Ohio voters overwhelmingly reject Issue 2, dealing a blow to Gov. John Kasich

This is interesting:

Ohio voters overwhelmingly reject Issue 2, dealing a blow to Gov. John Kasich | cleveland.com

Abner :smile:

 

What's interesting about it?

 

I will guess that Governor John Kasich was probably eyeing the 2016 nomination for president when he formulated the plan to do away with labor unions in his state. I understand that his approval numbers are so low right now that he would not survive a recall if it came up for a vote today. Are those some perhaps interesting points?

 

Precisely! We unionists out here in California are looking at Ohio VERY closely.

Abner :smile:

 

Yup! I voted no on 2.

 

Thanks Tedmeister!!!!!!!!

Abner :smile: :banana:

 

Darwinism at its finest

Politician tries to kill unions in a midwest state. This is the equivalent of a sanitation engineer leaving extra trash on the curb instead of picking it up.

I could see someone trying this in Texas or even Massachusetts.. but Ohio? Only place worse for the behavior is Michigan.

 

Actually, Wisconsin has been a good case study as well.

Abner

 

Took me awhile to figure out what exactly what you were saying, but goddamn it was funny (and true) once I figured it out.

 

Tedmeister,

This Southern California gentelman would like your boots on the ground Ohio assessment of the events preceeding the vote on no 2. Was no.2 discussed much in your typical places like, the grocery store, retail stores, donut shops, eateries, karoake bars, etc?

How, in your opinion, is Gov.Kasich viewed now by constituents in Ohio? I did read the Kasich did acknowledge "the voters have spoken". I wonder if Kasich feels the same as Scott Waker now feels about "possibly going to far".

Your thoughts and comments would be greatly appreciated brother Heiks. Maybe next year I will try to travel out to Ohio or Wisconsin for expeditionary/research purposes.

See ya,

Abner :smile:

 

The unions seek to do one thing and that is to increase the price of labor beyond the market clearing price, therefore creating a deficit of jobs and unemployment.
Minimum wage laws are one of the primary causes of unemployment. Its elementary economics. Therefore I believe that the unions do the nation a disservice and are part of the problem. Yes they helped to create the legal framework necessary to protect people from unsafe work environments but their management is rooted in Marxist ideology.

 

You have a right to your opinion brother ryoder. It's funny, I have a couple of right wing friends who used to be so anti-union, but curiously enough, they both now work union jobs. When they complain about the union, I tell them they are free to leave as this is a free market. Neither one takes me up on my challenge.

My personal opinion is we need to stop the flow of outsourcing, and start rewarding companies to actually hire and create jobs here in the US. Here is what I have been seeing for years. Companies getting our taxpayers money in tax cuts, and then turn around, keep the money, and outsource. The money stays in third world cheap labor countries, and the moeny doesn't circulate back here. For example, a person from Bangladesh cannot afford to take their american outsourced wages, then turn around and buy American products. Thus, there is a break in the economic cycle. Outsourced money, goes out, but does not return.

Just my two cents, you are free to disagree.

Abner :smile:

 

Well done MC.

The issues with Abner's and Ryoder's arguments aren't that they are stating inaccurate data. The issues are that they are infusing them with their own opinions. The middle ground is that unions do act as an inflationary force in terms of providing benefits to their employees as doing so fulfills the union's need to survive and grow. Problems arise when the economy either becomes too weak to support the existing union contracts or too large for the union to effectively provide greater value to its members than the economy alone can provide (e.g. if a worker gets a good job and good wages without the union, why pay dues?)

We've seen both situations occur and of course, union membership fluctuates with bull and bear markets. The political arguments are herrings because the unions are created in response to environments that exploit workers and fold when workers have what they need to survive (based on their own individual hierarchy of needs) with membership demographs showing fluctuation between cities and regions based on economic conditions.

All people who need help are not helped by Marxists and all people who are well off are not capitalists. However, it's sure nice to put a label on something to distract people from natural events because distracted and annoyed people are usually easily manipulated.. which (as long as we're bandying about opinions) is my opinion of the purpose of politics and why our forefathers advised people that the career politician was to be avoided and a socially cancerous profession if pursued.

 

Let take this quote:" they helped to create the legal framework necessary to protect people from unsafe work environments".

Do you believe worker/labor/workplace safety rights are static, or are there those who profit from trying to erode such rights. Have you stopped to think that unions are one of the guardians at the gate who are charge with ensuring these rights are not taken away? Do you think these rights just exist because they were created a long time ago by unions ?Or are we to believe corporations are going to fight for to ensure workers rights?

Abner

 

I'm not going to argue with someone so staunchly in the other camp. Its a waste of yours and my time because we both will not change our position. The best we can hope for is to find the elusive swing voter and change his mind.

 

I am not looking to argue, nor change your mind. You think what you think. You think it is ok to bash unions, but not banks (ref. to Brand X post).

" Lets not bash banks please. Some of us work for them and some of us have mortgages, student loans and other loans given to us by them. Without financial leverage, many things in this modern world would not be possible". (ryoder)

Very well then,

Have a good one,

Abner :smile:

 

The Lessons of Ohio - By Richard Trumka

Bill,

Here is an article that might interest you and others.

Richard Trumka: The Lessons of Ohio

"This sea change was strongest among voters in the middle of the economic and ideological spectrums. Yes, public employees, union members, Democrats and liberals voted overwhelmingly against the controversial law. But they were joined by definitive majorities of voters from households with no public employee (Ted Heiks for example), workers without union representation and independents, as well as 30 percent of Republicans and 36 percent of conservatives".



Good night! Next year is going to be exciting indeed!

Abner :smile: