote on whether to organize, I didn't hear much outrage. Despite the fact that it's a brazen attempt to apply further intimidation to their opposition (and the opposition in this case aren't 1 percenters--they're attempting to intimidate laborers who simply want to work, and don't want to relinquish their earnings to the union).
The point of all this is that Big Labor exists to push people around, and thrives when they are given more leverage to do so by the government, which kind of explains the long-term quid pro quo that's been going on between Big Labor's leadership and Dem leadership for decades. Until Scott Walker, I don't recall ever seeing someone successfully push back in a way that fundamentally changes the playing field. And yet I'm not a believer in "wishing on a politician" to solve our problems, so the question that's been bugging me today is, "what can an average person like me do fight back?"
I don't really have an answer but I've figured out one place I'm going to start. I want to vote with my dollar. As a consumer, I'm going to make it my business to try and buy non-union, particularly for large purchases. I'm thinking here about autos, but it applies more broadly than that.
Why should I buy from a company that plays ball with the UAW? My purchase is subsidizing UAW political ads for Dems, as well as giving them more profitability for the UAW to siphon off. I'd rather buy a vehicle from a non-union shop, and know I'm just paying for the car--not the political agenda I don't support. Furthermore, if lots of people took this approach (not gonna happen, but I can dream), it would create a favorable outcome for the workers who've chosen not to get into bed with Big Labor (whose firms would thrive, leading to more jobs, wages, benefits, etc.), and an unfavorable outcome for Big Labor. The golden goose would have a few less eggs to spread around.
This creates something of a dilemma for me, because I've always been a believer of "buy American", and still am. I've only bought cars from the Big 3 my whole life (well, actually just Ford and Dodge). And yet now, if I buy Big 3, all I'll be thinking about is how I'm lining the pockets of these bare-knuckled socialists. I need a new plan, but I'm not sure what it is.
But bankrolling Dem campaigns is just the beginning of how they operate. These organizations base their operational effectiveness on intimidation and the subversion of independent thinking. How else does one describe a picket line? Will picketing workers respect the conscience of a co-worker who decides to cross the line? Sort of. If by respect you mean ongoing harrassment and shooting up her house.
Then there are the battles to organize non-union shops. Usually these groups need some % of the current workforce to meet the legal requirement to become a union shop. Once "organized," they can impose all their union-ness, including deducting dues from everyone's paycheck, regardless of whether they want to be a member of the union (and support the union's agenda, pay for their big wigs, political agenda, etc.). [P.S. Shout out to the Professor---if you're out there, I'd love a little more clarity on the "organization" process]
Love the banner artwork. Mobs with fists held high, all individual traits obliterated as people become silhouettes. |
And who can forget the card check nonsense that Unions asked their buddies in the BO administration to advocate? If the GOP advocated scrapping the secret ballot in politicial elections, the media firestorm would be out of control. Yet when Dems backed a union plan that calls for eliminating the secret ballot when laborers vote on whether to organize, I didn't hear much outrage. Despite the fact that it's a brazen attempt to apply further intimidation to their opposition (and the opposition in this case aren't 1 percenters--they're attempting to intimidate laborers who simply want to work, and don't want to relinquish their earnings to the union).
The point of all this is that Big Labor exists to push people around, and thrives when they are given more leverage to do so by the government, which kind of explains the long-term quid pro quo that's been going on between Big Labor's leadership and Dem leadership for decades. Until Scott Walker, I don't recall ever seeing someone successfully push back in a way that fundamentally changes the playing field. And yet I'm not a believer in "wishing on a politician" to solve our problems, so the question that's been bugging me today is, "what can an average person like me do fight back?"
I don't really have an answer but I've figured out one place I'm going to start. I want to vote with my dollar. As a consumer, I'm going to make it my business to try and buy non-union, particularly for large purchases. I'm thinking here about autos, but it applies more broadly than that.
Why should I buy from a company that plays ball with the UAW? My purchase is subsidizing UAW political ads for Dems, as well as giving them more profitability for the UAW to siphon off. I'd rather buy a vehicle from a non-union shop, and know I'm just paying for the car--not the political agenda I don't support. Furthermore, if lots of people took this approach (not gonna happen, but I can dream), it would create a favorable outcome for the workers who've chosen not to get into bed with Big Labor (whose firms would thrive, leading to more jobs, wages, benefits, etc.), and an unfavorable outcome for Big Labor. The golden goose would have a few less eggs to spread around.
This creates something of a dilemma for me, because I've always been a believer of "buy American", and still am. I've only bought cars from the Big 3 my whole life (well, actually just Ford and Dodge). And yet now, if I buy Big 3, all I'll be thinking about is how I'm lining the pockets of these bare-knuckled socialists. I need a new plan, but I'm not sure what it is.
Labels:
Big Labor,
Buy American,
Buy Non-Union,
Corruption
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Always sniffing for the truth
Contributors
Links
- Love and Lunchmeat
- Long Island Prepper
- Fredo's Mets Blog
- Continental Sausage
- Human Events
- Maker's Mark
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Newt Gingrich
- NRO
- Pro Ecclesia
- Ralfy's Whisky Reviews
- Red Albany
- Res Publica et Cetera
- Sour Mash Manifesto
- Straight Bourbon
- Taki Mag
- The American Conservative
- The American Spectator
- The Anchoress Online
- The Politico
- The Weekly Standard
- Wild Turkey Bourbon
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(232)
-
▼
June
(37)
- Ed Burns explains ideological drift
- Mitt tries to make hay with Court's declaration th...
- Roberts has "gone native," liberal accolades are e...
- Holder in Contempt of Congress
- The Senate Race is the New Front Line
- OccObs awarded!
- The dissent holds the key
- Krauthamer on Roberts
- Chief Justice Souter
- SCOTUSblog breaks down the PPACA decision
- Fortuno gets some love from NR
- Stewart rips on everyone w/r/t Executive Privelege...
- Nancy Pelosi... she's pretty cool...
- A Physician Explains the Problem with Obamacare
- Nixama
- Pawlenty rumors gain traction
- The Longest Wait
- Romney-Pawlenty '12?
- You grab my junk...
- I'm glad I'm not Ronan Farrow
- The Veep is full of #win
- A helpful chart
- National Bourbon Day
- Kindegarten Graduation... Palestine Style
- The Daily Show on WI recall
- Why do unions do all the intimidating?
- That's the power of bacon
- This is a product that needed to be made
- Gentlemen
- My Jeb mancrush compels me to link this
- I grow weary of labor unions
- An Economic Argument for the Traditional Family
- DOJ to monitor WI recall election
- A great explanation of why the Fed is f*cking you
- More Veepstakes rumors
- The man who should have been President
- Blogger bash!
-
▼
June
(37)
0 comments: