Facing Reality
We’re coming up on seven years since Anchor Rising launched. In the peculiar sensation of time, the days have felt as if they’ve sped, but it seems as if the site has been around forever.
When we started out, we had the attitude of hobbyists — we would battle the problems of Rhode Island and the nation as we had time. But as we moved forward, not only did we pick up a healthy growth curve of readers, but we slid into habits of research and content creation somewhat beyond a hobbyist’s scope. We’ve done some real, substantive research; we’ve gathered audio and video of events as if it were our occupation.
And we’ve done a fair bit of good.
Last winter, I was hopeful that enough people had seen the value in what we do that we could find funding for a single full-time job. We pretty quickly found enough pledges to form a healthy baseline, but nowhere near enough to make the transition without a large investment from a single person or group. Twice the possibility of the dream come true was tantalizingly close, but, well, people have their own ideas and priorities.
I continue to believe that a year of full-speed Anchor Rising would make its own case (and allow enough freedom of time and movement) for us to find consistent revenue to continue growing beyond the range of a hobby. Unfortunately, we lack the resources to fund that year; I (for one) don’t even have the remaining capacity for debt to take out a business loan for that purpose.
Yet, life has its demands. I’m going to do my best to continue with the regular content for the rest of August, but come September, I have to reorder my priorities. We’ll still be here, making our opinions known, but I’ll be putting aside the sense of obligation to have a steady stream of new posts. Spring 2011 was just too arduous, and I’ve got to find some other direction.
In terms of the free market, Rhode Island and its center-right contingent have expressed a lack of interest in a media organization such as Anchor Rising is and could be. It’s unfortunate that we’re about to slide into the most critical election season in recent memory — both for Rhode Island and for the United States. We had hoped to provide a counter to the stream of skewed PolitiFacts and politically tilted journalism and to challenge the flawed ideas that dominate Rhode Islanders’ sense of how things should function.
The state, in particular, really, truly needs a voice that will make the long-term case that conservative ideas aren’t strange notions at which to scoff in the thick of debates and campaigning, but are at the very least arguable and are very likely correct. Anchor Rising’s readership has been small, relative to the major media organizations in Rhode Island, but our reach has been broad, attracting the attention of the people who set the storyline for the state.
I can’t think of a better political or ideological investment than making good ideas and common sense seem less foreign year ’round. That’s the groundwork that must be in place for real reform to occur. Activist groups can alert the public to the greatest excesses, and charismatic politicians might individually slip into office with just the right blend of name recognition and negative ads. But their victories will be fleeting unless we change the way that people understand their society.
For that, what’s necessary is continual conversation… reasoned explanations of a method of thought, with research and examples from current events as evidence. Anchor Rising is well positioned to offer such a service, but the effort can’t continue to require so much sacrifice of our personal lives and ambitions.
Good job Justin (and crew Marc, Monique,etc). I will continue to support AR in whatever form it evolves into. Fight the good fight.
Tone down the anti public sector union rhetoric and I’s be happy to support the site, as I have in the past. I just cannot justify feeding the beast that is bent on destroying labor.
Conservative grassroots organizations are forever expected to “march on” without any funding from individuals or establishment groups with financial resources. Apparently a pat on the head and some kudos are all those with the bucks are willing to invest. They just don’t get it. We are in a new political world and most of the work is actually done at the grassroots level (and yes, I consider AR grassroots). The left understands this, and has relentlessly funded organizations that work at the grassroots level, whether it’s media, activism, get out the votes efforts, non-profits or whatever.
Passion and principle can only take you so far until you crash and burn due to financial, family, or work obligations, particularly in a state in which the fight is not just against the other side, but when some of the most wearing battles are against those who supposedly share your own philosophical values.
In the end, though, it comes down to money, and volunteers cannot be expected to soldier on forever out of pure altruism and dedication to the cause. Eventually, the realties of life do get in the way.
The people of RI sure do owe you all a debt of gratitude.
Justin, you and the AR team have done a good job. Until the tide turns, I doubt conservative thought will have a following sea in RI. Being the “loyal opposition” is a difficult path. Michael, as regards “destroying labor”, I am sure there is an analogy in Greek mythology, but memory fails. If you believe that people are engaged in “destroying labor”, you might pause to reconsider your premises. Perhaps “labor” has reached an apogee, or turned a corner, and this has not been realized. One of the inherent difficulties for unions is that that they have to continue to “deliver”. Else, the membership will ask “what have you done for us lately?”, “what are we paying dues for”? Those of us who have to make the “delivery” will, at times, become impatient. This does not seem a difficult idea to grasp. Consider this one. I have a guy helping me with my barn. He is a 63 year old, former toolmaker. His job has gone to China, employment prospects are nil. Real Toolmaking is a very skilled occupation, with long apprenticeships, etc. He spent 40 years at his trade, at his peak, he was making about 55K. He has saved regularly, has a 401K and a small investment property. He is not impoverished. He also has a neighbor. The neighbor spent 23 years as an instructor at a local Voke school. No particular educational requirement, short days, short years. He is now retired with a pension of 53K. The “retiree” spends his days hanging out at Dunkin Donuts. The toolmaker does whatever will bring in a dollar, thinking times may get worse. He still pays taxes to pay town pensions. It disturbs him that the pension is more than his prior pay after taxes. Who is right here? “Choices”… Read more »
I used the term “labor” only after considering a few alternatives. Labor is simply a synonym for unions but I had already used that word and didn’t want to be redundant.
Dan and the like can pontificate all they want about my lack of understanding and callous attitudes toward the economy, but the main reason I keep coming back here is the constant attack on public sector unions-some warranted, some not.
I have toolmakers in my family who are out of work. Would a labor union have saved their jobs? I doubt it, when the company that hires them can go overseas and get the tools cheaper, much like the Verizon workers on Washington Street in Providence whose jobs will be going elsewhere unless the strike by 45,000 workers slows things down. Can people in the Philippines handle customer calls as efficiently as American’s, and for less? Probably, but the calls for assistance are from American citizens whose American money is being fed into a corporation that already pays no income tax on the billions of profits, and actually got a tax rebate from the federal government.
You can’t outsource firefighters. Can’t send students to school in China because it’s cheaper. Can’t ship prisoners to foreign lands because it’s cheaper.
I also have kids in their early thirties who have graduated from business colleges with degrees in finance. They will never worry about a pension because in the years they have been out of school they have accumulated enough money to invest they will never worry about things like retirement.
Choices.
I forgot what my point was, if I ever even had one. But Anchor Rising insists on attacking public sector unions, and therefore I cannot justify supporting their coffers, but I can drop a line now and then.
“a corporation that already pays no income tax on the billions of profits, and actually got a tax rebate from the federal government.”
Don’t hate the playah, hate the game. Don’t blame people for following the rules, if you don’t like the rules, which I don’t like either, then change them. I think the Verizons and GMs of the US *should* pay a fair share in taxes. But that needs to change in Congress, not in the board rooms.
“They will never worry about a pension because in the years they have been out of school they have accumulated enough money to invest”
But if we listen to the people over at the other blog, they’ll say that’s impossible. You need a pension to survive in retirement. Look at the recent stock market results. That’ll wipe them out. Without a pension, your kids will be living on dog food at 60, no?
I’d also be happy to support the site with the tax money I’ve saved by moving out of Rhode Island, provided that you completely revise your political platform to support a hodge-podge of libertarian causes, including gay marriage, reducing the size of the military by 80%, repealing victimless crime laws like marijuana use and prostitution, and replacing the 10 Commandments with smiley faces in all public places. Lastly, please turn up the rhetoric on public unions – people need to know who the true power brokers are in the state and who has been behind the current pension crisis from day one for their own benefit at the expense of the health of the state. On a more serious note, I’ve been astonished at the quality and frequency of the contributions here. To my pleasure, it is far beyond what is necessary to maintain relevance and an informed regular following. We’ve all seen what happens to a political blog when you completely give up on standards (see: RIFuture), and you and the rest of the team have taken this blog to a whole new level in recent years. My significant other has been blogging once a week for an online publication, and even that commitment has been a major drain on her schedule. I honestly have no idea how you have been able to keep it up this long with all of your other commitments, which certainly should come first. Thank you. The true reason why I have been reluctant to contribute to AR or various other RI good government groups is because I decided years ago that Rhode Island was a lost cause. Since then, I have been doing all in my power to convince people to move out of the state (with some limited success) to deny the… Read more »
‘You can’t outsource firefighters. Can’t send students to school in China because it’s cheaper. Can’t ship prisoners to foreign lands because it’s cheaper.”
“You can’t outsource firefighters.”
That is precisely what was done before the invention of municipal fire departments. Prior experience wasn’t good, but might have been corrected.
“Can’t send students to school in China because it’s cheaper”
Not now, but perhaps eventually. We can now send them to Europe, and save a lot of dough. American schools have learned this and created a “Year abroad” at full U.S. tuition.
“Can’t ship prisoners to foreign lands because it’s cheaper.”
Devil’s Island, Australia. I don’t know why we couldn’t re-invent “transportation” as a criminal punishment?
Justin-Congrats on 7 years I’ve enjoyed the site for many years because despite what many people believe being a union member and conservative are not mutually exclusive. I don’t think the answer for RI ‘s future lies in dismantling unions it lies in dismantling our entitlement society. Public sector union members are hard working middle class people. Welfare receipiants are lay-about do nothings who take but don’t give. Maybe AR can dedicate some time in the coming years to go after this travesty. Maybe for every dozen or so anti-union posts we get one anti-welfare post.
“Devil’s Island, Australia. I don’t know why we couldn’t re-invent “transportation” as a criminal punishment?”
Hey Mr. Murderer, start swimming!
“…it lies in dismantling our entitlement society…”
Before we dismantle it, can we try to make it work correctly first? Maybe that’s the happy middle between those who want to outsource fire departments and those who would like to see their benefits expanded to the rest of us.
To Dan:
“The true reason why I have been reluctant to contribute to AR or various other RI good government groups is because I decided years ago that Rhode Island was a lost cause. Since then, I have been doing all in my power to convince people to move out of the state”
Dan,you should support AR precisely because they ARE trying to reverse the course of the state. They need your help more than ever. Justin and crew are not part of the corrupt establishment. I am a RI native living in Fort Worth. I choose to support AR on a regular monthly basis. If you do not help who will? Moving out of state is a choice you and I made. It does not however solve the problem. AR is a voice for a new way. Let us get behind it.
Painting this site as “anti-union” is irresponsible and inaccurate. The commenters and the contributors here have been quite clear that what they oppose is not “labor” or “unionism” generally, but specifically closed-shop legislation, as exists in Rhode Island, that grants unions monopoly power over a workforce and forces members to pay dues to an overcompensated and corrupt class of labor bosses against their will. No matter how many times this is explained, the Sierras, Tom Kenneys, and Michaels of the union world still come here and perpetuate the lie that we oppose the right of workers to organize. It’s the same dirty tactic as certain progressives accusing conservatives of being “anti-immigrant” when they are actually against illegal immigration.
