Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where do you get your logic? Public workers unions are funded by public workers. They do a job/provide a service and they get a paycheck for it. What they do with that paycheck has nothing to do with the tax payers funding anything. You could make the same case for my company--my customers pay me, so do you think they have any say in how I invest or spend my money? Wrong.
Who are paid with my taxes.
And applying your own logic... if you engaged in a cause that was in conflict with the sensibilities of a customer, that customer would be free to (and most likely) take their business elsewhere.
We don't get to make that choice with the public sector, they get our tax dollars regardless.
Pandemonium - It is not that folks like DeForest do not know but that they do not want to accept reality.
Once a person accepts a wage it is not their concern where the money came from. The wages are their money and they, as any other individual, may spend it as they please. If they want to contribute to a union campaign fund that is their right. It seems to me that some people would remove public employees’ rights by creating a special set of 2nd class citizens’ controlled outside of their working environment like so many private sector employees that are forced to live in the right neighborhood, go to the Right churches and sent their kids to the right schools if they ever want to be considered for advancement.
Besides, none of the people complaining were very vocal when the private sector executives were making millions for the same work as a 100k/y government executive.
Well, then they need to expand mental health care for these folks. Pronto. That isn't well wrapped.
Taking his logic, any public sector employee that uses birth control....his tax dollars supports. Any movie that an employee sees he is forced to support. If I order a book online that doesn't meet his criteria of what constitutes "good" he is supporting it.
And applying your own logic... if you engaged in a cause that was in conflict with the sensibilities of a customer, that customer would be free to (and most likely) take their business elsewhere.
We don't get to make that choice with the public sector, they get our tax dollars regardless.
You're right in one respect--my customers can vote with their feet in terms of using my services or not as a private company, but once they contract with me for services, what I do with my money is my own business.
Every employee has the right to express their political views--the issue becomes whether or not you can be fired for them. For the last 40 years, the Supreme Court has ruled that public employees don't leave their first amendment rights at the door--that the state can't do indirectly (fire someone for political beliefs) what they also can't do directly (restrict the voting rights of their employees).
Oh thats right..you are one of the crowd that can't differentiate between the politics and the actual employees.
It is heart warming to be able to say that back in the 1970s I was a sustaining member of the Americans Against Union Control of Government. It is even more heartwarming to realize that when Jimmy Carter's FEC destroyed that group with fines and such they sat back and allowed the NEA to give Jimmy $4.5 million to campaign with. I was a member of the AAUCG and also one of the millions of NEA members. I withdrew my membership in the NEA just as soon as they paid me the money that they deemed a fair share from not having allowed us to vote on that money for Carter.
I have been in those early days of union work and see what is going on now, especially with public employees.
Well, since I contract with the Federal government, I'm certain that some part of my paycheck comes courtesy of Frank DeForrest, so I'll be sure to ask him before I decide whether to donate money to Sierra Club versus NRA, for example, and of course before choosing to donate to the RNC or the DNC. After all, it's his money, right?
Frank, you realize that a similar argument has been made many times in the past by anti-war taxpayers who object to their money going to fund war? In some cases, they've put their money where their mouths are and gone to jail by refusing to pay taxes. Now there's a suggestion.
You don't get to decide where your tax dollars are going, beyond voting and petitioning the government. And you certainly don't get to decide how people paid salaries from tax dollars spend their money.
"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic." -Ben Franklin
Libs like to talk about Franklin telling the woman outside the meeting hall, when asked what had been drawn up in the meetings, "A republic, if you can keep it.
Libs don't like to talk about Franklin saying that once people find they can vote themselves money they will bring the republic to an end. Thanks for posting that quote from Franklin.
Who pays those peoples' salaries? Somehow I thought they got their money from the public coffers and those come from the other taxpayers, also.
I notice that you finally ran out of talking points and had to declare another poster full of crap and then you said that we do not own those we pay the salaries of. SAD
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