There are still unions in right-to-work states, but they are voluntary and compete on a level playing field, as they should in a free society. This is all anyone here has advocated, so the public union members who gripe here about the site being “anti-union” could resolve their objections by simply paying more attention and practicing semantic hygiene. There is no legitimate rationale behind closed shop legislation – it is inherently corrupt and prone to the kind of self-serving abuse that we should all be against. We do respect workers and their right to organize. What we don’t respect is corrupt monopoly status enshrined in state law for a class of undeserving labor leaders who perpetuate a constant stream of abuses and frauds in the name of worker’s rights.
dan do you really think that the comments from the likes of Tommy Cranston and mike cappelli are not anti union. If you really think that then I need some of what you are smoking!
dan do you really think that the comments from the likes of Tommy Cranston and mike cappelli are not anti union. If you really think that then I need some of what you are smoking!
dan do you really think that the comments from the likes of Tommy Cranston and mike cappelli are not anti union. If you really think that then I need some of what you are smoking!
Sweety – I don’t know, why don’t you ask them? I seriously doubt they would be against any and all collective bargaining absent corrupt closed shop legislation granting the unions an abuse-prone and insulated monopoly status. Without all the distorting, anti-free market protections of closed shop, it’s simply free association. How could anybody be against that? The public union members in this thread are saying that the contributors here are anti-union, which is certainly not the case. They are misstating positions because it’s nearly impossible to oppose right-to-work on a legitimate basis.
I don’t smoke any substances, legal or illegal, nor have I ever, although I would defend your right to do so.
Dan-lets just skip the BS-Sweety is right and you know it. Capelli, Cranston, and yes even you post comments that can be construed as anti-union. Don’t ask me to cite examples they’re far to numerous to list particularly in a post dedicated to thanking AR for 7 thought provoking years. If you’re that interested in the anti-union posts you need look no further than the Verizon Strike story or any other post that garners more than 12-15 comments chances are they’ll be about the unions.
Public Sector Unions have destroyed this state and all others over whom they have a stranglehold on government. TOTALLY different than private sector unions. Even FDR said that the public sector unions should have no ability for collective bargaining as the inherent conflict of interest is all too foreseeable.
What don’t some of you get about the state of our economy in RI, in which public sector unions control all aspects of government? Is it working? Ask the pensioners in Central Falls if it’s working for them. Sure it’s working for the union leaders- they are paid lavishly and have fully funded pensions. Not so for Mr. Janitor in X municipality. Sure its working for their lackey’s in local and state government, who get sweet paybacks. But soon not working for the vast majority of public sector union members whose pensions will be cut catastrophically due to lack of funding. Promises made by Union bosses and GA members who always knew the bill would never be paid, and/or didn’t give a crap if they were.
Just because the folks at AR are intelligent enough to compute basic math and connect the dots shouldn’t be a reason to excoriate them for sounding the alarm. RI government policies don’t just hit Joe Taxpayer in the butt; they’re going to nail Joe Government Guy too.
Sierra – No, how about you skip the BS and stop calling us “anti-union.” It’s not accurate and you know it. Show me one single post made by me or any of the contributors here that states that we are against all collective bargaining. You can’t. It’s quite simple – we are against closed shop public union legislation which has created a corrupt union monopoly over the public workforce. We support truly free association in the form of right-to-work, where people can choose whether or not they want to join a union and pay dues. You can’t argue against right-to-work because it makes perfect sense, and there is no legitimate reason why a union needs monopoly power over the state police or municipal firefighters or any other workforce. They should have to compete at an equal level and not get any special privileges through broken contracts with labor-friendly political insiders. Stop misrepresenting us by tarring us as a bunch of fascists opposing free association – we are the ones supporting the liberty of people to freely associate, even if you don’t realize it because you’ve been listening to the rhetoric of “worker’s rights” for so long.
“skewed facts and politically tilted journalism” ? ? = Mark Steyn
Dan
You didn’t even read my post. If you had you would have seen that I told you not to ask for examples-I told you where you could start to find them if you really are that blind. You have no idea what I’ve been listening to so don’t tell me I’m hearing “workers rights” rhetoric. And don’t tell me or anyone else they can’t argue against something. You may believe in a right-to-work but don’t presume to know what Capelli and Cranston think. You’re so God-damned arrogant! No one called you or anyone else a fascist, all I said was that many comments made by you and others that can be construed as anti-union.
Posted by Patrick at August 15, 2011 1:30 PM
“Devil’s Island, Australia. I don’t know why we couldn’t re-invent “transportation” as a criminal punishment?”
Hey Mr. Murderer, start swimming!”
Perhaps you misunderstand me. Rather than expensive prisons in the U.S., there must be a spot in the Kwajalien Atoll which needs “beautification”. Perhaps we could put them to work at snow removal in the Arctic.
dan do you really think that the comments from the likes of Tommy Cranston and mike cappelli are not anti union. If you really think that then I need some of what you are smoking!
Posted by Sweety at August 15, 2011 3:35 PM
Not “unions”.
I was in UFCW myself for 5 years before and during college and I recognize the value of unions and what total a**holes management can be.
I am against the PUBLIC union predators who elect puppets as officeholders and then “negotiate” with their own puppets.
The state has been brought down to Greek-level insolvency by this chicanery, not that the progressives or the puppetmasters will ever admit it.
Yeh I read this blog enough to know that mike and the Cranston guy are good friends to the unions members. And pigs can fly and Justin loves the gays and Dan is notma pompous windbag
Perhaps there is a ray of hope.
Drudge/Boston Herald announced that another “winner” picked by the state has filed bankruptcy. Evergreen Solar, which obtained 60 million from the state of Massachusetts, promised 800 new “green” jobs. Evergreen was killed by competition from China and plunging solar panel prices.
Politicians are rumored to be hoping that profits from the heavily subsidized “wind farm” off Cape Cod will offset the loses.
Since “green energy” has all of the indicies of a “bubble”, perhaps this time the taxpayers will remember. Even as I write, I doubt this. When has the government “picked a winner”, last month Chevy sold 147 Volts.
“If you had you would have seen that I told you not to ask for examples”
Ah, my mistake. See, I generally expect that when somebody accuses me of something that they be able to back it up with at least one example. It was wrong of me expect this much. You have “construed” my posts as against all collective bargaining, so that’s the end of the discussion, isn’t it? I can’t exactly argue with how you choose to construe things. I’ve explained to you exactly where I stand on unions, but who am I to explain my own positions?
Still waiting to know exactly who is against all unions here. Should I not expect examples there either?
Though I think right-to-work is preferable and hope that RI could get there some day, I’d at least like to see the first step where the employer (the state) is not responsible for collecting union dues. If the union is so great for the employee, let the employees mail in checks each month, just like I do for the YMCA and other clubs and associations where I find value.
What would you think if the YMCA required that you pay them $70 a month and you had no choice in the matter? Oh, the choice is to go find a job somewhere else? How come that line doesn’t work when the union people want to go on strike for better benefits and I try to answer, “if you don’t like it, go work somewhere else”?
“Though I think right-to-work is preferable and hope that RI could get there some day, I’d at least like to see the first step where the employer (the state) is not responsible for collecting union dues.”
Although I doubt this would effect public sector unions much, elimination of the “Prevailing Wage” (i.e. union wage)Law would o a lot further. This would probably most effect “private sector” unions, carpenters, ironworkers,etc. As it seems few people know, the law requires all public construction jobs to pay union wages. Most Northern states have a “Prevailing Wage Law”. The wording of these is close enough to identical to assure that they were lobbied through by the unions. Some will say that union workers are better trained, for the moment, I don’t doubt that. But employers will always prefer skilled workers. The private sector has managed to produce “certified” mechanics/technicians. I don’t know why “certified” carpenters should be so hard to manage.
This might encourage more competitive bidding. I know a few contractors who won’t bid public jobs. How do they explain to employees that you are worth 40% less on this job than the job we worked last week.
This also leads to what the unions call “double breasted” contractors. They have one division, which is unionized, and only bids public work. They also have a non-union division that only bids private work.
If you have a free moment today, a fun and enlightening exercise is to compare a map of right-to-work vs closed-shop states with a map of the states color-coded by public debt per capita. The correspondence is pretty stunning, like matching up the East coast of South America with the West coast of Africa. Whether it’s correlation, causation, or both is a matter for interpretation, although neither case is particularly flattering – either closed-shop public unions thrive in fiscally irresponsible states or they cause the irresponsible spending themselves.
how about a new subscription level between the 7 and 20 dollar mark.
quite a jump at least for me.
“Although I doubt this would effect public sector unions much…”
Warrington, I disagree. It would really show how much employees value their union when they can then withhold their dues. Even if the law is as against them in that area as it is to someone withholding their taxes, it would also be good to see the employees need to send in that check every month and keep asking themselves, “am I getting value for this money?” I think it would be a huge step toward “right to work” and I think the unions know that and that’s why they require the employer to collect the dues for them.
If I was the employer, I’d charge a ridiculously high handling fee. Probably about as much as the dues themselves cost.
“Although I doubt this would effect public sector unions much…”
Patrick, sorry, I guess I didn’t tie in the prefatory phrase. I meant that elimination of “prevailing wage” would probably not effect public sector unions directly. The unions involved work on “public sector” jobs, but are “private sector” employees.
I’m sorry for all my foolish statements here. I was posting under the apparently false premise that this blog was actually not union-friendly.
With friends like you……….
[[[[[ michael,
If you want to control your destiny, go work for yourself.
The thing that kills me about the whining union dopes is that they want things guaranteed, without any of the responsibility of doing what needs to be done to assure those things.
The union dopes make me laugh. They act all tough and everything, but when it comes down to it, they got no sack to go out and take the risk and do it for themselves. Basically, they need the comfy confines of a union because they can’t cut it on their own. Real tough guys.
Posted by Mike Cappelli at August 11, 2011 12:31 PM ]]]]]
Well, maybe I wasn’t entirely wrong!
[[[[[ michael,
Cut the cord from your FD job, lose your benefits, and then you’ll be self employed. I’d love to see your tanning salon workers unionize. That’ll give you a lesson in business.
Unions are for wusses who can’t cut it on their own, or are too lazy. Either way, not respectable.
Posted by Mike Cappelli at August 11, 2011 6:37 PM ]]]]]
At least I wasn’t wrong regarding one poster!
Tom Kenney – You have identified exactly one commenter out of dozens here, and zero blog contributors. A single commenter hardly makes this an “anti-union” blog.
Would you like to be lumped in with Rainone, Liedecker, and Crowley, or maybe some of the whacko self-identified Marxists and socialists who post over on RIFuture in support of your union? Would you consider that fair?
How about I just equate you with the scumbag fraudster Sauro, who happens to be a member of your union? One for one?
Dan you did say that none of the comments here were anti union and that is clearly not true. Are you a scumbag attorney because you surely disrespect the truth like one.
Durrrr, you got me “Danny.” One troll on the whole site makes anti-union comments, so the entire site must be anti-union. You must be a total genius to prove me wrong like that and select a witty name for yourself like Rimjobber. How many times have you been banned now? I’ve lost count.
Watching the last few comments in this thread, it seems as though things have gone WILDLY off-topic — and for that matter, the amount of ad-hominem (which I still think is hilarious when spell-check asks me “Do you mean Eminem?” like, REALLY?) oops, see there I went off track too. That’s how little I care about this little fight between you folks. Go take it outside to email. That said, I do wanna throw out there that while I’ve never been a huge fan of Justin’s policy analysis, his rigor, his dedication, and his openness to debate have all gotten me in trouble for bringing up around my progressive friends. Gotta do what you gotta do, but I’m afraid if AR goes the way of RIF, the only outlet it town other than the Projo is going to be GLP. That would be sad. I hope you guys can keep it up just in the same way that I hope RIF might actually be resurrected into a real blog again (but am not holding my breath). Best of luck whatever choices you make Justin. PS: Oh, and my .02 on the whole union thing? Union-busting has been a plank in even the moderate wing of the Republican Party for at least as long as I’ve been alive. Some unions are actually quite foul and corrupt. Some aren’t. It’d be awesome if we could ALSO bust some bad corporations while we’re going after the so-called bad unions, eh? Yeah… that lack of balance is my problem. We save terrible corporations with tax-money bailouts, but then we say UNIONS are destroying this country? There’s a lot of blame to go around for ANYONE who is so self-interested that they don’t care the country is falling down around them. Wanting to bust both… Read more »
jr paris-no,you actually don’t sound like a communist.Communists don’t believe in corporations at all(except when they run them like the PRC does)and I think you present a fair point of view.
I’ve noticed that while you may be somewhat left of center,you can see what goes on at RIF.
I have no sympathy for corporations that treat their workforce as a disposable commodity and ship good jobs overseas.
Maybe some of the old companies had very antagonistic relations with unions,but they did offer job security,health coverage,and retirement.
The new faceless entities that deal in mega billions on Wall Street offer nothing except more money for their executive staff.They don’t seem to produce anything tangible like steel,cars,construction equipment,furniiture,etc.
If corporations act like pirates,treat them like pirates and if unions act like the Cosa Nostra,treat them appropriately in that regard.
jparis,
If RIFUTURE keeps bouncing people that challenge their bloggers, they’ll eventually run out of audience. As you may notice not everyone here is right of center and yet they are tolerated. They sure don’t tolerate right of center on that side.
“They sure don’t tolerate right of center on that side.”
No, they sure didn’t…
Just for the record:
I never stated or thought that Anchor Rising or any of it’s contributors or posters was evil or anything similar to that. There are a few posters who are so far from my beliefs that it’s a waste of time for me to debate them, but that’s OK.
Anchor Rising is a valuable forum with thoughtful debate and a tolerance (for the most part) of opposing views. RIFuture is a joke. I haven’t posted there in over a year.
Keep up the good work Justin and others.
But…for anyone to say that the majority of contributors and posters are not anti-union is just intelectually dishonest.
“But…for anyone to say that the majority of contributors and posters are not anti-union is just intelectually dishonest.”
Well, I think it’s more intellectually honest to say that most posters and contributors are anti-public sector union under the current “closed shop” laws.
I bet most would agree with that. As for private unions, I don’t see much of a use for them, but if that’s what they want to do, go for it.
Tom Kenney – This is why semantic hygiene is important. You use vague terms like “anti-union” to tar this blog and its commenters and contributors, implying we’re against freedom of association and freedom of contract, but what does “anti-union” even mean? I don’t like alcohol, does that mean I’m a prohibitionist? Quite the opposite.
I’ve never heard somebody here say they want to ban collective bargaining, so you can stop jabbering about your “rights” being trampled. Contrary to your claims, most here have put a lot of effort in distinguishing their views by saying they support right to work or similar good government protections. Instead you name one troll and paint the entire site as anti-worker or some such hogwash. I support the right of workers to spontaneously organize, I simply don’t want unions granted monopolies over the workforce and guaranteed dues by the state. I view that as an improper role of government. Does that make me anti-union? I don’t think so. Please exercise more care in how you label people.
Dan
You wrote;
If you have a free moment today, a fun and enlightening exercise is to compare a map of right-to-work vs closed-shop states with a map of the states color-coded by public debt per capita.
Now compare a map of “right to work” states with a map of states that formed the Confederate States and another with states that allowed slavery. Great Fun.
Phil – How is that at all relevant today? I shouldn’t live in Virginia because they used to have slaves? I have some bad news for you about the history of progressive New England. Wait until we get to the history of your “enlightened” European countries.
How far back did you want us to go Phil. Before Massachusetts and New York abolished it or after.
” Before Massachusetts and New York abolished it or after.”
Make that, “Before Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island abolished it or after.”